Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0002962 (angina)
 21,142 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

Various clinical studies have been undertaken to assess whether medical interventions are effective for the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with coronary artery disease. In the Angioplasty Compared with MEdical therapy (ACME) and Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina 2 (RITA-2) studies, a medical strategy was associated with significantly fewer adverse cardiovascular events, but percutaneous revascularization was associated with greater functional improvement. In the Atorvastatin VErsus Revascularization Treatment (AVERT) study, aggressive lipid-lowering therapy with atorvastatin was more effective than angioplasty at reducing the total number of ischemic events; however, angioplasty was superior in terms of functional improvements. Thus, to prevent ischemic events in this population, coronary artery disease is best treated systemically; if better symptom control is required, angioplasty is still necessary. In the effects of QUinapril On Vascular ACE and Determinants of ISchemia (QUO VADIS) study, treatment with the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor quinapril was associated with significantly fewer ischemic events than placebo at one year following coronary artery bypass graft surgery. However, no significant differences were found between treatments in terms of primary and other secondary outcomes. For patients who have undergone bypass surgery, long term ACE inhibitor therapy may be of benefit, although further studies are warranted.
 ...
PMID:Clinical data: AVERT and QUO VADIS. 1090 24

Medical therapy reduces myocardial infarction and death in patients with stable coronary heart disease (CHD). In contrast, there is little evidence available to evaluate the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on hard endpoints in such patients. Four randomized, controlled trials have compared PCI with medical therapy. These studies have demonstrated that PCI results in an improvement in angina and exercise tolerance compared with medical therapy, but they also suggest that medical therapy may be preferable to PCI with respect to the risk of cardiac events. Interpretation of these studies has been limited by small sample size, exclusion of high-risk subjects, no or reduced use of stents, lack of a cost- effectiveness evaluation, and absence of risk factor intervention (except for Atorvastatin versus Revascularization Treatment, which used aggressive low-density lipoprotein lowering with atorvastatin in the medical group only). The Clinical Outcomes Utilizing Revascularization and Aggressive Drug Evaluation (COURAGE) trial will permit better definition of the role of PCI in the treatment of stable or recently stabilized patients with CHD.
 ...
PMID:Percutaneous coronary intervention versus medical therapy for coronary heart disease. 1112 56

Statins may act rapidly to reverse abnormalities of the arterial wall that may predispose to recurrent ischemic events after acute coronary syndromes. Such abnormalities are endothelial dysfunction, a local inflammatory response. and an exaggerated thrombogenic tendency. In one study almost 20,000 patients with first myocardial infarction were studied with regard to statin treatment (28%) or not. Baseline characteristics were adjusted using multivariate regression analysis including propensity analysis. One year mortality was 3.7/5.0% in statin/not statin groups, respectively, P = 0.001, relative risk 0.75. In another study of more than 20,000 patients, 18% were prescribed statin after an acute coronary syndrome and followed for six months. Propensity analysis was performed in this study as well. Deaths in statin/not statin groups were 1.7/3.5%, P<0.0001, relative risk 0.48. In the Myocardial Ischemia Reduction with Aggressive Cholesterol Lowering (MIRACL), a double-blind randomized, placebo-controlled intervention study, 3086 patient with acute non-Q-wave coronary syndromes were allocated immediately in hospital to receive atorvastatin 80 mg daily or placebo for four months. No lower limit for plasma LDL cholesterol was used. Primary endpoint was time to first occurrence of death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and worsening angina with objective evidence of ischemia. This was significantly reduced compared to the placebo group by 2.4% (14.8 versus 17.2%, relative risk 0.84, P= 0.048). Atorvastatin also reduced significantly fatal or non-fatal strokes. Possible mechanisms behind these acute beneficial effects are discussed. The studies highlight the importance of treatment with a statin in the early management of acute coronary syndromes and the need to incorporate this therapeutic strategy in national guidelines and treatment recommendations.
 ...
PMID:Early initiation of treatment with statins in acute coronary syndromes. 1201 32

