Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
172
result(s) for
"Francis, Darrel"
Sort by:
Meta-analysis of secure randomised controlled trials of β-blockade to prevent perioperative death in non-cardiac surgery
Background Current European and American guidelines recommend the perioperative initiation of a course of β-blockers in those at risk of cardiac events undergoing high- or intermediate-risk surgery or vascular surgery. The Dutch Echocardiographic Cardiac Risk Evaluation Applying Stress Echocardiography (DECREASE) family of trials, the bedrock of evidence for this, are no longer secure. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of β-blockade on perioperative mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke and hypotension in non-cardiac surgery using the secure data. Methods The randomised controlled trials of initiation of β-blockers before non-cardiac surgery were examined. Primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days or at discharge. The DECREASE trials were separately analysed. Results Nine secure trials totalling 10 529 patients, 291 of whom died, met the criteria. Initiation of a course of β-blockers before surgery caused a 27% risk increase in 30-day all-cause mortality (p=0.04). The DECREASE family of studies substantially contradict the meta-analysis of the secure trials on the effect of mortality (p=0.05 for divergence). In the secure trials, β-blockade reduced non-fatal myocardial infarction (RR 0.73, p=0.001) but increased stroke (RR 1.73, p=0.05) and hypotension (RR 1.51, p<0.00001). These results were dominated by one large trial. Conclusions Guideline bodies should retract their recommendations based on fictitious data without further delay. This should not be blocked by dispute over allocation of blame. The well-conducted trials indicate a statistically significant 27% increase in mortality from the initiation of perioperative β-blockade that guidelines currently recommend. Any remaining enthusiasts might best channel their energy into a further randomised trial which should be designed carefully and conducted honestly.
Journal Article
The impact of artificial intelligence on clinical education: perceptions of postgraduate trainee doctors in London (UK) and recommendations for trainers
Background
Artificial intelligence (AI) technologies are increasingly used in clinical practice. Although there is robust evidence that AI innovations can improve patient care, reduce clinicians’ workload and increase efficiency, their impact on medical training and education remains unclear.
Methods
A survey of trainee doctors’ perceived impact of AI technologies on clinical training and education was conducted at UK NHS postgraduate centers in London between October and December 2020. Impact assessment mirrored domains in training curricula such as ‘clinical judgement’, ‘practical skills’ and ‘research and quality improvement skills’. Significance between Likert-type data was analysed using Fisher’s exact test. Response variations between clinical specialities were analysed using k-modes clustering. Free-text responses were analysed by thematic analysis.
Results
Two hundred ten doctors responded to the survey (response rate 72%). The majority (58%) perceived an overall positive impact of AI technologies on their training and education. Respondents agreed that AI would reduce clinical workload (62%) and improve research and audit training (68%). Trainees were skeptical that it would improve clinical judgement (46% agree,
p
= 0.12) and practical skills training (32% agree,
p
< 0.01). The majority reported insufficient AI training in their current curricula (92%), and supported having more formal AI training (81%).
Conclusions
Trainee doctors have an overall positive perception of AI technologies’ impact on clinical training. There is optimism that it will improve ‘research and quality improvement’ skills and facilitate ‘curriculum mapping’. There is skepticism that it may reduce educational opportunities to develop ‘clinical judgement’ and ‘practical skills’. Medical educators should be mindful that these domains are protected as AI develops. We recommend that ‘Applied AI’ topics are formalized in curricula and digital technologies leveraged to deliver clinical education.
Journal Article
Central venous pressure as a method of optimising atrio-ventricular delay after cardiac surgery
Haemodynamic atrioventricular delay (AVD) optimisation has primarily focussed on signals that are not easy to acquire from a pacing system itself, such as invasive left ventricular catheterisation or arterial blood pressure (ABP). In this study, standard clinical central venous pressure (CVP) signals are tested as a potential alternative.
Sixteen patients with a temporary pacemaker after cardiac surgery were studied. AV delay optimisation was performed by alternating between a reference AVD of 120ms and tested settings ranging from 40 to 280ms, with 8 replicates for each setting. Alongside (a) the raw data, three methods of correcting for respiration were tested: (b) limiting analysis to a respiratory cycle, (c) asymmetric least squares (ALS) and (d) discrete wavelet transform (DWT). The utility of a quality control step was tested.
CVP signals were a mirror image of the systolic ABP signals: The four R values were -0.674, -0.692, -0.631, -0.671 respectively (all p<0.001). With quality control, the mirror image was best for DWT (R = -0.76, p<0.001), with the CVP and ABP optima agreeing well (R = 0.78, p<0.001). The automated quality control signal correctly predicted the gap between the AVD optima calculated from ABP and CVP (R = 0.8, p<0.001).
Central venous pressure signals could be used to optimise AVD, because they have a reliable inverse relationship with ABP when pacemaker settings undergo protocolised testing. However, protocols need careful design to circumvent spontaneous biological variability.
Journal Article
Beta-blocker efficacy across different cardiovascular indications: an umbrella review and meta-analytic assessment
Background
Beta-blockers are widely used for many cardiovascular conditions; however, their efficacy in contemporary clinical practice remains uncertain.
Methods
We performed a prospectively designed, umbrella review of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the evidence of beta-blockers in the contemporary management of coronary artery disease (CAD), heart failure (HF), patients undergoing surgery or hypertension (registration: PROSPERO CRD42016038375). We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception until December 2018. Outcomes were analysed as beta-blockers versus control for all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), incident HF or stroke. Two independent investigators abstracted the data, assessed the quality of the evidence and rated the certainty of evidence.
Results
We identified 98 meta-analyses, including 284 unique RCTs and 1,617,523 patient-years of follow-up. In CAD, 12 meta-analyses (93 RCTs, 103,481 patients) showed that beta-blockers reduced mortality in analyses before routine reperfusion, but there was a lack of benefit in contemporary studies where ≥ 50% of patients received thrombolytics or intervention. Beta-blockers reduced incident MI at the expense of increased HF. In HF with reduced ejection fraction, 34 meta-analyses (66 RCTs, 35,383 patients) demonstrated a reduction in mortality and HF hospitalisation with beta-blockers in sinus rhythm, but not in atrial fibrillation. In patients undergoing surgery, 23 meta-analyses (89 RCTs, 19,211 patients) showed no effect of beta-blockers on mortality for cardiac surgery, but increased mortality in non-cardiac surgery. In non-cardiac surgery, beta-blockers reduced MI after surgery but increased the risk of stroke. In hypertension, 27 meta-analyses (36 RCTs, 260,549 patients) identified no benefit versus placebo, but beta-blockers were inferior to other agents for preventing mortality and stroke.
Conclusions
Beta-blockers substantially reduce mortality in HF patients in sinus rhythm, but for other conditions, clinicians need to weigh up both benefit and potential risk.
Journal Article
N-of-1 Trial of a Statin, Placebo, or No Treatment to Assess Side Effects
Patients who had discontinued statins because of side effects received four bottles of a statin, four bottles of placebo, and four empty bottles, each to be used for 1 month in a random sequence for 12 months. The symptom burden with placebo was 90% of the symptom burden with the statin.
Journal Article
Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable angina (ORBITA): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial
Symptomatic relief is the primary goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in stable angina and is commonly observed clinically. However, there is no evidence from blinded, placebo-controlled randomised trials to show its efficacy.
ORBITA is a blinded, multicentre randomised trial of PCI versus a placebo procedure for angina relief that was done at five study sites in the UK. We enrolled patients with severe (≥70%) single-vessel stenoses. After enrolment, patients received 6 weeks of medication optimisation. Patients then had pre-randomisation assessments with cardiopulmonary exercise testing, symptom questionnaires, and dobutamine stress echocardiography. Patients were randomised 1:1 to undergo PCI or a placebo procedure by use of an automated online randomisation tool. After 6 weeks of follow-up, the assessments done before randomisation were repeated at the final assessment. The primary endpoint was difference in exercise time increment between groups. All analyses were based on the intention-to-treat principle and the study population contained all participants who underwent randomisation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02062593.
ORBITA enrolled 230 patients with ischaemic symptoms. After the medication optimisation phase and between Jan 6, 2014, and Aug 11, 2017, 200 patients underwent randomisation, with 105 patients assigned PCI and 95 assigned the placebo procedure. Lesions had mean area stenosis of 84·4% (SD 10·2), fractional flow reserve of 0·69 (0·16), and instantaneous wave-free ratio of 0·76 (0·22). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of exercise time increment between groups (PCI minus placebo 16·6 s, 95% CI −8·9 to 42·0, p=0·200). There were no deaths. Serious adverse events included four pressure-wire related complications in the placebo group, which required PCI, and five major bleeding events, including two in the PCI group and three in the placebo group.
In patients with medically treated angina and severe coronary stenosis, PCI did not increase exercise time by more than the effect of a placebo procedure. The efficacy of invasive procedures can be assessed with a placebo control, as is standard for pharmacotherapy.
NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre, Foundation for Circulatory Health, Imperial College Healthcare Charity, Philips Volcano, NIHR Barts Biomedical Research Centre.
Journal Article
The fractal heart — embracing mathematics in the cardiology clinic
In this Perspectives article, Captur
et al
. explain the fundamental principles of fractal geometry, and summarize cardiovascular studies in which fractal methods have been used to investigate disease mechanisms. The authors propose that clinical researchers can deploy innovative fractal solutions to common cardiac problems, which might ultimately translate into advancements in patient care.
For clinicians grappling with quantifying the complex spatial and temporal patterns of cardiac structure and function (such as myocardial trabeculae, coronary microvascular anatomy, tissue perfusion, myocyte histology, electrical conduction, heart rate, and blood-pressure variability), fractal analysis is a powerful, but still underused, mathematical tool. In this Perspectives article, we explain some fundamental principles of fractal geometry and place it in a familiar medical setting. We summarize studies in the cardiovascular sciences in which fractal methods have successfully been used to investigate disease mechanisms, and suggest potential future clinical roles in cardiac imaging and time series measurements. We believe that clinical researchers can deploy innovative fractal solutions to common cardiac problems that might ultimately translate into advancements for patient care.
Journal Article
Percutaneous coronary intervention for stable coronary artery disease
The adverse consequences of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) are death, myocardial infarction (MI) and angina. Trials in stable CAD show that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) does not reduce mortality. PCI does appear to reduce spontaneous MI rates but at the expense of causing some periprocedural MI. Therefore, the main purpose of PCI is to relieve angina. Indeed, patients and physicians often choose PCI rather than first attempting to control symptoms with anti-anginal medications as recommended by guidelines. Nevertheless, it is unclear how effective PCI is at relieving angina. This is because, whereas anti-anginal medications are universally required to be tested against placebo, there is no such requirement for procedural interventions such as PCI. The first placebo-controlled trial of PCI showed a surprisingly small effect size. This may be because it is overly simplistic to assume that the presence of a stenosis and inducible ischaemia in a patient means that the clinical chest pain they report is caused by ischaemia. In this article, we review the evidence base and argue that if we as a medical specialty wish to lead the science of procedures for symptom control, we should recognise the special merit of placebo-controlled experiments.
Journal Article