Cardiology

Tecson, K. M., D. Brown, J. W. Choi, G. Feghali, G. V. Gonzalez-Stawinski, B. L. Hamman, R. Hebeler, S. R. Lander, B. Lima, S. Potluri, J. M. Schussler, R. C. Stoler, C. Velasco and P. A. McCullough (2018). “Major Adverse Renal and Cardiac Events After Coronary Angiography and Cardiac Surgery.” Ann Thorac Surg 105(6): 1724-1730.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Patients at high risk for having postprocedural complications may receive iodixanol, an iso-osmolar contrast, during coronary angiography to minimize the risk of renal toxicity. For those who also require cardiac surgery, the wait time between angiography and surgery may be a modifiable factor capable of mitigating poor surgical outcomes; however, there have been inconsistent reports regarding the optimal wait time. We sought to determine the effects of wait time between angiography and cardiac surgery, as well as contrast-induced acute kidney injury on the development of major adverse renal and cardiac events (MARCE). METHODS: We merged datasets to identify adults who underwent coronary angiography with iodixanol and subsequent cardiac surgery. RESULTS: Of 965 patients, 126 (13.1%) had contrast-induced acute kidney injury; 133 (13.8%) had MARCE within 30 days and 253 (26.2%) within 1 year of surgery. After adjusting for contrast-induced acute kidney injury, age, and Thakar acute renal failure score, the effect of wait time lost significance for the full cohort, but remained for the subgroup of 654 who had coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery within 1 day of coronary angiography had an approximate twofold increase in risk of MARCE (30-day hazard ratio 2.13, 95% confidence interval: 1.16 to 3.88, p = 0.014; 1-year hazard ratio 2.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.32 to 3.23, p = 0.002) compared with patients who waited 5 or more days. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who had contrast-induced acute kidney injury and had cardiac surgery within 1 day of angiography had an increased risk of MARCE.

Shutze, W., V. Suominem, W. Jordan, P. Cao, S. Oweida and R. Milner (2018). “The incidence and effect of noncylindrical neck morphology on outcomes after endovascular aortic aneurysm repair in the Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment.” J Vasc Surg. May 23. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: The Gore Global Registry for Endovascular Aortic Treatment (GREAT) was designed to evaluate real-world outcomes after treatment with Gore aortic endografts used in a real-world, global setting. We retrospectively analyzed the GREAT data to evaluate the incidence and effects of noncylindrical neck anatomy in patients undergoing endovascular aortic aneurysm repair. METHODS: The present analysis included patients with data in the GREAT who had been treated with the EXCLUDER endograft from August 2010 to October 2016. A noncylindrical neck was defined when the proximal aortic landing zone diameter had changed >/=2 mm over the first 15 mm of the proximal landing zone, indicating a tapered, conical, or hourglass morphology. Cox multivariate regression analyses were performed for any reintervention (including reinterventions on aortic branch vessels), device-related reinterventions, and reintervention specifically for endoleak. Independent binary (cylindrical vs noncylindrical necks) and continuous (percentage of neck diameter change) variables were assessed. The abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) diameter, proximal neck length, maximal infrarenal neck angle, gender, and use of aortic extender cuffs were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 3077 GREAT patients with available proximal aortic landing zone diameter measurements available, 1765 were found to have cylindrical necks and 1312 had noncylindrical necks. The noncylindrical neck cohort had a significantly greater proportion of women (17.4% vs 12.6%; P < .001) and more severe infrarenal angulation (33.8 degrees vs 28.4 degrees ; P < .001). A total 14.7% of noncylindrical neck patients and 11.2% cylindrical neck patients underwent implantation outside of the EXCLUDER instructions for use regarding the anatomic inclusion criteria (P = .004). The procedural characteristics were similar between the two cohorts; however, noncylindrical neck patients required significantly more aortic extender cuffs (P = .004). The average follow-up was 21.2 +/- 17.5 months and 17.8 +/- 15.8 months for the cylindrical and noncylindrical cohorts, respectively (P < .001). The Cox multivariate regression models demonstrated female gender and maximum AAA diameter were significant risk factors for subsequent reintervention (overall, device-related, and endoleak-specific). Women were 2.2 times as likely to require device-related intervention during the follow-up period compared with men (P < .001). Neck shape morphology was not a significant predictor, except for device-related intervention, for which cylindrical necks (binary definition) resulted in a slightly elevated risk (1.5 times; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Noncylindrical neck morphology was more common in women and was associated with an increased use of aortic extender cuffs but did not increase the risk of intervention. Female gender and AAA diameter were associated with an increased need for reintervention.

