Guía de presión encarcelada en el tratamiento percutáneo de las bifurcaciones coronarias: daño estructural y resultados clínicos / Jailed pressure wire technique for coronary bifurcation lesions: structural damage and clinical outcomes

Introducción y objetivos: El uso de una guía de presión encarcelada para evaluar los resultados de la rama lateral durante la técnica del stent provisional parece factible. Sin embargo, existen dudas sobre su seguridad por el daño mecánico de la guía y son escasos los datos referentes al pronóstico de los pacientes. El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar el daño estructural de la guía de presión en la técnica de la guía encarcelada y examinar los resultados clínicos a medio plazo. Métodos: Se incluyó a 99 pacientes con lesiones bifurcadas tratadas mediante la técnica de guía de presión encarcelada y, como control histórico, a 114 pacientes tratados mediante la técnica de la guía encarcelada con guías no poliméricas. Se evaluó el daño de la guía mediante microscopía estereoscópica. El objetivo primario fue localizar la presencia de daño microscópico significativo. Se examinaron eventos cardiovasculares adversos mayores a los dos años de seguimiento. Resultados: El daño microscópico significativo fue más frecuente en las guías de presión que en las no poliméricas (53,5% vs 22,8%, p <0,001). No hubo fracturas en ningún grupo. Hubo menos intervenciones de la rama lateral en el grupo de la guía de presión (posdilatación 32,3% vs 56,1%, p=0,001; stent, 0,0% vs 2,6%, p=0,104). El riesgo de eventos cardiovasculares a los 2 años fue similar en ambos grupos (HRadj=0,42; IC95%, 0,10-1,73; p=0,229). Conclusiones: La guía de presión fue menos resistente al encarcelamiento que la guía no polimérica. Los pacientes tratados con guía de presión requirieron menos intervenciones de la rama lateral, pero tuvieron similar riesgo de eventos a los 2 años de seguimiento. (AU)

Introduction and objectives: The use of a pressure wire as a jailed wire to evaluate side branch results during provisional stenting seems feasible. However, safety concerns exist due to the mechanical damage of the wire and the lack of prospective data evaluating the prognosis of patients treated using this technique. This study sought to evaluate the structural damage of the pressure wire in patients treated using the jailed pressure wire technique and to assess mid-term clinical outcomes. Methods: We enrolled 99 patients with single bifurcation lesions and provisional stenting as the strategy of choice. A jailed pressure wire was used to guide side branch intervention according to the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). A total of 114 patients and the respective nonpolymer-coated jailed wires were used as historical controls. Guidewire damage was evaluated by stereomicroscopy. The primary endpoint was significant microscopic damage. Major adverse cardiac events were evaluated at 2-year follow-up. Results: Significant microscopic damage was more frequent in pressure wires than in nonpolymer-coated wires (53.5% vs 22.8%, P<.001). There were no fractures in either group. There were fewer side branch interventions in the pressure wire group (postdilation/kissing balloon, 32.3% vs 56.1%, P=.001; stenting, 0.0% vs 2.6%, P=.104). The 2-year rate of major adverse cardiac events was similar between the 2 groups (HRadj, 0.42; 95%CI, 0.10-1.73; P=.229). Conclusions: Pressure wires were less resistant to jailing than conventional nonpolymer-coated wires. Patients treated with iFR-guided provisional stenting required fewer side branch interventions but had similar 2-year clinical outcomes than patients treated with the angiography-guided technique. (AU)

Jailed pressure wire technique for coronary bifurcation lesions: structural damage and clinical outcomes.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The use of a pressure wire as a jailed wire to evaluate side branch results during provisional stenting seems feasible. However, safety concerns exist due to the mechanical damage of the wire and the lack of prospective data evaluating the prognosis of patients treated using this technique. This study sought to evaluate the structural damage of the pressure wire in patients treated using the jailed pressure wire technique and to assess mid-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: We enrolled 99 patients with single bifurcation lesions and provisional stenting as the strategy of choice. A jailed pressure wire was used to guide side branch intervention according to the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR). A total of 114 patients and the respective nonpolymer-coated jailed wires were used as historical controls. Guidewire damage was evaluated by stereomicroscopy. The primary endpoint was significant microscopic damage. Major adverse cardiac events were evaluated at 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Significant microscopic damage was more frequent in pressure wires than in nonpolymer-coated wires (53.5% vs 22.8%, P<.001). There were no fractures in either group. There were fewer side branch interventions in the pressure wire group (postdilation/kissing balloon, 32.3% vs 56.1%, P=.001; stenting, 0.0% vs 2.6%, P=.104). The 2-year rate of major adverse cardiac events was similar between the 2 groups (HRadj, 0.42; 95%CI, 0.10-1.73; P=.229). CONCLUSIONS: Pressure wires were less resistant to jailing than conventional nonpolymer-coated wires. Patients treated with iFR-guided provisional stenting required fewer side branch interventions but had similar 2-year clinical outcomes than patients treated with the angiography-guided technique.

Electrocardiographic features and need for pacemaker in cardiac amyloidosis: Analysis of 58 cases. / Alteraciones electrocardiográficas y necesidad de marcapasos en amiloidosis cardiaca: análisis de 58 casos.

AIM: Amyloidosis is a disease in which amyloid fibrils can be deposited in different cardiac structures, and several electrocardiographic abnormalities can be produced by this phenomenon. The objective of this study was to describe the most common basal electrocardiographic alterations in patients diagnosed with cardiac amyloidosis (CA) and to determine if these abnormalities have an impact on the need of pacemaker. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients who had an established diagnosis of CA [light-chain cardiac amyloidosis (LA-CA) or transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (TTR-CA)] between January 2013 and March 2021. The baseline heart rate, the percentage of patients with a pseudo-infarct pattern, low-voltage pattern or cardiac conductions disturbances, and the impact of these factors on the need of pacemaker were analysed. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with CA (20 with LA-CA and 38 with TTR-CA) were included, and the majority were male (69.0%). Twenty-one patients had atrial fibrillation (AF) at diagnosis. Thirty-five patients had a pseudo-infarct pattern, 35% had a low-voltage pattern, and 22% had criteria for ventricular hypertrophy. Two hirds had a conduction disorder: 18 patients with first degree atrioventricular block, 12 right bundle branch block, 3 left bundle branch block and 25 with a branch hemiblock. There were no differences between LA-CA and TTR-CA. Patients with TTR-CA had a greater need for pacemakers in the folow-up (39±40 meses). Bundle branch block was a predictor of the need for a permanent pacemaker (HR: 23.43; CI 95%: 4.09.134.09; P=.01). CONCLUSIONS: Electrocardiographic abnormalities in patients diagnosed wich CA are heterogeneus. Most frecuent is the presence of conduction disorders, the pseudoinfarction pattern, followed by the low voltage pattern. Patients with any bundle branch block at the baseline electrocardiogram need more frecuent to require a pacemaker during follow-up, especially in TTR-CA.