Depth of valve implantation, conduction disturbances and pacemaker implantation with CoreValve and CoreValve Accutrak system for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation, a multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVI) is now considered an indispensable treatment strategy in high operative risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis. However, conduction disturbances and the need for Permanent Pacemaker (PPM) implantation after TAVI with the CoreValve prosthesis still remain frequent. METHODS AND RESULTS: We aimed to evaluate the implantation depth, the incidence and predictors of new conduction disturbances, and the need for PPM implantation within the first month after TAVI, using the new Accutrak CoreValve delivery system (ACV), compared to the previous generation CoreValve (non-ACV). In 5 experienced TAVI-centers, a total of 120 consecutive non-ACV and 112 consecutive ACV patients were included (n=232). The mean depth of valve implantation (DVI) was 8.4+/-4.0mm in the non-ACV group and 7.1+/-4.0mm in the ACV group (p=0.034). The combined incidence of new PPM implantation and new LBBB was 71.2% in the non-ACV group compared to 50.5% in the ACV group (p=0.014). DVI (p=0.002), first degree AV block (p=0.018) and RBBB (p<0.001) were independent predictors of PPM implantation. DVI (p<0.001) and pre-existing first degree AV-block (p=0.021) were identified as significant predictors of new LBBB. CONCLUSION: DVI is an independent predictor of TAVI-related conduction disturbances and can be reduced by using the newer CoreValve Accutrak delivery system, resulting in a significantly lower incidence of new LBBB and new PPM implantation

Single bolus intravenous regadenoson injection versus central venous infusion of adenosine for maximum coronary hyperaemia in fractional flow reserve measurement

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the hyperaemic effect of a single bolus regadenoson injection to a central venous adenosine infusion for inducing hyperaemia in the measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR).\n\nMETHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred patients scheduled for FFR measurement were enrolled. FFR was first measured by IV adenosine (140 µg/kg/min), thereafter by IV bolus regadenoson injection (400 µg), followed by another measurement by IV adenosine and bolus injection of regadenoson. The regadenoson injections were randomised to central or peripheral intravenous. Hyperaemic response and duration of steady state maximum hyperaemia were studied, central versus peripheral venous regadenoson injections were compared, and safety and reproducibility of repeated injections were investigated. Mean age was 66±8 years, 75% of the patients were male. The target stenosis was located in the LM, LAD, LCX, and RCA in 7%, 54%, 20% and 19%, respectively. There was no difference in FFR measured by adenosine or by regadenoson (ΔFFR=0.00±0.01, r=0.994,

Reactivity of CuI and CuBr toward Dialkyl Sulfides RSR: From Discrete Molecular Cu 4

The 1D coordination polymer (CP) [(Me2S)(3){Cu-2(mu-I)(2)}](n) (1) is formed when CuI reacts with SMe2 in n-heptane, whereas in acetonitrile (MeCN), the reaction forms exclusively the 2D CP [(Me2S)(3){Cu-4(mu-I)4}](n) (2) containing flower-basket Cu4I4 units. The reaction product of CuI with MeSEt is also solvent-dependent, where the 1D polymer [(MeSEt)(2){Cu-4(mu(3)-I)(2)(mu(2)-I)(2)}(MeCN)(2)](n) (3) containing stepped-cubane Cu4I4 units is isolated in MeCN. In contrast, the reaction in n-heptane affords the 1D CP [(MeSEt)(3){Cu-4(mu(3)-I)4}](n) (4) containing closed-cubane Cu4I4 clusters. The reaction of MeSPr with CuI provides the structurally related 1D CP [(MeSPr)(3){Cu-4(mu(3)-I)4}](n) (5), for which the X-ray structure has been determined at 115, 155, 195, 235, and 275 K, addressing the evolution of the metric parameters. Similarly to 4 and the previously reported CP [(Et2S)(3){Cu-4(mu(3)-I)4}](n) (Inorg. Chem. 2010, 49, 5834), the 1D chain is built upon closed cubanes Cu-4(mu(3)-I)4 as secondary building units (SBUs) interconnected via mu-MeSPr ligands. The 0D tetranuclear clusters [(L)4{Cu-4(mu(3)-I)4}] [L = EtSPr (6), Pr2S (7)] respectively result from the reaction of CuI with EtSPr and n-Pr2S. With i-Pr2S, the octanuclear cluster [(i-Pr2S)(6){Cu-8(mu(3)-I)(3)}(mu(4)-I)(2)}] (8) is formed. An X-ray study has also been performed at five different temperatures for the 2D polymer [(Cu3Br3)(MeSEt)(3)](n) (9) formed from the reaction between CuBr and MeSEt in heptane. The unprecedented framework of 9 consists of layers with alternating Cu(mu(2)-Br)(2)Cu rhomboids, which are connected through two mu-MeSEt ligands to tetranuclear open-cubane Cu4Br4 SBUs. MeSPr forms with CuBr in heptane the 1D CP [(Cu3Br3)(MeSPr)(3)](n) (10), which is converted to a 2D metalorganic framework [(Cu5Br5)(mu(2)-MeSPr)(3)](n) (11) incorporating pentanuclear [(Cu-5(mu(4)-Br)(mu(2)-Br)] SBUs when recrystallized in MeCN. The thermal stability and photophysical properties of these materials are also reported