Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Preamble : The Lubs & Dubs

The lubs and dubs, along with some added sounds are the only language, the heart can speak in health and distress. It’s a worrying story altogether, gradually many of us are becoming “cardiac illiterates” as we struggle to read , its gentle communication. it is not our fault. Stethoscopes are reduced to become a social marker of being a doctor. We may excuse ourselves, even if we can’t differentiate a systolic from diastolic murmur, after all, hand held echo machines, instantly tell the diagnosis.

( After reading this article, fellows are expected to understand why the first heart sound in MR (ie the lubs,) are mostly soft,  some times normal or even loud in certain conditions)

Now, let us go to the mitral valve dynamics

How many of us are aware, there is a big science of physics and biology operating when the mitral valve perfectly closes at the level of the annulus, with each systole , balancing different sets of known and unknown forces.

In this article, we will see how these two sets of forces mitral valve tethering and closing forces balance out each other to seal the mitral valve and what happens when the forces begin to fight each other.

Balance of Tethering and Closing Forces in Mitral Valve Coaptation

The mitral valve (MV) coaptation refers to the edge-to-edge apposition of the anterior and posterior leaflets during systole, ensuring a competent seal to prevent regurgitation. This process is governed by a delicate balance between tethering forces (which restrain leaflet motion to prevent prolapse into the left atrium) and closing forces (which approximate the leaflets for sealing).

  • Tethering forces: These are primarily transmitted through the chordae tendineae from the papillary muscles (PMs) to the leaflet free edges and bellies, pulling the leaflets apically and laterally toward the left ventricular (LV) apex. They arise from:
  • Closing forces: These are driven by the transmitral pressure gradient during systole, where rising LV pressure (generated by LV contraction) exceeds left atrial (LA) pressure, pushing the leaflets together. The force is proportional to the LV dP/dt (rate of pressure rise) and peaks in midsystole.
  • Balancing mechanism: Coaptation occurs when closing forces overcome tethering, enabling leaflets to meet with sufficient overlap (coaptation length >8 mm typically). Imbalance favors regurgitation: excessive tethering (e.g., from PM displacement) causes apical tenting and incomplete closure; insufficient closing (e.g., low LV contractility) fails to seal the orifice. In health, the forces are synchronized with systole, with closing forces dominating midsystole to minimize the effective regurgitant orifice area (EROA).

Paradoxes in the Balancing Mechanism

MV mechanics exhibit several counterintuitive paradoxes, where adaptive or dysfunctional responses lead to outcomes opposite to expectations. These highlight the interplay of geometry, contractility, and force transmission:

  1. Paradoxical systolic PM elongation: Normally, PMs shorten during systole (1 cm) to offset annular descent and maintain annulopapillary balance. Post-myocardial infarction (MI), scarred or ischemic PMs paradoxically elongate driven by transmitral pressure tension. This decreases annulopapillary distance, attenuates tethering, and reduces MR severity—contrary to the intuition that PM weakness worsens regurgitation. However, extreme elongation risks leaflet prolapse, flipping the paradox to increased MR.
  2. PM dysfunction attenuating ischemic MR: In isolated dysfunction, reduced PM contraction intuitively increases slack chordae and prolapse risk. Yet, in localized basal inferior LV remodeling, PM dysfunction (measured as reduced longitudinal systolic strain) inversely correlates with MR fraction attenuating MR by limiting excessive tethering. This holds only with certain level of remodeling . Gross and asymmetrical remodeling can exaggerate tethering and increase the MR.
  3. Dynamic EROA reduction despite peak driving pressure: MR often peaks early systole (when closing forces are low and tethering dominates) but paradoxically decreases midsystole, even as LV pressure (driving force) maximizes. This occurs because rising closing forces (transmitral gradient) overcome tethering, shrinking the orifice mimicking reduced regurgitation when it should worsen.Thgis mechansim can some times seen when MR jet is bi-fid in doppler tracing.
  4. Imbalanced chordal forces causing focal prolapse: In acute ischemic MR (e.g., posterior wall ischemia), tethering redistributes unevenly: tension drops in ischemic-side chordae but rises on the nonischemic side causing focal tenting and relative prolapse on the ischemic commissure. This creates an eccentric jet despite global LV contraction.

