University of Bergamo

ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG), Silvia G. Priori (Chairperson) (Italy), Jean-Jacques Blanc (France), Andrzej Budaj (Poland), John Camm (UK), Veronica Dean (France), Jaap Deckers (The Netherlands), Kenneth Dickstein (Norway), John Lekakis (Greece), Keith McGregor (France), Marco Metra (Italy), João Morais (Portugal), Ady Osterspey (Germany), Juan Tamargo (Spain), José Luis Zamorano (Spain) Document Reviewers, Marco Metra (CPG Review Coordinator) (Italy), Michael Böhm (Germany), Alain Cohen-Solal (France), Martin Cowie (UK), Ulf Dahlström (Sweden), Kenneth Dickstein (Norway), Gerasimos S. Filippatos (Greece), Edoardo Gronda (Italy), Richard Hobbs (UK), John K. Kjekshus (Norway), John McMurray (UK), Lars Rydén (Sweden), Gianfranco Sinagra (Italy), Juan Tamargo (Spain), Michal Tendera (Poland), Dirk van Veldhuisen (The Netherlands), Faiez Zannad (France) Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents aim to present all the relevant evidence on a particular issue in order to help physicians to weigh the benefits and risks of a particular diagnostic or therapeutic procedure. They should be helpful in everyday clinical decision-making. A great number of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents have been issued in recent years by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and by different organizations and other related societies. This profusion can put at stake the authority and validity of guidelines, which can only be guaranteed if they have been developed by an unquestionable decision-making process. This is one of the reasons why the ESC and others have issued recommendations for formulating and issuing Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents. In spite of the fact that standards for issuing good quality Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents are well defined, recent surveys of Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents published in peer-reviewed journals between 1985 and 1998 have shown that methodological standards were not complied with in the vast majority of cases. It is therefore of great importance that guidelines and recommendations are presented in formats that are easily interpreted. Subsequently, their implementation programmes must also be well conducted. Attempts have been made to determine whether guidelines improve the quality of clinical practice and the utilization of health resources. The ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines (CPG) supervises and coordinates the preparation of new Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents produced by Task Forces, expert groups, or consensus panels. The chosen experts in these writing panels are asked to provide disclosure statements of all relationships they may have which might be perceived as real or potential conflicts of interest. These disclosure forms are kept on file at the European Heart House, headquarters of the ESC. The Committee is also responsible for the endorsement of these Guidelines and Expert Consensus Documents or statements. The Task Force has classified and ranked the usefulness or efficacy of the recommended procedure and/or treatments and the Level of Evidence as indicated in the tables on page 3. These Guidelines are based on the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Guidelines published in 1995, 1997, and renewed in 2001,1–3 which has now been combined into one manuscript. Where new information is available, an update has been performed while other parts are unchanged or adjusted only to a limited extent. The aim of this report is to provide updated practical guidelines for the diagnosis, assessment, and treatment of heart failure for use in clinical practice, as well as for epidemiological surveys and clinical trials. Particular attention in this update has been allocated to diastolic function and heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (PLVEF). The intention has been to merge the previous Task Force report4 with the present update. The Guidelines are intended as a support for practising physicians and other health care professionals concerned with the management of heart failure patients and to provide advice on how to manage these patients, including recommendations for referral. Documented and published evidence on diagnosis, efficacy, and safety is the main basis for these guidelines. ESC Guidelines are relevant to 49 member-states with diverse economies and therefore recommendations based on cost-effectiveness have been avoided in general. National health policy as well as clinical judgement may dictate the order of priority of implementation. It is recognized that some interventions may not be affordable in some countries for all appropriate patients. The recommendations in these guidelines should therefore always be considered in the light of national policies and local regulatory requirements for the administration of any diagnostic procedure, medicine, or device. This report was drafted by a Writing Group of the Task Force (see title page) appointed by the CPG of the ESC. Within this Task Force, statements of Conflicts of Interests were collected, which are available at the ESC Office. The draft was sent to the Committee and the document reviewers (see title page) and after their input the document was updated, reviewed and for The is based on a which statements and This document is available at the ESC The report should be in or information is based to the has been including a of the evidence for for the diagnosis, evidence is and in based on consensus of expert in the was not to use evidence in this The has been or recommendations have been by The ESC countries with a of that are at patients with heart failure in are also patients with of heart failure and a The of heart failure is if the be of patients a of heart failure and in patients with heart failure patients with heart failure have and is now the of heart failure in the and are and is of recommendations of is by the ESC. of recommendations of is by the ESC. of evidence of evidence that the of by clinical is in and the and and to the treatment of heart the to the must be or avoided The heart failure is to or of heart failure by of including forms and heart Guidelines on heart by is the of heart A of is The present document on the of and on heart if not is to the heart are with evidence of left ventricular diastolic at is a if not In diastolic and heart should not be considered as heart failure is and of heart failure in the of a ejection at diastolic is in patients in importance in the is in in and with are to and left heart failure to with of the or The not which is and and and are other in the clinical of these is information and therefore of use in treatment for heart or heart failure is as a clinical is for patients can with of or for patients are and attention and for the of only of this The of heart failure on clinical judgement based on a and appropriate Heart failure should be the only Heart failure is a in which the patients should have the of heart or at or or and evidence of at The between heart heart failure that has been by and heart failure are in A clinical to treatment at heart failure is not for diagnosis, the should some in and/or in to treatments in which a be or left ventricular is considered as of and is with It is and treatment is available, and the is therefore in these The of the of heart failure is not is responsible for in in patients with only a between and This that is not the only responsible for and or that to may not be in the of also and are the and of heart failure may be to in patients, in and in It should be and different and should be and are as they the to the that heart failure The clinical of heart failure must be by at function is also an in heart The of are including and by in this and are the of of of heart failure should be in a clinical including and the a of heart failure has been may be to the of heart failure and should be to the of as the of The Heart is in use In other the of into or is in have to have evidence of have a of heart failure and be treatment for heart failure in order to the of heart is a between and the of may be related to if after In the by has been to and It is to the between and are also in patients different of ejection should not be with are in patients of heart failure whether or not the to be has for the of heart the other if the is heart is The of may as the of A that may be present and a for A that the of should be should be of the diagnostic in heart It is to and has only in the of and and in diagnostic of patients with and and to function should be considered to clinical In is by the diagnostic potential of is function is is evidence that their can diastolic is that may left ventricular heart or or and of or their and are helpful in the of heart A in an heart failure as the of and have of their in treatment to be In the use of and as diagnostic should be that a a or in an heart failure as the of In clinical practice the of and is as to in care also in of care the and The cost-effectiveness of the that a should the for as in the as well as The to and use of is for the of heart is and is the for the of at The of ventricular function is the left ventricular ejection fraction for patients with patients with preserved of diastolic function may be to of diastolic function in patients present with and left ventricular ejection in in heart failure patients, in a of left ventricular diastolic and in and A of diastolic heart failure to be of or of of or only left ventricular function and evidence of left ventricular diastolic or diastolic is to an of diastolic is a of with a in a in the and therefore a in the In patients with may be a of with an a and a The is to left that an in the In patients with an between and the and the may be a This may be by the of by The and and diastolic by the combined of and to of diastolic a that if of diastolic function by these may improve management of heart failure patients. is not recommended and can only be in patients have an in patients, and in patients with of or is to or a in the can be recommended in the of patients with heart failure only is an in the clinical or in In patients in at has not information and in patients with or and may and is a and for the of left and ventricular and The is well for of and and of function are of in they are in of can be to the of which is a in patients with heart In clinical practice, is of limited for the of heart a in a not treatment for heart failure heart failure as a The main of in are on and treatment and on is not to the of may be in the or to should be considered in patients with or and in patients with heart failure or are not to should also be considered in patients with or any other evidence of if they are not to appropriate has not been shown to in heart failure in clinical and in the of to is not is also indicated in patients with heart failure of and in patients with evidence of or of by of a is indicated in patients are for or to treatment of patients with not to and appropriate heart should not be to of are not recommended for diagnostic or in patients. is of in the of may and the and of and ventricular which be or of heart should be to patients with and of an The is the in clinical may or the and of heart failure and therefore to be to the of heart failure in patients should be performed in patients with heart failure in order to the should be performed or in in which diagnostic or clinical a for heart the of heart of heart failure and evidence of must be present The of function by clinical is should be a for the of a with of heart failure or of left ventricular a management the of the guidelines with the treatment The of in heart failure is for limited to the and heart failure and efficacy of methodological The indicated as are in and/or of to and heart of to heart failure is or in quality of is the is to the of ventricular if and the benefits of the the be treatment should be at or left ventricular that the of and the of heart The of ventricular and heart failure may be or by treatment of to heart in particular in patients with and/or of of evidence The of heart failure should always be a to left ventricular to heart failure is on page of The therapeutic in patients with that is by left ventricular advice and other and The available of