Objective It is still debated if benefits associated with radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are due to the access site selection itself, operator expertise or other underlying mechanisms. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, and meeting abstracts for randomized trials comparing radial versus femoral access site for coronary angiography and PCI. Primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). This study is registered with PROSPERO. Results We identified 31 trials (30,096 patients, PCI performed in 21,225 patients). Radial compared to femoral access was associated with a significant risk reduction in major bleeding (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.42–0.66, I2 = 3.3%). Findings were consistent regardless of clinical characteristics or whether coronary angiography was performed with or without PCI. The benefit of radial access was significantly increased in studies published before 2010 and in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Risk for stroke (OR 1.11, 95%CI 0.76–1.64, I2 = 0%) and MI (OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.79–1.04, I2 = 0%) were comparable between the groups. Risk for mortality and vascular complications were significantly lower with radial than femoral access. Conclusion In patients undergoing coronary angiography and PCI, radial access is associated with a significant risk reduction in bleeding, vascular complications, and mortality compared to femoral access. The risk of stroke or MI were comparable in patients with radial or femoral access.
Percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with coronary stent implantation is a lifesaving medical procedure that has become, nowadays, the most frequent performed therapeutic procedure in medicine. Plain balloon angioplasty, bare metal stents, first and second generation drug-eluting stents, bioresorbable and bioabsorbable scaffolds have offered diachronically a great advance against coronary artery disease and have enriched our medical armamentarium. Stented areas constitute vulnerable sites for endothelial damage, endothelial dysfunction, flow turbulence, hemorheologic changes, platelet dysfunction, coagulation changes and fibrinolytic disturbances. Implant surface attracts several proteins such as albumin, fibronectin, fibrinogen, and complement that lead to complement system activation. Macrophages recognize the implant as foreign substance due to protein adsorption and its continuous presence results in macrophage differentiation and fusion into foreign body giant cells. Polymer coating, stent metallic platforms and the released drugs can act as strong antigenic complex that apply continuous, repetitive, persistent and chronic hypersensitivity irritation to the coronary intima. The concomitant administration of oral antiplatelet drugs and environmental exposures can induce hypersensitivity inflammation. A class of platelets, activated via high-affinity and low-affinity IgE hypersensitivity receptors FCγRI, FCγRII, FCεRI and FCεRII, can induce Kounis hypersensitivity-associated thrombotic syndrome inside the stented coronaries. Type III variant of this syndrome is diagnosed when coronary artery stent thrombosis is associated with thrombus infiltrated by eosinophils or mast cells and/or when coronary intima, media and adventitia adjacent to stent, is infiltrated by eosinophils or mast cells. Careful history of hypersensitivity reactions to all implanted materials and concomitant drugs with monitoring of inflammatory mediators as well as lymphocyte transformation studies to detect hypersensitivity must be undertaken in order to avoid disastrous consequences. Food and Drug Administration recommendations for coronary stent implantation should be applied also to bioresorbable scaffolds. Further studies with inert and non-allergenic implants are necessary.
Radial artery (RA) occlusion (RAO) remains the Achilles heel of transradial coronary procedures. Although of silent nature, RAO is relatively frequent, results in graft shortage for future coronary artery bypass surgery, and may occur even after short-lasting, 5F coronary angiography (CAG). The most frequent predictors of RAO are RA size, body size, female gender, and periprocedural anticoagulation intensity. Methods to detect RAO are variable, of which the Barbeau test and ultrasonography have similar diagnostic accuracy. Data indicate that late RAO recanalization may occur. Meticulous handling of RA and the use of appropriate hemostatic devices and techniques along with sufficient heparin dose appear important measures to reduce RAO rates. Recent contradictory studies indicate that the decreasing incidence of RAO overtime is not as uniform as previously thought. In 2 meta-analyses, the benefit of higher over lower anticoagulation intensity became evident. As "it may all be appropriate anticoagulation" for a simplified approach against RAO, the results of an ongoing trial comparing 100 with 50 IU/kg body weight in transradial CAG are eagerly awaited.
