Comparison of Radiation Exposure Among Interventional Echocardiographers, Interventional Cardiologists, and Sonographers During Percutaneous Structural Heart Interventions.

Importance: Transesophageal echocardiography during percutaneous left atrial appendage closure (LAAO) and transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (TEER) require an interventional echocardiographer to stand near the radiation source and patient, the primary source of scatter radiation. Despite previous work demonstrating high radiation exposure for interventional cardiologists performing percutaneous coronary and structural heart interventions, similar data for interventional echocardiographers are lacking. Objective: To assess whether interventional echocardiographers are exposed to greater radiation doses than interventional cardiologists and sonographers during structural heart procedures. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this single-center cross-sectional study, radiation doses were collected from interventional echocardiographers, interventional cardiologists, and sonographers at a quaternary care center during 30 sequential LAAO and 30 sequential TEER procedures from July 1, 2016, to January 31, 2018. Participants and study personnel were blinded to radiation doses through data analysis (January 1, 2020, to October 12, 2021). Exposures: Occupation defined as interventional echocardiographers, interventional cardiologists, and sonographers. Main Outcomes and Measures: Measured personal dose equivalents per case were recorded using real-time radiation dosimeters. Results: A total of 60 (30 TEER and 30 LAAO) procedures were performed in 60 patients (mean [SD] age, 79 [8] years; 32 [53.3%] male) with a high cardiovascular risk factor burden. The median radiation dose per case was higher for interventional echocardiographers (10.6 µSv; IQR, 4.2-22.4 µSv) than for interventional cardiologists (2.1 µSv; IQR, 0.2-8.3 µSv; P < .001). During TEER, interventional echocardiographers received a median radiation dose of 10.5 µSv (IQR, 3.1-20.5 µSv), which was higher than the median radiation dose received by interventional cardiologists (0.9 µSv; IQR, 0.1-12.2 µSv; P < .001). During LAAO procedures, the median radiation dose was 10.6 µSv (IQR, 5.8-24.1 µSv) among interventional echocardiographers and 3.5 (IQR, 1.3-6.3 µSv) among interventional cardiologists (P < .001). Compared with interventional echocardiographers, sonographers exhibited low median radiation doses during both LAAO (0.2 µSv; IQR, 0.0-1.6 µSv; P < .001) and TEER (0.0 µSv; IQR, 0.0-0.1 µSv; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, interventional echocardiographers were exposed to higher radiation doses than interventional cardiologists during LAAO and TEER procedures, whereas sonographers demonstrated comparatively lower radiation doses. Higher radiation doses indicate a previously underappreciated occupational risk faced by interventional echocardiographers, which has implications for the rapidly expanding structural heart team.

Recurrent Cardiogenic Syncope From Extrinsic Organ Anomaly.

CASE PRESENTATION: A 40-year-old woman presented with recurrent syncope. She reported multiple (>20) episodes of non-prodromal loss of consciousness, periodically provoked by physical exertion. One episode resulted in a nasal fracture due to the abrupt nature of her syncope. The characterization of each episode was inconsistent with a neurogenic seizure. Other causes of syncope (vasovagal, situational, carotid hypersensitivity, and orthostasis) were also deemed unlikely. On physical examination, a low-pitched, brief adventitious sound was appreciated after each S2 sound in the right lower sternal border. The remainder of the physical examination was unremarkable. Initial workup, including complete blood count, comprehensive metabolic panel, cardiac enzymes, and ECG yielded normal results. The chest radiograph did not show any gross cardiac or pulmonary parenchymal pathologic condition (Fig 1). Telemetry did not demonstrate any malignant arrhythmias, and video-guided EEG did not document any seizure activity.

SAMe-TT2R2 predicts quality of anticoagulation in patients with acute venous thromboembolism: The MAQI2 experience.

A high SAMe-TT2R2 score predicted poor warfarin control and adverse events among atrial fibrillation patients. However, the SAMe-TT2R2 score has not been well validated in venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients. A cohort of 1943 warfarin-treated patients with acute VTE was analyzed to correlate the SAMe-TT2R2 score with time in therapeutic range (TTR) and clinical adverse events. A TTR <60% was more frequent among patients with a high (>2) versus low (0-1) SAMe-TT2R2 score (63.4% vs 52.3%, p<0.0001). A high SAMe-TT2R2 score (>2) correlated with increased overall adverse events (7.9 vs 4.5 overall adverse events/100 patient years, p=0.002), driven primarily by increased recurrent VTE rates (4.2 vs 1.5 recurrent VTE/100 patient years, p=0.0003). The SAMe-TT2R2 score had a modest predictive ability for international normalized ratio (INR) quality and adverse clinical events among warfarin-treated VTE patients. The utility of the SAMe-TT2R2 score to guide clinical decision-making remains to be investigated.

Impact of intra-aortic balloon pumping on hypotension and outcomes in acute right ventricular infarction.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the immediate hemodynamic effects of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) support and clinical outcomes in patients with acute right ventricular infarction (RVI) complicated by hypotension. BACKGROUND: IABP improves hypotension in patients with acute myocardial infarction and left ventricular shock, but the effects have not been well studied in acute RVI with predominant right ventricular shock. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed hemodynamics and clinical outcomes in 32 patients with acute inferior ST elevation myocardial infarction complicated by RVI, in whom hypotension requiring IABP placement developed despite intact left ventricular ejection fraction. RESULTS: Pre-IABP hypotension was present in all (100%) patients, and in every case IABP augmentation increased mean arterial pressure (55.9±7.4 to 76.8±14.7 mmHg, P<0.0001). Adverse clinical events included respiratory distress requiring intubation in 46.9%, cardiopulmonary resuscitation in 25%, episodes of ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation in 56.3%, and transvenous pacemaker placement in 56.3% of patients. There were six inhospital deaths (18.8%). Pre-IABP hemodynamics were similar in those patients who survived to discharge compared with those who died. However, in those patients who died, there was significantly lower augmentation of peak systolic blood pressure during IABP support compared with survivors (2.7±17 vs. 27±22 mmHg, P<0.015). CONCLUSION: IABP support results in immediate hemodynamic improvement in patients with acute RVI complicated by shock. The majority of these shock patients survived and the magnitude of mean arterial pressure and peak systolic blood pressure augmentation may impart prognostic value.