Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘acute coronary syndrome’

Myocardial infarction (STEMI)  occurs in two distinct arterial  territories .The anterior LAD circulation and postero- inferior RCA/LCX circulation.The incidence is equally shared.

There has been some  learned and unlearned perceptions about Inferior MI.

Inferior MI is less dangerous than anterior MI.  True or false ?

Answer: Essentially true in most situations.

Reasons.

Inferior wall of the heart (strictly speaking there is no walls for heart , only surfaces , which blends with adjacent areas)  inferior wall  is formed by diaphragmatic surface and posterior surface.Inferior MI can occur by either RCA or LCX obstruction.The outcome of inferior MI is determined by mainly by  the extent  of   LV myocardial   damage it inflicts.To  quantitate this  we need to know , how much of LV is supplied by RCA , or LCX or combination of both ? This depend on the coronary dominance .It is estimated , the bulk of the LV is supplied ( up to 75%  ) by LCA. This becomes further high in left dominant circulations . In fact , it is believed LV can never get involved in non dominant RCA occlusions. This has brought in a new terminology  called “Small inferior MI”.Inferior STEMI due to PDA  occlusion or in a co -dominant circulation is not yet studied

Apart from the above  anatomical considerations the following clinical observations  have  been made regarding inferior MI.

  • When thrombolysis was introduced , many studies  suggested the the ST elevation in inferior  leads toched the isolectric levels  in most situations even without thrombolysis.Technically, this implies spontaneous , successful thrombolysis are more common in RCA. Among the thrombolysed ,persistent ST elvation is a rare phenomenon.
  • The well known difference in the conduction defect between anterior and inferior MI  is an important contibutor for better outcome in the later.(AV blocks in inferior MI , are often transient, non progressive, supra hisian location rarely require permanent pacemakers)
  • During acute phase cardiogenic shock occurs in a minority (That too , only if RV shock is included )
  • Even in the follow up the ejection fraction in inferior MI is  almost always above  40%. In many EF is not affected at all.
  • Progressive adverse remodelling of LV is rare

When can Inferior MI be dangerous ?

Anatomical factors

Inspite of the  above  factors  inferior MI can not be taken lightly . Especially when it  extend into posterior, lateral , (Rarely anterior) segments.

While  posterior extension  is often  tolerated , lateral extension is very poorly tolerated .This is probably explained as  the extension involves the vital free wall of LV and the laplace forces could precipitate LVF. Free wall rupture is also common in this situation.

Posterior extension , predominantly involves the surface of RV which is less important hemodynamically. Of course incidence of MR  due to it’s effect on posterior mitral leaflet can be trouble some.

inferior MI ECG

High risk clinical catagories.

Out of hospital STEMI  are at  equal  risk irrespective of the territories involved  .This is because,  primary VF does not differentiate , whether  ischemia comes from RCA or LAD .

  1. In elderly , dibetics and co existing medical condtions  the the established  benign   character  of  inferior MI disappear, as  any  muscle loss  in LV has equally adverse outcome.
  2. Even though  inferior MIs are immune  to cardiogenic shock  , a equally worrisome  prolonged hypotension due to high vagal tone, bradycardia, plus or minus RVMI can create trouble. Fortunately , they respond better to  treatment. Except a few with extensive transmural RVMI outcome is good.
  3. Presence of  mechanical complications of  ventricular septal rupture , ischemic MR can bring  the mortality on par with large anterior MI.

How different is the clinical outcome of infero-posterior  MI with reference  to the  site of  coronary arterial  obstruction   ?

The sequence of  outcome  From  best to worse  : Non dominant RCA* → Dominant RCA but distal to RV branch → LCX dominant with large OMs

* It is believed   an  acute proximal  obstruction of a  non dominant RCA may not be mechanically significant, but can be electrically significant as it retains the risk of primary VF and SA nodal ischemia. The ECG changes  can be very minimal or  some times simple bradycardia is the only clue. One should be able to recognise this entity (Non dominant  RCA STEMI)  as the outcome is  excellent and these patients  would never require procedure like primary  PCI

** A inferior MI due to a dominant LCX and a large OMs have comparable outcome as that of extensive anterior MI. The ECG will reveal ST elevation in both inferior and lateral leads.

***In patients with prior CAD  and collateral dependent  multivessel disease  the  inferior anterior sub classification does not make much sense as  entire coronary circulation can be mutually interdependent.

Final message

Inferior STEMI  generally lacks the vigor  to cause extensive damage to myocardium in most situations .Further they respond better to treatment. Risk stratification of STEMI based on the location of MI has not been popular among mainstream cardiologists. This issue needs some introspection as  the costly and complex treatment modalities like primary PCI  is unwarranted in most of the low risk inferior MIs.

Related posts in my blog:

1.Why thrombolysis is more effective in RCA?

Read Full Post »

Coronary arterial spasm is a commonly discussed entity  in clinical cardiology. Originally described by prinzmetal decades ago .It was reported to occur only in coronary care units as variant angina .There is nothing called stable spasm every episode of spasm is considered as unstable angina.

How common is coronary artery spasm ?

This condition thought to be very  common during ACS , but  notoriously difficult to confirm.In fact many of episodes are clinically suspected and never confirmed. There has been lot of provocative tests for confirming coronary spasm like ergonavine etc.None of these tests were  neither useful nor practical.

What are the clinical situations where coronary spasm occur ?

Old concepts die hard.Most of us believe , the most common cause for coronary spasm is prinzmetal’s  angina ie , angina   in normal coronary arteries or  with minimal lesions .Clinical experience ,  has taught us coronary spasm can occur in all spectrum of acute coronary syndrome or even chronic coronary syndromes.

Some believe every episode of STEMI will have a component of coronary spasm.

In NSTEMI/Unstable angina spontaneous coronary spasm is an important pathogenetic mechanism

Now,  we witness transient coronary artery spasm in the cath lab due to catheter and other hard ware.The spasm  here  , is secondary to mechanical stress and this in no way related to the coronary spasm described by prinzmetal in the pre cath era.

What is the link between coronary spasm and electrocardiogram ?

The most common  fallacy among  coronary care physician is , if it is spasm  there must be ST elevation

The classical cardiology teaching all over the world , has been so powerful  this myth continues to prevail over . The fact  of the matter is ,  the  coronary arterial spasm  , can never have any direct impact on the ECG. (Unless , coronary smooth muscle generate ST currents !)  . So , whatever  be  the effect of spasm it  is through it’s effect on the myocardial  blood flow.

Hence ,  it is not the coronary artery spasm that will dictate  the movement of ST segment . It is the impact of myocardial blood flow  to the layers of the myocadium  namely , endocardium, epicardium  , epicardium (  or a combination of  the above )  that will dictate ST segment dynamics.

What are the  the ECG features of coronary artery spasm ?

It can be

  1. ST depression
  2. ST elevation
  3. Only with T wave changes (Tall or Deep T invrsions)
  4. Flattish ST segment  or  rarely , entirely normal ECG indicating balanced ST forces

Among this , the most common manifestation of coronary spasm is thought to be ,  subendocardial ischemia and resultant ST depression .This classically occur in many cases of NSTEMI/UA .

This makes  ST depression  the dominant manifestation of spasm  ,

How coronary spasm can elevate the ST segment ?

If it  can   induce a transmural ischemia  it  can elevate a ST segment . Does  all episodes coronary spasm result in transmural ischemia ? No,not at all .in fact it happens very rare  as we have already seen .

To result in transmural ischemia , the spasm should be total &  sustained ,   at least for few minutes   to   completely   occlude  the blood flow .

Milder forms of spasm can elicit only  a  sub endocardial ischemia  that  depress the ST segment.

*There is a rare variety of spasm where subepicardium is more affected than endocardium and hence ST elevation may occur.

What is the effect of Nitroglycerine on coronary spasm ?

This is a very powerful coronary spasmolytic agent.We can witness it’s action more vividly in cath lab .

It brings back the ST segment to neutral position , from either a elevated or depressed state  .Many believe , ( may it’s a fact ) much of the early  benefit of angina relief in UA/NSTEMI is  amelioration of coronary spasm

Is coronary spasm a neural event or a biochemical event ?

The exact  answer is not known .It should be chemicals as  neural  signals are also mediated by chemicals.

What are the biochemical mediators of coronary spasm ?

  • Smooth muscle calcium : Calcium flux is the immediate cause for spasm
  • Mediators .Neural :Catecholamine ,
  • Thrombus  secretes  Thromoxane A2  which is a powerful vasoconstrictor

Smooth muscle calcium

Is  coronary vasoconstriction  and  coronary spasm  are synonymous ?

Both terms are synonymous . Vasoconstriction is often used to refer  constriction of  microvasculature

while  spasm  often describes  the event in large  epicardial vessel. Some times the term coronary vasomotion is used to describe  fluctuating coronary arterial tone.

What are the determinants of coronary artery spasm ?

