Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 99(3): 853-859, 2022 02.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35235693

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is an attractive option in order to treat carotid artery stenosis. However, its safety in elderly patients is questioned. Aim of this single-center retrospective study was to assess data of elderly patients undergoing CAS, and to compare them with those of the younger (< 75 years). METHODS: We collected data of 580 consecutive patients undergoing CAS between December 2007 and June 2020 and compared clinical and procedural characteristics as well as in-hospital major adverse events (MACCE) and long-term mortality between patients < 75 years and patients ≥ 75 years old. RESULTS: There were 272 patients (46.9%) with age ≥ 75 years and 308 patients (53.1%) with age < 75 years. The median follow-up was 48 months (range 2-144). There was no significant difference about in-hospital MACCE between the two groups (4.7% in the older vs. 3.5% in the younger group, p = 0.9), but a higher rate of cerebral hemorrhage occurred in the older group (1.8% vs. = 0.3%, p = 0.07), even if not significant. Long-term mortality was significantly higher in the older group (27.9 vs. 20.1%, p = 0.027). Multivariate predictors of 12-months mortality were neurologic symptoms within 6 months (OR: 4.83; 95% CI: 2.04-11.42; p ≤ 0.001), smoking status (OR: 2.84; 95% CI: 1.17-6.86; p = 0.02) and age ≥ 75 years (OR: 2.78; 95% CI: 1.14-6.76; p = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: In elderly patients, CAS can be carried out efficaciously with acceptable procedural risks, if performed by expert operators and after a correct selection by a multidisciplinary team.


Subject(s)
Cardiology , Carotid Stenosis , Endarterectomy, Carotid , Stroke , Aged , Carotid Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Carotid Stenosis/etiology , Carotid Stenosis/therapy , Endarterectomy, Carotid/adverse effects , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Stents , Stroke/etiology , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
2.
Future Cardiol ; 17(8): 1435-1452, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33739146

ABSTRACT

The functional evaluation of coronary stenoses has obtained important clinical results in recent years, resulting in strong guideline recommendations. Nonetheless, the use of coronary wire-based functional evaluation has not yet become part of the routine in catheterization laboratories for several reasons, including the need to advance a wire into the coronary vessel to interrogate the stenosis. Angiography-derived indexes have been introduced to expand the current use of physiology to estimate the functional meaning of a stenosis on the basis of angiographic data only. The most studied and validated angiography-derived index is certainly the quantitative flow ratio. This article will summarize the basics of the quantitative flow ratio, the related validation studies and its current and future applications.


Lay abstract Coronary arteries are the main vessels that carry blood and oxygen to the heart muscle, ensuring its functionality. In cardiology, coronary stenoses are defined as pathological narrowing of one or more of these vessels, which can lead to a critical reduction in blood flow, ischemic problems and myocardial infarction. Currently, percutaneous coronary intervention is considered the first-line treatment of myocardial infarction. This technique consists of a procedure in which the stenosis is resolved and proper blood flow is restored thanks to balloon inflation and stent implantation through a percutaneous procedure performed under local anesthesia. Coronary angiography was, for many years, the only available tool to diagnose and assess the consequences of coronary atherosclerosis, becoming the standard reference in the study of ischemic heart disease, allowing us to routinely describe the severity of coronary stenosis or the severity of the disease based on the number of vessels affected. Subsequently, the introduction of invasive methods to assess coronary physiology allowed us to obtain a precise assessment regarding the physiological impact of stenoses located in main vessels while demonstrating the poor diagnostic performance of angiography to assess the functional impact of these stenoses. Among these coronary physiology techniques, quantitative flow ratio has recently been the object of many investigations. In contrast to invasive techniques that can be performed only by advancing a wire into the coronary artery, quantitative flow ratio allows us to perform a functional evaluation of coronary stenoses on the basis of angiographic data only. Given its potential, this work will summarize the basics of quantitative flow ratio, the main validation studies and its current and future applications in interventional cardiology.


Subject(s)
Coronary Artery Disease , Coronary Stenosis , Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial , Coronary Angiography , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Stenosis/diagnostic imaging , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Severity of Illness Index
3.
Minerva Cardioangiol ; 67(2): 94-101, 2019 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30895761

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of patients with aspirin intolerance undergoing stent implantation represents a challenge for physicians. The aim of this study was to assess the overall number of patients discharged with mono antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The most frequent aspirin intolerance symptoms in this population and the overall incidence of patient-oriented composite endpoints (POCE). METHODS: From January 2006 to June 2016 all patients discharged with mono-antiplatelet therapy because of aspirin intolerance/hypersensitivity/allergy and treated by means of PCI were included. Data about percutaneous treatments and aspirin intolerance were collected. POCE were evaluated at a twelve-month clinical follow-up comparing safety and efficacy of clopidogrel monotherapy versus new P2Y12 inhibitors. RESULTS: We collected 70 patients, that is 0.3% of the total amount of PCI in the considered period, 25 (35%) of them were women and the remaining 45 (65%) were men. An acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was the clinical presentation in 47 (67.1%) patients, with NSTEMI in 19 (27.1%) of them. Forty-six patients (65.7%) were treated with clopidogrel and 24 (34.3%) with new P2Y12 inhibitors. At one-year follow-up, 18 (25.7%) patients suffered a new clinically relevant adverse event, 5 (7.1%) died, 3 (4.3%) required a target vessel revascularization and 10 (14.3%) patients a target lesion revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: Our study evaluated patients with ACS or stable coronary artery disease undergoing PCI and treated with mono-antiplatelet therapy with P2Y12 inhibitors due to aspirin intolerance shows a 25% incidence of POCE at one year. Further studies with adequate sample size are required to evaluate the efficacy and safety of mono antiplatelet therapy in this clinical scenario.


Subject(s)
Clopidogrel/administration & dosage , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/methods , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Acute Coronary Syndrome/therapy , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aspirin/administration & dosage , Aspirin/adverse effects , Clopidogrel/adverse effects , Drug Therapy, Combination , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Stents , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...