Network


Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.

Hotspot


Dive into the research topics where Michael R. Jaff is active.

Publication


Featured researches published by Michael R. Jaff.


Circulation | 2011

Management of Massive and Submassive Pulmonary Embolism, Iliofemoral Deep Vein Thrombosis, and Chronic Thromboembolic Pulmonary Hypertension A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Michael R. Jaff; M. Sean McMurtry; Stephen L. Archer; Mary Cushman; Neil A. Goldenberg; Samuel Z. Goldhaber; J. Stephen Jenkins; Jeffrey A. Kline; Andrew D. Michaels; Patricia A. Thistlethwaite; Suresh Vedantham; R. James White; Brenda K. Zierler

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is responsible for the hospitalization of >250 000 Americans annually and represents a significant risk for morbidity and mortality. Despite the publication of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines to aid in the management of VTE in its acute and chronic forms, the clinician is frequently confronted with manifestations of VTE for which data are sparse and optimal management is unclear. In particular, the optimal use of advanced therapies for acute VTE, including thrombolysis and catheter-based therapies, remains uncertain. This report addresses the management of massive and submassive pulmonary embolism (PE), iliofemoral deep vein thrombosis (IFDVT),and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH). The goal is to provide practical advice to enable the busy clinician to optimize the management of patients with these severe manifestations of VTE. Although this document makes recommendations for management, optimal medical decisions must incorporate other factors, including patient wishes, quality of life, and life expectancy based on age and comorbidities. The appropriateness of these recommendations for a specific patient may vary depending on these factors and will be best judged by the bedside clinician.


Cerebrovascular Diseases | 2007

Mannheim carotid intima-media thickness consensus (2004-2006). An update on behalf of the Advisory Board of the 3rd and 4th Watching the Risk Symposium, 13th and 15th European Stroke Conferences, Mannheim, Germany, 2004, and Brussels, Belgium, 2006.

P.-J. Touboul; Michael G. Hennerici; Stephen Meairs; Harold P. Adams; Pierre Amarenco; Natan M. Bornstein; László Csiba; M. Desvarieux; S. Ebrahim; Marc Fatar; R. Hernandez Hernandez; Michael R. Jaff; S. Kownator; P. Prati; Tatjana Rundek; M. Sitzer; U. Schminke; J.-C. Tardif; A. Taylor; E. Vicaut; K.S. Woo; F. Zannad; M. Zureik

Intima-media thickness (IMT) is increasingly used as a surrogate end point of vascular outcomes in clinical trials aimed at determining the success of interventions that lower risk factors for atherosclerosis and associated diseases (stroke, myocardial infarction and peripheral artery diseases). The necessity to promote further criteria to distinguish early atherosclerotic plaque formation from thickening of IMT and to standardize IMT measurements is expressed through this updated consensus. Plaque is defined as a focal structure that encroaches into the arterial lumen of at least 0.5 mm or 50% of the surrounding IMT value or demonstrates a thickness >1.5 mm as measured from the media-adventitia interface to the intima-lumen interface. Standard use of IMT measurements is based on physics, technical and disease-related principles as well as agreements on how to perform, interpret and document study results. Harmonization of carotid image acquisition and analysis is needed for the comparison of the IMT results obtained from epidemiological and interventional studies around the world. The consensus concludes that there is no need to ‘treat IMT values’ nor to monitor IMT values in individual patients apart from exceptions named, which emphasize that inside randomized clinical trials should be performed. Although IMT has been suggested to represent an important risk marker, according to the current evidence it does not fulfill the characteristics of an accepted risk factor. Standardized methods recommended in this consensus statement will foster homogenous data collection and analysis. This will help to improve the power of randomized clinical trials incorporating IMT measurements and to facilitate the merging of large databases for meta-analyses.


Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2011

2011 ACCF/AHA Focused Update of the Guideline for the Management of Patients With Peripheral Artery Disease (Updating the 2005 Guideline) A Report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines

Thom W. Rooke; Alan T. Hirsch; Sanjay Misra; Anton N. Sidawy; Joshua A. Beckman; Laura K. Findeiss; Jafar Golzarian; Heather L. Gornik; Jonathan L. Halperin; Michael R. Jaff; Gregory L. Moneta; Jeffrey W. Olin; James C. Stanley; Christopher J. White; John V. White; R. Eugene Zierler

Keeping pace with the stream of new data and evolving evidence on which guideline recommendations are based is an ongoing challenge to timely development of clinical practice guidelines. In an effort to respond promptly to new evidence, the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Task Force) has created a “focused update” process to revise the existing guideline recommendations that are affected by the evolving data or opinion. New evidence is reviewed in an ongoing fashion to more efficiently respond to important science and treatment trends that could have a major impact on patient outcomes and quality of care. Evidence is reviewed at least twice a year, and updates are initiated on an as-needed basis and completed as quickly as possible while maintaining the rigorous methodology that the ACCF and AHA have developed during their partnership of >20 years. These updated guideline recommendations reflect a consensus of expert opinion after a thorough review primarily of late-breaking clinical trials identified through a broad-based vetting process as being important to the relevant patient population, as well …


