Risk Factors Associated with Hemodynamic Instability during Stent Implantation in Unprotected Left Main Lesions without Routine IABP: Identification of the High Risk Patients

The different presentations, comorbidities, and outcomes of COVID-19 highlight the importance of early identification and proper triage of patients. High-risk patients can be divided into patients with common comorbidities and patients with special categories. Common comorbidities include, but are not limited to, Cardiovascular Disease (CVD), Diabetes Mellitus (DM), immunosuppression, underlying respiratory disease, and obesity. Certain categories of COVID-19 patients are also at increased risk, including neonates and pregnant women. In the present article, we delineate the reported risk factors for acquisition of infection, and for increased severity of the clinical disease. We also comparatively analyze those risk factors associated with COVID-19 and with the antecedent human acute respiratory syndrome-causing viruses, SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV. We hypothesize that the structural similarities of the three viruses predict a similarity in the profile of high-risk patients. Several pathophysiological patterns have been detected to support this theory.

Download Full-text

Behavioral Emergencies and Crises

The Oxford Handbook of Clinical Psychology ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195366884.013.0033 ◽

2010 ◽

pp. 739-762

Author(s):

Phillip M. Kleespies ◽

Justin M. Hill

Keyword(s):

Mental Health ◽

Risk Factors ◽

High Risk ◽

Work Environment ◽

Emotional Impact ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Life Threatening ◽

Behavioral Emergencies ◽

And Training

This chapter illustrates the mental health clinician’s relationship with behavioral emergencies. The chapter begins by distinguishing the terms behavioral emergency and behavioral crisis, and underlying themes among all behavioral emergencies are identified. Given that most clinicians will face a behavioral emergency in their careers, the importance of enhancing the process of educating and training practitioners for such situations far beyond the minimal training that currently exists is highlighted. The chapter continues by exploring various aspects of evaluating and managing high-risk patients (i.e., those who exhibit violent tendencies toward themselves or others, and those at risk for victimization). It includes a discussion of the benefits and limitations to estimating life-threatening risk factors and specific protective factors. The chapter concludes by discussing the emotional impact that working with high-risk patients has on clinicians, and an emphasis is placed on the importance of creating a supportive work environment.

Download Full-text

Prevention of Hypotension following Spinal Anaesthesia in Caesarean Section - then and now

Kathmandu University Medical Journal ◽

10.3126/kumj.v8i4.6242 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 8 (4) ◽

pp. 415-419

Author(s):

J K Mitra

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Clinical Practice ◽

High Risk ◽

Caesarean Section ◽

Spinal Anaesthesia ◽

Limited Data ◽

First Line ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Poor Efficacy

Hypotension during spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section remains a common scenario in our clinical practice. Certain risk factors play a role in altering the incidence of hypotension. Aortocaval compression counteraction does not help to prevent hypotension. Intravenous crystalloid prehydration has poor efficacy; thus, the focus has changed toward co-hydration and use of colloids. Phenylephrine is established as a first- line vasopressor, although there are limited data from high-risk patients. Ephedrine crosses the placenta more than phenylephrine and cause possible alterations in the foetal physiology.http://dx.doi.org/10.3126/kumj.v8i4.6242 Kathmandu Univ Med J 2010;8(4):415-19

Download Full-text

Percutaneous Revascularisation for Unprotected Left Main Disease in High-Risk Patients: A Single Centre Experience

Heart Lung and Circulation ◽

10.1016/j.hlc.2008.05.430 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 17 ◽

pp. S181

Author(s):

Sze-Yuan Ooi ◽

Mark Pitney ◽

Joseph Matthews ◽

Robert Giles ◽

Daniel Friedman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Left Main ◽

Left Main Disease ◽

Single Centre ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Single Centre Experience ◽

Unprotected Left Main Disease ◽

Risk Patients

Download Full-text

Uptake and detection rate of a stepwise cardiometabolic disease detection program in primary care—a cohort study

European Journal of Public Health ◽

10.1093/eurpub/ckz201 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 30 (3) ◽

pp. 402-407

Author(s):

Daphne M Stol ◽

Monika Hollander ◽

Ilse F Badenbroek ◽

Mark M J Nielen ◽

François G Schellevis ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Primary Care ◽

Cohort Study ◽

High Risk ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Additional Risk ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Detection Program ◽

Risk Patients

Abstract Background Early detection and treatment of cardiometabolic diseases (CMD) in high-risk patients is a promising preventive strategy to anticipate the increasing burden of CMD. The Dutch guideline ‘the prevention consultation’ provides a framework for stepwise CMD risk assessment and detection in primary care. The aim of this study was to assess the outcome of this program in terms of newly diagnosed CMD. Methods A cohort study among 30 934 patients, aged 45–70 years without known CMD or CMD risk factors, who were invited for the CMD detection program within 37 general practices. Patients filled out a CMD risk score (step 1), were referred for additional risk profiling in case of high risk (step 2) and received lifestyle advice and (pharmacological) treatment if indicated (step 3). During 1-year follow-up newly diagnosed CMD, prescriptions and abnormal diagnostic tests were assessed. Results Twelve thousand seven hundred and thirty-eight patients filled out the risk score of which 865, 6665 and 5208 had a low, intermediate and high CMD risk, respectively. One thousand seven hundred and fifty-five high-risk patients consulted the general practitioner, in 346 of whom a new CMD was diagnosed. In an additional 422 patients a new prescription and/or abnormal diagnostic test were found. Conclusions Implementation of the CMD detection program resulted in a new CMD diagnosis in one-fifth of high-risk patients who attended the practice for completion of their risk profile. However, the potential yield of the program could be higher given the considerable number of additional risk factors—such as elevated glucose, blood pressure and cholesterol levels—found, requiring active follow-up and presumably treatment in the future.

Download Full-text

Risk Factors for Post-ERCP Pancreatitis in High-Risk Patients Receiving Post-procedure Rectal Indomethacin

Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery ◽

10.1007/s11605-018-3864-0 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 22 (11) ◽

pp. 1903-1910

Author(s):

Xiaoyu Kang ◽

Liyue Zheng ◽

Wei Zeng ◽

Shengye Yang ◽

Hao Sun ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

High Risk ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Post Procedure ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Rectal Indomethacin

Download Full-text

Abstract P275: Demographic and Clinical Profile of Patients with Risk Factors for Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) Defined by National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Adult Treatment Panel (ATP) III Guidelines

Circulation ◽

10.1161/circ.129.suppl_1.p275 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 129 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

David M Kern ◽

Sanjeev Balu ◽

Ozgur Tunceli ◽

Swetha Raparla ◽

Deborah Anzalone

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

High Risk ◽

Risk Groups ◽

Lipid Lowering ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Low Hdl ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Artery Disease ◽

