Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 460
Filtrar
1.
Am Heart J ; 233: 14-19, 2020 Nov 27.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33249094
5.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 13(23): 2806-2810, 2020 Dec 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33069644

RESUMO

Accurate evaluation of the quality of invasive cardiology procedures requires appraisal of case selection, technical performance, and procedural and clinical outcomes. Regrettably, the medical care delivery system poses a number of obstacles to developing and sustaining a high-quality environment. The purposes of this viewpoint are to summarize the most common impediments, followed to summarize the most common impediments, followed by the optimal ways to design and sustain a quality assurance program to overcome these barriers. A 7-step program to create and implement an effective quality assurance program is outlined.

6.
Cardiol Clin ; 38(4): 527-542, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33036715

RESUMO

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a complex condition with a high risk for morbidity and mortality. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices were developed to support patients with CS in cases refractory to treatment with vasoactive medications. Current devices include intra-aortic balloon pumps, intravascular microaxial pumps, percutaneous LVAD, percutaneous RVAD, and VA ECMO. Data from limited observational studies and clinical trials show a clear difference in the level of hemodynamic support offered by each device. However, at this point, there are insufficient clinical trial data to guide MCS selection and, until ongoing clinical trials are completed, use of the right device for the right patient depends largely on clinical judgment.

7.
Eur Heart J Acute Cardiovasc Care ; : 2048872619896205, 2020 Oct 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33081496

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Previous studies published before the era of systematic early invasive strategy have reported a higher mortality in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with heart failure. The aim of our study was to compare the clinical characteristics, outcomes and causes of death of patients according to their heart failure status at admission in a large non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction population with planned early invasive management. METHODS: We performed a post-hoc analysis of the Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome with Otamixaban randomised trial which included non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with systematic coronary angiography within 72 h. Patients were categorised according to presence or absence of heart failure (Killip grade ≥2) at admission. RESULTS: A total of 13,172 patients were enrolled, of whom 944 (7.2%) had heart failure. At day 30, death occurred in 213 patients (1.6%) and cardiovascular death was the dominant cause of death in both groups ((with vs without heart failure) 78.8% vs 78.4%, p = 0.94). At six months, death occurred in 90/944 (9.5%) patients with heart failure and 258/12228 patients without heart failure (2.1%) (p < 0.001). After adjustment on Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events risk score, heart failure was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality at day 30 (odds ratio: 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-2.36, p = 0.02) and at day 180 (odds ratio: 1.77; 95% confidence interval, 1.3-2.42, p < 0.001) as well as of ischaemic complications (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis or stroke at day 30 (odds ratio: 1.28; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.62, p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with heart failure at admission still have worse outcomes than those without heart failure, even with systematic early invasive strategy. Further efforts are needed to improve the prognosis of these high risk patients.

