Clinical and experimental aspects of functional and flow reserve of the myocardium

Basic research over the past 50 years has provided the clinician with important concepts for understanding human coronary physiology. One such tool is the determination of coronary blood flow reserve. Defined as the ratio of maximal to resting coronary flow, flow reserve may be helpful in assessing the need for revascularization in selected patients (1), as well as providing insight into pathophysiological states involving small arterial vessels (2-4). Many methodologies have been developed for measuring myocardial blood flow in patients, however most are limited by poor spatial resolution, the need for prolonged sampling periods or inherent inaccuracies with the measurements (5). Two invasive techniques have recently shown promise in the determination of coronary flow reserve in patients. Ultrasonic Doppler catheters have become small and steerable and can accurately assess changes in coronary blood flow velocities following infusions of vasodilators such as papaverine and adenosine. The technique has gained widespread acceptance for use in the catheterization laboratory, particularly to evaluate the success of interventions such as percutaneous trans luminal coronary angioplasty ( 6). Another invasive modality combines videodensitometry and digital subtraction angiography. This method uses a measurement of contrast density at two different vessel locations to determine the transit time and together with vascular volume can provide measurements of coronary blood flow (7). Both of these techniques are safe and show good results when validated against other accepted techniques. The major disadvantage however is that neither absolute blood flow nor transmural flow distributions can be measured. Positron emission tomography (PET) is non-invasive, and thus does not theoretically alter baseline flows such as might occur with an intracoronary catheter. Positron emitting tracers such as H20 15 are administered either intravenously or as inhaled C02 15 and are rapidly extracted by the myocardium. With the use of high resolution, rapid tomographic scanners, one can measure time activity curves in the left ventricular chamber and the myocardial regions of interest. Using tracer kinetic principles, total and regional myocardial blood flows can be accurately quantitated. The results correlate well with flow measurements obtained from radiolabeled microspheres in dogs, over a wide range of flows (8). Because of the short half-lifes of the tracers, sequential measurements can be made to evaluate multiple interventions

Outcomes after angiography with sodium bicarbonate and acetylcysteine

Background: Intravenous sodium bicarbonate and oral acetylcysteine are widely used to prevent acute kidney injury and associated adverse outcomes after angiography without definitive evidence of their efficacy. Methods: Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomly assigned 5177 patients at high risk for renal complications who were scheduled for angiography to receive intravenous 1.26% sodium bicarbonate or intravenous 0.9% sodium chloride and 5 days of oral acetylcysteine or oral placebo; of these patients, 4993 were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis. The primary end point was a composite of death, the need for dialysis, or a persistent increase of at least 50% from baseline in the serum creatinine level at 90 days. Contrast-associated acute kidney injury was a secondary end point. Results: The sponsor stopped the trial after a prespecified interim analysis. There was no interaction between sodium bicarbonate and acetylcysteine with respect to the primary end point (P=0.33). The primary end point occurred in 110 of 2511 patients (4.4%) in the sodium bicarbonate group as compared with 116 of 2482 (4.7%) in the sodium chloride group (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.72 to 1.22; P=0.62) and in 114 of 2495 patients (4.6%) in the acetylcysteine group as compared with 112 of 2498 (4.5%) in the placebo group (odds ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.33; P=0.88). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of contrast-associated acute kidney injury. Conclusions: Among patients at high risk for renal complications who were undergoing angiography, there was no benefit of intravenous sodium bicarbonate over intravenous sodium chloride or of oral acetylcysteine over placebo for the prevention of death, need for dialysis, or persistent decline in kidney function at 90 days or for the prevention of contrast-associated acute kidney injury. (Funded by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Office of Research and Development and the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia; PRESERVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01467466.

In-Stent Restenosis in Saphenous Vein Grafts (from the DIVA Trial)

Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) have high rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR). We compared the baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics of patients and lesions that did develop ISR with those who did not develop ISR during a median follow-up of 2.7 years in the DIVA study (NCT01121224). We also examined the ISR types using the Mehran classification. ISR developed in 119 out of the 575 DIVA patients (21%), with similar incidence among patients with drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents (BMS) (21% vs 21%, p = 0.957). Patients in the ISR group were younger (67 ± 7 vs 69 ± 8 years, p = 0.04) and less likely to have heart failure (27% vs 38%, p = 0.03) and SVG lesions with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 3 flow before the intervention (77% vs 83%, p <0.01), but had a higher number of target SVG lesions (1.33 ± 0.64 vs 1.16 ± 0.42, p <0.01), more stents implanted in the target SVG lesions (1.52 ± 0.80 vs 1.31 ± 0.66, p <0.01), and longer total stent length (31.37 ± 22.11 vs 25.64 ± 17.42 mm, p = 0.01). The incidence of diffuse ISR was similar in patients who received drug-eluting-stents and BMS (57% vs 54%, p = 0.94), but BMS patients were more likely to develop occlusive restenosis (17% vs 33%, p = 0.05). © 202

Dose dependent effect of statins on postoperative atrial fibrillation after cardiac surgery among patients treated with beta blockers

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Previous studies on the effects of Statins in preventing atrial fibrillation (AF) after cardiac surgery have shown conflicting results. Whether statins prevent AF in patients treated with postoperative beta blockers and whether the statin-effect is dose related are unknown.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We retrospectively studied 1936 consecutive patients who underwent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) (n = 1493) or valve surgery (n = 443) at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center. All patients were in sinus rhythm before the surgery. Postoperative beta blockers were administered routinely (92% within 24 hours postoperatively).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mean age was 66+10 years and 68% of the patients were taking Statins. Postoperative AF occurred in 588 (30%) patients and led to longer length of stay in the intensive care unit versus those without AF (5.1+7.6 days versus 2.5+2.3 days, p < 0.0001). Patients with a past history of AF had a 5 times higher risk of postoperative AF (odds ratio 5.1; 95% confidence interval 3.4 to 7.7; p < 0.0001). AF occurred in 31% of patients taking statins versus 29% of the others (p = 0.49). In multivariable analysis, statins were not associated with AF (odds ratio (OR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7 to 1.2; p = 0.59). However, in a subgroup analysis, the patients treated with Simvastatin >20 mg daily had a 36% reduction in the risk of postoperative AF (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.6; p = 0.03) in comparison to those taking lower dosages.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Among cardiac surgery patients treated with postoperative beta blockers Statin treatment reduces the incidence of postoperative AF when used at higher dosages</p

Stent-Only Versus Adjunctive Balloon Angioplasty Approach for Saphenous Vein Graft Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BACKGROUND: Direct stenting without pre-dilation or post-dilation has been advocated for saphenous vein graft percutaneous coronary intervention to decrease the incidence of distal embolization, periprocedural myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of patients enrolled in the DIVA (Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Angioplasty; ) prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Patients were stratified into stent-only and balloon-stent groups. Primary end point was 12-month incidence of target vessel failure (defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization). Secondary end points included all-cause death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization during follow-up. RESULTS: Of the 575 patients included in this substudy, 185 (32%) patients underwent stent-only percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients in the stent-only versus balloon-stent group had similar baseline characteristics and similar incidence of target vessel failure at 12-months (15% versus 19%; hazard ratio, 1.34 [95% CI, 0.86–2.08]; P=0.19). During long-term follow-up (median of 2.7 years), the incidence of definite stent thrombosis (1% versus 5%; hazard ratio, 9.20 [95% CI, 1.23–68.92]; P=0.0085), the composite of definite or probable stent thrombosis (5% versus 11%; hazard ratio, 2.52 [95% CI, 1.23–5.18]; P=0.009), and target vessel myocardial infarction (8% versus 14%; hazard ratio, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.08–3.40]; P=0.023) was lower in the stent-only group. Multivariable analysis showed that a higher number of years since coronary artery bypass grafting and >1 target saphenous vein graft lesions were associated with increased target vessel failure during entire follow-up, while preintervention Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-3 flow was protective. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention of de novo saphenous vein graft lesions, there was no difference in target vessel failure at 12 months and long-term follow-up in the stent-only versus the balloon-stent group; however, the incidence of stent thrombosis was lower in the stent-only group, as was target vessel myocardial infarction