Search

Objective: to describe the characteristics of patients with acute myocardial infarction without obstructive coronary lesions (MINOCA), as well as their cardiovascular outcomes at 18 months. Materials and methods: ambispective cohort study that included patients who underwent coronary angiography after being diagnosed with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) between 2015 and 2019. The MINOCA group was selected, and outcomes such as readmissions and major cardiovascular events were obtained at 18 months. Results: data form 433 patients who met the inclusion criteria were obtained, of which 141 (33%) met the criteria for MINOCA. The most prevalent clinical manifestations were chest pain and anginal equivalents (62% and 62.4% respectively), The majority presented with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (92.1%), with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥ 50% (42.6%). During the 18-month follow-up, data were obtained from 102 patients, of whom 22% had readmissions; 18% experienced reinfarction, mortality during the follow-up was 12% due to cardiovascular causes, and 36% due to all causes. Conclusions: a higher proportion of MINOCA was found compared to what is described in the literature, with a predominance of atypical clinical manifestations. Equally striking is the significant percentage of pre-infarctions and cardiovascular deaths during the follow-up of this cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cirugía y Cirujanos is the property of Publicidad Permanyer SLU and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: Coronary Ectasia (CE) is a pathological remodeling with a low worldwide prevalence. It is defined as a diffuse dilatation greater than 1.5 times the diameter of the adjacent segments of the same or different coronary arteries. Objective: To document the clinical and angiographic characteristics, and medical treatment at the discharge of patients diagnosed with coronary ectasia who attended the National Institute of Cardiology (INC). Methods: Cross-sectional study with a non-experimental descriptive design, with a non-probabilistic convenience sampling. Results: Of 69 patients who attended the INC with a diagnosis of CD, most were men, with a mean age of 56 + 11 years, the most common coronary risk factor in patients with CE was smoking 58% (40); it was associated mostly with an acute myocardial infarction ST-segment elevation (STEMI) 65.2% (45), of frequent location in the lower face 40% (18), correlated with the most affected artery is the Right Coronary Artery (CD) 69.6% (48), followed by the circumflex (Cx) 56.5% (39). A mean LVEF of 47 + 9.72 was evident within the ventricular function. As well as the preferential use of dual antiplatelet therapy with anticoagulant (DAP + OAC) in 58% (40) at the discharge of each patient from the INC. Conclusion: CE is a not uncommon pathological remodeling in INC. This study showed that STEMI is the most typical manifestation of CE, diagnostic coronary angiography identified a type 3 Markis, so a low rate of mortality and recurrence of cardiovascular events would be expected, and despite the lack of consensus on the ideal therapy, at the INC individualized treatment is preferred, recommending lifestyle changes, and using triple therapy (DAP + OAC) as a medical treatment only at the time of patient discharge. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in adults around the world. Young adult population has suffered changes in lifestyle over the decades, favoring the appearance of atherosclerosis at early ages, and as a consequence, the incidence of cardiovascular events emerges prematurely. It has been identified that most common risk factors are potentially modifiable. There is a greater prevalence of non-atherosclerotic etiologies of myocardial infarction such as spontaneous coronary dissection, congenital malformations, coronary embolism, and coronary spasm. Different angiographic findings and outcomes according to age and gender have been recognized. For this reason, we searched PubMed for published research and registries for the study of acute myocardial infarction in young patients. With this data, we carried out the present review to better understand the common findings in this group, and to compare them with older age groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: One-catheter strategy, based in multipurpose catheters, allows exploring both coronary arteries with a single catheter. This strategy could simplify coronary catheterization and reduce the volume of contrast administration, by reducing radial spasm. To date, observational studies showed greater benefits regarding contrast consumption and catheterization performance than controlled trials. The aim of this work is to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) to adequately quantify the benefits of one-catheter strategy, with multipurpose catheters, over conventional two-catheter strategy on contrast consumption, and catheterization performance. Methods: A search in PubMed, CINALH, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify randomized trials comparing one-catheter and two-catheter strategies. The primary outcome was volume of iodinated contrast administrated. Secondary endpoints, evaluating coronary catheterization performance included: arterial spasm, fluoroscopy time, and procedural time. Results: Five RCT were included for the final analysis, with a total of 1599 patients (802 patients with one-catheter strategy and 797 patients with two-catheter strategy). One-catheter strategy required less administration of radiological contrast (difference in means [DiM] [95% confidence interval (CI)]; -3.831 mL [-6.165 mL to-1.496 mL], p = 0.001) as compared to two-catheter strategy. Furthermore, less radial spasm (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.484 [0.363 to 0.644], p < 0.001) and less procedural time (DiM [95% CI], -72.471 s [-99.694 s to -45.249 s], p < 0.001) were observed in one-catheter strategy. No differences on fluoroscopy time were observed. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy induces a minimal reduction on radiological contrast administration but improves coronary catheterization performance by reducing arterial spasm and procedural time as compared to conventional two-catheter strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Radial access is the gold standard for ST-elevation myocardial infarction; nevertheless, there is scarce information in Mexico. Objectives: The objectives of this study were to describe the differences in radiation exposure, intervention time, fluoroscopy time, complications and temporal trends, and risk factors among radial and femoral access for coronary procedures. Materials and Methods: A total of 493 patients underwent coronary interventions by femoral or radial access. Sociodemographic and procedural data were recorded. A logistic regression model to determine risk factors for complications was performed. Results: The population included 346 men and 147 women, with a median age of 63 years, 159 underwent radial and 334 femoral approaches. Complications occurred in 18 patients (3.6%), 11 in radial and 7 in femoral access, with a higher trend in the first 5 months (n = 14). Vasospasm was the most common (n = 9) complication. Median fluoroscopy time was 12 min for radial and 9 min for femoral groups, with a total radiation dose of 2282 μGm2 and 2848 μGm2, respectively. Temporal trends showed that complications occurred most frequently during the first 6 months of the study. The main predictors for complications were intervention time and one-vessel disease. Conclusions: Radial access had higher frequency of complications than femoral approach and they were more common during the first 6 months. The main risk factor was intervention time longer than 60 min. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]