All Content

Clinical question: Does a short, fixed duration of antibiotic therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections lead to equivalent outcomes and less antibiotic exposure than the traditional approach?

Background: Published guidelines recommend appropriate antimicrobial agents for intra-abdominal infections, but the optimal duration of therapy remains unclear. Most practitioners continue to treat for 10–14 days and until all physiologic evidence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) has resolved. More recently, small studies have suggested that a shorter course may lead to equivalent outcomes with decreased antibiotic exposure.

Study design: Open-label, multicenter, randomized control trial.

Setting: Twenty-three sites throughout the U.S. and Canada.

Synopsis: In the short-course group, 257 patients were randomized to receive antimicrobial therapy for four full days after their index source-control procedure; 260 patients in the control group received antimicrobial therapy until two days after resolution of the physiological abnormalities related to SIRS. The median duration of therapy was 4.0 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0–5.0) for the experimental group and 8.0 days (IQR 5.0–10.0) in the control group (95% CI, -4.7 to -3.3; P<0.001).

There was no significant difference in surgical site infection, recurrent intra-abdominal infection, or death between the experimental and control groups (21.8% vs. 22.3%, 95% CI, -7.0 to 8.0; P=0.92). In the experimental group, 47 patients did not adhere to the protocol, and all of those patients received a longer antimicrobial treatment course than specified in the protocol.

This trial excluded patients without adequate source control and included a small number of immunocompromised hosts. The rate of nonadherence to the protocol was high, at 18% of patients in the experimental group. The calculated sample size to assert equivalence between groups was not achieved, although the results are suggestive of equivalence.

Bottom line: A shorter course of antimicrobial therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections might lead to equivalent outcomes with less antibiotic exposure compared with current practice; however, it is challenging for providers to stop antimicrobial therapy while patients continue to show physiologic evidence of SIRS.

Citation: Sawyer RG, Claridge JA, Nathens AB, et al. Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection. NEJM. 2015;372(21):1996–2005.

Visit our website for more reviews of HM-focused research.

Clinical question: Does a short, fixed duration of antibiotic therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections lead to equivalent outcomes and less antibiotic exposure than the traditional approach?

Background: Published guidelines recommend appropriate antimicrobial agents for intra-abdominal infections, but the optimal duration of therapy remains unclear. Most practitioners continue to treat for 10–14 days and until all physiologic evidence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) has resolved. More recently, small studies have suggested that a shorter course may lead to equivalent outcomes with decreased antibiotic exposure.

Study design: Open-label, multicenter, randomized control trial.

Setting: Twenty-three sites throughout the U.S. and Canada.

Synopsis: In the short-course group, 257 patients were randomized to receive antimicrobial therapy for four full days after their index source-control procedure; 260 patients in the control group received antimicrobial therapy until two days after resolution of the physiological abnormalities related to SIRS. The median duration of therapy was 4.0 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0–5.0) for the experimental group and 8.0 days (IQR 5.0–10.0) in the control group (95% CI, -4.7 to -3.3; P<0.001).

There was no significant difference in surgical site infection, recurrent intra-abdominal infection, or death between the experimental and control groups (21.8% vs. 22.3%, 95% CI, -7.0 to 8.0; P=0.92). In the experimental group, 47 patients did not adhere to the protocol, and all of those patients received a longer antimicrobial treatment course than specified in the protocol.

This trial excluded patients without adequate source control and included a small number of immunocompromised hosts. The rate of nonadherence to the protocol was high, at 18% of patients in the experimental group. The calculated sample size to assert equivalence between groups was not achieved, although the results are suggestive of equivalence.

Bottom line: A shorter course of antimicrobial therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections might lead to equivalent outcomes with less antibiotic exposure compared with current practice; however, it is challenging for providers to stop antimicrobial therapy while patients continue to show physiologic evidence of SIRS.

Citation: Sawyer RG, Claridge JA, Nathens AB, et al. Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection. NEJM. 2015;372(21):1996–2005.

Visit our website for more reviews of HM-focused research.

Clinical question: Does a short, fixed duration of antibiotic therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections lead to equivalent outcomes and less antibiotic exposure than the traditional approach?

Background: Published guidelines recommend appropriate antimicrobial agents for intra-abdominal infections, but the optimal duration of therapy remains unclear. Most practitioners continue to treat for 10–14 days and until all physiologic evidence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) has resolved. More recently, small studies have suggested that a shorter course may lead to equivalent outcomes with decreased antibiotic exposure.

Study design: Open-label, multicenter, randomized control trial.

Setting: Twenty-three sites throughout the U.S. and Canada.

Synopsis: In the short-course group, 257 patients were randomized to receive antimicrobial therapy for four full days after their index source-control procedure; 260 patients in the control group received antimicrobial therapy until two days after resolution of the physiological abnormalities related to SIRS. The median duration of therapy was 4.0 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0–5.0) for the experimental group and 8.0 days (IQR 5.0–10.0) in the control group (95% CI, -4.7 to -3.3; P<0.001).

There was no significant difference in surgical site infection, recurrent intra-abdominal infection, or death between the experimental and control groups (21.8% vs. 22.3%, 95% CI, -7.0 to 8.0; P=0.92). In the experimental group, 47 patients did not adhere to the protocol, and all of those patients received a longer antimicrobial treatment course than specified in the protocol.

This trial excluded patients without adequate source control and included a small number of immunocompromised hosts. The rate of nonadherence to the protocol was high, at 18% of patients in the experimental group. The calculated sample size to assert equivalence between groups was not achieved, although the results are suggestive of equivalence.

Bottom line: A shorter course of antimicrobial therapy for complicated intra-abdominal infections might lead to equivalent outcomes with less antibiotic exposure compared with current practice; however, it is challenging for providers to stop antimicrobial therapy while patients continue to show physiologic evidence of SIRS.

Citation: Sawyer RG, Claridge JA, Nathens AB, et al. Trial of short-course antimicrobial therapy for intraabdominal infection. NEJM. 2015;372(21):1996–2005.

Visit our website for more reviews of HM-focused research.

NEW YORK - Endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is associated with an initial survival advantage over open repair, according to a study of "real-world" data from California.

However, the difference disappears in the long term, researchers report in JAMA Surgery, online September 2.

Dr. David C. Chang of Harvard Medical School in Boston said by email that the study "highlights the importance of looking at real-world data in evaluating surgical options. Clinically, our study found that the survival advantage for EVAR repairs is maintained until 3 years, after which mortality was higher for patients who had EVAR repairs."

The team studied more than 23,000 patients who underwent AAA repair between 2001 and 2009. Just over half had EVAR while the remaining patients underwent open repair. Median follow-up was for three years.

EVAR was associated with improved 30-day all-cause mortality (1.54% vs. 4.74%) and significantly improved survival until three years postoperatively. After that mortality rose, and the researchers found no difference in long-term mortality for the entire cohort after adjusting for confounders (hazard ratio, 0.99; p=0.64).

EVAR was linked with a significantly higher rate of reinterventions and AAA late ruptures. At five years, for instance, the reintervention rate was 6.59% in the EVAR group vs. 1.48% in the open group.

"This is different from data from clinical trials," Dr. Chang pointed out. "The short-term survival advantage of EVAR from clinical trials data likely eroded as patient risk factors exact their toll over time. These are real-world issues and concerns that are often not captured in idealized clinical trials."

Senior author Dr. Samuel E. Wilson, of the University of California-Irvine Medical Center, added by email that EVAR is safer than the open procedure, which it has replaced. The mortality advantage last for three years, "then other morbidity, especially effects of smoking, even out survival."

Dr. Chang went on to note that "our use of data from the State of California also has an important policy implication: That many states actually have better and more complete population data than the federal government when it comes to healthcare quality. While research and policies related to healthcare quality are driven mostly by the federal government

currently (through Medicare), the federal government has limited data on patient care outside of Medicare."

"Therefore," Dr. Chang concluded, "an argument can be made that the federal government should delegate healthcare research and quality improvement responsibilities to individual states, and support state-level efforts to examine and improve healthcare quality. Healthcare, like politics, is all local."

In an accompanying editorial, Drs. Jamie E. Anderson and James W. Holcroft, of the University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, observe that the study "offers a glimpse into the future of population-based health services research methods."

In a joint email, they said, "Harnessing information already captured for patient care or billing purposes to advance medical research makes sense."

NEW YORK - Endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is associated with an initial survival advantage over open repair, according to a study of "real-world" data from California.

However, the difference disappears in the long term, researchers report in JAMA Surgery, online September 2.

Dr. David C. Chang of Harvard Medical School in Boston said by email that the study "highlights the importance of looking at real-world data in evaluating surgical options. Clinically, our study found that the survival advantage for EVAR repairs is maintained until 3 years, after which mortality was higher for patients who had EVAR repairs."

The team studied more than 23,000 patients who underwent AAA repair between 2001 and 2009. Just over half had EVAR while the remaining patients underwent open repair. Median follow-up was for three years.

