Combined Rotational excimer lASER coronary atherectomy (RASER) in non-crossable, non-dilatable coronary artery disease: observations from a single center.

BACKGROUND: Balloon non-crossable stenoses represent a challenging subset of coronary artery disease (CAD). They are clinically associated with patients who are older, frailer, and with multi-morbidities, and angiographically with increased tortuosity and coronary artery calcification. Combined rotational (RA) excimer laser coronary atherectomy (ELCA), or RASER, may facilitate stent delivery and deployment in non-crossable, non-dilatable severely calcified lesions. In this study, we assessed preliminary safety and efficacy of the RASER hybrid technique. METHODS: RASER feasible percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures performed at a large tertiary hospital in the northeast of England were retrospectively analyzed from September 1, 2008, to February 28, 2022. Major endpoints were in-hospital death from any cause, as well as procedural and angiographic success, defined by stent delivery with less than 50% residual stenosis and without clinical or angiographic complications, respectively. RESULTS: From 74 unique cases, there were 28 RASER, 24 ELCA/RA, 16 balloon angioplasty ± stenting, and 6 medically treated patients. In-hospital mortality rate was 5.2%, including 1 ELCA- and 3 RASER-treated patients. Successful stent delivery was achieved in significantly more RASER-treated patients compared to ELCA/RA- or balloon-treated patients: 96.4% (27/28), 25% (6/24), and 31.3% (5/16) respectively (P less than .001). CONCLUSIONS: In our retrospective, single-center study, patients with CAD who were deemed appropriate for RASER PCI had a high peri-procedural mortality rate. In this context, adjunctive RASER therapy provides acceptable safety and efficacy as a bailout strategy, with at least 3 out of 5 patients achieving satisfactory procedural and angiographic results. Randomized controlled trials are needed to comprehensively compare the clinical outcomes of high-risk RASER PCI vs conservative medical therapy.

Intracoronary imaging in PCI for acute coronary syndrome: Insights from British Cardiovascular Intervention Society registry.

BACKGROUND: While previous studies have demonstrated the superiority of ICI-guided PCI over an angiography-based approach, there are limited data on all-comer ACS patients. This study aimed to identify the characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients undergoing intracoronary imaging (ICI) guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: All patient undergoing PCI for ACS in England and Wales between 2006 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed and stratified according to ICI utilization. The outcomes assessed were in-hospital all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) using multivariable logistic regression models. RESULTS: 598,921 patients underwent PCI for ACS, of which 41,716 (7.0 %) had ICI which was predominantly driven by IVUS use (5.6 %). ICI use steadily increased from 1.4 % in 2006 to 13.5 % in 2019. Adjusted odds of mortality (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.58-0.83) and MACCE (OR 0.77, 95%CI 0.73-0.83) were significantly lower in the ICI group. The association between ICI and improved outcomes varied according to vessel treated with both left main stem (LMS) and LMS/left anterior descending (LAD) PCI associated with significantly lower odds of mortality (OR 0.34, 95%CI 0.27-0.44, OR 0.51 95%CI 0.45-0.56) and MACCE (OR 0.44 95%CI 0.35-0.54, OR 0.67 95%CI 0.62-0.72) respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although ICI use has steadily increased, less than one in seven patients underwent ICI-guided PCI. The association between ICI use and improved in-hospital outcomes was mainly observed in PCI procedures involving LMS and LAD.

Early experience of intravascular lithotripsy in unprotected calcified left main coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of unprotected severely calcified left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease is a complex interventional procedure. Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) and rotational atherectomy (RA) are safe and effective methods of treating coronary calcification in the non-LMCA setting. This retrospective analysis assessed the feasibility of IVL versus RA in unprotected LMCA disease. METHODS: We analyzed IVL and RA procedures performed at a large tertiary hospital in the Northeast of England from January 1, 2019 to April 31, 2022. Major safety and efficacy endpoints were procedural and angiographic success, defined by stent delivery with <50 % residual stenosis and without clinical or angiographic complications, respectively. Another important clinical endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year. RESULTS: From 242 patients, 44 had LMCA IVL, 81 had LMCA RA and 117 had non-LMCA IVL. Patients with LMCA disease were older and more likely to have aortic stenosis. IVL was a second-line or bailout technique in 86.4 % LMCA and 92.2 % non-LMCA cases. Procedural and angiographic success rates were ≥ 84 % across all groups (p > 0.05). In 3 LMCA IVL and 3 LMCA RA cases arrhythmias and cardiac tamponade complicated the procedures respectively. At 1 year, MACE occurred in 10/44 (22.7 %) LMCA IVL, 16/81 (19.8 %) LMCA RA and 25/117 (21.4 %) cases (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In our single center retrospective analysis, IVL is feasible in unprotected calcified LMCA as a second-line and third-line adjuvant calcium modification technique. Its use in unprotected calcified LMCA disease should be formalized with the undertaking of large randomized controlled trials.