management are in and of of evidence for management with and their should are to weigh on a basis to as of a for after in of a of in to a health care or their to the if a in is the of in the is a that in in heart on should be to patients with heart with or The of In practice, a of is in heart of is other in of is of should in patients. or is present in of patients with The of and that is is an of should always be The use of should be and may or or should be In are to by other of It is not to dictate guidelines are to the not to the is and the for is the of treatments for heart failure on is evidence of the of in patients with heart for is of the of the based on in and should be Within and patients are to their The should be with with any of heart failure treatment or and and In heart failure or of or is function and therefore should be and on how to and that not are in patients in recommendations for in heart failure patients by the European Society of Cardiology have been are recommended as in patients with a left ventricular function as a ejection with or (see page of of evidence should be to the shown to be in the in heart failure of of evidence and not based on of of evidence patients with a left ventricular should be with an to or the of heart also the of and in this of of evidence of shown to be in are in and of which have been for the treatment of heart failure in are presented in patients with heart failure that is by left ventricular should an of of evidence and in patients with and heart failure and left ventricular should be as the in the of In patients with should be with of of evidence should be in patients with or of heart if after the of if the are to improve and to and for heart failure of of evidence patients with a left ventricular of of evidence with are and may be as an in patients or on an of of evidence in and diastolic and in are in patients. treatment is in the of and previous of of evidence The of should always be at the and to the The recommended for an are in of function is after and at the of an is or other which may are or in patients with or present or should be or any recommendations and are in and are for treatment is present and as or The use of in of and of of evidence are that have the on or of these should always be in with and if of of evidence should only be if or in heart failure the and of of evidence In patients are to of to and or may be of of evidence are in this of of evidence The use of all should be by of and A practical is to and after of treatment the are can be made should be considered for the treatment of all patients with and heart failure or and on including and is a of of evidence and heart the and to of heart This has been in of different and or of of evidence In patients with left ventricular with or heart an is recommended in to to of of evidence in clinical may be present between different in patients with heart only and can be recommended of of evidence The should be and and to the in the clinical trials. should be to may heart and of heart the recommended procedure for the use of in clinical practice and the of the in the relevant and for are in are recommended in to and in heart failure with to improve and of of evidence are recommended in to and in heart failure after with left ventricular and of heart failure or to and of of evidence patients with left ventricular patients with and is evidence for the of an or an to heart failure or can be as an to in patients to to improve and of of evidence and to have efficacy in on and of of evidence In with of heart failure or left ventricular and have or on of of evidence can be considered in with in patients to of of evidence and for heart failure of of evidence by a potential between and have not been by recent in or of of evidence and of which are in are to for and the recommended are shown in are indicated in and any of heart whether or not left ventricular is the the ventricular which ventricular function and of of evidence A of and to in patients with of of evidence has on may heart failure in the patients with heart failure by left ventricular and with and in heart of of evidence to the use of and and The of is if is in the the is for in the treatment of of of evidence they may be as for or of of evidence In of for and the can be to and and quality of of of evidence may be for the treatment of or of of of evidence Evidence that improve of heart failure or an is is evidence to support the use of in heart failure of of evidence safety with and a on they may a for the treatment of or not by and are not recommended for the treatment of heart failure by and in are not recommended in heart failure of they are in to of of evidence of and to treatment for heart failure not improve and not on of of evidence a or has been shown to be in as well as to patients with heart with is may and some patients are or treatment with and is not recommended in of of evidence administration of is in patients with heart failure with of and may and their on is on of evidence and of that some may have on and function and are with are at of to are with of in and is evidence to support the treatment with an and in heart In with a previous or a left ventricular is indicated of of evidence is evidence to that the of or in patients with heart a or are recommended as of of evidence should be avoided in patients with with heart failure of of evidence of the potential for should be the in In the of in heart failure are to the of any potential of in these patients. other are not indicated in patients with In patients with or ventricular treatment with may be should be avoided as they may ventricular have an and in heart failure of of evidence in heart failure of of evidence (see also page may also be indicated or in with or in the management of or ventricular of of evidence administration of in patients with heart failure is not of of evidence is and ventricular of of evidence It may and in patients with heart failure and in the of left or improve the of and is the treatment in this is the only relevant is for the treatment of in has in of of evidence clinical of heart failure are must always be considered of of evidence are to support the use of for the of heart failure on heart failure of that might to of of evidence the of are or is not recommended as management of patients with heart failure and of of evidence in patients with left ventricular and to ventricular may to in heart failure patients of of evidence This is also for to left ventricular is indicated in patients with left ventricular heart failure of of evidence be recommended for the treatment of heart failure of of evidence be considered a to heart of of evidence left be recommended for the treatment of heart failure of of evidence the should not be considered an to heart of of evidence ventricular be recommended for the treatment of heart an in and with some of of evidence and A on the of or has been as well as a on have been in patients with heart failure to only of the in patients with ventricular and may of of evidence can be considered in patients with ejection fraction and ventricular and to improve of of evidence of of evidence and of of evidence In patients with ventricular or ventricular the is in of these by or and the for The the limited and with and the cost-effectiveness to the into a with The patients with left ventricular and heart failure and that of an in with in patients with heart failure and was not to in of and therefore the treatment with and may be for the majority of patients. should be for patients considered at of treatment and The cost-effectiveness of this treatment to be In the patients with and were to or a of was a in by was between and on of an in with can be considered in patients with heart failure with and to improve or of of evidence is recommended to improve in patients have or have ventricular which is or with left ventricular function of of evidence is in patients with not of a on including and an to of of evidence recent the of on in patients with ejection the with is of treatment is to the of the and must also be into of patients in is not well with in the of is evidence that patients with as the of this is the benefits may be should be considered for heart are with of heart failure with of treatment and with a The of new treatments has the of the to heart (see page The must be and to and be as to the to and after The for heart are shown in Heart is an of treatment for heart have been is considered to to and quality of with are of of evidence of the main of heart is of the which is responsible for a of in the The is limited by the of and by for left ventricular and heart to and in some patients support of of evidence ventricular are as a to treatment is these are not recommended for use of of evidence may be to or to in patients with heart the is The of in the of heart failure that is by is in the to be and should be to the presented in In the the ejection the the of heart failure or with an is recommended in patients with if indicated by a in (see on in the page should be to the in patients with left ventricular if an page page to the in a page and to in in with an by a the and should be the of the should be by a The of can be adjusted based on any should be the an an may be if a and to in in and have to heart failure should page In patients and in patients the of an should be considered page of heart failure are shown in in that have the or are should page are can be in and of with a are should be considered if is evidence of left ventricular Heart or may a limited should be for heart if In to the treatments in support and/or can be in heart always should be considered as an to treatment that the patients on the for support with or ventricular or may be These should be only in the of a for the management of the treatment in patients should always be considered and may the use of for the of recent epidemiological that in the the of patients with heart and may be as as is the of diastolic in patients with heart failure and a function in the is evidence clinical or on how to heart failure with Heart failure with and heart failure to diastolic are not The the evidence of preserved and not that left ventricular diastolic has been The of diastolic heart failure evidence of diastolic which may be to should be and in particular should be and is is to patients heart The recommendations are of the limited available in patients with or diastolic of of evidence is evidence that patients with diastolic heart failure any may improve and and may have their and of and may be with are should be as not to and and be to heart and the diastolic may be for the with have shown a in patients with A of an may Heart failure patients with a of years in is with are and patients also which the of and may In these patients in have been trials. of of may be the of treatment for patients. and are and in patients in general. In the are of In patients, is with a of and or and are well in the if patients with as and are should not be of patients may be to of are recommended in patients with as and the and the of these should be of the of It is to and for improve function and with and of of evidence In patients with ventricular the use of is only in patients with ventricular and should be the of of evidence is indicated in patients with heart failure and with ventricular ventricular or ventricular and in patients at of of of evidence be may on the of and left of of evidence In patients with and heart failure and/or left ventricular the use of to should be to of of evidence if available, to of of evidence In patients or the may be considered for of ventricular of of evidence In patients with are the of of evidence In can be considered of of evidence in with should always be considered of of evidence of is not on previous heart failure or is on and recommendations in to treatment for heart failure of left ventricular is present if not or is present the of and or if not present if not also of heart failure care and of of evidence and of of evidence of patients with heart It is that the on local and and whether the is for of patients of heart and left ventricular or the heart failure of of evidence between heart and heart failure for the of heart failure or left ventricular The and and diastolic of that is left ventricular The should be as an of how on can be made on the of heart failure A in

BACKGROUND: Treatment with the direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, results in similar suppression of ischemia while reducing hemorrhagic complications in patients with stable angina and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The safety and efficacy of bivalirudin in high-risk patients are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3602 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who presented within 12 hours after the onset of symptoms and who were undergoing primary PCI to treatment with heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor or to treatment with bivalirudin alone. The two primary end points of the study were major bleeding and combined adverse clinical events, defined as the combination of major bleeding or major adverse cardiovascular events, including death, reinfarction, target-vessel revascularization for ischemia, and stroke (hereinafter referred to as net adverse clinical events) within 30 days. RESULTS: Anticoagulation with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, resulted in a reduced 30-day rate of net adverse clinical events (9.2% vs. 12.1%; relative risk, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.92; P=0.005), owing to a lower rate of major bleeding (4.9% vs. 8.3%; relative risk, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.77; P<0.001). There was an increased risk of acute stent thrombosis within 24 hours in the bivalirudin group, but no significant increase was present by 30 days. Treatment with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, resulted in significantly lower 30-day rates of death from cardiac causes (1.8% vs. 2.9%; relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40 to 0.95; P=0.03) and death from all causes (2.1% vs. 3.1%; relative risk, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.44 to 1.00; P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who are undergoing primary PCI, anticoagulation with bivalirudin alone, as compared with heparin plus glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, results in significantly reduced 30-day rates of major bleeding and net adverse clinical events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00433966 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