Cerebrovascular Diseases | 2012

MANNHEIM CAROTID INTIMA-MEDIA THICKNESS AND PLAQUE CONSENSUS (2004–2006–2011)

P.-J. Touboul; Michael G. Hennerici; Stephen Meairs; Harold P. Adams; Pierre Amarenco; Natan M. Bornstein; László Csiba; M. Desvarieux; S. Ebrahim; R. Hernandez Hernandez; Michael R. Jaff; S. Kownator; Tasneem Z. Naqvi; P. Prati; Tatjana Rundek; M. Sitzer; U. Schminke; J.-C. Tardif; A. Taylor; E. Vicaut; K.S. Woo

Intima-media thickness (IMT) provides a surrogate end point of cardiovascular outcomes in clinical trials evaluating the efficacy of cardiovascular risk factor modification. Carotid artery plaque further adds to the cardiovascular risk assessment. It is defined as a focal structure that encroaches into the arterial lumen of at least 0.5 mm or 50% of the surrounding IMT value or demonstrates a thickness >1.5 mm as measured from the media-adventitia interface to the intima-lumen interface. The scientific basis for use of IMT in clinical trials and practice includes ultrasound physics, technical and disease-related principles as well as best practice on the performance, interpretation and documentation of study results. Comparison of IMT results obtained from epidemiological and interventional studies around the world relies on harmonization on approaches to carotid image acquisition and analysis. This updated consensus document delineates further criteria to distinguish early atherosclerotic plaque formation from thickening of IMT. Standardized methods will foster homogenous data collection and analysis, improve the power of randomized clinical trials incorporating IMT and plaque measurements and facilitate the merging of large databases for meta-analyses. IMT results are applied to individual patients as an integrated assessment of cardiovascular risk factors. However, this document recommends against serial monitoring in individual patients.


The New England Journal of Medicine | 2014

Stenting and Medical Therapy for Atherosclerotic Renal-Artery Stenosis

Christopher J. Cooper; Timothy P. Murphy; Donald E. Cutlip; Kenneth Jamerson; William L. Henrich; Diane M. Reid; David J. Cohen; Alan H. Matsumoto; Michael W. Steffes; Michael R. Jaff; Martin R. Prince; Eldrin F. Lewis; Katherine R. Tuttle; Joseph I. Shapiro; John H. Rundback; Joseph M. Massaro; Lance D. Dworkin

BACKGROUND Atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis is a common problem in the elderly. Despite two randomized trials that did not show a benefit of renal-artery stenting with respect to kidney function, the usefulness of stenting for the prevention of major adverse renal and cardiovascular events is uncertain. METHODS We randomly assigned 947 participants who had atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and either systolic hypertension while taking two or more antihypertensive drugs or chronic kidney disease to medical therapy plus renal-artery stenting or medical therapy alone. Participants were followed for the occurrence of adverse cardiovascular and renal events (a composite end point of death from cardiovascular or renal causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for congestive heart failure, progressive renal insufficiency, or the need for renal-replacement therapy). RESULTS Over a median follow-up period of 43 months (interquartile range, 31 to 55), the rate of the primary composite end point did not differ significantly between participants who underwent stenting in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone (35.1% and 35.8%, respectively; hazard ratio with stenting, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.17; P=0.58). There were also no significant differences between the treatment groups in the rates of the individual components of the primary end point or in all-cause mortality. During follow-up, there was a consistent modest difference in systolic blood pressure favoring the stent group (-2.3 mm Hg; 95% CI, -4.4 to -0.2; P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS Renal-artery stenting did not confer a significant benefit with respect to the prevention of clinical events when added to comprehensive, multifactorial medical therapy in people with atherosclerotic renal-artery stenosis and hypertension or chronic kidney disease. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00081731.).


