Management of spontaneous coronary artery dissection complicated by cardiogenic shock using mechanical circulatory support with the Impella device.

OBJECTIVE: The aim is to evaluate the feasibility of using mechanical circulatory support, specifically the Impella device, in spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) patients with cardiogenic shock. BACKGROUND: The therapeutic options for managing SCAD complicated by cardiogenic shock are limited. Risky revascularization procedures are often necessary. METHODS: This was a multicenter case series in the United States. Approximately 20 cases of Impella implantation in patients with SCAD are known. The implanting physician for each of these cases was contacted and de-identified records were requested. The records were analyzed for Impella indications, outcomes, and complications. RESULTS: Records from four cases were received. All patients survived to hospital discharge and no major complications were observed. In two cases, cardiogenic shock developed in the absence of ongoing ischemia, suggesting a Takotsubo-like cardiomyopathy. In these cases, the Impella provided hemodynamic support until the patient's cardiac function recovered. CONCLUSION: Although a small case series, given the scarcity of SCAD cases complicated by cardiogenic shock and the limited therapies available to treat these patients, these data are of clinical value in highlighting the feasibility of Impella use in SCAD. The Impella can be valuable for procedural support and in cardiogenic shock, especially in cases without evidence of ongoing ischemia.

Effect of reduction of the pulse rates of fluoroscopy and CINE-acquisition on x-ray dose and angiographic image quality during invasive cardiovascular procedures.

BACKGROUND: Reducing digital pulse rates (PR) are known to reduce total energy during invasive cardiovascular procedures, which likely has benefits for patients and staff. Physicians may be reluctant to reduce these parameters because they fear a decline in image quality that could affect procedural outcomes. We sought to assess the effect of default rates of fluoroscopy (Fluoro) and CINE-acquisition (CINE) on total x-ray dose and image quality during invasive cardiovascular procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: We retrospectively reviewed procedures done with 2 default PRs: a standard dose cohort (PR, 15 for Fluoro and CINE), and a reduced dose cohort (PR, 10 for Fluoro and CINE). Total x-ray dose, Fluoro time, and contrast use were compared between groups. A blinded angiographic image quality assessment was then performed using an objective 10-point angiographic quality score. There were no significant differences between cohorts for fluoroscopy time or contrast use. The reduced dose cohort has a significant reduction in mean total x-ray dose (PR 15, 1763.1 mGy; PR 10, 1179.1 mGy; P<0.0001). When adjusted for potential confounders, a 38% reduction in total x-ray dose was identified (P<0.0001). There was no difference in adjusted angiographic quality score between the cohorts (PR 15, 7.90; PR 10, 8.00; P=0.67), indicating no decline in image quality with PR reduction. CONCLUSIONS: Reducing default PRs during invasive cardiovascular procedures yields large and significant reductions in total x-ray energy with no decline in angiographic image quality.

Right heart catheterization using antecubital venous access: feasibility, safety and adoption rate in a tertiary center.

OBJECTIVES: To determine feasibility, safety, and adoption rates of right heart catheterization (RHC) using antecubital venous access (AVA) as compared to using the traditional approach of proximal venous access (PVA). BACKGROUND: RHC via PVA (i.e., internal jugular, femoral or subclavian) is generally a low risk procedure; however, complications may occur and are usually access site related. RHC via an antecubital approach has regained attention given the increase in transradial left heart catheterizations. METHODS: Patients undergoing RHC for any indication at a single large academic medical center were identified over a 5-year period (January 2008 to December 2012) from a database. Medical records were retrospectively analyzed for demographic, procedural and outcomes data. RESULTS: Two hundred seventy-two RHC procedures were included (106 AVA, 166 PVA). The adoption rate of AVA for RHC increased rapidly since its introduction in our laboratory in 2010 (100% PVA in 2008 and 2009, 85% AVA in 2012). All procedures were successful; however, 6% of procedures required additional, alternate access to the original site. Initial success rates were similar in the two groups (91 vs. 96% for AVA and PVA respectively, P = 0.12). Fluoroscopy time was shorter in the group of patients who underwent the procedure via AVA. The complication rate was 0% in the AVA group compared with 3% in the PVA group (P = 0.16). CONCLUSION: RHC via the AVA is a feasible and safe alternative to PVA. Our experience and rapid adoption support the use AVA as the access site of choice for RHC in uncomplicated patients.

Reduction in operator radiation exposure during transradial catheterization and intervention using a simple lead drape.

BACKGROUND: Transradial access for cardiac catheterization and intervention is a recognized method for reducing complications and improving patient comfort. However, there are concerns over possible increased operator radiation exposure. We tested the hypothesis that a simple lead drape would reduce operator exposure in transradial procedures. METHODS: Patients undergoing either diagnostic or interventional procedures using transradial access were assigned in an alternating manner to the use of a 0.5-mm lead apron across the patient's abdomen in addition to standard operator protection. Patients were divided into 4 groups: (left enhanced shielding vs left standard shielding; right enhanced shielding vs right standard shielding). Dosimeters were taped to the primary and secondary operators' left wrist and outside the thyroid guard. The operator exposure was measured for each site on every case in centigray. RESULTS: In standard shielded patients, there was no increase in operator exposure between the left and right approach patients at any measurement site. Measured exposure was reduced with enhanced shielding at all dosimeter sites except the secondary operator's collar (both left and right) and the primary operator's collar from the right. There was no significant difference in fluoroscopy, air kerma, or dose area product between standard and enhanced shielded patients. CONCLUSIONS: The use of a lead drape reduces the rate of operator radiation exposure at multiple measurement sites. Use of the left radial approach was not associated with an increase in operator exposure compared with the right radial approach.