EVAR was associated with improved 30-day all-cause mortality (1.54% vs. 4.74%) and significantly improved survival until three years postoperatively. After that mortality rose, and the researchers found no difference in long-term mortality for the entire cohort after adjusting for confounders (hazard ratio, 0.99; p=0.64).

EVAR was linked with a significantly higher rate of reinterventions and AAA late ruptures. At five years, for instance, the reintervention rate was 6.59% in the EVAR group vs. 1.48% in the open group.

"This is different from data from clinical trials," Dr. Chang pointed out. "The short-term survival advantage of EVAR from clinical trials data likely eroded as patient risk factors exact their toll over time. These are real-world issues and concerns that are often not captured in idealized clinical trials."

Senior author Dr. Samuel E. Wilson, of the University of California-Irvine Medical Center, added by email that EVAR is safer than the open procedure, which it has replaced. The mortality advantage last for three years, "then other morbidity, especially effects of smoking, even out survival."

Dr. Chang went on to note that "our use of data from the State of California also has an important policy implication: That many states actually have better and more complete population data than the federal government when it comes to healthcare quality. While research and policies related to healthcare quality are driven mostly by the federal government

currently (through Medicare), the federal government has limited data on patient care outside of Medicare."

"Therefore," Dr. Chang concluded, "an argument can be made that the federal government should delegate healthcare research and quality improvement responsibilities to individual states, and support state-level efforts to examine and improve healthcare quality. Healthcare, like politics, is all local."

In an accompanying editorial, Drs. Jamie E. Anderson and James W. Holcroft, of the University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, observe that the study "offers a glimpse into the future of population-based health services research methods."

In a joint email, they said, "Harnessing information already captured for patient care or billing purposes to advance medical research makes sense."

NEW YORK - Endovascular repair (EVAR) of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) is associated with an initial survival advantage over open repair, according to a study of "real-world" data from California.

However, the difference disappears in the long term, researchers report in JAMA Surgery, online September 2.

Dr. David C. Chang of Harvard Medical School in Boston said by email that the study "highlights the importance of looking at real-world data in evaluating surgical options. Clinically, our study found that the survival advantage for EVAR repairs is maintained until 3 years, after which mortality was higher for patients who had EVAR repairs."

The team studied more than 23,000 patients who underwent AAA repair between 2001 and 2009. Just over half had EVAR while the remaining patients underwent open repair. Median follow-up was for three years.

EVAR was associated with improved 30-day all-cause mortality (1.54% vs. 4.74%) and significantly improved survival until three years postoperatively. After that mortality rose, and the researchers found no difference in long-term mortality for the entire cohort after adjusting for confounders (hazard ratio, 0.99; p=0.64).

EVAR was linked with a significantly higher rate of reinterventions and AAA late ruptures. At five years, for instance, the reintervention rate was 6.59% in the EVAR group vs. 1.48% in the open group.

"This is different from data from clinical trials," Dr. Chang pointed out. "The short-term survival advantage of EVAR from clinical trials data likely eroded as patient risk factors exact their toll over time. These are real-world issues and concerns that are often not captured in idealized clinical trials."

Senior author Dr. Samuel E. Wilson, of the University of California-Irvine Medical Center, added by email that EVAR is safer than the open procedure, which it has replaced. The mortality advantage last for three years, "then other morbidity, especially effects of smoking, even out survival."

Dr. Chang went on to note that "our use of data from the State of California also has an important policy implication: That many states actually have better and more complete population data than the federal government when it comes to healthcare quality. While research and policies related to healthcare quality are driven mostly by the federal government

currently (through Medicare), the federal government has limited data on patient care outside of Medicare."

"Therefore," Dr. Chang concluded, "an argument can be made that the federal government should delegate healthcare research and quality improvement responsibilities to individual states, and support state-level efforts to examine and improve healthcare quality. Healthcare, like politics, is all local."

In an accompanying editorial, Drs. Jamie E. Anderson and James W. Holcroft, of the University of California Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, observe that the study "offers a glimpse into the future of population-based health services research methods."

In a joint email, they said, "Harnessing information already captured for patient care or billing purposes to advance medical research makes sense."

Three pediatric hospitalists – Dr. Ricardo Quiñonez of San Antonio Children’s Hospital, Dr. Shawn Ralston of Dartmouth-Hitchcock, and Dr. Alan Schroeder of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center – talk about the concept of “right care” in hospital medicine, and their participation in the Lown Institute’s Right Care movement.

Three pediatric hospitalists – Dr. Ricardo Quiñonez of San Antonio Children’s Hospital, Dr. Shawn Ralston of Dartmouth-Hitchcock, and Dr. Alan Schroeder of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center – talk about the concept of “right care” in hospital medicine, and their participation in the Lown Institute’s Right Care movement.

Three pediatric hospitalists – Dr. Ricardo Quiñonez of San Antonio Children’s Hospital, Dr. Shawn Ralston of Dartmouth-Hitchcock, and Dr. Alan Schroeder of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center – talk about the concept of “right care” in hospital medicine, and their participation in the Lown Institute’s Right Care movement.

Diabetes affects up to 14 percent of the U.S. population - an increase from nearly 10 percent in the early 1990s - yet over a third of cases still go undiagnosed, according to a new analysis.

Screening seems to be catching more cases, accounting for the general rise over two decades, the study authors say, but mainly whites have benefited; for Hispanic and Asian people in particular, more than half of cases go undetected.

"We need to better educate people on the risk factors for diabetes - including older age, family history and obesity - and improve screening for those at high risk," lead study author Andy Menke, an epidemiologist at Social and Scientific Systems in Silver Spring, Maryland, said by email.

Globally, about one in nine adults has diagnosed diabetes, and the disease will be the seventh leading cause of death by 2030, according to the World Health Organization.

Most of these people have Type 2, or adult-onset, diabetes, which happens when the body can't properly use or make enough of the hormone insulin to convert blood sugar into energy. Left untreated, diabetes can lead to nerve damage, amputations, blindness, heart disease and strokes.

Average blood sugar levels over the course of several months can be estimated by measuring changes to the hemoglobin molecule in red blood cells. The hemoglobin A1c test measures the percentage of hemoglobin - the protein in red blood cells that

carries oxygen - that is coated with sugar, with readings of 6.5 percent or above signaling diabetes.

People with A1c levels between 5.7 percent and 6.4 percent aren't diabetic, but because this is considered elevated it is sometimes called "pre-diabetes" and considered a risk factor for going on to develop full-blown diabetes.

Menke and colleagues estimated the prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected on 2,781 adults in 2011 to 2012 and an additional 23,634 adults from 1988 to 2010.

While the prevalence of diabetes increased over time in the overall population, gains were more pronounced among racial and ethnic minorities, the study found.

About 11 percent of white people have diabetes, the researchers calculated, compared with 22 percent of non-Hispanic black participants, 21 percent of Asians and 23 percent of Hispanics.

Among Asians, 51 percent of those with diabetes were unaware of it, and the same was true for 49 percent of Hispanic people with the condition.

An additional 38 percent of adults fell into the pre-diabetes category. Added to the prevalence of diabetes, that means more than half of the U.S. population has diabetes or is at increased risk for it, the authors point out.

The good news, however, is fewer people are undiagnosed than in the past, Dr. William Herman and Dr. Amy Rothberg of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor note in commentary accompanying the study in JAMA.

In it, they note that the increase in diabetes prevalence between 1988 and 2012 seen in the study was due to an increase in diagnosed cases, and that overall undiagnosed cases fell from 40 percent in 1988-1994 to 31 percent in 2008-2012.

This "likely reflects increased awareness of the problem of undiagnosed diabetes and increased testing," they said by email.

The drop in undiagnosed cases, they added, may be due in part to the newer, simpler A1c test, which doesn't require fasting or any advance preparation.

It's also possible that new cases of diabetes are starting to fall for the first time in decades because more people are getting the message about lifestyle choices that can contribute to diabetes, noted Dr. David Nathan, director of the diabetes center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and a professor at Harvard Medical School.

In particular, more patients now understand that being overweight or obese increases the risk for diabetes, Nathan, author of a separate report in JAMA on advances in diagnosis and treatment, said by email.

"Behavioral changes, including healthy eating and more activity can prevent, or at least ameliorate, the diabetes epidemic," Nathan said.

Diabetes affects up to 14 percent of the U.S. population - an increase from nearly 10 percent in the early 1990s - yet over a third of cases still go undiagnosed, according to a new analysis.

Screening seems to be catching more cases, accounting for the general rise over two decades, the study authors say, but mainly whites have benefited; for Hispanic and Asian people in particular, more than half of cases go undetected.

"We need to better educate people on the risk factors for diabetes - including older age, family history and obesity - and improve screening for those at high risk," lead study author Andy Menke, an epidemiologist at Social and Scientific Systems in Silver Spring, Maryland, said by email.

Globally, about one in nine adults has diagnosed diabetes, and the disease will be the seventh leading cause of death by 2030, according to the World Health Organization.