8.
Crit Pathw Cardiol ; 19(4): 166-172, 2020 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32947379

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To describe from a noninterventional registry (Utilization of Ticagrelor in the Upstream Setting for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome), the short-term ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI) are managed with a loading dose (LD) of a P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12i) given at least 4 hours before diagnostic angiography and delineation of coronary anatomy. Prior data on the effects of such "upstream loading" have been inconsistent. METHODS: In 53 US hospitals, we evaluated the in-hospital care and outcomes of patients with confirmed non-ST elevation MI managed with an interventional strategy and loaded upstream (at least 4 h before diagnostic angiography) with oral P2Y12i therapy. Patients entered into the database were grouped into 1 of 4 cohorts for analysis: (1) overall cohort, (2) thienopyridine (clopidogrel or prasugrel) load, (3) ticagrelor load, and (4) ticagrelor-consistent. The fourth cohort is a subset of cohort 3 that received ticagrelor throughout the index hospital stay and at discharge. We evaluated in-hospital clinical course and ischemic and bleeding outcomes in all patients and also 30-day outcomes in the ticagrelor-consistent cohort. RESULTS: A total of 3355 patients were enrolled, of whom 1087 had 30-day follow-up. The mean (±SD) age was 63.3 ± 12.5 years, and 62.6% were male. Thrombolysis in MI and Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events scores placed these patients in the intermediate risk range, and CRUSADE scores were in the moderate risk range. The LD in Utilization of Ticagrelor in the Upstream Setting for Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome was clopidogrel in 45.6%, ticagrelor in 53.6%, and prasugrel in 0.8%. The median upstream interval (LD to angiography) was 17:27 hours and did not change appreciably over the course of the data collection period (2/15-10/19). Access was radial in 48.6% and femoral in 51.4%. Postangiography management was medical only in 32.3%, percutaneous coronary intervention in 59.4%, and coronary artery bypass grafting in 8.3%. Median length of stay was 2.7 days, and median time from angiography to coronary artery bypass grafting was 3.6 days. In-hospital mortality was 0.51%, and major bleeding (thrombolysis in MI) was 0.24%; the in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events rate was 0.7%, and stent thrombosis occurred in 0.18%. No significant differences were seen between the ticagrelor and clopidogrel cohorts in hospital, but 16% received more than 1 P2Y12i in-hospital. On follow-up (93.2% response), 86.7% of patients reported taking ticagrelor as directed. CONCLUSIONS: Upstream loading of P2Y12i was associated with very low rates of bleeding and short length of stay in a large cohort of non-ST elevation MI (NSTEMI) patients managed invasively.

9.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 76(12): 1468-1483, 2020 Sep 22.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32943165

RESUMO

Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting.

10.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 96(6): 1258-1265, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32840956

RESUMO

The society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) think tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2020 think tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease (CHD). Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's emerging leader mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialogue from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI and the industry community in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.

13.
14.
EuroIntervention ; 2020 Aug 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32830645

RESUMO

AIMS: To model the safety and effectiveness of drug-coated stents (DCS) vs. bare-metal stents (BMS) in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients according to the Academic Research Criteria (ARC) criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants from the LEADERS FREE (LF) and LEADERS FREE (LFII) studies were pooled into one dataset. Participants were treated with 30 days of DAPT. The primary safety (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) and effectiveness (target-lesion revascularization) endpoints were compared between DCS and BMS in the subgroup of patients satisfying the ARC-HBR definition using propensity-score modelling. From the 3,635 participants included in the combined LF & LFII dataset, 2,898 (79.7%) satisfied the ARC-HBR criteria (DCS: 1,923; BMS: 975). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 184 (9.8%) and in 132 (13.8%) participants in the DCS and BMS groups, respectively (adjusted HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.57-0.91; p=0.006). The risk of the primary effectiveness endpoint was also significantly lower with DCS (6.2%) vs. BMS (8.8%) (adjusted HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.94; p=0.016). Safety and effectiveness of DCS vs. BMS were consistent according to ARC-HBR status (p interaction = 0.206 and 0.260, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: DCS are safer and more effective than BMS in an ARC-defined HBR population.

15.
J Am Coll Cardiol ; 76(11): 1345-1357, 2020 09 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32710927

RESUMO

Standard evaluation and management of the patient with suspected or proven cardiovascular complications of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome related-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is challenging. Routine history, physical examination, laboratory testing, electrocardiography, and plain x-ray imaging may often suffice for such patients, but given overlap between COVID-19 and typical cardiovascular diagnoses such as heart failure and acute myocardial infarction, need frequently arises for advanced imaging techniques to assist in differential diagnosis and management. This document provides guidance in several common scenarios among patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection and possible cardiovascular involvement, including chest discomfort with electrocardiographic changes, acute hemodynamic instability, newly recognized left ventricular dysfunction, as well as imaging during the subacute/chronic phase of COVID-19. For each, the authors consider the role of biomarker testing to guide imaging decision-making, provide differential diagnostic considerations, and offer general suggestions regarding application of various advanced imaging techniques.


