Dataset Information

Successful Simultaneous Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia and Concomitant Acute Myocardial Infarction.

ABSTRACT: Acute limb ischemia (ALI) is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, even with the advent of technical advances. Although myocardial infarction is one of the causes of ALI along with intraventricular thrombus formation and subsequent embolism, ALI with concomitant acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is extremely rare. Here, we report a complicated ALI case with concurrent AMI and prolonged limb ischemic duration. The cause may be attributed to thrombosis with atherosclerotic disease of the coronary and peripheral arteries triggered by dehydration. We successfully treated the patient using simultaneous revascularization in a hybrid operating room with the aid of intraoperative hemodialysis for preventing life-threatening reperfusion syndrome.

SUBMITTER: Miyake K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6200629 | biostudies-other | 2018 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Successful Simultaneous Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia and Concomitant Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Miyake Keisuke K Kikuchi Shinsuke S Kitani Yuya Y Koya Atsuhiro A Takeuchi Toshiharu T Hasebe Naoyuki N Sawa Yoshiki Y Azuma Nobuyoshi N

Annals of vascular diseases 20180901 3

Acute limb ischemia (ALI) is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates, even with the advent of technical advances. Although myocardial infarction is one of the causes of ALI along with intraventricular thrombus formation and subsequent embolism, ALI with concomitant acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is extremely rare. Here, we report a complicated ALI case with concurrent AMI and prolonged limb ischemic duration. The cause may be attributed to thrombosis with atherosclerotic disease of ...[more]

PMID: 30402191

Similar Datasets

Project description:Patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) who are admitted to hospitals without coronary revascularization are frequently transferred to hospitals with this capability. We sought to determine whether the timeliness of hospital transfer and quality of destination hospitals differed between black and white patients.We evaluated all white and black Medicare beneficiaries admitted with AMI at nonrevascularization hospitals in 2006 who were transferred to a revascularization hospital. We compared hospital length of stay before transfer and the transfer destination's 30-day risk-standardized mortality rate for AMI between black and white patients. We used hierarchical regression to adjust for patient characteristics and examine within and across-hospital effects of race on 30-day mortality and length of stay before transfer.A total of 25,947 (42%) white and 2345 (37%) black patients with AMI were transferred from 857 urban and 774 rural nonrevascularization hospitals to 928 revascularization hospitals. Median (interquartile range) length of stay before transfer was 1 day (1 to 3 d) for white patients and 2 days (1 to 4 d) for black patients (P<0.001). In adjusted models, black patients tended to be transferred more slowly than white patients, a finding because of both across and within-hospital effects. For example, within a given urban hospital, black patients were transferred an additional 0.24 days (95% confidence interval 0.03-0.44 d) later than white patients. In addition, the lengths of stay before transfer for all patients at urban hospitals increased by 0.37 days (95% confidence interval 0.28-0.47 d) for every 20% increase in the proportion of AMI patients who were black. These results were attenuated in rural hospitals. The risk-standardized mortality rate of the revascularization hospital to which patients were ultimately sent did not differ between black and white patients.Black patients are transferred more slowly to revascularization hospitals after AMI than white patients, resulting from both less timely transfers within hospitals and admission to hospitals with greater delays in transfer; however, 30-day mortality of the revascularization hospital to which both groups were sent to appeared similar. Race-based delays in transfer may contribute to known racial disparities in outcomes of AMI.

Project description:BackgroundAcute limb ischemia (ALI) is an important clinical event threatening both life and the affected limbs, but the optimal treatment for ALI remains undefined. The aim of this study was to compare the safety and effectiveness of thrombectomy approaches via either catheter-based thrombectomy (CBT) or catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT).MethodsA total of 98 patients (mean age 69.7 years, 60 male) who underwent endovascular intervention for ALI from January 2015 to July 2019 were included. Of these, 57 were treated with primary CBT via a large-bore catheter, an AngioJet catheter or Rotarex catheter, and/or underwent low-dose CDT, and 41 were treated with primary CDT. The safety and effectiveness of CBT compared to conventional CDT and other various endovascular techniques were evaluated.ResultsMore Rutherford IIb patients were treated with primary CBT (68.4%) than CDT (26.8%; P < .001). Patients who underwent primary CDT achieved a higher technical success rate than those who underwent primary CBT in a shorter procedure time (P < .001), whereas 42.1% of patients who underwent CBT did not need adjunctive CDT. The duration and dosage of adjunctive CDT in the CBT group were significantly decreased compared with those in the primary CDT group (both P < .001), and the CBT group achieved a shorter in-hospital length of stay (P < .001). Subgroup analysis revealed that patients treated with AngioJet and Rotarex catheters achieved slightly lower dosages, shorter CDT durations and shorter in-hospital stay lengths than those treated with large-bore catheters (P > .05). Clinical success was estimated to be achieved in 98.2% of patients who underwent CBT, which is similar to the 97.6% estimated in those who underwent primary CDT (P = 1.000), and this finding was similar among the CBT subgroups. Patients who underwent CBT had a higher procedure-related distal embolization rate and economic cost than those who underwent primary CDT (P < .05), but it had slightly fewer complications than those who underwent primary CDT (P = .059), especially minor complications (P = .036). The freedom from amputation at 6 and 12 months for CBT and CDT was assessed (93.0% vs 90.2% respectively, P = .625; 89.5% vs 82.9%, respectively, P = .34,). Comparable limb salvage was found for different techniques of large bore catheters, AngioJet catheters and Rotarex catheters. The Kaplan-Meier table analysis also showed similar limb salvage rates between groups.ConclusionsEndovascular treatment of ALI with the use of catheter-based therapies is an effective modality that can reduce the requirement for thrombolysis, with expected reductions in hemorrhagic complications, but at the risk of remediable distal emboli and increased economic cost. It has a similar clinical outcome to conventional CDT alone. Different CBT techniques have comparable efficacy but different adverse event profiles.

Dataset Information

Successful Simultaneous Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia and Concomitant Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Publications

Successful Simultaneous Revascularization for Acute Limb Ischemia and Concomitant Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets