Background-In developing economies, there are patients in whom pacemaker implantation is delayed because they cannot afford one. Reused devices have been a solution. To address concerns about safety, a cohort of consecutive patients implanted with a reused pacemaker was compared with a control group. Methods and Results-A cohort of 603 consecutive patients from 2000 to 2010 was studied in an ambispective noninferiority study. The study group patients (n=307) received resterilized pacemakers, and the control group patients (n=296) received a new pacemaker. A combined end point of 3 major outcomes-unexpected battery depletion, infection, and device dysfunction-was analyzed. A total of 85 pacemakers had to be explanted, 31 in the control group (10.5%) and 54 in the study group (17.6%; relative risk, 1.68; 95% confidence interval, 1.

An association of positive tilt table testing to a single nucleotide polymorphism with a Gly to Arg switch at position 389 of the beta(1)AR was found. This polymorphism may contribute to susceptibility to faint during orthostatic challenge.

No abstract

Studies on natural history of unruptured intracranial aneurysms suggest 10 year cumulative bleeding-related mortality and severe morbidity of no less than 7.5%. In our study, surgical clipping resulted in an 0.8% rate of mortality and 3.4% permanent morbidity. This suggests that surgical clipping has the potential of a superior outcome to the natural history of patients who have an estimated life expectancy of no less than 10 years.

Purpose To evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of a strategy based on direct‐acting uterine curettage (UC) versus a pre‐direct‐acting misoprostol (1600 mg) in patients with missed abortion (MA), from the perspective of a National Health System. Methods An open prospective cohort study was carried out at Reina Sofía University Hospital (Córdoba, Spain) from January 1, 2019 to December 31, 2019 in 180 patients diagnosed with MA. The patients chose medical treatment with intravaginal misoprostol (800 μg/4 h) or UC after receiving complete and detailed information. The effectiveness, clinical characteristics of the patients, costs of treating and managing the disease, and satisfaction with the procedures were recorded. Results One hundred and forty‐five patients (80.6%) chose misoprostol versus 35 patients (19.4%) who chose UC. The effectiveness of misoprostol has been 42% evaluated at 48 h; UC success rate has been 100%. The incidence of side effects is significantly higher in patients treated with misoprostol (p < 0.05); as well as the number of care received by the patient (p < 0.05). Satisfaction is higher in patients treated with UC (p < 0.05). However, the cost is almost 5‐folds higher in patients treated with UC (p < 0.05). Conclusion UC has a higher success rate, greater satisfaction, and a lower incidence of side effects, although significantly increases the cost compared to misoprostol in MA.