Most of these people have Type 2, or adult-onset, diabetes, which happens when the body can't properly use or make enough of the hormone insulin to convert blood sugar into energy. Left untreated, diabetes can lead to nerve damage, amputations, blindness, heart disease and strokes.

Average blood sugar levels over the course of several months can be estimated by measuring changes to the hemoglobin molecule in red blood cells. The hemoglobin A1c test measures the percentage of hemoglobin - the protein in red blood cells that

carries oxygen - that is coated with sugar, with readings of 6.5 percent or above signaling diabetes.

People with A1c levels between 5.7 percent and 6.4 percent aren't diabetic, but because this is considered elevated it is sometimes called "pre-diabetes" and considered a risk factor for going on to develop full-blown diabetes.

Menke and colleagues estimated the prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected on 2,781 adults in 2011 to 2012 and an additional 23,634 adults from 1988 to 2010.

While the prevalence of diabetes increased over time in the overall population, gains were more pronounced among racial and ethnic minorities, the study found.

About 11 percent of white people have diabetes, the researchers calculated, compared with 22 percent of non-Hispanic black participants, 21 percent of Asians and 23 percent of Hispanics.

Among Asians, 51 percent of those with diabetes were unaware of it, and the same was true for 49 percent of Hispanic people with the condition.

An additional 38 percent of adults fell into the pre-diabetes category. Added to the prevalence of diabetes, that means more than half of the U.S. population has diabetes or is at increased risk for it, the authors point out.

The good news, however, is fewer people are undiagnosed than in the past, Dr. William Herman and Dr. Amy Rothberg of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor note in commentary accompanying the study in JAMA.

In it, they note that the increase in diabetes prevalence between 1988 and 2012 seen in the study was due to an increase in diagnosed cases, and that overall undiagnosed cases fell from 40 percent in 1988-1994 to 31 percent in 2008-2012.

This "likely reflects increased awareness of the problem of undiagnosed diabetes and increased testing," they said by email.

The drop in undiagnosed cases, they added, may be due in part to the newer, simpler A1c test, which doesn't require fasting or any advance preparation.

It's also possible that new cases of diabetes are starting to fall for the first time in decades because more people are getting the message about lifestyle choices that can contribute to diabetes, noted Dr. David Nathan, director of the diabetes center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and a professor at Harvard Medical School.

In particular, more patients now understand that being overweight or obese increases the risk for diabetes, Nathan, author of a separate report in JAMA on advances in diagnosis and treatment, said by email.

"Behavioral changes, including healthy eating and more activity can prevent, or at least ameliorate, the diabetes epidemic," Nathan said.

Diabetes affects up to 14 percent of the U.S. population - an increase from nearly 10 percent in the early 1990s - yet over a third of cases still go undiagnosed, according to a new analysis.

Screening seems to be catching more cases, accounting for the general rise over two decades, the study authors say, but mainly whites have benefited; for Hispanic and Asian people in particular, more than half of cases go undetected.

"We need to better educate people on the risk factors for diabetes - including older age, family history and obesity - and improve screening for those at high risk," lead study author Andy Menke, an epidemiologist at Social and Scientific Systems in Silver Spring, Maryland, said by email.

Globally, about one in nine adults has diagnosed diabetes, and the disease will be the seventh leading cause of death by 2030, according to the World Health Organization.

Most of these people have Type 2, or adult-onset, diabetes, which happens when the body can't properly use or make enough of the hormone insulin to convert blood sugar into energy. Left untreated, diabetes can lead to nerve damage, amputations, blindness, heart disease and strokes.

Average blood sugar levels over the course of several months can be estimated by measuring changes to the hemoglobin molecule in red blood cells. The hemoglobin A1c test measures the percentage of hemoglobin - the protein in red blood cells that

carries oxygen - that is coated with sugar, with readings of 6.5 percent or above signaling diabetes.

People with A1c levels between 5.7 percent and 6.4 percent aren't diabetic, but because this is considered elevated it is sometimes called "pre-diabetes" and considered a risk factor for going on to develop full-blown diabetes.

Menke and colleagues estimated the prevalence of diabetes and pre-diabetes using data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) collected on 2,781 adults in 2011 to 2012 and an additional 23,634 adults from 1988 to 2010.

While the prevalence of diabetes increased over time in the overall population, gains were more pronounced among racial and ethnic minorities, the study found.

About 11 percent of white people have diabetes, the researchers calculated, compared with 22 percent of non-Hispanic black participants, 21 percent of Asians and 23 percent of Hispanics.

Among Asians, 51 percent of those with diabetes were unaware of it, and the same was true for 49 percent of Hispanic people with the condition.

An additional 38 percent of adults fell into the pre-diabetes category. Added to the prevalence of diabetes, that means more than half of the U.S. population has diabetes or is at increased risk for it, the authors point out.

The good news, however, is fewer people are undiagnosed than in the past, Dr. William Herman and Dr. Amy Rothberg of the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor note in commentary accompanying the study in JAMA.

In it, they note that the increase in diabetes prevalence between 1988 and 2012 seen in the study was due to an increase in diagnosed cases, and that overall undiagnosed cases fell from 40 percent in 1988-1994 to 31 percent in 2008-2012.

This "likely reflects increased awareness of the problem of undiagnosed diabetes and increased testing," they said by email.

The drop in undiagnosed cases, they added, may be due in part to the newer, simpler A1c test, which doesn't require fasting or any advance preparation.

It's also possible that new cases of diabetes are starting to fall for the first time in decades because more people are getting the message about lifestyle choices that can contribute to diabetes, noted Dr. David Nathan, director of the diabetes center at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston and a professor at Harvard Medical School.

In particular, more patients now understand that being overweight or obese increases the risk for diabetes, Nathan, author of a separate report in JAMA on advances in diagnosis and treatment, said by email.

"Behavioral changes, including healthy eating and more activity can prevent, or at least ameliorate, the diabetes epidemic," Nathan said.

NEW YORK - A variant of the CHADS2 score that's used to estimate ischemic stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is also modestly accurate in heart failure patients, even in those without AF, researchers say. The variant, CHA2DS2-VASc, calculates stroke risk based on 10 possible points with higher scores indicating higher risk.

Line Melgaard from Aalborg University in Denmark and colleagues used three Danish nationwide registries to investigate whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score could predict ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in patients with heart failure without AF as effectively as it does in patients with AF.

Patients with heart failure had a high risk of all three outcomes, whether or not AF was present, and the CHA2DS2-VASc score modestly predicted these endpoints at one-year and five-year follow-up (C statistics, 0.67 and 0.69, respectively).

Heart failure patients without AF whose CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 or higher had increased risks of ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in a manner comparable to patients with AF, according to the August 30 JAMA online report.

The negative predictive value (NPV) was around 90% at one-year follow-up for all three outcomes, although NPVs were strongly attenuated by the five-year follow-up.

"In our study, one of our principal findings was that the absolute risk of ischemic stroke among patients without AF was about 1.5% per year or higher with CHA2DS2-VASc scores of 2 or higher, with associated five-year absolute ischemic stroke risks in excess of 4% or more," the researchers noted. This risk level would be sufficient to prompt initiation of long-term anticoagulation in patients with AF, they say.

"The poor prognosis of atrial fibrillation for ischemic stroke and death in patients with heart failure was evident in our study and expected," Melgaard said. "But the observation that additional risk factors in patients with heart failure are particularly significant among those without atrial fibrillation is an important and (to some extent) unexpected result."

"I hope physicians will recognize that patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm have an increased risk of ischemic stroke, and that some subgroups within this population most likely need thromboprophylaxis," Melgaard concluded. "Especially patients with multiple comorbidities (high CHA2DS2-VASc score) need attention in the clinic."

NEW YORK - A variant of the CHADS2 score that's used to estimate ischemic stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is also modestly accurate in heart failure patients, even in those without AF, researchers say. The variant, CHA2DS2-VASc, calculates stroke risk based on 10 possible points with higher scores indicating higher risk.

Line Melgaard from Aalborg University in Denmark and colleagues used three Danish nationwide registries to investigate whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score could predict ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in patients with heart failure without AF as effectively as it does in patients with AF.

Patients with heart failure had a high risk of all three outcomes, whether or not AF was present, and the CHA2DS2-VASc score modestly predicted these endpoints at one-year and five-year follow-up (C statistics, 0.67 and 0.69, respectively).

Heart failure patients without AF whose CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 or higher had increased risks of ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in a manner comparable to patients with AF, according to the August 30 JAMA online report.

The negative predictive value (NPV) was around 90% at one-year follow-up for all three outcomes, although NPVs were strongly attenuated by the five-year follow-up.

"In our study, one of our principal findings was that the absolute risk of ischemic stroke among patients without AF was about 1.5% per year or higher with CHA2DS2-VASc scores of 2 or higher, with associated five-year absolute ischemic stroke risks in excess of 4% or more," the researchers noted. This risk level would be sufficient to prompt initiation of long-term anticoagulation in patients with AF, they say.

