Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
1.
Vnitr Lek ; 60(2): 134-8, 2014 Feb.
Article in Czech | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24754418

ABSTRACT

Despite the extensive armamentarium of antihypertensive medication available, the control of hypertension remains poor. Therefore any possibilities of non-pharmacological treatment of resistant hypertension are welcome. Recently, close attention was paid to renal denervation. Present work summarizes the scientific reports and clinical trials related to this topic published so far and addresses the unanswered questions. Moreover, it also contains brief summary of authors own experience with the method.


Subject(s)
Hypertension/therapy , Kidney/innervation , Sympathectomy , Antihypertensive Agents/therapeutic use , Drug Resistance , Humans
2.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 63(10): 964-72, 2014 Mar 18.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24211309

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare radial and femoral approaches in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by high-volume operators experienced in both access sites. BACKGROUND: The exact clinical benefit of the radial compared to the femoral approach remains controversial. METHODS: STEMI-RADIAL (ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction treated by RADIAL or femoral approach) was a randomized, multicenter trial. A total of 707 patients referred for STEMI <12 h of symptom onset were randomized in 4 high-volume radial centers. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of major bleeding and vascular access site complications at 30 days. The rate of net adverse clinical events (NACE) was defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major bleeding/vascular complications. Access site crossover, contrast volume, duration of intensive care stay, and death at 6 months were secondary endpoints. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 1.4% of the radial group (n = 348) and 7.2% of the femoral group (n = 359; p = 0.0001). The NACE rate was 4.6% versus 11.0% (p = 0.0028), respectively. Crossover from radial to femoral approach was 3.7%. Intensive care stay (2.5 ± 1.7 days vs. 3.0 ± 2.9 days, p = 0.0038) as well as contrast utilization (170 ± 71 ml vs. 182 ± 60 ml, p = 0.01) were significantly reduced in the radial group. Mortality in the radial and femoral groups was 2.3% versus 3.1% (p = 0.64) at 30 days and 2.3% versus 3.6% (p = 0.31) at 6 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI by operators experienced in both access sites, the radial approach was associated with significantly lower incidence of major bleeding and access site complications and superior net clinical benefit. These findings support the use of the radial approach in primary PCI as first choice after proper training. (Trial Comparing Radial and Femoral Approach in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] [STEMI-RADIAL]; NCT01136187).


Subject(s)
Catheterization, Peripheral/methods , Electrocardiography , Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Czech Republic/epidemiology , Female , Femoral Artery , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Radial Artery , Retrospective Studies , Risk Factors , Survival Rate/trends , Treatment Outcome
3.
Am Heart J ; 165(3): 338-43, 2013 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23453102

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Although radial approach is increasingly used in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) including in acute myocardial infarction (MI), patients with cardiogenic shock have been excluded from comparisons with femoral approach. The aim of our study was to compare clinical outcomes in patients undergoing primary PCI with cardiogenic shock by radial and femoral approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: From 2,663 patients presenting with ST-elevation MI in 2 large volume radial centers, we identified 197 patients (7.4%) with signs of cardiogenic shock immediately before undergoing primary PCI. Radial approach was used in 55% of cases when at least 1 radial artery was weakly palpable, either spontaneously or after intravenous noradrenaline bolus. Patients in the radial group were older (69 ± 12 vs 64 ± 12 years, P = .010), had less diabetes (13% vs 26%, P = .028), and required less often intubation prior PCI (42% vs 66%, P = .0006) or intraaortic balloon pump (36% vs 55%, P = .0096). Mortality at 1 year was 44% in the radial group and 64% in the femoral group (P = .0044). Independent predictors of late mortality included radial approach (hazard ratio [HR] 0.65, 95% CI 0.42-0.98, P = .041), the use of glycoprotein IIb-IIIa receptor inhibitors (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.40-0.96, P = .032), baseline creatinine ≥110 µmol/L (HR 3.34, 95% CI 2.20-5.12, P < .0001), initial glycemia >200 mg/dL (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.34-3.11, P = .0008), and age >65 years (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.18-2.79, P = .006). CONCLUSION: Radial approach was safe and feasible in more than half of the patients with ST-elevation MI and cardiogenic shock treated by primary PCI. After adjustment for baseline and procedural characteristics, radial approach remained associated with better survival. However, prognosis of patients undergoing primary PCI in cardiogenic shock remains poor.


Subject(s)
Femoral Artery/surgery , Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Postoperative Hemorrhage/epidemiology , Radial Artery/surgery , Shock, Cardiogenic/surgery , Aged , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/mortality , Shock, Cardiogenic/drug therapy , Survival Analysis , Treatment Outcome
4.
Am J Cardiol ; 107(11): 1698-701, 2011 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21439528

ABSTRACT

Radial artery occlusion (RAO) can result from transradial catheterization. We compared the incidence of RAO with 2 heparin dosage regimens after transradial coronary angiography, and we evaluated the efficacy and safety of transient homolateral ulnar artery compression to achieve acute radial artery recanalization. Patients referred for coronary angiography were randomized to very-low-dose heparin (2,000 IU) or low-dose heparin (5,000 IU). On sheath removal, hemostasis was obtained using the TR band with a plethysmography-guided patent hemostasis technique. In the case of RAO as assessed by duplex ultrasonography 3 to 4 hours after hemostasis, immediate 1-hour ulnar artery compression was applied. Hematomas >15 cm(2) were also assessed. We randomized 465 patients, 222 in the 2,000-IU group and 243 in the 5,000-IU group. The baseline and procedural characteristics were comparable in both groups. The incidence of initial RAO was 5.9% in the 2,000-IU group and 2.9% in the 5,000-IU group (p = 0.17), with a compression time of 2.10 ± 0.78 hours and 2.25 ± 0.82 hours, respectively (p = 0.051). After ulnar artery compression, the final incidence of RAO was 4.1% in the 2,000-IU group and 0.8% in the 5,000-IU group (p = 0.03). The incidence of local hematoma was 2.3% and 3.7% in the 2,000- and 5,000-IU groups, respectively (p = 0.42). In conclusion, acute RAO after transradial catheterization can be recanalized by early 1-hour homolateral ulnar artery compression. This simple nonpharmacologic method was effective and safe in patients with very-low- and low-dose heparin. Nevertheless, the incidence of final RAO remained significantly lower after a higher anticoagulation level.


Subject(s)
Anticoagulants/administration & dosage , Catheterization, Peripheral/adverse effects , Coronary Angiography/methods , Radial Artery , Ulnar Artery , Aged , Female , Heparin/administration & dosage , Humans , Incidence , Male , Middle Aged , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...