Unprotected Left Main Primary PCI via Distal Transradial Access in the Setting of STEMI-Related Cardiogenic Shock.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Oliveira MDP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8445137 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Early revascularization is the gold standard for management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and cardiogenic shock (CS). The use of transradial artery access (TRA) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has increased in recent years and has emerged as a safe and effective approach to PCI in high-risk patients, with advantages in reduced major bleeding events, other peri-procedural complications, and all-cause mortality when compared with transfemoral artery access (TFA). Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated these advantages of TRA vs. TFA PCI in STEMI patients. Although there remains a lack of dedicated randomized trials in CS, observational data suggest benefits on the same endpoints as in STEMI with TRA vs. TFA PCI in CS. This review summarizes the existing literature on the use of TRA compared to TFA for STEMI and CS patients; the reduction of major bleeding events, other peri-procedural complications, and mortality associated with TRA in STEMI and CS; and technical considerations and challenges in the care of these high-risk patient populations.
| S-EPMC8476228 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a severe complication of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). In AMI-CS, the ST segment deviation on ECG may be elevated (STEMI-CS) or non-elevated (NSTEMI-CS), which may influence prognosis. Our aim was to analyze the clinical profile, acute-phase prognosis, and long-term outcomes of CS relative to the ST pattern on admission. In a prospective registry of 4647 AMI patients admitted to the intensive cardiac care unit of a university hospital between 2010 and 2019, we compared the clinical characteristics, 30-days case fatality, and long-term outcomes of AMI-CS, based on the presence of ST-segment deviation. AMI-CS developed in 239 (5.1%) patients (26.4% women): 190 (79.5%) STEMI-CS and 49 (20.5%) NSTEMI-CS. The mean age was 69.7 years. The STEMI-CS patients had larger infarcts and more mechanical complications than the NSTEMI-CS patients. The NSTEMI-CS patients had a greater prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, previous cardiovascular comorbidities, three-vessel disease, and left main disease than the STEMI-CS patients. The STEMI-CS patients had higher 30-day mortality than the NSTEMI-CS (59.5% vs. 36.7%; p = 0.004), even after multivariable adjustment (HR 1.91; 95% CI 1.16–3.14), but no differences in mortality were observed at 3 years. In conclusion, the 30-day case-fatality is higher in STEMI-CS, but the long-term outcome is similar in both groups.
| S-EPMC9224589 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimsTo evaluate safety and efficacy of distal right radial access (DRRA) compared to right radial access (RRA), for coronary procedures, in patients with smaller diameter radial arteries (SDRA) (radial artery diameter (RAD) < 2.1 mm).Methods and resultsThis is a retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy of DRRA Vs. RRA in patients undergoing coronary procedures at our cardiac catheterization laboratories over a 10- month period between September 2017 and June, 2018 (first 5 calendar months with RRA-first; next 5 calendar months with DRRA-first). All patients underwent pre-procedure ultrasound of arm arteries. All patients had RAD<2.1 mm (mean RAD 1.63 ± 0.27 mm; RAD≤1.6 mm in 73.5%). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Primary end-point of puncture success was significantly lower in DRRA vs RRA group [79.5% vs 98.5%, p < 0.0001]. Puncture success was also lower in the subgroup of patients with RAD <1.6 mm Vs. ≥ 1.6 mm in the DRRA group (p < 0.0001). The secondary end-point of puncture time was significantly higher (2.1 ± 1.4 min vs. 1.0 ± 0.45 min, p < 0.00001) in the DRRA Vs. RRA group. The occurrence of vascular access site complications (including access site hematomas), radial artery occlusion (RAO) and distal RAO at day 1 and day 30 were similar between RRA and DRRA groups.Non-vascular access-site complication was seen only in the DRRA group.ConclusionDRRA is a safe and effective access for coronary procedures; though technically challenging in patients with SDRA (RAD<2.1 mm; mean RAD 1.63 ± 0.27 mm), with lower puncture success and higher puncture time compared to RRA.
| S-EPMC7961259 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) can typically complicate with the development of cardiogenic shock; nevertheless, other less frequent types of shock may occur, including adrenal crisis (AC). We describe a case of STEMI complicated by AC and, for the first time, AC-induced focal takotsubo syndrome.
| S-EPMC9834149 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Distal transradial access for vascular interventions has gained ground recently. While the novel approach is associated with reduced radial artery occlusion and faster hemostasis, it could be related with prolonged procedural time, higher crossover rate and increased radiation, comparing to conventional transradial approach. Whether the radiation is increased in the procedures performed by the novel approach remains unambiguous. In the specific article, we aim to review the current literature and to propose possible explanations for this phenomenon. Could radiation be the Achilles' heel of distal transradial artery access?
| S-EPMC9453017 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe CULPRIT-SHOCK trial compared two treatment strategies for patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease complicated by cardiogenic shock: (a) culprit vessel only percutaneous coronary intervention (CO-PCI), with additional staged revascularisation if indicated, and (b) immediate multivessel PCI (MV-PCI).MethodsA German societal and national health service perspective was considered for three different analyses. The cost utility analysis (CUA) estimated costs and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) based on a pre-trial decision analytic model taking a lifelong time horizon. In addition, a within trial CUA estimated QALYs and costs for 1 year. Finally, the cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) used the composite primary outcome, mortality and renal failure at 30-day follow-up, and the within trial costs. Econometric and survival analysis on the trial data was used for the estimation of the model parameters. Subgroup analysis was performed following an economic protocol.ResultsThe lifelong CUA showed an incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER), CO-PCI vs. MV-PCI, of €7010 per QALY and a probability of CO-PCI being the most cost-effective strategy > 64% at a €30,000 threshold. The ICER for the within trial CUA was €14,600 and the incremental cost per case of death/renal failure avoided at 30-day follow-up was €9010. Cost-effectiveness improved with patient age and for those without diabetes.ConclusionsThe estimates of cost-effectiveness for CO-PCI vs. MV-PCI have been shown to change depending on the time horizon and type of economic evaluation performed. The results favoured a long-term horizon analysis for avoiding underestimation of QALY gains from the CO-PCI arm.
| S-EPMC7561561 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMajor bleeding (MB) is an independent predictor of mortality among ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). Prevention of access-site MB has received significant attention. However, limited data have been obtained on the influence of access-site MB vs non-access-site MB and association with subsequent adverse in-hospital outcomes in the STEMI population undergoing pPCI.MethodsWe identified 1494 STEMI patients who underwent pPCI between 2012 and 2018. Unadjusted and adjusted differences among patients with no MB, access-site MB, non-access-site MB, and in-hospital clinical outcomes were assessed. The use of bleeding-avoidance strategies and their effects on MB were also evaluated.ResultsMB occurred in 121 (8.1%) patients. Access-site MB occurred in 34 (2.3%) patients, and non-access-site MB occurred in 87 (5.8%). The median reduction in hemoglobin was 31 g/L (interquartile range: 19-43) with access-site MB, and 44 g/L (interquartile range: 29-62) with non-access-site MB. After multivariable adjustment, non-access-site MB was independently associated with in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.21; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.04-8.68), cardiogenic shock (aOR 10.91; 95% CI 5.67-20.98), and cardiac arrest (aOR 5.63; 95% CI 2.88-11.01). Conversely, access-site MB was not associated with adverse in-hospital outcomes. Bleeding-avoidance strategies were used frequently; however, after multivariable adjustment, no single bleeding-avoidance strategy was significantly associated with reduced MB.ConclusionsIn STEMI patients undergoing pPCI, non-access-site MB was independently associated with adverse in-hospital outcomes, whereas access-site MB was not. Additional study of strategies to reduce the incidence and impact of non-access-site MB appears to be warranted.
| S-EPMC8347846 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPost-CABG coronary and grafts angiography (CGAG) and interventions (PCI) have historically been performed via classic transfemoral approach. Particularly for those with left internal mammary artery (LIMA) grafts, left standard transradial access (lsTRA) represents a feasible alternative, with significant fewer vascular complications, but it has ergonomic disadvantage for the operator because of the need to bend over the patients, especially in obese ones. Distal transradial access (dTRA) may provide important advantages, including shorter hemostasis and greater patient and operator comfort, mainly for left dTRA (ldTRA). We aim to describe the feasibility and safety of right and left dTRA for post-CABG CGAG and PCI.Material and methodsFrom February 2019 to April 2021, 111 consecutive post-CABG patients submitted to CGAG and/or PCI via dTRA have been enrolled.ResultsMean patient age was 67.6 years old. Most were male (88.3%) and had chronic coronary syndromes (61.3%). Overall, 35.1% had acute coronary syndromes. Distal RA was successfully punctured in all 111 patients, always without ultrasound guidance. All procedures involving LIMA grafts were done via ipsilateral ldTRA. We had only 5 (4.5%) access site crossovers. Successful dTRA sheath insertion was then achieved in 95.5% of all patients, mostly (74.8%) via ldTRA and with standard 6Fr sheath (99.1%). Distal and proximal RA pulses were palpable in all patients at hospital discharge. No major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and no major complications related to dTRA were recorded.ConclusionsdTRA for routine post-CABG CGAG and PCI by experienced transradial operators appears to be feasible. Further randomized and larger trials are needed to assure clinical benefits and safety of this new technique.
| S-EPMC8424285 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Aims: The current study aims to verify the feasibility and safety of chronic total occlusion (CTO)-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) via the distal transradial access (dTRA). Methods: Between April 2017 and December 2019, 298 patients who underwent CTO PCI via dTRA were enrolled in this study. The baseline demographic and procedural characteristics were listed and compared between groups. The incidences of access-site vascular complications and procedural complications and mortality were recorded. Results: The mean J-CTO (Japanese chronic total occlusion) score was 2.6 ± 0.9 points. The mean access time was 4.6 ± 2.9 min, and the mean procedure time was 115.9 ± 55.6 min. Left radial snuffbox access was performed successfully in 286 patients (96.5%), and right radial snuffbox access was performed successfully in 133 patients (97.7%). Bilateral radial snuffbox access was performed in 107 patients (35.9%). 400 dTRA (95.5%) received glidesheath for CTO intervention. Two patients (0.7%) developed severe access-site vascular complications. None of the patients experienced severe radial artery spasm and only 2 patients (0.5%) developed radial artery occlusion during the follow-up period. The overall procedural success rate was 93.5%. The procedural success rate was 96.5% in patients with antegrade approach and 87.7% in patients with retrograde approach. Conclusions: It is both safe and feasible to use dTRA plus Glidesheath for complex CTO intervention. The incidences of procedure-related complications and severe access-site vascular complications, and distal radial artery occlusion were low.
| S-EPMC8141614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThis retrospective study investigated the effectiveness and safety of left distal transradial access (LDTRA) in patients with cardiovascular disease in Trinidad undergoing coronary angiography (CAG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodProcedural parameters, including technical success and safety outcomes such as vascular complications and radial artery occlusion (RAO), were assessed in 111 consecutive patients undergoing CAG or PCI from January 2023 to June 2023 at the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex, Trinidad and Tobago. Eighty-eight patients underwent LDTRA, while 23 received left transradial access (LTRA).ResultsThere was no difference in procedural success with LDTRA compared to LTRA, 90.9% vs. 100%, p-value 0.202, non-significant (ns). LDTRA was associated with shorter fluoroscopy times (8.4 ± 6.8 minutes vs. 12.4 ± 7.7 minutes, p-value = 0.02), procedural duration (26.7 ± 18 minutes vs. 35.8 ± 20 minutes, p-value = 0.04), and hemostasis time (142 ± 41 minutes vs. 186 ± 44 minutes, p-value < 0.05). There were no significant differences in procedural-related complications (8% for LDTRA vs. 4.3% for LTRA, p-value = 0.476, ns). There were no reported cases of RAO. In the subgroup of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), the fluoroscopy and procedure times were similar for both access sites; however, LDTRA was associated with a shorter hemostasis time (128 ± 30 minutes vs. 194 ± 39 minutes, p-value = 0.01).ConclusionsLDTRA is effective and safe for coronary procedures and is associated with a shorter hemostasis time. This study may prove clinically pertinent in a limited-resource Caribbean setting.
| S-EPMC10880138 | biostudies-literature