Adherence to antihypertensive medication in renal denervation trials: new studies, old problems?

(...

Intracranial pressure pulse amplitude during changes in head elevation: a new parameter for determining optimum cerebral perfusion pressure?

Objective: During short-term postural changes, the factors determining the amplitude of intracranial pulse pressure (ICPPA) remain constant, except for cerebrovascular resistance (CVR). Therefore, it may be possible to draw conclusions from the ICPPA onto the cerebrovascular resistance (CVR) and thus the relative change in cerebral perfusion pressure (CPP). Methods: Age, sex, disease, Glasgow Coma Scale score, placement of ventricular drain, blood gas analysis, and parameters of airway management were prospectively recorded in 40 patients. The changes in intracranial pressure (ICP), CPP, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and ICPPA at head elevations of 0°, 30°, and 60° were measured and analyzed online. Status of cerebrovascular autoregulation was checked using the pressure-reactivity index (PRx). Results: Altogether 36 subjects fulfilled the study conditions. Three patients had positive PRx indicating disturbed autoregulation and were excluded. Thus, 33 were left for analysis (18 females and 15 males). All of them were sedated and mechanically ventilated with Glasgow Coma scores ranging from 3-8. During change in head elevation from 0° to 60°, we found a significant (p < 0.05) improvement of the ICP, an increase of the ICCPA, a reduction of the MAP, and a decrease in the CPP. Increasing ICPPA was linked to decreasing CPP (0° to 60°, r = −0.42, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Head elevation is an important part of the ICP and CPP therapy in neurointensive care. When searching for the patient-specific optimum upper body position, ICPPA may provide additional information. Providing that the cerebral autoregulation is intact, the lowest ICPPA of a patient corresponds to the individual upper body position with the highest CP

Renal Denervation in Daily Practice: If So, How?

(...

Effect of visit-to-visit variation of heart rate and systolic blood pressure on outcomes in chronic systolic heart failure: results from the Systolic Heart Failure Treatment With the If Inhibitor Ivabradine Trial (SHIFT) trial

Background: Elevated resting heart rate (HR) and low systolic blood pressure (SBP) are related to poor outcomes in heart failure (HF). The association between visit-to-visit variation in SBP and HR and risk in HF is unknown. Methods and Results: In Systolic Heart Failure Treatment with the If inhibitor ivabradine Trial (SHIFT) patients, we evaluated relationships between mean HR, mean SBP, and visit-to-visit variations (coefficient of variation [CV]=SD/mean×100%) in SBP and HR (SBP-CV and HR-CV, respectively) and primary composite endpoint (cardiovascular mortality or HF hospitalization), its components, all-cause mortality, and all-cause hospitalization. High HR and low SBP were closely associated with risk for primary endpoint, all-cause mortality, and HF hospitalization. The highest number of primary endpoint events occurred in the highest HR tertile (38.8% vs 16.4% lowest tertile; P&lt;0.001). For HR-CV, patients at highest risk were those in the lowest tertile. Patients in the lowest thirds of mean SBP and SBP-CV had the highest risk. The combination of high HR and low HR-CV had an additive deleterious effect on risk, as did that of low SBP and low SBP-CV. Ivabradine reduced mean HR and increased HR-CV, and increased SBP and SBP-CV slightly. Conclusions: Beyond high HR and low SBP, low HR-CV and low SBP-CV are predictors of cardiovascular outcomes with additive effects on risk in HF, but with an unknown effect size. Beyond HR reduction, ivabradine increases HR-CV. Low visit-to-visit variation of HR and SBP might signal risk of cardiovascular outcomes in systolic HF. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.isrctn.com/. Unique identifier: ISRCTN70429960

Troubleshooting of a left common carotid artery pseudoaneurysm as complication of central venous catheter placement

(...

Off-the-shelf barrier for emergency intubation in the cardiac catheterization laboratory during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic

With the spread of SARS-CoV-2, it is expected that cases of acute coronary syndrome in the setting of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) develop. As expensive and sophisticated protection devices are not widely available, we have been working on a simple, off-the-shelf protection device for endotracheal intubation of potentially infected patients. For this purpose, we used a large transparent plastic bag (such as the sterile protective cover of the lead glass shield) for protection from airborne infections. The cover is moved over the patient's head from cranial to caudal, covering the catheter table including the torso with no need for patient mobilization. The intubation is done conventionally under direct visual control

Urokinase versus Alteplase in Patients with Intermediate–High-Risk Pulmonary Embolism Treated with Ultrasound-Accelerated Endovascular Thrombolysis

Background. Ultrasound-accelerated thrombolysis (USAT) is a safe and effective treatment for patients with intermediate–high-risk pulmonary embolism (PE). In all studies investigating USAT in the setting of PE, the recombinant tissue-plasminogen activator (rt-PA) alteplase or actilyse was used. Currently, there is a shortage of alteplase (Alteplase, Boehringer Ingelheim) in Europe. It is unknown whether the efficacy of urokinase (UK) is comparable with alteplase for USAT in patients with PE. Methods. Patients with intermediate–high-risk PE undergoing USAT with urokinase and alteplase were included in this study. One-to-one nearest neighbour matching was performed to account for baseline differences. We identified one patient treated with USAT and UK (n = 9) for each patient treated with USAT and alteplase (n = 9). Results. A total of 56 patients underwent USAT. The treatment was successful in all patients. The propensity score matched the identified nine pairs of patients. There were no statistically significant differences in the change in right ventricle-to-left ventricle (RV/LV) ratio (0.4 ± 0.3 versus 0.5 ± 0.4, p = 0.54), systolic pulmonary artery pressure (17.3 ± 8.0 versus 18.1 ± 8.1, p = 0.17), or improvement of RV function (5.8 ± 3.8 versus 5.1 ± 2.6, p = 1.0). The complication rates were comparable (11% in both groups, p = 0.55). There were no deaths in hospital or during 90 days in either group. Conclusions. In this case-matched comparison, the short-term clinical and echocardiographic outcomes showed comparable results between USAT–UK and USAT–rt-PA

Association of medication adherence and depression with the control of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and blood pressure in patients at high cardiovascular risk

Background: Many patients at high cardiovascular risk do not reach targets for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and blood pressure (BP). Depression is a frequent comorbidity in these patients and contributes to poor medication adherence. Objective: The aim of this study was to elucidate the associations between adherence to lipid- and BP-lowering drugs, the diagnosis of depression, and the control of LDL-C and BP. Patients and methods: This study was conducted as multicenter, single-visit cross-sectional study in Germany. Adherence was assessed by the Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8 (MMAS-8), and depression was assessed as documented in the patient chart. Results: A total of 3,188 ambulatory patients with hypercholesterolemia (39.8%), stable coronary artery disease (CAD; 7.4%), or both (52.9%) were included. Patients had a history of myocardial infarction (30.8%), diabetes (42.0%), were smokers (19.7%), and 16.1% had the investigator-reported diagnosis of depression. High or moderate adherence to lipid-lowering medication compared to low adherence was associated with lower LDL-C levels (105.5±38.3 vs 120.8±42.4 mg/dL) and lower BP (systolic BP 133.4±14.5 vs 137.9±13.9 mmHg, diastolic BP 78.3±9.6 vs 81.8±9.6 mmHg) and with a higher proportion of patients achieving the guideline-recommended LDL-C (16.9% vs 10.1%) and BP target (52.2% vs 40.8%, all comparisons P<0.0001). Adherence was worse in patients with depression. Correspondingly, patients with depression showed higher LDL-C levels, higher BP, and a lower probability of achieving the LDL-C and BP goal. Medication adherence correlated between BP- and lipid-lowering medications. Conclusion: Self-reported medication adherence can be easily obtained in daily practice. A low adherence and the diagnosis of depression identify patients at risk for uncontrolled LDL-C and BP who likely benefit from intensified care