Comparison of Pressure vs Volume Overload Ventricular Wall Stress in Patients With Valvular Heart Disease.

BACKGROUND: Aortic stenosis (AS) and mitral regurgitation (MR) result in different patterns of left ventricular remodeling and hypertrophy. OBJECTIVES: We characterized left ventricular wall stress (LVWS) profiles in pressure and volume-overloaded systems, examined the relationship between baseline LVWS and cardiac remodeling, and assessed the acute effects of valve intervention on LVWS using invasive pressures combined with cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging measures of left ventricular volumes/mass. METHODS: A total of 47 patients with severe AS undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and 15 patients with severe MR undergoing MitraClip (MC) underwent a 6-minute walk test (6MWT), transthoracic echocardiogram, and CMR before their procedures. Catheters in the left ventricle were used to record hemodynamic changes before and after valve/clip deployment. This was integrated with CMR data to calculate LVWS before and after intervention. RESULTS: The TAVR group demonstrated significant reductions in systolic LVWS post procedure (median 24.7 Pa [IQR: 14 Pa] pre vs median 17.3 Pa [IQR: 12 Pa] post; P < 0.001). The MC group demonstrated significant reductions in diastolic LVWS (median 6.4 Pa [IQR: 5 Pa] pre vs median 4.3 Pa [IQR: 4.1 Pa] post; P = 0.021) with no significant change in systolic LVWS (30.6 ±1.61 pre vs 33 ±2.47 Pa post; P = 0.16). There was an inverse correlation between baseline systolic LVWS and 6MWT in the TAVR group (r = -0.31; P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR results in significant reductions in systolic LVWS acutely. MC results in significant reductions in diastolic LVWS. Higher baseline systolic LVWS in TAVR is associated with shorter 6MWT suggesting that in AS, LVWS may be a useful marker of early decompensation.

Pre-hospital heparin use for ST-elevation myocardial infarction is safe and improves angiographic outcomes.

AIMS: This study aims to evaluate if pre-hospital heparin administration by paramedics is safe and improves clinical outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using the multicentre Victorian Cardiac Outcomes Registry, linked with state-wide ambulance records, we identified consecutive patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI between January 2014 and December 2018. Information on thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow at angiography was available in a subset of cases. Patients receiving pre-hospital heparin were compared to those who did not receive heparin. Findings at coronary angiography and 30-day clinical outcomes were compared between groups. Propensity-score matching was performed for risk adjustment. We identified a total of 4720 patients. Of these, 1967 patients had TIMI flow data available. Propensity-score matching in the entire cohort yielded 1373 matched pairs. In the matched cohort, there was no observed difference in 30-day mortality (no-heparin 3.5% vs. heparin 3.0%, P = 0.25), MACCE (no-heparin 7% vs. heparin 6.2%, P = 0.44), and major bleeding (no-heparin 1.9% vs. heparin 1.4%, P = 0.64) between groups. Propensity-score analysis amongst those with TIMI data produced 552 matched pairs. The proportion of cases with TIMI 0 or 1 flow in the infarct-related artery (IRA) was lower among those receiving pre-hospital heparin (66% vs. 76%, P < 0.001) compared to those who did not. CONCLUSION: In this multicentre, propensity-score matched study, the use of pre-hospital heparin by paramedics was safe and is associated with fewer occluded IRAs in patients presenting with STEMI.