Posts Tagged ‘acc’

There are numerous complex grading for bifurcation lesions available.

The one proposed by Medina is simple and most useful.

In this grading three segments

  • Proximal main vessel
  • Distal main vessel
  • Branch vessel

Are given a code 0, and 1 if  lesion is present or absent .

This grading gives simple and fast method to label a bifurcatiuon lesion and to asssess the response to PCI. The only issue here is the individual  lesions are not graded , for example branch vessel ostium just involved about 20 % is not addressed . Further TIMI flow in these vessels may also be incorporated

How medina grading can be used to assess effectiveness of

angioplasty  ?

A patient with 1.1.1  after the treatment should revert back to 0.0.0.  if converted into 0.0.(.5) may indicate a residual side branch lesion  .5 shall indicate 50% residual lesion, .3 , 30% etc


What is the best management strategy for bifurcation lesions?

The topic has been discussed extensively for over a decade in various forums.

Though the lesions and intervention techniques  appear complex the basic concept is simple.

Following is the 8 point algorithm

1. Assess the bifurcation lesion accurately.

2. Apply the general rule and ask the first question whether PCI is neccessary at all ? if decided for PCI

3. Stent the main vessel.Protect the side branch.  

4. Dilate the side branch with a balloon.(KIss or through the struts) 

5. Very rarely,  if the side vessel is more significant and large  stent it and balloon the main vessel.

6. Use drug eluting stents with caution .

7. Resist the temptation of using two stents unless the situation demands and is absolutely required.

8. Never attempt to do bifurcation angioplasty during ACS as apart of primary angioplasty.( Unless you’re extremely competent, even then aim of primary PCI is to salvage myocarium quickly , not to provide TIMI 3 flow in non IRA vessel.)

Dr.S.Venkatesan.Madras medical college.Chennai.

Read Full Post »

                                   ACS   is the  most common cardiac emergency .  Management of STEMI is relatively straight forward.  The  only decision that to be taken is the  modality of reperfusion. (Primary PCI   or thrombolysis.) There is no need to risk stratify  STEMI on arrival. All STEMI patients are considered high risk on admission. Whereas  NSTEMI consists of  a heterogeneous  population. They need to be   triaged into low intermediate  or high risk categorizes on arrival.There is two management  approaches for unstable angina .All high risk UA should enter early invasive strategy . And low risk and intermediate risk group will get early conservative management. 

                                       The principle of management of  UA differ from STEMI in a fundamental way , as there is no issue of myocardial salvage in UA .The primary aim is to provide relief from pain and prevent an MI. So in the strict sense there is no time window in unstable angina /NSTEMI.


                                       But it is generally considered 48 hours is the time limit for an early invasive approach.If the patient has crossed this time there is apparently no great difference in outcome for conservative and invasive approach. 

Read Full Post »