Outcomes of a modified, low-cost, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (V-A ECMO) for elective, periprocedural support of high-risk percutaneous cardiac interventions: An experience from a latinamerican center.

INTRODUCTION: High-risk procedures in interventional cardiology include a wide spectrum of clinical and anatomical scenarios related to a higher periprocedural morbidity and mortality. The prophylactic use of short-term mechanical circulatory support (ST-MCS) may improve both the safety and efficacy of the intervention by leading to more stable procedural hemodynamics. However, the significant costs may limit its use in resource constrained settings. To overcome this limitation, we ideated a modified, low-cost, veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (V-A ECMO) setup. METHODS: We conducted an observational prospective study including all patients undergoing a high-risk interventional cardiology procedure at our institution under prophylactic ST-MCS using a modified, low-cost version of V-A ECMO, where some components of the standard V-A ECMO circuit were replaced by supplies used for cardiac surgical cardiopulmonary bypass, achieving a cost reduction of 72%. We assessed in-hospital and mid-term outcomes, including procedural success, post-procedure complications and mortality. RESULTS: Between March 2016 and December 2021, ten patients underwent high-risk IC procedures with prophylactic use of V-A ECMO. Isolated percutaneous intervention (PCI) was performed in six patients, isolated transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in two, and a combined procedure (PCI + TAVR) in two. Mean ejection fraction was 34% (range 20-64%). Mean STS PROM was 16.2% (range 9.5-35.8%) and mean EuroScore was 23.7% (range 1.5-60%). The planned intervention was successfully performed in all cases. There were no reports of V-A ECMO malfunction. In nine patients the VA-ECMO was withdrawn immediately after the procedure but one patient required extended - 24 h - support with no significant issues. One patient experienced a periprocedural myocardial infarction and another developed a femoral pseudoaneurysm. In-hospital and 30-day survival were 100%, and 1-year survival was 80%. CONCLUSIONS: High-risk procedures in interventional cardiology can be successfully performed under prophylactic ST-MCS using a modified, low-cost V-A ECMO, suitable for limited-resource settings.

Takotsubo cardiomyopathy Afatinib-related in a non-small cell lung cancer patient: Case report.

Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) mutations are frequently found among NSCLC patients. Second-generation Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI) Afatinib is frequently used in this population of patients achieving better results than cytotoxic chemotherapy in terms of survival and progression. Afatinib-related cardiotoxicity has been rarely reported. Here we comment on a clinical case of a Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy Afatinib-induced in an NSCLC patient.

Effect of Early Normotension with Olmesartan on Rho-kinase Activity in Hypertensive Patients.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin II is a potent activator of the Rho-kinase (ROCK) pathway, through which it exerts some of its adverse vasoconstrictor effects. Clinical evidence on the effects of blocking the angiotensin II receptor 1 on ROCK activity in hypertensive patients is scarce. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate that ROCK activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PMBCs) in patients with essential hypertension is reduced earlier than previously observed, along with blood pressure (BP) lowering on treatment with olmesartan. METHODS: Prospective pilot open study; 17 hypertensive patients were treated with progressive olmesartan doses starting with 20 mg qd. BP was measured at 3, 6 and 9 weeks after treatment initiation. If treatment failed to normalize BP after 3 weeks, olmesartan dose was increased to 40 mg qd, and if still hypertensive after 6 weeks, 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide qd was added. ROCK activity was measured at baseline and 9 weeks after treatment as myosin phosphatase target subunit 1 phosphorylation (MYPT1-p/T ratio) in PBMC. RESULTS: Mean baseline BP was 162 ± 4.9/101 ± 2.4 mmHg. After 9 weeks of treatment, both systolic and diastolic BP were reduced by 41 and 22 mmHg, respectively (p<0.05). Mean pretreatment MYPT1- p/T ratio in PMBCs was significantly reduced by 80% after 9 weeks with olmesartan (p<0.01). CONCLUSION: Normotension achieved after 9 weeks in 82% of the patients treated with olmesartan was associated with a significant reduction of ROCK activity in PBMC.

A 45-Year-Old Man With Progressive Dyspnea, Chest Pain, and Hypereosinophilia.

CASE PRESENTATION: A previously healthy 45-year-old man was admitted to our ED with a 3-week history of progressive dyspnea on exertion. He also presented with orthopnea, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, and mild ankle swelling, but he showed no fever, wheezing, coughing, or sputum production. Outpatient laboratory studies, performed 1 week after symptom onset, revealed hypereosinophilia (4.100/µL). He was diagnosed with asthma and prescribed inhaled corticosteroids and low-dose prednisone, but he showed no symptomatic improvement. Over the last 48 h, he experienced rapid progression of dyspnea that made it difficult to speak with accompanying resting, substernal, nonradiating chest pain that became worse on inspiration. He had no allergies and reported no recent travels. Before symptom onset, he had not been taking any medication. He denied eating raw fish or meat and had not been exposed to mildew. His only exposure to animals was from his two indoor cats.

Gaps and Resemblances in Current Heart Failure Guidelines: A Clinical Perspective.

The newly available clinical guidelines in heart failure (HF) from Europe (2012), the United States (2010 and 2013), and Canada (2015) were compared, focusing on the systems for grading the evidence and classifying the recommendations, HF definitions, pharmacologic treatment, and devices used in HF. Some gaps were evident in the methodology for assessing evidence or in HF definitions. Pharmacologic treatments and recommendations for cardiac resynchronization therapy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators are similar but some differences need to be considered by the practicing clinician. Guideline recommendations regarding new emergent treatments are becoming available.