Comprehensive Shielding System Enhances Radiation Protection for Structural Heart Procedures.

Background: This study of radiation exposure (RE) to physicians performing structural heart procedures evaluated the efficacy of a novel comprehensive radiation shield compared to those of traditional shielding methods. A novel comprehensive shielding system (Protego, Image Diagnostics Inc) has been documented to provide superior RE protection during coronary procedures compared to that provided by a standard "drop down" shield. The purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of this shield in transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures, which are associated with disproportionate RE to operators. Methods: This single-center, 2-group cohort, observational analysis compared RE to the primary physician operator performing TAVR using the Protego shield (n = 25) with that using a standard drop-down shield with personal leaded apparel (n = 25). RE was measured at both thyroid and waist levels with a real-time dosimetry system (RaySafe i3, RaySafe) and was calculated on a mean per case basis. Data were collected on additional procedural parameters, including access site(s) for device implantation, per case fluoroscopy time, air kerma, and patient factors, including body mass index. Between-group comparisons were conducted to evaluate RE by group and measurement sites. Results: The Protego system reduced operator RE by 99% compared to that using standard protection. RE was significantly lower at both the thyroid level (0.08 ± 0.27 vs 79.2 ± 62.4 µSv; P < .001) and the waist level (0.70 ± 1.50 vs 162.0 ± 91.0 µSv, P < .001). "Zero" total RE was documented by RaySafe in 60% (n = 15) of TAVR cases using Protego. In contrast, standard protection did not achieve zero exposure in a single case. Conclusions: The Protego shield system provides superior operator RE protection during TAVR procedures. This shield allows operators to work without the need for personal lead aprons and has potential to reduce catheterization laboratory occupational health hazards.

Right Ventricular Myocardial Infarction-A Tale of Two Ventricles: JACC Focus Seminar 1/5.

Right ventricular infarction (RVI) complicates 50% of cases of acute inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and is associated with high in-hospital morbidity and mortality. Ischemic right ventricular (RV) systolic dysfunction decreases left ventricular preload delivery, resulting in low-output hypotension with clear lungs, and disproportionate right heart failure. RV systolic performance is generated by left ventricular contractile contributions mediated by the septum. Augmented right atrial contraction optimizes RV performance, whereas very proximal occlusions induce right atrial ischemia exacerbating hemodynamic compromise. RVI is associated with vagal mediated bradyarrhythmias, both during acute occlusion and abruptly with reperfusion. The ischemic dilated RV is also prone to malignant ventricular arrhythmias. Nevertheless, RV is remarkably resistant to infarction. Reperfusion facilitates RV recovery, even after prolonged occlusion and in patients with severe shock. However, in some cases hemodynamic compromise persists, necessitating pharmacological and mechanical circulatory support with dedicated RV assist devices as a "bridge to recovery."

Comprehensive radiation shield minimizes operator radiation exposure in coronary and structural heart procedures.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the efficacy of a novel comprehensive shield designed to minimize radiation exposure (RE) to Physicians performing coronary and structural heart procedures. BACKGROUND: The Protego™ radiation shielding system (Image Diagnostics Inc., Fitchburg, Ma) is designed to provide comprehensive protection from RE and has been State certified sufficient to allow operators to perform procedures without orthopedically burdensome lead aprons. METHODS: This single center two-group cohort study assessed the efficacy of this shield in a large number of cardiac procedures (coronary and structural), comparing operator RE compared to standard protection methods (personal lead apparel and "drop down" shield). RESULTS: The Protego™ system reduced operator RE by 99 % compared to Standard Protection. RE was significantly lower at both "Head" level by thyroid median dose 0.0 (0.0, 0,0) vs 5.7 (2.9, 8.2) µSv (p < 0.001), as well as waist dose 0.0 (0.0, 0.0) vs 10.0 (5.0, 16.6) µSv (p < 0.001). "Zero" Total RE was documented by Raysafe™ in 64 % (n = 32) of TAVR cases and 73.2 % (n = 183) of the coronary cases utilizing Protego™. In contrast, standard protection did not achieve "Zero" exposure in a single case. These dramatic differences in RE were achieved despite higher fluoroscopy times in the Protego™ arm (11.9 ± 8.6 vs 14.3 ± 12.5 min, p = 0.015). Per case procedural exposure measured by Dose Area Product was higher in the Protego™ group compared to standard protection (115.4 ± 139.2 vs 74.9 ± 69.3, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The Protego™ shield provides total body RE protection for operators performing both coronary and structural heart procedures. This shield allows procedural performance without the need for personal lead aprons and has potential to reduce catheterization laboratory occupational health hazards.

Comprehensive Radiation Shield Minimizes Operator Radiation Exposure and Obviates Need for Lead Aprons.

Background: The catheterization laboratory predisposes to occupational health hazards. Chronic radiation exposure (RE) direct injuries include a predilection to cataracts and concerns for cancers. Indirectly adverse effects underly the prevalence of orthopedic maladies in interventionists, linked to the burden of mandatory protective lead aprons. A novel comprehensive shielding system (Protego, Image Diagnostics Inc) has been validated in early studies to provide excellent radiation protection. The system is designed to reduce operator RE sufficient to eliminate the need for personal lead aprons. Recent system refinements offer potentially even greater degrees of protection. This clinical study evaluated the efficacy of this system. Methods: This single-center 2-group cohort study compared physician operator RE utilizing the latest iteration of the Protego shield (n = 25 cases) or standard protection (personal leaded apparel and drop-down shield, n = 25 cases) during routine cardiac catheterization procedures. RE at both thyroid and waist levels were measured with a real-time dosimetry system (Raysafe) and calculated on a mean per case basis at both thyroid and waist levels. Additional parameters collected included procedure type, access site, per case fluoroscopy time, and patient factors including body mass index. Between-group comparisons were conducted to evaluate RE by group and measurement sites. Results: Protection with Protego was superior to standard methods. Protego showed markedly lower RE at both the thyroid level (0.36 ± 0.86 vs 58.5 ± 50.2 µSv; P < .001) and the waist level (0.84 ± 2.99 vs 121.4 ± 171.2 µSv; P < .001. "Zero" total RE was documented in 68% (n = 17) of Protego cases; in contrast, standard protection did not achieve "zero" exposure in a single case. Conclusions: The Protego shield system provides excellent RE protection to the physician operator, achieving "zero" RE in two-thirds of cases. RE was superior to standard protection methods. The magnitude of protection achieves state regulatory standards sufficient to allow operators to perform procedures without orthopedically burdensome lead aprons. This shield system has the potential to reduce occupational health hazards.

Valve-in-Mitral Annular Calcification Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement After Thrombosis of Extracardiac Valved Conduit.

We report a patient with severe mitral annular calcification, mitral stenosis/regurgitation, hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy, and subaortic membrane treated with valved left atrium-left ventricle conduit, septal myectomy, and membrane resection. Subsequent thrombosis of the conduit prompted successful valve-in- mitral annular calcification transcatheter mitral valve replacement and laceration of the anterior mitral leaflet to prevent outflow obstruction. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

Hemodynamic compromise in pulmonary embolism: "A tale of two ventricles".

In acute pulmonary embolism (PE), low cardiac output (CO)-hypotension results from disparate ventricular conditions: The left ventricle (LV) is under-filled and contracting vigorously, whereas the right ventricle (RV) is failing and dilated. The proximate cause of LV preload deprivation is thrombus-induced pulmonary vascular obstruction; abruptly increased pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) induces acute RV systolic dysfunction which further compromises trans-pulmonary flow. "Escalation of Care" interventions (thrombolytics and aspiration thrombectomy) improve systemic hemodynamics by increasing LV preload delivery directly by reducing PVR and indirectly by relief of the strained failing RV.

Disparate impact of severe aortic and mitral regurgitation on left ventricular dilation.

In asymptomatic severe aortic (AR) and mitral regurgitation (MR), left ventricular (LV) dimension criteria were established to guide timing of valve replacement to prevent irreversible LV dysfunction. Given both lesions are primary LV volume overload ''leaks'', it might be expected that both lesions would induce similar impact on the LV and result in equivalent dimension criteria for intervention. However, the dimension-based intervention criteria for AR versus MR (developed through natural history studies), differ markedly. The pathophysiological foundations for such discordance have neither been fully elucidated nor emphasized. This case-based treatise compares the two regurgitant lesions with respect to: (a) ''total regurgitant circuits''; (b) ''driving pressures'' resulting in LV volume overload from each respective ''leak''; and (c) volume and afterload wall stresses imposed on the LV.Key points The ''total circuits'' of volume overload differ: The AR circuit includes the LV and systemic vasculature, whereas MR includes the LV ejecting into the left atrium/pulmonary veins and systemic circulation. The ''driving pressure'' of regurgitation and afterload are high with AR and low with MR. Differing ''total circuits'' and ''driving pressures'' impose disparate wall stresses upon the LV. Parallel and serial sarcomere replication occurs in AR, while only serial replication occurs in MR. It therefore follows that for regurgitation of similar severities, AR results in greater LV dilation at the point of irreversible myocardial dysfunction compared to MR. These considerations may explain, at least in part, the disparate dimension criteria employed for valve intervention for severe AR vs MR.

Impella RP for treatment of right ventricular shock: Appropriate unloading never gets old.

Rapid restoration of hemodynamics is key to successful shock management. The failing right ventricular (RV) is resilient and recovers if hemodynamics are supported while the underlying insulting cause is alleviated. Inotropic/vasopressor drugs constitute a "double-edged sword" that augment hemodynamics, but exacerbate myocardial and multiorgan injury. Impella RP mechanical support for RV shock stabilizes hemodynamics and is associated with favorable clinical outcomes.