Journal of Endovascular Therapy | 2006

Drug-Eluting and Bare Nitinol Stents for the Treatment of Atherosclerotic Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery: Long-Term Results from the SIROCCO Trial

Stephan H. Duda; Marc Bosiers; Johannes Lammer; Dierk Scheinert; Thomas Zeller; Vincent L. Oliva; Alexander V. Tielbeek; John Lennon Anderson; Benjamin Wiesinger; Gunnar Tepe; Alexandra J. Lansky; Michael R. Jaff; Catharina Mudde; Hans Tielemans; Jean-Paul Beregi

Purpose: To review clinical outcomes of patients with chronic limb ischemia and TASC type C lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting versus bare SMART nitinol self-expanding stents. Methods: Data were obtained from a randomized, multicenter, double-blinded study conducted in 2 phases. All 93 patients had chronic limb ischemia and superficial femoral artery (SFA) occlusions or stenoses (average lesion length 8.3 cm). In total, 47 patients (31 men; mean age 66.3±9.1 years, range 50–84) received the sirolimus-eluting SMART stent and 46 patients (36 men; mean age 65.9 ± 10.8 years, range 38–83) received a bare SMART nitinol stent. Both groups were followed for a mean 24 months. Results: Both the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stents were effective in revascularizing the diseased SFA and in sustaining freedom from restenosis. For both types of stents, improvements in ankle-brachial indices (ABI) and symptoms of claudication were maintained over 24 months (median 24-month ABI 0.96 for the sirolimus group versus 0.87 for the bare stent group, p>0.05). At 24 months, the restenosis rate in the sirolimus group was 22.9% versus 21.1% in the bare stent group (p>0.05). The cumulative in-stent restenosis rates according to duplex ultrasound were 4.7%, 9.0%, 15.6%, and 21.9%, respectively, at 6, 9, 18, and 24 months; the rates did not differ significantly between the treatment groups. The TLR rate for the sirolimus group was 6% and for the bare stent group 13%; the TVR rates were somewhat higher: 13% and 22%, respectively. Mortality rates did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusion: These data demonstrate that the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stent are effective, safe, and free from restenosis in a majority of patients for up to 24 months. Because the restenosis rate in the bare stent group is unexpectedly low, no significant difference could be found between the sirolimus-eluting and the bare SMART stents.


Circulation | 1998

Four-Year Follow-up of Palmaz-Schatz Stent Revascularization as Treatment for Atherosclerotic Renal Artery Stenosis

Gerald Dorros; Michael R. Jaff; Lynne Mathiak; Isa I. Dorros; Adam Lowe; Kelly Murphy; Thomas He

BACKGROUND Stent revascularization is perceived as superior to balloon angioplasty and surgical revascularization, but the paucity of stent publications precludes even historical comparison with surgical data. METHODS AND RESULTS Palmaz-Schatz stent revascularization of renal artery stenosis was successfully performed on 163 consecutive patients for poorly controlled hypertension or preservation of renal function. Of these, 145 were eligible for > or =6-month clinical follow-up of the effect of the procedure on renal function, blood pressure control, number of antihypertensive medications, and survival. At 4 years, systolic and diastolic blood pressures significantly decreased (from 166+/-26 to 148+/-22 mm Hg and from 86+/-14 to 80+/-11 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.05), and blood pressure control was more facile in approximately half of the patients. Creatinine decreased or remained stable in approximately two thirds of the patients. The cumulative probability of survival was 74+/-4% at 3 years, with few deaths related to end-stage renal disease. Survival was good in patients with normal (92+/-4%) baseline renal function, fair (74+/-7%) in those with mildly impaired renal function, and poor (52+/-7%) in patients with elevated baseline creatinine levels (> or =2.0 mg/dL). The combination of impaired renal function and bilateral disease adversely affected survival. CONCLUSIONS Renal artery stent revascularization in the presence of normal or mildly impaired renal function had a beneficial effect on blood pressure control and a nondeleterious effect on renal function. Survival was adversely affected by renal dysfunction despite adequate revascularization. Early diagnosis and adequate revascularization before the onset of renal dysfunction could beneficially affect blood pressure control, preserve or prevent deterioration of renal function, and improve patient survival.


Circulation-cardiovascular Interventions | 2011

Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents Show Superiority to Balloon Angioplasty and Bare Metal Stents in Femoropopliteal Disease Twelve-Month Zilver PTX Randomized Study Results

Michael D. Dake; Gary M. Ansel; Michael R. Jaff; Takao Ohki; Richard R. Saxon; H. Bob Smouse; Thomas Zeller; Gary S. Roubin; Mark W. Burket; Yazan Khatib; Scott A. Snyder; Anthony O. Ragheb; J. King White; Lindsay Machan

Background— Sustained benefits of drug-eluting stents in femoropopliteal arteries have not been demonstrated. This prospective, multinational, randomized study was designed to compare the 12-month safety and effectiveness of a polymer-free, paclitaxel-coated nitinol drug-eluting stent (DES) with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) and provisional bare metal stent (BMS) placement in patients with femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease. Methods and Results— Patients were randomly assigned to primary DES implantation (n=236) or PTA (n=238). Demographics and lesion characteristics were similar between groups (eg, average lesion length, approximately 65±40 mm). One hundred twenty patients had acute PTA failure and underwent secondary random assignment to provisional DES (n=61) or BMS (n=59). Primary end points were the 12-month rates of event-free survival and patency in the primary DES and PTA groups. Compared with the PTA group, the primary DES group exhibited superior 12-month event-free survival (90.4% versus 82.6%; P=0.004) and primary patency (83.1% versus 32.8%; P<0.001), satisfying the primary hypotheses. In the secondary evaluations, (1) the primary DES group exhibited superior clinical benefit compared with the PTA group (88.3% versus 75.8%; P<0.001), (2) the provisional DES group exhibited superior primary patency (89.9% versus 73.0%; P=0.01) and superior clinical benefit (90.5% and 72.3%, P=0.009) compared with the provisional BMS group, and (3) the stent fracture rate (both DES and BMS) was 0.9% (4/457). Conclusions— Femoropopliteal peripheral artery disease treatment with the paclitaxel-eluting stent was associated with superior 12-month outcomes compared with PTA and provisional BMS placement. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00120406.


Circulation | 2011

2011 ACCF/AHA focused update of the guideline for the management of patients with peripheral artery disease (Updating the 2005 Guideline)

Thom W. Rooke; Alan T. Hirsch; Sanjay Misra; Anton N. Sidawy; Joshua A. Beckman; Laura K. Findeiss; Jafar Golzarian; Heather L. Gornik; Jonathan L. Halperin; Michael R. Jaff; Gregory L. Moneta; Jeffrey W. Olin; James C. Stanley; Christopher J. White; John V. White; R. Eugene Zierler

Keeping pace with the stream of new data and evolving evidence on which guideline recommendations are based is an ongoing challenge to timely development of clinical practice guidelines. In an effort to respond promptly to new evidence, the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association (ACCF/AHA) Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Task Force) has created a “focused update” process to revise the existing guideline recommendations that are affected by the evolving data or opinion. New evidence is reviewed in an ongoing fashion to more efficiently respond to important science and treatment trends that could have a major impact on patient outcomes and quality of care. Evidence is reviewed at least twice a year, and updates are initiated on an as-needed basis and completed as quickly as possible while maintaining the rigorous methodology that the ACCF and AHA have developed during their partnership of >20 years. These updated guideline recommendations reflect a consensus of expert opinion after a thorough review primarily of late-breaking clinical trials identified through a broad-based vetting process as being important to the relevant patient population, as well …


Circulation-cardiovascular Interventions | 2010

Nitinol Stent Implantation Versus Balloon Angioplasty for Lesions in the Superficial Femoral Artery and Proximal Popliteal Artery Twelve-Month Results From the RESILIENT Randomized Trial

John R. Laird; Barry T. Katzen; Dierk Scheinert; Johannes Lammer; Jeffrey S. Carpenter; Maurice Buchbinder; Rajesh Dave; Gary M. Ansel; Alexandra J. Lansky; Ecaterina Cristea; Tyrone J. Collins; Jeffrey Goldstein; Michael R. Jaff

Background—Controversy still exists regarding the best endovascular treatment strategy for patients with symptomatic disease of the superficial femoral artery. There are conflicting data regarding the benefits of superficial femoral artery stenting and the role of primary stenting compared with balloon angioplasty with provisional stent implantation. Methods and Results—A total of 206 patients from 24 centers in the United States and Europe with obstructive lesions of the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal artery and intermittent claudication were randomized to implantation of nitinol stents or percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. The mean total lesion length was 71 mm for the stent group and 64 mm for the angioplasty group. Acute lesion success (<30% residual stenosis) was superior for the stent group compared with the angioplasty group (95.8% versus 83.9%; P<0.01). Twenty-nine (40.3%) patients in the angioplasty group underwent bailout stenting because of a suboptimal angiographic result or flow-limiting dissection. Bailout stenting was treated as a target lesion revascularization and loss of primary patency in the final analysis. At 12 months, freedom from target lesion revascularization was 87.3% for the stent group compared with 45.1% for the angioplasty group (P<0.0001). Duplex ultrasound-derived primary patency at 12 months was better for the stent group (81.3% versus 36.7%; P<0.0001). Through 12 months, fractures occurred in 3.1% of stents implanted. No stent fractures resulted in loss of patency or target lesion revascularization. Conclusions—In this multicenter trial, primary implantation of a self-expanding nitinol stent for moderate-length lesions in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal artery was associated with better acute angiographic results and improved patency compared with balloon angioplasty alone. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00673985.

Collaboration


Dive into the Michael R. Jaff's collaboration.

Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Gary M. Ansel

Riverside Methodist Hospital

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar

Joshua A. Beckman

Vanderbilt University Medical Center

View shared research outputs
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Top Co-Authors

Avatar
Researchain Logo
Decentralizing Knowledge