"The poor prognosis of atrial fibrillation for ischemic stroke and death in patients with heart failure was evident in our study and expected," Melgaard said. "But the observation that additional risk factors in patients with heart failure are particularly significant among those without atrial fibrillation is an important and (to some extent) unexpected result."

"I hope physicians will recognize that patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm have an increased risk of ischemic stroke, and that some subgroups within this population most likely need thromboprophylaxis," Melgaard concluded. "Especially patients with multiple comorbidities (high CHA2DS2-VASc score) need attention in the clinic."

NEW YORK - A variant of the CHADS2 score that's used to estimate ischemic stroke risk in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) is also modestly accurate in heart failure patients, even in those without AF, researchers say. The variant, CHA2DS2-VASc, calculates stroke risk based on 10 possible points with higher scores indicating higher risk.

Line Melgaard from Aalborg University in Denmark and colleagues used three Danish nationwide registries to investigate whether the CHA2DS2-VASc score could predict ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in patients with heart failure without AF as effectively as it does in patients with AF.

Patients with heart failure had a high risk of all three outcomes, whether or not AF was present, and the CHA2DS2-VASc score modestly predicted these endpoints at one-year and five-year follow-up (C statistics, 0.67 and 0.69, respectively).

Heart failure patients without AF whose CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4 or higher had increased risks of ischemic stroke, thromboembolism, and death in a manner comparable to patients with AF, according to the August 30 JAMA online report.

The negative predictive value (NPV) was around 90% at one-year follow-up for all three outcomes, although NPVs were strongly attenuated by the five-year follow-up.

"In our study, one of our principal findings was that the absolute risk of ischemic stroke among patients without AF was about 1.5% per year or higher with CHA2DS2-VASc scores of 2 or higher, with associated five-year absolute ischemic stroke risks in excess of 4% or more," the researchers noted. This risk level would be sufficient to prompt initiation of long-term anticoagulation in patients with AF, they say.

"The poor prognosis of atrial fibrillation for ischemic stroke and death in patients with heart failure was evident in our study and expected," Melgaard said. "But the observation that additional risk factors in patients with heart failure are particularly significant among those without atrial fibrillation is an important and (to some extent) unexpected result."

"I hope physicians will recognize that patients with heart failure and sinus rhythm have an increased risk of ischemic stroke, and that some subgroups within this population most likely need thromboprophylaxis," Melgaard concluded. "Especially patients with multiple comorbidities (high CHA2DS2-VASc score) need attention in the clinic."

NEW YORK - The American College of Physicians (ACP) has issued a baker's dozen of recommendations intended to guide the effective use of telemedicine in primary care settings.

"The recommendations balance the potential benefits and expanded use of telemedicine with the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship and patient safety," Hilary Daniel from American College of Physicians, Washington, DC, said by email.

Telemedicine, the use of technology to deliver health care services at a distance, began mainly in rural communities and federal health programs, but now is used in a variety of medical specialties and subspecialties.

Daniel and colleagues on the ACP Health and Public Policy Committee detail pragmatic recommendations on the use of telemedicine in the primary care setting, physician considerations for those who use telemedicine in their practices, and policy recommendations on the practice and reimbursement of telemedicine in their September 8 Annals of Internal Medicine online position paper.

While ACP "supports the expanded role of telemedicine as a method of health care delivery that may enhance patient-physician collaborations," it also recommends that direct-to-patient telemedicine services should be used only as an intermittent alternative to a patient's primary care physician when necessary to meet the patient's immediate care

needs.

These services should take place within the context of a valid patient-physician relationship. Physicians who use telemedicine have an obligation to establish such a relationship based on the standard of care required for an in-person visit or consult with another physician who has such a relationship with the patient.

Physicians should take care to see that financially disadvantaged populations also have access to telemedicine services, where appropriate, as well as ensure that these services comply with federal and state security and privacy regulations while meeting the same standards of practice as if the physician were seeing the patient in person.

ACP supports efforts to reimburse telemedicine communications and telehealth services and supports processes to obtain medical licenses and hospital privileges necessary to support telemedicine across state lines.

The committee also endorses the use of federal funds to support the broadband infrastructure and to establish an evidence base on the safety, efficacy, and cost of telemedicine technologies.

"Telemedicine can be an effective and beneficial tool for physicians and patients to enhance a patient's care," Daniel concluded. "Physicians can take away from this report a greater understanding of the regulatory and payment issues surrounding telemedicine and evaluate how telemedicine may be useful for their patients and practice and augment the care they already provide."

In a related editorial, Dr. David A. Asch, from the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, addressed the hidden economics of telemedicine. He said by email, "I think it is a trap to think that the only promise of telemedicine is the opportunity to do something remotely that used to happen face to face. The real opportunities will come from doing health care in a different way because of this remote technology."

"An important question is, 'If there are so many opportunities from telemedicine, why doesn't more of it happen?'" Dr. Asch said. "I think there are a lot of reasons for that but one important reason is that insurers, in particular, worry that if they make telemedicine payments easy, then they will open up the floodgates of demand."

Dr. Laura Markwick, from Wegmans School of Nursing, St. John Fisher College, Rochester, New York, said by email, "I would like to apply these to all health care providers and not just physicians. Of note, they do mention that they recommend a relationship already be established with the patient, which I do not feel is an absolute must. When we did our telemedicine program, we did not have a previous in-person relationship established and we were able to provide high-quality care that improved access for the patients."

"All health care providers should be reimbursed for telemedicine care, at levels similar to what is reimbursed currently," Dr. Markwick said. "This should be a covered service from the person's insurance, depending upon the care needed. If it is just someone who does not feel like making it to an appointment but otherwise could with little difficulty (social issues included in this decision), then perhaps the patient should contribute toward this reimbursement."

Dr. Manish N. Shah, from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, said by email, "It is important to know that the U.S. is behind the rest of the world when it comes to telemedicine. In Canada, the Ontario Telemedicine Network has existed for years. In the UK, telemedicine has been also available."

"Reimbursement for telemedicine is a complex issue, particularly because the entire provider payment system is changing," Dr. Shah said. "However, without funding, telemedicine will not be made available to patients despite increasing evidence showing that patients want to use it, that care can be effectively delivered via telemedicine, and that telemedicine is cost effective."

The authors reported no external funding or disclosures.

NEW YORK - The American College of Physicians (ACP) has issued a baker's dozen of recommendations intended to guide the effective use of telemedicine in primary care settings.

"The recommendations balance the potential benefits and expanded use of telemedicine with the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship and patient safety," Hilary Daniel from American College of Physicians, Washington, DC, said by email.

Telemedicine, the use of technology to deliver health care services at a distance, began mainly in rural communities and federal health programs, but now is used in a variety of medical specialties and subspecialties.

Daniel and colleagues on the ACP Health and Public Policy Committee detail pragmatic recommendations on the use of telemedicine in the primary care setting, physician considerations for those who use telemedicine in their practices, and policy recommendations on the practice and reimbursement of telemedicine in their September 8 Annals of Internal Medicine online position paper.

While ACP "supports the expanded role of telemedicine as a method of health care delivery that may enhance patient-physician collaborations," it also recommends that direct-to-patient telemedicine services should be used only as an intermittent alternative to a patient's primary care physician when necessary to meet the patient's immediate care

needs.

These services should take place within the context of a valid patient-physician relationship. Physicians who use telemedicine have an obligation to establish such a relationship based on the standard of care required for an in-person visit or consult with another physician who has such a relationship with the patient.

Physicians should take care to see that financially disadvantaged populations also have access to telemedicine services, where appropriate, as well as ensure that these services comply with federal and state security and privacy regulations while meeting the same standards of practice as if the physician were seeing the patient in person.

ACP supports efforts to reimburse telemedicine communications and telehealth services and supports processes to obtain medical licenses and hospital privileges necessary to support telemedicine across state lines.

The committee also endorses the use of federal funds to support the broadband infrastructure and to establish an evidence base on the safety, efficacy, and cost of telemedicine technologies.

"Telemedicine can be an effective and beneficial tool for physicians and patients to enhance a patient's care," Daniel concluded. "Physicians can take away from this report a greater understanding of the regulatory and payment issues surrounding telemedicine and evaluate how telemedicine may be useful for their patients and practice and augment the care they already provide."

In a related editorial, Dr. David A. Asch, from the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, addressed the hidden economics of telemedicine. He said by email, "I think it is a trap to think that the only promise of telemedicine is the opportunity to do something remotely that used to happen face to face. The real opportunities will come from doing health care in a different way because of this remote technology."

"An important question is, 'If there are so many opportunities from telemedicine, why doesn't more of it happen?'" Dr. Asch said. "I think there are a lot of reasons for that but one important reason is that insurers, in particular, worry that if they make telemedicine payments easy, then they will open up the floodgates of demand."

Dr. Laura Markwick, from Wegmans School of Nursing, St. John Fisher College, Rochester, New York, said by email, "I would like to apply these to all health care providers and not just physicians. Of note, they do mention that they recommend a relationship already be established with the patient, which I do not feel is an absolute must. When we did our telemedicine program, we did not have a previous in-person relationship established and we were able to provide high-quality care that improved access for the patients."