The Dilemma of Repeat In-Stent Restenosis: Can Intravascular Lithotripsy Provide an Alternative Approach to an Age-old Problem?

In-stent restenosis (ISR) has always been considered a conundrum for interventional cardiologists. Despite many technical advances in the past 20 years aimed at reducing its occurrence, this area of interventional cardiology remains challenging. Here, we present a novel use of intravascular lithotripsy therapy (IVL) in a patient with repeat ISR, in whom IVL treatment has provided excellent procedural and follow-up results. Here, we present a 79-year-old man with previous ISR to a left circumflex artery (LCX) stent presenting with angina. An elective coronary angiogram confirmed recurrent ISR in the LCX. This was treated by IVL, which provided an excellent procedural result. The patient made an uneventful recovery and was discharged the same day with a follow-up 90 days postprocedure, at which point they were asymptomatic from angina. IVL is a relatively simple technique to modify ISR with a short learning curve. This case presentation highlights a novel use of IVL in a subclass of patients that remains challenging for the interventional cardiology community.

Excimer Laser With and Without Contrast for the Management of Under-Expanded Stents.

Under-expanded and under-deployed stents carry a high risk of restenosis and thrombosis, with inherent serious clinical complications. The management of under-expanded stents is a difficult clinical entity. METHOD: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data on all under-expanded, under-deployed stents that were managed by excimer laser, with and without contrast, performed at the Freeman Hospital, a large tertiary cardiac center, in the northeast of England. RESULTS: Between November 2014 and September 2016, a total of 19 cases were treated with excimer laser with or without contrast, with the initial approach done without contrast. All cases were successful with a stepwise energy-level approach. There were no clinical, procedural, or in-hospital complications, with full expansion of the stents after laser application. CONCLUSION: The use of excimer laser with or without contrast offers a safe and effective method for managing under-expanded and under-deployed stents and potentially avoiding long-term complications of under-expansion.

Shock-index as a novel predictor of long-term outcome following primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

UNLABELLED: Early identification of higher risk patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) will allow a more aggressive strategy and approach. The aim of this study was to evaluate the shock index (ratio of heart rate/systolic blood pressure on admission) as a predictor of mortality post PPCI in addition to other parameters. METHODS: We analysed prospectively collected data on 3049 STEMI patients treated with PPCI in a large tertiary centre between March 2008-December 2011, out of which 2424 patients were aged up to 75 years (young) and 625 patients were older than 75 years (elderly). RESULTS: Compared to younger patients, in-hospital mortality rates were four-fold higher in the elderly (11.5% vs 2.8%, odds ratio (OR) 3.5, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.0-5.9). Cardiogenic shock (OR 8.7 (5.1-14.6)), non-TIMI3 (Thrombosis In Myocardial Infarction) flow post percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (OR 5.0 (3.1-7.9)), age over 75 (OR 3.5 (2.3-5.3)) and a positive shock index pre PPCI (OR 3.5 (2.0-5.9)) were the strongest independent predictors of in-hospital mortality. For long-term outcome (median follow-up period 454 days) we excluded 141 (4.6%) patients that died during the initial hospital stay. Previous angina (hazard ratio (HR) 2.9), and previous cerebrovascular events (HR 3.7) were predictors of adverse outcome in the younger patients, while previous myocardial infarction (HR 2.0) and a positive shock index (HR 2.3) were predictors in the elderly. Cardiogenic shock prior to PPCI was not able to predict long-term outcome for in-hospital survivors. CONCLUSION: Mortality rates following PPCI were higher in elderly patients although remained acceptable. Invasively measured shock index before PPCI is the strongest independent predictor of long-term outcome in elderly patients. In addition, predictors of in-hospital mortality were similar across different age groups but differed significantly in relation to longer-term mortality.

Thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction: A review of clinical evidence and guidelines.

Acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is characterized by complete thrombotic occlusion of a major coronary artery. Early recanalization of the infarct-related artery is most efficiently delivered by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), however this does not always restore normal myocardial perfusion, mainly due to distal embolization of the thrombus and microvascular obstruction. Early evidence for manual thrombus aspiration during PPCI was promising and this was once considered an important aspect of the procedure, especially in patients with a high thrombus burden. However, a large body of evidence from recent major randomized controlled trials (notably TASTE and TOTAL) does not support the routine use of manual thrombus aspiration in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI.

Provision of gastroprotective medication and bleeding risk following acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with increased mortality. ACCF/AHA/SCAI guidelines recommend prophylaxis to prevent GI bleeding in patients, with the highest GI bleeding risks taking dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The REPLACE risk score identifies factors predictive of peri-PCI bleeding from vascular access and non-access sites. We determined whether high bleeding risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients taking DAPT were appropriately provided with GI prophylaxis and investigated the association between age and clinical presentation on the likelihood of receiving prophylactic therapy. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of all non-elective PCI patients at a single center between May and December 2008 stratified by age (<65, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years). REPLACE scores were calculated and discharge medication was obtained from case records. RESULTS: Complete discharge medication data were available for 800 patients (median age, 63 years; 45.1% with ST-elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI]). A total of 370 patients (46.3%) were high bleeding risk (REPLACE scores ≥ 10), including all patients ≥ 75 years (n = 173), 83.5% of patients 65-74 years (n = 177), and 4.8% of patients <65 years (n = 20). In total, 97.6% were discharged on DAPT. Within the high bleeding risk group, 45.1% received GI prophylaxis. Patients 65-74 years were least likely to receive prophylaxis (<65 years, 60%; 65-74 years, 38.4%; ≥ 75 years, 50.3%; P<.03). Presentation with STEMI was independently associated with a reduced likelihood of GI prophylaxis provision (odds ratio, 0.63; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.99; P=.045). CONCLUSIONS: Less than half of ACS patients at high bleeding risk taking DAPT are provided with GI prophylaxis. Increased use of objective bleeding risk scores may help guide risk/benefit decisions in patients taking clopidogrel and proton pump inhibitors.

Mortality outcome of out-of-hours primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the current era.

AIMS: To assess the impact of the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) on in-hospital and long-term all-cause mortality in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study retrospectively analyses the prospectively collected data on 2571 consecutive PPCI-treated STEMI patients between March 2008 and June 2011. Of these, 1036 patients (40.3%) underwent PPCI during a weekday between 08:00 and 18:00 (routine-hours group) and 1535 patients (59.7%) underwent PPCI on a weekday between 18:00 and 08:00 or a weekend (out-of-hours group). Compared with the routine-hours group, the out-of-hours group had a lower mean age, fewer patients with previous angina, longer call-to-hospital time, and fewer multivessel PCI. The overall in-hospital mortality rate was 4.5% with no significant difference [0.2%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -1.4 to 1.9%] between the routine-hours group (4.3%) and the out-of-hours group (4.6%) (adjusted odds ratio: 1.33, 95% CI: 0.73-2.40, P = 0.35). During a mean follow-up period of 560 days, 295 patients (11.5%) died, 12.2% in the routine-hours group and 11.0% in the out-of-hours group (difference of -0.1%, 95% CI: -0.4 to 0.2%). In the multiple Cox proportional hazards model, there was no difference in mortality between the two groups (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.82-1.46, P = 0.57). Similarly, no increase in mortality was seen in patients who underwent PPCI later at night (22:00-06:00). CONCLUSION: This study of real-world, unselected STEMI patients demonstrates that in a large, well-staffed centre, PPCI outside routine-working hours is safe with no difference in outcome of in-hospital and long-term mortality compared with PPCI during routine-working hours.