Feeds:
Posts
Comments

 

                                          CRT , cardiac resynchronisation therapy  is being  projected  as a revolutionary treatment for cardiac failure , where a failing heart is rewired electrically through multiple leads and make it contract  more effectively.The success rate of CRT was highly variable.The basic question here  is,  there should be a  significant  documentation of desynchronisation  prior to CRT , for resynchronisation to be effective. Further , the sites of  myocardial  stimulation ( Coronary sinus/LV epicardial) , dose of electricity and the sequence of stimulation and the  electrical delay  are very  critical. Achieving this into perfection  is not a simple job and is  real rocket science ! ( If we can achieve 5 % of what  the normal purkinje network do within the LV we can term it a huge success.) Let us hope we catch up with nature . Finally , it is ironical  the sites of LV pacing ,  electrophysiologists  select currently  is infact not selected by them but pre selected by the patients coronary venous anatomy ! .So as on date ,  one can imagine how scientific this treatment could be !

                                         Initially it was adviced for patients with only wide qrs later for even normal qrs patients.When people started using it indiscriminately  insurance companies started to rethink and thus came the   RETHINQ study in NEJM  and brought a full stop to CRT in normal qrs CHF.

How to identify who will benefit from  the costly CRT  ?

It is a million dollar question. So millions of dollars were spent to identify the correct tool to identify the true responders to CRT.Echo cardiography with sophisticated methods tissue doppler, tissue tracking and , 3 D echo ,velocity vector imaging were done .These methods are not only costly but also time consuming and  hugely expertise driven.

Does all this  efforts with  advanced echo techniques worthwhile ?

This simple question was addressed in PROSPECT study in circulation

Click to read the article

                                               The superior aspect of   coronary sinus and a portion of the left atrium share a common wall .Embryological defects in this area result in a communication between left atrium and coronary sinus. This defect  descriptively called as unroofed coronary sinus .This entity is most commonly associated with persistent left SVC. Extreme form of unroofing is some times termed as absent coronary sinus.

How to diagnose it ?

A high degree of anticipation is necessary in all patients with ASD or LSVC. A dilated coronary sinus in routine echocardiography warrants full investigation. A contrast echocardiography with agitated saline injection in left cubital vein will clinch the diagnosis as contrast enters LA after opacifying the dilated coronary sinus. During  right heart catheterisation catheter course entering coronary sinus and  advancing into LA through the fenestrations (Unroofing)  will confirm the defect.

How do you classify unroofed coronary sinus ?

The morphologic type of URCS was classified as Kirklin and Barratt-Boyes

 Type   I, completely unroofed with LSVC;

 Type II, completely unroofed without LSVC;

 Type III, partially unroofed midportion;

 Type IV, partially unroofed terminal portion

What is the clinical relevance of this entity ?

This entity should be suspected in every patient with persistent LSVC, ( and LSVC should be suspected in every patient with ASD). The hemodynamics is that of an ASD but if sufficient mixing of LSVC blood and LA blood takes place the child will have mild cyanosis.Some times when the coronary sinus is totally absent it will present as a typical dusky ASD picture which can closely mimic a TAPVC clinically.

Surgeons have a greater role in recognising and treating this entity. A typical repair will be done like this

 

Links to some of interesting articles on this topic

Raghib circulation 1965

                                Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is currently classified as STEMI and NSTEMI.This classification came into vogue  primarily to  triage patients for thrombolysis eligibility , as ST elevation is the  only criteria for thrombolysis.The  earlier term  non q MI  is largely used  to denote the  present day NSTEMI. In the past q  MI was referring to transmural MI non q MI  to non transmural  pathologically.(Of course , now we know  the relationship between q waves and transmurality is not good )

So when can we still use term non q MI ?

These terminologies of STEMI and NSTEMI are made on admission  at the emergency room.  ACS being a dynamic entity these  patients can  have rapidly changing  ST shifts , from depression to elevation and vice versa. Fresh T wave changes can also occur .Q waves  may or may not develop ,  depending upon the damage sustained to the myocardium and the efficacy of thrombolysis / PCI. So it should be emphasised here STEMI,  NSTEMI ,  q  MI ,  non q MI are the  descriptions of the  same group of patients in different time frames. The common mode of  evolution  of  STEMI  is  to q MI and NSTEMI  into non q MI. Cross overs can occur.

 

 

 The problem here is NSTEMI getting converted into STEMI  is quiet common and has no nomenclature issues . But  when   STEMI down grades  into NSTEMI  there is apparent  nomenclature incompatibility .This category of  patients have  no other labelling option other than “A STEMI evolving into non q MI”. Because one can’t label  STEMI  evolving into NSTEMI as  many of  them  will  have a residual ST elevation as well.

What is the final message ?

The term non q MI is still relevant and is used at discharge , in a patient with STEMI when he or she evolves without a q wave .In the setting of unstable angina , NSTEMI has largely replaced  the term  non q MI either on admission or at discharge.

Before I close

                 The important point to remember here  is NSTEMI getting converted into STEMI  is an adverse outcome and  in fact, it is  a complication and the patient should get an immediate  thrombolysis or PCI , while a STEMI getting converted into non Q MI is generally a  major therapeutic success.( Effective salvaging and preventing q waves )

//

                Human civilisation has met so many challenges.Man kind has enjoyed the benefits of modern medicine for over a century.Now comes the new threat.Threat from within.The onslaught of marketing force has contaminated the medical science .

              It is widely  recognised  commerce is masquereading as science , from stem cell research to futile and costly  drugs, and  questionable  devices and procedures . 

How is the medical  community responding to this  issue ? 

Silence  is the response !  Why silent ? Are we the part of the problem ?  Occasional articles in the  Annals of medicine, Lancet, BMJ, or JAMA talk about these issues and nothing happens next .

Click below  to read one such article from the recent issue of Annals !

 

 

Let us hope the world financial crisis currently we are witnessing , would be good for human health as all futile market driven  , enforced medical expenditure goes bust !

Non ST elevation Myocardial infarction  (NSTEMI) is a major mode of presentation of acute coronary syndrome.

Patients present with clinical unstable angina and  elevated cardiac enzymes or troponin.

ECG features can be any of the following.

1.ST depression (70-80%)

2.T wave inversion(10-20%)

3.Both ST depression and T wave inversion

4Post MI NSTEMI  -ECG changes variable ( Ironically ,even a residual  ST elevation may be present)

5.Normal ECG.

                                     Bulk of the NSTEMI belong to ST depression group.NSTEMI with purely T wave inversion is less common but occurs mainly in perioperative settings, pre existing CAD.NSTEMI with normal ECG is very rare  but can occur.

 

 Rescue thrombolysis in acute   myocardial   Infarction  

 *Venkatesan sangareddi ,Madras medical college,Chennai.India

 

 

   Back ground  Failed thrombolysisin acute myocardial infarction occurs in 30-40% of patients. The incidence of progressive pathological remodelling and cardiac failure is high in these patients. The approach to the patient with failed thrombolysis is generally considered to be catheter based and the outcome is not clear. Bleeding can be troublesome in patients, taken for interventional procedures in the immediate post thrombolytic state. The option of repeat thrombolysis has not been studied widely and is not popular among cardiologists.

Methods:We present our experience with six patients (Age 42-56, M-6, F-0) who were thrombolysed for failed first thrombolysis. All had anterior MI and had received either urokinse or streptokinase (between four to nine hours) after the onset of chest pain. All of them had persistent ST elevation, angina not responsive to maximal doses of IV NTG and beta blockers. The initial thrombolysis was deemed to have failed. Repeat thrombolysis with streptokinase (15 lakhs) was given between 16 and 24 th hour. The clinical outcome following the second thrombolysis was rewarding. It relieved the angina, ST segment elevation came down by 50% and coronary angiogram done at 2-4 weeks showed complete IRA patency in four out of six patients. The factors responsible for failed thrombolysis is complex and multifactorial. A logical explanation from the fundamentals of clinical pharmacology would suggest that a common cause of failure of any drug is due to a inadequate first dose.

Conclusion :We conclude that repeat (Rescue) thrombolysis can be an effective medical intervention for failed thrombolysis in AMI.

Personal perspective                  

                             Repeat  thrombolysis for failed ( initial ) thrombolysis  is still   considered  a  fantasy treatment  by most of the cardiologists !  The utility and efficacy of this modality of  treatment (Rescue thrombolyis ) , will never be known to humanity , as planning  such a  study , in a large population  would  promptly be  called unethical by the modern day cardiologists.

