Browsing by Author "Ozpelit, Ebru"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Arrhythmia/Electrophysiology/Pacemaker/CRT-ICD
(Kare Publ, 2022) Boyuk, Ferit; Caliskan, Serhat; Kocabas, Umut; Cakmak, Ender Ozgun; Ozpelit, Ebru; Kasap, Mithat; Türk, Uğur Önsel
[Abstract Not Available]
Citation - WoS: 2
Citation - Scopus: 2
Correlation and Agreement Between the Score2 and Prevent 10-Year Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Scores: Insights From Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography
(Mdpi, 2024) Ozpelit, Mehmet Emre; Colak, Ayse; Uzumcu, Hatice Irem; Kumral, Zeynep; Ozpelit, Ebru
Background: We aimed to evaluate the correlation and agreement between the Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation 2 (SCORE2) and Predicting Risk of CVD EVENTs (PREVENT) 10-year ASCVD risk scores by incorporating computed tomographic (CT) data to assess differences between the scoring systems. Methods: The PREVENT risk score was calculated for 171 patients, while the SCORE2 and SCORE2 Older Persons (OP) risk scores were calculated for 113 patients. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores were calculated, and the grading of coronary artery disease (CAD) was assessed according to these scores. Results: According to the PREVENT risk category, 79 patients (46.2%) were in the low-risk category, 32 (18.7%) were in the borderline-risk category, and 51 (29.8%) were in the intermediate-risk category. In contrast, the SCORE2 systems placed 32 patients (28.3%) in the low- to moderate-risk categories. Only 9 patients (5.3%) were classified as being at high risk by PREVENT, while SCORE2 categorized 39 patients (34.5%) as being at high risk and 42 patients (37.2%) as being at very high risk. There was a strong correlation between the scores (r = 85, p < 0.001), with a Bland-Altman plot analysis showing a bias of -3.71 points and the limits of agreement ranging from -16.06 to 8.64. The total CAC score and CAD grading were significantly different across the PREVENT risk groups (p < 0.001 for all) but were similar across the SCORE2 groups (p = 0.3 and p = 0.051, respectively). Conclusions: There is a strong correlation and agreement between the two risk scores. However, SCORE2 tends to categorize more patients as high-risk than PREVENT does. Additionally, the PREVENT risk categories are more effective than SCORE2 in determining the likelihood of CAD based on CT results.
Citation - WoS: 1
Citation - Scopus: 2
Evaluation of Treatment Safety in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation on Edoxaban Therapy in Real-Life in Turkey Study: Design and Rationale
(Aves, 2022) Türk Uğur Önsel; Alioglu, Emin; Mavioglu, Zafer; Diker, Erdem; Ozpelit, Ebru; De Caterina, Raffaele
Objective: Safety and effectiveness of edoxaban was demonstrated in phase III, Effective Anticoagulation with Factor Xa Next Generation in Atrial Fibrillation-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 48 (ENGAGE-AF-TIMI 48) trial and is being confirmed in the post-authorization Edoxaban Treatment in routiNe clinical prActice for patients with Atrial Fibrillation in Europe (ETNA-AF-Europe) study in patients with atrial fibrillation. However. any post-authorization safety study focusing on the safety of edoxaban treatment in Turkey with a prospective design has not been performed yet. The Evaluation of Treatment Safety in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation on Edoxaban Therapy in Real-Life in Turkey (ETAF-TR) study is designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of edoxaban treatment in atrial fibrillation in routine practice. The present article describes the design and rationale for the ETAF-TR Study. Methods: The ETAF-TR (NCT04594915) is a national. multicenter. prospective, observational study that enrolled 858 patients from 32 centers. The primary outcome of the ETAF-TR study is any overt bleeding (consisting of major bleeding or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding or any bleeding that does not meet this definition but is considered as overt bleeding by the participating physician). Effectiveness, treatment persistence. and posology will also be evaluated in an explorative manner. The overall duration of follow-up will be 1 year: the first patient was enrolled in August 2020. Conclusions: Results of ETAF-TR wilt add data from clinical practice to those from ENGAGE-AF trial and also ETNA-AF study. Comparing their results will enable to test the external validity of ENGAGE-AF trial in the country conditions.