Coronary hyperemic dose responses of intracoronary sodium nitroprusside.

BACKGROUND: Sodium nitroprusside is one of several agents considered effective for treating the no-reflow phenomenon during acute coronary interventions. However, the coronary hyperemic dose responses and systemic hemodynamic effects of intracoronary nitroprusside have yet to be determined in humans. The purpose of this study was to compare the hyperemic and hemodynamic responses of intracoronary nitroprusside to intracoronary adenosine in patients during cardiac catheterization with angiographically normal anterior descending arteries. METHODS AND RESULTS: In 21 patients, coronary blood flow velocity (0.014-inch Doppler flow wire), heart rate, and blood pressure were measured in unobstructed left anterior descending coronary arteries at rest, after intracoronary adenosine (30- to 50-microg boluses), and after 3 serial doses (0.3-, 0.6-, and 0.9-microg/kg boluses) of intracoronary nitroprusside. Coronary reserve was calculated as hyperemia/basal coronary flow velocity. In an additional 9 patients with intermediate stenoses (53+/-7%), 14 fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements (using 0.014-inch pressure wire) were performed with both intracoronary adenosine and nitroprusside (0.6 microg/kg). Intracoronary nitroprusside produced equivalent coronary hyperemia with a longer duration ( approximately 25%) compared with intracoronary adenosine. Intracoronary nitroprusside (0.9 microg/kg) decreased systolic blood pressure by <20%, with minimal change in heart rate, whereas intracoronary adenosine had no effect on these parameters. FFR measurements with intracoronary nitroprusside were identical to those obtained with intracoronary adenosine (r=0.97). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with adenosine, intracoronary nitroprusside produces an equivalent but more prolonged coronary hyperemic response in normal coronary arteries. Intracoronary nitroprusside, in doses commonly used for the treatment of the no-reflow phenomenon, can produce sustained coronary hyperemia without detrimental systemic hemodynamics. On the basis of FFR measurements compared with adenosine, sodium nitroprusside also appears to be a suitable hyperemic stimulus for coronary physiological measurements.

Benefits of cutting balloon before stenting.

UNLABELLED: The objectives of this study were to prospectively evaluate the safety and feasibility of pretreating the culprit coronary artery lesion with cutting balloon (CB) angioplasty prior to coronary stent implantation. BACKGROUND: The CB has shown promise for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions and in-stent restenoses, but has not been prospectively evaluated for use prior to stent implantation. METHODS: Patients with significant coronary artery disease requiring stent placement had the culprit lesion pretreated with a CB. Stents were deployed to cover the entire segment pretreated with the CB. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was used to interrogate acute luminal gain following stent implantation and after serial post-deployment inflation pressures ranging from 8 16 atmospheres (atm). Coronary angiograms were also obtained to determine luminal diameter. In-hospital complication rates were noted. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were treated with the CB prior to stent implantation. Minimal stent cross-sectional area increased significantly with increasing inflation pressures between 8 and 10 atm (p < 0.0004) and between 10 and 12 atm (p = 0.0049). The minimal stent cross-sectional area achieved, as measured by IVUS, was 7.59 mm2 2.00 mm2 at 8 atm, 8.06 mm2 1.53 mm2 at 10 atm and 8.72 mm2 1.58 mm2 at 12 atm. The final in-stent percent diameter stenosis was lower compared to pre-procedure (5.4% 12.2% versus 64.1% 14.1%, respectively) by quantitative coronary angiography. CONCLUSION: The CB can be used prior to stent implantation to attain significant gains in minimal stent cross-sectional areas at relatively low pressures.