ABSTRACT
This case of acute plaque rupture within a myocardial bridging segment demonstrates the importance of performing hemodynamic assessment of intermediate-appearing coronary lesions, as well as utilizing intracoronary imaging to characterize coronary lesions and aid in selecting the appropriate treatment plan.
Subject(s)
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Plaque, Atherosclerotic , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction , Coronary Angiography , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Myocardium/pathology , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/complications , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/diagnosis , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/pathology , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/diagnosis , ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction/surgery , Stents , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Atherosclerosis is the primary cause of renal artery stenosis. Atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS) is associated with three clinical problems: renovascular hypertension, ischemic nephropathy and cardiac destabilization syndrome which pose huge healthcare implications. There is a significant rate of natural disease progression with worsening severity of renal artery stenosis when renal revascularization is not pursued in a timely manner. Selective sub-groups of individuals with ARAS have had good outcomes after percutaneous renal artery stenting (PTRAS). For example, individuals that underwent PTRAS and had improved renal function were reported to have a 45% survival advantage compared to those without improvement in their renal function. Advances in the imaging tools have allowed for better anatomic and physiologic measurements of ARAS. Measuring translesional hemodynamic gradients has allowed for accurate assessment of ARAS severity. Renal revascularization with PTRAS provides a survival advantage in individuals with significant hemodynamic renal artery stenosis lesions. It is important that we screen, diagnosis, intervene with invasive and medical treatments appropriately in these high-risk patients.
ABSTRACT
Patients with atrial fibrillation are at increased risk of having a cardioembolic stroke. The use of oral anticoagulation is now well established to prevent strokes in patients with atrial fibrillation and a CHA2DS2-VASc (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years [2 points], diabetes mellitus, prior stroke/transient ischemic attack or thromboembolism [2 points], vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) score of greater than 1, beyond sex. However, the role of antiplatelet therapy, specifically aspirin in low-risk patients or as an alternative to oral anticoagulation, remains controversial. The most recent US guidelines conflict with the European guidelines, which do not recommend antiplatelet monotherapy for stroke prevention irrespective of stroke risk. The aim of this review is to summarize published studies that question the role of aspirin in preventing strokes associated with atrial fibrillation. Overall, aspirin is found to play a limited role in the prevention of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation and is associated with a similar risk of hemorrhagic events compared with anticoagulants. The benefit of dual antiplatelet therapy as an alternative to oral anticoagulation requires further study.