Pericardial Effusion After Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Timing, Predictors, and Clinical Impact.

BACKGROUND: Pericardial effusion (PE) is the most common serious left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) complication, but its mechanisms, time course, and prognostic impact are poorly understood. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the frequency, timing, predictors and clinical impact of PE after LAAC. METHODS: Data on consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous LAAC between 2009 and 2022 were prospectively collected including the 1-year follow-up. Both single (Watchman 2.5/FLX, Boston Scientific) and double (Amplatzer Cardiac Plug or Amulet, St. Jude Medical/Abbott) LAAC devices were used. An imaging core laboratory adjudicated the PEs and categorized them as early (≤7 days) and late (8-365 days). Logistic regression analysis was used to identify predictors of early and overall PE. RESULTS: Of 1,023 attempted LAAC procedures, PE was observed in 44 (4.3%) patients; PE was categorized as early in 34 (3.3%) and late in 10 (0.9%) patients. The majority of PEs occurred within 6 hours after LAAC (n = 25, 56.8%) and were clinically relevant (n = 28, 63.6%). Independent predictors of early PE were double-closure left atrial appendage devices (adjusted OR: 8.20; 95% CI: 1.09-61.69), female sex (adjusted OR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.50-7.73), the use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) at baseline (adjusted OR: 2.60; 95% CI: 1.11-6.09), and advanced age (adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 1.01-1.23), whereas female sex and OAC at baseline remained independent predictors of overall PE. CONCLUSIONS: In this large LAAC registry, PE was observed in <1 in 20 patients and usually occurred within 6 hours after procedure. The majority of early PEs were clinically relevant and occurred in the Amplatzer Cardiac Plug/Amulet procedures. Independent predictors included the use of double-closure devices, female sex, OAC at baseline, and advanced age. (LAAC-registry: Clinical Outcome After Echocardiography-guided LAA-closure; NCT04628078).

Needs and supporting tools for primary care physicians to improve care of patients with vertigo and dizziness: a national survey.

Background: The diagnostic workup and treatment decisions for vertigo or dizziness in primary care can be challenging due to the broad range of possible causes and limited time and expertise of physicians. This can lead to delays in treatment and unnecessary tests. We aimed to identify the unmet needs of primary care physicians (PCPs) and strategies to improve care for dizzy patients. Materials and methods: An online survey was conducted among board-certified PCPs in Switzerland to explore needs in caring for dizzy patients and potential educational approaches. Results: Based on responses from 152 participating PCPs, satisfaction and confidence were higher in diagnosing (82%) and treating (76%) acute dizziness compared to episodic/chronic cases (63 and 59%, respectively). Younger PCPs had lower diagnostic yield and confidence. Areas for improvement in specialist interactions included communication between physicians (23%/36%; always/often true), shorter waiting times for consultations (19%/40%), more detailed feedback (36%/35%), and consistent patient back referrals (31%/30%). PCPs expressed interest in hands-on courses, workshops, practical guidelines, web-based algorithms, and digital tools such as printed dizzy diaries and apps for follow-up. Conclusion: Enhanced dialog between PCPs and specialists is crucial to address the most common unmet needs. Reducing waiting times for referrals and providing clear instructions to specialists for triage are essential. The findings from this survey will guide the development of tools to improve the diagnosis and treatment of dizzy patients. Younger PCPs, who face higher diagnostic uncertainty, should be prioritized for educational approaches such as hands-on courses, workshops, and practical recommendations.

What is the current status of primary care in the diagnosis and treatment of patients with vertigo and dizziness in Switzerland? A national survey.

