Search

Background and objectives Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is increasingly used in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to treat acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients who experienced cardiogenic shock. However, to date, there have been no studies on the relationship between clinical outcomes and CPR time in such patients with AMI treated by ECMO-assisted primary PCI. Methods From July 2008 to March 2016, we analyzed data from 42 AMI with cardiogenic shock patients who underwent CPR and were treated by ECMO-assisted primary PCI. The primary outcome was 30-day in-hospital mortality after primary PCI. The predictors of mortality were determined using a Cox proportional hazards model. Results Thirty-day in-hospital mortality was observed for 33 patients (78.6%). The mean CPR time was 37.0±37.3 minutes. The best cut-off CPR time value associated with clinical outcome was calculated to be 12.5 minutes using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Multivariate analysis revealed that CPR time of >12.5 minutes was an independent predictor of 30-day mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 4.71; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-17.406; p=0.018). Conclusions Despite ECMO support, the clinical outcomes of AMI patients with a complication of cardiogenic shock remain poor. Prolonged CPR time is associated with a poor prognosis in patients with AMI treated by ECMO-assisted primary PCI.

Treatments of choice for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are the removal of the entire CIED system, control of infection, and new device implantation. Occasionally, a complete CIED removal can not be performed for several reasons, such as very old age, severe comobidity, limited life expectancy, or refusal by a patient. We encountered a male patient who developed traumatic CIED infection five years after cardioverter-defibrillator implantation. An intravenous electrode could not be removed by a simple transvenous extraction procedure, and he refused surgical removal of the remnant electrode. After control of local infection, the tips of the electrode were separated and buried between muscles, and the wound was closed with a local flap. CIED infection did not recur for 12 months even without relying on long-term antimicrobial treatment.

Background—Biological mechanisms underlying statin and angiotensin II type 1 receptor blocker therapies differ. Therefore, we compared vascular and metabolic responses to these therapies either alone or in combination in hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive patients. Methods and Results—This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial with 3 treatment arms (each 2 months) and 2 washout periods (each 2 months). Forty-seven hypertensive, hypercholesterolemic patients were given simvastatin 20 mg and placebo, simvastatin 20 mg and losartan 100 mg, or losartan 100 mg and placebo daily during each 2-month treatment period. Losartan alone or combined therapy significantly reduced blood pressure compared with simvastatin alone. Compared with losartan alone, simvastatin alone or combined therapy significantly changed lipoproteins. All 3 treatment arms significantly improved flow-mediated dilator response to hyperemia and decreased plasma malondialdehyde and monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 levels relative to baseline measurements. However, these parameters were changed to a greater extent with combined therapy compared with simvastatin or losartan alone (both P0.001 and P0.030 for monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 by ANOVA). Combined therapy or losartan alone significantly increased plasma adiponectin levels and insulin sensitivity (determined by QUICKI) relative to baseline measurements. These changes were significantly greater than in the group treated with simvastatin alone (P0.001 for adiponectin, P0.029 for QUICKI by ANOVA). Conclusions—Simvastatin combined with losartan improves endothelial function and reduces inflammatory markers to a greater extent than monotherapy with either drug in hypercholesterolemic, hypertensive patients. (Circulation. 2004; 110:3687-3692.)

Diagnosing and selecting an appropriate treatment strategy for left main coronary artery (LMCA) obstruction is very important. Although this disease is not frequently encountered, it can cause severe hemodynamic deterioration resulting in a less favorable prognosis without a suitable management approach. Another aspect of LMCA that we must not overlook is coronary artery spasm, which can be an infrequent but important cause of acute coronary syndrome. Although it is rare, LMCA can cause critical complications. In this study, we report the case of a 35-year-old female who was admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation in the aVR lead caused by a left main coronary spasm that was examined on intravascular ultrasound.

Chest trauma can lead to various cardiac complications ranging from simple arrhythmias to myocardial rupture. A variety of injuries to the coronary arteries, including laceration, thrombosis, intimal dissection, arteriovenous fistula and pseudoaneurysm formation following blunt trauma have been rarely reported. We report a very unusual case of distal embolization of left ventricular thrombus due to blunt chest trauma-induced coronary artery occlusion.