Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Cardiology -Mechnisms of disease’ Category

William Heberden first introduced the term angina to the medical community in 1772. His descriptions became immortal. Still, no one would ever know what was the angina-related artery, Heberden was alluding to.

Now, some jobless cardiologist is asking this question after 200 years. How is angina from the LAD system differ from the RCA  system? or let me put it another way, How does angina of anterior circulation (LAD) differ from posterior circulation (RCA/LCX)? Though there is distinct hemodynamic profiling of RCAvs LAD ACS, surprisingly, cardiology literature does not answer the chest pain aspect of it. One rare study, done  4 decades ago throws some light

Here is a curious little study, with a simple & crisp conclusion.

chest pain and IRA localisation angina LAD angian RCA

It concludes, that LAD angina rarely radiates to JAW or epigastrium. While RCA angina relay radiates to the left shoulder.

So, why does this happen?

What I could guess is the ubiquitous vagal fibers that travel in the posterior aspect of the heart, and carries pain signal directly up to the jaw whenever these areas become ischemia. LAD is less likely to irritate the vagus. Of course, there can be a definite overlap.

OMG, give me some time to keep in touch with  basic science 

Now, fellows of cardiology, please take a  pause from your regular aggressive cardiac cath lab workouts and get a break at least once in a while. How does the ischemia of myocardial tissue generate pain? Why it is severe in some, trivial in others, and even dead silent in some, 

The chest pain genesis is initiated by sensory electrical neural action potential, that captures the epicardial neural plexus first, switching over from somatic to the visceral pathway and trespassing the para ganglionic plexus and traveling further to the spinal cord. Where it may collide with other incoming sensory signals ascends in specific myelinated and non-myelinated neural cables, reaching the brainstem, interacting with local nuclei, and finally reflecting on subcortical and cortical pain matching centers.  We haven’t yet located the exact center for anginal pain. (Perithalmic and amygdala could be closer to real centers) 

So, it is a really complex sensory world yet to be understood fully. Mind you, I haven’t touched upon the neurophysics of referred pain, linked or clandestine angina.

  • What is the effect of cardiac denervation, autonomic neuropathy, or on the perception of chest pain(Does a quadriplegic feel angina ? or post-transplant heart immune to angina ? (Gallego Page JC,Rev Esp Cardiol. 2001) 
  • Is it biochemical or neural, can substance P in blood cause pain hitting the amygdala? 
  • Will hypoglycemia and anemia cause angina due to lack of glucose and oxygen?
  • Finally, how is Infarct pain is different from ischemic pain (Ischemic)

Where do get the answer to these questions?

This paper from Dr. Robert Formean(Ref 2) university of Oklahoma is just the best source I think, to explore and understand the topic. (Reading time 60 minutes: Let me tell you, it is worth more than a time spent on an insignificant angioplasty of painless PDA lesions)

Final message 

So, what have you learned from this post? Does this question about angina matter at all? Surely not. in this space-age cardiac care where we are right inside the coronary even before we listen to the patient’s complaint properly. We are always at liberty to do what we want( or love) to do. But, the urge to understand the foundations of clinical science is the last remaining hope, that will keep the specialty of cardiology enchanting. 

Reference
 
 
A comprehensive reference for the genesis and signal processing  of chest pain 
 
 

Read Full Post »

Syncope is one of the common, yet difficult symptoms to evaluate especially in the elderly. Post-prandial syncope is one condition likely to be missed out.As the name suggests It has a distinct relationship with food intake. Mild fall in postprandial BP is an expected response but if it exceeds a  limit* syncope is triggered. (*Highly variable)

Hemodynamics of Postprandial state

  1. Normally splanchnic circulation demands up to a 25%  increase in blood volume after a moderately large meal. 
  2. When this happens there must be compensatory vasoconstriction elsewhere especially in muscles. Lack of this response results in inappropriate falls in SVR. (The second mechanism is more constant and can be disproportionate to fall of BP)
  3. The mediators for this are either neurogenic or hormonal or both.
  4. Gastrointestinal mediator (Vasoactive Intestinal polypeptide dysregulation) is thought to play a major role. 

From Jansen et al  Archives of Internal medicine 1995

When does it occur?

It can manifest as early as 15 minutes, up to 2 hrs. The fall in systolic  BP is around 20mmhg. More common with large, hot meals. The fact that it can occur up to 2 hrs post meals, there is a likelyhood we might overlook it in history.

Other differential diagnoses 

Management 

There is no specific therapy. Some of the following might be effective.

  • Caffeine,
  • Somatostatin,
  • Acarbose,( α-Glucosidase Inhibitor ) 
  • Avoiding acute high carbohydrate intake.
  • A psychogenic component can be noted in a few that is attenuated by cognitive-behavioral therapy.
  • Midoridine, an Alpha¹ receptor stimulant  can be surprisingly more effective in some who have overlap with orthostatic hypo  (Cleve Clin J Med. 2010 May; 77(5): 298–306.)

Final message

Postprandial hypotension/syncope is a less recognized entity. As always, history is the most important diagnostic tool in the evaluation of syncope, which comes free of cost as well. The diagnostic yield is much greater than sophisticated Holter and event monitors.

Please note, there is a much more prevalent, lesser version of this condition, ie postprandial dizziness or giddiness. However, as already stated there is a significant overlap between orthostatic hypotension and postprandial syncope. It’s worth ruling out diabetes and autonomic dysfunction, (even subclinical Parkinsons) in elders with such symptoms. 

Reference

Here is a  comprehensive and elegant study (I think, It is only one of that kind on this topic )

1.Jansen RWMM, Connelly CM, Kelley-Gagnon MM, Parker JA, Lipsitz LA. Postprandial Hypotension in Elderly Patients With Unexplained Syncope. Arch Intern Med. 1995;155(9):945–952.

Postprandial hypotension Jansen1995

 

 

 

 

 

Read Full Post »

Hyperlipidimia is one of the well-known coronary  risk factor.Serum cholesterol ( Various fractions ) levels are measured to represent that risk. Epidemiologically ,it does a perfect job , however , the fact is , circulating lipids has little correlation with the lipids that’s deposited in the vessel wall.

Time and again , we have proven this as severity of CAD has little  to do with the absolute levels of lipid levels.The number  volume of plaques , the thickness of lipid core, and degree of vulnerability  show  poor correlation with circulating lipid levels than  what we would expect.It tempts us to make a statement , that serum lipid is a poor surrogate marker for CAD. (Still, it may predict the risk of developing it !)

Why this paradox ? What are the  missing links and hidden secrets ?

If you plot a simple graph with serum lipids with  plaque mass, volume and content in CAD population , we might get an  answer .I don’t know whether such a study exist. (Those who find one , please share)

A new concept called cholesterol crystalisation 

It’s not the lipids alone that are responsible for CAD . There is a whole lot of factors , circulating  pro inflammatory  mediators, altered blood coagulation system  , various  inflammatory molecules, , heightened  intra-coronary pressures, genetic vulnerabilities .

Most importantly ,the format  of lipid molecule in side  the plaque seems to matter more  rather the  absolute content.(Small dense LDL, oxidised lipids,Lipid fed macrophages etc )

There is lesser reported phenomenon  called cholesterol crystalisation , with sharp edges (Lipid knife ?) that are responsible random episodes  plaque fissure and rupture.

It was reported in  one of the  rare research paper that came from  (Abela Am J Cardiol.2009)  Factors that crysalise cholesterol include local saturation,  PH, temperature , hydration and plaque RBC contact.

If you argue lipid levels are not  correlating with CAD , how is that reducing it with statins dramatically reduce  CAD and the events ?

Like blood pressure the normality of serum lipids itself is not defined.One insightful definition was proposed , that the level at which a person develops CAD is high for that patient however low it may be..A person who develops extensive CAD  say at a level of  90mgLDL what to infer ? We do not know exact  answer.

That’s why the  concept of satin for all with clinical CAD looked attractive. Still , statin’s action doesn’t help  answer the original query about the relationship between blood lipids and plaque lipids.

Statins beneficial effect is not by reduction of serum cholesterol.It primary acts by  regressing intra-plaque lipids by blocking synthesis of lipids in every cell.The anti inflammatory,plaque stabilisation action of  statin may be  independent of lipid reduction.How much it contributes to overall benefits is not known.

The mystery will deepen

Not every LDL is bad.(I will be slapped if I call them Good LDL !) Small dense LDL , LDL P (Particle) ApoB (The real culprit on which LDL piggybacks ) lipoprotein little a and so many other lipid sub particles are being studied.

Final message

The purpose of this post is not to confuse our understanding about coronary  lipidology but to widen our vision . Serum lipids remain a poor surrogate marker for plaque lipids. This is because , It’s rather a small fraction of sample volume we catch in the  circulating blood , while loads of lipids gets deposited elsewhere in the body ! This also make it clear,no single risk factor in isolation is really CAD risky.It is the combination of risks , genetic susceptibility , LDL subfractions, few unknown risk/protective factors and finally a mandatory trigger(Hemodynamic, Emotional ?) that determine the outcome of  CAD.

So ladies and gentle men , just don’t over react to mildly abnormal lipid levels you often find in  master health checks .There is much more untold stories behind the true CAD risk than the glossy lab printouts would suggest !

Reference

2.

3.The Role of Lipids and Lipoproteins in Atherosclerosis MacRae F Linton, MD, Patricia G Yancey, 

Read Full Post »

This cartoon succinctly  depict all the options we have in our fight against end stage heart failure .We know , a failing heart is often compared to a sick , aged and tired horse.

cardiac failure cartoon tired horse whicpping lionel opie book

Image courtesy Heart Physiology: From Cell to Circulation :Lionel H. Opie Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2004

 

1.Don’t whip the horse (Except in emergency)

  • Avoid all Inotropics ( Doubutamine and Milrinone were shown to improve quality of life marginally but  with dramatic reduction in quantity of life ! However , the same thing does not apply for Digoxin as it is the  the only Inotropic with a soothing para-sympathetic comfort  !
  • Please be reminded, CRT wires could act as  “multiple whip equivalents” right inside the heart , especially in advanced class 3 or just recovered class 4 patients. Beware!

2.Unload the horse

Vasodilators

  • ACEI/ARBS

3.Slow the horse

  • Never exert too much (Not more than 70% of capacity)
  • Beta blockers
  • Ivabradine (Slow the sinus node and expect a reduction in MVO2 )

4.Change the horse

  • Heart transplant may be the best solution

5.Switch to an Artificial Horse(Tractor )

  • ie  LV assist device

6.Finally try to heal the horse (Still largely in research labs!)

  • Genetic engineering
  • Tissue repairing
  • Stem cells
  • Holistic and spiritual healing etc (Has really  worked in few )

Read Full Post »

When a patient comes with angina at rest , it could mean two things .Either a  STEMI or an NSTEMI .This , we can diagnose only after seeing the ECG .

Can we differentiate these two by the  character of chest pain alone ?

Very  tough task isn’t  ? But there are some definite clues .

Infarct  pain

  • Is mostly sudden .
  • Likely to be crescendo , lasts more than 20-30 minutes .
  • Fails to get relived by rest or even  Nitrites.
  • Sweating due to sympathetic activation is more pronounced.

Unstable angina

  • Is rarely  sudden .Often has a pro-drome.
  • UA is  mostly precipitated by an increased demand situation or a stress.
  • It has  a typical waxing and waning  pattern . Rarely assume a true  crescendo character  as myocytes  does not necrose (Just threaten to die !)
  • The chest pain radiation   to  shoulder is less  conspicuous , instead it  tends to  reach  the  jaw area .(* An observation,Is it something to do with multi-vessel CAD in UA ?)

Mechanism of the difference : Epicardial vs Endocardial angina

The pain of UA is   due to subtotal occlusion and  endocardial ischemia , while STEMI is  sudden total occlusion  and the resultant  transmural  ischemia . In STEMI  epicardial  surface is always involved (Which lifts the ST segment in ECG .).We know epicardium  is same as  visceral layer of pericardium which is well innervated .Hence  pain  of STEMI   acquires  more of somatic character  than a  predominately visceral type pain  that occurs with  UA/NSTEMI where epicardial ischemia is absent.

Clinical importance

The demarcation between unstable angina and Infarct pain becomes vital when we calculate the time window for thrombolysing STEMI .Many of them have a phase of pre infarction angina which is a type of unstable angina. If we mistake it for Infarct pain then one may falsely calculate a prolonged time window and deny re-perfusion therapy.

