High-risk diabetic patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: characteristics and medium-term outcomes of percutaneous revascularization with drug-eluting stents.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents is an alternative for patients with high-risk unprotected left main coronary artery disease; those with diabetes mellitus are at even higher risk. Recent advances in percutaneous coronary intervention could lead to better results. The aim of this study was to evaluate medium-term results in a real-world sample of high-risk diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.From 3 tertiary hospitals, we retrospectively identified 334 high-risk patients, of whom 141 (42%) were diabetic and 193 (58%) were nondiabetic. The diabetes mellitus group showed a higher prevalence of peripheral vascular disease and left ventricular dysfunction. Angiographic and procedural characteristics did not differ significantly, with the exception of poor distal vessels in the diabetes mellitus group (44.5% vs 28.5%, P = 0.006). The use of intra-aortic balloon pumping and intravascular ultrasonography was low in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients. After a median follow-up of 22.4 months, cardiac death was higher in the diabetes mellitus group (16.2% vs 7.5%, P = 0.015), especially in insulin-dependent diabetic patients (25.8%). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events, including cardiac death, target-lesion revascularization, and myocardial infarction was similar in both groups (23.8% vs 18.3%, P = NS).High-risk diabetic patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease present with a worse clinical profile that carries a higher cardiac mortality rate in the medium term, especially in insulin-dependent diabetic patients.

[Left ventricular dysfunction induced by monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias: large improvement in ventricular function after radiofrequency ablation of the arrhythmic source]. / Disfunción ventricular izquierda inducida por arritmias ventriculares monomórficas: gran mejoría de la función ventricular tras ablación con radiofrecuencia del foco arrítmico.

Left ventricular systolic dysfunction related to ventricular arrhythmias is a relatively poorly understood entity. To increase our knowledge base, we describe 5 patients in whom the link between ventricular dysfunction and ventricular arrhythmia was unequivocally established. All patients had repetitive monomorphic ventricular arrhythmias and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (ejection fraction < or =40% and end-diastolic size > or =55 mm). The arrhythmogenic source was identified by electrophysiological study (right ventricle in 2 patients, left ventricle in 2, and left sinus of Valsalva in one), and was eliminated in all patients by radiofrequency catheter ablation. At 7+/-2 months post-ablation, large improvements were seen in left ventricular function and remodeling (ejection fraction >/=50% and end-diastolic size < or =51 mm in all cases), with no recurrence of arrhythmia during follow-up (10-69 months). This finding confirms that recurring ventricular arrhythmias can induce left ventricular dysfunction which may be reversible after ablation.

[Infectious endocarditis: degree of discordance between clinical guidelines recommendations and clinical practice]. / Endocarditis infecciosa: grado de discordancia entre lo recomendado por las guías clínicas y lo realizado en la práctica.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The present study was made to investigate the degree of discordance between the recommendations of clinical guidelines and actual practice in the care of patients with infectious endocarditis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data was gathered on 34 patients that were admitted to our hospital for native valve infection over a 4-year period. The degree of discordance (%) was obtained by comparing each clinical history with a catalog of 15 specific actions recommended in the clinical guidelines for four consecutive phases: pre-diagnosis, hospital diagnosis, antibiotic treatment, and surgical treatment. A system was constructed, scoring each phase with the greatest detected error (on a severity scale of 0 to 8 points) and adding together the scores for the four phases. RESULTS: The mean degree of discordance was 30.5% (range, 0-66%). Scores of more than six points were clearly associated with an unfavourable evolution. CONCLUSIONS: The recommendations of clinical guidelines for infectious endocarditis are inadequately followed in practice, which can affect the course of the disease. It is necessary to increase adherence to clinical guidelines in practice, in order to improve the care of patients with this serious disease.