ABSTRACT
Abstract We report the case of a 41-year-old female who presented with left upper limb embolization due to primary thoracic aortic mural thrombus; this latter represented an uncommon condition with difficult diagnosis and a high rate of life-threatening complications. Upper extremities embolization is extremely rare because it usually occurs in the lower limbs. Management strategy is still controversial, and no clear guidelines indicate superiority of either conservative or invasive treatment approach to date. Our report illustrates how endovascular exclusion of thoracic aortic mural thrombus has the advantage to be a low-risk procedure that represents a definitive therapy.
Subject(s)
Humans , Female , Adult , Aortic Diseases/surgery , Aortic Diseases/etiology , Aortic Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Thromboembolism , Thrombosis/surgery , Thrombosis/etiology , Thrombosis/diagnostic imaging , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Aorta, Thoracic/surgery , Aorta, Thoracic/diagnostic imaging , Risk Factors , Treatment Outcome , Upper ExtremityABSTRACT
We report the case of a 41-year-old female who presented with left upper limb embolization due to primary thoracic aortic mural thrombus; this latter represented an uncommon condition with difficult diagnosis and a high rate of life-threatening complications. Upper extremities embolization is extremely rare because it usually occurs in the lower limbs. Management strategy is still controversial, and no clear guidelines indicate superiority of either conservative or invasive treatment approach to date. Our report illustrates how endovascular exclusion of thoracic aortic mural thrombus has the advantage to be a low-risk procedure that represents a definitive therapy.
Subject(s)
Aortic Diseases , Endovascular Procedures , Thromboembolism , Thrombosis , Adult , Aorta, Thoracic/diagnostic imaging , Aorta, Thoracic/surgery , Aortic Diseases/diagnostic imaging , Aortic Diseases/etiology , Aortic Diseases/surgery , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Risk Factors , Thromboembolism/etiology , Thrombosis/diagnostic imaging , Thrombosis/etiology , Thrombosis/surgery , Treatment Outcome , Upper ExtremityABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the potential clinical impact of using 3-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) to measure left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients considered for implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation and to assess the predictive value of 3DE LVEF for arrhythmic events. BACKGROUND: ICD therapy is currently recommended to prevent sudden cardiac death in patients with symptomatic heart failure and LVEF ≤35%, and in asymptomatic patients with ischemic heart disease and LVEF ≤30%. Two-dimensional echocardiography (2DE) is currently used to calculate LVEF. However, 3DE has been reported to be more reproducible and accurate than 2DE to measure LVEF. METHODS: The study prospectively enrolled 172 patients with LV dysfunction (71% ischemic). Both 2DE and 3DE LVEF were obtained during the same study. The outcome was the occurrence of major arrhythmic events (sudden cardiac death, aborted cardiac arrest, appropriate ICD therapy). RESULTS: After a median follow up of 56 (range 18 to 65) months, major arrhythmic events occurred in 30% of the patients. Compared with 2DE, 3DE changed the assignment above or below the LVEF thresholds for ICD implantation in 20% of patients, most of them having 2DE LVEFs within ± 10% from threshold. By cause-specific hazard model, 3DE LVEF was the only independent predictor of the occurrence of major arrhythmic events. CONCLUSIONS: LVEF by 3DE was an independent predictor of major arrhythmic events and improved arrhythmic risk prediction in patients with LV dysfunction. When compared with 2DE LVEF, 3DE measurement of LVEF may change the decision to implant an ICD in a sizable number of patients.