"All health care providers should be reimbursed for telemedicine care, at levels similar to what is reimbursed currently," Dr. Markwick said. "This should be a covered service from the person's insurance, depending upon the care needed. If it is just someone who does not feel like making it to an appointment but otherwise could with little difficulty (social issues included in this decision), then perhaps the patient should contribute toward this reimbursement."

Dr. Manish N. Shah, from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, said by email, "It is important to know that the U.S. is behind the rest of the world when it comes to telemedicine. In Canada, the Ontario Telemedicine Network has existed for years. In the UK, telemedicine has been also available."

"Reimbursement for telemedicine is a complex issue, particularly because the entire provider payment system is changing," Dr. Shah said. "However, without funding, telemedicine will not be made available to patients despite increasing evidence showing that patients want to use it, that care can be effectively delivered via telemedicine, and that telemedicine is cost effective."

The authors reported no external funding or disclosures.

NEW YORK - The American College of Physicians (ACP) has issued a baker's dozen of recommendations intended to guide the effective use of telemedicine in primary care settings.

"The recommendations balance the potential benefits and expanded use of telemedicine with the importance of maintaining the patient-physician relationship and patient safety," Hilary Daniel from American College of Physicians, Washington, DC, said by email.

Telemedicine, the use of technology to deliver health care services at a distance, began mainly in rural communities and federal health programs, but now is used in a variety of medical specialties and subspecialties.

Daniel and colleagues on the ACP Health and Public Policy Committee detail pragmatic recommendations on the use of telemedicine in the primary care setting, physician considerations for those who use telemedicine in their practices, and policy recommendations on the practice and reimbursement of telemedicine in their September 8 Annals of Internal Medicine online position paper.

While ACP "supports the expanded role of telemedicine as a method of health care delivery that may enhance patient-physician collaborations," it also recommends that direct-to-patient telemedicine services should be used only as an intermittent alternative to a patient's primary care physician when necessary to meet the patient's immediate care

needs.

These services should take place within the context of a valid patient-physician relationship. Physicians who use telemedicine have an obligation to establish such a relationship based on the standard of care required for an in-person visit or consult with another physician who has such a relationship with the patient.

Physicians should take care to see that financially disadvantaged populations also have access to telemedicine services, where appropriate, as well as ensure that these services comply with federal and state security and privacy regulations while meeting the same standards of practice as if the physician were seeing the patient in person.

ACP supports efforts to reimburse telemedicine communications and telehealth services and supports processes to obtain medical licenses and hospital privileges necessary to support telemedicine across state lines.

The committee also endorses the use of federal funds to support the broadband infrastructure and to establish an evidence base on the safety, efficacy, and cost of telemedicine technologies.

"Telemedicine can be an effective and beneficial tool for physicians and patients to enhance a patient's care," Daniel concluded. "Physicians can take away from this report a greater understanding of the regulatory and payment issues surrounding telemedicine and evaluate how telemedicine may be useful for their patients and practice and augment the care they already provide."

In a related editorial, Dr. David A. Asch, from the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Health Care Innovation, Philadelphia, addressed the hidden economics of telemedicine. He said by email, "I think it is a trap to think that the only promise of telemedicine is the opportunity to do something remotely that used to happen face to face. The real opportunities will come from doing health care in a different way because of this remote technology."

"An important question is, 'If there are so many opportunities from telemedicine, why doesn't more of it happen?'" Dr. Asch said. "I think there are a lot of reasons for that but one important reason is that insurers, in particular, worry that if they make telemedicine payments easy, then they will open up the floodgates of demand."

Dr. Laura Markwick, from Wegmans School of Nursing, St. John Fisher College, Rochester, New York, said by email, "I would like to apply these to all health care providers and not just physicians. Of note, they do mention that they recommend a relationship already be established with the patient, which I do not feel is an absolute must. When we did our telemedicine program, we did not have a previous in-person relationship established and we were able to provide high-quality care that improved access for the patients."

"All health care providers should be reimbursed for telemedicine care, at levels similar to what is reimbursed currently," Dr. Markwick said. "This should be a covered service from the person's insurance, depending upon the care needed. If it is just someone who does not feel like making it to an appointment but otherwise could with little difficulty (social issues included in this decision), then perhaps the patient should contribute toward this reimbursement."

Dr. Manish N. Shah, from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, said by email, "It is important to know that the U.S. is behind the rest of the world when it comes to telemedicine. In Canada, the Ontario Telemedicine Network has existed for years. In the UK, telemedicine has been also available."

"Reimbursement for telemedicine is a complex issue, particularly because the entire provider payment system is changing," Dr. Shah said. "However, without funding, telemedicine will not be made available to patients despite increasing evidence showing that patients want to use it, that care can be effectively delivered via telemedicine, and that telemedicine is cost effective."

The authors reported no external funding or disclosures.

NEW YORK - Coating on endovascular devices is associated with embolization and microvascular occlusion leading to purpura or livedo racemosa, according to a new report.

Dr. Alina Bridges, of the Department of Dermatology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, said by email that the study was conducted "to make clinicians and pathologists aware of this underrecognized phenomenon of iatrogenic hydrophilic polymer gel embolization that can involve the skin and present with purpura."

The phenomenon "has distinctive microscopic morphology and potential for internal organ involvement," she added.

Endovascular devices commonly are coated with hydrophilic polymer gels to improve maneuverability and prevent vasospasm. However, there are reports of the coating embolizing, resulting

in severe reactions such as stroke, pulmonary infarction, and death.

Dr. Bridges and colleagues presented a case study of eight patients with livedo racemosa and purpura after an endovascular procedure. The patients had punch biopsies obtained with hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections.

The study subjects were between 58 and 81 years old, most were men and most had previous endovascular procedures and multiple comorbidities, according to an article online August 11 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

In all but one patient, the cutaneous lesions were unilateral and all but two were asymptomatic. Six patients presented with livedo racemosa and two with purpura.

All cases demonstrated pauci-inflammatory occlusion in the mid-dermal and small superficial vessels. Likewise, histopathologic evidence was consistent with previously reported cases of emboli secondary to hydrophilic gel polymer.

There was no evidence of embolic sequela to the organs in three patients. However, one patient died of unknown reasons and four patients experienced postoperative complications including spinal cord ischemia, acute kidney injury, and cerebral infarction. In all cases, the cutaneous manifestations resolved without intervention.

The authors say they suspect the incidence of this type of embolization is underrecognized, especially with the common use of hydrophilic polymer gel coatings.

"This report highlights the importance of awareness of this rare iatrogenic complication and the importance of investigating a patient's clinical history to determine if there had been recent exposure to an intravascular device with a hydrophilic coating," Dr. Bridges said.

"While the use of polymer-coated devices offers several advantages, clinicians must be aware of their potential complications, including stroke, myocardial and pulmonary infarction, gangrene, and/or death," she said.

The authors reported no funding or conflicts of interest.

NEW YORK - Coating on endovascular devices is associated with embolization and microvascular occlusion leading to purpura or livedo racemosa, according to a new report.

Dr. Alina Bridges, of the Department of Dermatology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, said by email that the study was conducted "to make clinicians and pathologists aware of this underrecognized phenomenon of iatrogenic hydrophilic polymer gel embolization that can involve the skin and present with purpura."

The phenomenon "has distinctive microscopic morphology and potential for internal organ involvement," she added.

Endovascular devices commonly are coated with hydrophilic polymer gels to improve maneuverability and prevent vasospasm. However, there are reports of the coating embolizing, resulting

in severe reactions such as stroke, pulmonary infarction, and death.

Dr. Bridges and colleagues presented a case study of eight patients with livedo racemosa and purpura after an endovascular procedure. The patients had punch biopsies obtained with hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections.

The study subjects were between 58 and 81 years old, most were men and most had previous endovascular procedures and multiple comorbidities, according to an article online August 11 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

In all but one patient, the cutaneous lesions were unilateral and all but two were asymptomatic. Six patients presented with livedo racemosa and two with purpura.

All cases demonstrated pauci-inflammatory occlusion in the mid-dermal and small superficial vessels. Likewise, histopathologic evidence was consistent with previously reported cases of emboli secondary to hydrophilic gel polymer.

There was no evidence of embolic sequela to the organs in three patients. However, one patient died of unknown reasons and four patients experienced postoperative complications including spinal cord ischemia, acute kidney injury, and cerebral infarction. In all cases, the cutaneous manifestations resolved without intervention.

The authors say they suspect the incidence of this type of embolization is underrecognized, especially with the common use of hydrophilic polymer gel coatings.

"This report highlights the importance of awareness of this rare iatrogenic complication and the importance of investigating a patient's clinical history to determine if there had been recent exposure to an intravascular device with a hydrophilic coating," Dr. Bridges said.

"While the use of polymer-coated devices offers several advantages, clinicians must be aware of their potential complications, including stroke, myocardial and pulmonary infarction, gangrene, and/or death," she said.