Shutze, W., W. P. Shutze, Jr., P. Prajapati, G. Ogola, J. Schauer, E. Biller, N. Douville and R. A. Shutze (2018). “Postoperative continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic reduces pain scores and narcotic use after lower extremity revascularization.” Vascular 26(3): 262-270.

Full text of this article.

Objective: Postoperative pain following lower extremity revascularization procedures is traditionally controlled with narcotic administration. However, this may not adequately control the pain and puts the patient at risk for complications from opiate use. Here we report an alternative strategy for pain management using a continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic into the operative limb. Design Retrospective case-control study. Methods: Patients undergoing lower extremity revascularization procedures using continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic were compared to similar patients undergoing similar procedures during the same time period who did not receive continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic. Records were reviewed for pain scores, narcotics consumption, length of stay, need for postoperative chest X-ray, supplemental oxygen use, wound complications, and 30-day readmission. Results: There were 153 patients (mean age 69.5 years) from September 2011 to December 2014 who underwent common femoral artery procedures, femoral-popliteal bypass, femoral-tibial bypass, popliteal aneurysm repair, popliteal to pedal bypass, popliteal artery thrombo-embolectomy, sapheno-popliteal venous bypass, or ilio-femoral bypass. There were no significant differences between the continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic (n=57) and control (n=96) groups regarding age, body mass index, cardiac history, diabetes, hypertension, and procedures performed. The continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic group showed better cumulative average pain scores, better high pain scores on postoperative days 1-3, and better average pain scores on postoperative days 2-3 (P<0.03). The continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic group had lower median narcotics consumption on postoperative days 1-2 (P=0.02). No differences were found in postoperative length of stay, urinary catheter use, number of postoperative chest X-rays, oxygen use, mobilization, or fever. Wound complications occurred in 8.8% of the continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic group and in 11.5% of controls (P=0.79). Readmission rates were 23% (continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic) and 21% (controls; P=0.84). Conclusion: Postoperative continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic reduces pain scores and pain medication use compared to standard opiate therapy in these patients, without increasing wound complication or readmission rates. Continuous catheter-infused local anesthetic appeared to have no effect on the incidence of pulmonary complications, mobilization, or fever.

Patel, M. R., J. H. Calhoon, G. J. Dehmer, J. A. Grantham, T. M. Maddox, D. J. Maron and P. K. Smith (2018). “Correction to: ACC/AATS/AHA/ASE/ASNC/SCAI/SCCT/STS 2017 Appropriate Use Criteria for Coronary Revascularization in Patients With Stable Ischemic Heart Disease.” J Nucl Cardiol May 10. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

To more clearly reflect the relationship between iFR (instantaneous wave-free ratio) and FFR (fractional flow reserve), this Correction document highlights the following changes to the original document published in the Journal of Nuclear Cardiology; the version available at JACC has been updated to reflect the changes, with JACC’s Correction document available at.

Packer, M. and P. R. Kowey (2018). “Building Castles in the Sky: Catheter Ablation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation and Chronic Heart Failure.” Circulation May 30. [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

Atrial fibrillation is part of the medical history in >30% of patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction and in >50% of those with a preserved ejection fraction. In general, the arrhythmia does not cause heart failure; but does it contribute to progression of the disease? The treatment of atrial fibrillation has advanced over the past 20 years, as we have moved from antiarrhythmic drugs to catheter ablation. Yet, is intervention beneficial? It is important to relieve disabling symptoms due to paroxysms of the arrhythmia, but this is a valid goal whether heart failure exists or not. However, for most patients with heart failure and atrial fibrillation, control of the ventricular response and systemic anticoagulation are all that is required.