This article clearly tells us that the forces acting on the mitral valve apparatus are so complex. The conceptual model of tethering and closing forces may be oversimplified. There are variable interactions between them. More importantly, the atrial forces also influence and intrude into these forces. Realize that MV competence is not just about force magnitude but their vectorial distribution and timing, often amplified by LV geometry changes.

Final message

As cardiologists and surgeons, we must realize the fact, how important it is to analyze both anatomy and the physiological impact when we rush to clip, cut, or repair it with annuloplasty and subvalvular interventions.

*Sometimes, it might even be tempting to do mitral valve replacement, even when it is not indicated, because we need not bother about all these dizzy mechanics and physics of MR jet forces.

Read Full Post »

As we enter, another customary happy “New year” , a lingering “Old wish” remains largely unfulfilled. Let us try to return,  to our  forgotten home space, called patient’s bed side . Shall get Immersed in history taking , Intuitive clinical examination, and master the art of listening to our patient’s heart with our own ears. Investigations can wait unless it is a dire emergency.

Too often today, we bypass these foundations, relying blindly on Images, echocardiograms, angiograms, a deluge of scans, , multi-modality algorithms ,AI predictions. We have also become greedy servants to technology commerce , and increasingly intoxicating  science as well. Let us not insist on investigations , driven by peer pressures or pride, in the process losing common sense in a flood of data.

Let us reclaim the intellect,  that taught us  listening and understanding to the patients symptoms (with kindness)  is the  highest form of Investigation .

Coming to scientific research, grow courage to question, debate , that ultimately would simplify complex problems .

Finally, seek the truth, which often hides behind the distorted evidence base and obsessive compulsive protocols.

Welcome to new year 2026

Greeting & regards from Chennai.

Dr. S.Venkatesan

Read Full Post »

“Every Interventional Cardiologist, realistically, need to be a preventive neurologist too!”

The concept a permanent ascending aortic porous membrane filter (PAA-PMF) is an extrapolation of the idea of mechanical thrombus capture, as proven by IVC filters for venous embolism prevention . Also we do have and temporary intra-aortic filters like Sentinel , Embol-X for arterial particulate capture.

Device Concept

The PAA-PMF would feature a self-expanding nitinol frame, with a fully porous head end. The device can be heparin-coated polyester or polyurethane mesh membrane, deployable via 12-14 Fr femoral sheath, similar to IVC filter designs but should be optimized for aortic pressures. Suggested pore size of 100-125 μm targets >100 μm emboli, akin to Embol-X filtration efficacy in capturing 95% of particulates (atheroma, fibrin) during aortic declamping. The essential requirement is that the porous membrane should not create an impedance gradient. How feasible it is, to be tested. Conical shape, the radial force will ensure good ascending aortic wall apposition.

Device location site

Site of placement is critical. Proximal ascending aorta, 2-3 cm distal to sinotubular junction/proximal to brachiocephalic trunk, as in Embol-X for maximal cardiac/aortic debris interception without coronary/arch compromis

Potential indications

(Only in patients with very high risk of cardioembolic stroke)

1.Chronic stroke reduction in patients with MVR/AVR/TAVR/MAVR

2.High-risk mobile LV mural thrombus

3.Chronic AF with visible and invisible clots in LA

4..High-risk procoagulant conditions with recurrent embolism

Definite Risks

*Occlusion and hemodynamic compromise is the most crucial issue. However, when compared to the incidence IVC filter clogging, the high pressure aortic flow is likely to self-wash the device (as happens in a prosthetic aortic valve)

Trapped emboli may enter into coronary circulation is a possibility. Putting a filter at ascending aorta precludes left heart catheterization.

*Migration , Hemolysis are other expected complications.

Intense anticoagulation would be required to prevent occlusion of the filte . (Still, stopping it temporarily doe not not increase the risk of stroke)

Final message : Is it Worth for a Preclinical trial ?

We do have temporary aortic filters. The concept of permanent or semi-permanent filters is largely theoretical, with potential risks being more than benefits. The device can take care of only cardio-aortic embolic stroke.

However, considering so many complex, risky intracardiac and intravascular devices being tested on a daily basis, it is not a big deal for the current generation of interventional cardiologists to try this.

More than our interventional appetite, we really need a device that prevents stroke in a permanent fashion. It is definitely worthy to do initial studies in a porcine model. Would be glad , if Edwards, Abbot or Medtronic and other new Innovators respond to this.

References

  1. Shammas NW, et al. Intra-Aortic Filtration: Capturing Particulate Emboli during Cardiopulmonary Bypass. NIH. 2004. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1351822/
  2. Shammas NW, et al. Embol-X Intra-Aortic Filtration System: Capturing Particulate Emboli in the Cardiac Surgery Patient. NIH. 2004. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4682540/
  3. PCI Mag. Revolutionary Anti-Thrombogenic Coating for Stents Promises Safer, Faster Healing. 2024. Available from: https://www.pcimag.com/articles/112641-revolutionary-anti-thrombogenic-coating-for-stents-promises-safer-faster-healing
  4. Kaufman JA, et al. Radiologists’ Field Guide to Retrievable and Convertible Inferior Vena Cava Filters. AJR. 2019. Available from: https://ajronline.org/doi/10.2214/AJR.19.21722
  5. Cleveland Clinic. Vena Cava Filters: Purpose & Placement. 2025. Available from: https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/treatments/17609-vena-cava-filters
  6. Bilal H, et al. Complications of Inferior Vena Caval Filters. NIH. 1997. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3036364/
  7. Alpaslan M, et al. Embolic Protection Devices in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation. NIH. 2025. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12194329/
  8. Almanza DC, et al. Comparative Review of Large Animal Models for Suitability of Cardiovascular Devices. IJMS. 2024. Available from: https://ijms.info/IJMS/article/view/763/1645
  9. Mohammadi H, et al. Simulation of blood flow in the abdominal aorta considering hyperelasticity of the wall. J Carme. 2021. Available from: https://jcarme.sru.ac.ir/article_1223.html
  10. Ketha S, et al. Comparative Review of Large Animal Models for Suitability of Cardiovascular Devices. IJMS. 2019. Available from: https://ijms.info/IJMS/article/download/763/1644?inline=1

Read Full Post »

Read Full Post »

It would be silly to remind, it’s the same five liters of blood, that circulates across, both the arterial  and venous system. But, its journey one away from the heart, and the other towards the heart are strikingly different. They are subjected to various hemodynamic forces, travels different terrains, at different speeds, thousands of kilometers of microvasculature along the cardiovascular highway, yet merging with each other every 15 seconds or so, at the pulmonary junction box. Have a look at the following images, to understand the distribution of the blood volume.

The first image is taken from the maverick physiologist Dr. Guyton’s textbook of physiology, and the second one from the equally famous Dr. Ganong’s. Both images depict the distribution of blood volume, the corresponding pressures, and velocity. Every cardiology fellow should recall these two images even in their sleep. Also mind, they circulate around the body, lifelong without clotting or bleeding, assisted by the right balance of pro and antithrombotic forces.

Why some of patient’s blood is more likely to get frozen ?

Logic would suggest venous thrombosis should be more prevalent than arterial thrombosis at any point of time and location. This is due to the slowness of the circulation and the enormous volume within the venous reservoir. But is this the clinical reality? It is indeed true,  that incidence of minor venous thrombosis exceeds arterial thrombosis. Since venous thrombosis often gets lysed or get stuck in the lungs, it’s frequently under-recognized. Arterial thrombosis causes more damage in an important sense, as it leads to target organ ischemia.

Apart from hemodynamic factors, the 200 year old Virchow’s triad is very much alive. The vessel wall integrity, intrinsic defects in the coagulation and anticoagulant/fibrinolytic molecules, the genetic susceptibility are the important determining factors. The RBC and platelet behaviour too changes, in high and low pressure environments.

How to diagnose a patient who is in a procoagulant state?

The topic is so complex .Many things are still poorly understood. We should have a checklist of all systemic conditions that can cause increased risk of thrombus. We know pregnancy is inherently a procoagulant state, as is  manifest or concealed malignancy.

What we normally do ?

It is very easy to tick the coagulation profile/panel slip and pass it on to the nursing staff. Some of us take another easy route, referring such patients to a rheumatologist for the risk-stratifying job. This is probably because we strongly believe SLE and connective tissue disorders are the first culprits.

I think we need to engage the hematologist more often because thrombosis is not only due to excess coagulation. It is also due to a lack of enough circulating anticoagulants. (As a cardiologist, sometimes I feel awkward. to call myself an expert of the circulatory system, with almost zero knowledge of how the blood clots or dissolves.) This article tries to differentiate the risk factors operative on the venous and arterial sides. It is only a gross attempt; many risk factors are invisible and are common between arterial and venous thrombus.

For a detailed analysis of Sydney criteria /ACR-EULAR (Reference 7 )

How to treat pro-coagulant state?

Fortunately, identifying the thrombosis prone patients is complex , but the treatment is fairly simple. We have only few options: Aspirin, Warfarin, and NOACs *We need to choose one of them. The general rule is aspirin doesn’t work much on the venous side. I don’t know how far this is really true. (It has something to do with the shearing force of platelets? ) However, in obstetrics, the placental circulation is full of low pressure venous plexus where Aspirin is used as a norm.

Between Warfarin and NOACs, there is absolutely no doubt Warfarin is the clear winner on the arterial side. Because of monitoring issues and fear of bleeding, we are compelled to switch to NOACs in many situations. Beware, think twice before prescribing NOAC for prophylaxis against arterial thrombus. The venous side does not have much difference in choice. *Heparin (& its glamor sibling LMWH) is a unique molecule, which has ability to work on both arterial and venous sides.

References

1.Previtali E, Bucciarelli P, Passamonti SM, Martinelli I. Risk factors for venous and arterial thrombosis. Blood Transfus. 2011 Apr;9(2):120-38. doi: 10.2450/2010.0066-10. Epub 2010 Oct 25. PMID: 21084000; PMCID: PMC3096855.

2.Quist-Paulsen P, Naess IA, Cannegieter SC, Romundstad PR, Christiansen SC, Rosendaal FR, Hammerstrøm J. Arterial cardiovascular risk factors and venous thrombosis: results from a population-based, prospective study (the HUNT 2). Haematologica. 2010 Jan;95(1):119-25. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2009.011866. Epub 2009 Aug 27. PMID: 19713225; PMCID: PMC2805742.

3.Brusch A. The Significance of Anti-Beta-2-Glycoprotein I Antibodies in Antiphospholipid Syndrome. Antibodies (Basel). 2016 Jun 8;5(2):16. doi: 10.3390/antib5020016. PMID: 31557997; PMCID: PMC6698844.

4.Quist-Paulsen P, Naess IA, Cannegieter SC, Romundstad PR, Christiansen SC, Rosendaal FR, Hammerstrøm J. Arterial cardiovascular risk factors and venous thrombosis: results from a population-based, prospective study (the HUNT 2). Haematologica. 2010 Jan;95(1):119-25. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2009.011866. Epub 2009 Aug 27. PMID: 19713225; PMCID: PMC2805742.

5.Rout P, Goyal A, Singhal M. Antiphospholipid Syndrome. [Updated 2024 May 6]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK430980/

6.McLendon K, Goyal A, Attia M. Deep Venous Thrombosis Risk Factors. [Updated 2023 Mar 17]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025

7.Alijotas-Reig J, Miro-Mur F, Hoxha A, Khamashta MA, Shoenfeld Y. 2023 ACR/EULAR classification criteria for antiphospholipid syndrome: more lights rise but shade remains. RMD Open. 2025;11:e006014. https://doi.org/10.1136/rmdopen-2025-006014

8.Arachchillage DJ, Platton S, Hickey K, Chu J, Pickering M, Sommerville P, MacCallum P, Breen K; BSH Committee. Guidelines on the investigation and management of antiphospholipid syndrome. Br J Haematol. 2024 Sep;205(3):855-880. doi: 10.1111/bjh.19635. Epub 2024 Jul 19. PMID: 39031476.

Postamble

The article doesn’t discuss the intra vascular metals, wires, devices, valves, pacemakers , related thrombosis. Here there is a known trigger. It is possible, they also influenced by the baseline factors of pro-coagulation discussed above.

Read Full Post »

When we  change the way we look at things, the things we look at change.” 

                                                Wayne Dyer

Standalone thrombolysis remains a potent, evidence-based, time tested lifeline for STEMI patients worldwide.It delivers  rapid myocardial salvage. This is a rule,not an exception ,where primary PCI delays or pharmaco-invasive infrastructure falter, with absolute mortality reductions of 2-3% when administered early . The benefits holds on or often beats pPCI despite it’s relative edge in ideal settings.

STEMI : Time trumps technology

Fibrinolysis, as a modality has pioneered the science of myocardial reperfusion. It reduced the early mortality by >50% in landmark trials enrolling tens of thousands, and still stands tall. it carries (Class I-A Indication ) Pharmaco-invasive strategies reduce reinfarction by 2% absolute (NNT 50) over lysis-alone but show only uncertain 0.5% mortality gains (NNT -200, low-certainty), as per the 2025 PLOS ONE meta-analysis of 7 RCTs .

This is major evidence stress an important hidden truth , that standalone lysis is not “obsolete” in low-risk, well-reperfused cases where PCI risks (bleeding, microvascular injury) may offset slim benefits.(Soriano-Moreno DR 2025 PLOS ONE meta analysis)

Real-world registries confirm this. In >70% of global STEMI (LMICs, rural/high-transfer areas), lysis achieves TIMI 3 flow in 50-60% and can beat the delayed PCI prognostically., if door-to-needle <30 minutes . More importantly (& not so-scientifically too) TIMI 2 flows are not considered as success in most of these studies. In reality, an early TIMI 2 flow, which can be achieved with lytics easily, is more than good enough to prevent myocardial necrosis. This is in contrast to the fact, that even a glorious TIMI 3 flow, after PCI does not guarantee complete myocardial reperfusion.

Systems reality: Equity vs PCI hegemony

Population-based registries indicate primary PCI utilization rates below 20% for STEMI cases in India, or other developing countires. 

Compulsive mandates, that  prioritise  PCI, increase total ischemic time, elevate no-reflow incidence, and raise mortality compared to systems enabling universal early fibrinolysis. The most troubling truth is, non-PCI centers hesitate to deliver timely fibrinolysis ,  due to perceived Inferiority, peer pressure , potentially forgoing established mortality benefits.

Commercial undercurrents: Incentives could Injure the myocardium

PCI ecosystem prioritizes procedural volume metrics, cardiologist’s Incentives, reimbursements (10-20 times higher than fibrinolysis costs), and institutional performance indicators, resulting in under-investment in fibrinolysis infrastructure. This systemic bias potentially compromising overall STEMI outcomes by deprioritizing rapid reperfusion strategies.

Final message

Cardiology Literature Needs a Scientific Distillation & a Philosophical Kick

Modern cardiology’s PCI dogma is trying to blind thrombolysis’s enduring truth. A village PHC’s or ER crew’s humble hand injections at 30 minutes could salvage more myocardium than a helicopter transferred  PCI,  in a star rated cathlab.

Standalone lysis fights STEMI fiercely, early, equitably, economically, unless commercial narratives, transfer dogma, and selective trials confer them a cult status, exposing millions of ACS patients to prolonged ischemia.

Are we reqdy to  revive and embrace the truth?  Population-based pPCI can wait. It is a futile to set wrong goals like “stent for every STEMI”; not only in a country like India, it applies to even the developed nations. Let us, prioritize lysis-first systems, especially the pre-hospital  or ultra-fast in-hospital lysis. Reserve pharmaco-invasive PCI for failures or high-risk, especially with built in harm seen with routine early PCI post-lysis.

References

  1. Bouyaddid S, Bouchlarhem A, Bazid Z, Ismaili N, El Ouafi N. Pharmaco-invasive Therapy: A Continued Role for Fibrinolysis in the Primary PCI era. Clin Appl Thromb Hemost. 2023;29:10760296231221549. doi:10.1177/10760296231221549. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38145624/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  2. Armstrong PW, Gershlick AH, Goldstein P, et al. Fibrinolysis or primary PCI in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(15):1379-1387. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1304062. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1304062ncbi.nlm.nih
  3. Assessment of the Safety and Efficacy of a New Thrombolytic Regimen (ASSENT)-4 PCI investigators. Primary versus tenecteplase-facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (ASSENT-4 PCI): randomised trial. Lancet. 2006;367(9510):569-578. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(06)68148-0. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16488800/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih
  4. McDonald MA, Fu Y, Zeymer U, et al. Adverse outcomes in fibrinolytic-based facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the ASSENT-4 PCI electrocardiographic substudy. Eur Heart J. 2008;29(7):871-879. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehm599. https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/29/7/871/483738academic.oup
  5. Pinto DS, Kirtane AJ, Ruocco TA Jr, et al. Facilitated percutaneous coronary intervention following fibrinolysis: the path to redemption? Insights from BRAVE, GRACIA, and beyond. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2007;8(4):187-194. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/18192961/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  6. Steg PG, James SK, Atar D, et al. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute myocardial infarction in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation. Eur Heart J. 2012;33(20):2569-2619. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehs215. https://academic.oup.com/eurheartj/article/33/20/2569/4095042academic.oup
  7. Soriano-Moreno DR, Tuco KG, Delgado Flores CJ, Flores-Lovon K, Ccami-Bernal F, Quijano-Escate R, López-Rojas LM, Goicochea-Lugo S. Pharmacoinvasive strategy versus fibrinolytic therapy alone in adults with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2025 Oct 9;20(10):e0334309. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0334309. PMID: 41066493; PMCID: PMC12510495.

Read Full Post »

This is an editorial submitted by this author to a leading cardiology journal, which was returned within 24 hours , with a comment that article is unsuitable for publication .Want to know, whether the readers agree with the journal editorial team


The Unfinished Story of “Successful” Primary PCI

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) has revolutionized the management of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and remains the gold standard for restoring coronary perfusion. Angiographic success defined as achieving Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) grade 3 flow in the infarct-related artery occurs in more than 90–95% of cases. (1,3)However, this measure reflects epicardial recanalization alone and falls short as an indicator of effective myocardial reperfusion.​.(5)

Cardiac magnetic resonance (MRI/CMR) imaging, myocardial contrast echocardiography, and nuclear perfusion techniques consistently reveal that adequate tissue-level reperfusion occurs in only 60–70% of patients with angiographically successful PPCI. This disparity highlights a critical gap between procedural endpoints and true myocardial salvage.(6)

The Persistent Challenge of Microvascular Obstruction

Despite apparent angiographic success, up to 20–30% of patients exhibit microvascular obstruction (MVO) or “no-reflow.” The pathophysiology of MVO involves distal microembolization, capillary edema, and endothelial dysfunction. (2)

MRI studies have demonstrated MVO in 10–15% of PPCI-treated patients with TIMI 3 flow, often associated with larger infarct size, lower left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, and worse long-term outcomes. (4,6)

Redefining the Endpoints: From Epicardial Patency to Microvascular Integrity

Left ventricular function remains the most clinically relevant indicator of therapeutic success in STEMI. Persistent LV dysfunction in up to 40% of successfully revascularized patients underscores the inadequacy of angiography based assessment. (3)

TIMI grading system is the universally adopted most popular angiographic flow grading. It has its limitations . It confines with epicardial flow . The max grade is TIMI 3 , and it sort of falsely reassures 

The concept of TIMI 4 flow was originally suggested by Dr Gibson in 1999 , calling hyperemic flow with a low TIMI fame count,  as TIMI 4 flow. For some reason this concept was never adopted, though this term extends the traditional TIMI grading system to include  microcirculatory perfusion.

This proposed category reflects optimal tissue level reperfusion, measurable through myocardial blush grade, the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), or perfusion-based MRI parameters. (8,10)TIMI 4, therefore, would define the ultimate therapeutic endpoint in the physiological perfusion at the myocyte level.

Emerging Tools and Strategies for Microvascular Optimization

Several strategies can favorably influence microvascular flow. Intracoronary vasodilators such as adenosine, verapamil, and sodium nitroprusside mitigate microvascular constriction and distal embolization. Deferred stenting techniques may reduce reperfusion injury in selected cases.

Recalibrating the Definition of Successful pPCI

Given the growing evidence base, it is time to reconsider what constitutes “success” in pPCI. A restored epicardial lumen without adequate tissue perfusion represents an incomplete therapeutic achievement.

A Call to Global Cardiovascular Leadership

It is good, if the major professional societies like the American College of Cardiology (ACC), European Society of Cardiology (ESC), and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) reassess the criteria used to define procedural success in STEMI interventions. Integrating TIMI 4 flow as a recognized endpoint, along with preservation of maximal left ventricular function, will more accurately define the true success of pPCI.

References

  1. Sarkar A, Shravage P. TIMI Grade Flow. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482412/ncbi.nlm.nih
  2. Wu KC. CMR of microvascular obstruction and hemorrhage in myocardial infarction. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2012 Nov 22;14:68. ttps://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3514126/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  3. Henriques JP, et al. Predictors of suboptimal TIMI flow after primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: insights from the ATLANTIC trial. EuroIntervention. 2024 Jun 17. https://eurointervention.pcronline.com/article/predictors-of-suboptimal-timi-flow-after-primary-angioplasty-for-acute-myocardialeurointervention.pcronline
  4. Jeyaprakash P, et al. Index of Microcirculatory Resistance to predict microvascular obstruction in STEMI: a meta-analysis. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2024 Feb. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38179600/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih
  5. Zeymer U, et al. Impact of TIMI 3 patency before primary percutaneous intervention on outcome in patients with STEMI. EuroIntervention. 2012 Aug;8(8):900-7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3760529/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  6. Eitel I, et al. Clinical Impact of Persistent Microvascular Obstruction in CMR After Reperfused STEMI. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2025. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40357554/pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih
  7. Pantea-Roșan LR, et al. No-Reflow after PPCI—A Predictor of Short-Term Mortality in STEMI. J Clin Med. 2020 Oct 8;9(10):3145. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7563881/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  8. Fearon WF, et al. One-year results from the Assessing MICRO-vascular resistances via IMR to predict outcome in ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with multivessel disease undergoing primary PCI (AMICRO) trial. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Dec 1;9:1051174. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/cardiovascular-medicine/articles/10.3389/fcvm.2022.1051174/fullfrontiersin
  9. de Waha S, et al. Prognostic Value of Myocardial Blush Grade in ST-elevation MI. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2022. Available from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9340576/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih
  10. van ‘t Hof AW, et al. Angiographic assessment of myocardial reperfusion in patients treated with primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: myocardial blush grade. Circulation. 2001 Aug 28;104(9):1130-4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2810032/pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih

Read Full Post »

Revascularization in chronic CAD is be primarily based on

A. Angina & its severity

B. Inducible Ischemia by stress test

C. Coronary anatomy & FFR/IFR based.

D.Total Plaque burden , plaque morphology & Vulnerability

E.As per the cardiologist’s wish

F As per patient’s wish or their Insurance limits

Trying to Answer

*Revascularization means, first we should document, there is significantly reduced baseline myocardial blood flow to the distal myocardium (which would mean near total block).

*Then, we must realize ischemia and angina are two different things. Ischemia can exist without angina; similarly, angina can occur without an obstructive epicardial lesion, that is due to demand or microvascular disease.

*It is also vital to understand that PCI or CABG is meant mainly for symptom relief. PCI is just a lesion-specific temporary fix. Note that symptom means angina; dyspnea relief after revascularization, either by PCI or CABG, is an exception, not a rule.

*Plaque burden and its vulnerability are major determinants of long-term survival. In multivessel CAD, we can’t attend to all by PCI.

*It is also a fact that , while PCI can successfully fix an eccentric vulnerable plaque, it can very easily destabilize a non-vulnerable plaque if the metals are not maintained properly.

*It is wise to understand medical management , which by stabilizing and regressing a plaque, is technically a medical revascularization process . I am sure no cardiologist would be ready to accept this (Request them to go through AVERT study : Atorvastatin beats PTCA) So, the correct decision to revascularize is based on the presence of significant symptoms of angina that are refractory to a trial of anti-anginal drugs.

Reference

Few are worth mentioning* (As RCTs seem to fight with each other)

*There are dozens of guidelines and hundreds of RCTs, and meta-analyses that have addressed this question. I am afraid none have answered it clearly or we are not able to follow it, as the conclusions colludes with our wish. Not being able to find an answer to research question despite large systematic studies, implies, RCTs may not be the real solution in many clinical queries.

Read Full Post »

Coronary arterial perforation continues to be challenging task . There are multiple options to arrest the perforation as listed below.

Image source Ref : 1

Still, we don’t have a quick balloon occlusion strategy that maintains antegrade flow. Here is a new innovation, a circumferentially inflating balloon (like an airbag or a parachute from the catheter) that can maintain the antegrade flow. This may be vital in salvaging or preventing a myocardial infarction. This balloon catheter is named the Ringer balloon, manufactured by Teleflex. ( _K_andzari DE, Alqarqaz M, Nicholson. et al J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv.2025 Jul 22;4(7):103575. doi: 10.1016/j.jscai.2025. )

Source : Teleflex website

Reference

1.Perforation-management ,A review article Molly Silkowski, Anbukarasi Maran, -An assessment of balloon tamponade, Ringer balloon, covered stents, coils, and thrombin.

2.Link to the Teleflex website

3.Link to a video lecture on Ringer balloon

Read Full Post »

It is predicted, (or already happening ) atleast 30 % of clinical consults happen with AI assistsnce or with completely with machines.

The Initial work up is suggested by the AI bots, even in ER rooms. They may be right in 80% of times. But, who is it to filter and grab those remaining 20%. No one , except a astutely learnt clinician. Unfortunately, there is no super AI to do this job.

Final message

This is the beginning of, a new exciting & dangerous era, for the medical profession. If we are not vigilant or loose our common sense, these bots will soon reach their next destination, ie patient’s bed side.

Reference

BMJ in its current Issue address these  aspects of increasing AI usage in the clinical consults

1. Clinical competencies for using generative AI in patient care BMJ 2025; 391 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2025-085324 

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2025-085324

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »