International journal of cardiology
-
Review Meta Analysis Comparative Study
Right versus left radial artery access for coronary procedures: an international collaborative systematic review and meta-analysis including 5 randomized trials and 3210 patients.
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. ⋯ 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.
-
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) provides excellent support to circulation. However, ECMO capacity to effectively assist the heart, and in particular the left ventricle, is limited. We herein review the modifications of left ventricular dynamics during peripheral ECMO, highlight the importance of left ventricle venting and describe a method for the conversion of a femoro-femoral ECMO into a paracorporeal left ventricular assist device.
-
Multicenter Study Observational Study
Prima-vista multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention in haemodynamically stable patients with acute coronary syndromes: analysis of over 4.400 patients in the EHS-PCI registry.
The role of adhoc multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) in patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) has not fully defined yet. Therefore, we sought to evaluate the impact of MV-PCI on in-hospital outcome of patients with MV disease presenting with ACS. ⋯ In clinical practice MV-PCI in haemodynamically stable with ACS is used only in a minority of patients. There was no significant difference in hospital mortality between patients treated with MV- and CL-PCI, but MV-PCI was associated with a higher rate of postprocedural myocardial infarction.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study
Navigating the fine line between benefit and risk in chronic atrial fibrillation: rationale and design of the Standard versus Atrial Fibrillation spEcific managemenT studY (SAFETY).
Health outcomes associated with atrial fibrillation (AF) continue to be poor and standard management often does not provide clinical stability. The Standard versus Atrial Fibrillation spEcific managemenT studY (SAFETY) compares the efficacy of a post-discharge, nurse-led, multi-disciplinary programme to optimise AF management with usual care. ⋯ If positive, SAFETY will represent a potentially cost-effective and readily applicable strategy to improve health outcomes in high risk individuals discharged from hospital with chronic AF.