Prof Darrel Francis ☺ Mk CardioFellows Great Again

Can YOU interpret clinical research statistics? Courses of silent, 15-minute seminars, to do on your phone during boring Zoom calls. Do each seminar twice, a few days apart: First time to learn. Second time, GO FOR GOLD! Click here > inspirion.org/sa/aca~-MDQ9cX…

Shame he was unable to read the writing on the wall.

@venkmurthy @mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo Really interesting, thank you Venk.

@ProfDFrancis @mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo Endpoint was "The primary end point was a composite of death, stroke, or unplanned hospitalization for cardiovascular causes" Late TAVR not counted. Any TAVR within six months counted as unplanned by protocol but at seven months not counted unless unplanned.

I’m not sure. 👇🏻👇🏻 No sig diff in “hard” outcomes. Unplanned hospitalization curve separates very soon after randomization. Is this subtraction anxiety? @rajkumar_chris

@venkmurthy @mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo Good grief, so hang on - the endpoint is "death at any stage, or TAVI in the control arm within the first 6 months of randomization"

@venkmurthy @mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo Aaaaaah, i see!

@mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo It is _not_ what we would get from simply biological subtraction anxiety itself, because there is no reason for that to occur on a date UNIFORMLY DISTRIBUTED over the range 0 to 6 months. Rather, the anxiety (excess slope) would be greatest at the start, and then tail off.

@mugander @rajkumar_chris @drjohnm @rallamee @bnallamo ... but then no more, from 6 months on. It is _not_ what we would get from a protocolised phone call _at_ exactly 6 months: that would be a huge blip _at_ exactly 6 months.

New Cardiology Registrar? Enjoy!

@mugander @rallamee @mshunshin In principle I am skeptical that making it _harder_ for blood to circulate, can make symptoms in (any kind of) HF better. Would you want your CO restricted like that? However, I was skeptical of Coronary Sinus Reducer because it sounded mad too... Placebo trials key here...

This is pretty cool. 👀 Percutaneous stent-based "stenosing" of both pulmonary artery branches to treat #HFrEF 🫀. Hemodynamic response looking promising. Next up, placebo-controlled trial a la #ORBITA one would hope. @rallamee @ProfDFrancis @mshunshin

I'm delighted that the British Heart Foundation has awarded £5 million for a BHF Centre for Research Excellence at the National Heart & Lung Institute. Congrats to Profs Manuel Mayr and Costanza Emanueli and team, for all their brilliant work! imperial.ac.uk/news/253615/im…

@mandeep_mayo At first I thought "nothing", but then I read the responses, including "Severe AR", which I am swung by. Is the giveway that: (a) On the first beat, contrast goes into the aorta, but then slops back into LV? (b) LV takes ages to clear, despite good EF?

What is wrong with this LV angiogram?

Hat tip to our excellent PhD student Catherine Stowell for finding this and telling me this concept is called "polyptoton". I pretended that I knew that already, since I am a professor and obviously I know everything. But anyway you be the judge: ww.sci-hub.tf/https://doi.or…

Anyway, the reason to mention this is to ask what you think of this opening sentence. Was this for a bet, do you think?

Do you guys ever do inside-jokes in your papers? This was one that I had to pull rank on, against the wishes of the entire rest of the authors, to get in. "What if one day we want to publish in the Lancet?" "Nah, never gonna happen. And anyway they don't read the BMJ."

@AngryCardio @MohammedAlo @MaryanneDemasi @JAMAInternalMed @pbyrne82 Just to clarify, I am not laughing at them for being a bit thick. It was just a huge coincidence that I laughed out loud at that time, your honour.

@AngryCardio @MohammedAlo @MaryanneDemasi @JAMAInternalMed @pbyrne82 Hahahaha

🧵 Thread on my statin research 👇🏼 Our analysis in @JAMAInternalMed 21 statin trials, 143,532 participants The benefits of #statins were minimal & most trial participants who took statins, derived no clinical benefit. Reducing LDL-C with statins showed an inconsistent/weak relationship with MI, stroke & death tinyurl.com/mryyvj9f

@MohammedAlo @AngryCardio @MaryanneDemasi @JAMAInternalMed @pbyrne82 Yes definitely puts Glucose up by 0.1mmol/l. But the CV event reduction is _despite_ that.

@AngryCardio @MaryanneDemasi @JAMAInternalMed @ProfDFrancis @pbyrne82 Correct. But fear mongering people about taking a medication that is life-saving especially people who are diabetic just because they're anyone seem like go up 0.1% is not proper

@olieidel Don't be so pessimistic. 8-)

In the unlikely case that you're interested in a conference on regulation of medical software - we're hosting one on Sept 22nd, and it's free! Have a look: openregulatory.com/conference

@mshunshin @rkhamis @rallamee Actually get back to the AI stuff!!

ACC24 with two trials from Imperial TELE-ACS (@rkhamis), and ORBITA-COSMIC (@rallamee - who is telling me to stop tweeting and get back to R).