La coronarioectasia difiere en los factores de riesgo clásicos de enfermedad coronaria / Compared to usual coronary artery disease risk factors are different in those with coronary ectasia

Introducción: La coronarioectasia (CE), es una infrecuente forma de enfermedad coronaria, en que dilataciones coronarias coexisten con placas ateroes-cleróticas. Puede presentarse como cuadros agudos o crónicos, aún sin estenosis significativa. Distintas series lo han asociado a perfiles variados de factores de riesgo cardiovascular. Métodos: Se efectuó un estudio analítico de cohorte retrospectivo, evaluando las coronariografías realizadas en nuestro centro entre Junio de 2009 a Julio de 2015. Se definió CE como dilatación >1,5 veces comparado con el diámetro de la arteria de referencia. Se estudiaron factores de riesgo cardiovascular clásicos y se compararon con un grupo control elegido de forma aleatoria. Resultados: De 9648 coronariografías, 64 presentaban CE. La mayor parte eran hombres, de menor edad, con menos hipertensión arterial, diabetes e hiperlipidemia, comparados con los controles. En la mayoría de los casos la CE afectaba a 3 vasos (83,3%) y en solo 5 casos (28%) coexistía con estenosis. El análisis multivariado señaló como factores de riesgo significativos a la edad < 55 años (OR: 2,63, IC: 1,4 -4,9, p<0,05), Obesidad (OR: 3,2; IC:1,7-5,8, p<0,05) e Hiperlipidemia (OR: 0,09; IC: 0,016-0,54). Considerando los pacientes que se presentaron como SCA se observó que los pacientes con CE fueron más jóvenes (45,9 años; DE: 5,9 v/s 48,8 años; DE: 5,3; p=0,02), y con menos hiperlipidemia (OR:0,2; IC:0,06-0,7, p=0,01). Respecto a la obesidad, esta fue más preva-lente en pacientes con CE (OR: 2,49; IC: 0,956-6,4. p=ns). Conclusión: La CE es una entidad poco frecuente, que puede producir SCA aun en ausencia de estenosis significativa. Son pacientes más jóvenes y con menos antecedente de dislipidemia, por lo que en su patogenia aparentemente participan factores diferentes a los de la enfermedad ateroesclerótica obstructiva.

Background: Coronary ectasia (CE) is an uncommon condition where coronary artery dilatation coexists with atherosclerotic plaques. It may present as either acute or chronic syndromes even in the absence of coronary artery stenosis. Differences in risk factors associated to CE compared to those associated to usual CAD have been described. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed coronary arteriograms performed between June 2009 and July 2015. CE was defined as the presence of dilatation >1.5 times the diameter of the unaffected vessel. Cardiovascular risk factors were compared in CE vs a random sample of non-CE patients. Results: Out of 9648 coronary arteriograms 64 showed CE (9.5%). Compared to controls, CE patients were males, younger and hat lower prevalence or hypertension, diabetes and hyperlipidemia. CE was present in all 3 main vessels in 83.3% of CE patients and co-existed with significant stenosis in only 28%. Multivariate analysis showed that significant differences in risk factors were age <55 years (OR: 2.63; CI: 1.4 to 4.9, p <0.05), obesity (OR: 3 2; CI: 1.7 to 5.8, p <0.05) and hyperlipidemia (OR: 0.09; CI: 0.016 to 0.54). In patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome, those with CE were younger (45,9 years; SD: 5,9 v/s 48,8 years; SD: 5,3; p=0,02), y and a lower prevalence or hyperlipidemia (OR:0,2; IC:0,06-0,7, p=0,01). Conclusion: CE is an infrequent condition in CAD. It may me associated to either acute or chronic syndromes. They are younger, have a lower prevalence of dyslipidemia suggesting that risk factors other than traditionally recognized in obstructive CAD influence de development of CE.

Management of a distal coronary psudoaneurysm using an amplatzer vascular plug II.

Coronary pseudoaneurysms are rare complications of coronary perforation or dissection that can progress to rupture and cardiac tamponade. There is no optimal standard treatment, and their management is often guided by individual criteria including the risk of rupture, location in the coronary tree, size and flow in it. All of them must be taken into account when deciding the best treatment strategy. We report a case in which an Amplatzer Vascular Plug II (AVP II) was used successfully to occlude a distal coronary pseudoaneurysm that developed early after rescue angioplasty in a woman with a myocardial infarction due to spontaneous coronary dissection.

Microvascular coronary flow comparison in acute myocardial infarction angioplasty treated with a mesh covered stent (MGUARD stent) versus bare metal stent: MICAMI-MGUARD.

BACKGROUND: Distal embolization of thrombus/platelet aggregates decreases myocardial reperfusion during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and is associated with worse immediate and long-term prognosis of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). OBJECTIVE: Assess the efficacy of a mesh covered stent (MGuard™ stent, MGS) in preventing distal embolization and microvascular reperfusion impairment during primary PCI, compared with a bare metal stent (BMS). METHODS: Forty patients with STEMI referred for primary PCI were randomized for stenting the culprit lesion with the MGS (n = 20) or a BMS (n = 20). Blinded experts performed off-line measurements of angiographic epicardial and microvascular reperfusion criteria: TIMI flow grade, myocardial blush, corrected TIMI frame count (cTFC). RESULTS: At baseline clinical, angiographic and procedural variables were not different between groups. Post PCI TIMI flow grade was similar in both groups. We observed better myocardial Blush grade in group MGS compared to BMS (median value 3.0 vs 2.5, 2p = 0.006) and cTFC (mean cTFC: MGS 19.65 ± 4.07 vs BMS 27.35 ± 7.15, 2p < 0.001, cTFC mean difference MGS-BMS: 7.7, CI 95%: 3.94 to 11.46). MGS stent group had a higher percentage of successful angioplasty (cTFC ≤ 23: MGS 85% vs BMS 30%, 2p < 0.001). We had two cases of acute stent thrombosis (one for each group) at 30days follow up, but no clinical events at 6 months follow up. CONCLUSIONS: In this exploratory study, MGS significantly improved microvascular reperfusion criteria compared with a BMS in primary PCI. However its safety and impact on clinical outcomes should be verified in larger randomized clinical trials.