RESUMO
Currently, gender is not considered in the choice of the revascularization strategy for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. This study analyzed the effect of gender on the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vs coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with ULMCA disease. Females who had PCI (n = 328) were compared with females who had CABG (n = 132) and PCI in males (n = 894) was compared with CABG (n = 784). Females with CABG had higher overall hospital mortality and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) than females with PCI. Male patients with CABG had higher MACE; however, mortality did not differ between males with CABG vs PCI. In female patients, follow-up mortality was significantly higher in CABG patients, and target lesion revascularization was higher in patients with PCI. Male patients had no difference in mortality and MACE between groups; however, MI was higher with CABG, and congestive heart failure was higher with PCI. In conclusion, women with ULMCA disease treated with PCI could have better survival with lower MACE compared with CABG. These differences were not evident in males treated with either CABG or PCI. PCI could be the preferred revascularization strategy in women with ULMCA disease.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/efeitos adversos , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary revascularization for left-main disease is still debated. The study aimed to characterize patients who received dual versus single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for unprotected left-main disease and compare the outcomes of those patients. RESULTS: This multicenter retrospective cohort study included 551 patients who were grouped into 2 groups: patients who received SAPT (n = 150) and those who received DAPT (n = 401). There were no differences in age ( P = 0.451), gender ( P = 0.063), smoking ( P = 0.941), diabetes mellitus ( P = 0.773), history of myocardial infarction ( P = 0.709), chronic kidney disease ( P = 0.615), atrial fibrillation ( P = 0.306), or cerebrovascular accident ( P = 0.550) between patients who received SAPT versus DAPT. DAPTs were more commonly used in patients with acute coronary syndrome [87 (58%) vs. 273 (68.08%); P = 0.027], after off-pump CABG [12 (8%) vs. 73 (18.2%); P = 0.003] and in patients with radial artery grafts [1 (0.67%) vs. 32 (7.98%); P < 0.001]. While SAPTs were more commonly used in patients with low ejection fraction [55 (36.67%) vs. 61 (15.21%); P < 0.001] and in patients with postoperative acute kidney injury [27 (18%) vs. 37 (9.23%); P = 0.004]. The attributed treatment effect of DAPT for follow-up major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events was not significantly different from that of SAPT [ß, -2.08 (95% confidence interval (CI), -20.8-16.7); P = 0.828]. The attributed treatment effect of DAPT on follow-up all-cause mortality was not significantly different from that of SAPT [ß, 4.12 (CI, -11.1-19.32); P = 0.595]. There was no difference in bleeding between groups ( P = 0.666). CONCLUSIONS: DAPTs were more commonly used in patients with acute coronary syndrome, after off-pump CABG, and with radial artery grafts. SAPTs were more commonly used in patients with low ejection fraction and acute kidney injury. Patients on DAPT after CABG for left-main disease had comparable major adverse cerebrovascular and cardiac events and survival to patients on SAPT, with no difference in bleeding events.