BACKGROUND: Treatment options for myelofibrosis are limited. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a potent and selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, as compared with the best available therapy, in patients with myelofibrosis. METHODS: We assigned 219 patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis, or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis to receive oral ruxolitinib or the best available therapy. The primary end point and key secondary end point of the study were the percentage of patients with at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48 and at week 24, respectively, as assessed with the use of magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography. RESULTS: A total of 28% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group had at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48, as compared with 0% in the group receiving the best available therapy (P<0.001); the corresponding percentages at week 24 were 32% and 0% (P<0.001). At 48 weeks, the mean palpable spleen length had decreased by 56% with ruxolitinib but had increased by 4% with the best available therapy. The median duration of response with ruxolitinib was not reached, with 80% of patients still having a response at a median follow-up of 12 months. Patients in the ruxolitinib group had an improvement in overall quality-of-life measures and a reduction in symptoms associated with myelofibrosis. The most common hematologic abnormalities of grade 3 or higher in either group were thrombocytopenia and anemia, which were managed with a dose reduction, interruption of treatment, or transfusion. One patient in each group discontinued treatment owing to thrombocytopenia, and none discontinued owing to anemia. Nonhematologic adverse events were rare and mostly grade 1 or 2. Two cases of acute myeloid leukemia were reported with the best available therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous ruxolitinib therapy, as compared with the best available therapy, was associated with marked and durable reductions in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms, improvements in role functioning and quality of life, and modest toxic effects. An influence on overall survival has not yet been shown. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00934544.).

The novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak, caused by SARS-CoV-2, represents the greatest medical challenge in decades. We provide a comprehensive review of the clinical course of COVID-19, its comorbidities, and mechanistic considerations for future therapies. While COVID-19 primarily affects the lungs, causing interstitial pneumonitis and severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), it also affects multiple organs, particularly the cardiovascular system. Risk of severe infection and mortality increase with advancing age and male sex. Mortality is increased by comorbidities: cardiovascular disease, hypertension, diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, and cancer. The most common complications include arrhythmia (atrial fibrillation, ventricular tachyarrhythmia, and ventricular fibrillation), cardiac injury [elevated highly sensitive troponin I (hs-cTnI) and creatine kinase (CK) levels], fulminant myocarditis, heart failure, pulmonary embolism, and disseminated intravascular coagulation (DIC). Mechanistically, SARS-CoV-2, following proteolytic cleavage of its S protein by a serine protease, binds to the transmembrane angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) -a homologue of ACE-to enter type 2 pneumocytes, macrophages, perivascular pericytes, and cardiomyocytes. This may lead to myocardial dysfunction and damage, endothelial dysfunction, microvascular dysfunction, plaque instability, and myocardial infarction (MI). While ACE2 is essential for viral invasion, there is no evidence that ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs) worsen prognosis. Hence, patients should not discontinue their use. Moreover, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors might be beneficial in COVID-19. Initial immune and inflammatory responses induce a severe cytokine storm [interleukin (IL)-6, IL-7, IL-22, IL-17, etc.] during the rapid progression phase of COVID-19. Early evaluation and continued monitoring of cardiac damage (cTnI and NT-proBNP) and coagulation (D-dimer) after hospitalization may identify patients with cardiac injury and predict COVID-19 complications. Preventive measures (social distancing and social isolation) also increase cardiovascular risk. Cardiovascular considerations of therapies currently used, including remdesivir, chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, tocilizumab, ribavirin, interferons, and lopinavir/ritonavir, as well as experimental therapies, such as human recombinant ACE2 (rhACE2), are discussed.

The biodiversity-productivity relationship (BPR) is foundational to our understanding of the global extinction crisis and its impacts on ecosystem functioning. Understanding BPR is critical for the accurate valuation and effective conservation of biodiversity. Using ground-sourced data from 777,126 permanent plots, spanning 44 countries and most terrestrial biomes, we reveal a globally consistent positive concave-down BPR, showing that continued biodiversity loss would result in an accelerating decline in forest productivity worldwide. The value of biodiversity in maintaining commercial forest productivity alone-US$166 billion to 490 billion per year according to our estimation-is more than twice what it would cost to implement effective global conservation. This highlights the need for a worldwide reassessment of biodiversity values, forest management strategies, and conservation priorities.

BACKGROUND: The role of coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure has not been clearly established. METHODS: Between July 2002 and May 2007, a total of 1212 patients with an ejection fraction of 35% or less and coronary artery disease amenable to CABG were randomly assigned to medical therapy alone (602 patients) or medical therapy plus CABG (610 patients). The primary outcome was the rate of death from any cause. Major secondary outcomes included the rates of death from cardiovascular causes and of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 244 patients (41%) in the medical-therapy group and 218 (36%) in the CABG group (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.04; P=0.12). A total of 201 patients (33%) in the medical-therapy group and 168 (28%) in the CABG group died from an adjudicated cardiovascular cause (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.00; P=0.05). Death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes occurred in 411 patients (68%) in the medical-therapy group and 351 (58%) in the CABG group (hazard ratio with CABG, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.85; P<0.001). By the end of the follow-up period (median, 56 months), 100 patients in the medical-therapy group (17%) underwent CABG, and 555 patients in the CABG group (91%) underwent CABG. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized trial, there was no significant difference between medical therapy alone and medical therapy plus CABG with respect to the primary end point of death from any cause. Patients assigned to CABG, as compared with those assigned to medical therapy alone, had lower rates of death from cardiovascular causes and of death from any cause or hospitalization for cardiovascular causes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and Abbott Laboratories; STICH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00023595.).

