Mesenteric Artery Dissection and Wall-Thickening, Case Study and General Review.

Mesenteric artery dissection (D) and wall-thickening (WT) are rare vasculopathies that can lead to serious complications. This is a single center analysis of all patients evaluated for mesenteric arterial (celiac, superior (SMA) and/or inferior mesenteric (IMA)) D and/or WT from January 1, 2000, to January 31, 2020 at our hospital. Among the 101 included patients, the average age was 55.6 ± 13.6 years, mostly affecting men (62%). There were 20 celiac artery D, 8 WT, 15 D with WT, 15 SMA D, 7 WT, 8 D with WT, one IMA D, two WT, and 25 with multiple arterial involvement. Primary etiologies included segmental arterial mediolysis (SAM) (n = 17), isolated D (n = 17), localized vasculitis of the gastrointestinal tract (LVGT) (n = 16), fibromuscular dysplasia (FMD) (n = 13), extension of thoracoabdominal aortic D (n = 12), and trauma (n = 12). Most (71%) patients presented with abdominal pain. Hypertension (55%), hyperlipidemia (33%) and tobacco use (31%) were prevalent. Management included conservative (22%), medical (47%), endovascular (19%), and/or open repair (12%) with high in-hospital survival (98%) and symptom relief (73%). Our paper complements the scarce literature addressing the diagnosis and management of rare mesenteric vasculopathies. Most patients improved with conservative management, reserving endovascular or surgical interventions for symptomatic patients with more complicated presentations.

Revascularization and long-term outcomes in high-acuity spontaneous coronary artery dissection.

BACKGROUND: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is often treated conservatively due to revascularization risks. Yet, an important number of SCAD patients have high acuity characteristics necessitating revascularization, with uncertain long-term outcomes. OBJECTIVES: Document revascularization utilization and long-term outcomes in high acuity SCAD. METHODS: Prospective/retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) due to first SCAD event presenting directly to the Minneapolis Heart Institute 2002-2021, median follow-up 3.8 years. RESULTS: Among 139 patients (age 49 ± 12 years, 96% female), revascularization was performed in 60 (43%), utilizing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n = 56, successful in 80%) or coronary artery bypass graft (n = 4). In the entire cohort, 90 (65%) unique patients had one or more high acuity characteristic: ST-elevation (38%), proximal dissection (38%), cardiogenic shock (6.5%), cardiac arrest (9.4%), left main dissection (6.5%), peripartum dissection (7.2%). High acuity patients accounted for 51 of 60 (85%) revascularizations. Revascularization rates were: ST-elevation (60%), proximal dissection (62%), cardiogenic shock (89%), cardiac arrest (62%), left main dissection (100%), peripartum dissection (70%). Survival was 97% (revascularized) vs 100% (nonrevascularized); p = 0.2. Adverse outcomes (revascularized vs. nonrevascularized) included recurrent AMI:16.7% versus 8.9%; p = 0.2, SCAD recurrence: 13.3% versus 6.3%; p = 0.1, stroke: 5% versus 2.5%; p = 0.44, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator: 6.7% versus 6.3%; p > 0.9. Reintervention was necessary in 21% of PCI-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: High-acuity characteristics were present in nearly two-thirds of this SCAD cohort; the vast majority of revascularizations were performed in high-acuity patients. Despite high acuity, long-term survival was favorable in revascularized patients.

Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection and Evidence-Based Medicine.

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a relatively newly diagnosed area, and evidence-based medicine (EBM) standards are emerging and currently include an aspirin, ß blocker, clopidogrel, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor blocker for patients with hypertension, vascular abnormality imaging, and cardiac rehabilitation. Because SCAD is an uncommon condition, many providers are unfamiliar with EBM treatment standards which could affect the implementation of recommended treatment. This study documented the frequency of failure to meet EBM SCAD treatment standards and factors contributing to conformance failure. Patients who presented to a tertiary referral hospital from January 1, 2005, to July 6, 2020, were included. The electronic medical record was reviewed for EBM treatment. Patients who did not meet the criteria of EBM were contacted by phone for a phone interview. The study period included 118 patients with SCAD, 3 of whom (2.5%) died and were not eligible for this study. In the final cohort of 115 patients, the average age was 55 years, female gender (97%) and EBM standards were met in 30%. Of patients who participated in the phone interview, 38 (33%) reported frustration with SCAD misdiagnosis (39%), inadequate mental health resources (37%), and communication failure regarding the need for cardiologist follow-up (26%). Cardiac rehabilitation use was impacted by location, time of day, availability, and cost. The most common medication-limiting factor for ß-blocker usage was fatigue (15%). Most (59%) patients did not undergo fibromuscular dysplasia imaging. In conclusion, in this 15-year SCAD study from a single tertiary care hospital SCAD registry, only 30% met the current EBM for SCAD. Unique solutions that are both patient-informed and evidence-driven are needed to achieve the best clinical outcomes.

Adoptability and accuracy of point-of-care ultrasound in screening for valvular heart disease in the primary care setting.

PURPOSE: Despite continued efforts, a majority of patients with valvular heart disease (VHD) remain undiagnosed and untreated. This study aimed to assess the adoptability and accuracy of point-of-care handheld echocardiographic assessments (POCE) in the primary care setting. METHODS: Eleven previously untrained primary care providers were trained to use the Vscan Extend (GE, WI) POCE to assess VHD, left ventricular function (LVEF), and major extra-cardiac findings. Their assessments were compared to those of three blinded expert readers. A total of 175 patients underwent POCE assessments which were evaluated using Kappa statistics (κ) together with their estimated standard error, p value, and 95% CI bounds. RESULTS: Each patient had a mean of 3.3 ± 1.1 (±SD) assessments performed. Identical or nearly identical agreement between previously untrained primary providers and expert readers was evident for the diagnosis of tricuspid regurgitation, mitral regurgitation, pericardial effusion, and volume status. These agreements were strongest in apical long axis (κ = 1, p < 0.001) and parasternal long and short axis views (κ > =0.82 p < 0.001), though agreement remained robust in apical 4-chamber views (κ ≥ 0.76). The agreements in LVEF assessment were identical in the apical long axis view (κ = 1, p < 0.001) and robust in the remaining 3 views (κ > =0.66, p < 0.001). The assessments of aortic stenosis (parasternal/long, κ = 0.42, and parasternal/short, κ = 0.47, both p < 0.001) were weak in their agreement. CONCLUSION: Compared to expert echocardiography readers, the untrained providers' use of POCE for VHD shows high user adoptability and diagnostic accuracies in the primary care setting.