Assuntos
Síndrome Coronariana Aguda , Injúria Renal Aguda , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/cirurgia , Síndrome Coronariana Aguda/induzido quimicamente , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/efeitos adversos , Hemorragia/induzido quimicamente , Injúria Renal Aguda/induzido quimicamenteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularization strategy in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease in the emergency setting is still controversial. Thus, we aimed to compare the outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) vs. coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with and without emergent LMCA disease. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2138 patients recruited from 14 centers between 2015 and 2019. We compared patients with emergent LMCA revascularization who underwent PCI (n = 264) to patients who underwent CABG (n = 196) and patients with non-emergent LMCA revascularization with PCI (n = 958) to those who underwent CABG (n = 720). The study outcomes were in-hospital and follow-up all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). RESULTS: Emergency PCI patients were older and had a significantly higher prevalence of chronic kidney disease, lower ejection fraction, and higher EuroSCORE than CABG patients. CABG patients had significantly higher SYNTAX scores, multivessel disease, and ostial lesions. In patients presenting with arrest, PCI had significantly lower MACCE (P = 0.017) and in-hospital mortality (P = 0.016) than CABG. In non-emergent revascularization, PCI was associated with lower MACCE in patients with low (P = 0.015) and intermediate (P < 0.001) EuroSCORE. PCI was associated with lower MACCE in patients with low (P = 0.002) and intermediate (P = 0.008) SYNTAX scores. In non-emergent revascularization, PCI was associated with reduced hospital mortality in patients with intermediate (P = 0.001) and high (P = 0.002) EuroSCORE compared to CABG. PCI was associated with lower hospital mortality in patients with low (P = 0.031) and intermediate (P = 0.001) SYNTAX scores. At a median follow-up time of 20 months (IQR: 10-37), emergency PCI had lower MACCE compared to CABG [HR: 0.30 (95% CI 0.14-0.66), P < 0.003], with no significant difference in all-cause mortality between emergency PCI and CABG [HR: 1.18 (95% CI 0.23-6.08), P = 0.845]. CONCLUSIONS: PCI could be advantageous over CABG in revascularizing LMCA disease in emergencies. PCI could be preferred for revascularization of non-emergent LMCA in patients with intermediate EuroSCORE and low and intermediate SYNTAX scores.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/efeitos adversos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The evidence about the optimal revascularization strategy in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease and impaired renal function is limited. Thus, we aimed to compare the outcomes of LMCA disease revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] vs. coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) in patients with and without impaired renal function. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 2,138 patients recruited from 14 centers between 2015 and 2,019. We compared patients with impaired renal function who had PCI (n= 316) to those who had CABG (n = 121) and compared patients with normal renal function who had PCI (n = 906) to those who had CABG (n = 795). The study outcomes were in-hospital and follow-up major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE). RESULTS: Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of in-hospital MACCE was significantly higher in CABG compared to PCI in patients with impaired renal function (odds ratio [OR]: 8.13 [95% CI: 4.19-15.76], p < 0.001) and normal renal function (OR: 2.59 [95% CI: 1.79-3.73]; p < 0.001). There were no differences in follow-up MACCE between CABG and PCI in patients with impaired renal function (HR: 1.14 [95% CI: 0.71-1.81], p = 0.585) and normal renal function (HR: 1.12 [0.90-1.39], p = 0.312). CONCLUSIONS: PCI could have an advantage over CABG in revascularization of LMCA disease in patients with impaired renal function regarding in-hospital MACCE. The follow-up MACCE was comparable between PCI and CABG in patients with impaired and normal renal function.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Ponte de Artéria Coronária/efeitos adversos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/complicações , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Rim/cirurgiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of baseline anemia and anemia following revascularization on outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter, observational study conducted between January 2015 and December 2019. The data on patients with ULMCA who underwent revascularization through percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) were stratified by the hemoglobin level at baseline into anemic and non-anemic groups to compare in-hospital events. The pre-discharge hemoglobin following revascularization was categorized into very low (<80 g/L for men and women), low (≥80 and ≤119 g/L for women and ≤129 g/L for men), and normal (≥130 g/L for men and ≥120 g/L for women) to assess impact on follow-up outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2,138 patients were included, 796 (37.2%) of whom had anemia at baseline. A total of 319 developed anemia after revascularization and moved from being non-anemic at baseline to anemic at discharge. There was no difference in hospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) and mortality between CABG and PCI in anemic patients. At a median follow-up time of 20 months (interquartile range [IQR]: 27), patients with pre-discharge anemia who underwent PCI had a higher incidence of congestive heart failure (CHF) (p < 0.0001), and those who underwent CABG had significantly higher follow-up mortality (HR: 9.85 (95% CI: 2.53-38.43), p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: In this Gulf LM study, baseline anemia had no impact upon in-hospital MACCE and total mortality following revascularization (PCI or CABG). However, pre-discharge anemia is associated with worse outcomes after ULMCA disease revascularization, with significantly higher all-cause mortality in patients who had CABG, and a higher incidence of CHF in PCI patients, at a median follow-up time of 20 months (IQR: 27).
