Acute coronary syndrome associated cardiogenic shock in the catheterization laboratory: peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator management and recommendations.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a critical disease with high mortality rates requiring complex treatment to maximize patient survival chances. Emergent coronary revascularization along with circulatory support are keys to saving lives. Mechanical circulatory support may be instigated in severe, yet still reversible instances. Of these, the peripheral veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenator (pVA-ECMO) is the most widely used system for both circulatory and respiratory support. The aim of our work is to provide a review of our current understanding of the pVA-ECMO when used in the catheterization laboratory in a CS ACS setting. We detail the workings of a Shock Team: pVA-ECMO specifics, circumstances, and timing of implantations and discuss possible complications. We place emphasis on how to select the appropriate patients for potential pVA-ECMO support and what characteristics and parameters need to be assessed. A detailed, stepwise implantation algorithm indicating crucial steps is also featured for practitioners in the catheter laboratory. To provide an overall aspect of pVA-ECMO use in CS ACS we further gave pointers including relevant human resource, infrastructure, and consumables management to build an effective Shock Team to treat CS ACS via the pVA-ECMO method.

Drug-coated balloon therapy is more effective in treating late drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis than the early occurring one-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (DES-ISR) remains one of the important assignments to be resolved in interventional cardiology, as it is present in 5%-10% of total percutaneous coronary intervention cases. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) utilization is promising, as it comes with long-term protection from recurrent restenosis in optimal conditions without the hazard of higher risk for stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis. We aim to reduce the need for recurrent revascularization in DES-ISR, specifying the population in which the DCB therapy should be used. In this meta-analysis, the results of studies containing data on the time frame between drug-eluting stent implantation and the clinical presentation of in-stent restenosis and concomitant drug-coated balloon treatment were summarized. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Central, Web of Science, Scopus and Embase databases on November 11th, 2021. The QUIPS tool was used to assess the risk of bias in the included studies. The occurrence of a major cardiac adverse events (MACE) composite endpoint, containing target lesion revascularization (TLR), myocardial infarction, and cardiac death, and each of these separately, was assessed at 12 months after the balloon treatment. Random effects meta-analysis models were used for statistical analysis. Data of 882 patients from four studies were analyzed. Across the included studies, a 1.68 OR (CI 1.57-1.80, p < 0.01) for MACE and a 1.69 OR (CI 1.18-2.42 p < 0.01) for TLR were observed, both in favor of late DES-ISR. The main limitation of the study is the relatively low patient number. Nevertheless, this analysis shows the first statistically significant results for the effect of DCB treatment in the early or late presentation of DES-ISR. As to date, intravascular imaging (IVI) remains limitedly accessible, other landmarks as the time frame of in-stent restenosis development are to be pursued to advance therapeutic outcomes. In consideration of other biological, technical and mechanical factors, time frame of occurrence as a prognostic factor could reduce the burden of recurrent revascularization in patients at an already high risk. Systematic Review Registration: identifier [CRD42021286262].

Comparison of Safety of RADial comPRESSion Devices: A Multi-Center Trial of Patent Hemostasis following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention from Conventional Radial Access (RAD-PRESS Trial).

Although radial access is the current gold standard for the implementation of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), post-procedural radial compression devices are seldom compared with each other in terms of safety or efficacy. Our group aimed to compare a cost effective and potentially green method to dedicated radial compression devices, with respect to access site complications combined in a device oriented complex endpoint (DOCE), freedom from which served as our primary endpoint. Patients undergoing PCI were randomized to receive either the cost effective or a dedicated device, either of which were removed using patent hemostasis. Twenty-four hours after the procedure, radial artery ultrasonography was performed to evaluate the access site. The primary endpoint was assessed using a non-inferiority framework with a non-inferiority margin of five percentage points, which was considered as the least clinically meaningful difference. The cost-effective technique and the dedicated devices were associated with a comparably low rate of complications (freedom from DOCE: 83.3% vs. 70.8%, absolute risk difference: 12.5%, one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11%). Composition of the DOCE (i.e., no complication, hematoma, pseudoaneurysm, and radial artery occlusion) and compression time were also assessed in superiority tests as secondary endpoints. Both the cost-effective technique and the dedicated devices were associated with comparably low rates of complications: p = 0.1289. All radial compression devices performed similarly when considering the time to complete removal of the respective device (120.0 (inter-quartile range: 100.0-142.5) for the vial vs. 120.0 (inter-quartile range: 110.0-180) for the dedicated device arm, with a median difference of [95% CI]: 7.0 [-23.11 to 2.00] min, p = 0.2816). In conclusion, our cost-effective method was found to be non-inferior to the dedicated devices with respect to safety, therefore it is a safe alternative to dedicated radial compression devices, as well as seeming to be similarly effective.

The Design and Feasibility of the: Radial Artery Puncture Hemostasis Evaluation - RAPHE Study, a Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Clinical Trial.

Introduction and Aim: Radial artery approach angiography is the current gold standard for coronary status diagnostics and eventual percutaneous revascularization (PCI). Currently, application of adequate, patent hemostasis based physical torniquets are used for puncture site control, to avoid bleeding, radial artery occlusion and damage (RAO and RAD). The Radial Artery Puncture Hemostasis Evaluation (RAPHE) is a prospective, randomized, multicenter clinical trial designed to investigate new, simplified techniques of radial artery hemostasis utilizing physical compression free methods. Methods and Results: The RAPHE study has been designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two non-compression based radial artery hemostasis methods: a 100% chitosan bioactive hemostatic dressing and a purpose-built radial potassium-ferrate based topical hemostasis disc. These devices will be investigated in a standalone configuration. Control group is a standard pneumatic airbladder-based compression device. A total of 600 patients will be enrolled in a three-way randomization (1:1:1) with two study and one control groups. Safety and efficacy endpoints are RAO, puncture site hematoma formation and RAD respectively, consisting of dissection, (pseudo)aneurism and/or fistula formation, measured post-procedure and at sixty days. Conclusion: The results from this trial will provide valuable information on new, simplified methods of radial artery hemostasis options and possibly simplify post-puncture management of patients. Clinical Trial Registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [NCT04857385].

Predictors of mortality following extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support in an unselected, critically ill patient population.

INTRODUCTION: Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has been established as a means of augmenting circulation in patients with critically decreased systolic function due to a variety of underlying clinical reasons. Different methods of MCS may be used, with the venous-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation system (VA-ECMO) being one of the most utilized devices in everyday care. AIM: To determine independent predictors influencing mortality outcomes following VA-ECMO therapy in a large, unselected, adult, critically ill patient population in cardiogenic shock (CS). MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data on 235 consecutive, real-world VA-ECMO treatments were assessed. Analysis was conducted for all subjects requiring MCS with the VA-ECMO as the first instalment, regardless of underlying cause or eventual upgrade. All potential clinical factors influencing mortality were examined and evaluated. RESULTS: Overall mortality was ~66% at median 28 days follow-up and significantly depended upon pH < 7.3 (HR = 3.56; p < 0.001), and age ≥ 65 years (HR = 1.96; p = 0.001). Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) as an indication for VA-ECMO displayed a nearly significant value (HR = 1.44; p = 0.07). Heart transplant (hTX) primary graft failure as an indication for the VA-ECMO displayed a clearly favorable outcome (HR = 0.51, p = 0.025); all data based on multivariate Cox regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in patients requiring VA-ECMO remains high. We conclude that only decreased pH values and advanced age clearly influence mortality in this MCS scenario. ACS also bodes unfavorably, whereas hTX as an indication clearly shows better survival.