Angiographic characteristics of patients with STEMI and COVID-19: Insights from NACMI registry.

BACKGROUND: To date, there has been no independent core lab angiographic analysis of patients with COVID-19 and STEMI. The study characterized the angiographic parameters of patients with COVID-19 and STEMI. METHODS: Angiograms of patients with COVID-19 and STEMI from the North American COVID-19 Myocardial Infarction (NACMI) Registry were sent to a Core Laboratory in Vancouver, Canada. Culprit lesion(s), Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow, Thrombus Grade Burden (TGB), and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcome were assessed. RESULTS: From 234 patients, 74% had one culprit lesion, 14% had multiple culprits and 12% had no culprit identified. Multivessel thrombotic disease and multivessel CAD were found in 27% and 53% of patients, respectively. Stent thrombosis accounted for 12% of the presentations and occurred in 55% of patients with previous coronary stents. Of the 182 who underwent PCI, 60 (33%) had unsuccessful PCI due to post-PCI TIMI flow <3 (43/60), residual high thrombus burden (41/60) and/or thrombus related complications (27/60). In-hospital mortality for successful, partially successful, and unsuccessful PCI was 14%, 13%, and 27%, respectively. Unsuccessful PCI was associated with increased risk of in-hospital mortality (risk ratio [RR] 1.96; 95% CI: 1.05-3.66, P = .03); in the adjusted model this estimate was attenuated (RR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.65-2.34, P = .51). CONCLUSION: In patients with COVID-19 and STEMI, thrombus burden was pervasive with notable rates of multivessel thrombotic disease and stent thrombosis. Post-PCI, persistent thrombus and sub-optimal TIMI 3 flow rates led to one-third of the PCI's being unsuccessful, which decreased over time but remained an important predictor of in-hospital mortality.

Peripheral arterial disease and hypertension.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Hypertension (HTN) is a well known risk factor for atherosclerosis and peripheral arterial disease (PAD). PAD affects more than 250 million people globally and is associated with worse clinical outcomes. Although multiple studies have been performed to evaluate treatment of HTN in patients with PAD, blood pressure management in this high-risk cohort remains poor. RECENT FINDINGS: There has been conflicting evidence regarding blood pressure goals in PAD with some recent studies showing adverse outcomes with low blood pressure in this patient population. Current guidelines, however, continue to recommend treatment goals in PAD patients similar to patients without PAD. To date, no single antihypertensive drug class has shown a clear benefit in PAD population over other antihypertensive drug classes. SUMMARY: Prospective randomized trials enrolling PAD patients are required that can shed light on optimum blood pressure target and also distinguish between different antihypertensive drugs in terms of reducing adverse outcomes.

Cerebral protection during percutaneous intervention for left ventricular assist device outflow graft obstruction.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) outflow graft obstruction is an uncommon complication but carries significant morbidity and mortality. Here we provide a case series of patients with LVAD intrinsic outflow graft obstruction who are deemed to be a high surgical risk for pump exchange and, therefore, underwent percutaneous intervention with the concomitant use of neuroprotective device-Sentinel cerebral protection system (CPS) (Boston Scientific) to prevent embolic stroke. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent LVAD placement in our institution and developed LVAD outflow graft obstruction. The diagnosis of LVAD outflow graft obstruction was confirmed by utilizing various cardiac imaging modalities such as echocardiography and/or computed tomography angiography. All patients were treated with percutaneous intervention and a catheter-based CPS. RESULTS: From a total of 501 LVAD implants in our institute, 6 (1.2%) patients with LVAD outflow graft obstruction who underwent percutaneous treatment were included; 4 patients with HeartMate-III LVAD, 1 patient with HeartMate-II LVAD, and 1 patient with HeartWare (HVAD). The median age of patients was 56.5 years at the time of LVAD implantation. The median time from the LVAD implantation to the episode of LVAD outflow obstruction was 1343 days. Utilization of Sentinel CPS resulted in the capture and removal of thrombus/debris in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous intervention of LVAD outflow graft obstruction is less invasive than surgical pump exchange and an acceptable alternative in properly selected patients. In our experience, utilization of a catheter-based CPS can help in reducing the incidence of periprocedural embolic events.

