8 research outputs found
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Triggered By A Monomorphic Ventricular Couplet In A Patient With Acute Coronary Syndrome
Atrial fibrillation is a common arrhythmia in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction, however its pathophysiological mechanisms are not fully understood. We describe the unusual case of a 76-year old woman admitted for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who developed multiple episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation triggered by monomorphic ventricular couplets. Beta-blocking and amiodarone therapy resulted efficacious in preventing arrhythmic recurrences. We then discuss the possible arrhythmogenic mechanisms, with special emphasis on the unique electrophysiological, hemodynamic, cellular and anatomical milieu created by acute myocardial ischemia
Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation Triggered By A Monomorphic Ventricular Couplet In A Patient With Acute Coronary Syndrome
Atrial fibrillation is a common arrhythmia in patients suffering from acute myocardial infarction, however its pathophysiological mechanisms are not fully understood. We describe the unusual case of a 76-year old woman admitted for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, who developed multiple episodes of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation triggered by monomorphic ventricular couplets. Beta-blocking and amiodarone therapy resulted efficacious in preventing arrhythmic recurrences. We then discuss the possible arrhythmogenic mechanisms, with special emphasis on the unique electrophysiological, hemodynamic, cellular and anatomical milieu created by acute myocardial ischemia
Quantitative Flow Ratio Identifies Nonculprit Coronary Lesions Requiring Revascularization in Patients with ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease
Background - The nonculprit lesion (NCL) management in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease is debated. We sought to assess whether quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a noninvasive tool to identify potentially flow-limiting lesions, may be reliable in this scenario. Methods and Results - The present proof-of-concept study is based on a 3-step process: (1) identification of the QFR reproducibility in NCLs assessment (cohort A, n=31); (2) prospective validation of QFR diagnostic accuracy in respect to fractional flow reserve (cohort B, n=45); and (3) investigation of long-term clinical outcomes of NCLs stratified according to QFR (cohort C, n=110). A blinded core laboratory computed QFR values for all NCLs. Cohort A showed a good correlation and agreement between QFR values at index (acute) and at staged (subacute, 3-4 days later) procedures (r=0.98; 95% confidence interval, 0.96-0.99; mean difference, 0.004 [-0.027 to 0.34]). The inter-rater agreement was κ=0.9. In cohort B, fractional flow reserve and QFR identified 16 (33%) and 17 (35%) NCLs potentially flow limiting. Sensitivity, specificity, negative, and positive predictive values were 88%, 97%, 94%, and 94%. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was 0.96 (95% confidence interval, 0.89-0.99). Finally, in cohort C, we identified 110 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients where at least 1 NCL was left untreated. Patients with NCLs showing a QFR value ≤0.80 were at higher risk of adverse events (hazard ratio, 2.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-4.5; P=0.01). Conclusions - In a limited and selected study population, our study showed that QFR computation may be a safe and reliable tool to guide coronary revascularization of NCLs in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients
Indication to cardioverter-defibrillator therapy and outcome in real world primary prevention. Data from the IRIDE [Italian registry of prophylactic implantation of defibrillators] study
MEDICAL SCIENCE. GISSI-2: A factorial randomised trial of alteplase versus streptokinase and heparin versus no heparin among 12 490 patients with acute myocardial infarction
A multicentre, randomised, open trial with a 2 x 2 factorial design was conducted to compare the benefits and risks of two thrombolytic agents, streptokinase (SK, 1\ub75 MU infused intravenously over 30-60 min) and alteplase (tPA, 100 mg infused intravenously over 3 h) in patients with acute myocardial infarction admitted to coronary care units within 6 h from onset of symptoms. The patients were also randomised to receive heparin (12 500 U subcutaneously twice daily until discharge from hospital, starting 12 h after beginning the tPA or SK infusion) or usual therapy. All patients without specific contraindications were given atenolol (5-10 mg iv) and aspirin (300-325 mg a day). The end-point of the study was the combined estimate of death plus severe left ventricular damage. 12 490 patients were randomised to four treatment groups (SK alone, SK plus heparin, tPA alone, tPA plus heparin). No specific differences between the two thrombolytic agents were detected as regards the combined end-point (tPA 23\ub71%; SK 22\ub75%; relative risk 1\ub704, 95% Cl 0\ub795-1\ub713), nor after the addition of heparin to the aspirin treatment (hep 22\ub77%, no hep 22\ub79%; RR 0\ub799, 95% Cl 0\ub791-1\ub708). The outcome of patients allocated to the four treatment groups was similar with respect to baseline risk factors such as age, Killip class, hours from onset of symptoms, and site and type of infarct. The rates of major in-hospital cardiac complications (reinfarction, post-infarction angina) were also similar. The incidence of major bleeds was significantly higher in SK and heparin treated patients (respectively, tPA 0\ub75%, SK 1\ub70%, RR 0\ub757, 95% Cl 0\ub738-0\ub785; hep 1\ub70%, no hep 0\ub76%, RR 1\ub764, 95% Cl 1\ub709-2\ub745), whereas the overall incidence of stroke was similar in all groups. SK and tPA appear equally effective and safe for use in routine conditions of care, in all infarct patients who have no contraindications, with or without post-thrombolytic heparin treatment. The 8\ub78% hospital mortality of the study population (compared with approximately 13% in the control cohort of the GISSI-1 trial) indicates the beneficial impact of the proven acute treatments for AMI. \ua9 1990