Acute Coronary Syndrome Presenting during On- and Off-Hours: Is There a Difference in a Tertiary Cardiovascular Center?

Background and Objectives: ACS presents an acute manifestation of coronary artery disease and its treatment is based on timely interventional diagnostics and PCI. It has been known that the treatment and the outcomes are not the same for all the patients with ACS during the working day, depending on the availability of the procedures and staff. The aim of the study was to explore the differences in clinical characteristics and outcomes in patients admitted for ACS during on- and off-hours. Materials and Methods: The retrospective study included 1873 consecutive ACS patients admitted to a tertiary, university hospital that underwent coronary angiography and intervention. On-hours were defined from Monday to Friday from 07:30 h to 14:30 h, while the rest was considered off-hours. Results: There were more males in the off-hours group (on-hours 475 (56%) vs. off-hours 635 (62%); p = 0.011), while previous MI was more frequent in the on-hours group (on 250 (30%) vs. off 148 (14%); p < 0.001). NSTEMI was more frequent during on-hours (on 164 (19%) vs. off 55 (5%); p < 0.001), while STEMI was more frequent during off-hours (on 585 (69%) vs. off 952 (93%); p < 0.001). Patients admitted during on-hours had more multivessel disease (MVD) (on 485 (57%) vs. off 489 (48%); p = 0.006), as well as multivessel PCI (on 187 (22%) vs. off 171 (16%); p = 0.002), while radial access was preferred in off-hours patients (on 692 (82%) vs. off 883 (86%); p = 0.004). Left main PCI was performed with similar frequency in both groups (on 37 (4%) vs. off 35 (3%); p = 0.203). Death occurred with similar frequency in both groups (on 17 (2.0%) vs. off 26 (2.54%); p = 0.404), while major adverse cardio-cerebral events (MACCEs) were more frequent in the on-hours group (on 105 (12.4%) vs. off 70 (6.8%); p = 0.039) probably due to the more frequent repeated PCI (on 49 (5.8%) vs. off 27 (2.6%); p = 0.035). Conclusions: Patients admitted for ACS during working hours in a tertiary hospital present with more complex CAD, have more demanding interventions, and experience more MACCEs during follow-up mostly due to myocardial infarctions and repeated procedures.

Drugs for spontaneous coronary dissection: a few untrusted options.

Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is a rare cause of acute coronary syndrome that is often overlooked, misdiagnosed, and maltreated. Medical treatment poses a significant challenge because of the lack of randomized studies to guide treatment. The initial clinical presentation should guide medical and interventional management. Fibrinolytic agents and anticoagulants should be avoided because they could favor hematoma propagation. In patients with SCAD, antiplatelet therapy should be prescribed especially dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel, whereas potent P2Y12 inhibitors, e.g., ticagrelor and prasugrel, should be avoided. If a stent was used, DAPT should be continued for 12 months. Aspirin only can be an option for patients without "high-risk" angiographic features-thrombus burden, critical stenosis, and decreased coronary flow. Beta-blocking (BB) agents should be used to prevent recurrence of SCAD. There is a general agreement that angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid antagonists, and loop diuretics should be used in patients with SCAD experiencing the symptoms of heart failure and a decrease in left ventricular ejection fraction below 50%. Although without firm evidence, statins can be used in SCAD due to their pleiotropic properties. The results of a randomized trial on the use of BB and statins are awaited. Aggregation of data from national registries might point out truly beneficial medications for patients with SCAD.

Multislice computerized tomography coronary angiography can be a comparable tool to intravascular ultrasound in evaluating "true" coronary artery bifurcations.

Aim: Coronary bifurcation atherosclerosis depends on its angles, flow, and extensive branching. We investigate the ability of CT coronary angiography (CTCA) to determine atherosclerotic plaque characteristics of "true" bifurcation compared with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and the influence on side branch (SB) fate after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results: The study included 70 patients with 72 "true" bifurcations. Most of the bifurcations were in the left anterior descending-diagonal (Dg) territory [50 out of 72 (69.4%)]. Longitudinal plaque evaluation at the polygon of confluence [carina and 5 mm proximal and distal in the main branch (MB)] showed that carina side MB and SB plaque had occurred with the lowest incidence with fibro-lipid structure (115 ± 63 HU and 89 ± 73 HU, p < 0.001 for all). Bland-Altman analysis showed a discrepancy in measuring mainly the lumen area between CTCA and IVUS in proximal MB [lumen 5.10, 95% CI (95% confidence interval, 4.53-5.68) mm2, p < 0.001; vessel -1.42, 95% CI (-2.63 to -0.21) mm2, p = 0.023], carina MB [lumen 3.74, 95% CI (3.37-4.10) mm2, p < 0.001; vessel -0.48, 95% CI (-1.45 to 0.48) mm2, p = 0.322], and distal MB [lumen 4.72, 95% CI (4.27-5.18) mm2, p < 0.001; vessel 0.62, 95% CI (-0.53 to 1.77) mm2, p = 0.283]. A significant correlation existed between average plaque density on CTCA with a percentage of calcified plaque on IVUS tissue characterization (proximal r = 0.307/p = 0.024, carina 0.469/0.008, distal 0.339/0.024, minimal lumen diameter 0.318/0.020). Circumferential plaque in the proximal MB segment remained an independent predictor of SB compromise [OR 3.962 (95% CI 1.170-13.418)]. Conclusion: Detection and characterization of atherosclerotic plaque by CTCA in non-left main "true" coronary bifurcations can provide useful information about bifurcation anatomy and plaque distribution that can predict outcomes after provisional stenting, thus guiding the interventional strategy to bifurcation PCI.

Idiopathic premature ventricular complexes treatment: Comparison of flecainide, propafenone, and sotalol.

BACKGROUND: Beta-blockers (BB) or dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (CCBs) are still the first choices in the treatment of idiopathic premature ventricular complexes (PVCs), with low-modest efficacy. Antiarrhythmic drugs (AADs) of Ic class are moderate to highly efficient but the evidence on their benefits is still limited. AIM: To compare effectiveness and safety of flecainide, propafenone, and sotalol in the treatment of symptomatic idiopathic PVCs. METHODS: Our single-center retrospective study analyzed 104 consecutive patients with 130 medication episodes of frequent idiopathic PVCs treated with AADs flecainide, propafenone (Ic class) or sotalol (III class). The primary outcome was complete/near complete reduction of PVCs after medication episode (PVCs burden reduction >99%), and the secondary outcome was significant PVC burden reduction (≥80%). RESULTS: The complete/near complete PVCs burden reduction occurred in 31% and was significant in 43% of treated patients. A reduction of PVC burden for >99% was achieved in 56% of patients on flecainide, in 11% of patients on propafenone (p = .002), and in 21% of patients receiving sotalol (p = .031). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .174). A reduction of PVC burden for ≥80% was achieved in 64% of patients on flecainide, in 30% of patients on propafenone (p = .009), and 33% of patients on sotalol (p = .020). There was no difference between propafenone and sotalol (p = .661). CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of AADs class Ic and III in the treatment of idiopathic PVCs was modest. Flecainide was the most effective AAD in the achievement of complete/near complete or significant PVC burden reduction, compared to propafenone and sotalol.