Immediate coronary angiography and systematic targeted temperature management are associated with improved outcome in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest.

Rapid and systematic access to coronary angiography (CAG) and target temperature management (TTM) might improve outcome in comatose patients who survive cardiac arrest (CA). However, there is controversy around indicating immediate CAG in the absence of transmural ischemia on the electrocardiogram after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). We evaluated the short- and long-term outcome of patients undergoing systematic CAG and TTM, based on whether culprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed. All consecutive comatose CA survivors without obvious extra-cardiac causes undergoing TTM were included. Analysis involved the entire population and subgroups, namely patients with initial unshockable rhythm, no ST elevation on electrocardiogram, and good neurological recovery. We enrolled 107 patients with a median age of 64.9 (57.7-73.6) years. The initial rhythm was shockable in 83 (77.6%). Sixty-six (61.7%) patients underwent PCI. In-hospital survival was 71%. It was 78.8% and 58.5% in those undergoing or not PCI (p = 0.022), respectively. Age, time from CA to ROSC and culprit lesion PCI were independent predictors of in-hospital survival. Long-term survival was significantly higher in patients who underwent PCI (respectively 61.5% vs 34.1%; Log-rank: p = 0.002). Revascularization was associated with better outcomes regardless of initial rhythm (shockable vs non-shockable) and ST deviation (elevation vs no-elevation), and improved the long-term survival of patients discharged with good neurological recovery. Systematic CAG and revascularization, when indicated, were associated with higher survival in comatose patients undergoing TTM, regardless of initial rhythm and ST deviation in the post-ROSC electrocardiogram. The benefit was sustained at long-term particularly in those with neurological recovery.

Switching from clopidogrel to prasugrel to protect early invasive treatment in acute coronary syndromes: Results of the switch over trial.

BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel is used to pretreat patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS), but prasugrel provides better platelet inhibition with improved outcome. However, switching from clopidogrel at the time of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains incompletely defined. Our aim was to compare the pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of 3 prasugrel loading doses (LDs; G1:10mg, G2: 30mg, and G3: 60mg) before PCI. A fourth group, continuing clopidogrel, served as control (G4). METHODS: 100 clopidogrel-pretreated patients were enrolled and blood collected before PCI, 30min, 1, 2, 4, 6, 24 and 48h thereafter. Platelet inhibition was measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation (VASP) and Verify-Now assays. The end-points (EP) was the difference of PD effect at 4h between G3 and G4 (primary EP) with hierarchic evaluation between G2 and G1 versus G4 (secondary EP). A mixed-design ANOVA statistic was used to compare the four group scores over time. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were balanced across the groups. Only patients receiving 60 and 30mg prasugrel LDs showed a rapid (<1h) and significant (p<0.001) platelet inhibition up to 48h after PCI·The primary EP was met by G3 (p<0.0001), but also G2 scored different (p<0-001) from G4 at 4h after PCI. Similar findings were observed with Verify-Now. No differences in 30-day clinical outcomes were observed across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Switching NSTE-ACS patients before PCI to prasugrel 60 or 30mg LDs determined a better and faster platelet inhibition than continuing clopidogrel, while PCI it is still underway.

[Coronary care units: who to admit and how long]. / Le unità di terapia intensiva cardiologica: chi ricoverare, per quanto tempo.

Coronary care units (CCUs) should ensure the best intensive therapy for all critical cardiologic patients and not only for patients with acute coronary heart disease. Such structures apply the Hub & Spoke model, which consists of an integrated network of services allowing a health organization in which different realities interact and collaborate; this organization is composed of referral core centers (Hubs) and smaller structures (Spokes) referring to Hubs that are engaged in selection, channeling of patients in the acute phase, and for follow-up care of patients in the post-acute phase. The CCUs, based on the organizational reality in which they operate, must hospitalize and dismiss complex patients in a brief lapse of time. Criteria for CCU admission and length of stay are still ill-defined. Therefore, the following paper, summarizing the contents of the recent CCU convention at the ANMCO congress, attempts to define the priorities for hospitalization in the CCU, based on three different levels of evidence: level A indication (immediate mandatory admission); level B indication (immediate admission, the availability of beds allowing); level C indication (admission not indicated, but possible in the absence of other alternatives, e.g. limited bed availability in other intensive care units). Concerning the duration of stay within the CCU, clear-cut indications are difficult, but the concept is emphasized that the length of stay should be minimized, given the limited bed availability, in order to ensure the availability of intensive monitoring to all critical patients.