Early coronary angiography in NSTEMI: a regional Victorian perspective.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines highlight a paucity of evidence guiding optimal timing for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) in high-risk and non-high-risk cases. AIM: We assessed long-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) in NSTEMI patients undergoing early (<24 h) versus delayed (>24 h) coronary angiography at 6 years. Secondary end-points included all-cause mortality and cumulative MACE outcomes. METHODS: Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were assessed among 355 patients presenting to a tertiary regional hospital between 2017 and 2018. Cox proportional hazard models were generated for MACE and all-cause mortality outcomes, adjusting for the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) score, patient demographics, biomarkers and comorbidities. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy patients were included; 147 (54.4%) and 123 (45.6%) underwent early and delayed coronary angiography respectively. Median time to coronary angiography was 13.3 and 45.4 h respectively. At 6 years, 103 patients (38.1%) experienced MACE; 41 in the early group and 62 in the delayed group (hazard ratio (HR) = 2.23; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.50-3.31). After multivariable adjustment, the delayed group had higher rates of MACE (HR = 1.79; 95% CI = 1.19-2.70), all-cause mortality (HR = 2.76; 95% CI = 1.36-5.63) and cumulative MACE (incidence rate ratio = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.12-2.11). Subgroup analysis of MACE outcomes in rural and weekend NSTEMI presentations was not significant between early and delayed coronary angiography (HR = 1.49; 95% CI = 0.83-2.62). CONCLUSION: Higher MACE rates in the delayed intervention group suggest further investigation is needed. Randomised control trials would be well suited to assess the role of early invasive intervention across all NSTEMI risk groups.

Treatment inequity in antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: releasing the evidence vacuum.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a global health problem and an independent risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Despite evidence-based therapies significantly improving cardiovascular mortality outcomes in the general population and those with non-dialysis-dependent CKD, this risk reduction has not translated to patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). Absent from all major antiplatelet trials, this has led to insufficient safety data for P2Y12 inhibitor prescriptions and treatment inequity in this subpopulation. This review article presents an overview of the progression of research in understanding antiplatelet therapy for ischaemic heart disease in patients with advanced CKD (defined as eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2). Beyond trial recruitment strategies, new approaches should focus on registry documentation by CKD stage, risk stratification with biomarkers associated with inflammation and haemorrhage and building a knowledge base on optimal duration of dual and single antiplatelet therapies.

What is the context? Patients with kidney disease are more likely to experience a heart attack than those without.Those with advanced kidney disease have a higher risk of death following a heart attack.Over the past two decades, advances in treatment following a heart attack have reduced the risk of death, however this has not translated to those with advanced kidney disease.Progression of kidney disease influences antiplatelet (e.g. clopidogrel) treatment efficacy.What is new?This contemporary review analyses registry and trial data to highlight some of the issues surrounding treatment inequity in patients with advanced kidney disease.This article describes potential mechanisms by which progression of kidney disease can influence clotting, bleeding and antiplatelet treatments.What is the impact?Further research into antiplatelet therapy for patients with advanced kidney disease is required.Registry and trial data can improve upon classification of kidney disease for future research.Future trials in antiplatelet therapy for advanced kidney disease are anticipated.

Sudden cardiac death in ischaemic heart disease: coronary thrombosis or myocardial fibrosis?

The mechanisms underlying sudden cardiac death (SCD) in patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD) caused by coronary atherosclerosis are not yet clarified. For decades, acute coronary causes have been sought as the main triggers of SCD in these patients. In fact, angiographic and pathological studies in cardiac arrest survivors and SCD victims, respectively, consistently show that acute plaque events occur in ∼50% of SCD of patients with IHD. Among the acute events, plaque rupture and erosion triggering acute coronary thrombosis remain the main substrates; however, a significant percentage of plaque haemorrhage (20%) is identified by pathological studies. Its role in acute coronary thrombosis is unknown and deserves future intravascular imaging developments. In the remaining 50% of SCD, the atherosclerotic coronary disease shows the characteristics of structural stability. More recent studies have focused attention not only on the coronary tree and on the search for acute complications of atherosclerotic plaques but also on myocardial tissue, identifying replacement and patchy fibrosis as the most frequent findings in the post-mortem hearts of these patients, a feature followed by cardiac hypertrophy, as assessed by the heart weight, usually associated with fibrosis. The possibility of characterizing myocardial fibrosis in vivo, besides confirming the pathological data, now offers new risk stratification perspectives to prevent SCD in IHD, alongside the consolidated secondary prevention criteria based on left ventricular dysfunction.

Trans-septal left ventricular endocardial lead in a patient with extensive anterior myocardial infarction and left ventricle (LV) apical endoventriculoplasty using a Vascutek patch-case report.

Background: Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) implantation has significantly improved quality of life and reduced overall mortality due to heart failure. The conventional method of CRT implantation is implanting a left ventricle (LV) lead into a side branch of the coronary sinus (CS) tributary to pace the epicardial surface and capture the LV. This is safe, and well tolerated with a high success rate. The rate of failure to place an LV lead has decreased over time, however, there are still challenging cases where a conventional CRT implant fails and alternative techniques are being considered, one such technique is trans-septal endocardial LV lead placement used to capture the LV, endocardially but its use is limited due to lack of evidence, practice uptake and clinical trials. Case Description: We present, a case report of a patient for whom we successfully used a trans-septal left ventricle (TSLV) endocardial lead implantation approach following a failed LV lead implant via the CS to get effective cardiac resynchronisation. Conclusions: Post-TSLV lead implantation follow-up checks were normal with good electrical parameters and appropriate biventricular pacing. No post-procedural complications were reported, and echocardiographic parameters improved at follow-up. We believe, although, TSLV lead implant is more complex and often double operators are required, in selected patients, it can be a safe alternative following a failed traditional LV lead implant via the CS.