Assuntos
Doenças Cardiovasculares , Infecções por Coronavirus , Imagem Multimodal/métodos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Betacoronavirus , Doenças Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Doenças Cardiovasculares/etiologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/complicações , Infecções por Coronavirus/fisiopatologia , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Gerenciamento Clínico , Humanos , Pneumonia Viral/complicações , Pneumonia Viral/fisiopatologia , Pneumonia Viral/terapia
16.
Curr Atheroscler Rep ; 22(8): 42, 2020 07 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32671483

RESUMO

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review examines trials of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with optimal medical therapy (OMT) in order to inform clinical decision-making regarding the role of PCI in stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). RECENT FINDINGS: Several large, randomized, controlled trials published in recent years suggest that OMT should be the initial treatment strategy for symptomatic SIHD, but there is a role for PCI in patients who continue to be symptomatic despite OMT. Additionally, using fractional flow reserve (FFR) and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) techniques may help to identify physiologically significant lesions and may be useful in maximizing the benefit from PCI in SIHD. Recent trials demonstrate PCI for the treatment of symptomatic SIHD does not reduce mortality compared with OMT but effectively relieves anginal symptoms. However, OMT continues to be the first-line therapy for SIHD but is significantly underutilized.

17.
Am Heart J ; 227: 9-10, 2020 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32640370

RESUMO

We aimed to investigate long-term (≥5 years) outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) using a meta-analysis from updated published randomized trials. Our data showed that the risk of all-cause death as well as cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke was similar between PCI and CABG, whereas PCI had significantly higher rates of repeat revascularization compared to CABG. Decisions for PCI versus CABG for LMCAD should be based on weighing the upfront morbidity and mortality risk of CABG with late risk of repeat revascularization with PCI and taking into consideration patient preference.


Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/cirurgia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Humanos , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
18.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med ; 21(11): 1360-1368, 2020 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32473910

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: For low-risk patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) the recommended optimal discharge timing is inconsistent in guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend early discharge within 48-72 h, while the American College of Cardiology guidelines do not recommend a specific discharge strategy. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we compared outcomes with early discharge (≤3 days) versus late discharge (>3 days). METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were selected after searching MEDLINE and EMBASE database. Meta-analysis was stratified according to study design. Outcomes were reported as random effects risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Seven RCTs comprising 1780 patients and 4 observational studies comprising 39,288 patients were selected. The RCT-restricted analysis did not demonstrate significant differences in terms of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.97 [0.23-4.05]) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (RR, 0.84 [0.56-1.26]). Conversely, observational study restricted analysis showed that early vs late discharge strategy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (RR, 0.40 [0.23-0.71]) and MACE (RR, 0.45 [0.26-0.78]). There were no significant differences in hospital readmissions between early vs late discharge in both RCT or observational study analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Early discharge strategy in appropriately selected low-risk patients with STEMI undergoing PCI is safe and it has the potential to improve cost of care.

19.
Circ Cardiovasc Interv ; 13(6): e008702, 2020 06.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32527190

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Procedural anticoagulation with bivalirudin (BIV), trans-radial intervention (TRI), and use of a vascular closure device (VCD) are thought to mitigate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-related bleeding. We compared the impact of these bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) for PCIs stratified by bleeding risk. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of PCIs from 18 facilities within one health care system from 2009Q3 to 2017Q4. Bleeding risk was assessed per the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI bleeding model, with procedures stratified into 6 categories (first, second, third quartiles, 75th-90th, 90th-97.5th, and top 2.5th percentiles). Regression models were used to assess the impact of BAS on bleeding outcome. RESULTS: Of 74 953 PCIs, 9.4% used no BAS, 12.0% used BIV alone, 20.8% used TRI alone, 26.8% used VCD alone, 5.4% used TRI+BIV, and 25.6% used VCD+BIV. The crude bleeding rate was 4.4% overall. Only 2 comparisons showed significant trends across all risk strata: VCD+BIV versus no BAS, odds ratio (95% CI) range: first quartile, 0.36 (0.18-0.72) to top 2.5th percentile, 0.50 (0.32-0.78); TRI versus no BAS, odds ratio (95% CI) range: first quartile, 0.15 (0.06-0.38) to top 2.5th percentile, 0.49 (0.28-0.86). TRI had lower odds of bleeding compared with BIV for all risk strata except the top 2.5th percentile. Addition of BIV to TRI did not change the odds of bleeding for any risk strata. Factors potentially limiting use of TRI (renal failure, shock, cardiac arrest, and mechanical circulatory support) were present in ≤10% of procedures below the 90th percentile. CONCLUSIONS: Among individual BAS, only TRI had consistently lower odds of bleeding across all risk strata. Factors potentially limiting TRI were found infrequently in procedures below the 90th percentile of bleeding risk. For transfemoral PCI, VCD+BIV had lower odds of bleeding compared with no BAS across all risk strata.


