Abstract Background Traumatic coronary artery dissection (CAD) after blunt chest trauma (BCT) is extremely rare, particularly in children. Among coronary dissections, left main coronary artery (LMCA) ...dissection is the least common, with only two pediatric cases reported previously. Manifestations of coronary dissections can range from ST segment changes to sudden death. However, these manifestations are not specific and can be present with other cardiac injuries. To our knowledge we present the first pediatric case of traumatic LMCA dissection after sport-related BCT that was treated successfully with coronary stenting. Case Report A 14-year-old child sustained BCT during a baseball game. Early in the clinical course, he had episodes of ventricular dysrhythmias, diffuse ST changes, rising troponin I, and hemodynamic instability. Emergent cardiac catheterization revealed an LMCA dissection with extension into the proximal left anterior descending artery (LADA). A bare metal stent was placed from the LMCA to the LADA, which improved blood flow through the area of dissection. He has had almost full recovery of myocardial function and has been managed as an outpatient with oral heart failure and antiplatelet medications. Why Should an Emergency Physician Be Aware of This? Our case highlights that CAD, although rare, can occur after pediatric BCT. Pediatric emergency responders must have a heightened awareness that evidence of ongoing myocardial ischemia, such as evolving and focal myocardial infarction on electrocardiogram, persistent elevation or rising troponin I, and worsening cardiogenic shock, can represent a coronary event and warrant further evaluation. Cardiac catheterization can be both a diagnostic and therapeutic modality in such cases. Early recognition and management is vital for myocardial recovery.
Previous randomised renal denervation studies did not show consistent efficacy in reducing blood pressure. The objective of our study was to evaluate the effect of renal denervation on blood pressure ...in the absence of antihypertensive medications.
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED was a multicentre, international, single-blind, randomised, sham-controlled, proof-of-concept trial. Patients were enrolled at 21 centres in the USA, Europe, Japan, and Australia. Eligible patients were drug-naive or discontinued their antihypertensive medications. Patients with an office systolic blood pressure (SBP) of 150 mm Hg or greater and less than 180 mm Hg, office diastolic blood pressure (DBP) of 90 mm Hg or greater, and a mean 24-h ambulatory SBP of 140 mm Hg or greater and less than 170 mm Hg at second screening underwent renal angiography and were randomly assigned to renal denervation or sham control. Patients, caregivers, and those assessing blood pressure were blinded to randomisation assignments. The primary endpoint, change in 24-h blood pressure at 3 months, was compared between groups. Drug surveillance was done to ensure patient compliance with absence of antihypertensive medication. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety events were assessed at 3 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02439749.
Between June 25, 2015, and Jan 30, 2017, 353 patients were screened. 80 patients were randomly assigned to renal denervation (n=38) or sham control (n=42) and followed up for 3 months. Office and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure decreased significantly from baseline to 3 months in the renal denervation group: 24-h SBP −5·5 mm Hg (95% CI −9·1 to −2·0; p=0·0031), 24-h DBP −4·8 mm Hg (−7·0 to −2·6; p<0·0001), office SBP −10·0 mm Hg (−15·1 to −4·9; p=0·0004), and office DBP −5·3 mm Hg (−7·8 to −2·7; p=0·0002). No significant changes were seen in the sham-control group: 24-h SBP −0·5 mm Hg (95% CI −3·9 to 2·9; p=0·7644), 24-h DBP −0·4 mm Hg (−2·2 to 1·4; p=0·6448), office SBP −2·3 mm Hg (−6·1 to 1·6; p=0·2381), and office DBP −0·3 mm Hg (−2·9 to 2·2; p=0·8052). The mean difference between the groups favoured renal denervation for 3-month change in both office and 24-h blood pressure from baseline: 24-h SBP −5·0 mm Hg (95% CI −9·9 to −0·2; p=0·0414), 24-h DBP −4·4 mm Hg (−7·2 to −1·6; p=0·0024), office SBP −7·7 mm Hg (−14·0 to −1·5; p=0·0155), and office DBP −4·9 mm Hg (−8·5 to −1·4; p=0·0077). Baseline-adjusted analyses showed similar findings. There were no major adverse events in either group.
Results from SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED provide biological proof of principle for the blood-pressure-lowering efficacy of renal denervation.
Medtronic.
Coronary revascularization guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is associated with better patient outcomes after the procedure than revascularization guided by angiography alone. It is unknown ...whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), an alternative measure that does not require the administration of adenosine, will offer benefits similar to those of FFR.
We randomly assigned 2492 patients with coronary artery disease, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo either iFR-guided or FFR-guided coronary revascularization. The primary end point was the 1-year risk of major adverse cardiac events, which were a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The trial was designed to show the noninferiority of iFR to FFR, with a margin of 3.4 percentage points for the difference in risk.
At 1 year, the primary end point had occurred in 78 of 1148 patients (6.8%) in the iFR group and in 83 of 1182 patients (7.0%) in the FFR group (difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval CI, -2.3 to 1.8; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.33; P=0.78). The risk of each component of the primary end point and of death from cardiovascular or noncardiovascular causes did not differ significantly between the groups. The number of patients who had adverse procedural symptoms and clinical signs was significantly lower in the iFR group than in the FFR group (39 patients 3.1% vs. 385 patients 30.8%, P<0.001), and the median procedural time was significantly shorter (40.5 minutes vs. 45.0 minutes, P=0.001).
Coronary revascularization guided by iFR was noninferior to revascularization guided by FFR with respect to the risk of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. The rate of adverse procedural signs and symptoms was lower and the procedural time was shorter with iFR than with FFR. (Funded by Philips Volcano; DEFINE-FLAIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02053038 .).
Coronary subclavian steal syndrome (CSSS) is the reversal of blood flow in an internal mammary artery bypass graft that results in coronary ischemia. CSSS is an uncommon but treatable cause of ...coronary ischemia. In this review, we highlight the historical background and epidemiology of CSSS, common clinical presentations, diagnosis of CSSS and management strategies for relieving ischemia. We also present a case report to illustrate the complexity of CSSS and percutaneous management using current technology.
Most commonly, CSSS results from atherosclerotic stenosis of the subclavian artery and occurs in 2.5-4.5% of patients referred for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). All patients referred for CABG should have bilateral noninvasive brachial blood pressures checked to screen for the underlying subclavian stenosis. A review of 98 case reports with 128 patients demonstrated a diverse clinical presentation of CSSS, including acute myocardial infarction, unstable angina and acute systolic heart failure. Resolution of CSSS symptoms has been reported with both surgical and percutaneous revascularization. Long-term patency with either revascularization strategy is excellent. Percutaneous revascularization is largely considered the first-line therapy for CSSS and can be safely performed prior to CABG to prevent CSSS.
CSSS should be suspected in patients presenting with angina, heart failure or myocardial infarction after CABG. Successful amelioration of CSSS symptoms can be safely and effectively performed via percutaneous revascularization.
A chamber stiffness (K(LV))-transmitral flow (E-wave) deceleration time relation has been invasively validated in dogs with the use of average stiffness (DeltaP/DeltaV)(avg). K(LV) is equivalent to ...k(E), the (E-wave) stiffness of the parameterized diastolic filling model. Prediction and validation of 1) (DeltaP/DeltaV)(avg) in terms of k(E), 2) early rapid-filling stiffness (DeltaP/DeltaV)(E) in terms of k(E), and 3) passive (postdiastasis) chamber stiffness (DeltaP/DeltaV)(PD) from A waves in terms of the stiffness parameter for the Doppler A wave (k(A)) have not been achieved. Simultaneous micromanometric left ventricular (LV) pressure (LVP) and transmitral flow from 131 subjects were analyzed. (DeltaP)(avg) and (DeltaV)(avg) utilized the minimum LVP-LV end-diastolic pressure interval. (DeltaP/DeltaV)(E) utilized DeltaP and DeltaV from minimum LVP to E-wave termination. (DeltaP/DeltaV)(PD) utilized atrial systolic DeltaP and DeltaV. E- and A-wave analysis generated k(E) and k(A). For all subjects, noninvasive-invasive relations yielded the following equations: k(E) = 1,401. (DeltaP/DeltaV)(avg) + 59.2 (r = 0.84) and k(E) = 229.0. (DeltaP/DeltaV)(E) + 112 (r = 0.80). For subjects with diastasis (n = 113), k(A) = 1,640. (DeltaP/DeltaV)(PD) - 8.40 (r = 0.89). As predicted, k(A) showed excellent correlation with (DeltaP/DeltaV)(PD); k(E) correlated highly with (DeltaP/DeltaV)(avg). In vivo validation of average, early, and passive chamber stiffness facilitates quantitative, noninvasive diastolic function assessment from transmitral flow.
Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)–guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown in clinical trials, registries, and meta-analyses to reduce recurrent major adverse cardiovascular ...events after PCI. However, IVUS utilization remains low. An increasing number of high-risk or complex coronary artery lesions are treated with PCI, and we hypothesize that the impact of IVUS in guiding treatment of these complex lesions will be of increased importance in reducing major adverse cardiovascular events while remaining cost-effective. The “IMPact on Revascularization Outcomes of intraVascular ultrasound-guided treatment of complex lesions and Economic impact” trial (registered on clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04221815) is a multicenter, international, clinical trial randomizing subjects to IVUS-guided versus angiography-guided PCI in a 1:1 ratio. Patients undergoing PCI involving a complex lesion are eligible for enrollment. Complex lesion is defined as involving at least 1 of the following characteristics: chronic total occlusion, in-stent restenosis, severe coronary artery calcification, long lesion (≥28 mm), or bifurcation lesion. The clinical investigation will be conducted at approximately 120 centers in North America and Europe, enrolling approximately 2,500 to 3,100 randomized subjects with an adaptive design. The primary clinical end point is the rate of target vessel failure at 12 months, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. The co-primary imaging end point is the final post-PCI minimum stent area assessed by IVUS. The primary objective of this study is to assess the impact of IVUS guidance on the PCI treatment of complex lesions.
The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients deferred from coronary revascularization on the basis of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or fractional flow reserve ...(FFR) measurements in stable angina pectoris (SAP) and acute coronary syndromes (ACS).
Assessment of coronary stenosis severity with pressure guidewires is recommended to determine the need for myocardial revascularization.
The safety of deferral of coronary revascularization in the pooled per-protocol population (n = 4,486) of the DEFINE-FLAIR (Functional Lesion Assessment of Intermediate Stenosis to Guide Revascularisation) and iFR-SWEDEHEART (Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio Versus Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stable Angina Pectoris or Acute Coronary Syndrome) randomized clinical trials was investigated. Patients were stratified according to revascularization decision making on the basis of iFR or FFR and to clinical presentation (SAP or ACS). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization at 1 year.
Coronary revascularization was deferred in 2,130 patients. Deferral was performed in 1,117 patients (50%) in the iFR group and 1,013 patients (45%) in the FFR group (p < 0.01). At 1 year, the MACE rate in the deferred population was similar between the iFR and FFR groups (4.12% vs. 4.05%; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.79; p = 0.60). A clinical presentation with ACS was associated with a higher MACE rate compared with SAP in deferred patients (5.91% vs. 3.64% in ACS and SAP, respectively; fully adjusted hazard ratio: 0.61 in favor of SAP; 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 0.99; p = 0.04).
Overall, deferral of revascularization is equally safe with both iFR and FFR, with a low MACE rate of about 4%. Lesions were more frequently deferred when iFR was used to assess physiological significance. In deferred patients presenting with ACS, the event rate was significantly increased compared with SAP at 1 year.
Display omitted
PDF
