Gene/Protein Disease Symptom Drug Enzyme Compound
Pivot Concepts:   Target Concepts:
Query: UMLS:C0018799 (heart disease)
 34,133 document(s) hit in 31,850,051 MEDLINE articles (0.00 seconds)

The safety of autologous blood donation by "high-risk" patients (those with some preexisting medical conditions) has been questioned. The authors reviewed 1393 consecutive blood donation records (207 high-risk autologous [HRA], 665 non-high-risk autologous [NHRA], and 521 directed donors [DD]) to determine the safety and outcome of blood donation by HRA patients as compared with other donors at their center. The HRA group included patients with a history of significant coronary artery on cerebral vascular disease, recent seizures, cardiac arrhythmia, chronic heart failure, valvular or congenital heart disease, symptomatic dyspnea, insulin-dependent diabetes and/or current therapy with two or more antihypertensive medications. Those designated NHRA were all other autologous donors; DD met all criteria for homologous donation. Donor characteristics including predonation hematocrit, pre- and postdonation mean arterial pressure and heart rates were similar in all groups. Eight HRA donors (3.9%) had reactions, compared with 21 NHRA (3.2%) and 23 DD (4.4%), a difference that was without statistical significance. The reaction rate in all autologous donors (HRA and NHRA) was 3.4%. No differences in symptoms reported, hemodynamics or reaction severity were observed among the three groups (P > .05). A multiple logistic regression was performed within and among the groups with the risk factor categories listed above and medication classes including beta blockers, cardiac glycosides, calcium-channel blockers, antihypertensive agents, nitrates, and antiarrhythmic agents (chi 2 = 14.9; P = .0006). Only first-time donation (P = .0001) and cardiac glycoside usage (P = .04) were positively associated with an untoward reaction. The authors conclude that donation by HRA donors is at least as safe as that by donors who meet homologous donation criteria in their population and setting.
 ...
PMID:Comparable safety of blood collection in "high-risk" autologous donors versus non-high-risk autologous and directed donors in a hospital setting. 787 63

Atrial vulnerability and intra-atrial conduction delay are important substrates for paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (AFib); however, their significance is unknown in patients undergoing atrial flutter ablation. Antegrade (high right atrium to coronary sinus: HRA-CS) and retrograde (CS-HRA) intra-atrial conduction times and AFib inducibility were assessed in 61 patients undergoing ablation for type I atrial flutter. Twenty-three patients had structural heart disease and 18 AFib before the procedure. After 16 +/- 12 months of follow-up 17 patients experienced AFib, 5 of which progressed into chronic AFib. During the study, AFib was easily inducible in 14 patients, 7 of which developed AFib (P =.03). Patients with post- ablation AFib were older (59 +/- 11 vs. 44 +/- 15 years, P =.001), had longer intra-atrial conduction times before (98 +/- 17 ms vs. 68 +/- 20 ms, P <.001) and after ablation (91 +/- 19 ms vs. 73 +/- 21 ms, P =.01) than those without AFib. Discriminant analysis revealed that only age, previous AFib and inta-atrial conduction delay (>90 ms) were independent predictors of postablation AFib. Patients without a history of AFib and with normal intra-atrial conduction had a 3% risk of AFib, while patients with both factors had a 90% risk of AFib after ablation. Intra-atrial conduction delay is an important electrophysiological factor predicting atrial fibrillation after successful flutter ablation.
 ...
PMID:Occurrence of atrial fibrillation after flutter ablation: the significance of intra-atrial conduction and atrial vulnerability. 1294 84