Dear Readers,<\/p>\n
This year the annual Journal Watch Cardiology Top Stories feature has a new dimension. We are presenting two lists \u2014 one from us and one from you. To create the Journal Watch Cardiology 2009: Editors’ Choice list, our editors voted for the stories that they believe to be most important to you and your practices. For the Top 10 Most Read Online list, we looked at which cardiology stories were viewed most often by Journal Watch registered users and subscribers. <\/p>\n
Surprisingly, the lists have only one story in common \u2014 it concerns diabetes treatment in patients with coronary artery disease. The story Journal Watch users read most often discussed the number of patients who would be eligible for statin treatment if criteria suggested by the JUPITER trial results were adopted; your second most read story was about travel and venous thromboembolism. By contrast, the most important article in the editors’ opinion analyzed the use of cardiac resynchronization therapy to prevent heart failure. Overall, the most read stories demonstrate the broader primary care interests of the Journal Watch subscribers as a whole.<\/p>\n
We hope that you will peruse these lists and see how they fit with your own assessment of the most important developments in cardiology during 2009. Some of these studies \u2014 ARBITER, for example \u2014 engendered quite a bit of controversy. You might find your own personal favorite in one of these lists or feel that some valuable pearls managed to escape our attention. Let us know what you think by commenting on this story today.<\/p>\n
Cardiology Top Stories of 2009: Editors’ Choice<\/strong><\/p>\n Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy to Prevent Heart Failure: Gathering Momentum<\/a> Directing Coronary Intervention Using Fractional Flow Reserve<\/a> Prasugrel vs. Clopidogrel in Patients with ST-Segment-Elevation MI<\/a> ARBITER 6-HALTS: A Surprise Knockout<\/a> Darbepoetin \u03b1 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes, Chronic Kidney Disease, and Anemia<\/a> Treating Diabetes and Coronary Artery Disease<\/a> Can Thienopyridines and Proton-Pump Inhibitors Peacefully Coexist?<\/a> Surgical Ventricular Reconstruction: Function Fails to Follow Form<\/a> Exercise Training in Patients with LV Systolic Dysfunction<\/a> Which Revascularization Strategy is Best for Severe Coronary Artery Lesions?<\/a> Cardiology Top Stories of 2009: Most Read<\/strong><\/p>\n Who Might Be Eligible to Receive Statins for Primary Prevention?<\/a> Travel and Venous Thromboembolism<\/a> Statins for Primary Prevention: Homing in on Effectiveness<\/a> Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Use in Patients with Heart Failure<\/a> You’ll Faint When You See the Bill<\/a> Proton Pump Inhibitors and Clopidogrel: Bad Company?<\/a> A Closer Look at Aspirin for Primary Prevention<\/a> Vitamin K for Warfarin-Induced Hypocoagulation<\/a>
\nMark S. Link, MD
\nMADIT-CRT findings demonstrate a benefit of resynchronization in patients with NYHA class I or II heart failure.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Moss AJ et al. N Engl J Med 2009 Sep 1<\/p>\n
\nBeat J. Meyer, MD
\nAssessing the functional relevance of an angiographic stenosis before PCI could improve safety and reduce costs.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Tonino PAL et al. for the FAME Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 2009 Jan 15; 360:213
\nEllis SG. N Engl J Med 2009 Jan 15; 360:292<\/p>\n
\nBeat J. Meyer, MD
\nA substudy of TRITON-TIMI 38 confirms the main trial findings that prasugrel is more efficacious but might be less safe than clopidogrel.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Montalescot G et al. Lancet 2009 Feb 28; 373:723
\nStone GW. Lancet 2009 Feb 28; 373:695<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nNiacin’s clear win over ezetimibe as an adjunct to statin therapy challenges assumptions about lipid management.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Taylor AJ et al. N Engl J Med 2009 Nov 16<\/p>\n
\nPaul S. Mueller, MD, MPH
\nThe drug provides little benefit and might cause harm.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Pfeffer MA et al. N Engl J Med 2009 Oct 30<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nPrompt revascularization or initial medical therapy? Insulin sensitization or provision? From the BARI 2D trial, no strategy emerged a clear winner.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Frye RL et al. for the BARI 2D Study Group. N Engl J Med 2009 Jun 11; 360:2503
\nBoden WE and Taggart DP. N Engl J Med 2009 Jun 11; 360:2570<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nAn observational analysis of trial data confirms the functional interaction but provides no evidence of adverse clinical effects.<\/em>
\nReviewing: O’Donoghue ML et al. Lancet 2009 Sep 1<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nThis procedure did not improve clinical outcomes in CABG patients.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Jones RH et al. for the STICH Hypothesis 2 Investigators. N Engl J Med 2009 Mar 29
\nEisen HJ. N Engl J Med 2009 Mar 2<\/p>\n
\nFrederick A. Masoudi, MD, MSPH
\nData from a large randomized trial demonstrate that exercise therapy is safe, but the health gains are modest.<\/em>
\nReviewing: O\u2019Connor CM et al. JAMA 2009 Apr 8; 301:1439
\nFlynn KE et al. JAMA 2009 Apr 8; 301:1451<\/p>\n
\nHoward C. Herrmann, MD
\nResults of the SYNTAX trial failed to show that PCI is noninferior to CABG in patients with 3-vessel or left main disease<\/em>.
\nReviewing: Serruys PW et al. for the SYNTAX Investigators. N Engl J Med 2009 Feb 18
\nLange RA and Hillis LD. N Engl J Med 2009 Feb 18<\/p>\n
\nJoAnne M. Foody, MD
\nRoughly four out of five older Americans might, according to results of the JUPITER trial.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Spatz ES et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 2009 Jan; 2:41<\/p>\n
\nJoel M. Gore, MD
\nResults of a meta-analysis showed a significant elevation in risk that increased with the duration of the journey.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Chandra D et al. Ann Intern Med 2009 Aug 4; 151:180<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nA new meta-analysis bolsters the case for benefit.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Brugts JJ et al. BMJ 2009 Jun 30; 338:b2376<\/p>\n
\nFrederick A. Masoudi, MD, MSPH
\nCompelling evidence for avoiding NSAIDs underscores the challenges of pain management in these patients<\/em>.
\nReviewing: Gislason GH et al. Arch Intern Med 2009 Jan 26; 169:141<\/p>\n
\nFrederick A. Masoudi, MD, MSPH
\nThe most expensive tests for evaluating syncope usually don’t influence diagnosis or management, and the least expensive \u2014 and most useful \u2014 test is underused.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Mendu ML et al. Arch Intern Med 2009 Jul 27; 169:1299<\/p>\n
\nJoAnne M. Foody, MD
\nIn a large observational cohort of ACS patients, this drug combination was associated with poorer outcomes than was clopidogrel alone.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Ho PM et al. JAMA 2009 Mar 4; 301:937<\/p>\n
\nHarlan M. Krumholz, MD, SM
\nA meta-analysis of individual patient data from six trials uncovers no clear benefit.<\/em>
\nReviewing: Collins R et al. for the Antithrombotic Trialists\u2019 (ATT) Collaboration. Lancet 2009 May 30; 373:1849
\nAlgra A and Greving JP. Lancet 2009 May 30; 373:1821<\/p>\n
\nJoel M. Gore, MD
\nLow-dose vitamin K conferred no more clinical benefit than placebo, despite lowering INRs more rapidly.<\/em>
\nCrowther MA et al. Ann Intern Med 2009 Mar 3; 150:293<\/p>\n