SCAI publications committee manual of standard operating procedures.

Evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice are intended to help health care providers and patients make decisions, minimize inappropriate practice variation, promote effective resource use, improve clinical outcomes, and direct future research. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) has been engaged in the creation and dissemination of clinical guidance documents since the 1990s. These documents are a cornerstone of the society's education, advocacy, and quality improvement initiatives. The publications committee is charged with oversight of SCAI's clinical documents program and has created this manual of standard operating procedures to ensure consistency, methodological rigor, and transparency in the development and endorsement of the society's documents. The manual is intended for use by the publications committee, document writing groups, external collaborators, SCAI representatives, peer reviewers, and anyone seeking information about the SCAI documents program.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Treatment of Unprotected Left Main Stenosis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This article reviews the latest data on unprotected left main (ULM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, with a focus on the NOBLE and EXCEL trials. RECENT FINDINGS: In EXCEL trial, the primary endpoint at 3 years was 15.4% in the PCI group and 14.7% in the CABG group (p = 0.02 for non-inferiority of PCI versus CABG). In NOBLE, the primary endpoint at 5 years was 28% and 18% for PCI and CABG, respectively (HR 1.51, CI 1.13-2.0, which did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority of PCI to CABG; p for superiority of CABG was 0.0044). Higher repeat revascularization and non-procedural myocardial infarction were noted in PCI group but there was no difference in all-cause or cardiac mortality between the two groups. A heart team approach with appropriate patient selection, careful assessment of LM lesions, and meticulous procedural technique makes PCI a valid alternative to CABG for ULM stenosis.

Late breaking trials of 2015 in structural heart disease and peripheral artery disease: Commentary covering ACC, EuroPCR, SCAI, TCT, VIVA, ESC, and AHA.

With the large number of late breaking clinical trials presented at major meetings, it is often difficult to stay current with advances in interventional cardiology. Therefore, the SCAI Publications Committee summarizes and provides editorial commentary on the most important structural heart and peripheral artery disease late-breaking trials from 2015. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

SCAI/SVM expert consensus statement on carotid stenting: Training and credentialing for carotid stenting.

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) has become an integral part of the therapeutic armamentarium offered by cardiovascular medicine programs for the prevention of stroke. The purpose of this expert consensus statement is to provide physician training and credentialing guidance to facilitate the safe and effective incorporation of CAS into clinical practice within these programs. Since publication of the 2005 Clinical Competence Statement on Carotid Stenting, there has been substantial device innovation, publication of numerous clinical trials and observational studies, accumulation of extensive real-world clinical experience and widespread participation in robust national quality improvement initiatives [5]. Collectively, these advances have led to substantial evolution in the selection of appropriate patients, as well as in the cognitive, technical and clinical skills required to perform safe and effective CAS. Herein, we summarize published guidelines, describe training pathways, outline elements of competency, offer strategies for tracking outcomes, specify facility, equipment and personnel requirements, and propose criteria for maintenance of CAS competency.

Commentary on highlighted late breaking trials in interventional cardiology at ESC, VIVA, TCT, and AHA 2013.

With the plethora of clinical trials, it is difficult for busy interventional cardiologists to stay up to date. Therefore, the SCAI publications committee concisely summarizes and provides editorial commentary on the most important trials from recent, large international meetings. The intent is to provide this summary every six months to allow quick assimilation of trial results into interventional practice. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Commentary on late breaking trials in interventional cardiology at ESC, VIVA, TCT, AHA (Fall 2012), and ACC 2013.

With the plethora of clinical trials, it is difficult for busy interventional cardiologists to stay up to date. Therefore, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) publications committee concisely summarized and provided editorial commentary on the most important trials from recent, large international meetings. The intent is to provide this summary every six months to allow quick assimilation of trial results into interventional practice.

Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention: a consensus statement from the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions.

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) may be performed during the same session as diagnostic catheterization (ad hoc PCI) or at a later session (delayed PCI). Randomized trials comparing these strategies have not been performed; cohort studies have not identified consistent differences in safety or efficacy between the two strategies. Ad hoc PCI has increased in prevalence over the past decade and is the default strategy for treating acute coronary syndromes. However, questions about its appropriateness for some patients with stable symptoms have been raised by the results of recent large trials comparing PCI to medical therapy or bypass surgery. Ad hoc PCI for stable ischemic heart disease requires preprocedural planning, and reassessment after diagnostic angiography must be performed to ensure its appropriateness. Patients may prefer ad hoc PCI because it is convenient. Payers may prefer ad hoc PCI because it is cost-efficient. The majority of data confirm equivalent outcomes in ad hoc versus delayed PCI. However, there are some situations in which delayed PCI may be safer or yield better outcomes. This document reviews patient subsets and clinical situations in which one strategy is preferable over the other.

Carotid artery stenting: patient, lesion, and procedural characteristics that increase procedural complications.

From the earliest experiences with carotid artery stenting (CAS) presumptive high risk features have included thrombus-containing lesions, heavily calcified lesions, very tortuous vessels, and near occlusions. In addition patients have been routinely excluded from CAS trials if they have contra-indications to dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and thienopyridines), a history of bleeding complications and severe peripheral arterial disease (PAD) making femoral artery vascular access difficult. Variables that increase the risk of CAS complications can be attributed to patient characteristics, anatomic or lesion features, and procedural factors. Clinical features such as older age (≥80 years), decreased cerebral reserve (dementia, multiple prior strokes, or intracranial microangiopathy) and angiographic characteristics such as excessive tortuosity (more than two 90° bends within 5 cm of the target lesion) and heavy calcification (concentric calcification ≥ 3 mm in width) have been associated with increased CAS complications. Other high risk CAS features include those that prolong catheter or guide wire manipulation in the aortic arch, make crossing a carotid stenosis more difficult, decrease the likelihood of successful deployment or retrieval of an embolic protection device (EPD), or make stent delivery or placement more difficult. Procedure volume for the operator and the catheterization laboratory team are critical elements in reducing the risk of the procedure. In this article, we help CAS operators better understand procedure risk to allow more intelligent case selection, further improving the outcomes of this emerging procedure.

Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With COVID-19 Presenting With Myocardial Infarction.

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) complicating COVID-19 is associated with an increased risk of cardiogenic shock and mortality. However, little is known about the frequency of use and clinical impact of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in these patients. We sought to define patterns of MCS utilization, patient characteristics, and outcomes in patients with COVID-19 with STEMI. The NACMI (North American COVID-19 Myocardial Infarction) is an ongoing prospective, observational registry of patients with COVID-19 positive (COVID-19+) with STEMI with a contemporary control group of persons under investigation who subsequently tested negative for COVID-19 (COVID-19-). We compared the baseline characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19+ and patients with COVID-19- according to the use of MCS. The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital mortality, stroke, recurrent MI, and repeat unplanned revascularization. A total of 1,379 patients (586 COVID-19+ and 793 COVID-19-) enrolled in the NACMI registry between January 2020 and November 2021 were included in this analysis; overall, MCS use was 12.3% (12.1% [n = 71] COVID-19+/MCS positive [MCS+] vs 12.4% [n = 98] COVID-19-/MCS+). Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The use of percutaneous coronary intervention was similar between the groups (84% vs 78%; p = 0.404). Intra-aortic balloon pump was the most frequently used MCS device in both groups (53% in COVID-19+/MCS+ and 75% in COVID-19-/MCS+). The primary outcome was significantly higher in COVID-19+/MCS+ patients (60% vs 30%; p = 0.001) because of very high in-hospital mortality (59% vs 28%; p = 0.001). In conclusion, patients with COVID-19+ with STEMI requiring MCS have very high in-hospital mortality, likely related to the significantly higher pulmonary involvement compared with patients with COVID-19- with STEMI requiring MCS.

Educational Experience of Interventional Cardiology Fellows in the United States and Canada.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and iodinated contrast shortage may have affected interventional cardiology (IC) fellowship training. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the educational experience of first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. METHODS: A 59-question online survey was conducted among 2021-2022 first-year IC fellows in the United States and Canada. RESULTS: Of the 360 IC fellows invited to participate, 111 (31%) responded; 95% were from the United States, and 79% were men. Participants were mostly from university programs (70%), spent 61 to 70 hours/week in the hospital, and had an annual percutaneous coronary intervention case number of <200 (5%), 200 to 249 (8%), 250 to 349 (33%), 350 to 499 (39%), 500 to 699 (12%), or ≥700 (3%). For femoral access, a micropuncture needle was used regularly by 89% and ultrasound-guided puncture by 81%, and 43% used vascular closure devices in most cases (>80%). Intravascular ultrasound was performed and interpreted very comfortably by 62% and optical coherence tomography (OCT) by 32%, and 20% did not have access to OCT. Approximately one-third felt very comfortable performing various atherectomy techniques. Covered stents, fat embolization, and coil embolization were used very comfortably by 14%, 4%, and 3%, respectively. Embolic protection devices were used very comfortably by 11% to 24% of IC fellows. Almost one-quarter of fellows (24%) were warned about their high radiation exposure. Eighty-four percent considered IC fellowship somewhat or very stressful, and 16% reported inadequate psychological support. CONCLUSIONS: This survey highlights opportunities for improvement with regard to the use of intravascular imaging, atherectomy techniques, complication prevention and management strategies, radiation awareness and mitigation, and psychological support.

Renal intervention to treat hypertension.

Renal artery intervention to treat hypertension is one of the frontiers of ongoing research in combating this epidemic. This article focuses on recent data regarding PTRS and catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation. Despite progress in this field large multicenter, randomized trials that compare these treatment modalities with medical therapy for hypertension are lacking.

Endovascular Management of Chronic Mesenteric Ischemia in a Patient With Left Ventricular Assist Device.

Classical symptoms of chronic mesenteric ischemia include postprandial pain referred to as "intestinal angina", food fear and weight loss. Here we present a case of chronic mesenteric ischemia treated by endovascular stenting in a patient with chronic heart failure and left ventricular assist device.

Feasibility and Safety of Coronary Angiography via Radial Approach in Cardiac Transplant Recipients: A Single Center Experience.

Coronary angiography remains the gold standard post-transplant screening test for cardiac allograft vasculopathy. This procedure has traditionally been performed via femoral approach. Data on safety and efficacy of radial approach in cardiac transplant patients remains scarce. Single center retrospective study including all cardiac transplant patients who underwent coronary angiography via transradial approach (TRA) or transfemoral approach (TFA). Safety and efficacy outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Primary end points included major bleeding, vascular complications, crossover to femoral approach, contrast use and radiation exposure. A total of 201 patients were included. 96 patients (47.8%) underwent angiography via TRA. At baseline, no significant differences with regards to age, gender, or traditional risk factors such as HTN, DM, hyperlipidemia were noted between the 2 groups. Most patients underwent intravascular ultrasound (n = 179, 89%) with no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups (TRA: 90.6% vs TFA: 87.6%, P = 0.5). Additionally, there were no statistically significant differences in radiation exposure, amount of contrast use and fluoroscopy time between the 2 groups. Although there were trends toward increased bleeding among TFA group, these were not statistically significant and were mostly driven by access site hematomas. Use of TRA increased over time and Conversion from TRA to TFA was low (n = 4, 4.2%). Coronary angiography via the radial approach in cardiac transplant recipients is feasible, safe and is associated with low a risk of bleeding with no significant increase in radiation exposure when compared to the traditional femoral approach.