Post-ablation Dyspnea a Case Report to Highlight the Differential Diagnoses.

The diagnosis of post-cardiac ablation pericarditis is difficult as it requires the exclusion of the more common causes of chest pain, but in the right setting, non-invasive diagnostic tools are adequate. Here we present the case of a 60-year-old man who underwent atrial fibrillation ablation and subsequently developed severe mid-sternal chest pain and dyspnea one day later without significant electrocardiographic findings, a mildly elevated troponin T, and elevation of the right hemidiaphragm. The patient was managed conservatively. A two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiogram showed no regional wall motion abnormalities, significant transvalvular gradients, but showed minimal pericardial effusion. A sniff test was negative for diaphragmatic paralysis. After the diagnosis, the patient's symptoms resolved with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and colchicine. This case of pericarditis after cardiac ablation highlights the possible differential diagnosis when confronted with post-ablation cardiac symptoms. Despite the classic presentation, the electrocardiogram showed no significant ST/PR changes. In the right clinical setting, non-invasive imaging may be appropriate management.

Heparin induced thrombocytopenia: case presentation and review.

UNLABELLED: Heparin Induced Thrombocytopenia (HIT) is an adverse effect of heparin therapy with possibly devastating consequences. We present a case of HIT Type II. An in-depth review of HIT is presented, examining the important clinical symptoms and diagnostic indicators. The treatment of HIT is then discussed, with an emphasis on current therapies. An extensive literature review has been performed to present a comprehensive review of the causes, pathophysiology and treatment of HIT. KEYWORDS: Heparin induced thrombocytopenia; Anticoagulation; PF4; HIT.

Mature Cardiac Teratoma in an Adult.

The incidental diagnosis in adult age is very unusual and the presence of clinical symptoms is related to its location, which is most commonly intrapericardial. The presence of intramyocardial teratoma lesions is even rarer and has been reported in few publications. The recommendations for the diagnosis and management of a cardiac teratoma depends upon the imaging studies and the pathological report after surgical excision. The prognosis of surgically treated patient is very good and a complete surgical excision is preferred in order to avoid complications.

Left bundle branch block in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a sign of advanced cardiovascular involvement.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate left bundle branch block (LBBB) as an indicator of advanced cardiovascular involvement in diabetic (DM) patients by examining left ventricular systolic function and proteinurea. METHODS: Data of 26 diabetic patients with left bundle branch block (DM with LBBB) were compared with data of 31 diabetic patients without left bundle branch block (DM without LBBB) and 18 nondiabetic patients with left bundle branch block (non-DM with LBBB). The inclusion criteria were age >45 years, and diabetes mellitus type 2 of >5 years. RESULTS: Mean ages of patients in DM with LBBB, DM without LBBB, and non-DM with LBBB groups were 67 +/- 8, 68 +/- 10, and 65 +/- 10 years, respectively (P = NS). Females were 65%, 61%, and 61%, respectively (P = NS). Left ventricular ejection fraction in DM with LBBB was significantly lower than in DM without LBBB and non-DM with LBBB (30 +/- 10% vs 49 +/- 12% and 47 +/- 8%, P < 0.01). Left ventricular end-diastolic volume was significantly higher in DM with LBBB than in DM without LBBB and non-DM with LBBB (188.6 +/- 16.4 mL vs 147.5 +/- 22.3 mL and 165.3 +/- 15.2 mL, P < 0.03). Similarly, left ventricular end-systolic volume was significantly higher in DM with LBBB than in DM without LBBB and non-DM with LBBB (135.4 +/- 14.7 mL vs 83.7 +/- 9.5 mL and 96.6 +/- 18.4 mL, P < 0.02). No statistically significant difference was seen in left atrial size. Proteinurea in DM with LBBB (79.4 +/- 18.9 mg/dL) was significantly higher than in DM without LBBB (35.6 +/- 8.5 mg/dL, P < 0.05) and non-DM with LBBB (12 +/- 3.5 mg/dL, P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference in Hb A1c levels in DM with LBBB and DM without LBBB (9.01% vs 7.81%, P = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Left bundle branch block in diabetic patients indicates advanced cardiovascular involvement manifesting with more severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction and proteinurea compared to both diabetic patients without left bundle branch block and nondiabetic patients with left bundle branch block.