Search

Background: ST-segment elevation in lead aVR predicts left main and/or three-vessel disease (LM/3VD) in patients with acute coronary syndromes. ST-segment elevation in lead aVR is generally reciprocal to and accompanied by ST-segment depression in precordial leads. Previous studies have assessed the independent predictive value of ST-segment elevation in lead aVR for LM/3VD in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and have reported conflicting results.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 379 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Electrocardiograms on presentation were reviewed especially for ST-segment elevation ≥0.05 mV in lead aVR and ST-segment depression ≥0.05 mV in more than two contiguous leads in any other leads.Results: Among 379 patients, 97 (26%) patients had ST-segment elevation in lead aVR and 88 (23%) patients had LM/3VD. Patients with ST-segment elevation in lead aVR had a higher rate of LM/3VD (39% vs. 18%; P < 0.001) and in-hospital revascularization (73% vs. 60%; P = 0.02) driven by a higher rate of in-hospital coronary artery bypass grafting (19% vs. 7%; P < 0.001) than those without ST-segment elevation in lead aVR. On multivariate analysis, ST-segment elevation in lead aVR (odds ratio [OR] 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-3.77; P = 0.02) and ST-segment depression in leads V1 -V4 (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.46-6.15; P = 0.003) were independent predictors of LM/3VD.Conclusion: This study demonstrates that ST-segment elevation in lead aVR is an independent predictor of LM/3VD in patients with NSTEMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) can lead to subendocardial ischemia by altering the coronary blood flow and its transmural myocardial distribution in the setting of increased oxygen demand. We hypothesized that electrocardiographic LVH predicts nonsignificant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). We performed a retrospective analysis of 406 consecutive patients with NSTEMI who underwent coronary angiography. The LVH was diagnosed using Sokolow-Lyon and Cornell voltage criteria. Nonsignificant CAD was defined as stenosis less than 50% in the left main and 70% in any other coronary arteries. Of the 406 patients, 100 (25%) patients had electrocardiographic LVH and 99 (24%) patients had nonsignificant CAD. Patients with electrocardiographic LVH had a higher prevalence of nonsignificant CAD (32% vs 22%, P = .04) and a lower rate of in-hospital revascularization (45% vs 69%, P < .001) than those without LVH. On multivariate analysis, electrocardiographic LVH was an independent predictor of nonsignificant CAD (odds ratio 1.94; 95% confidence interval 1.12-3.35; P = .02). In conclusion, electrocardiographic LVH is an independent predictor of nonsignificant CAD and associated with a lower rate of in-hospital revascularization in patients with NSTEMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/purpose: Patients with acute coronary syndrome due to left main and/or three-vessel disease (LM/3VD) are at the highest risk of short- and long-term adverse cardiovascular events. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been shown to predict the severity of coronary artery disease in various clinical settings, but its independent predictive value for LM/3VD has not been investigated in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). We aimed to evaluate the independent predictive value of NLR for LM/3VD in NSTEMI patients.Methods/materials: We performed a retrospective analysis of consecutive NSTEMI patients who underwent coronary angiography. NLR was calculated as the ratio of neutrophil to lymphocyte based on the laboratory data on admission. The primary outcome was the presence of LM/3VD.Results: In all, 396 patients were included in the final analysis. Median NLR in the entire study population was 3.43 (interquartile range, 2.12-5.51). By receiver operating characteristics curve analysis, the optimal cutoff value of NLR in predicting LM/3VD was 2.80 (area under the curve 0.60, sensitivity 73%, specificity 43%). Of the 396 patients, 244 patients (62%) had NLR ≥2.8. Patients with NLR ≥2.8 were older and had a higher prevalence of LM/3VD (30 % vs. 18%, p=0.005). According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, NLR ≥2.8 was an independent predictor of LM/3VD after adjusting for other clinical variables including ST depression and ST elevation in lead aVR (odds ratio 1.83, 95% confidence interval 1.07-3.21, p=0.03).Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that NLR ≥2.8 is an independent predictor of LM/3VD in patients with NSTEMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Radial artery access is a mainstay in the diagnosis and treatment of coronary artery disease. However, there is uncertainty on the comparison of right versus left radial access for coronary procedures. We thus undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing right versus left radial access for coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures. Methods: Pertinent studies were searched in CENTRAL, Google Scholar, MEDLINE/PubMed, and Scopus, together with international conference proceedings. Randomized trials comparing right versus left radial (or ulnar) access for coronary diagnostic or interventional procedures were included. Risk ratios (RR) and weighted mean differences (WMD) were computed to generate point estimates (95% confidence intervals). Results: A total of 5 trials (3210 patients) were included. No overall significant differences were found comparing right versus left radial access in terms of procedural time (WMD=0.99 [−0.53; 2.51]min, p=0.20), contrast use (WMD=1.71 [−1.32; 4.74]mL, p=0.27), fluoroscopy time (WMD=−35.79 [−3.54; 75.12]s, p=0.07) or any major complication (RR=2.00 [0.75; 5.31], p=0.49). However, right radial access was fraught with a significantly higher risk of failure leading to cross-over to femoral access (RR=1.65 [1.18; 2.30], p=0.003) in comparison to left radial access. Conclusions: Right and left radial accesses appear largely similar in their overall procedural and clinical performance during transradial diagnostic or interventional procedures. Nonetheless, left radial access can be recommended especially during the learning curve phase to reduce femoral cross-overs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]