Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
Articles by J. V Tu
Total Records ( 4 ) for J. V Tu
  D. S Lee , P Gona , R. S Vasan , M. G Larson , E. J Benjamin , T. J Wang , J. V Tu and D. Levy

Background— The contributions of risk factors and disease pathogenesis to heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) versus heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFREF) have not been fully explored.

Methods and Results— We examined clinical characteristics and risk factors at time of heart failure onset and long-term survival in Framingham Heart Study participants according to left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45% (n=314; 59%) versus >45% (n=220; 41%) and hierarchical causal classification. Heart failure was attributed to coronary heart disease in 278 participants (52%), valvular heart disease in 42 (8%), hypertension in 140 (26%), or other/unknown causes in 74 (14%). Multivariable predictors of HFPEF (versus HFREF) included elevated systolic blood pressure (odds ratio [OR]=1.13 per 10 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.22), atrial fibrillation (OR=4.23; 95% CI, 2.38 to 7.52), and female sex (OR=2.29; 95% CI, 1.35 to 3.90). Conversely, prior myocardial infarction (OR=0.32; 95% CI, 0.19 to 0.53) and left bundle-branch block QRS morphology (OR=0.21; 95% CI, 0.10 to 0.46) reduced the odds of HFPEF. Long-term prognosis was grim, with a median survival of 2.1 years (5-year mortality rate, 74%), and was equally poor in men and women with HFREF or HFPEF.

Conclusions— Among community patients with new-onset heart failure, there are differences in causes and time-of-onset clinical characteristics between those with HFPEF versus HFREF. In people with HFREF, mortality is increased when coronary heart disease is the underlying cause. These findings suggest that heart failure with reduced left ventricular systolic function and heart failure with preserved left ventricular systolic function are partially distinct entities, with potentially different approaches to early detection and prevention.

  T Huynh , S Perron , J O'Loughlin , L Joseph , M Labrecque , J. V Tu and P. Theroux

Background— Published meta-analyses comparing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with fibrinolytic therapy in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction include only randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We aim to obviate the limited applicability of RCTs to real-world settings by undertaking meta-analyses of both RCTs and observational studies.

Methods and Results— We included all RCTs and observational studies, without language restriction, published up to May 1, 2008. We completed separate bayesian hierarchical random-effect meta-analyses for 23 RCTs (8140 patients) and 32 observational studies (185 900 patients). Primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with reductions in short-term (≤6-week) mortality of 34% (odds ratio, 0.66; 95% credible interval, 0.51 to 0.82) in randomized trials, and 23% lower mortality (odds ratio, 0.77; 95% credible interval, 0.62 to 0.95) in observational studies. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with reductions in stroke of 63% in RCTs and 61% in observational studies. At long-term follow-up (≥1 year), primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with a 24% reduction in mortality (odds ratio, 0.76; 95% credible interval, 0.58 to 0.95) and a 51% reduction in reinfarction (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% credible interval, 0.32 to 0.66) in RCTs. However, there was no conclusive benefit of primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the long term in the observational studies.

Conclusions— Compared with fibrinolytic therapy, primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with short-term reductions in mortality, reinfarction, and stroke in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Primary percutaneous coronary intervention was associated with long-term reductions in mortality and reinfarction in RCTs, but there was no conclusive evidence for a long-term benefit in mortality and reinfarction in observational studies.

  G Thanassoulis , I Karp , K Humphries , J. V Tu , M. J Eisenberg and L. Pilote

Background— Prescription plans frequently use restrictive strategies to control drug expenditures. Increased restrictions may reduce access to evidence-based therapy among patients with chronic disease. We sought to evaluate the impact of increased restrictions on medication use among heart failure (HF) patients.

Methods and Results— We conducted a population-based cohort study of administrative data from 3 Canadian provinces. During 1998 to 2001, Quebec (QC) had a minimally restrictive plan, whereas Ontario (ON) and British Columbia (BC) had more restrictive prescription plans. We evaluated drug use at 30 days of discharge stratified by prescription plan. Provincial rates of filled prescriptions for HF drugs in QC, ON, and BC were 62%, 58%, and 47% for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors; 34%, 22%, and 16% for β-blockers; 9%, 5%, and 3% for angiotensin receptor blockers; and 79%, 76%, and 62% for loop diuretics, respectively. In multivariate analyses, patients residing in provinces with restrictive plans were less likely to be prescribed drugs that were restricted, such as β-blockers (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.60; 0.36, 0.29 to 0.44, for ON and BC, respectively) and angiotensin receptor blockers (0.50, 0.45 to 0.56; 0.38, 0.32 to 0.46, for ON and BC, respectively), than drugs with no restrictions, such as loop diuretics (0.81, 0.74 to 0.88; 0.40, 0.36 to 0.45, for ON and BC, respectively) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (0.80, 0.75 to 0.86; 0.47, 0.43 to 0.52, for ON and BC, respectively).

Conclusion— Among HF patients, residing in a province with a more restrictive prescription plan may be associated with lower use of restricted HF medications over and above the expected regional differences in HF drug use across provinces.

  D. S Lee , M. J Schull , D. A Alter , P. C Austin , A Laupacis , A Chong , J. V Tu and T. A. Stukel

Background— Although approximately one third of patients with heart failure (HF) visiting the emergency department (ED) are discharged home, little is known about their care and outcomes.

Methods and Results— We examined the acute care and early outcomes of patients with HF who visited an ED and were discharged without hospital admission in Ontario, Canada, from April 2004 to March 2007. Among 50 816 patients (age, 76.4±11.6 years; 49.4% men) visiting an ED for HF, 16 094 (31.7%) were discharged without hospital admission. A total of 4.0% died within 30 days from admission, and 1.3% died within 7 days of discharge from the ED. Although multiple (≥2) previous HF admissions (odds ratio [OR], 1.64; 95% CI, 1.14 to 2.31), valvular heart disease (OR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.84), peripheral vascular disease (OR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.00 to 1.93), and respiratory disease (OR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.63) increased the risk of 30-day death among those discharged from the ED, presence of these conditions did not increase the likelihood of admission. Patients were more likely to be admitted if they were older (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.10 per decade), arrived by ambulance (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.93 to 2.12), had a higher triage acuity score (OR, 4.12; 95% CI, 3.84 to 4.42), or received resuscitation in the ED (OR, 2.85; 95% CI, 2.68 to 3.04). In those with comparable predicted risks of death, subsequent 90-day mortality rates were higher among discharged than admitted patients (11.9% versus 9.5%; log-rank P=0.016).

Conclusions— Patients with HF who are discharged from the ED have substantial risks of early death, which, in some cases, may exceed that of hospitalized patients.

Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility