scholarly journals Reality of surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation in the Czech Republic - Data from the National Register of Cardiac Surgery (2010-2015)

Cor et Vasa ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. e305-e311
Author(s):  
Petr Budera ◽  
Vojtěch Kurfirst ◽  
Štěpán Černý ◽  
Petr Němec ◽  
Jan Pirk ◽  
...  
2015 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-174
Author(s):  
Maciej Zych

Abstract The aim of this paper is the analysis of the names used on cartographic publications in Poland and the Czech Republic for transboundary geographical objects lying on the common boundary. After the analysis of the Czech and Polish topographic maps that are available on the national geoportals, maps of the divisions into natural regions, and toponymic databases (Polish the National Register of Geographical Names, and Czech Geonames – the Database of geographic names of the Czech Republic) it was established that 360 named geographic objects lie on this boundary. This number includes: 123 hydronyms (names of rivers and other streams), 224 oronyms (139 names of summits, 22 names of mountain passes, 35 names of mountain ranges and ridges, 15 names of highlands, plateaus and uplands, 7 names of mountain basins, valleys and depressions, 3 names of lowlands, and 3 names of rocks), 9 names of forests, 1 name of mountain meadow (alp), and 3 names of tracks. 212 of these objects (59%) have names in both languages – Polish and Czech, however, in 99 cases (47% of objects that have name in both Polish and Czech languages) the Polish and Czech toponyms entirely do not correspond to each other. From the remaining objects 67 (18%) have only the Czech name, and 81 (23%) only the Polish name. In some natural regions, the limits of their ranges set by the Czech and Polish geographers vary widely, for example a single region on one side of the boundary corresponds to two or more regions on other side of the boundary. In other cases illustrations of incorrectness are more sophisticated, like the river that has different course according to the Czech or Polish maps (stream regarded as a main watercourse in one country, which has its own name, in another country is considered as a tributary one with a different name). In the summary, it should be stated that in the large part of the Polish and Czech names of the geographical objects lying on the common boundary were drawn regardless of the names used in the neighboring country.


Author(s):  
Mohsin Uzzaman ◽  
Imthiaz Manoly ◽  
Mohini Panikkar ◽  
Maciej Matuszewski ◽  
Nicolas Nikolaidis ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND/AIM To evaluate outcomes of concurrent Cox-Maze procedures in elderly patients undergoing high-risk cardiac surgery. MEHODS We retrospectively identified patients aged over 70 years with Atrial Fibrillation (AF) from 2011 to 2017 who had two or more other cardiac procedures. They were subdivided into two groups: 1. Cox-Maze IV AF ablation 2. No-Surgical AF treatment. Patients requiring redo procedures or those who had isolated PVI or LAAO were excluded. Heart rhythm assessed from Holter reports or 12-lead ECG. Follow-up data collected through telephone consultations and medical records. RESULTS There were 239 patients. Median follow up was 61 months. 70 patients had Cox-Maze IV procedures (29.3%). Demographic, intra- and post-operative outcomes were similar between groups although duration of pre-operative AF was shorter in Cox-Maze group (p=0.001). One (1.4%) patient in Cox maze group with 30-day mortality compared to 14 (8.2%) the control group (p=0.05). Sinus rhythm at annual and latest follow-up was 84.9% and 80.0% respectively in Maze group - significantly better than No-Surgical AF treatment groups (P<0.001). 160 patients (66.9%) were alive at long-term follow-up with better survival curves in Cox Maze group compared to No-Surgical treatment group (p=0.02). There was significantly higher proportion of patients in NYHA 1 status in Cox-Maze group (p=0.009). No differences observed in freedom from stroke (p=0.80) or permanent pacemaker (p=0.33). CONCLUSIONS. Surgical ablation is beneficial in elderly patients undergoing high-risk surgery - promoting excellent long-term freedom from AF and symptomatic/prognostic benefits. Therefore, surgical risk need not be reason to deny benefits of concomitant AF-ablation.


Lung Cancer ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 41 ◽  
pp. S267
Author(s):  
Miloslav Marel ◽  
Zdenek Skacel ◽  
Irena Spasova ◽  
Boris Stastny ◽  
L. Melinova

2006 ◽  
Vol 74 ◽  
pp. S135-S139 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Jankovec ◽  
D. Cechurova ◽  
M. Krcma ◽  
S. Lacigova ◽  
M. Zourek ◽  
...  

Cor et Vasa ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronika Bulková ◽  
Martin Fiala ◽  
Jan Chovančík ◽  
Dan Wichterle ◽  
Robert Čihák ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 54 (8) ◽  
pp. 528-531 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Lindner ◽  
P. Jansa ◽  
J. Kunstyr ◽  
E. Mayer ◽  
J. Blaha ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Z Motovska ◽  
H Melicharova ◽  
J Knot ◽  
J Dusek ◽  
S S Simek ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Antithrombotic therapy is effective in preventing ischemic and thromboembolic events, however it simultaneously increases the risk of bleeding. The efforts thus focus on balancing the intensity of combined antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy. Purpose The study aimed to compare efficacy and safety of single (aspirin/clopidogrel) or dual (aspirin plus clopidogrel) antiplatelet therapy in combination with an oral anticoagulant in non-selected patient population with atrial fibrillation (AFib) and an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods The analysis used data from National Registry of Reimbursed Health Services (NRRHS), which contains data of the entirety of health care paid from the public health insurance (almost 100% of healthcare in the Czech Republic) combined with the database of death records. Occurrence of an ACS, stroke, and bleeding requiring hospitalization within one year was compared in patients discharged on dual and triple antithrombotic therapy. Dual antithrombotic therapy consists of aspirin/clopidogrel plus an oral anticoagulant. Triple antithrombotic therapy was defined as combination of aspirin, clopidogrel and an oral anticoagulant. Results Over a four-year period (2012–2016) 104 000 patients with an ACS were hospitalized in the Czech Republic. AFib (any types) was reported in 12.4% (N=12 891) of them (21.2% in patients 75+ years old). +AFib (vs. −AFib) patients were a higher risk population with respect to the comorbidity (diabetes, hypertension, renal disease, stroke, heart failure) (p<0.05 for all comorbidities). Oral anticoagulant therapy was indicated in 25.3% of them. PCI was performed in 57.7% (−AFib) and 43.4% (+AFib) patients, respectively. Hospital mortality was significantly higher in +AFib patients (8.6% and 5.6%, OR (95% CI): 1.585 (1.481; 1.696), p<0.001). We identified 1017 patients discharged on dual and 967 patients on triple antithrombotic therapy. Risk of recurrent ACS within one year with dual therapy was comparable to that with triple therapy (OR (95% CI): 1.219 (0.766; 1.940), p=0.403). The same was also observed for the risk of stroke (1.273 (0.648; 2.501), p=0.483). After six months, persistence on dual antithrombotic therapy (33.4% patients) was higher than on triple therapy (10.3%, p<0.001). Within the first three months, de-escalation from triple antithrombotic therapy to dual antithrombotic therapy (in 212 patients) was accompanied by a significant increase of bleeding requiring hospitalization (0% on dual vs. 3.3% on triple therapy, p=0.048). Conclusion Protective effect of dual antithrombotic therapy on the occurence of recurrent major adverse cardiovascular event is comparable to that of the triple antithrombotic therapy in non-selected patients with an acute coronary syndrome and atrial fibrillation. Moreover, long-term persistence on triple therapy is significantly lower due to bleeding risk.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document