  • Location (RCA>LCA)
  • Lesion characteristics -Eccentric overhanging lesion can trigger a spasm by  the plaque ‘s weight.
  • Thrombus content
  • Acuteness of the event
  • Adrenergic tone and nerve activity
  • Concomitant betablockade  .  Theoretical risk ?

What are the types  of coronary spasm ?

  • Discrete ring or band like  spasm
  • Segmental
  • Diffuse long segment  spasm
  • Multilevel spasm in same coronary artery
  • Pan coronary spasm entire vessel (rare)
  • Remote spasm away from catheter tip

Unanswered questions in coronary spasm

Can a totally normal  coronary artery go for spasm all of a sudden ?

It is thought to be rare. Even in prinxmetal series some amount of atherosclerosis was documented in most patients.

What is the relationship between spasm and adjacent lesion ?

Spasm following PCI :Can spasm crush a stent ?

Can a  coronary collaterals go for spasm ?

Logically  Spasm  can  occur  coronary collaterals .But it is difficult to document .coronary collaterals eventhough  has three layes as that of artery (Intima, media, adventia) th medial smooth muscles are less sparse. Advential lack vasa nervorum and hence neural input is less.So spasm is a rare event in coronary collaterals

Read Full Post »

Failed thrombolysis is an important clinical  issue  in STEMI   as  successful thrombolysis  occurs  only in  about 50-60%  of pateints . The typical criteria to define failed thrombolysis is  the  regression  of less than 50% of sum total( or maximum)  ST elevation in infarct leads.

So what do you do for these patients with failed thrombolysis ?

It depends upon the patient’s symptom, hemodynamic stability, LV dysfunction .

They  should  get one of the following .

  1. Conservative medical management  with /without CAG
  2. Repeat thrombolysis
  3. Rescue PCI
  4. CABG

Medical management is  thought to be  too inferior a  management,  many of the interventional cardiologists  do  not want to talk about . But  , there is  an important  group of patients (Not often addressed in cardiology literature)  who  technically fulfill the criteria  of failed thrombolysis  , but   still  very  comfortable , asymtomatic  and in  class 1. These patients ,  have  a strong option for continuing the conservative management .

Repeat thrombolysis does not have a consistent effect but can  be  tried in some  stable patients. CABG  can be a genuine option in few

Rescue PCI

This terminology  has become  the  glamorous one since the  catchy word  rescue is tagged in the title  itself. For most of the cardiac physicians ,  this has become the default treatment modality.This is an unfortunate perception . What  one should realise   here is  , we are  tying to rescue  the myocardium and  the patient ,   not the patient’s coronary artery !

Opening up a coronary obstruction is not synonymous with rescue .

For rescue PCI ,  to be effective it should be done within the same time window as that for thrombolysis (ie within 6 or at the most  12 hours) .This timing  is  of vital importance  for the simple reason , there will be nothing to rescue after 12 hours as most of the muscle  would be  dead. Reperfusing a dead myocardium has been shown to be hazardous in some ,  as it converts a simple  infarct into a hemorrhagic  infarct.This softens the core of the infarct and  carry a risk of rupture. Further,   doing a complex emergency  PCI  ,  in  a thrombotic milieu with   presumed  long term  benefit ,  is  a  perfect recipe for a potential  disaster.

While the above statement may be seen as pessimistic view , the optimistic cardiologist would vouch for the“Curious  open artery hypothesis” .This theory simply states , whatever be the status  of the distal myocardium ( dead or alive !)   opening an obstruction in the concerened coronary artery  will benefit the patient !

It is  huge surprise , this concept   continues to  be alive even after  repeatedly shot dead by number of very good clinical trials (TOAT, CTO limb of COURAGE etc ).

The REACT study (2004) concluded undisputed benefit of rescue PCI for failed thrombolysis  , only if the rescue was done  within  5-10 hours after the onset of symptoms.The mean time for  pain-to-rescue PCI was 414 minutes (6.5hours)

Final  message

It is fashionable to talk about time window for thrombolyis but not for PCI  .The time window for rescue PCI is an redundant issue  for many  cardiologists ! . But ,  the fact of the matter is ,  it is not . . .

The concept of time window in rescue PCI  , is as important as ,   that of  thrombolysis. Please , think twice or thrice !  if some body suggest you to do a rescue PCI in a stable patient  ,  12hours after the index event .

Important note : This rule   does not (  or need  not  ) apply for patients in cardiogenic shock  or patient ‘s with ongoing iscemia and angina.

Read Full Post »

NSTEMI  constitutes a  very heterogeneous population .The cardiac   risk   can vary  between very low to very high .  In contrast ,  STEMI patients  carry  a high risk for  electro mechanical complication including   sudden death .They all need immediate treatment  either with  thrombolysis or PCI to open up the blood vessel  and salvage the myocardium.

