Coronary Angiographic Manifestations and Outcomes in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection Patients With and Without Fibromuscular Dysplasia.

BACKGROUND: Fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) is widely recognized as an important predisposing condition for spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD). However, it remains unclear in SCAD patients with coexistent extracoronary FMD whether SCAD can be attributed to coronary FMD. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive patients enrolled in our Vancouver SCAD registries between September 2009 and October 2019 who were screened for extracoronary FMD. We reviewed coronary angiograms for manifestations of coronary FMD that were previously described (ie, irregular stenosis, smooth stenosis, dilatation/ectasia, and severe tortuosity). Outcome of interest was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE). RESULTS: We included 346 SCAD patients, of these, 250 (72.3%) had extracoronary FMD. Patients with FMD were older (54.6 ± 9.5 vs 51.7 ± 9.8 years) and more likely to have prior history of myocardial infarction (7.2% vs 1.0%, P = 0.047) and stroke (4.4% vs 0%, P = 0.081) compared with non-FMD patients. On coronary angiography, severe tortuosity was more prevalent in patients with extracoronary FMD (58.4% vs 36.5%, P < 0.001). Rates of irregular stenosis, smooth stenosis, and dilatation/ectasia were numerically higher in patients with extracoronary FMD, but differences were not significantly different. The rate of MACE at median follow-up of 807 (interquartile range, 392-1096) days was not different between groups (19.6% vs 15.6%; non-FMD as a reference: hazard ratio 1.44; 95% confidence interval, 0.76-2.71, P = 0.261). CONCLUSION: SCAD patients with extracoronary FMD were more likely to have coronary FMD manifestations on angiogram, especially severely tortuous vessels, compared with those without extracoronary FMD, with similar clinical outcomes. This may suggest that SCAD can occur at sites of pre-existent subclinical coronary FMD.

Hand sanitizers: A review of ingredients, mechanisms of action, modes of delivery, and efficacy against coronaviruses.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of the novel virus, SARS-CoV-2, has posed unprecedented challenges to public health around the world. Currently, strategies to deal with COVID-19 are purely supportive and preventative, aimed at reducing transmission. An effective and simple method for reducing transmission of infections in public or healthcare settings is hand hygiene. Unfortunately, little is known regarding the efficacy of hand sanitizers against SARS-CoV-2. METHODS: In this review, an extensive literature search was performed to succinctly summarize the primary active ingredients and mechanisms of action of hand sanitizers, compare the effectiveness and compliance of gel and foam sanitizers, and predict whether alcohol and non-alcohol hand sanitizers would be effective against SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Most alcohol-based hand sanitizers are effective at inactivating enveloped viruses, including coronaviruses. With what is currently known in the literature, one may not confidently suggest one mode of hand sanitizing delivery over the other. When hand washing with soap and water is unavailable, a sufficient volume of sanitizer is necessary to ensure complete hand coverage, and compliance is critical for appropriate hand hygiene. CONCLUSIONS: By extrapolating effectiveness of hand sanitizers on viruses of similar structure to SARS-CoV-2, this virus should be effectively inactivated with current hand hygiene products, though future research should attempt to determine this directly.