Assuntos
Anemia , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Stents Farmacológicos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Masculino , Humanos , Feminino , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/complicações , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Anemia/complicações , Sistema de Registros , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Real-world data for managing patients with diabetes and left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease are scarce. We compared percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) outcomes versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in diabetes and LMCA disease patients. METHODS: We retrospectively studied patients with LMCA presented to 14 centers from 2015 to 2019. The study included 2138 patients with unprotected LMCA disease; 1468 (68.7 %) had diabetes. Patients were grouped into; diabetes with PCI (n = 804) or CABG (n = 664) and non-diabetes with PCI (n = 418) or CABG (n = 252). RESULTS: In diabetes, cardiac (34 (5.1 %) vs. 22 (2.7 %); P = 0.016), non-cardiac (13 (2 %) vs. 6 (0.7 %); P = 0.027) and total hospital mortality (47 (7.1 %) vs. 28 (3.5 %); P = 0.0019), myocardial infarction (45 (6.8 %) vs. 11 (1.4 %); P = 0.001), cerebrovascular events (25 (3.8 %) vs. 12 (1.5 %); P = 0.005) and minor bleeding (65 (9.8 %) vs. 50 (6.2 %); P = 0.006) were significantly higher in CABG patients compared to PCI; respectively. The median follow-up time was 20 (10-37) months. In diabetes, total mortality was higher in CABG (P = 0.001) while congestive heart failure was higher in PCI (P = 0.001). There were no differences in major adverse cerebrovascular events and target lesion revascularization between PCI and CABG. Predictors of mortality in diabetes were high anatomical SYNTAX, peripheral arterial disease, chronic kidney disease, and cardiogenic shock. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter retrospective study, we found no significant difference in clinical outcomes during the short-term follow-up between PCI with second-generation DES and CABG except for lower total mortality and a higher rate of congestive heart failure in PCI group of patients. Randomized trials to characterize patients who could benefit from each treatment option are needed.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Diabetes Mellitus , Insuficiência Cardíaca , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Revascularização Miocárdica , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Insuficiência Cardíaca/etiologia , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
The optimal stenting strategy for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease remains debated. This retrospective observational study (Gulf Left Main Registry) analyzed the outcomes of 1 vs 2 stents in patients with unprotected left main percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Overall, 1222 patients were evaluated; 173 had 1 stent and 1049 had 2 stents. The 2-stent group was older with more comorbidities, higher mean SYNTAX scores, and more distal bifurcation lesions. In the 1-stent group, in-hospital events were significant for major bleeding, and better mean creatinine clearance. At median follow-up of 20 months, the 1-stent group was more likely to have target lesion revascularization (TLR). Total mortality was numerically lower in the 1-stent group (.00% vs 2.10%); however, this was not statistically significant (P=.068). Our analysis demonstrates the benefits of a 2-stent approach for ULMCA patients with high SYNTAX scores and lesions in both major side branches, while the potential benefit of a 1-stent approach for less complex ULMCA was also observed. Further studies with longer follow-up are needed to definitively demonstrate the optimal approach.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Stents Farmacológicos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Stents , Estudos Retrospectivos , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMO
A 21-years-old with Down syndrome presented with respiratory distress. Initial investigations revealed a cardiac tamponade. On further evaluation, he had positive coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), severe chest infection and severe hypothyroidism. He responded well to urgent pericardiocentesis, levothyroxine, hydrocortisone and tocilizumab.
RESUMO
The COVID-19 pandemic had significant impact on health care worldwide which has led to a reduction in all elective admissions and management of patients through virtual care. The purpose of this study is to assess changes in STEMI volumes, door to reperfusion, and the time from the onset of symptoms until reperfusion therapy, and in-hospital events between the pre-COVID-19 (PC) and after COVID-19 (AC) period. All acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) cases were retrospectively identified from 16 centers in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia during the COVID-19 period from January 01 to April 30, 2020. These cases were compared to a pre-COVID period from January 01 to April 30, 2018 and 2019. One thousand seven hundred and eighty-five patients with a mean age 56.3 (SD ± 12.4) years, 88.3% were male. During COVID-19 Pandemic the total STEMI volumes was reduced (28%, nâ¯=â¯500), STEMI volumes for those treated with reperfusion therapy was reduced too (27.6%, n= 450). Door to balloon time < 90 minutes was achieved in (73.1%, noâ¯=â¯307) during 2020. Timing from the onset of symptoms to the balloon of more than 12 hours was higher during 2020 comparing to pre-COVID 19 years (17.2% vs <3%, respectively). There were no differences between the AC and PC period with respect to in-hospital events and the length of hospital stay. There was a reduction in the STEMI volumes during 2020. Our data reflected the standard of care for STEMI patients continued during the COVID-19 pandemic while demonstrating patients delayed presenting to the hospital.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST , Tempo para o Tratamento/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , COVID-19/psicologia , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa/prevenção & controle , Feminino , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação de Processos e Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/psicologia , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/métodos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/estatística & dados numéricos , Estudos Retrospectivos , SARS-CoV-2 , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/diagnóstico , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/epidemiologia , Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnível do Segmento ST/terapia , Arábia Saudita/epidemiologia , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Padrão de Cuidado/organização & administraçãoRESUMO
OBJECTIVES: During this unprecedented time of COVID-19 pandemic, it was noticed a decline in cardiovascular cases presentation to the Emergency rooms in many countries, raising many speculations about the reasons and its ramifications. 1 - Identify the reasons during this pandemic that refrain patients from seeking medical care and its impact on stress level and medication adherence. 2 - Emphasize the new role of virtual medicine. METHODS: A quantitative descriptive cross-section survey study of 388 patients. It has been done in the cardiac outpatient department and conducted virtually through telemedicine. RESULTS: Despite this pandemic and its consensuses, the majority of cardiac outpatients will still seek medical advice in case of experiencing symptoms. Nevertheless, the fear of contracting COVID-19 infection, which can alter patient's decisions from visiting the emergency room and the increase in stress level during these challenging times, is genuine and no more an element of guessing. CONCLUSION: The majority of cardiac outpatients will wisely seek medical advice in case of serious cardiac symptoms and are adherent to their medications during this pandemic. Nevertheless, they face many concerns which need to implement a preventive and helping measures to fight the consensuses of COVID-19 such as, patient educations, establishing a hotline to all patients, telemedicine, new phone applications, and delivering medications to patients are essential in such circumstances to ensure continuity of care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transcatheter Mitral Valve-in-Valve Implantation (TMViVI) has recently emerged as a novel therapy for degenerated mitral valve bioprosthesis. Re-operative mitral valve surgery is associated with a substantial risk of mortality and morbidity. The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve implantations in our cardiac center. METHODS: Twenty-two patients underwent the valve-in-valve procedure because of bioprosthesis degeneration from March 2017 to October 2018. Clinical, echocardiographic, procedural details and survival at follow up were assessed. RESULTS: Eight patients refused re-operative cardiac surgery while others were deemed a high risk for conventional re-operative sternotomy. All patients had TMViVI performed via a trans-septal approach, and the prosthesis was implanted successfully with immediate hemodynamic improvement in 20 patients. One patient had tamponade (4.55%), two had permanent pacemaker insertion (9.09%), two patients had a renal impairment (9.09%), and three patients had vascular complications (13.64%). There was one aborted procedure for the failure to cross the tissue valve with a transcatheter valve, and one patient was converted to an emergency mitral valve surgery. All patients were discharged in NYHA class I/II and NYHA class was markedly improved at one-year follow-up (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Trans-septal mitral valve-in-valve implantation can be performed safely for degenerative mitral valve bioprosthesis and with favorable early clinical and hemodynamic outcomes.