BACKGROUND: As compared with thrombolytic therapy, primary percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in acute myocardial infarction reduces the rates of death, reinfarction, and stroke, but recurrent ischemia, restenosis, and reocclusion of the infarct-related artery remain problematic. When used in combination with PTCA, coronary stenting and platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors may further improve outcomes. METHODS: Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned 2082 patients with acute myocardial infarction to undergo PTCA alone (518 patients), PTCA plus abciximab therapy (528), stenting alone with the MultiLink stent (512), or stenting plus abciximab therapy (524). RESULTS: Normal flow was restored in the target vessel in 94.5 to 96.9 percent of patients and did not vary according to the reperfusion strategy. At six months, the primary end point - a composite of death, reinfarction, disabling stroke, and ischemia-driven revascularization of the target vessel - had occurred in 20.0 percent of patients after PTCA, 16.5 percent after PTCA plus abciximab, 11.5 percent after stenting, and 10.2 percent after stenting plus abciximab (P<0.001). There were no significant differences among the groups in the rates of death, stroke, or reinfarction; the difference in the incidence of the primary end point was due entirely to differences in the rates of target-vessel revascularization (ranging from 15.7 percent after PTCA to 5.2 percent after stenting plus abciximab, P<0.001). The rate of angiographically established restenosis was 40.8 percent after PTCA and 22.2 percent after stenting (P<0.001), and the respective rates of reocclusion of the infarcted-related artery were 11.3 percent and 5.7 percent (P=0.01), both independent of abciximab use. CONCLUSIONS: At experienced centers, stent implantation (with or without abciximab therapy) should be considered the routine reperfusion strategy.

In patients with renal diseases characterized by proteinuria, the initial insult to the kidney is usually followed by a progressive decline in the glomerular filtration rate. This decline has been thought to be due to changes in renal hemodynamics initiated by the loss of nephrons.1 When renal mass is reduced in rats, the remaining nephrons undergo sudden hypertrophy, with a concomitant lowering of arteriolar resistance and an increase in glomerular plasma flow.2,3 Afferent arteriolar tone decreases more than efferent arteriolar tone, and therefore, the hydraulic pressure in glomerular capillaries rises4 and the amount of filtrate formed by each nephron . . .

BACKGROUND: The multicenter double-blind, randomized Bergamo Nephrologic Diabetes Complications Trial (BENEDICT) was designed to assess whether angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors and non-dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers, alone or in combination, prevent microalbuminuria in subjects with hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and normal urinary albumin excretion. METHODS: We studied 1204 subjects, who were randomly assigned to receive at least three years of treatment with trandolapril (at a dose of 2 mg per day) plus verapamil (sustained-release formulation, 180 mg per day), trandolapril alone (2 mg per day), verapamil alone (sustained-release formulation, 240 mg per day), or placebo. The target blood pressure was 120/80 mm Hg. The primary end point was the development of persistent microalbuminuria (overnight albumin excretion, > or =20 microg per minute at two consecutive visits). RESULTS: The primary outcome was reached in 5.7 percent of the subjects receiving trandolapril plus verapamil, 6.0 percent of the subjects receiving trandolapril, 11.9 percent of the subjects receiving verapamil, and 10.0 percent of control subjects receiving placebo. The estimated acceleration factor (which quantifies the effect of one treatment relative to another in accelerating or slowing disease progression) adjusted for predefined baseline characteristics was 0.39 for the comparison between verapamil plus trandolapril and placebo (P=0.01), 0.47 for the comparison between trandolapril and placebo (P=0.01), and 0.83 for the comparison between verapamil and placebo (P=0.54). Trandolapril plus verapamil and trandolapril alone delayed the onset of microalbuminuria by factors of 2.6 and 2.1, respectively. Serious adverse events were similar in all treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with type 2 diabetes and hypertension but with normoalbuminuria, the use of trandolapril plus verapamil and trandolapril alone decreased the incidence of microalbuminuria to a similar extent. The effect of verapamil alone was similar to that of placebo.