Very High ◽

Statin Use

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with different risk factors for CHD as defined by NCEP ATP III guidelines. Methods: Dyslipidemia patients (≥1 medical claim for dyslipidemia, ≥1 pharmacy claim for a statin, or ≥1 LDL-C value ≥100 mg/dL [index date]) aged ≥18 y were identified from the HealthCore Integrated Research Environment from 1/1/2007-7/31/2012. Patients were classified as low risk (0 or 1 risk factor): hypertension, age ≥45 y [men] or ≥55 y [women], or low HDL-C), moderate/moderately high risk (≥2 risk factors), high risk (having CHD or CHD risk equivalent), or very high risk (having ACS or other established cardiovascular disease plus diabetes or metabolic syndrome). Demographics, comorbidities, medication use and lipid levels during the 12 months prior, and statin use during the 6 months post-index date were compared across risk groups (very high vs each other risk group). Results: There were 1,524,351 low-risk (mean age: 47 y; 45% men), 242,357 moderate-risk (mean age: 58 y; 59% men), 188,222 high-risk (mean age: 57 y; 52% men), and 57,469 very-high-risk (mean age: 63 y; 61% men) patients identified. Mean Deyo-Charlson comorbidity score differed greatly across risk strata: 0.20, 0.33, 1.26, and 2.22 from low to very high risk (p<.0001 for each). Compared with high-risk patients, very-high-risk patients had a higher rate of ischemic stroke: 5.4% vs 4.1%; peripheral artery disease: 17.1% vs 11.6%; coronary artery disease: 8.5% vs 8.2%; and abdominal aortic aneurysm: 2.3% vs 2.0% (p<.05 for each). Less than 1% of the total population had a prior prescription for each non-statin lipid-lowering medication (bile acid sequestrants, fibrates, ezetimibe, niacin, and omega-3). Very-high-risk patients had lower total cholesterol (very-high-risk mean: 194 mg/dL vs 207, 205, and 198 mg/dL for low-, moderate-/moderately-high-, and high-risk patients, respectively) and LDL-C (very-high-risk mean: 110 mg/dL vs 126, 126, and 116 mg/dL for the other risk groups; p<.0001 for each); higher triglycerides (TG) (very-high-risk mean: 206 mg/dL vs 123, 177, and 167 mg/dL for the other groups; p<.0001 for each); and lower HDL-C (very-high-risk mean: 45 mg/dL vs 57 [p<.0001], 45 [p=.006], and 51 mg/dL [p<.0001]). Statin use was low overall (15%), but higher in the very-high-risk group (45%) vs the high- (29%), moderate-/moderately-high- (18%), and low- (12%) risk groups (p<.0001 for each). Conclusions: Despite a large proportion of patients having high lipid levels, statin use after a dyslipidemia diagnosis was low: ≥80% of all patients (and more than half at very high risk) failed to receive a statin, indicating a potentially large population of patients who could benefit from statin treatment. Prior use of non-statin lipid-lowering medications was also low considering the high TG and low HDL-C levels among high-risk patients.

Download Full-text

Abstract 78: Risk Factors Associated with Failure of Aggressive Medical Therapy in the SAMMPRIS Trial

Stroke ◽

10.1161/str.45.suppl_1.78 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 45 (suppl_1) ◽

Author(s):

Michael F Waters ◽

Brian L Hoh ◽

Michael J Lynn ◽

Tanya N Turan ◽

Colin P Derdeyn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

High Risk ◽

Medical Therapy ◽

Primary Endpoint ◽

Univariate Analysis ◽

Baseline Risk ◽

Medical Group ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Increased Risk ◽

Risk Patients

Background: The SAMMPRIS trial showed that aggressive medical therapy was more effective than stenting for preventing stroke in high-risk patients with symptomatic intracranial stenosis. However, 15% of patients in the medical group still had a primary endpoint (any stroke or death within 30 days of enrollment or stroke in the territory beyond 30 days) during a median follow-up of 32.7 months. We sought to determine baseline risk factors that were associated with a primary endpoint in the medical arm of SAMMPRIS. Methods: Data on 227 patients randomized to the medical group in SAMMPRIS were analyzed. Baseline demographic features, vascular risk factors, qualifying event, brain imaging and angiographic features were analyzed. The hazard ratio and p-value from a Cox proportional hazard regression model relating time until a primary endpoint to each factor were calculated. Results: Female gender, diabetes, stroke as the qualifying event (especially non-penetrator stroke), old infarct in the territory of the stenotic artery, and > 80% stenosis were associated (p < 0.10) with a higher risk of the primary endpoint on univariate analysis (see accompanying table) (multivariate analysis will be available by the time of ISC). Variables not associated with a higher risk of a primary endpoint in the medical arm included: age, race, antithrombotic therapy at the time of a qualifying event, time from qualifying event to enrollment (< 7 days vs. > 7 days), and location of stenosis. Conclusions: Several features were associated with an increased risk of the primary endpoint in the medical group in SAMMPRIS. On univariate analysis, the most important risk factors were an old infarct in the territory of the stenotic artery and stroke (especially non-penetrator stroke) as the qualifying event. These features will be useful for identifying particularly high-risk patients who should be targeted for future clinical trials testing alternative therapies to aggressive medical management.

Download Full-text