Assuntos
Antitrombinas/administração & dosagem , Cateterismo Periférico , Hemorragia/prevenção & controle , Técnicas Hemostáticas , Hirudinas/administração & dosagem , Fragmentos de Peptídeos/administração & dosagem , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Artéria Radial , Idoso , Antitrombinas/efeitos adversos , Cateterismo Periférico/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Técnicas Hemostáticas/efeitos adversos , Técnicas Hemostáticas/instrumentação , Hirudinas/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fragmentos de Peptídeos/efeitos adversos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Punções , Proteínas Recombinantes/administração & dosagem , Proteínas Recombinantes/efeitos adversos , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos , Dispositivos de Oclusão Vascular
20.
Am Heart J ; 225: 55-59, 2020 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32474205

RESUMO

Cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with high mortality. In the absence of data to support coronary revascularization beyond the infarct artery and selection of circulatory support devices or medications, clinical practice may vary substantially. METHODS: We distributed a survey to interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons through relevant professional societies to determine contemporary coronary revascularization and circulatory support strategies for MI with CS and multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). RESULTS: A total of 143 participants completed the survey between 1/2019 and 8/2019. Overall, 55.2% of participants reported that the standard approach to coronary revascularization was single vessel PCI of the infarct related artery (IRA) with staged PCI of non-culprit lesions. Single vessel PCI of the IRA only (28.0%), emergency multi-vessel PCI (11.9%), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (4.9%) were standard approaches at some centers. A plurality of survey respondents (46.9%) believed initial PCI with staged CABG for multi-vessel CAD would be associated with the most favorable outcomes. A minority of respondents believed PCI-only strategies (23.1%) and CABG alone (6.3%) provided optimal care, and 23.1% were unsure of the best strategy. After PCI for CS, Impella (76.9%), intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (12.8%), and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (7.7%) were preferred. After CABG, IABP (34.3%), Impella (32.2%), and ECMO (28%) were preferred. CONCLUSIONS: This survey indicates substantial heterogeneity in clinical care in CS. There is evidence of provider uncertainty and clinical equipoise regarding the optimal management of patients with MI, multi-vessel CAD, and CS. SHORT ABSTRACT: We sought to determine contemporary practice patterns of coronary revascularization and circulatory support in patients with MI, multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), and cardiogenic shock. A survey was distributed to interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons through relevant professional societies. Survey respondents identified substantial heterogeneity in clinical care and evidence of provider uncertainty and clinical equipoise regarding the optimal management of patients with MI, multi-vessel CAD, and CS.


Assuntos
Ponte de Artéria Coronária/estatística & dados numéricos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Revascularização Miocárdica/métodos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/estatística & dados numéricos , Padrões de Prática Médica , Choque Cardiogênico/terapia , Cardiotônicos/uso terapêutico , Catecolaminas/uso terapêutico , Terapia Combinada , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/complicações , Pesquisas sobre Serviços de Saúde , Humanos , Internacionalidade , Infarto do Miocárdio/complicações , Revascularização Miocárdica/normas , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Choque Cardiogênico/etiologia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA