Educational Experience of Interventional Cardiology Fellows in the United States and Canada.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and iodinated contrast shortage may have affected interventional cardiology (IC) fellowship training. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the educational experience of first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. METHODS: A 59-question online survey was conducted among 2021-2022 first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: Of the 360 IC fellows invited to participate, 111 (31%) responded; 95% were from the United States, and 79% were men. Participants were mostly from university programs (70%), spent 61 to 70 hours/week in the hospital, and had an annual percutaneous coronary intervention case number of <200 (5%), 200 to 249 (8%), 250 to 349 (33%), 350 to 499 (39%), 500 to 699 (12%), or ≥700 (3%). For femoral access, a micropuncture needle was used regularly by 89% and ultrasound-guided puncture by 81%, and 43% used vascular closure devices in most cases (>80%). Intravascular ultrasound was performed and interpreted very comfortably by 62% and optical coherence tomography (OCT) by 32%, and 20% did not have access to OCT. Approximately one-third felt very comfortable performing various atherectomy techniques. Covered stents, fat embolization, and coil embolization were used very comfortably by 14%, 4%, and 3%, respectively. Embolic protection devices were used very comfortably by 11% to 24% of IC fellows. Almost one-quarter of fellows (24%) were warned about their high radiation exposure. Eighty-four percent considered IC fellowship somewhat or very stressful, and 16% reported inadequate psychological support. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights opportunities for improvement with regard to the use of intravascular imaging, atherectomy techniques, complication prevention and management strategies, radiation awareness and mitigation, and psychological support.

Implementation of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Without On-Site Cardiac Surgery or Perfusion Support: A Tale of Two County Hospitals.

Patients with refractory respiratory and cardiac failure may present to noncardiac surgery centers. Prior studies have demonstrated that acute care surgeons, intensivists, and emergency medicine physicians can safely cannulate and manage patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). Harborview Medical Center (Harborview) and Hennepin County Medical Center (Hennepin) are both urban, county-owned, level 1 trauma centers that implemented ECMO without direct, on-site cardiac surgery or perfusion support. Both centers 1) use an ECMO specialist model staffed by specially trained nurses and respiratory therapists and 2) developed comparable training curricula for ECMO specialists, intensivists, surgeons, and trainees. Each program began with venovenous ECMO to provide support for refractory hypoxemic respiratory failure and subsequently expanded to venoarterial ECMO support. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created an impetus for restructuring, with each program creating a consulting service to facilitate ECMO delivery across multiple intensive care units (ICUs) and to promote fellow and resident training and experience. Both Harborview and Hennepin, urban county hospitals 1,700 miles apart in the United States, independently implemented and operate adult ECMO programs without involvement from cardiovascular surgery or perfusion services. This experience further supports the role of ECMO specialists in the delivery of extracorporeal life support.

Bedside veno-venous ECMO cannulation: A pertinent strategy during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Patient selection and cannulation arguably represent the key steps for the successful implementation of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support. Cannulation is traditionally performed in the operating room or the catheterization laboratory for a number of reasons, including physician preference and access to real-time imaging, with the goal of minimizing complications and ensuring appropriate cannula positioning. Nonetheless, the patients' critical and unstable conditions often require emergent initiation of ECMO and preclude the safe transport of the patient to a procedural suite. AIMS: Therefore, with the objective of avoiding delay with the initiation of therapy and reducing the hazard of transport, we implemented a protocol for bedside ECMO cannulation. MATHERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 89 patients required ECMO support at Hennepin County Medical Center between March 2015 and December 2019. Twenty-eight (31%) required veno-venous support and were all cannulated at the bedside. Overall survival was 71% with no morbidity or mortality related to the cannulation procedure. CONCLUSION: In the current pandemic, the strategy of veno-venous bedside cannulation may have additional benefits for the care of patients with refractory acute respiratory distress syndrome due to coronavirus-disease-2019, decreasing the risk of exposure of health care worker or other patients to the novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 occurring during patient transport, preparation, or during disinfection of the procedural suite and the transportation pathway after ECMO cannulation.