Objectives To assess the impact of anemia on clinical outcomes in female patients enrolled in the Women's InterNational transcatheter aortic valve implantation (WIN‐TAVI) registry. Background Anemia is highly prevalent among females who constitute half of TAVI candidates, yet, its clinical significance remains poorly investigated. Methods Patients were divided into three groups according to preprocedural hemoglobin (Hb) level: (1) no anemia (Hb ≥12 g/dl), (2) mild‐to‐moderate anemia (10 ≤ Hb <12 g/dl), and (3) severe anemia (Hb <10 g/dl). The primary outcome was the occurrence of Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)‐2 efficacy endpoint, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalization for valve‐related symptoms or heart failure or valve‐related dysfunction at 1‐year follow‐up. Results Hemoglobin level was available in 877 (86.1%) patients: 412 (47.0%) had no anemia, 363 (41.4%) had mild‐to‐moderate anemia, and 102 (11.6%) had severe anemia. The latter group had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Compared with patients without anemia, severe anemia was associated with a greater risk of VARC‐2 efficacy endpoint (adjHR 1.71, 95% CI: 1.02–2.87, p = .04), all‐cause death (adjHR 2.36, 95% CI: 1.31–4.26, p = .004) and a composite of death, MI or stroke (adjHR 1.88, 95% CI: 1.10–3.22, p = .02) at 1 year. Moreover, an increased risk of late mortality (adjHR 1.15, 95% CI: 1.02–1.30, p = .03) was observed with every 1 g/dl decrease in hemoglobin level. Conclusion Severe anemia in females undergoing TAVI was independently associated with increased rates of VARC‐2 efficacy endpoint and mortality at 1 year.
Kounis syndrome (KS) has been defined as acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in the context of a hypersensitivity reaction. Patients may present with normal coronary arteries (Type I), established coronary artery disease (Type II) or in-stent thrombosis and restenosis (Type III). We searched PubMed until 1 January 2020 for KS case reports. Patients with age <18 years, non-coronary vascular manifestations or without an established diagnosis were excluded. Information regarding patient demographics, medical history, presentation, allergic reaction trigger, angiography, laboratory values and management were extracted from every report. The data were pulled in a combined dataset. From 288 patients with KS, 57.6% had Type I, 24.7% Type II and 6.6% Type III, while 11.1% could not be classified. The mean age was 54.1 years and 70.6% were male. Most presented with a combination of cardiac and allergic symptoms, with medication being the most common trigger. Electrocardiographically, 75.1% had ST segment elevation with only 3.3% demonstrating no abnormalities. Coronary imaging was available in 84.8% of the patients, showing occlusive lesions (32.5%), vascular spasm (16.2%) or normal coronary arteries (51.3%). Revascularization was pursued in 29.4% of the cases. In conclusion, allergic reactions may be complicated by ACS. KS should be considered in the differential diagnosis of myocardial infarction with non-obstructive coronary arteries.
Background Women have been associated with higher rates of recurrent events after percutaneous coronary intervention than men, possibly attributable to advanced age at presentation and greater comorbidities. These factors also put women at higher risk of bleeding, which may influence therapeutic strategies and clinical outcomes. Methods and Results We performed a patient‐level pooled analysis of 4 postapproval registries to evaluate sex‐related differences in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. HBR required fulfillment of at least 1 major or 2 minor criteria of the Academic Research Consortium definition. Outcomes of interest were major bleeding and major adverse cardiac events (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite/probable stent thrombosis). Of the total 10 502 patients, 2832 (27.0%) were women. The prevalence of HBR was higher in women compared with men (29.0% versus 20.5%, P <0.0001). Women at HBR were older and had more comorbidities, while men at HBR were more often smokers, with prior myocardial infarction and more complex coronary lesions. At 4 years, women at HBR had significantly higher major bleeding compared with men at HBR (10.8% versus 6.2%, P <0.0001); however, this difference was attenuated after multivariable adjustment (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.41–2.08). Major adverse cardiac event rates between groups were similar (12.2% versus 12.6%, P =0.82) and remained consistent after adjustment (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.32–1.28). Conclusions The prevalence of HBR was higher in women compared with men, with considerable differences in the distribution of criteria. Women at HBR experienced higher rates of major bleeding but similar major adverse cardiac event rates compared with men at HBR at 4 years.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.