Angiographic characteristics of coronary arterial segments progressing to myocardial infarction in patients with and without chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Individuals with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have high rates of myocardial infarction (MI), but whether the nature of coronary lesions susceptible to plaque rupture is altered and whether the high rate of MI is related to a greater burden of atherosclerotic lesions in individuals with CKD is uncertain. METHODS: We used quantitative coronary angiography to assess atherosclerotic plaque location and characteristics at baseline and at the time of MI in 62 patients with and without CKD. Univariate and multivariable conditional logistic regression models were used to assess whether the association between pre-MI angiographic findings and MI differs in individuals with and without CKD. RESULTS: The risk of MI rose as the distance from the coronary ostium decreased both in patients with CKD (odds ratio per 10 mm 0.92 [95 % CI 0.87-0.99]) and in those without CKD (odds ratio 0.83 [95 % CI 0.75-0.93]). Although tighter degrees of coronary stenosis were associated with increased risks of MI in patients with and without CKD, the majority of MIs (70.9 % in patients with CKD and 89.5 % in those without CKD) occurred in segments with <50 % diameter stenosis at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The characteristics of lesions progressing to MI are similar in individuals with and without CKD and the majority of events occur in areas with <50 % stenosis at baseline. Given the high burden of non-stenotic lesions in patients with CKD, an interventional strategy aimed solely at sites with high-grade stenosis is unlikely to markedly reduce the risk of MI in patients with CKD.

Rationale and design of the MASS COMM trial: A randomized trial to compare percutaneous coronary intervention between MASSachusetts hospitals with cardiac surgery on-site and COMMunity hospitals without cardiac surgery on-site.

BACKGROUND: Emergency surgery has become an increasingly rare event after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There have been no randomized trials evaluating whether cardiac surgery services on-site are essential for patient safety and optimal outcomes during and after PCI. STUDY DESIGN: The MASS COMM trial (ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT01116882) is a randomized trial comparing the safety and effectiveness of nonemergency PCI at hospitals without surgery on-site (SOS) (non-SOS hospitals) and hospitals with SOS (SOS hospitals). A total of 3,690 subjects will be randomized in a 3:1 fashion to undergo PCI at non-SOS and SOS hospitals, with follow-up at hospital discharge, 30 days, and 12 months after PCI. The rate of major adverse cardiac events (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stroke) will serve as the primary safety end point at 30 days and the primary effectiveness end point at 12 months. The design is a 1-way randomized trial with a statistical hypothesis of noninferiority of nonemergency PCI at non-SOS hospitals for both safety and effectiveness end points. CONCLUSIONS: This multicenter, randomized trial will compare the relative safety and effectiveness of nonemergency PCI at sites with and without cardiac SOS.

Comparison of procedural times, success rates, and safety between left versus right radial arterial access in primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate if there are differences in procedural times, success rates, and safety between left and right radial approach (LRA and RRA, respectively) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: Given conflicting reports of different procedural success with LRA vs. RRA, it is unclear if the side of radial access impacts in-room procedural times and success rates in primary PCI. At our institution the LRA has been commonly used in certain STEMI patients. Our clinical database was reviewed to see if routine use of the LRA could generate favorable technical success and reperfusion times as compared to the RRA. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 135 consecutive STEMI patients treated with primary PCI performed via the left and right radial approach at our institution. RESULTS: There were 50 cases in the LRA group and 85 in the RRA group. There was no difference in median procedural times including total procedure time (LRA 53.5 mins vs. RRA 52 mins, P = 0.95), room-to-cannulation (LRA 12 min vs. RRA 13 min, P = 0.40) or room-to-balloon times (LRA 30 min vs. RRA 31 min, P = 0.74). There were no significant differences in procedural success rates (LRA 100% vs. RRA 97.6%, P = 0.27), or procedure-related complications or death between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Left and right trans-radial approach for primary PCI have similar in room procedural times, success rates, and comparable safety. Trans-radial PCI through either arm is a feasible and safe approach in patients with STEMI.

Relative spatial distributions of coronary artery bypass graft insertion and acute thrombosis: a model for protection from acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have demonstrated coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) to be superior to percutaneous coronary intervention with respect to long-term mortality and morbidity from myocardial infarction within specific high-risk cohorts. The purpose of this study was to analyze the spatial distribution of coronary artery bypass graft anastomoses relative to acute thromboses in native coronary arteries. We hypothesized that insertion sites of bypass grafts are located distal to sites of acute thrombosis and consequently decrease cardiac morbidity and mortality associated with plaque rupture. METHODS: We analyzed 168 patients with prior CABG and 208 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI) presenting to the Brigham and Women's Hospital who underwent coronary angiography. We constructed a spatial map of the coronary arterial bypass graft insertion sites and compared these locations to sites of acute thrombosis leading to STEMI. RESULTS: Graft insertion sites were consistently located distal to acute thrombosis sites (left anterior descending artery median graft insertion versus median thrombosis site = 72 versus 34 mm, right coronary artery 91 versus 42 mm, left circumflex artery 44 versus 37 mm). Greater than 97% of thrombosis sites were located proximal to 75% of graft insertion sites. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary arterial bypass grafts provide the coverage of anatomic zones at risk for STEMI. The superior performance of CABG in high risk patients may be attributed to targeting of proximal coronary locations where thrombosis risk is clustered.