Acute Coronary Syndrome Presenting during On- and Off-Hours: Is There a Difference in a Tertiary Cardiovascular Center?

Background and Objectives: ACS presents an acute manifestation of coronary artery disease and its treatment is based on timely interventional diagnostics and PCI. It has been known that the treatment and the outcomes are not the same for all the patients with ACS during the working day, depending on the availability of the procedures and staff. The aim of the study was to explore the differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients admitted for ACS during on- and off-hours. Materials and Methods: The retrospective study included 1873 consecutive ACS patients admitted to a tertiary, university hospital that underwent coronary angiography and intervention. On-hours were defined from Monday to Friday from 07:30 h to 14:30 h, while the rest was considered off-hours. Results: There were more males in the off-hours group (on-hours 475 (56%) vs. off-hours 635 (62%); p = 0.011), while previous MI was more frequent in the on-hours group (on 250 (30%) vs. off 148 (14%); p < 0.001). NSTEMI was more frequent during on-hours (on 164 (19%) vs. off 55 (5%); p < 0.001), while STEMI was more frequent during off-hours (on 585 (69%) vs. off 952 (93%); p < 0.001). Patients admitted during on-hours had more multivessel disease (MVD) (on 485 (57%) vs. off 489 (48%); p = 0.006), as well as multivessel PCI (on 187 (22%) vs. off 171 (16%); p = 0.002), while radial access was preferred in off-hours patients (on 692 (82%) vs. off 883 (86%); p = 0.004). Left main PCI was performed with similar frequency in both groups (on 37 (4%) vs. off 35 (3%); p = 0.203). Death occurred with similar frequency in both groups (on 17 (2.0%) vs. off 26 (2.54%); p = 0.404), while major adverse cardio-cerebral events (MACCEs) were more frequent in the on-hours group (on 105 (12.4%) vs. off 70 (6.8%); p = 0.039) probably due to the more frequent repeated PCI (on 49 (5.8%) vs. off 27 (2.6%); p = 0.035). Conclusions: Patients admitted for ACS during working hours in a tertiary hospital present with more complex CAD, have more demanding interventions, and experience more MACCEs during follow-up mostly due to myocardial infarctions and repeated procedures.

Facial Pain: A Comprehensive Review and Proposal for a Pragmatic Diagnostic Approach.

BACKGROUND: Facial pain, alone or combined with other symptoms, is a frequent complaint. Moreover, it is a symptom situated at, more than any other pain condition, a crosspoint where several disciplines meet, for example, dentists; manual therapists; ophthalmologists; psychologists; and ear-nose-throat, pain, and internal medicine physicians besides neurologists and neurosurgeons. Recently, a new version of the most widely used classification system among neurologists for headache and facial pain, the International Classification of Headache Disorders, has been published. OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to provide an overview of the most prevalent etiologies of facial pain and to provide a generic framework for the neurologist on how to manage patients presenting with facial pain. METHODS: An overview of the different etiologies of facial pain is provided from the viewpoint of the respective clinical specialties that are confronted with facial pain. Key message: Caregivers should "think outside their own box" and refer to other disciplines when indicated. If not, a correct diagnosis can be delayed and unnecessary treatments might be given. The presented framework is aimed at excluding life- or organ-threatening diseases, providing several clinical clues and indications for technical investigations, and ultimately leading to the correct diagnosis and/or referral to other disciplines.

A new minimally invasive technique for lead revision of perc-paddle leads.

To report on a less-invasive technique for replacing a broken lead in a spinal cord stimulation (SCS) device that makes use of St. Jude Medical's "Epiducer" device. A 53-year-old woman suffered a loss of stimulation on her internal pulse generator (IPG), which was found to have a broken lead. The broken lead was withdrawn using the Epiducer device with minimal invasiveness and without pain. A new lead was put in place, and successful stimulation using the IPG resumed. Follow-up 3 weeks later showed a well-functioning SCS system. An Epiducer can be used to revise the SCS system in a minimal invasive way without a new puncture. Follow-up study of this technique as well as others for revising an SCS system should be encouraged and used in comparison study.

Treatment of central sensitization in patients with 'unexplained' chronic pain: what options do we have?

INTRODUCTION: Central sensitization accounts for chronic 'unexplained' pain in a wide variety of disorders, including chronic whiplash-associated disorders, temporomandibular disorders, chronic low back pain, osteoarthritis, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome and chronic tension-type headache among others. Given the increasing evidence supporting the clinical significance of central sensitization in those with unexplained chronic pain, the awareness is growing that central sensitization should be a treatment target in these patients. AREAS COVERED: This article provides an overview of the treatment options available for desensitizing the CNS in patients with chronic pain due to central sensitization. It focuses on those strategies that specifically target pathophysiological mechanisms known to be involved in central sensitization. In addition, pharmacological options, rehabilitation and neurotechnology options are discussed. EXPERT OPINION: Acetaminophen, serotonin-reuptake inhibitor drugs, selective and balanced serototin and norepinephrine-reuptake inhibitor drugs, the serotonin precursor tryptophan, opioids, N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA)-receptor antagonists, calcium-channel alpha(2)delta (a2δ) ligands, transcranial magnetic stimulation, transcutaneous electric nerve stimulation (TENS), manual therapy and stress management each target central pain processing mechanisms in animals that - theoretically - desensitize the CNS in humans. To provide a comprehensive treatment for 'unexplained' chronic pain disorders characterized by central sensitization, it is advocated to combine the best evidence available with treatment modalities known to target central sensitization.