C. Michael Gibson MD
@CMichaelGibson
Followers
432K
Following
66K
Media
10K
Statuses
88K
Non-Profit Founder/Leader | ❤️ Doc | Artist Scientist Educator | News Anchor https://t.co/7OIKCgNtqr | RT ≠ endorse | Disclaimer: https://t.co/bwmE2O4rVu
Harvard Professor & MD
Joined October 2012
“The Last Shift”. Oil on clay covered wood board by C. Michael Gibson 2020. Welcome home to all of our courageous #CoronaHeroes who made the ultimate sacrifice 🙏💙.#cmgsees #COVID19
281
800
3K
RT @atherosociety: Episode 4 of the BCRI Atherosclerosis Webinar Series is now live!. IAS, in collaboration with @Cleerlyhealth, Mike Gibso….
0
5
0
RT @CMichaelGibson: Is a 2.9% reduction in major or clinically relevant non major bleeding worth a 1.5% increase in Death / heart attack /….
0
3
0
RT @CMichaelGibson: Would you trade a 3 fold difference in major or clinically relevant non major bleeding for a 3 fold difference in stent….
0
1
0
RT @CMichaelGibson: Should clinically relevant non major bleeding be part of the comparison with death / heart attack / stroke / urgent rev….
0
1
0
RT @CMichaelGibson: For a patient at average bleeding risk and average ischemic risk after an acute coronary syndrome, what is the optimal….
0
2
0
RT @CMichaelGibson: Dr. Renato Lopes and I discuss the results of the PARCUTE-HF trial testing the benefits of 2 drugs in a big but neglect….
0
6
0
Dr. Renato Lopes and I discuss the results of the PARCUTE-HF trial testing the benefits of 2 drugs in a big but neglected population, those patients with Chagas Disease and Heart Failure.
1
6
14
Excellent critique by Dr Kaul.
1/.Rumors of aspirin’s demise are greatly exaggerated. Concerns with TARGET-FIRST trial:. 1. Sample size estimation assumes 1% superiority of P2Y12i monotherapy (2.5% vs 3.5%) rather than conventional equivalence. 2. 80% power low for NI assessment.
0
1
7
The event rates were lower than expected making the results and inferences less than “robust”.
0
1
2
Caught in the middle of a political battle, @BlackRock reaffirmed its focus is helping millions of Americans save for retirement. They warned that injecting politics from either side risks undermining financial performance.
prosperityretirementalliance.com
Millions of Ameircans depend on the security of their retirement savings to live with dignity after a lifetime of hard work. That’s why the Alliance for Prosperity and a Secure Retirement (APSR)...
8
3
46
I have concerns about the TARGET first trial. The trial combines ischemic and bleeding events into a single endpoint (NACE) and uses a non inferiority test. This is NOT advised as ischemia & bleeding go in opposite directions driving results to the null (non inferiority).
1
0
7
Among low-risk pts with AMI who completed 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy was noninferior to continued dual antiplatelet therapy with respect to the occurrence of Net ischemic & bleeding events (NACE). There r limitations
nejm.org
An appropriate duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction that has been treated with guideline-recommended complete revasculariza...
0
1
6
In chronic coronary syndrome pts at high ischemic risk on oral anticoagulants, adding aspirin increased CV death, MI, stroke, embolism, coronary revascularization, or acute limb ischemia vs placebo, & increased death from any cause and major bleeding.
nejm.org
The appropriate antithrombotic regimen for patients with chronic coronary syndrome who are at high atherothrombotic risk and receiving long-term oral anticoagulation remains unknown. We conducted a...
1
6
21
RT @escardio: What’s new in the #ESCGuidelines on managing #ValvularHeartDisease?. @CMichaelGibson and @Drroxmehran break it down into easy….
0
19
0
For a patient at average bleeding risk and average ischemic risk after an acute coronary syndrome, what is the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy ?.
0
2
7
If you voted yes, why is NON major bleeding comparable to death / MI / stroke / urgent revasc ?.
0
1
2
Would you trade a 3 fold difference in major or clinically relevant non major bleeding for a 3 fold difference in stent thrombosis ?.
1
1
5
Should clinically relevant non major bleeding be part of the comparison with death / heart attack / stroke / urgent revasc ?.
2
1
5
Is a 2.9% reduction in major or clinically relevant non major bleeding worth a 1.5% increase in Death / heart attack / stroke or urgent revascularization ?.
5
3
12