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: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: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:ObjectiveThe previous meta-analysis has assessed that distal transradial access (dTRA) in anatomical snuffbox is safe and effective for coronary angiography and intervention and can reduce radial artery occlusion. However, since the publication of the previous meta-analysis, several observational studies have been added, so we performed an updated meta-analysis to include more eligible studies to compare distal transradial access in anatomical snuffbox with conventional transradial access (cTRA).MethodPubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant studies from the literature published until 5 January 2021 to evaluate catheterization/puncture failure, hematoma, radial artery spasm, radial artery occlusion (RAO), access time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose area product, total procedure time, and hemostatic device removal time. The pooled odds ratio (OR), weighted mean difference (WMD), and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous variables, respectively.ResultsA total of 9,054 patients from 14 studies were included in the meta-analysis, and we found no significant difference in catheterization/puncture failure (OR = 1.94, 95CI [0.97, 3.86], P=0.06), hematoma (OR = 0.97, 95CI [0.55, 1.73], P=0.926), radial artery spasm (OR = 0.76, 95CI [0.43, 1.36], P=0.354), total procedure time (SMD = 0.23, 95CI [-0.21, 0.68], P=0.308), or radiation dose area product (WMD = 216.88 Gy/cm2, 95CI [-126.24, 560.00], P=0.215), but dTRA had a lower incidence of RAO (OR = 0.39, 95CI [0.23, 0.66], P < 0.001), shorter hemostatic device removal time (WMD = -66.62 min, 95CI [-76.68, -56.56], P < 0.001), longer access time (SMD = 0.32, 95CI [0.08, 0.56], P=0.008), and longer fluoroscopy time (SMD = 0.16, 95CI [-0.00, 0.33], P=0.05) than cTRA.ConclusionCompared with the cTRA, the dTRA has a lower incidence of radial artery occlusion and shorter hemostatic device removal time, which is worthy of further evaluation in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8321763 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBleeding complications and acute limb ischemia (ALI) are devastating vascular complications in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Cardiogenic shock (CS) can further increase this risk due to multiorgan failure. In the contemporary era, percutaneous mechanical circulatory support is commonly used for management of CS. We hypothesized that vascular complications may be an important determinant of clinical outcomes for CS due to STEMI (CS-STEMI).ObjectiveWe evaluated 10-year national trends, resource utilization and outcomes of bleeding complications, and ALI in CS-STEMI.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of CS-STEMI patients from a large U.S. national database (National Inpatient Sample) between 2005 and 2014. Events were then divided into four different groups: no MCS, with intra-aortic balloon pump, percutaneous ventricular assist device includes Impella or Tandem Heart or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.ResultsBleeding complications and ALI were observed in 31,389 (18.2%) and 1,628 (0.9%) out of 172,491 admissions with CS-STEMI, respectively. Between 2005 and 2014, overall trends increased for ALI; however, the number of bleeding events decreased. ALI was associated with increased in-hospital mortality in comparison to those without any ALI. However, bleeding complications were not associated with increased in-hospital mortality. Compared to patients without complications, both bleeding and ALI were associated with increased length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs.ConclusionsBleeding and ALI are common complications associated with CS-STEMI in the contemporary era. Both complications are associated with increased hospital costs and LOS. These findings highlight the need to develop algorithms focused on vascular safety in CS-STEMI.
| S-EPMC8344361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has traditionally represented the standard of care for left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. However, percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI) has more recently emerged as a valuable alternative. The long-time awaited results of the largest randomized trials on the long-term impact of PCI versus CABG in LMCA disease, the newly published NOBLE and EXCEL studies, revealed contrasting results. Thus, aim of the present meta-analysis was to review the most robust evidence from randomized comparisons of CABG versus PCI for revascularization of LMCA.MethodsRandomized studies comparing long-term clinical outcomes of CABG or Stent-PCI for the treatment of LMCA disease were searched for in PubMed, the Chochrane Library and Scopus electronic databases. A total of 5 randomized studies were selected, including 4499 patients.ResultsNo significant difference between CABG and PCI was found in the primary analysis on the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction (OR = 1·06 95% CI 0·80-1·40; p = 0·70). Similarly, no differences were observed between CABG and PCI for all-cause death (OR = 1·03 95% CI 0·81-1·32; p = 0·81). Although not statistically significant, a lower rate of stroke was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 0·86; p = 0·67), while a lower rate of myocardial infarction was found in the CABG arm (OR = 1·43; p = 0·17). On the contrary, a significantly higher rate of repeat revascularization was registered in the PCI arm (OR = 1·76 95% CI 1·45-2·13; p < 0·001).ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis, the most comprehensive and updated to date, including 5 randomized studies and 4499 patients, demonstrates no difference between Stent-PCI and CABG for the treatment of LMCA disease in the composite endpoint of death, stroke and myocardial infarction. Hence, a large part of patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease can be managed equally well by means of both these revascularization strategies.
| S-EPMC5588710 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID 19 pandemic resulted in a total reduction in the number of hospitalizations for acute coronary syndromes. A consequence of the delay in coronary revascularization has been the resurgence of structural complications of myocardial infarctions. Ventricular septal rupture (VSR) complicating late presenting acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with high mortality despite advances in both surgical repair and perioperative management. Current data suggests a declining mortality with delay in VSR repair; however, these patients may develop cardiogenic shock while waiting for surgery. Available options are limited for patients with VSR who develop right ventricular failure and cardiogenic shock. The survival rate is very low in patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing surgical or percutaneous VSR repair. In this study we present two late presenting ST elevation MI patients who were complicated by rapidly declining hemodynamics and impending organ failure. Both patients were bridged with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) to cardiac transplant.
| S-EPMC7756170 | biostudies-literature