Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘cost effectiveness in cardiology’ Category

Why routine thrombus aspiration is prohibited in STEMI ?

Posted in Cardiology -Criteria, Cardiology -Therapeutic dilemma, cardiology wisdom, Coronary angiogram, cost effectiveness in cardiology, STEMI, STEMI -Managment, STEMI-Primary PCI, Thrombolysis, Thrombolysis -Tips, tagged , , , on May 12, 2018|

It was 1912 , Titanic had just sank off the Atlantic . When the world attention was elsewhere , An unassuming young Dr.Herrick J.B silently working in his Michigan lab inquisitively proposed thrombus occluding the coronary artery is the chief culprit in acute myocardial Infarction.It took seven more decades when Davis et all from Glasgow .UK. proved it by doing dramatic angiographic studies soon after STEMI in year 1979.

Now, even after 100 years , we, the confused cardiologists debate endlessly in glamorous global conclaves in exotic locales whether to aspirate these humble looking thrombus, threatening to damage the myocardium with every passing moment !

Why is this controversy ?

My answer

I am failing to understand the concept and the answer is elusive .While every one agrees that thrombus is true culprit, in bulk of the STEMI , still we are not authorised (In an assertive fashion ) either to lyse as first choice or to aspirate as second choice.

It seems vital, thrombus must be tackled vigorously by any means. Drugs,lytics,(Intravenous or Intra-coronary.) by micro and rheolytic catheters .Only documented, flow limiting complex mechanical lesions must be stented. If we are convinced tackling thrombus by mechanical means is problematic (As studies would suggest ) lysis should prevail over aspiration as a routine measure by default isn’t ?

*It’s a been quite a while , the world cardiology community has made it appear thrombolysing a patient who is otherwise eligible for primary PCI ! a “coronary crime*” Ofcourse , I must say , I proudly commit that crime with rewarding results in many MI patients.

*In fact , I would think not promoting or delaying prompt lysis should qualify for the definition.

In the management of STEMI, prehospital lysis followed by a Intensive care in a good coronary care center is best modality.

This doesn’t mean in-hospital lysis is banished. Yes, STEMI is a cardiac emergency , but triaging STEMI patients must be done by scientific means (STEMI risk score) as well with accumulated wisdom .Rush only true emergencies into cath lab. (A best estimate is about 20 % of all STEMI) If we are not able to decide which STEMI will require prompt PCI , it would Imply we need to go back and do once more the basics postings in coronary care of resident days !

An angry counter from a young Interventionist

Only God can tell whether a given patient with STEMI will (or will not) derive maximum benefit from pPCI. We are not yet trained to make that decision by looking at patient and his ECG.So my logic is all STEMIs are equal. I will continue to do emergency angioplasty in all STEMI patients . I expect them blindly to accept all the potential complications arising out of poking the thrombotic milieu in those low risk patients who might have done well with thrombolysis.

Never afraid of challenges. It is like going to war. Casualties are bound to happen.We have enough technology , Imaging , expertise, to tackle all those complex lesions we encounter during primary PCI especially in elderly comorbid patients. We can even do a triple vessel angioplasty , left main etc. Only Yesterday I posted in my nonstop whatsapp group , where I did a dramatic acute angled bifurcation angioplasty for a stable STEMI patient that required a iFR guided jailed side branch assessment and 3d OCT transmitting stunning snaps of fresh thrombus, ending with a semi culotte procedure.The patient is doing well with a Impella 2.5 device and a high frequency ventilator support and my anesthetist has promised me to wean him soon ! I must actually thank his Glo-Health plus Insurance company for clearing the procedure.

An Important tip for complex lesions during STEMI

We need to know there is always a saving grace , if for some reason we couldn’t accomplish PCI due to complexities of the lesion with multiple IRA mimickers. We can always sheepishly thrombolyse these patients inside cath lab . . . a modality just few minutes ago would have been ridiculed with all our vigor to convince the anxious family for a costly Invasive procedure !

Reference

3. Herrick Original paper . https://jamanetwork.com/

Read Full Post »

Mature cardiologists should never trust BMS !

Posted in cost effectiveness in cardiology, Ethics in Medicine, innovations in cardiology, Newer hardwares in cardiology, Technology Emerging, tagged , , on April 22, 2017| 1 Comment »

BMS, the original stent technology with meticulous metallurgy and design has been silently replaced by the drug eluting stent (DES) for over a decade. DES was introduced to bail out BMS from perceived high rates of  restenosis . It was a fundamental flaw, we failed to give due  weightage to the multiple variables like  operator expertise, lesion morphology, patient factors that determined the restenosis  rate .

There was never a single study done in large scale that compared a well deployed BMS with a poorly deployed BMS/ DES in terms of restenosis rate.This would have clearly quantified the technical component in the  restenosis rate that brought  pseduo -bad name for BMS in early days.

Without applying mind, wrong questions were asked and tested. No body could refute a “novel concept” , when some big names in industry  suggested  we must involve an anti cancer drug to prevent cell growth and neo-vascularisation  and hence restenosis. But , in reality  the technology of DES essentially complicated the metal behavior by adding a drug and drug adhesive agent(Polymer)  to the otherwise inert metal. Further , the , metallurgy  engineers had to restart / reduplicate from the scratch since we had  already well developed stent technology for BMS . The manipulation was  to add a drug to the metal.

The  irony of DES lies in the fact it Intentionally allowed to interfere /damage the endothelial healing and make the extended anti-platelet mandatory.  Still , DES was able to rule the world backed up by hyped data  with   bloated  reduction in restenosis rate. (Now we realise  the true benefits of DES  are nil  or at best marginal or even harmful in certain subsets of ACS .Read NORSTENT Trial linked below  )

Yes DES has a concern , but its not the drug you know !, 

Off late , since the polymer was  assumed as  culprit, variety of new generation stents with disposable /Non durable /Zero poylmer were developed. Still, polymer could not be proven as true culprit , some have started blaming  the drug again. Recently, It led to one famed DES based on Paclitaxel (which has a pride of place in the Land mark SYNTAX  study ) exited the human domain  with disgrace . (I wonder can  we conclude then SYNTAX study is also become invalid !)

This study done with over 9000 patients  concluded  like this  . . .

The DES industry was (is) so powerful it could easily shrug  the challenge of truth that came out briefly  in early 2000s when DES got hit with increased  acute complications.

Now, in 2016 NORSTENT study again showed us BMS is as good as DES in all walks of CAD.  Let us see what happens , still  its very unlikely mature cardiologists do not trust BMS.

*I have a belief  (Paranoid or not time will tell !) one of the reasons  DES are strongly promoted  is to sustain DAPT market alive and kicking for a long haul !

Scenerio  in India is frightening.

While the developed countries have DES usage rate around 65 % , India leads the world with DES constituting 95% (NIC registry 2017) of all deployed stents.What a way for a poor country  to  tackle CAD , which doesn’t even have prompt prehospital Aspirin for  bulk of their ACS patients, ready to waste  its resources in DES.

India , a country Infested with an unregulated health industry  became the perfect battle  ground for abusing the stents. With direct collusion with the large hospital managements the issue got exploded recently  .The Govt was compelled to come out with urgent restrictions and price control  in the use of stents.

Funny world this. World’s richest economies  are worried about the cost and want to phase out inappropriate therapy whenever possible, its absolute arrogance most of us feel shamed to keep BMS in their cathlab.

Final message

A  good metal based flexible ,trackable , thin struted  BMS should be the default choice for coronary stenting .( We used have one , now it vanished !)It avoids unnecessary prolonged DAPT .Most importantly one BMS costs 25 % of the cost of DES   . . . think of 4 critical proximal LAD lesions of a poor man can be fixed at the cost of one DES , that’s  definite way forward. Govt of India can pass another regulation in this regard. If you think  NORSTENT is NONSENSE  let us atleaset  insist for a large scale Indian  study for BMS /DES and  Cardiological society of India has much work to do !

Future for BMS  . . . looks bright !

While the  superiority  of DES is being increasingly questioned , the concept of surface modified BMS is being tested .This I believe is a face saving way to bring back the BMS in lieu of DES. There is a distinct  possibility of many of the new generation  DES going the BVS way in the near future.

Reference 

1.Hassan AK1, Bergheanu SC, Stijnen T, van der Hoeven .J Late stent malapposition risk is higher after drug-eluting stent compared with bare-metal stent implantation and associates with late stent thrombosis.Eur Heart 2010 May;31(10):1172-80. 

2.Zhang K1, Liu T, Li JA, Chen JY, Wang J,   Surface modification of implanted cardiovascular metal stents: from antithrombosis and antirestenosis to endothelialization.J Biomed Mater Res A. 2014 Feb;102(2):588-609.

3. https://www.pcronline.com/eurointervention/114th_issue/volume-12/number-17/350/ultra-hydrophilic-stent-platforms-promote-early-vascular-healing-and-minimise-late-tissue-response-a-potential-alternative-to-second-generation-drug-eluting-stents.

4.Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents for Coronary Artery Disease NORSTENT Investigators N Engl J Med 2016; 375:1242-1252

Post-ample : Only For non believers  ( who think this article is near rubbish ) 

I am  very much  convinced DES should be superior  for the simple reason it elutes a drug and the whole world believes it works !

Do you know, what these drugs do, and what they are expected to do ! In this elegant study  by Hassan AK1 Eur Heart J. 2010 May;31(10):1172-80.  Its proven with IVUS , DES is many fold likely to cause late stent apposition than BMS.( Thus carrying the risk long term )  Reason is simple , patchy and incomplete endothelisation on the luminal side and pathological metal vessel wall interface  in abluminal promoting late mal-apposition.

Read Full Post »