The above concept , may  be true in   many situations  ,  but what we fail to recognize   is  that ,   STEMI   also  is  a heterogeneous clinico pathological  with varying risks and outcome !

Let us see briefly ,  why this  is very important  in the management of STEMI

Management of STEMI  has undergone great  change  over the past 50 years and  it is the standing example of evidence based coronary care in the modern era ! The mortality  ,  in the early era was around 30-40% . The advent of coronary care units, defibrillators, reduced the mortality to around 10-15%  in 1960 /70s . Early use of heparin , aspirin   further improved the outcome .The inhospital mortality  was greatly  reduced to a level of  7-8% in the thrombolytic  era. And ,  then  came the interventional approach, namely primary PCI ,  which is now considered the best form of reperfusion when done early by an experienced team.

Inspite of this wealth of evidence   for the   superiority  of PCI  , it is only a fraction of  STEMI patients get  primary PCI   even in some  of the  well equipped centers ( Could be as low as  15 %)

Why ? this paradox

Primary PCI   has   struggled  to establish itself  as a global  therapeutic concept  for STEMI ,   even after   20 years of it’s introduction (PAMI trial)  .  If we  attribute ,  lack of   infrastructure  , expertise are  responsible for this low utility of primary PCI , we are mistaken ! There are so many institutions , at least in developing world ,   reluctant to do primary PCI  for varied reasons.( Affordability , support system , odd hours ,and finally perceived fear of untoward complication !)

Primary PCI may be a great treatment modality , but it comes with a inherent risk related to the procedure.

In fact the early hazard could exceed the potential benefit in many of the low risk STEMI  patients !

All STEMI’s are not  same , so all does not require same treatment !

Common sense and logic would   tell us any medical condition should be risk stratified before applying the management protocol. This will enable  us to avoid applying “high risk  – high benefit”  treatments in low risk patients . It is a great surprise,  the cardiology community has extensively researched to risk stratify NSTEMI/UA   ,  it has  rarely  considered risk stratification of STEMI before  starting the treatment.

In this context , it should  be emphasized  most of the clinical trails on   primary PCI  do not address  the clinical  relevance and the  differential outcomes   in various  subsets of  STEMI .

Consider the following two cases.

Two young men with STEMI  , both present within  3  hours   after  onset of symptoms

  1. ST elevation in V1 -V6 , 1 , AVL   ,  Low blood pressure , with severe  chest pain.
  2. ST elevation in 2 ,3, AVF , hemodynamically stable , with minimal  or no  discomfort .

In the above example,   a  small inferior  MI by a distal RCA occlusion  ,  and a proximal LAD lesion jeopardising entire anterior wall , both  are  categorized as STEMI !

Do you want to advocate same treatment  for both ?  or Will you  risk stratify the STEMI and treat individually ?  (As we do in NSTEMI !)

Current guidelines , would  suggest PCI for both situations. But , logistic ,  and real world experience would clearly favor thrombolysis for the second patient .

Does that mean,  the second patient is getting an inferior modality of treatment ?

Not at all . In fact there is a strong case for PCI being inferior in these patients as the risk of the procedure may far outweigh the benefit especially if it is done on a  random basis  by  not so well experienced cath lab team.

(Note : Streptokinase  or TPA does not  vary it’s action ,  whether given by  an ambulance drive or a staff nurse or even a  cardiologist !  .In contrast ,  the infrastructure and expertise have the  greatest impact on the success and failure  of PCI )

Final message

So , it is argued the world cardiology societies(ACC/ESC etc)  need to risk stratify STEMI (Like we do in NSTEMI ) into low risk, intermediate risk and high risk categories and advice primary PCI only for high risk patients.

Read Full Post »

                                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 )

//

Read Full Post »

                             Glucose is the molecule of life   ,burnt every second inside the body at the energy store house called mitochondria. Heart , the most active organ in the body  gets  bulk  of it’s energy supply  from fatty acids,  glucose and a little from keto acids. Under anerobic conditions this energy substrates shifts towards glucose .

                             We are  rarely inclined to think  that heart  can ever suffer from hypoglycemia ! But hypoglycemia can have distinct direct and indirect effects on heart.  In fact indirect effects due to activation of adrenergic activation is more obvious.An episode of hypoglycemia can precipitate an arrhythmia . Glucose potassium insulin infusion

 

 

 

Final message

Hypoglycemia , can be a trigger of ACS .This aspect is poorly recognised and studied.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts