Myocardial ischemia in the setting of extrinsic coronary compression: two case reports.

Background: Myocardial ischemia occurs in the setting of inadequate or complete cessation of blood supply to the myocardium. While atherosclerosis is the most common cause; other causes have been identified. Rare cases can be caused by extrinsic compression of the coronaries by a dilated pulmonary artery (PA) or by mechanical obstruction from nearby chest tubes or drains. We present two cases of myocardial ischemia-driven malignant arrhythmia leading to cardiac arrest caused by obstruction of the coronary blood flow from external compression. Case Description: In the first case, venous bypass graft compression from a chest tube postoperatively was noted and in the second case left main coronary artery (LMCA) compression from a dilated PA secondary to pulmonary artery hypertension (PAH) was seen. Diagnosis of these two cases was made via emergent coronary angiogram and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and treated by placing a drug eluting stent (DES) in LMCA compression and by adjusting the chest tube and placing a DES in the venous bypass graft with the restoration of flow. We also review the available literature regarding the incidence, diagnosis, and management of this rare entity. Conclusions: Overall, extrinsic compression of the coronaries is rare, therefore clinicians need to be aware of this infrequent process, to allow for appropriate diagnosis, management, and to prevent excess morbidity and mortality from this rare complication.

ECPELLA: Beyond a Left Ventricular Venting Strategy When to Unload the Left Ventricle and How to Decide.

Left ventricular (LV) unloading has been shown to improve survival for patients requiring veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA ECMO) support for cardiogenic shock. A mortality benefit has been shown for ECMO and concomitant placement of a transcatheter unloading LV pump such as an Impella device (colloquially referred to as ECPELLA or ECMELLA) for patients resuscitated with VA ECMO after a short period of cardiac arrest. Despite the described benefit of LV unloading with VA ECMO for cardiopulmonary resuscitation, it remains unclear as to what criteria should be used and what other diagnostic and therapeutic adjuncts may be useful. We describe here the successful utilization of concomitant VA ECMO and Impella in a 43 year old male with acute heart failure and cardiac arrest. Distinguishing itself from the currently reported methods, our methodology incorporates transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) in the emergency department for rapid decision-making in addition to an automatic chest compression device, the Lund University Cardiac Assist System (LUCAS) device (Stryker, Portage, MI) as a bridge to LV unloading in a hybrid operating suite.

Antithrombotic Management for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: There have been significant changes in the optimal antithrombotic regimen post transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) after the results of major clinical trials in the past few years. Given the clinical importance of the optimal antithrombotic therapy post TAVI, we performed a narrative description of the major clinical trials behind the scientific evidence supporting these changes, as well the current guideline recommendations and knowledge gaps. METHODS: We performed a narrative description of the major clinical trials behind the scientific evidence supporting these changes. We used PubMed as a major source to collect the major clinical trials including the following key words: "transcatheter aortic valve replacement", "transcatheter aortic valve implantation", "antithrombotic", "antiplatelet" and "anticoagulation". We selected the major clinical trials on this topic. This is not a systematic review or meta-analysis. RESULTS: We describe the results of the major clinical trials on antithrombotic therapy post TAVI: POPULAR-TAVI A, POPULAR-TAVI B, ENVISAGE-TAVI AF, GALILEO, ATLANTIS and ADAPT-TAVR trials. Based on the results of these trials, single antiplatelet therapy is recommended post TAVI in patients without concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy, especially in elderly patients. In younger patients, it is advised to evaluate the patient's bleeding and thrombotic risk, and dual antiplatelet therapy may be reasonable in patients with a high thrombotic risk and low bleeding risk. In patients with a concurrent indication for oral anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy, it is recommended to continue oral anticoagulation or dual antiplatelet therapy post TAVI. CONCLUSION: In most patients without concomitant indication for oral anticoagulation, single antiplatelet therapy is recommended post TAVI.

Emphysematous pancreatitis with pulmonary embolism: A case report.

Background: Emphysematous pancreatitis is a severe systemic inflammatory process with reports of pulmonary embolism in the setting of acute pancreatitis rarely described. Case presentation: A 61-year-old woman presented with severe abdominal pain of 1 day duration. She was found to have acute interstitial pancreatitis. During her hospitalization, the patient developed worsening abdominal pain associated with increasing oxygen demands, requiring supplemental oxygen through nasal cannula. Workup showed pulmonary embolism in the posterior segmental branch of the left lower lobar artery and development of emphysematous pancreatitis was noted on imaging. The patient was started on intravenous antibiotics and therapeutic anticoagulation; her condition improved and was discharged home. Conclusion: Patients with severe acute pancreatitis may be at risk for pulmonary embolism due to immobilization and other inflammatory mechanisms. Mitigating individualized risk factors and anticoagulation use as prophylaxis should be considered in patients with pancreatitis to prevent embolism. Early detection by clinicians is critical to reduce misdiagnosis and mortality rates.

A Rare Case of Persistent Bacteremia: Leadless Micra Pacemaker Endocarditis.

Leadless pacing systems have revolutionized the field of electrophysiology given its low complication rates and almost non-existent rate of infections compared with traditional pacemakers. These devices boast resistance to infections given its unique features; however, as described in this report, device-related infection from these leadless devices is still possible. In patients with leadless pacing system that is persistently bacteremic in the future, evaluation of the device with transesophageal echocardiogram or intracardiac echocardiography should be performed, and if vegetation is noted on the device, device extraction should highly be considered, along with empiric intravenous antibiotics. Lastly, new leadless device should not be re-implanted within 2 weeks of the removal of the infected device to prevent seeding of the new device.

Characteristics of clinical trials evaluating cardiovascular therapies for Coronavirus Disease 2019 Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: a cross sectional analysis.

Morbidity and mortality associated with COVID-19 has increased exponentially, and patients with cardiovascular (CV) disease are at risk for poor outcomes. Several lines of evidence suggest a potential role for CV therapies in COVID-19 treatment. Characteristics of clinical trials of CV therapies related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov have not been described. METHODS: ClinicalTrials.gov was queried on August 7, 2020 for COVID-19 related trials. Studies evaluating established CV drugs, other fibrinolytics (defibrotide), and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were included. Studies evaluating anti-microbial, convalescent plasma, non-colchicine anti-inflammatory, and other therapies were excluded. Trial characteristics were tabulated from study-specific entries. RESULTS: A total of 2,935 studies related to COVID-19 were registered as of August 7, 2020. Of these, 1,645 were interventional studies, and the final analytic cohort consisted of 114 studies evaluating 10 CV therapeutic categories. Antithrombotics (32.5%; n = 37) were most commonly evaluated, followed by pulmonary vasodilators (14.0%; n = 16), renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system-related therapies (12.3%; n = 14), and colchicine (8.8%; n = 10). Trials evaluating multiple CV therapy categories and CV therapies in combination with non-CV therapies encompassed 4.4% (n = 5) and 9.6% (n = 11) of studies, respectively. Most studies were designed for randomized allocation (87.7%; n = 100), enrollment of less than 1000 participants (86.8%; n = 99), single site implementation (55.3%; n = 63), and had a primary outcome of mortality or a composite including mortality (56.1%; n = 64). Most study populations consisted of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 (81.6%; n = 93). At the time of database query, 28.9% (n = 33) of studies were not yet recruiting and the majority were estimated to be completed after December 2020 (67.8%; n = 78). Most lead sponsors were located in North America (43.9%; n = 50) or Europe (36.0%; n = 41). CONCLUSIONS: A minority (7%) of clinical trials related to COVID-19 registered on ClinicalTrials.gov plan to evaluate CV therapies. Of CV therapy studies, most were planned to be single center, enroll less than 1000 inpatients, sponsored by European or North American academic institutions, and estimated to complete after December 2020. Collectively, these findings underscore the need for a network of sites with a platform protocol for rapid evaluation of multiple therapies and generalizability to inform clinical care and health policy for COVID-19 moving forward.

Comparison of Benefit of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Low Gradient Versus High Gradient Aortic Stenosis and Left Ventricular Dysfunction.

Patients with low gradient severe aortic stenosis (LG-AS) often exhibit significant limitations in functional status and quality of life. We aimed to evaluate the clinical effect of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) on LG-AS patients compared to those with high transvalvular gradients and similar left ventricular dysfunction. Retrospective analysis of records for all patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction <50% who underwent TAVI at our institution was performed. Patients were grouped according to their transvalvular gradient. Data were collected from The Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology Transcatheter Valve Therapy Registry. Clinical benefit endpoints included improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction and changes in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Additional outcomes analyzed included 1-year all-cause mortality, stroke rates, rates of rehospitalization, need for a permanent pacemaker, and hospital length of stay. Two hundred three patients met our inclusion criteria. one hundred one LG-AS patients (mean transvalvular gradient <40 mm Hg) were compared to 102 patients with high transvalvular gradients (mean transvalvular gradient >40 mm Hg). LG-AS patients yielded similar improvements in left ventricular ejection fraction (43.5% ± 63.7 vs 37.7% ± 58.7; p = 0.525) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores (423.51% ± 1257.02 vs 266.56% ± 822.81; p = 0.352). There were no differences between the groups with respect to 1-year mortality (16.8% vs 12.7%; p = 0.412), stroke rates, hospital length of stay, need for permanent pacemaker implantation or hospital readmissions. In conclusion, we found that TAVI is associated with comparable improvement in clinical and echocardiographic outcomes in LG-AS patients as compared to those with high gradient severe aortic stenosis.

Current perspectives on location of monitoring and length of stay following PPCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction.

IMPORTANCE: There is marked variability in location of care and hospital length of stay after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). OBSERVATIONS: We performed a literature review on non-critical care monitoring and early discharge following primary percutaneous coronary intervention and describe a framework for implementation in the real world. The medical literature was searched from 1 January 1988 to 31 April 2019 using PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized clinical trials, observational studies and guideline statements were included. Available data suggest that carefully selected low-risk STEMI patients identified using Zwolle or CADILLAC risk stratification scores after primary percutaneous coronary intervention may be considered for discharge after 48 hours of hospital care. There was no increase in major adverse cardiac events, medication non-compliance or hospital readmission with this treatment strategy. There are limited data on non-critical monitoring of uncomplicated STEMI patients; however, given the low adverse events rate, this strategy is likely to be safe in selected patients and may facilitate reduced length of stay and reduce resource utilization. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Available evidence supports the safety of early discharge after 48 hours of care and omission of critical care monitoring in carefully selected patients following primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Early risk stratification and structured discharge planning are imperative. Adoption of this treatment strategy could reduce hospital costs, resource utilization and enhance patient satisfaction without affecting outcomes.

Identifying patients for safe early hospital discharge following st elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVES: To examine whether the CADILLAC risk score is an effective method of patient stratification for early discharge following ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: Patients with STEMI are typically hospitalized to monitor for serious complications such as arrhythmias, heart failure, and reinfarction. Optimal length of stay is unclear. Whether low risk patients can be safely discharged before 72 hr of hospitalization is unclear. METHODS: Patients with STEMI who underwent successful PCI were retrospectively stratified using CADILLAC risk score to low risk (n = 123) and intermediate to high risk (n = 105). The primary outcome was adverse clinical events at day 3 or later. Secondary outcomes were adverse clinical events on day 1 and mortality rates at 30 days and 31 to 365 days. RESULTS: Low risk patients had lower major adverse clinical events at day 3 or later (0 vs. 11.4%, P = 0.0002) and lower total mortality at 1 year (0 vs. 4.8%, P = 0.02) than patients with intermediate to high risk. Low risk patients were also less likely to have a cardiovascular event during the first 24 hr when compared to those with an intermediate to high risk score (3.3% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Low risk patients identified using CADILLAC risk score with STEMI treated successfully with primary PCI have a low adverse event rate on the third day or later of hospitalization suggesting that an earlier discharge is safe in properly selected patients. Monitoring in a noncritical care setting following primary PCI for STEMI may be feasible for selected patients. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.