Asymptomatic Left Ventricle Systolic Dysfunction

Heart failure is a common debilitating illness, associated with significant morbidity and mortality, rehospitalisation and societal costs. Current guidelines and position statements emphasise the management of patients with overt symptomatic disease, but the increasing prevalence of congestive heart failure underscores the need to identify and manage patients with early left ventricular dysfunction prior to symptom onset. Asymptomatic left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ALVSD), classified as stage B heart failure, is defined as depressed left ventricular systolic function in the absence of clinical heart failure. Early initiation of therapies in patients with presumed ALVSD has been shown to lead to better outcomes. In this article, the authors clarify issues surrounding the definition and natural history of ALVSD, outline clinical tools that may be of value in identifying patients with ALVSD and highlight potential opportunities for future investigations to better address aspects of our understanding of this complex syndrome

Coronary endothelial function testing provides superior discrimination compared with standard clinical risk scoring in prediction of cardiovascular events

BACKGROUND Endothelial dysfunction is regarded as the early stage of atherosclerosis and is associated with cardiovascular (CV) events. This study was designed to determine whether assessment of coronary endothelial function (CEF) is safe and can reclassify risk in patients with early coronary artery disease beyond the Framingham risk score (FRS). METHODS AND RESULTS CEF was evaluated using intracoronary acetylcholine in 470 patients who presented with chest pain and nonobstructive coronary artery disease. CV events were assessed after a median follow-up of 9.7 years. The association between CEF and CV events was examined, and the net reclassification improvement index (NRI) was used to compare the incremental contribution of CEF when added to FRS.The mean age was 53 years, and 68% of the patients were women with a median FRS of 8. Complications (coronary dissection) occurred in three (0.6%) and CV events in 61 (13%) patients. In univariate analysis, microvascular CEF [hazard ratio (HR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-0.97, P=0.032] and epicardial CEF (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.59-0.90, P=0.01) were found to be significant predictors of CV events, whereas FRS was not (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.85-1.26, P=0.61). When added to FRS, microvascular CEF correctly reclassified 11.3% of patients [NRI 0.11 (95% CI 0.019-0.21)], epicardial CEF correctly reclassified 12.1% of patients [NRI 0.12 (95% CI -0.02 to 0.26)], and the combined microvascular and epicardial CEF correctly reclassified 22.8% of patients [NRI 0.23 (95% CI 0.08-0.37)]. CONCLUSION CEF testing is safe and adds value to the FRS, with superior discrimination and risk stratification compared with FRS alone in patients presenting with chest pain or suspected ischemia

Coronary microvascular dysfunction is associated with poor glycemic control amongst female diabetics with chest pain and non-obstructive coronary artery disease

Abstract Background Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events compared to those without diabetes. The timing, relative to disease onset, and degree of glycemic control that reduces the risk of adverse cardiovascular events remains uncertain. Coronary microvascular dysfunction is prevalent in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and is linked to adverse cardiovascular events. We assessed the association between endothelial-dependent and endothelial-independent coronary microvascular dysfunction and glycemic control in patients presenting with chest pain and nonobstructive coronary disease at angiography. Methods Patients presenting with chest pain and found to have non-obstructive CAD (stenosis  140 mg/dL was significantly associated with an abnormal CFRAdn Ratio, 4.28 (1.43–12.81). Conclusion Poor glycemic control is associated with coronary microvascular dysfunction amongst female diabetics presenting with chest pain and non-obstructive CAD. These findings highlight the importance of sex specific risk stratification models and treatment strategies when managing cardiovascular risk amongst diabetics. Further studies are required to identify additional risk prevention tools and therapies targeting microvascular dysfunction as an integrated index of cardiovascular risk

5-fluorouracil and cardiotoxicity: a review

Fluoropyrimidines such as 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) form the foundation of a wide variety of chemotherapy regimens. 5-FU is in fact the third most commonly used chemotherapeutic agent in the treatment of solid malignancies across the world. As with all chemotherapy, balancing the potential benefits of therapy against the risks of drug-related toxicity is crucial when clinicians and patients make shared decisions about treatment. 5-FU is the second most common chemotherapeutic drug associated with cardiotoxicity after anthracyclines, which can manifest as chest pain, acute coronary syndrome/myocardial infarction or death. Nevertheless a widespread appreciation of 5-FU-related cardiotoxicity and its implications is lacking amongst clinicians. In this review, we outline the incidence, possible risk factors, and likely pathophysiological mechanisms that may account for 5-FU-related cardiotoxicity and also highlight potential management strategies for this poorly understood clinical entity

Lack of correlation between the optimal glycaemic control and coronary micro vascular dysfunction in patients with diabetes mellitus: a cross sectional study.

Background Coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) is associated with cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Optimal glycaemic control does not always preclude future events. We sought to assess the effect of the current target of HBA1c level on the coronary microcirculatory function and identify predictive factors for CMD in T2DM patients. Methods We studied 100 patients with T2DM and 214 patients without T2DM. All of them with a history of chest pain, non-obstructive angiograms and a direct assessment of coronary blood flow increase in response to adenosine and acetylcholine coronary infusion, for evaluation of endothelial independent and dependent CMD. Patients with T2DM were categorized as having optimal (HbA1c < 7 %) vs. suboptimal (HbA1c ≥ 7 %) glycaemic control at the time of catheterization. Results Baseline characteristics and coronary endothelial function parameters differed significantly between T2DM patients and control group. The prevalence of endothelial independent CMD (29.8 vs. 39.6 %, p = 0.40) and dependent CMD (61.7 vs. 62.2 %, p = 1.00) were similar in patients with optimal vs. suboptimal glycaemic control. Age (OR 1.10; CI 95 % 1.04–1.18; p < 0.001) and female gender (OR 3.87; CI 95 % 1.45–11.4; p < 0.01) were significantly associated with endothelial independent CMD whereas glomerular filtrate (OR 0.97; CI 95 % 0.95–0.99; p < 0.05) was significantly associated with endothelial dependent CMD. The optimal glycaemic control was not associated with endothelial independent (OR 0.60, CI 95 % 0.23–1.46; p 0.26) or dependent CMD (OR 0.99, CI 95 % 0.43–2.24; p = 0.98). Conclusions The current target of HBA1c level does not predict a better coronary microcirculatory function in T2DM patients. The appropriate strategy for prevention of CMD in T2DM patients remains to be addressed. Keywords: Endothelial dysfunction; Diabetes mellitus; Coronary microcirculationAndalusian Department for Equality and Social Well Being. Spain. The National Institute of Health (NIH Grants HL-92954 and AG-31750), the Mayo Foundation.Ye