Renal allograft-related inflammation complicated by acute coronary syndromes: A case report.

INTRODUCTION: Persistent systemic inflammation is considered to be predictive for future cardiovascular events. Here, in a patient with pyelonephritis of his failed renal allograft, consecutive coronary angiograms proved that coronary artery disease progressed within 3 weeks, when infection was uncontrolled. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 52-year-old male type 2 diabetic with a failed renal allograft suffering from hematuria, leukocyturia, and chest pain at rest was hospitalized. DIAGNOSES: An acute coronary syndrome in presence of pyelonephritis was diagnosed. Besides pyelonephritis, the histological examination of the kidney transplant revealed signs of chronic rejection and the presence of a renal cell carcinoma in situ. INTERVENTIONS: A percutaneous coronary intervention was performed, and an elective surgery for allograft removal was scheduled. However, within 5 weeks after discharge, two more surges of infection coincided with episodes of unstable angina. OUTCOMES: Once the renal allograft has been removed, systemic inflammation was contained. The patient was not re-hospitalized for acute-coronary syndrome within the next 12 months. CONCLUSION: Surges of systemic inflammation due to infection were paralleled by instability of coronary plaques as documented by repeat coronary angiograms.

Role of inducibility and its dynamic change in the outcome of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation: a single center prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The role of atrial arrhythmia inducibility as an endpoint of catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been a controversial subject in many studies. Our goal is to evaluate the significance of inducibility, the impact of multiple sites or protocols of stimulation or the change in inducibility status in a prospective study including patients with AF undergoing first catheter ablation. METHODS: We studied 170 consecutive patients with AF (62.9% paroxysmal) undergoing catheter ablation. All patients underwent two separate stimulation protocols before and after the ablation from the coronary sinus ostium and the left atrial appendage: burst pacing at 300, 250, 200 milliseconds (or until refractoriness) for 10 seconds and ramp decrementing from 300 to 200 milliseconds in increments of 10 milliseconds every three beats for 10 seconds. Inducibility was defined as any sustained AF or organized atrial tachycardia (AT) lasting >30 seconds. RESULTS: We had AF/AT inducibility in 55 patients at baseline compared to 36 following ablation. After a mean of 41, 3 months follow-up, 115 patients were free of AF. Inducibility before or after the ablation or change in inducibility status did not influence AF recurrence. There were no significant differences regarding paroxysmal or persistent patients with AF. CONCLUSIONS: Non-inducibility of atrial arrhythmia or change in inducibility status following pulmonary vein (PV) isolation and substrate modification are not associated with long-term freedom from recurrent arrhythmia. Therefore, the use of induction of an endpoint in AF ablation is limited.