Difference between SF6 and N2 multiple breath washout kinetics is due to N2 back diffusion and error in N2 offset.

Measurement of lung clearance index (LCI) by multiple breath washout (MBW) is a sensitive method for monitoring lung disease in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). To compare nitrogen MBW (N2-MBW) and sulfur hexafluoride MBW (SF6-MBW), we connected these two gas analysis systems in series to obtain truly simultaneous measurements, with no differences other than the gas used. Nonsmoking healthy controls (HC) and subjects with CF were recruited at two institutions. The Exhalyzer-D (for N2-MBW measurement) was connected in series with the Innocor (for SF6-MBW measurement). Subjects washed in SF6 from a Douglas bag with tidal breathing and washed out SF6 and nitrogen with 100% oxygen provided as bias flow. Washout of both gases was continued past the LCI point (1/40th of equilibration concentration) in triplicate. N2-MBW resulted in higher cumulative exhaled volume, functional residual capacity (FRC), and LCI when compared with SF6-derived parameters in HC subjects (P < 0.0001 for all comparisons). All N2-MBW parameters were also significantly higher than SF6-MBW parameters in subjects with CF (P < 0.01 for all comparisons). After recalculation with a common FRC, N2-MBW LCI was higher than SF6-MBW LCI in subjects with CF (19.73 vs. 11.39; P < 0.0001) and in HC (8.12 vs. 6.78; P < 0.0001). Adjusting for N2 back diffusion and an offset error in the nitrogen measurement resulted in near complete agreement between the two methodologies. We found significant differences in LCI and FRC measurements using two different gases for MBW. This may have significant implications for the future use and interpretation of LCI data in clinical trials and routine clinical care.NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study provides important insights into the differences between the two techniques used for measuring lung clearance index (LCI): N2 and SF6 multiple breath washout. Differences between measurements made by these two methods in subjects with cystic fibrosis and healthy controls could be explained by nitrogen back diffusion and N2 offset error. This is important for use and interpretation of LCI data as an outcome measure for clinical trials and in routine clinical care.

The Long-Term Multicenter Observational Study of Dabigatran Treatment in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation (RELY-ABLE) Study.

BACKGROUND: During follow-up of between 1 and 3 years in the Randomized Evaluation of Long-term Anticoagulation Therapy (RE-LY) trial, 2 doses of dabigatran etexilate were shown to be effective and safe for the prevention of stroke or systemic embolism in patients with atrial fibrillation. There is a need for longer-term follow-up of patients on dabigatran and for further data comparing the 2 dabigatran doses. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients randomly assigned to dabigatran in RE-LY were eligible for the Long-term Multicenter Extension of Dabigatran Treatment in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation (RELY-ABLE) trial if they had not permanently discontinued study medication at the time of their final RE-LY study visit. Enrolled patients continued to receive the double-blind dabigatran dose received in RE-LY, for up to 28 months of follow up after RE-LY (median follow-up, 2.3 years). There were 5851 patients enrolled, representing 48% of patients originally randomly assigned to receive dabigatran in RE-LY and 86% of RELY-ABLE-eligible patients. Rates of stroke or systemic embolism were 1.46% and 1.60%/y on dabigatran 150 and 110 mg twice daily, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.69-1.20). Rates of major hemorrhage were 3.74% and 2.99%/y on dabigatran 150 and 110 mg (hazard ratio, 1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.53). Rates of death were 3.02% and 3.10%/y (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.80-1.19). Rates of hemorrhagic stroke were 0.13% and 0.14%/y. CONCLUSIONS: During 2.3 years of continued treatment with dabigatran after RE-LY, there was a higher rate of major bleeding with dabigatran 150 mg twice daily in comparison with 110 mg, and similar rates of stroke and death.

Effect of simvastatin on coronary flow reserve in patients with atherosclerosis and hypercholesterolemia: an intracoronary Doppler study.

BACKGROUND: Early stages of coronary atherosclerosis are accompanied by a functional impairment of coronary vasodilator capacity and endothelial dysfunction. Reduced coronary flow reserve has been reported in patients with hypercholesterolemia, despite angiographically normal coronary arteries. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of simvastatin on coronary flow reserve. METHODS: The study was an open non-placebo-controlled serial investigation in which every patient acted as his own control: 36 male patients with hypercholesterolemia and a non-significant coronary artery lesion in a not previously revascularized coronary artery. Intracoronary Doppler measurements were performed. Coronary flow reserve, relative coronary flow reserve and average peak velocity were performed at baseline, after 3 months on a lipid-lowering diet (control period), and after another 12 months of simvastatin 40 mg/day. In the same patient cohort, significant reduction in lesion plaque plus media has been demonstrated by intravascular ultrasound. RESULTS: Changes in coronary flow reserve were not influenced by either diet or simvastatin (2.5+/-0.6 vs. 2.6+/-0.5 vs. 2.6+/-0.6, P=ns). Maximum hyperemic flow (34.8+/-12.2 vs. 36.7+/-12.5 vs. 42.5+/-13.1, P<0.001) as well as resting flow (14.3+/-5.3 vs. 14.5+/-4.4 vs. 16.6+/-4.6, P<0.001) increased significantly after 12 months simvastatin therapy. CONCLUSION: Despite plaque plus media, regression simvastatin therapy for 12 months does not affect coronary flow reserve obtained using serial intracoronary Doppler studies. Simvastatin, however, increases the hyperemic flow velocity.