Rozległy ostry zawał serca spowodowany jednoczesną zakrzepicą w dwóch stentach

We report a case of a patient presenting with an anterior and inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction due to double- -arterial coronary stent thrombosis in the left anterior descending artery and right coronary artery, despite the administration of prasugrel and acetylsalicylic acid. Stent thrombosis is an uncommon, but serious complication, usually manifested by sudden death (20–40%) or acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (50–70%). It is a multifactor phenomenon, which involves other factors of the patient. Understanding of its histopathology and risk factors becomes necessary to try to prevent it, and we should keep in mind, that the deployment of a drug-eluting stent could be unsafe if it is not supported by a suitable evidence-based clinical guideline.W pracy opisano przypadek pacjenta z zawałem ścian przedniej i dolnej serca z uniesieniem odcinka ST spowodowanymzakrzepicą w dwóch stentach wieńcowych umieszczonych w gałęzi międzykomorowej przedniej i prawej tętnicy wieńcowej, która wystąpiła mimo stosowania prasugrelu i kwasu acetylosalicylowego. Zakrzepica w stencie jest rzadkim,lecz poważnym powikłaniem, zwykle prowadzącym do nagłego zgonu (20–40%) lub ostrego zawału serca z uniesieniemodcinka ST (50–70%). Powikłanie to ma podłoże wieloczynnikowe. Poznanie cech histopatologicznych i czynników ryzykazakrzepicy w stencie jest konieczne, aby można było zapobiec wystąpieniu tego powikłania. Ponadto należy pamiętać,że wszczepienie stentu uwalniającego lek może być niebezpieczne, jeśli nie jest zgodne z wytycznymi opartymi na dowodach naukowych

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio for the Assessment of Intermediate Left Main Coronary Artery Stenosis: Correlations With Fractional Flow Reserve/Intravascular Ultrasound and Prognostic Implications: The iLITRO-EPIC07 Study

Background: There is little information available on agreement between fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in left main coronary artery (LMCA) intermediate stenosis. Besides, several meta-analyses support the use of FFR to guide LMCA revascularization, but limited information is available on iFR in this setting. Our aims were to establish the concordance between FFR and iFR in intermediate LMCA lesions, to evaluate with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in cases of FFR/iFR discordance, and to prospectively validate the safety of deferring revascularization based on a hybrid decision-making strategy combining iFR and IVUS. Methods: Prospective, observational, multicenter registry with 300 consecutive patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis who underwent FFR and iFR and, in case of discordance, IVUS and minimal lumen area measurements. Primary clinical end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, LMCA lesion-related nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned LMCA revascularization. Results: FFR and iFR had an agreement of 80% (both positive in 67 and both negative in 167 patients); in case of disagreement (31 FFR+/iFR- and 29 FFR-/iFR+) minimal lumen area was & GE;6 mm(2) in 8.7% of patients with FFR+ and 14.6% with iFR+. Among the 300 patients, 105 (35%) underwent revascularization and 181 (60%) were deferred according to iFR and IVUS. At a median follow-up of 20 months, major adverse cardiac events incidence was 8.3% in the defer group and 13.3% in the revascularization group (hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI 0.30-1.72]; P=0.45). Conclusions: In patients with intermediate LMCA stenosis, a physiology-guided treatment decision is feasible either with FFR or iFR with moderate concordance between both indices. In case of disagreement, the use of IVUS may be useful to indicate revascularization. Deferral of revascularization based on iFR appears to be safe in terms of major adverse cardiac events

Multiple congenital coronary artery fistulae draining into the left ventrice

Coronary artery fistula between a coronary artery and a cardiac chamber is a rare condition, especially when multiple fistulas communicate with the left ventricle. Herein we report a case of an elderly woman with multiple diffuse coronary artery-left ventricular fistulas diagnosed by angiography. Since the coronary artery-cardiac chamber communications were multiple and diffuse neither surgery nor transcatheter coil occlusion was considered in this case

Seguridad del cateterismo diagnóstico ambulatorio en pacientes en tratamiento con anticoagulantes orales de acción directa

Introduction and objectives: Today it has become increasingly common to perform procedures without withdrawing oral anticoagulation. However, the need to withdraw oral anticoagulants prior to cardiac catheterization in patients chronically anticoagulated (OACs) remains controversial. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of performing transradial catheterization in outpatients without withdrawing direct-action oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Methods: Prospective and observational study where 270 patients who underwent elective transradial cardiac catheterization were included from January 2013 through November 2017, divided into 3 groups of 90 patients based on their anticoagulant intake: group A (without OAC), with group B (with vitamin K antagonist), and group C (with DOACs), and matched according to the date of completion. In no case was the OAC discontinued before the procedure. We evaluated the complications of radial access within the first 24 h and 1 month after the procedure. Results: The group of patients on DOACs had a higher proportion of men compared to the vitamin K antagonist group (71.1% vs 47.8%; p = .01) and patients were younger in the group without OAC (63.45 ± 11.47 vs 70.22 ± 9.35; p = .03). Group B had a lower percentage of diabetic patients (22.2% vs 36.67% in group C, p = .03). In group A, patients were more prone to having a history of ischemic heart disease compared to the groups of anticoagulated patients (27.84% vs 14.44% in group C, p = .028) in addition to a more frequent intake of antiplatelet drugs. Radial access was the access of choice in most patients (98.2%). There were no significant differences when it comes to vascular access complications among the groups being the rate of hematoma and/or bleeding at discharge equal to 1.1% in the DOACs group and the arterial occlusion rates both at discharge and at 1 month between 0% and 2.2%. Conclusions: In our experience performing transradial diagnostic cardiac catheterizations without discontinuation of DOACs is safe, with low rates of thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications, without any differences with vitamin K antagonist and no OAC.Introducción y objetivos: Actualmente es cada vez más habitual realizar procedimientos sin retirar la anticoagulación oral (ACO), pero la necesidad o no de suspender la ACO antes del cateterismo cardiaco sigue siendo una cuestión controvertida. Se evalúan la eficacia y la seguridad de la realización de un cateterismo transradial en pacientes ambulatorios sin retirar los anticoagulantes orales de acción directa (ACOD). Métodos: Estudio observacional, prospectivo, que incluye 270 pacientes sometidos a cateterismo transradial electivo desde enero de 2013 hasta noviembre de 2017, divididos en 3 grupos de 90 pacientes: grupo A (sin ACO), grupo B (con antagonista de la vitamina K), grupo C (con ACOD), emparejados según la fecha de realización del cateterismo. No se suspendió la ACO antes del procedimiento. Se evalúan las complicaciones del acceso radial en las primeras 24 h y un mes después del cateterismo. Resultados: Había más varones tratados con ACOD que con un antagonista de la vitamina K (71,1 frente a 47,8%; p = 0,01) y los pacientes eran más jóvenes en el grupo sin ACO (63,45 ± 11,47 frente a 70,22 ± 9,35 años; p = 0,03). En el grupo B hubo menos diabéticos (22,2 frente a 36,67% en el grupo C; p = 0,03). En el grupo A, los pacientes tenían más antecedentes de cardiopatía isquémica que los pacientes con anticoagulación (27,84 frente a 14,44% en el grupo C; p = 0,028), además de la toma concomitante de fármacos antiplaquetarios. El acceso fue radial en la mayoría de los pacientes (98,2%). No hubo diferencias significativas en las complicaciones del acceso vascular, con una tasa de hematoma o hemorragia al alta del 1,1% en el grupo con ACOD y tasas de oclusión arterial tanto al alta como al mes del 0-2,2%. Conclusiones: En nuestra experiencia, la realización de un cateterismo diagnóstico transradial sin interrupción de los ACOD es seguro, con tasas bajas de complicaciones trombóticas y hemorrágicas, sin diferencias respecto a los pacientes en tratamiento con un antagonista de la vitamina K o sin ACO