Explore the vast range of titles available.

The radial approach (RA) is the most common in invasive cardiology, but depending on the clinical situation, the femoral approach (FA) and brachial approach (BA) are also used. The BA is associated with the highest odds of complications so it is used mainly if a first-choice approach fails. The aim of the study was to assess clinical outcomes after invasive cardiology procedures stratified by the use of the RA, FA, and BA, with a focus on access site-related complications, quality of life (QoL), and patients’ perspective. A total of 250 procedures (RA: 98; FA: 99; BA: 53) performed between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. Puncture site-related complications, vascular events, patient preferences, and QoL were assessed by the analysis of medical records and telephone follow-up using a proprietary questionnaire and the modified EQ-5D-3L questionnaire. Patients from the RA group received the smallest volume of contrast during a percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) procedure (RA vs. FA vs. BA: 180 (150–240) mL vs. 200 (180–270) mL vs. 190 (100–200) mL, p = 0.045). The access site was changed most frequently in the procedures initiated from the RA (p < 0.04). Overall puncture site-related complications, especially local hematomas, occurred most commonly in the BA group (7.1, 14.1, and 24.5% for RA, FA, and BA, respectively, p = 0.01). During the index procedure, the access site was changed most frequently in procedures initiated from the RA (19.7, 8.5 and 0%, p = 0.04). The RA was indicated as an approach preferred by the patient for a hypothetical next procedure (87.9, 55.4, and 70.0% for subjects preferring the same approach out of patients who underwent a procedure by the RA, FA, and BA, respectively, p < 0.001). For the RA and FA, the prevalence of moderate or extreme access site-related problems in self-care decreased significantly (RA: p < 0.01, FA: p < 0.05) within 1 month after the index procedure (RA: 18.1, 4.2, and 1.4%; FA: 20.7, 11.1, and 9.6% periprocedurally, after 1 and 6 months, respectively). In contrast, for the BA these percentages were higher and a significant improvement (p < 0.05) was delayed until 6 months (54.6, 36.4, and 18.2% periprocedurally, after 1 and 6 months, respectively). In conclusion, compared to the BA and FA, the RA appears to be not only the safest, mainly due to the lowest risk of puncture site-related complications after coronary procedures but also represents a preferable approach from the patient’s perspective. Although overall post-procedural QoL outcomes did not differ significantly according to the access site, nevertheless, the BA was associated with more frequent self-care problems whose improvement was delayed until more than one month after the index procedure.

Background: Revascularisation strategy in patients with multi-vessel coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains challenging. One of the potential treatment options is complete percutaneous revascularisation during index hospitalisation. This strategy could positively influence left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF). Aim: To investigate the long-term changes in LVEF and clinical outcome among patients with AMI after complete coronary revascularisation (CCR). Methods: Records of 171 patients with a diagnosis of AMI and multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) on index angiography, in whom CCR was performed as a staged procedure during initial hospitalisation, were analysed. Clinical data were collected from in-hospital medical records and discharge letters. Cardiac ultrasound (CU), with particular assessment of LVEF, was performed one day before discharge. Follow-up (FU) CU was collected from the out-patient department at least six months ± one week after discharge. Follow-up data, including major adverse cardiac events (MACE), were collected during follow-up visits by telephone. Depending on the LVEF change during the follow-up period, patients were divided into two groups. Patients with a decrease in the LVEF (D-LVEF group) were compared with patients with no changes (preserved) or improvement regarding LVEF (P/I-LVEF). Results: The median duration of the follow-up was 19 months (14–24 months). The median change in LVEF during observation was –5.0p% (IQR (–7.0)–(-2.75p.%)) in the D-LVEF group and +4.0% (IQR 1.0–5.0p%) in the P/I-LVEF group. Among patients in the P/I-LVEF group, there was a sub-group of patients with no change in LVEF (28 patients), and one demonstrating improvement in LVEF (104 patients). In the subgroup of patients with improved LVEF, the median change in LVEF was 4.5p% (IQR 2–6.25p%). Among patients with decreasing LVEF, there was a significantly higher risk of MACE (15 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.031), especially non-fatal AMI (10 vs. 0%, p = 0.017). We found the following among predictors concerning increased risk of MACE occurrence: urgent PCI (p = 0.004), hospitalisations regardless of cause (p = 0.028), EF worsening (p = 0.025), fasting glucose serum concentration (p = 0.024) and fasting triglyceride serum concentration (p = 0.027). Conclusions: Complete revascularisation (CR) at baseline (one stage) in patients with AMI and multi-vessel disease is associated with LVEF improvement and MACE rate reduction. Patients with worse LVEF have poor clinical outcome and a higher rate of MACE.

Little is known about the similarity of microcirculation assessment outcomes performed with regadenoson and adenosine. The aim of the current study was to compare coronary flow reserve (CFR) and index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) assessment using adenosine and regadenoson, and to evaluate predictors regarding the size of differences. 44 patients were enrolled and diagnosed between 2021 and 2023. Fractional flow reserve (FFR), CFR and IMR were measured twice in the circumflex (Cx) (n = 8) or left anterior descending (LAD) (n = 36) artery: once with continuous infusion of adenosine (Adenocor 140 µg/kg/min) and 10 minutes later with regadenoson (Rapiscan 400 µg i.v.). Averaged results were quantified with adenosine and regadenoson for FFR (0.81 [0.75 ÷ 0.89] vs. 0.80 [0.73 ÷ 0.88]), CFR (3.84 [1.67 ÷ 4.08] vs. 3.97 [1.78 ÷ 4.32]) and IMR (20.01 [11 ÷ 24.5] vs. 20.25 [10.75 ÷ 23]), respectively. None of the differences were statistically significant. Among the significant (p < 0.05) predictors of greater ΔCFR, the following can be noted: prior percutaneous transluminal angioplasty/carotid artery stenting (β = 2.35), oral anticoagulant usage (β = 0.89), and prior stroke/transient ischaemic attack (TIA) (β = 1.09), with the latter being also confirmed for greater ΔIMR (β = 8.89). Moreover, patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II/III, as compared to those with NYHA class I, were more likely to have greater ΔIMR (β = 11.89). Regadenoson may be a feasible alternative to adenosine in coronary microcirculation assessment, as it produces similar outcomes. Selected factors were found to be predictors of greater differences in IMR, CFR and FFR values according to the agent used for coronary hyperemia.

Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remain one of the most frequent reasons for patient admissions to emergency care units. The majority of ACS are represented by myocardial infarction caused by atherosclerotic plaque rupture. Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) remains a rare but frequently underdiagnosed cause of ACS.

Radial artery is the preferred access for coronary interventions. However, the procedure is sometimes interrupted by a spasm which causes pain, prolongs the procedure, and can force the access crossover. To observe factors contributing to a symptomatic radial artery spasm. In this prospective study, we present results of 103 consecutive patients regarding radial artery spasm and angiographic image of the punctured artery. Angiography of the radial artery was performed in 70 (68.0%) patients. Potential risk factors for radial artery spasm were evaluated. The overall incidence of the radial artery spasm was high - 25 (24.3%). Signs of spasm were present in 37.1% of radial artery angiographies before the procedure and 60.1% after, however, it did not always indicate a symptomatic spasm. Risk factors related to radial artery spasm included female sex (OR = 2.94, = 0.02), failure of the first puncture attempt (OR = 3.12, = 0.014) and use of non-hydrophilic sheath (OR = 9.56, = 0.036). Radial artery narrowing at the tip of the sheath was also a risk factor for spasm ( = 0.022). No spasms were observed after hydrophilic sheath application ( = 13). The administration of a radial cocktail was not observed to significantly decrease the spasm odds. Risk factors for radial artery spasm include female sex and multiple puncture attempts. Hydrophilic sheath coating protects against radial artery spasm. Overall signs of a spasm in the angiography are common and do not imply a symptomatic spasm, which can be predicted by a tight narrowing at the tip of the sheath.

Comorbidities in aortic stenosis (AS) significantly impact treatment outcomes by influencing intervention timing, choice, and prognosis. Diseases affecting cardiac hemodynamics independently of AS progression may distort echocardiographic interpretation, risking misclassification of AS severity. Understanding how comorbidities alter key echocardiographic parameters may facilitate more precise evaluation. To assess the impact of common cardiovascular comorbidities on echocardiographic evaluation of AS. Medical records of 234 hospitalized patients with moderate/severe AS were retrospectively analyzed. Exclusion criteria included acute myocardial infarction, prior valvular surgery, and congenital heart defects. All patients underwent standard echocardiographic assessment during hospitalization. Among the 234 patients (median age 76, 47.4% female), 85.0% had severe AS. The most prevalent comorbidities were hypertension (82.5%), chronic kidney disease (CKD, 45.3%), and type 2 diabetes (T2DM, 39.7%). Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurred in 33.8%, predominantly paroxysmal (49.4%). AF was associated with lower aortic valve mean pressure gradient (AVGmean, = 0.001), peak velocity (Vmax, 0.001), and stroke volume (SV, = 0.01), and higher left atrial (LA) area ( 0.001). T2DM was associated with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF, = 0.02), higher LA area ( = 0.02), and higher left ventricular mass ( = 0.01). Hypertension correlated with lower AVGmean ( = 0.04). CKD correlated with lower LVEF, AVGmean, SV, and cardiac output ( ≤ 0.02), but higher LA area and E/E' ( ≤ 0.01). Previous myocardial infarction was associated with lower LVEF ( = 0.01), aortic valve area ( = 0.002), SV ( = 0.004), and cardiac output ( 0.001), but higher E/E' ( = 0.01). Comorbidities significantly affect echocardiographic parameters in AS, potentially leading to miscategorization of severity. The observed differences highlight a need for more comprehensive evaluation in multimorbid patients.

Introduction: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) intravascular imaging including the latest version Ultreon™ 1.0 Software (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA), not only improve patients prognosis, but also facilitates improved percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare procedure related decision making, procedural indices, clinical outcomes according to the extent of stent expansion and assess risk factors of underexpansion in patients treated with PCI using OCT. Methods: The study comprised 100 patients, which were divided in groups according to the extent of stent expansion: <90 (29 patients) and ≥90% (71 patients). Comparison of OCT parameters, selected clinical and procedural characteristics was performed between groups. We assessed clinical outcomes during the follow-up: major adverse cardiovascular events and risk factors of stent underexpansion. Results: Patients from the stent underexpansion group were treated more often in the past with percutaneous peripheral interventions (p=0.02), no other significant differences being noted in general characteristics, procedural characteristics or clinical outcomes comparing both groups. Significant predictors of stent underexpansion assessed by simple linear univariable analysis included: hypercholesterolemia, obstructive bronchial diseases and treatment with inhalators, family history of cardiovascular disease, PCI of other than the left main coronary artery, stent and drug-eluting stent implantation, PCI without drug-eluting balloon, paclitaxel antimitotic agent, greater maximal stent diameter and lower mean Euroscore II value. Univariable logistic regression analysis revealed a correlation between stent underexpansion and greater creatinine serum concentration before [OR: 0.97, 95%CI: 0.95-0.99, p=0.01] and after PCI [OR: 0.98, 95%CI: 0.96-0.99, p=0.02]. Conclusions: Based on the presented analysis, the degree of stent expansion is not related to the selected procedural, OCT imaging indices and clinical outcomes. Logistic regression analysis confirmed such a relationship for creatinine level.