Background: Vertigo and dizziness are among the most frequent presenting symptoms in the primary care physicians' (PCPs) office. With patients facing difficulties in describing their complaints and clinical findings often being subtle and transient, the diagnostic workup of the dizzy patient remains challenging. We aimed to gain more insights into the current state of practice in order to identify the limitations and needs of the PCPs and define strategies to continuously improve their knowledge in the care of the dizzy patient. Materials and methods: Board-certified PCPs working in Switzerland were invited to participate in an online survey. A descriptive statistical analysis was performed, and prospectively defined hypotheses were assessed using regression analyses. Results: A vast majority of participating PCPs (n = 152) were familiar with the key questions when taking the dizzy patient's history and with performing provocation/repositioning maneuvers when posterior-canal benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV) was suspected (91%). In contrast, strong agreement that performing the alternating cover test (21%), looking for a spontaneous nystagmus with fixation removed (42%), and performing the head-impulse test (47%) were important was considerably lower, and only 19% of PCPs were familiar with lateral-canal BPPV treatment. No specific diagnosis could be reached in substantial fractions of patients with acute (35% [25; 50%], median [inter-quartile range]) and episodic/chronic (50% [40; 65.8%]) dizziness/vertigo. Referral to specialists was higher in patients with episodic/chronic dizziness than in acutely dizzy patients (50% [20.3; 75] vs. 30% [20; 50]), with younger PCPs (aged 30-40 years) demonstrating significantly increased odds of referral to specialists (odds ratio = 2.20 [1.01-4.81], p = 0.048). Conclusion: The assessment of dizzy patients takes longer than that of average patients in most primary care practices. Many dizzy patients remain undiagnosed even after a thorough examination, highlighting the challenges faced by PCPs and potentially leading to frequent referrals to specialists. To address this, it is crucial to promote state-of-the-art neuro-otological examination and treatment techniques that are currently neglected by most PCPs, such as "HINTS" and lateral-canal BPPV treatment. This can help reduce referral rates allowing more targeted treatment and referrals.

Rationale and design of the Hunting for the off-target propertIes of Ticagrelor on Endothelial function and other Circulating biomarkers in Humans (HI-TECH) trial.

BACKGROUND: Among the 3 approved oral P2Y12 inhibitors for the treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), ticagrelor, but not prasugrel or clopidogrel, has been associated with off-target properties, such as improved endothelial-dependent vasomotion and increased adenosine plasma levels. METHODS: The HI-TECH study (NCT02587260) is a multinational, randomized, open-label, crossover study with a Latin squares design, conducted at 5 European sites, in which patients free from recurrent ischemic or bleeding events ≥30 days after a qualifying ACS were allocated to sequentially receive a 30 ± 5-day treatment with prasugrel, clopidogrel, and ticagrelor in random order. The primary objective was to evaluate whether ticagrelor, at treatment steady state (ie, after 30 ± 5 days of drug administration), as compared with both clopidogrel and prasugrel, is associated with an improved endothelial function, assessed with peripheral arterial tonometry. Thirty-six patients undergoing evaluable endothelial function assessment for each of the assigned P2Y12 inhibitor were needed to provide 90% power to detect a 10% relative change of the reactive hyperemia index in the ticagrelor group. CONCLUSION: The HI-TECH study is the first randomized, crossover study aiming to ascertain whether ticagrelor, when administered at approved regimen in post-ACS patients, improves endothelial function as compared with both clopidogrel and prasugrel.

Decreased phosphatidylcholine plasmalogens--A putative novel lipid signature in patients with stable coronary artery disease and acute myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: Glycerophospholipids and sphingolipids are structurally heterogeneous due to differences in the O- and N-linked fatty acids and head groups. Sphingolipids also show a heterogeneity in their sphingoid base composition which up to now has been little appreciated. The aim of this study was to investigate the association of certain glycerophospholipid and sphingolipid species with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: The lipid profile in plasma from patients with stable CAD (n = 18) or AMI (n = 17) was compared to healthy subjects (n = 14). Sixty five glycerophospholipid and sphingolipid species were quantified by LC-MS. The relative distribution of these lipids into lipoprotein fractions was analyzed. RESULTS: In the CAD cohort, 45 glycerophospholipid and sphingolipid species were significantly lower compared to healthy controls. In the AMI group, 42 glycerophospholipid and sphingolipid species were reduced. Four PC plasmalogens (PC33:1, PC33:2, PC33:3 and PC35:3) showed the most significant difference. Out of eleven analyzed sphingoid bases, four were lower in the CAD and six in the AMI group. Sphingosine-1-phosphate (S1P) levels were reduced in the AMI group whereas an atypical C16:1 S1P was lower in both groups. Phosphatidylcholine and sphingomyelin species were exclusively present in lipoprotein particles, whereas lysophosphatidylcholines were mainly found in the lipoprotein-free fraction. The observed differences were not explained by the use of statins as confirmed in a second, independent cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced levels of four PC plasmalogens (PC33:1, PC33:2, PC33:3 and PC35:3) were identified as a putatively novel lipid signature for CAD and AMI.