The authors reported no funding or conflicts of interest.

NEW YORK - Coating on endovascular devices is associated with embolization and microvascular occlusion leading to purpura or livedo racemosa, according to a new report.

Dr. Alina Bridges, of the Department of Dermatology at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, said by email that the study was conducted "to make clinicians and pathologists aware of this underrecognized phenomenon of iatrogenic hydrophilic polymer gel embolization that can involve the skin and present with purpura."

The phenomenon "has distinctive microscopic morphology and potential for internal organ involvement," she added.

Endovascular devices commonly are coated with hydrophilic polymer gels to improve maneuverability and prevent vasospasm. However, there are reports of the coating embolizing, resulting

in severe reactions such as stroke, pulmonary infarction, and death.

Dr. Bridges and colleagues presented a case study of eight patients with livedo racemosa and purpura after an endovascular procedure. The patients had punch biopsies obtained with hematoxylin-eosin-stained sections.

The study subjects were between 58 and 81 years old, most were men and most had previous endovascular procedures and multiple comorbidities, according to an article online August 11 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.

In all but one patient, the cutaneous lesions were unilateral and all but two were asymptomatic. Six patients presented with livedo racemosa and two with purpura.

All cases demonstrated pauci-inflammatory occlusion in the mid-dermal and small superficial vessels. Likewise, histopathologic evidence was consistent with previously reported cases of emboli secondary to hydrophilic gel polymer.

There was no evidence of embolic sequela to the organs in three patients. However, one patient died of unknown reasons and four patients experienced postoperative complications including spinal cord ischemia, acute kidney injury, and cerebral infarction. In all cases, the cutaneous manifestations resolved without intervention.

The authors say they suspect the incidence of this type of embolization is underrecognized, especially with the common use of hydrophilic polymer gel coatings.

"This report highlights the importance of awareness of this rare iatrogenic complication and the importance of investigating a patient's clinical history to determine if there had been recent exposure to an intravascular device with a hydrophilic coating," Dr. Bridges said.

"While the use of polymer-coated devices offers several advantages, clinicians must be aware of their potential complications, including stroke, myocardial and pulmonary infarction, gangrene, and/or death," she said.

The authors reported no funding or conflicts of interest.

Too little sleep, or poor-quality sleep, may be linked to early markers of heart disease in asymptomatic healthy adults, a new study from South Korea suggests.

More than 47,000 men and women completed a sleep questionnaire and underwent assessments of coronary artery calcium and plaque as well as brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV).

Participants' average sleep duration was 6.4 hours per night, and about 84 percent said their sleep quality was "good," according to Dr. Chan-Won Kim of Kangbuk Samsung Hospital of Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine in Seoul, South Korea and colleagues.

The researchers considered those who got five hours or less per night to be "short" sleepers, and those who got nine or more hours to be "long" sleepers.

Short sleepers had 50% more coronary artery calcium than those who slept for seven hours per night, according to the results in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology. Long sleepers had 70% more calcium than those who slept seven hours.

Those who reported poor sleep quality also tended to have more coronary calcium and more arterial stiffness.

In a 2013 study, people who tended to get less than six hours of sleep nightly were more likely to have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes and to be obese.

"Adults with poor sleep quality have stiffer arteries than those who sleep seven hours a day or had good sleep quality," co-lead author Dr. Yoosoo Chang of the Center for Cohort Studies at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital said in a statement accompanying the study. "Overall, we saw the lowest levels of vascular disease in adults sleeping seven hours a day and reporting good sleep quality."

Short sleepers were more likely than others to be older, have depression, type 2 diabetes or to be smokers.

"The associations of too short or too long sleep duration and of poor sleep quality with early indicators of heart disease, such as coronary calcium and arterial stiffness, provides strong support to the increasing body of evidence that links inadequate sleep with an increased risk of heart attacks," Kim said by email.

"It is still not clear if inadequate sleep is the cause or the consequence of ill health," but good sleep hygiene, including avoiding electronic media at bedtime, should be part of a healthy lifestyle, Kim said.

"For doctors, it can be helpful to evaluate sleep duration and sleep quality when assessing the health status of their patients," Kim said.

Too little sleep, or poor-quality sleep, may be linked to early markers of heart disease in asymptomatic healthy adults, a new study from South Korea suggests.

More than 47,000 men and women completed a sleep questionnaire and underwent assessments of coronary artery calcium and plaque as well as brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV).

Participants' average sleep duration was 6.4 hours per night, and about 84 percent said their sleep quality was "good," according to Dr. Chan-Won Kim of Kangbuk Samsung Hospital of Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine in Seoul, South Korea and colleagues.

The researchers considered those who got five hours or less per night to be "short" sleepers, and those who got nine or more hours to be "long" sleepers.

Short sleepers had 50% more coronary artery calcium than those who slept for seven hours per night, according to the results in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology. Long sleepers had 70% more calcium than those who slept seven hours.

Those who reported poor sleep quality also tended to have more coronary calcium and more arterial stiffness.

In a 2013 study, people who tended to get less than six hours of sleep nightly were more likely to have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes and to be obese.

"Adults with poor sleep quality have stiffer arteries than those who sleep seven hours a day or had good sleep quality," co-lead author Dr. Yoosoo Chang of the Center for Cohort Studies at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital said in a statement accompanying the study. "Overall, we saw the lowest levels of vascular disease in adults sleeping seven hours a day and reporting good sleep quality."

Short sleepers were more likely than others to be older, have depression, type 2 diabetes or to be smokers.

"The associations of too short or too long sleep duration and of poor sleep quality with early indicators of heart disease, such as coronary calcium and arterial stiffness, provides strong support to the increasing body of evidence that links inadequate sleep with an increased risk of heart attacks," Kim said by email.

"It is still not clear if inadequate sleep is the cause or the consequence of ill health," but good sleep hygiene, including avoiding electronic media at bedtime, should be part of a healthy lifestyle, Kim said.

"For doctors, it can be helpful to evaluate sleep duration and sleep quality when assessing the health status of their patients," Kim said.

Too little sleep, or poor-quality sleep, may be linked to early markers of heart disease in asymptomatic healthy adults, a new study from South Korea suggests.

More than 47,000 men and women completed a sleep questionnaire and underwent assessments of coronary artery calcium and plaque as well as brachial-ankle pulse wave velocity (PWV).

Participants' average sleep duration was 6.4 hours per night, and about 84 percent said their sleep quality was "good," according to Dr. Chan-Won Kim of Kangbuk Samsung Hospital of Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine in Seoul, South Korea and colleagues.

The researchers considered those who got five hours or less per night to be "short" sleepers, and those who got nine or more hours to be "long" sleepers.

Short sleepers had 50% more coronary artery calcium than those who slept for seven hours per night, according to the results in Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis and Vascular Biology. Long sleepers had 70% more calcium than those who slept seven hours.

Those who reported poor sleep quality also tended to have more coronary calcium and more arterial stiffness.

In a 2013 study, people who tended to get less than six hours of sleep nightly were more likely to have high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes and to be obese.

"Adults with poor sleep quality have stiffer arteries than those who sleep seven hours a day or had good sleep quality," co-lead author Dr. Yoosoo Chang of the Center for Cohort Studies at Kangbuk Samsung Hospital said in a statement accompanying the study. "Overall, we saw the lowest levels of vascular disease in adults sleeping seven hours a day and reporting good sleep quality."

Short sleepers were more likely than others to be older, have depression, type 2 diabetes or to be smokers.

"The associations of too short or too long sleep duration and of poor sleep quality with early indicators of heart disease, such as coronary calcium and arterial stiffness, provides strong support to the increasing body of evidence that links inadequate sleep with an increased risk of heart attacks," Kim said by email.

"It is still not clear if inadequate sleep is the cause or the consequence of ill health," but good sleep hygiene, including avoiding electronic media at bedtime, should be part of a healthy lifestyle, Kim said.

"For doctors, it can be helpful to evaluate sleep duration and sleep quality when assessing the health status of their patients," Kim said.

NEW YORK—Smokers who switch to e-cigarettes - even if only some of the time - may dramatically reduce their exposure to air pollutants including carbon monoxide and acrolein, a British study suggests.

Researchers gave e-cigarettes to 40 smokers who said they wanted to quit. After four weeks, the 16 participants using only e-cigarettes had about an 80% drop in exposure both to carbon monoxide and to acrolein, a harmful breakdown product that is also in some e-cigarettes' vapor. Acrolein is known to irritate exposed tissues and can destroy cilia.

The 17 participants who swapped some regular cigarettes for the electronic version had a 52% decline in carbon monoxide exposure and a 60% decline for acrolein, according to a report online September 3 in Cancer Prevention Research.

To get the most benefit from switching to e-cigarettes, smokers need to completely give up traditional cigarettes, lead study author Dr. Hayden McRobbie, of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine at Queen Mary University of London, said by email.

"Smokers may get some encouragement from the finding that there is some potential health benefit as soon as they start the process," Dr. McRobbie said.

While tobacco control advocates fear that e-cigarettes may give rise to a new generation of nicotine addicts who eventually transition to conventional cigarettes, the current study adds to a small but growing body of evidence suggesting the devices might benefit the health of people who already smoke.

An international analysis of published research by the Cochrane Review in December concluded the devices could help smokers quit but said much of the existing research on e-cigarettes was thin.

Even though the current study points to another potential benefit of e-cigarettes, more evidence is still needed from longer and larger trials before scientists can draw firm conclusions about any safety advantages, Dr. Nancy Rigotti, director of tobacco research at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said by email.

"It is exactly the type of incremental, careful work that is needed but it is not yet a definitive study," Rigotti, who wasn't involved in the study, said.

Study participants were typically in their 40s and had attempted to quit at least twice before joining the trial. All of them were offered the same type of e-cigarette and encouraged to completely abandon traditional cigarettes.

Researchers measured carbon monoxide in participants' breath one week before switching to e-cigarettes, on the day they switched, and again four weeks later. They followed the same schedule for testing urine for exposure to acrolein.

A limitation of the study, the authors acknowledged, is that it only included people with a desire to quit smoking, making it possible the results would be different for smokers with no intention of quitting. It's also possible that the specific model of e-cigarette used in the study might not be representative of other devices.

Still, the findings suggest smokers should be told e-cigarettes may curb their exposure to toxic chemicals, Dr. Riccardo Polosa, head of the tobacco research center at the University of Catania in Italy, said by email.

"This study adds to the evidence that e-cigarettes are much less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes," said Polosa, who wasn't involved in the study.

NEW YORK—Smokers who switch to e-cigarettes - even if only some of the time - may dramatically reduce their exposure to air pollutants including carbon monoxide and acrolein, a British study suggests.

Researchers gave e-cigarettes to 40 smokers who said they wanted to quit. After four weeks, the 16 participants using only e-cigarettes had about an 80% drop in exposure both to carbon monoxide and to acrolein, a harmful breakdown product that is also in some e-cigarettes' vapor. Acrolein is known to irritate exposed tissues and can destroy cilia.

The 17 participants who swapped some regular cigarettes for the electronic version had a 52% decline in carbon monoxide exposure and a 60% decline for acrolein, according to a report online September 3 in Cancer Prevention Research.

To get the most benefit from switching to e-cigarettes, smokers need to completely give up traditional cigarettes, lead study author Dr. Hayden McRobbie, of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine at Queen Mary University of London, said by email.

"Smokers may get some encouragement from the finding that there is some potential health benefit as soon as they start the process," Dr. McRobbie said.

While tobacco control advocates fear that e-cigarettes may give rise to a new generation of nicotine addicts who eventually transition to conventional cigarettes, the current study adds to a small but growing body of evidence suggesting the devices might benefit the health of people who already smoke.

An international analysis of published research by the Cochrane Review in December concluded the devices could help smokers quit but said much of the existing research on e-cigarettes was thin.

Even though the current study points to another potential benefit of e-cigarettes, more evidence is still needed from longer and larger trials before scientists can draw firm conclusions about any safety advantages, Dr. Nancy Rigotti, director of tobacco research at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said by email.

"It is exactly the type of incremental, careful work that is needed but it is not yet a definitive study," Rigotti, who wasn't involved in the study, said.

Study participants were typically in their 40s and had attempted to quit at least twice before joining the trial. All of them were offered the same type of e-cigarette and encouraged to completely abandon traditional cigarettes.

Researchers measured carbon monoxide in participants' breath one week before switching to e-cigarettes, on the day they switched, and again four weeks later. They followed the same schedule for testing urine for exposure to acrolein.

A limitation of the study, the authors acknowledged, is that it only included people with a desire to quit smoking, making it possible the results would be different for smokers with no intention of quitting. It's also possible that the specific model of e-cigarette used in the study might not be representative of other devices.

Still, the findings suggest smokers should be told e-cigarettes may curb their exposure to toxic chemicals, Dr. Riccardo Polosa, head of the tobacco research center at the University of Catania in Italy, said by email.

"This study adds to the evidence that e-cigarettes are much less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes," said Polosa, who wasn't involved in the study.

NEW YORK—Smokers who switch to e-cigarettes - even if only some of the time - may dramatically reduce their exposure to air pollutants including carbon monoxide and acrolein, a British study suggests.

Researchers gave e-cigarettes to 40 smokers who said they wanted to quit. After four weeks, the 16 participants using only e-cigarettes had about an 80% drop in exposure both to carbon monoxide and to acrolein, a harmful breakdown product that is also in some e-cigarettes' vapor. Acrolein is known to irritate exposed tissues and can destroy cilia.

The 17 participants who swapped some regular cigarettes for the electronic version had a 52% decline in carbon monoxide exposure and a 60% decline for acrolein, according to a report online September 3 in Cancer Prevention Research.

To get the most benefit from switching to e-cigarettes, smokers need to completely give up traditional cigarettes, lead study author Dr. Hayden McRobbie, of the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine at Queen Mary University of London, said by email.

"Smokers may get some encouragement from the finding that there is some potential health benefit as soon as they start the process," Dr. McRobbie said.

While tobacco control advocates fear that e-cigarettes may give rise to a new generation of nicotine addicts who eventually transition to conventional cigarettes, the current study adds to a small but growing body of evidence suggesting the devices might benefit the health of people who already smoke.

An international analysis of published research by the Cochrane Review in December concluded the devices could help smokers quit but said much of the existing research on e-cigarettes was thin.

Even though the current study points to another potential benefit of e-cigarettes, more evidence is still needed from longer and larger trials before scientists can draw firm conclusions about any safety advantages, Dr. Nancy Rigotti, director of tobacco research at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, said by email.

"It is exactly the type of incremental, careful work that is needed but it is not yet a definitive study," Rigotti, who wasn't involved in the study, said.

Study participants were typically in their 40s and had attempted to quit at least twice before joining the trial. All of them were offered the same type of e-cigarette and encouraged to completely abandon traditional cigarettes.

Researchers measured carbon monoxide in participants' breath one week before switching to e-cigarettes, on the day they switched, and again four weeks later. They followed the same schedule for testing urine for exposure to acrolein.

A limitation of the study, the authors acknowledged, is that it only included people with a desire to quit smoking, making it possible the results would be different for smokers with no intention of quitting. It's also possible that the specific model of e-cigarette used in the study might not be representative of other devices.

Still, the findings suggest smokers should be told e-cigarettes may curb their exposure to toxic chemicals, Dr. Riccardo Polosa, head of the tobacco research center at the University of Catania in Italy, said by email.

"This study adds to the evidence that e-cigarettes are much less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes," said Polosa, who wasn't involved in the study.

NEW YORK — An experimental, highly sensitive troponin test cannot predict when type 2 diabetics with stable ischemic heart disease will benefit from prompt coronary revascularization, but it can show which patients are more likely to die from myocardial infarction, stroke, or other cardiovascular cases, according to a new study.

Because the troponin test measures damage to heart muscle, the outcome "suggests there's ongoing injury to patients with stable heart disease and diabetes. It has a strong association with death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure," the chief author, Dr. Brendan Everett, director of inpatient general cardiology at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, told Reuters Health in a telephone interview.

But when it comes to heading off a higher risk, "we need to do more research to understand where it's coming from and what therapies might be appropriate. So it does not appear in this population that opening the coronary arteries offers any long-term benefit with respect to death or heart attack," he said.

"It tells you this is not the type of disease status that can be managed by bypass or stenting," said Dr. David Zhao, chairman of cardiology at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He was not involved in the research.

"From the patient's standpoint, it is disappointing," Dr. Zhao said. "But from a science standpoint, it all comes together nicely. These patients tend to have more small-vessel microvascular disease and the constant elevation of troponin indicates that there is more severe microvascular disease and more endomyocardial injury. I think it gives us the opportunity to look at more intensified medical management in this group of patients."

The study was an offshoot of the BARI 2D trial, conducted at 49 sites in six countries. It found that aggressive revascularization didn't reduce the risk of death or cardiovascular outcomes compared to intensive medical therapy alone in type 2 diabetics with stable heart disease.

In the new research, the team went back and used a highly sensitive troponin test sold in Europe but not available in the United States to see "if it could be used in stable patients to identify those who would benefit from having their coronary arteries opened with either angioplasty and stenting or bypass surgery," Dr. Everett said.

"There aren't many studies addressing that question and luckily BARI 2D had samples that were stored and available to us after the completion of the trial," he said. "What we did find was that there's clearly a group of patients that are at very high risk for death, heart attack, heart failure, and stroke."

The researchers found 27.1% of patients with a troponin T level of 14.0 ng/L or higher died from cardiovascular cause, or had a heart attack or stroke, compared to 12.9% of patients whose levels were lower, they reported online August 12 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Adjusting for various factors, the risk of reaching one of those primary endpoints after five years was 85% greater with the higher troponin levels (P<0.001).

The risks for reaching individual components of the composite endpoint were also higher. Unadjusted five-year rates for patients with higher versus lower troponin levels were, respectively, 10.9% versus 3.5% for cardiovascular death, 18.7% versus 9.2% for myocardial infarction, 4.4% versus 2.3% for stroke, and 25.7% versus 11.1% for heart failure.

The Everett team also found that among the 897 volunteers whose levels had been at 14 or above, receiving a prompt intervention did not reduce their likelihood of reaching a primary endpoint compared to the 2,277 with normal concentrations.

The five-year rates of heart attack, stroke, or death from any cardiovascular cause were 26.5% in the revascularization group and 27.6% with medical therapy alone.

"We need to figure out how to better treat them, because fixing their coronary arteries doesn't seem to be giving them the benefit we thought it would, or hoped it would," said Dr. Everett. "For the time being, this is not a test that should be routinely used on stable patients."

The researchers also looked at how troponin levels changed over time.

"Despite aggressive medical therapy for type 2 diabetes and stable ischemic heart disease, the median troponin T concentration increased over one year of follow-up, and no significant reductions in troponin T concentrations were observed in patients who underwent coronary revascularization," the researchers said.

"If this type of patient has elevated troponin, I would be more aggressive in medical management, including statins, smoking cessation, and lifestyle changes," said Dr. Zhao of Wake Forest. "I think the next step would be to ideally run a clinical trial and see if, in patients with elevated troponin levels, intensified medical management reduces the number of events as compared to standard therapy.

NEW YORK — An experimental, highly sensitive troponin test cannot predict when type 2 diabetics with stable ischemic heart disease will benefit from prompt coronary revascularization, but it can show which patients are more likely to die from myocardial infarction, stroke, or other cardiovascular cases, according to a new study.

Because the troponin test measures damage to heart muscle, the outcome "suggests there's ongoing injury to patients with stable heart disease and diabetes. It has a strong association with death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure," the chief author, Dr. Brendan Everett, director of inpatient general cardiology at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, told Reuters Health in a telephone interview.

But when it comes to heading off a higher risk, "we need to do more research to understand where it's coming from and what therapies might be appropriate. So it does not appear in this population that opening the coronary arteries offers any long-term benefit with respect to death or heart attack," he said.

"It tells you this is not the type of disease status that can be managed by bypass or stenting," said Dr. David Zhao, chairman of cardiology at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He was not involved in the research.

"From the patient's standpoint, it is disappointing," Dr. Zhao said. "But from a science standpoint, it all comes together nicely. These patients tend to have more small-vessel microvascular disease and the constant elevation of troponin indicates that there is more severe microvascular disease and more endomyocardial injury. I think it gives us the opportunity to look at more intensified medical management in this group of patients."

The study was an offshoot of the BARI 2D trial, conducted at 49 sites in six countries. It found that aggressive revascularization didn't reduce the risk of death or cardiovascular outcomes compared to intensive medical therapy alone in type 2 diabetics with stable heart disease.

In the new research, the team went back and used a highly sensitive troponin test sold in Europe but not available in the United States to see "if it could be used in stable patients to identify those who would benefit from having their coronary arteries opened with either angioplasty and stenting or bypass surgery," Dr. Everett said.

"There aren't many studies addressing that question and luckily BARI 2D had samples that were stored and available to us after the completion of the trial," he said. "What we did find was that there's clearly a group of patients that are at very high risk for death, heart attack, heart failure, and stroke."

The researchers found 27.1% of patients with a troponin T level of 14.0 ng/L or higher died from cardiovascular cause, or had a heart attack or stroke, compared to 12.9% of patients whose levels were lower, they reported online August 12 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Adjusting for various factors, the risk of reaching one of those primary endpoints after five years was 85% greater with the higher troponin levels (P<0.001).

The risks for reaching individual components of the composite endpoint were also higher. Unadjusted five-year rates for patients with higher versus lower troponin levels were, respectively, 10.9% versus 3.5% for cardiovascular death, 18.7% versus 9.2% for myocardial infarction, 4.4% versus 2.3% for stroke, and 25.7% versus 11.1% for heart failure.

The Everett team also found that among the 897 volunteers whose levels had been at 14 or above, receiving a prompt intervention did not reduce their likelihood of reaching a primary endpoint compared to the 2,277 with normal concentrations.

The five-year rates of heart attack, stroke, or death from any cardiovascular cause were 26.5% in the revascularization group and 27.6% with medical therapy alone.

"We need to figure out how to better treat them, because fixing their coronary arteries doesn't seem to be giving them the benefit we thought it would, or hoped it would," said Dr. Everett. "For the time being, this is not a test that should be routinely used on stable patients."

The researchers also looked at how troponin levels changed over time.

"Despite aggressive medical therapy for type 2 diabetes and stable ischemic heart disease, the median troponin T concentration increased over one year of follow-up, and no significant reductions in troponin T concentrations were observed in patients who underwent coronary revascularization," the researchers said.

"If this type of patient has elevated troponin, I would be more aggressive in medical management, including statins, smoking cessation, and lifestyle changes," said Dr. Zhao of Wake Forest. "I think the next step would be to ideally run a clinical trial and see if, in patients with elevated troponin levels, intensified medical management reduces the number of events as compared to standard therapy.

NEW YORK — An experimental, highly sensitive troponin test cannot predict when type 2 diabetics with stable ischemic heart disease will benefit from prompt coronary revascularization, but it can show which patients are more likely to die from myocardial infarction, stroke, or other cardiovascular cases, according to a new study.

Because the troponin test measures damage to heart muscle, the outcome "suggests there's ongoing injury to patients with stable heart disease and diabetes. It has a strong association with death, heart attack, stroke, heart failure," the chief author, Dr. Brendan Everett, director of inpatient general cardiology at Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston, told Reuters Health in a telephone interview.

But when it comes to heading off a higher risk, "we need to do more research to understand where it's coming from and what therapies might be appropriate. So it does not appear in this population that opening the coronary arteries offers any long-term benefit with respect to death or heart attack," he said.

"It tells you this is not the type of disease status that can be managed by bypass or stenting," said Dr. David Zhao, chairman of cardiology at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. He was not involved in the research.

"From the patient's standpoint, it is disappointing," Dr. Zhao said. "But from a science standpoint, it all comes together nicely. These patients tend to have more small-vessel microvascular disease and the constant elevation of troponin indicates that there is more severe microvascular disease and more endomyocardial injury. I think it gives us the opportunity to look at more intensified medical management in this group of patients."

The study was an offshoot of the BARI 2D trial, conducted at 49 sites in six countries. It found that aggressive revascularization didn't reduce the risk of death or cardiovascular outcomes compared to intensive medical therapy alone in type 2 diabetics with stable heart disease.

In the new research, the team went back and used a highly sensitive troponin test sold in Europe but not available in the United States to see "if it could be used in stable patients to identify those who would benefit from having their coronary arteries opened with either angioplasty and stenting or bypass surgery," Dr. Everett said.

"There aren't many studies addressing that question and luckily BARI 2D had samples that were stored and available to us after the completion of the trial," he said. "What we did find was that there's clearly a group of patients that are at very high risk for death, heart attack, heart failure, and stroke."

The researchers found 27.1% of patients with a troponin T level of 14.0 ng/L or higher died from cardiovascular cause, or had a heart attack or stroke, compared to 12.9% of patients whose levels were lower, they reported online August 12 in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Adjusting for various factors, the risk of reaching one of those primary endpoints after five years was 85% greater with the higher troponin levels (P<0.001).

The risks for reaching individual components of the composite endpoint were also higher. Unadjusted five-year rates for patients with higher versus lower troponin levels were, respectively, 10.9% versus 3.5% for cardiovascular death, 18.7% versus 9.2% for myocardial infarction, 4.4% versus 2.3% for stroke, and 25.7% versus 11.1% for heart failure.

The Everett team also found that among the 897 volunteers whose levels had been at 14 or above, receiving a prompt intervention did not reduce their likelihood of reaching a primary endpoint compared to the 2,277 with normal concentrations.

The five-year rates of heart attack, stroke, or death from any cardiovascular cause were 26.5% in the revascularization group and 27.6% with medical therapy alone.

"We need to figure out how to better treat them, because fixing their coronary arteries doesn't seem to be giving them the benefit we thought it would, or hoped it would," said Dr. Everett. "For the time being, this is not a test that should be routinely used on stable patients."

The researchers also looked at how troponin levels changed over time.

"Despite aggressive medical therapy for type 2 diabetes and stable ischemic heart disease, the median troponin T concentration increased over one year of follow-up, and no significant reductions in troponin T concentrations were observed in patients who underwent coronary revascularization," the researchers said.

"If this type of patient has elevated troponin, I would be more aggressive in medical management, including statins, smoking cessation, and lifestyle changes," said Dr. Zhao of Wake Forest. "I think the next step would be to ideally run a clinical trial and see if, in patients with elevated troponin levels, intensified medical management reduces the number of events as compared to standard therapy.