                     While a cathlab based cardiologist  take on the lesion head on with multiple attempts  , it is an irony , poor  thrombolytic agents are given only one shot  and if failed in the first attempt,  it is doomed to be a  failure for ever.Currently,  the incidence of  failed thromolysis could be up to a whooping 50 %  .There has not been much scientific initiative  to enhance the efficacy of these drugs.

                            Common sense and logic would suggest it  is the  inadequate first dose ,  improper delivery , pharmacokinetics is   the major cause of failure of action of  a drug in clinical therapeutics.

If the first  dose is not working ,  always think about another  incremental dose if found safe to administer.

Can we increase the dose of thrombolytic agents  as we like ? Will it not increase the bleeding risk to dangerous levels ?

This is a clinical trial  question.

  • In patients with prosthetic valve thrombosis and acute pulmonary embolism we have safety data of administering of  1 lakh units for an hour for up to 48 hours.

Can  the same regimen be tried in STEMI if the initial thrombolysis has  failed  and emergency intervention is not possible  ?

Logic would say yes . Unfortunately we can’t go with logic alone in medicine .We need scientific data ( with or without logic ! ).But now ,  as we realise common sense is also a integral part of therapeutics  It is called as level 3 evidence / expert consensus by AHA/ACC .

Applying  mind , to all relevant issues ,  continuous streptokinase infusion 1 lakh/hour for 24-48 hours in patients with failed thrombolysis can indeed be an option,  especially when the patient is sinking and  no immediate catheter based intervention  possible .This study question is open to all researchers , and may be tested in a scientific setting if feasible.

     The greatest discovery in medicine is  “ common sense” and

    “democracy”.           

                       The greatest medical discovery  is the realization that medicine is an constantly evolving science. It needs lot of knowledge to know our ignorance . Common sense has probably saved more lives and reduced suffering in this world than any other single discovery. Note this glaring irony ! It has required a large multi national long term follow  up study (INTERHERT) to prove exercise and physical activity is good for health. Whatever science is teaching us it is we, with our sixth sense have to act appropriately .It is the only defense against the potential exploitation against man kind by various forces.

Another great development is the freedom of expression and democracy in medicine,  for which journals like BMJ, Internet are striving hard . . .

Dr .S.Venkatesan ,Assistant professor of cardiology . Madras medical college Chennai , India

     

 Click on the title to view the article and all nominations . 

 

 

 

 

                         

Answer: Do  coronary angiogram  for all patients  who had suffered from an acute myocardial infarction* ( Forget about all those mulitpage ACC/AHA  guidelines !).

For an  interventional cardiologist ,  it is often  considered a crime to  follow a conservative  approach !

*Caution This one line guideline is not based on scientific fact  but reality based . Ideally one should identify  high risk subsets among the patients who had an AMI .Patients who had complications during the MI get immediate CAG. Others need  a focused LV function asessment ,  pre discharge  sub maximal excercise stress test or perfusion studies .But this concept has been  virtually replaced by pre discharge coronary angiogram for all ,  in many  of the centres in the world.

Please click  below to enter my web site

 

 

 

dr s venkatesan ,venkatesan india , india venkatesan , dr venkatesan, cardiologist india, india cardiologist, indian cardiologist, chennai cardiologist, venkatesan madras,cardiologist madras medical college, venkatesan assistant professor of cardiology, top indian cardiologist, top ten cardiologist india, best cardiologist india, online cardiologist, consultant cardiologist chennai, india’s famous cardiologist,cardiological society of india,

One of the greatest physicians of all time,  I have come across , is my professor Dr.T.K.Ganesan from Coimbatore medical college.

dr tkg professor t k ganesan coimbatore medical college

A man who taught  medicine to generations of doctors.During those years  (1980-1990) learning medicine was simple and also not contaminated  with  commerce . Dr TKG made it so lively .He infused passion in the subject.

dr k a sambasivam dr s venkatesan  dr tkg dr t k ganesan coimbatore medical college

Myself and Dr K.A.Sambasivam (Son in law of DrTKG at his residence in Coimbatore )

* Dr K.A .Sambasivam  was my class mate during both my under and post graduation . He is now a senior Interventional cardiologist in GKNM Hospital Coimbatore .

This post will be updated.