Sudden death is one of the more frequent causes of death for hemodialysis patients, but the underlying mechanisms, contribution of arrhythmia, and associations with serum chemistries or the dialysis procedure are incompletely understood. To study this, implantable loop recorders were utilized for continuous cardiac rhythm monitoring to detect clinically significant arrhythmias including sustained ventricular tachycardia, bradycardia, asystole, or symptomatic arrhythmias in hemodialysis patients over six months. Serum chemistries were tested pre- and post-dialysis at least weekly. Dialysis procedure data were collected at every session. Associations with clinically significant arrhythmias were assessed using negative binomial regression modeling. Sixty-six patients were implanted and 1678 events were recorded in 44 patients. The majority were bradycardias (1461), with 14 episodes of asystole and only one of sustained ventricular tachycardia. Atrial fibrillation, although not defined as clinically significant arrhythmias, was detected in 41% of patients. With thrice-weekly dialysis, the rate was highest during the first dialysis session of the week and was increased during the last 12 hours of each inter-dialytic interval, particularly the long interval. Among serum and dialytic parameters, only higher pre-dialysis serum sodium and dialysate calcium over 2.5 mEq/L were independently associated with clinically significant arrhythmias. Thus, clinically significant arrhythmias are common in hemodialysis patients, and bradycardia and asystole rather than ventricular tachycardia may be key causes of sudden death in hemodialysis patients. Associations with the temporal pattern of dialysis suggest that modification of current dialysis practices could reduce the incidence of sudden death.

No abstract

The results of primary coronary stenting for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have been reported to improve significantly with the concomitant administration of platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor abciximab. There are, however, no data available with the use of eptifibatide, a more cost-effective, small-molecule GP IIb/IIIa blocker with a shorter half-life. In a prospective multicenter feasibility and efficacy study, we assigned 55 consecutive patients with AMI being taken up for primary stenting to receive eptifibatide just before the procedure (two boluses of 180 microg/kg 10 min apart and a 24-hr infusion of 2 microg/kg/min). Clinical outcomes were evaluated at 30 days after the procedure. The angiographic patency of the vessel with TIMI flow rates, TIMI myocardial perfusion (TMP) grade, and corrected TIMI frame counts were assessed at the end of procedure and before hospital discharge. At 30 days, the primary endpoint, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and urgent target vessel revascularization (TVR) was seen in 12.7% of patients. The TIMI 3 and TMP grade 3 flow, which was seen in 93% and 86% of patient, respectively, at the end of the procedure, declined to 86% and 78%, respectively (P < 0.05) before hospital discharge. Corrected TIMI frame counts also decreased from 25.7 +/- 7.2 to 22.9 +/- 6.8 (P < 0.05). There were five (9.1%) instances of subacute thrombosis (SAT) presenting as AMI, needing urgent TVR in all, within 3-5 days of the primary procedure. No excessive bleeding complication, directly attributable to the use of eptifibatide, was observed. The study was terminated prematurely because of an unacceptable SAT rate. Administration of eptifibatide along with primary stenting for AMI is associated with a high TIMI 3 and TMP grade 3 flow acutely. However, these flows decline significantly before hospital discharge and lead to a high rate of SAT. The dosage and duration of infusion of eptifibatide in this setting needs further evaluation.

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

In this situation clinical discretion is of paramount importance. We must discuss the benefits and risks of the treatments offered. Simply saying ''Take this antibiotic, it will protect you from endocarditis'' is not enough. The benefits of prophylaxis are greater in highrisk patients (those with prosthetic valves, previous infective endocarditis, congenital cyanotic heart disease) and relatively small in lowrisk groups such as patients with mitral valve prolapse. Unsurprisingly, the Microbiology Specialist Advisory Group working party is not the first to reach these conclusions. The French Recommendations published in 2002 in Heart also recommended maintaining the principle of prophylaxis but limiting it to patients with the highest ratio of individual benefit. 6