The aim of this review of the landmark HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) studies is to enable the clinician to draw practical lessons from these trials. The Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study (4S) established the importance of treating the hypercholesterolemic patient with established cardiovascular heart disease. The West of Scotland Coronary Prevention Study (WOSCOPS) showed the benefit of treating healthy hypercholesterolemic men who were nevertheless at high risk of developing cardiovascular heart disease in the future. The Cholesterol and Recurrent Events (CARE) study, a secondary prevention trial, proved the benefit of treating patients with myocardial ischemia and cholesterol levels within normal limits. This conclusion was confirmed by the Long-term Intervention With Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) study, another secondary prevention study that enrolled patients with a wide range of cholesterol levels (4-7 mmol/dL), into which the large majority of patients would belong. The importance of treating patients with established ischemic heart disease (IHD), and those at high risk of developing cardiovascular heart disease, regardless of cholesterol level, was being realized. The Air Force/Texas Coronary Artery Prevention Study (AFCAPS/TexCAPS) then showed that treatment can reduce adverse cardiovascular events even in the primary prevention of patients with normal cholesterol levels. The Myocardial Ischemia Reduction With Aggressive Cholesterol Lowering (MIRACL) trial showed that hypocholesterolemic therapy is useful in the setting of an acute coronary syndrome, while the Atorvastatin Versus Revascularisation Treatment (AVERT) study showed that aggressive statin therapy is as good as angioplasty in reducing ischemic cardiac events in patients with stable angina pectoris. Finally, the Heart Protection Study (HPS) randomized more than 20,000 patients, and the value of statins in reducing adverse cardiovascular events in the high-risk patient, including the elderly, women, and even in those with low cholesterol levels, is beyond doubt. The emphasis is now on the risk level for developing cardiovascular events, and treatment should target the high-risk group and not be dependent on the actual cholesterol level of the patient. It is interesting to compare the large amount of data on the value and safety of the statins with the much more limited and less convincing data on antioxidant vitamins.
 ...
PMID:Protecting the heart: a practical review of the statin studies. 1281 99

Myocardial injury during coronary intervention occurs in 10-40% of cases and is often characterized by a slight increase in the markers of myocardial necrosis, without symptoms, electrocardiographic changes or impairment of cardiac function. However, even small increases in creatine kinase (CK)-MB levels are an expression of a true and detectable infarction and may be associated with a higher follow-up mortality. The cause of CK-MB elevation in case of procedural complications is obvious; however, most cases of minor CK-MB elevation occur in patients with uncomplicated procedures with excellent final angiographic results. It has been suggested that the main mechanism explaining the occurrence of myocardial necrosis during otherwise successful coronary intervention may be distal microembolization of plaque components, an enhanced inflammatory state or total plaque burden and/or instability. Different treatments have been proposed to prevent myocardial injury during coronary intervention, including nitrate infusion, intracoronary beta-blockers, adenosine and IIb/IIa inhibitors, but none of these (apart from the use of IIb/IIIa inhibitors) have been routinely introduced into clinical practice. Previous observational studies suggested a beneficial effect of pre-treatment with statins in this setting; the ARMYDA (Atorvastatin for Reduction of Myocardial Damage During Angioplasty) trial is the first prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled study, evaluating the effects of 7-day therapy with 40 mg/day of atorvastatin on post-procedural release of markers of myocardial damage in patients with stable angina undergoing percutaneous intervention. In this study therapy with atorvastatin was associated with an 80% risk reduction in the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial infarction, as well as with a significant reduction in post-intervention peak levels of all markers of myocardial damage. The mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of atorvastatin may be an inflammatory action reducing myocardial injury necrosis due to microembolization, an improvement in endothelial function on microcirculation, and direct myocardial protection.
 ...
PMID:[Prevention of periprocedural myocardial damage in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention]. 1628 14