SUMMARY After several years of planning, the 1st International Workshop on High‐Order CFD Methods was successfully held in Nashville, Tennessee, on January 7–8, 2012, just before the 50th Aerospace Sciences Meeting. The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, the Air Force Office of Scientific Research, and the German Aerospace Center provided much needed support, financial and moral. Over 70 participants from all over the world across the research spectrum of academia, government labs, and private industry attended the workshop. Many exciting results were presented. In this review article, the main motivation and major findings from the workshop are described. Pacing items requiring further effort are presented. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

To formally establish the risk of lupus anticoagulants and anticardiolipin antibodies for arterial and venous thrombosis, we ran a MEDLINE search of the literature from 1988 to 2000. Studies were selected for their case-control (11), prospective (9), cross-sectional (3), and ambispective (2) design. They provided or enabled us to calculate the odds ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) of lupus anticoagulants and/or anticardiolipin antibodies for thrombosis in 4184 patients and 3151 controls. Studies were grouped according to the antibody investigated. Five studies compared lupus anticoagulants with anticardiolipin antibodies: the odds ratio with 95% CI of lupus anticoagulants for thrombosis was always significant. None of them found anticardiolipin antibodies were associated with thrombosis. Four studies analyzed only lupus anticoagulants: the odds ratio with 95% CI was always significant. The risk of lupus anticoagulants was independent of the site and type of thrombosis, the presence of systemic lupus erythematosus, and the coagulation tests employed to detect them. Sixteen studies served to assess 28 associations between anticardiolipin antibodies and thrombosis: the odds ratio with 95% CI was significant in 15 cases. Anticardiolipin titer correlated with the odds ratio of thrombosis. In conclusion, the detection of lupus anticoagulants and, possibly, of immunoglobulin G (IgG) anticardiolipin antibodies at medium or high titers helps to identify patients at risk for thrombosis. However, to take full advantage of the conclusions provided by the available evidence, there is an urgent need to harmonize investigational methods.

We present a modeling framework designed for patient-specific computational hemodynamics to be performed in the context of large-scale studies. The framework takes advantage of the integration of image processing, geometric analysis and mesh generation techniques, with an accent on full automation and high-level interaction. Image segmentation is performed using implicit deformable models taking advantage of a novel approach for selective initialization of vascular branches, as well as of a strategy for the segmentation of small vessels. A robust definition of centerlines provides objective geometric criteria for the automation of surface editing and mesh generation. The framework is available as part of an open-source effort, the Vascular Modeling Toolkit, a first step towards the sharing of tools and data which will be necessary for computational hemodynamics to play a role in evidence-based medicine.

The Janus kinase 2 mutation, JAK2617V>F, is myeloid neoplasm-specific; its presence excludes secondary polycythemia, thrombocytosis, or bone marrow fibrosis from other causes. Furthermore, JAK2617V>F or a JAK2 exon 12 mutation is present in virtually all patients with polycythemia vera (PV), whereas JAK2617V>F also occurs in approximately half of patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET) or primary myelofibrosis (PMF). Therefore, JAK2 mutation screening holds the promise of a decisive diagnostic test in PV while being complementary to histology for the diagnosis of ET and PMF; the combination of molecular testing and histologic review should also facilitate diagnosis of ET associated with borderline thrombocytosis. Accordingly, revision of the current World Health Organization (WHO) diagnostic criteria for PV, ET, and PMF is warranted; JAK2 mutation analysis should be listed as a major criterion for PV diagnosis, and the platelet count threshold for ET diagnosis can be lowered from 600 to 450 x 10(9)/L. The current document was prepared by an international expert panel of pathologists and clinical investigators in myeloproliferative disorders; it was subsequently presented to members of the Clinical Advisory Committee for the revision of the WHO Classification of Myeloid Neoplasms, who endorsed the document and recommended its adoption by the WHO.

BACKGROUND: Abnormalities in the number and function of platelets may contribute to thromboembolic complications in patients with essential thrombocythemia. We assessed whether maintaining the platelet count below 600,000 per cubic millimeter with hydroxyurea reduces the incidence of thrombosis in patients with essential thrombocythemia and a high risk of thrombosis. METHODS: A total of 114 patients with essential thrombocythemia (77 women and 37 men; median age, 68 years; range, 40 to 85) and a median platelet count of 788,000 per cubic millimeter (range, 533,000 to 1,240,000 per cubic millimeter) were randomly assigned to receive hydroxyurea (56 patients) or no myelosuppressive therapy (58 patients). Ninety-seven (85 percent) were over 60 years old, and 52 (46 percent) had had thrombosis. The two groups were matched for age, sex, and platelet count at randomization. Antiplatelet prophylaxis with aspirin or ticlopidine was not stopped. Follow-up lasted a median of 27 months in both groups. RESULTS: Two patients (3.6 percent) treated with hydroxyurea had thrombotic episodes (one stroke and one myocardial infarction), whereas 14 patients (24 percent) in the control group had thrombotic episodes (one stroke, five transient ischemic attacks, five peripheral arterial occlusions, one deep-vein thrombosis, and two cases of superficial thrombophlebitis). The difference (20.4 percentage points; 95 percent confidence interval, 8.5 to 32 percent) was statistically significant (chi-square with Yates' correction, 8.3; 1 df; P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Hydroxyurea is effective in preventing thrombosis in high-risk patients with essential thrombocythemia.

We present a review of critical concepts and produce recommendations on the management of Philadelphia-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms, including monitoring, response definition, first- and second-line therapy, and therapy for special issues. Key questions were selected according the criterion of clinical relevance. Statements were produced using a Delphi process, and two consensus conferences involving a panel of 21 experts appointed by the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) were convened. Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) should be defined as high risk if age is greater than 60 years or there is a history of previous thrombosis. Risk stratification in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) should start with the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for newly diagnosed patients and dynamic IPSS for patients being seen during their disease course, with the addition of cytogenetics evaluation and transfusion status. High-risk patients with PV should be managed with phlebotomy, low-dose aspirin, and cytoreduction, with either hydroxyurea or interferon at any age. High-risk patients with ET should be managed with cytoreduction, using hydroxyurea at any age. Monitoring response in PV and ET should use the ELN clinicohematologic criteria. Corticosteroids, androgens, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, and immunomodulators are recommended to treat anemia of PMF, whereas hydroxyurea is the first-line treatment of PMF-associated splenomegaly. Indications for splenectomy include symptomatic portal hypertension, drug-refractory painful splenomegaly, and frequent RBC transfusions. The risk of allogeneic stem-cell transplantation-related complications is justified in transplantation-eligible patients whose median survival time is expected to be less than 5 years.

Abstract Despite an international resurgence of interest in coproduction, confusion about the concept remains. This article attempts to make sense of the disparate literature and clarify the concept of coproduction in public administration. Based on some definitional distinctions and considerations about who is involved in coproduction, when in the service cycle it occurs, and what is generated in the process, the article offers and develops a typology of coproduction that includes three levels (individual, group, collective) and four phases (commissioning, design, delivery, assessment). The levels, phases, and typology as a whole are illustrated with several examples. The article concludes with a discussion of implications for research and practice.

Edward I. Altman, Brooks Brady, Andrea Resti, Andrea Sironi, The Link between Default and Recovery Rates: Theory, Empirical Evidence, and Implications, The Journal of Business, Vol. 78, No. 6 (November 2005), pp. 2203-2228

A qualitative analysis of the various outcomes of a drop impact on solid surfaces with different roughness and wettability is carried out. Water, ethanol, different mixtures of glycerin and water, liquid alloys, and silicone oil were used to provide a wide range of material properties such as surface tension, viscosity, and density. The impact velocity was varied by moving the drop generator vertically with respect to the plate. Also two drop diameter classes were considered. A variation of roughness amplitude and wavelength was achieved using a laser ablation process on polyvinyl chloride and glass substrates, creating a deterministic microstructure. A highly nonwettable rough surface was prepared with alkylketene dimer (AKD) [1]. A first classification of the different outcomes, in terms of splash, rebound, partial rebound, deposition, and other features, is presented.

The UN COP26 2021 conference on climate change offers the chance for world leaders to take action and make urgent and meaningful commitments to reducing emissions and limit global temperatures to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels by 2050. Whilst the political aspects and subsequent ramifications of these fundamental and critical decisions cannot be underestimated, there exists a technical perspective where digital and IS technology has a role to play in the monitoring of potential solutions, but also an integral element of climate change solutions. We explore these aspects in this editorial article, offering a comprehensive opinion based insight to a multitude of diverse viewpoints that look at the many challenges through a technology lens. It is widely recognized that technology in all its forms, is an important and integral element of the solution, but industry and wider society also view technology as being part of the problem. Increasingly, researchers are referencing the importance of responsible digitalization to eliminate the significant levels of e-waste. The reality is that technology is an integral component of the global efforts to get to net zero, however, its adoption requires pragmatic tradeoffs as we transition from current behaviors to a more climate friendly society.

The role of digital technologies in service business transformation is under-investigated. This paper contributes to filling this gap by addressing how the Internet of things (IoT), cloud computing (CC) and predictive analytics (PA) facilitate service transformation in industrial companies. Through the Data–Information–Knowledge–Wisdom (DIKW) model, we discuss how the abovementioned technologies transform low-level entities such as data into information and knowledge to support the service transformation of manufacturers. We propose a set of digital capabilities, based on the extant literature and the findings from four case studies. Then, we discuss how these capabilities support the service transformation trajectories of manufacturers. We find that IoT is foundational to any service transformation, although it is mostly needed to become an availability provider. PA is essential for moving to the performance provider profile. Besides providing scalability in all profiles, CC is specifically used to implement an industrialiser strategy, therefore leading to standardised, repeatable and productised offerings.