The utility and effectiveness of the newer generation high-resolution coronary computed tomography angiography in the evaluation of coronary in-stent restenosis.

BACKGROUND: The importance of coronary computerized tomography angiography (CCTA) in detecting native coronary artery stenosis has been established. However, very few studies investigated the efficacy of CCTA in the assessment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) in symptomatic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AIM OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the value of CCTA in diagnosing ISR. METHODS: We included 102 symptomatic patients with stable angina, presented one to five years after PCI. All patients were subjected to CCTA, and the patients with significant coronary artery disease were directed for invasive coronary angiography (ICA). CCTA results were compared to ICA as the gold standard tool for detecting ISR. RESULTS: In 88 (86.3 %) patients, CCTA could successfully exclude ISR together with the ICA (true negative), but in two cases, ICA detected an ISR which was not detected by CCTA (false negative). In eight patients, CCTA detected ISR. These were confirmed by ICA (true positive) and revascularized. In four patients (3.9 %), ISR was suspected by CCTA but excluded by ICA (false positive). In our study, according to the agreement of CCTA in detection or exclusion of ISR, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV and accuracy were 80.0 %, 96.65 %, 66.67 %, 97.78 %, 94.12 %, respectively. These results were statistically significant (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In up to 86 % of symptomatic patients with previous PCI, ISR was accurately excluded by CCTA. CCTA was demonstrated by this study as a high yielding tool for ruling out ISR, abolishing the need for more invasive and expensive diagnostic procedures.

Distal radial approach between theory and clinical practice.. Time to go distal!

BACKGROUND: Transradial access (TRA), which has a minimal risk of problems such as radial artery occlusion (RAO), hemorrhage, spasm, and so on, is now considered the standard procedure for cardiac catheterization. The aim of the study is to present the distal transradial access (d-TRA) as a possible promising novel technique in the field of cardiac coronary interventions comparing it to the standard conventional TRA using primary and secondary endpoints, exploring its benefits and drawbacks as a new experience in Alexandria University. One hundred cases with variable indications for coronary interventions were randomized to two arms using systematic random sampling method, coronary interventions in the first one were done via d-TRA (50 patients) and in the second arm via conventional TRA group (50 patients). RESULTS: Technically, there were highly statistically significant differences between the two arms in favor of TRA regarding procedural success, number of punctures taken, Access time, Total procedural time, vasodilator used, and crossover to another access site; meanwhile safety profile parameters have showed statistically significant differences in favor of d-TRA regarding post-operative hematoma, AV fistula, post-operative pain and compression time, and there were no statistically significant differences regarding RAO although it occurred more in TRA group. CONCLUSIONS: In the realm of cardiac intervention, the distal radial approach is a promising technique. When compared to TRA, we found it to be a viable and safe method for coronary angiography and interventions and it could be a real option for the interventionists in the near future, with a lower risk of radial artery blockage and no significant differences in wrist hematoma and radial artery spasm. The success rate of d-TRA is proportional to the steepness of the operator's learning curve and the quality of the examples chosen.