A case report of pericardial constriction with coexisting severe left main coronary artery disease.

Background: Constrictive pericarditis (CP) is a rare condition in which the pericardium becomes progressively fibrotic and non-compliant leading to impaired ventricular filling and overt heart failure. While CP shares many clinical and haemodynamic similarities with restrictive cardiomyopathy, differentiation of these diseases is crucial as CP is potentially curative through pericardiectomy. Here, we present a case of proven pericardial constriction with atypical haemodynamics in a patient presenting with heart failure and severe left main coronary artery disease (CAD). Case summary: A 69-year-old female with a history of hypertension and paroxysmal atrial fibrillation presented with persistent heart failure refractory to diuretics. Ischaemic and infiltrative work-up were found to be negative with magnetic resonance imaging demonstrating trace pericardial fluid and thickening of the pericardium. Echocardiogram and right-heart catheterization demonstrated atypical haemodynamics suggestive of but not conclusive for CP, with coronary angiogram demonstrating severe left main CAD. Ultimately, the patient underwent coronary artery bypass grafting along with pericardiectomy and pericardial biopsy demonstrating constrictive physiology. Discussion: We suspect the inconclusive nature of the echocardiogram and cardiac catheterization was likely secondary to severe CAD impairing left ventricular relaxation and dampening ventricular interdependence. As such, clinicians should consider the possibility of coexistent severe CAD in patients with a clinical suspicion of CP, but inconclusive haemodynamics.

Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Over the past decade, spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) has emerged as an important cause of myocardial infarction, particularly among younger women. The pace of knowledge acquisition has been rapid, but ongoing challenges include accurately diagnosing SCAD and improving outcomes. Many SCAD patients experience substantial post-SCAD symptoms, recurrent SCAD, and psychosocial distress. Considerable uncertainty remains about optimal management of associated conditions, risk stratification and prevention of complications, recommendations for physical activity, reproductive planning, and the role of genetic evaluations. This review provides a clinical update on the diagnosis and management of patients with SCAD, including pregnancy-associated SCAD and pregnancy after SCAD, and highlight high-priority knowledge gaps that must be addressed.

Differential outcomes of type A dissection with malperfusion according to affected organ system.

BACKGROUND: The management of malperfusion in patients with acute Stanford type A aortic dissection is controversial. We sought to determine the rate of resolution of malperfusion following primary repair of the dissection and to identify anatomic sites of malperfusion that may require additional management. METHODS: We reviewed the hospital records of patients who presented to our institution with acute type A aortic dissection. Patient demographics, operative details and post-operative course were retrospectively extracted from our institutional electronic database. Depending upon the anatomic site, malperfusion was identified by a combination of radiographic and clinical definitions. Data were analyzed using standard univariable and multivariable methods. RESULTS: Between 1997-2013, 101 patients underwent repair of an acute type A dissection. Thirty-day mortality was 14.9% (15/101); there were five intraoperative deaths. There was no difference in 30-day mortality between patients with or without malperfusion (15.4% vs. 14.7%, P=0.93). Twenty-five patients (24.7%), who survived surgery, presented with 31 sites of malperfusion. Anatomic sites included extremities [14], renal [10], cerebral [5] and intestinal [2]. Of these 31 sites, malperfusion resolved in 18 (58.1%) with primary aortic repair. Renal malperfusion resolved radiographically in 80.0%, with no difference in the incidence of insufficiency (44.0% vs. 35.2%; P=0.44) or dialysis (20.0% vs. 15.5%; P=0.61) between malperfusion and non-malperfusion patients. Extremity malperfusion resolved postoperatively in six out of 14 patients. Of the remaining eight, concomitant revascularization was performed in four, one had an amputation and three required postoperative interventions. Advanced patient age (OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 1.01-1.12, P=0.02) was an independent predictor of 30-day mortality, while preoperative malperfusion was not (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.18-3.31, P=0.73). CONCLUSIONS: Malperfusion complicating acute type A dissection can be managed in many patients by aortic replacement alone with low overall mortality. Most cases of renal and cerebral malperfusion resolved following aortic surgery. Revascularization was frequently necessary in patients with extremity malperfusion. Patients presenting with intestinal ischemia had very poor outcomes. A patient-specific approach is recommended in such complex patients.

Rewarming Rate During Cardiopulmonary Bypass Is Associated With Release of Glial Fibrillary Acidic Protein.

BACKGROUND: Rewarming from hypothermia during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) may compromise cerebral oxygen balance, potentially resulting in cerebral ischemia. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether CPB rewarming rate is associated with cerebral ischemia assessed by the release of the brain injury biomarker glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP). METHODS: Blood samples were collected from 152 patients after anesthesia induction and after CPB for the measurement of plasma GFAP levels. Nasal temperatures were recorded every 15 min. A multivariate estimation model for postoperative plasma GFAP level was determined that included the baseline GFAP levels, rewarming rate, CPB duration, and patient age. RESULTS: The mean rewarming rate during CPB was 0.21° ± 0.11°C/min; the maximal temperature was 36.5° ± 1.0°C (range, 33.1°C to 38.0°C). Plasma GFAP levels increased after compared with before CPB (median, 0.022 ng/mL versus 0.035 ng/mL; p < 0.001). Rewarming rate (p = 0.001), but not maximal temperature (p = 0.77), was associated with higher plasma GFAP levels after CPB. In the adjusted estimation model, rewarming rate was positively associated with postoperative plasma log GFAP levels (coefficient, 0.261; 95% confidence intervals, 0.132 to 0.390; p < 0.001). Six patients (3.9%) experienced a postoperative stroke. Rewarming rate was higher (0.3° ± 0.09°C/min versus 0.2° ± 0.11°C/min; p = 0.049) in the patients with stroke compared with those without a stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Rewarming rate during CPB was correlated with evidence of brain cellular injury documented with plasma GFAP levels. Modifying current practices of patient rewarming might provide a strategy to reduce the frequency of neurologic complications after cardiac surgery.