Purpose: Coagulation-fibrinolysis markers are widely used for the diagnosis of Stanford type A acute aortic dissection (SAAAD). However, the role of these markers in estimating prognosis remains unclear.
Methods: A single-center retrospective study was conducted to identify the relationship between preoperative D-dimer and fibrinogen levels on SAAAD postoperative early prognosis.
Results: Of 238 SAAAD patients who underwent surgery between January 2012 and December 2018, 201 (84.5%) and 37 (15.5%) patients constituted the survival and non-survival groups, respectively, 30 days after surgery. D-dimer and fibrinogen levels in the survival and non-survival groups were 45.2 ± 74.3 vs. 91.5 ± 103.6 μg/mL (p = 0.014) and 224.3 ± 95.6 vs. 179.9 ± 96.7 μg/mL (p = 0.012), respectively. According to logistic predictor analysis of 30-day mortality, significant factors showed patent type (OR 10.89, 95% CI 1.66-20.31) and malperfusion (OR 4.63, 95% CI 1.74-12.32). Increasing D-dimer (per +10 μg/mL) and decreasing fibrinogen (per -10 μg/mL) were significantly associated with patent type and malperfusion. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was performed to distinguish between survival and non-survival. The cutoff value of D-dimer was 60 μg/mL (sensitivity 61.1%; specificity 82.5%; area under curve [AUC] 0.713 ± 0.083); fibrinogen was 150 mg/dL (sensitivity 44.4%; specificity 84.0%; AUC 0.647 ± 0.092). Kaplan-Meier survival curve analysis showed that patients with D-dimer levels > 60 μg/mL and fibrinogen levels < 150 mg/dL had significantly low survival rates at 30 days after surgery (60.0%, p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Preoperative coagulation-fibrinolysis markers may be useful for predicting early prognosis in SAAAD.
Background: Susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19 is associated with risk factors for and presence of cardiovascular disease.
Methods: We performed a 2-sample Mendelian randomization to determine whether blood pressure (BP), body mass index (BMI), presence of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD) are causally related to presentation with severe COVID-19. Variant-exposure instrumental variable associations were determined from most recently published genome-wide association and meta-analysis studies (GWAS) with publicly available summary-level GWAS data. Variant-outcome associations were obtained from a recent GWAS meta-analysis of laboratory confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 with severity determined according to need for hospitalization/death. We also examined reverse causality using exposure as diagnosis of severe COVID-19 causing cardiovascular disease.
Results: We found no evidence for a causal association of cardiovascular risk factors/disease with severe COVID-19 (compared to population controls), nor evidence of reverse causality. Causal odds ratios (OR, by inverse variance weighted regression) for BP (OR for COVID-19 diagnosis 1.00 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.99-1.01, P = 0.604] per genetically predicted increase in BP) and T2DM (OR for COVID-19 diagnosis to that of genetically predicted T2DM 1.02 [95% CI: 0.9-1.05, P = 0.927], in particular, were close to unity with relatively narrow confidence intervals.
Conclusion: The association between cardiovascular risk factors/disease with that of hospitalization with COVID-19 reported in observational studies could be due to residual confounding by socioeconomic factors and /or those that influence the indication for hospital admission.
The use of intracoronary imaging with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) can define vessel architecture and has an established role in guidance and optimisation of percutaneous coronary intervention. Additionally intracoronary imaging has an emerging role in diagnosis, afforded by the ability to depict vessel wall characteristics not seen on angiography alone. Use of intracoronary imaging is recommended by international consensus guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and two recent expert consensus position statements from the European Association of Percutaneous Coronary Interventions (EAPCI). However, uptake in contemporary practice in the United Kingdom appears to lag behind these recommendations. Imaging is particularly advantageous in complex coronary lesions (such as left main stem coronary artery, bifurcation, or heavily calcified lesions) and in complex patients (acute presentations, atypical presentations, and renal dysfunction). Stent detail to the level of individual struts can be appreciated with intracoronary imaging, which facilitates appropriate stent selection and optimisation of the final stent result. We highlight specific subgroups that benefit from an imaging guided approach to percutaneous coronary intervention. We review the evidence and the role of intracoronary imaging and highlight specific subgroups that show particular benefit from imaging guided percutaneous coronary intervention.
The practice of interventional cardiology has changed dramatically over the last four decades since Andreas Gruentzig carried out the first balloon angioplasty. The obvious technological improvements in stent design and interventional techniques have facilitated the routine treatment of a higher risk cohort of patients, including those with complex coronary artery disease and poor left ventricular function, and more often in the setting of cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The use of mechanical cardiac support (MCS) in these settings has been the subject of intense interest, particularly over the past decade . A number of commercially available devices now add to the interventional cardiologist's armamentarium when faced with the critically unwell or high-risk patient in the cardiac catheter laboratory. The theoretical advantage of such devices in these settings is clear- an increase in cardiac output and hence mean arterial pressure, with variable effects on coronary blood flow. In doing so, they have the potential to prevent the downward cascade of ischaemia and hypoperfusion, but there is a paucity of evidence to support their routine use in any patient subset, even those presenting with cardiogenic shock. This review will discuss the use and haemodynamic effect of MCS devices during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and also examine the clinical evidence for their use in patients with cardiogenic shock, and those undergoing 'high risk' PCI.