Myocardial injury during coronary intervention occurs in 10-40% of cases and is often characterized by a slight increase of markers of myocardial necrosis, without symptoms, electrocardiographic changes or impairment of cardiac function. However, even small increases of creatine kinase-MB levels are expression of a true and detectable infarction, and may be associated with higher follow-up mortality. The cause of CK-MB elevation in case of procedural complications (dissection, transient vessel closure, no reflow, side branch occlusion etc.) is obvious; however, most cases of minor CK-MB elevation occur in patients with uncomplicated procedure with excellent final angiographic results. It has been suggested that the main mechanism explaining occurrence of myocardial necrosis during otherwise successful coronary interventions may be distal microembolization of plaque components, an enhanced inflammatory state or due to total plaque burden and/or to plaque instability. Different treatments have been proposed to prevent myocardial injury during coronary intervention, including nitrate infusion, intracoronary beta-blockers, adenosine, clopidogrel and IIb/IIIa inhibitors, but none of those (apart from the use of IIb/IIIa inhibitors) has been routinely introduced in clinical practice. We performed the ARMYDA (Atorvastatin for Reduction of MYocardial Damage during Angioplasty) trial, i.e. the first prospective, randomised, placebo controlled study to evaluate effects of 7 days of pre-treatment with a fixed dose of atorvastatin (40 mg/day) on post-procedural release of markers of myocardial damage in patients with stable angina undergoing percutaneous intervention. In this study therapy with atorvastatin has been associated with 80% risk reduction on the occurrence of peri-procedural myocardial infarction, as well as with significant reduction of post-intervention peak levels of all markers of myocardial damage. The mechanisms underlying the beneficial effects of atorvastatin may be an inflammatory action reducing myocardial necrosis due to microembolization, an improvement of endothelial function on microcirculation, and direct protection of myocardium.
 ...
PMID:Prevention of myocardial damage during coronary intervention. 1678 93

Although previous studies have shown systemic inflammatory activation the relation with the local plaque inflammatory activation has not been extensively studied. The present study investigated the relation between local and systemic inflammatory activation in patients with coronary artery disease and the impact of atorvastatin treatment. We included 215 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention; of them 140 were treated with atorvastatin. Patients with stable angina (SA) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS) were included. Systemic inflammation was assessed by serum C-reactive protein (CRP), soluble adhesion molecules levels and local plaque inflammatory activation by coronary thermography. Temperature difference (DeltaT) was assigned as the difference between the proximal vessel wall temperature from the maximal temperature at the culprit plaque. Patients with ACS (n=78) had increased DeltaT compared to patients with SA (n=137) (0.16+/-0.10 degrees C versus 0.08+/-0.07 degrees C, P<0.001). Patients treated with atorvastatin had lower DeltaT compared to untreated patients (0.10+/-0.07 degrees C versus 0.15+/-0.10 degrees C, P<0.01). DeltaT was less in the treated group compared to the untreated group in patients with SA and ACS (ACS: 0.13+/-0.08 degrees C versus 0.20+/-0.11 degrees C, P<0.01, SA: 0.08+/-0.06 degrees C versus 0.13+/-0.08 degrees C, P=0.03). Although a correlation was found between CRP levels and DeltaT (R=0.29, P<0.01), in certain groups a discrepancy between CRP levels and DeltaT was observed. In 25% of patients with low DeltaT CRP levels were >1mg/dl and in 35.5% of patients with high DeltaT CRP was <2mg/dl. The correlation between soluble adhesion molecules and DeltaT did not reach statistical significance. Although there is a correlation between widespread and local inflammatory activation in patients with coronary artery disease, a discrepancy between culprit plaque and systemic inflammatory activation is observed. Atorvastatin has a parallel effect on systemic and local inflammatory process in patients with coronary artery disease.
 ...
PMID:Relation between local temperature and C-reactive protein levels in patients with coronary artery disease: effects of atorvastatin treatment. 1682 Jan 48

We investigated the effects of atorvastatin on inflammation and cardiac events during the inpatient period and initial 6-month follow-up in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with low low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level. One hundred and twelve consecutive ACS patients with LDL cholesterol less than 100 mg/dl were included in the study (mean 78.2+/-12.3 mg/dl). While 70 randomly selected patients received a dose of 40 mg atorvastatin within the first 24 h on top of their standard treatment as the atorvastatin group, the remaining 42 patients considered as the control group were given the standard treatment only, i.e., without any lipid-lowering drug therapy. Lipid profile, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), and plasma amyloid A (SAA) levels were measured in all patients within the first 24 h of chest pain, on the 5th day, and in the 6th month. During the inpatient period and subsequent 6-month follow-up, all episodes of angina, reinfarction, revascularization, heart failure, rehospitalization, cardiac mortality, and total number of cardiac events were recorded. In the atorvastatin group, hsCRP and SAA values on the 5th day and in the 6th month compared to the first 24 h were significantly lower than those of the control group (P<0.0001). Mean LDL cholesterol level was significantly decreased in the atorvastatin group (55.7+/-17.7 mg/dl), but there was no significant change in the control group at the 6th month. The frequency of heart failure during the inpatient period and angina, unstable angina pectoris, heart failure, and revascularization in the first 6 months were also significantly reduced in the atorvastatin group. Atorvastatin started in the first 24 h reduces inflammation and improves the prognosis during both the inpatient period and the first 6 months of clinical follow-up in ACS patients with low LDL cholesterol levels.
 ...
PMID:The effect of early statin treatment on inflammation and cardiac events in acute coronary syndrome patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. 1715 16

A 35-year-old male was diagnosed as angina pectoris and showed severe stenosis with soft plaque in the proximal segment of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery as detected by multi-detector row computed tomography (MDCT). Although percutaneous coronary stent implantation to the LAD lesion was performed, soft plaque remained in the proximal lesion of the stent. Atorvastatin increased the coronary plaque density at the 6-month follow-up MDCT examination, and the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level fell from 141 to 63 mg/dl after 6 months. This case may indicate that assessment of the shape or composition of coronary plaque by MDCT is a useful strategy for judging the effects of intensive lipid-lowering therapy using statin.
 ...
PMID:Successful intensive lipid-lowering therapy using atorvastatin stabilizes coronary artery plaque as assessed by multi-detector row computed tomography. 1757 79

Placebo-controlled clinical trials have shown that atorvastatin is beneficial in patients with myocardial ischemia, established coronary artery disease, hypertension and 3 other cardiovascular risk factors (e.g. left-ventricular hypertrophy, type 2 diabetes, smoking), and in diabetes, but not in patients with calcific aortic stenosis. Recently, intensive low density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol lowering with atorvastatin 80 mg/day has been shown to have a greater clinical benefit than atorvastatin 10 mg/day in patients with coronary heart disease and one other high-risk factor (previous myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization or angina), and to be superior to moderate lipid lowering with pravastatin (40 mg/day) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome. However, a smaller study comparing lovastatin 5 mg/day with atorvastatin 80 mg/day was unable to detect any difference in outcomes in patients with stable coronary disease, despite the greater LDL-cholesterol lowering with the atorvastatin, possibly because it was not powered to do so. In a retrospective cohort study, atorvastatin 10 mg/day, pravastatin 20 mg/day, simvastatin 20 mg/day, lovastatin 20 mg/day and fluvastatin 20 mg/day had similar efficacy as secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction. At present, the evidence from clinical trials is favouring the intensity of the effect on LDL-cholesterol and/or C-reactive protein (CRP) with atorvastatin 80 mg, rather than the use of atorvastatin per se, when greater benefits are observed with the 80 mg dose of atorvastatin compared to other statins. Thus, at present, it is not clear whether atorvastatin is superior to other statins in some indications (coronary heart disease, acute coronary syndromes) or whether it is the intensive lipid lowering that is responsible for the superiority. Atorvastatin has little or no ability to increase high density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, and this may be a disadvantage in patients with metabolic syndrome or diabetes, where low HDL-cholesterol is a key feature. Thus, other statins should probably be preferred to atorvastatin in patients with diabetes/metabolic syndrome. Alternatively, atorvastatin can be used in combination with a fibrate to increase HDL-cholesterol in patients with diabetes/metabolic syndrome.
 ...
PMID:Is atorvastatin superior to other statins? Analysis of the clinical trials with atorvastatin having cardiovascular endpoints. 1847 65


1 2 Next >>