Transradial coronaro-angiography (TRA) can be performed with one catheter. We investigate the efficacy of four different DxTerity catheter curves dedicated to the single-catheter technique and compare this method to the standard two-catheter approach. For this prospective, single-blinded, randomized pilot study, we enrolled 100 patients. In groups 1, 2, 3, and 4, the DxTerity catheters Trapease, Ultra, Transformer and Tracker Curve, respectively, were used. In group 5 (control), standard Judkins catheters were used. The study endpoints were the percentage of optimal stability, proper ostial artery engagement and a good quality angiogram, the duration of each procedure stage, the amount of contrast, and the radiation dose. The highest rate of optimal stability was observed in groups 2 (90%) and 5 (95%). Suboptimal results with at least one episode of catheter fallout from the ostium were most frequent in group 1 (45%). The necessity of using another catheter was observed most frequently in group 4. The analysis of time frames directly depending on the catheter type revealed that the shortest time for catheter introduction and for searching coronary ostia was achieved in group 2 (Ultra). There were no differences in contrast volume and radiation dose between groups. DxTerity catheters are suitable tools to perform TRA coronary angiography. The Ultra Curve catheter demonstrated an advantage over other catheters in terms of its ostial stability rate and procedural time.

Therapeutic percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the treatment of choice in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). If optimally performed, PCI reduces myocardial injury and improves the likelihood of a positive clinical outcome. Therefore, the equal quality of PCI throughout both day and night shifts is of paramount importance. Our aim was to compare urgent diagnostic and therapeutic coronary interventions performed during day and night shifts. We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 144 patients who underwent coronary angiography for AMI over six months in a tertiary referral center working in 24/7 mode. The patients’ characteristics, procedural data and the operator’s experience in interventional cardiology were compared according to the time of intervention during a day shift (8 a.m. until 8 p.m., group A, n = 106) and night shift (from 8 p.m. until 8 a.m. next day, group B, n = 36). The baseline characteristics of the subjects of groups A and B were similar, except for a higher proportion of AMI without persistent ST-segment elevation (NSTEMI) in patients who underwent coronary angiography during regular working hours compared to off-hours (58% vs. 34%, p < 0.05). The average time of diagnostic coronary angiography was longer by about 5 min during the day shift (28.5 ± 12.2 vs. 23.8 ± 8.9 min, p < 0.05), while other procedural data, including the arterial access route, the number of catheters needed and the contrast-medium volume, were similar. The use of additional diagnostic tools for coronary lesion assessment (intracoronary ultrasound or fractional flow reserve measurement) was almost twice as frequent during regular working hours (15% vs. 8%). Urgent therapeutic PCI on the culprit artery was performed in 79% and 89% of group A and B patients, respectively. The groups did not differ in procedural characteristics regarding the total interventional session, including both diagnostic angiography and therapeutic PCI, such as total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, stenting technique and total stent length. Coronary thrombectomy or rotational atherectomy were more frequently used in group A (27% vs. 15%, p = 0.16). The percentage of doctors with the least experience in interventional cardiology was, albeit insignificantly, lower during day shifts (31% vs. 42%). In conclusion, the majority of clinical and periprocedural characteristics appeared to be independent of intervention time, except for a longer duration of diagnostic coronary angiography during daytime. This finding could probably result from a higher proportion of NSTEMI patients frequently requiring additional angiographic projections and special techniques to properly identify the infarct-related artery during the day shift. Whether a tendency of less frequent use of additional tools at off-hours may also be due to a lower percentage of NSTEMI interventions at night, or whether this can be linked to lower availability of experienced operators, remains to be validated in a large study. The latter possibility, if confirmed, might encourage public health authorities and healthcare organizers to improve off-hours cathlab staffing with experienced interventionalists. Finally, additional obligatory training in special diagnostic and therapeutic invasive techniques might be advisable for the least experienced operators scheduled to work night shifts.