[Application of radial artery in total arterial coronary revascularization in elderly patients].

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the application experience and clinical effect of radial artery in total arterial coronary revascularization (TAR) in elderly patients. METHODS: Retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of patients who underwent TAR at the University of Hong Kong Shenzhen Hospital from July 1, 2020 to May 30, 2022. Patients were divided into ≥ 65-year-old group and < 65-year-old group according to age. The radial artery blood flow, diameter, intimal integrity and Allen test were evaluated by ultrasound before operation. The distal ends of radial artery were collected for pathological examination during operation. Coronary artery CT angiography (CTA) was examined postoperatively and follow up. The safety and reliability of ultrasonic assessment of radial artery and application of radial artery in elderly patients with TAR were summarized and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients received TAR, including 35 cases aged ≥ 65 years old, 66 cases aged < 65 years old; 78 cases used bilateral radial arteries, and 23 cases used unilateral radial arteries. 4 cases of bilateral internal mammary arteries. All the proximal ends of the radial artery were anastomosed to the proximal end of the ascending aorta, 34 cases were performed of "Y" grafts, and 4 cases were sequential anastomoses. There was no in-hospital death and perioperative cardiovascular events. Perioperative cerebral infarction occurred in 3 patients. 1 patients was reoperated for bleeding. Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) assistance was used in 21 patients. Poor wound healing occurred in 2 cases and healed well after debridement. Follow-up of 2 to 20 months after discharge showed no internal mammary artery occlusion and 4 radial artery occlusions; no major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) occurred, and the survival rate was 100%. There was no significant difference in the above perioperative complications and follow-up endpoints between the two age groups. CONCLUSIONS: By adjusting the order of bypass anastomosis and optimizing the preoperative evaluation method, radial artery combined with internal mammary artery can obtain better outcome early in TAR, and can be safely and reliably applied to elderly patients.

Three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography measurement of mitral valve area in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis: multiplanar reconstruction or 3D direct planimetry?

3D direct planimetry is increasingly used in clinical practice as a rapid way to measure the mitral valve area (MVA) in patients with rheumatic mitral stenosis (MS) who underwent three-dimensional transesophageal echocardiography (3D-TEE). However, data on its accuracy and reliability are scarce. This study aimed to compare the MVA measurements obtained by 3D direct planimetry to the conventional technique multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) in MS patients using 3D-TEE. We retrospectively included 49 patients with rheumatic MS undergoing clinically-indicated 3D-TEE in the study. We determined the 3D direct planimetry measurements of MVA from the left atria aspect (MVALA) and the left ventricle aspect (MVALV), and compared those with the MPR method (MVAMPR). We also assessed the major and minor diameters of the mitral valve orifice using MPR and 3D direct planimetry. We found an excellent agreement between the MVA measurements obtained by the MPR method and 3D direct planimetry (MVALA and MVALV) [intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) = 0.951 and 0.950, respectively]. However, the MVAMPR measurements were significantly larger than the MVALA and MVALV (p < 0.001; mean difference: 0.12 ± 0.15 cm2 and 0.11 ± 0.16 cm2, respectively).The inter-observer and intra-observer variability ICC were 0.875 and 0.856 for MVAMPR, 0.982 and 0.984 for MVALA, and 0.988 and 0.986 for MVALV, respectively. The major diameter measured by MPR (1.90 ± 0.42 cm) was significantly larger than that obtained by 3D direct planimetry (1.72 ± 0.35 cm for the LA aspect, p < 0.001; 1.73 ± 0.36 cm for the LV aspect, p < 0.001). The minor diameter measured by MPR (0.96 ± 0.25 cm) did not differ from that derived by 3D direct planimetry (0.94 ± 0.25 cm for the LA aspect, p = 0.07; 0.95 ± 0.27 cm for the LV aspect, p = 0.32). 3D direct planimetry provides highly reproducible measurements of MVA and yields data in excellent agreement with those obtained by the MPR method. The discrepancy between the two techniques may be due to differences in major diameter measurements of the mitral valve orifice.