September 2021 Br J Cardiol 2021;28:89–94 doi:10.5837/bjc.2021.037
Joanna Osmanska, David Murdoch
Introduction Aortic stenosis (AS) is the most common primary valve disease requiring intervention in Europe and North America. The prevalence of AS increases with age, and degenerative AS is the most common type followed by AS secondary to a congenital bicuspid aortic valve.1,2 Prognosis of severe symptomatic AS is poor, with a reported 30–50% mortality at one year for patients who do not undergo any intervention.3,4 The optimal management of severe symptomatic AS in patients, often with multiple comorbidities, requires a multi-disciplinary team approach. The conservative approach with medical treatment of symptoms is associated with extre
October 2016 Br J Cardiol 2016;23:159–60 doi:10.5837/bjc.2016.034
Usha Rao, Timothy J Gilbert, Simon C Eccleshall
Case history Figure 1. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) image showing gross malapposition between the original stent (black arrow) and the vessel wall (transparent arrow) A 44-year-old smoker with a history of hypertension, high cholesterol and positive family history presented with inferior wall ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Angiography revealed the culprit was an occluded right coronary artery (RCA). A drug-eluting stent (Taxus element) 2.75 by 24 mm was deployed and the patient discharged with follow-up on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (aspirin and clopidogrel). Three years later he was re-admitted with another inferior STE
February 2014 Br J Cardiol 2014;21:37 doi:10.5837/bjc.2014.003 Online First
Jenny Walsh, Mark Hargreaves
Introduction Little observational data exist on the outcome of diagnostic cardiac catheterisation (DCC) in older people. In England and Wales, the population aged over 80 years is growing faster than any other age group.1DCC in these older patients may reveal widespread and complex coronary disease less suitable for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and age-related comorbidity may preclude surgical intervention. We conducted a retrospective, case-controlled study to examine the outcome, influence on management and complications of DCC in patients aged 80 years and older. The findings were compared with patients aged less than 70 years
February 2010 Br J Cardiol 2010;17:34–5
Musaab Yassin, Mohsin Ejaz, Brian O’Rourke
Introduction Some studies have stated that the responsibility for implanting temporary pacing wires should be taken away from general physicians and have recommended that junior staff should always be supervised by a cardiologist.1,2 Patients and methods A retrospective review of hospital records of patients receiving a temporary pacemaker at National Health Service (NHS) Lanarkshire hospitals over a two-year period was undertaken (between 30/04/2005 to 30/04/2007). Data were collected to yield information broadly comparable to three similar previous studies.2-4 Adequate records were obtained for 100 procedures. A questionnaire was formulate
July 2004 Br J Cardiol (Acute Interv Cardiol) 2004;11:AIC 62–AIC 67
Adrian Steele
No content available
September 2003 Br J Cardiol (Acute Interv Cardiol) 2003;10:AIC 82–AIC 88
Joseph Alex, Gurpreet S Bhamra, Alex RJ Cale, Steven C Griffin, Michael E Cowen, Levent Guvendik
No content available
April 2002 Br J Cardiol 2002;9:
Vinod Patel
No content available
February 2002 Br J Cardiol 2002;9:115-19
Clifford J Bailey, Ian W Campbell
No content available
You need to be a member to print this page.
Find out more about our membership benefits
You need to be a member to download PDF's.
Find out more about our membership benefits