Post -amble

It is tricky issue  to differentiate the  chest pain of  STEMI and NSTEMI  .A significant overlap can occur  in  real coronary care scenario . We know   chest pain  that occurs in both   pre and post infarct  phase  is considered  as unstable angina .(With infarct pain sandwiched between them!) Hence differentiating  them may even be termed as futile.

Still,clinical cardiology  can be  made  fascinating by indulging in such exercise !

 

Read Full Post »

We  traditionally believe  LV enlargement  results in dilatation of mitral annulus  from below  and  result in functional MR.
A lesser known  concept is , LA enlargement dilating the  mitral annulus from above and cause MR   !
Can atrial enlargement per se dilate mitral annulus ?

We often find  some degree of MR   associated with chronic  atrial fibrillation.What is the mechanism ?We also know MR begets MR.Is it because of progressive LV or LA enlargement ?

When the literature is searched  we have convincing proof that  LA enlargement can lead to significant  mitral annular dilatation and MR as well .
left atrial enlargement and mitral annuluseffect of la enlargement on mitral annulus
Reference

Read Full Post »

critical decision making cardiology cath lab tricks coronary  angiogram primary angioplasty ptca vs cabg acc aha guidelines esc guidelines

Answer

While our brain perceives  whatever option  we  choose is the best for the patient  , in reality it is rarely true !

The only comment I wish to make,  there is nothing called standard guidelines for complex and unusual problems .We need not be obsessed with protocols  !

Please remember , If you apply standard guidelines  in  non-standard situations  9/10 times we  are going to err !

So my  choice  would be, to  go with your gut feeling , of course  your gut should  be alive ,  up to date and periodically maintained !

If you don’t have the guts  . . . don’t worry  you have plenty of other options !

 

Read Full Post »

  • Diabetes , smoking , hypertension , dyslipidemia are the  leading cause of cardiac morbidity and  mortality .
  • Now air pollution the(  passive atmospheric smoking !) is threatening to be a major risk factor .
  • In fact , it has become the  official  cardiac risk factor nominated by WHO !
  • 40 %  of all deaths due to air pollution is due to cardiac events .
  • The surprise element is indoor air pollution is equally injurious .

WHO bulletin  in March 2014

air pollution and cardivascular health

The WHO assessment found the majority of air pollution deaths were linked with cardiovascular diseases.

For deaths related to outdoor pollution, it found:

  • 40% – heart disease
  • 40% – stroke
  • 11% – chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)
  • 6% – lung cancer
  • 3% – acute lower respiratory infections in children

For deaths related to Indoor pollution, it found:

  • 34% – stroke
  • 26% – heart disease

 

Related article from this site

A-new-coronary-risk-factor-community-smoking

Read Full Post »

  • Diabetes mellitus is a pro-coagulant state,especially so in severe uncontrolled states.(1)
  • This is mediated by increased  levels of   plasminogen  activator Inhibitor.(PAI 1 and 2
  • This tilts  anti-fibrinolytic  forces towards thrombosis.
  • High PAI-1 is an Independent risk factor for MI in young individuals (3)
  • During STEMI the success rate of  fibrinolysis is significantly lower in diabetic population because high levels of PAI 1 .
  • The triad of DM,Obesity, Insulin resistance is a powerful predictor of  poor  response to thrombolysis.

 

Read Full Post »

Is “Non-flow limiting coronary  lesions  more prone for ACS ?

  • If  your  answer  is “No”, you can skip this article.
  • If your  answer is “Yes” , you need to read this article.

ACS is the commonest cardiac emergency .Thousands of patients are treated every day.Millions of dollars are spent.Bulk of the cardiologist’s life revolves around this entity.

Scattered atherosclerotic plaques in coronary artery lead to ACS either in a random fashion or in a predictable manner .

Still, we are  highly  uncertain about  which lesions are likely to result in ACS ! Some time in the beginning of  21st century, the main stream cardiology media were abuzz with the concept, that non obstructive , non-flow limiting lesions are more prone for ACS rather than more tight  stenosis.

atherosclerosis flow limiting lesion glagov plaque rupture vulnerable erosion fissure vs dissection

I fail to understand how a tight lesion is less  prone for ACS. Tighter lesions are  bigger and must be  prone for more complications . Image courtesy :http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Endo_dysfunction_Athero.PNG

This reasoning was based on few studies, that lacked  solid scientific proof . In fact the initial  observation was  not made in living coronary arteries rather by autopsy observations .(Later live virtual histological studies came ,  but didn’t confirm this !)

Surprisingly the degree of  anatomical narrowing was conferred  vulnerability  , when we know plaque compositions , morphology and hemo-rheological  factors are many fold important in precipitating ACS . (Lipid content , fibrin cap  thickness, eccentricity , etc)

So where is the truth hidden?

Is it really possible, lesser the stenosis more  is the propensity for rupture ?

 We need to introspect .

“In all probability,  it is a meager statistical illusion”

For every tight lesion there are as many minor lesions scattered around in a given a coronary artery. These can progress into ACS  later.

It is basically wrong to assume non-flow limiting lesions are more prone for ACS than non-flow limiting lesions.To believe so , seriously underestimates  the  culpability of big lesions .It appears a coronary mockery to me  !

At best , we can conclude  non-flow limiting lesions  are not benign and can be an important source of ACS.

An unscientific chain reaction !

If we start believing non flow limiting (say  30%  stenosis ) is more prone for ACS , why we are not stenting all  those lesions ?

If the above concept  is  is applied in cath lab  routinely , the principle of  FFR   which relies solely on hemodynamic impact  will  crash into the dustbin !

Some  more truths

However , It is indeed true  when a plaque is hardened by severe sclerotic process or calcification it is less prone for  rupture and clinical ACS  but can be a source for stable angina.

Is it  justified to assume , larger the plaque the harder  would be it’s content  that  resists ACS ?

Meanwhile , we also know there need not be any lesion at all to cause an ACS.( In a young  smoker ,  100 % thrombotic STEMI  is possible  over an area of coronary erosion caused by endothelial dysfunction ! So , where do we go from here !)

Let us be clear

Are you confused more !   . . . after  reading this article, let us clear it by two-line summary !

As on 2014 ,

  • Symptomatic flow limiting lesion   are tackled by stents.
  • All non-flow limiting lesions  are treated by  high dose Statins  and vigorous medical management.

Final message

Contrary to popular  perception, tight lesions are  more complex, eccentric , soft and are at immediate risk of ACS.

Non flow limiting lesions remain static in most,  regress in many , still  carries  distinct  risk of progression into full blown ACS , at any time if conditions are favorable.

Fixed concepts and ideas in medical science do not help us  taking medicine forward. Especially so, when these are based on assumptions and approximations. If only we redo these studies with the currently available technology (FFR/OCT/NIR the conclusions would be dramatically different. !

Waiting for someone to nullify such false concepts in a more scientific way !

Reference

2.Glagov S, Weisenberg E, Zarins C, Stankunavicius R, Kolletis G. Compensatory enlargement of human atherosclerotic coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 1987; 316: 371–375.

3.Fuster V, Lewis A. Conner Memorial Lecture. Mechanisms leading to myocardial infarction: insights from studies of vascular biology. Circulation 1994;90:2126-2146.

4.Ambrose JA, Weinrauch M. Thrombosis in ischemic heart disease. Arch Int Med 1996;156:1382-1394

Postample 
This post was written in 2014. Happy to find a scientific proof to this concept in 2018.
Source :  PROSPECT study

Retrospective angiographic studies and the prospective PROSPECT (Providing Regional Observations to Study  Predictors of Events in the Coronary Tree) study have shown that plaques with severe stenosis carry a higher per-plaque risk for producing clinical events than plaques that cause no or non severe stenosis.

However, such lesions are few, and overall, most ACS are precipitated by plaques  without significant stenosis on an antecedent angiography
weeks or months before. This epidemiology is consistent with the distribution of TCFAs, as shown by a combined angiography and optical coherence tomographic imaging study of nonculprit lesions.

Lesions that caused severe stenosis were twice as likely to be
TCFAs than lesions with only non severe stenosis, but the total number of TCFAs with nonsevere stenosis was three times higher than those with severe stenosis. The mild pre-existent stenosis of most TCFAs and ruptured plaques is explained by expansive remodeling, because such lesions are, on average, large.

The long-held notion that mild to moderate obstructive coronary lesions are responsible for the majority of MIs has been challenged by studies that described significant narrowing in the days preceding MI. However, significant narrowing shortly before MI may be a result of (rather than a precursor) for rupture.

 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »