Contemporary management of Patent Foramen Ovale: A multinational survey on cardiologists' perspective

Objectives. The purpose of our survey is to analyze the clinical approach used by interventional and imaging cardiologists to diagnose, treat, and follow-up patients with PFO-related left circulation thromboembolism in different parts of the world with particular emphasis on adherence to current guidelines. Background. Firm guidelines do not cover many aspects of PFO-related patient care. Consequently, very disparate approaches exist among clinicians in the real-world. Methods. A 24-item electronic questionnaire was sent directly to experienced cardiology specialists practicing at consultant/attending positions directly involved in PFO closure management in the United States, United Kingdom, Gulf countries, and other countries. There were no unanswered questions. Responses were recorded between October 2019 and July 2020. Results. Seventy-one responses were obtained: 31 from the UK, 19 from the US, 16 from Gulf countries, 2 from Poland, and 1 response from Australia, Italy, and Switzerland. The overall response rate was 76%. Significant differences between regions were noted in the duration of ECG monitoring during the diagnostic process, PFO closure for left circulation thromboembolism other than stroke/transient ischemic attack, and intraoperative use of intracardiac echocardiography. A similar pattern was noted in the lack of routine screening for thrombophilia and the use of the long-term single antiplatelet therapy. Conclusions. The study shows a vast spectrum of opinions on the optimal approach to PFO closure with significant differences between the US, UK, and Gulf countries. The results stress the need for systematic, high-quality data on the diagnostic work-up and follow-up strategies to inform the standardized approach

Renal revascularization in resistant hypertension

Renal artery stenosis (RAS) is a common cause of secondary hypertension (HTN) and may lead to resistant (refractory) HTN despite guideline directed medical therapy. Although randomized controlled trials comparing medical therapy to medical therapy and renal artery stenting have shown no benefit with renal artery stenting, according to comparative effectiveness reviews by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the trials did not enroll patients with the most severe RAS who would be more likely to benefit from renal stenting. Because of limitations of conventional angiography, it is important to assess the hemodynamic severity of moderate (50%-70%) RAS lesions with a hemodynamic measurement. We review techniques to optimize patient selection, to minimize procedural complications, and to facilitate durable patency of renal stenting. We also review the current ACC/AHA Guidelines and SCAI Appropriate Use Criteria as they relate to renal stenting. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

When and how should we revascularize patients with atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis?

Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis is the leading cause of secondary hypertension and may lead to resistant (refractory) hypertension, progressive decline in renal function, and cardiac destabilization syndromes (pulmonary edema, recurrent heart failure, or acute coronary syndromes) despite guideline-directed medical therapy. Although randomized controlled trials comparing medical therapy with medical therapy and renal artery stenting have failed to show a benefit for renal artery stenting, according to comparative effectiveness reviews by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, the trials may not have enrolled patients with the most severe atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis, who would be more likely to benefit from renal stenting. Because of limitations of conventional angiography, it is critical that the hemodynamic severity of moderately severe (50% to 70%) atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis lesions be confirmed on hemodynamic measurement. The authors review techniques to optimize patient selection, to minimize procedural complications, and to facilitate durable patency of renal stenting. The authors also review the current American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions appropriate use criteria as they relate to renal stenting. (c) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Renaldenervation: alternative treatment options for hypertension?

Hypertension affects millions of Americans and has adverse long-term consequences increasing morbidity and mortality. Resistant hypertension (RH) continues to be difficult to treat with medications alone which may be associated with significant side effects. Alternate therapies have been evaluated for treating RH and renal denervation has been investigated extensively. We review the data from renal denervation trials and other novel technologies which are not FDA approved to date

Four Thrombotic Events Over 5 Years, Two Pulmonary Emboli and Two Deep Venous Thrombosis, When Testosterone-HCG Therapy Was Continued Despite Concurrent Anticoagulation in a 55-Year-Old Man With Lupus Anticoagulant

Background: When exogenous testosterone or treatments to elevate testosterone (human chorionic gonadotropin [HCG] or Clomid) are prescribed for men who have antecedent thrombophilia, deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism often occur and may recur despite adequate anticoagulation if testosterone therapy is continued. Case Presentation: A 55-year-old white male was referred to us because of 4 thrombotic events, 3 despite adequate anticoagulation over a 5-year period. We assessed interactions between thrombophilia, exogenous testosterone therapy, and recurrent thrombosis. In 2009, despite low-normal serum testosterone 334 ng/dL (lower normal limit [LNL] 300 ng/dL), he was given testosterone (TT) cypionate (50 mg/week) and human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG; 500 units/week) for presumed hypogonadism. Ten months later, with supranormal serum T (1385 ng/dL, upper normal limit [UNL] 827 ng/dL) and estradiol (E2) 45 pg/mL (UNL 41 pg/mL), he had a pulmonary embolus (PE) and was then anticoagulated for 2 years (enoxaparin, then warfarin). Four years later, on TT-HCG, he had his first deep venous thrombosis (DVT). TT was stopped and HCG continued; he was anticoagulated (enoxaparin, then warfarin, then apixaban, then fondaparinux). One year after his first DVT, on HCG, still on fondaparinux, he had a second DVT (5/315), was anticoagulated (enoxaparin + warfarin), with a Greenfield filter placed, but 8 days later had a second PE. Thrombophilia testing revealed the lupus anticoagulant. After stopping HCG, and maintained on warfarin, he has been free of further DVT-PE for 9 months. Conclusion: When DVT-PE occur on TT or HCG, in the presence of thrombophilia, TT-HCG should be stopped, lest DVT-PE reoccur despite concurrent anticoagulation

Multinational survey on management of patients with patent foramen ovale and left circulation thromboembolism

Background: The purpose of our survey was to capture the contemporary clinical practice of interventional and imaging cardiologists specialising in PFO management in different parts of the world with special emphasis on practice patterns in three core areas: patient screening, procedure and follow-up. Methods: An electronic questionnaire consisting of multiple-choice (single or multiple answers) or open-ended questions was sent in an email to suitable respondents identified by senior authors in their country/region of practice. All respondents were cardiology consultants directly involved in PFO closure procedures either as the operator, imaging specialist or in both roles. Responses were recorded between October 2019 and July 2020. There were no unanswered questions. Results: Seventy-one responses were obtained from different parts of the world: 31 from the United Kingdom, 19 from the United States, 16 from Gulf Countries, two from Poland and one response each from Australia, Italy and Switzerland. The overall response rate was 76%. Regional differences between the US, the UK and Gulf Countries are presented in Table. Conclusion: Based on the responses from the US, the UK and Gulf Countries, we show that there is no standard approach to patient selection, work-up and follow-up neither on international nor national/regional level. The results stress the need for systematic, high-quality data on diagnostic work-up and follow-up strategies to inform the standardised approach