ABSTRACT
Thrombo-embolic complications after Corona virus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccination have been previously reported. We aimed to study the coronary thrombo-embolic complications (CTE) after COVID-19 vaccination in a single centre during the initial 3 months of vaccination drive in India. All patients admitted to our hospital between 1st March 2021 and 31st May 2021 with Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were included. Of the 89 patients [Age 55 (47e64)y, 13f] with ACS and angiographic evidence of coronary thrombus, 37 (42%) had prior vaccination history. The timing from last vaccination dose to index event was <1, 1e2, 2e4 and >4 weeks in 9(24%), 4(11%), 15(41%) and 9 (24%) respectively. ChAdOx1 nCoV-19/AZD1222 (Covishield) was the most used vaccine- 28 (76%), while 9 (24%) had BBV152 (Covaxin). Baseline characteristics were similar in both vaccinated (VG) and non-vaccinated group (NVG), except for symptom to door time [8.5 (5.75e14) vs 14.5 (7.25e24) hrs, p ¼ 0.003]. Thrombocytopenia was not noted in any of the VG patients, while 2 (3.8%) of NVG patient had thrombocytopenia (p ¼ 0.51). The pre- Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow was significantly lower [1 (0e3) vs2 (1e3), p ¼ 0.03) and thrombus grade were significantly higher [4 (2.5e5) vs 2 (1e3), p ¼ 0.0005] in VG. The in-hospital (2.7% vs 1.9%, p ¼ 1.0) and 30-day mortality were also similar (5.4% vs 5.8%, p ¼ 1.0). This is the first report of CTE after COVID-19 vaccination during the first 3 months of vaccination drive in India. We need further reports to identify the incidence of this rare but serious adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination.
ABSTRACT
Radial access for cardiac catheterization and intervention in India has been growing steadily over the last decade with favorable clinical outcomes. However, its usage by interventional cardiologists varies greatly among Indian operators and hospitals due to large geographic disparities in health care delivery systems and practice patterns. It also remains unclear whether the advantages, as well as limitations of transradial (TR) intervention (as reported in the western literature), are applicable to developing countries like India or not. An evidence-based review involving various facets of radial procedure for cardiac catheterization, including practical, patient-related and technical issues was conducted by an expert committee that formed a part of Advancing Complex CoronariES Sciences through TransRADIAL intervention (ACCESS RADIAL™) Advisory Board. Emerging challenges in redefining TR management based on evidence supporting practices were discussed to formulate these final recommendations through consensus.
ABSTRACT
Though the radial artery is an ideal site of access for coronary interventions, at times anatomical variations make this procedure complicated. We describe one such arterial aberrancy, the retroesophageal right subclavian artery or arteria lusoria, in which the right subclavian artery arises distal to the left subclavian artery. Therefore, approaching through the right radial artery, the catheter has to take a zigzag course through the right subclavian to the descending aorta, and then to the ascending aorta. This often makes it difficult to perform diagnostic angiography. Performing angioplasty by the right transradial approach also becomes a more difficult task and requires greater perseverance and skill. In the case described here, the patient with arteria lusoria had tandem 90% stenosis involving the proximal and mid left anterior descending artery. Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with stenting of the proximal and mid left anterior descending artery by the right transradial approach was performed, negotiating the loop with two paclitaxel-eluting stents.