Objectives: We aimed to assess associations between depressive symptoms, lifestyle, and somatic symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Design: A prospective, observational study using a self-designed questionnaire.
Setting: Three general practitioners' (GP) offices in rural Germany.
Participants: 271 adult patients without manifest cardiovascular or pulmonary disease with (n = 82) and without (n = 189) hypertension reporting to our GP offices.
Main outcome measures: The reported increase of depressive symptoms (loneliness, sleeplessness, joylessness, listlessness) prior to the first documented case in Germany on 27.01.2020 (t0) as opposed to patients' health perception during the Corona pandemic (t1) was the primary outcome measure. The secondary outcome measures were changes in physical activity (PA), dyspnea and angina in the two groups.
Results: Out of 271 patients (50.8 ± 16.8 years, 55.1% females), 1.5% were tested positive for COVID-19. Overall, listlessness (8.5%, p = 0.001), sleeplessness (5.2%, p = 0.001) and joylessness (4.2%, p = 0.003) were increased. Dyspnea significantly increased (9.2%, p < 0.001) and employment status worsened (6.5%, p < 0.001). There were significant associations between the increase of depressive symptoms, weight increase (p = 0.017), and reduction in physical activity (p = 0.046). However, after adjusting for age, hypertensive patients did not show more depressive symptoms (p = 0.704), dyspnea (p = 0.063) or angina (p = 0.432), nor was there any difference in PA (p = 0.906) compared to healthy individuals.
Conclusions: We demonstrate an association between the deterioration of depressive symptoms, weight gain, and reduced physical activity during COVID-19, both in hypertensives and healthy controls. Hypertension is no driver of symptom deterioration during the pandemic. The trial was registered in the German Clinical Trials Registry (DRKS00022157).
Previous studies have found critically ill patients with COVID-19 to have an increased risk of thromboembolic complications. In this case report of two patients admitted with symptomatic COVID-19, both patients developed pulmonary embolism within a few days after hospital discharge. Both patients received thromboprophylaxis and had an increasing fibrin D-dimer during their hospital stay. Continued thromboprophylaxis after hospital discharge may be indicated for patients with COVID-19, especially for patients at high risk of thrombosis with elevated levels of fibrin D-dimer.
Background: The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) published an updated stable chest pain guideline in 2019, recommending the use of an updated pre-test probability (PTP) risk score (RS) to assess the likelihood of coronary artery disease (CAD). We sought to compare the 2019 and 2013 PTPRS in a contemporary cohort of patients.
Methods: 612 patients who were investigated with computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) for stable chest pain were included in a retrospective analysis.
Results: There were 255 patients with 2019 PTPRS 15-50% with a 9% yield of severe CAD on CTCA, compared with 402 patients and a 4% yield using the 2013 PTPRS (p = 0.01). 355 patients had a 2019 PTPRS of <15%, with 3% found to have severe CAD, compared with 67 patients and none with severe CAD using the 2013 PTPRS (p = 0.14). 336 of patients with 2019 PTPRS of <15% had a calcium score as part of the CTCA. 223 of these had a zero calcium score and only one had severe CAD. In comparison, 113 patients had a positive calcium score, and 10 (9%) had severe CAD (p < 0.001).
Discussion: The ESC 2019 PTPRS classifies more patients as at lower risk of CAD and hence reduces the risk overestimation associated with the 2013 PTPRS. However, in patients with a 2019 PTPRS of <15%, who would not be investigated, the use of the calcium score detected the majority of patients with significant CAD, who may benefit from secondary prevention and an associated mortality benefit as per the SCOT-Heart trial.
Objective: To compare statin prescribing rates between intermediate-risk people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV; PLWH) and intermediate-risk patients without a diagnosis of HIV for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).
Methods: Retrospective cohort study . Electronic health record data were used to identify a cohort of PLWH aged 40-75 years with a calculated 10-year ASCVD risk between 7.5%-19.9% as determined by the Pooled Cohort Equation (PCE). A matched cohort of primary prevention non-HIV patients was identified. The primary outcome was the proportion of PLWH who were prescribed statin therapy compared to patients who were not living with HIV and were prescribed statin therapy.
Results: 81 patients meeting study criteria in the PLWH cohort were matched to 81 non-HIV patients. The proportion of patients prescribed statins was 33.0% and 30.9% in the PLWH and non-HIV cohorts, respectively (p = 0.74).Conclusion and relevance: This study evaluated statin prescribing in PLWH for primary prevention of ASCVD as described in the 2018 AHA/ACC/Multisociety guideline. Rates of statin prescribing were similar, yet overall low, among intermediate-risk primary prevention PLWH compared to those not diagnosed with HIV.
An 86-year-old woman was admitted for a ruptured popliteal artery aneurysm (rPAA, 26 × 28 mm). Due to the patient's age and comorbidities, emergency endovascular repair was performed. After the failed antegrade guidewire crossing, a retrograde approach from the anterior tibial artery and snaring was performed for lesion crossing, and stentgraft (5 × 50 mm) was deployed from antegrade fashion. At the 14-month follow-up, computed tomography angiogram demonstrated stentgraft patency and reduced aneurysmal size. Although open surgery remains the first-line treatment for infected rPAA, our approach adds to the evidence and can be applied to emergency cases or high-risk surgical patients.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：