Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘cypher’

Fundamental principle  of  human biological system is to live in harmony with nature and environment.Each cell  has a unique reaction  when it comes into contact with  external  material. This reaction can be acute or chronic  ,   local or systemic. The most severe form of allergy is called anaphylaxis  that can result in instantaneous loss of life. There  is a whole gamut of disorders  that  resulted  in a  separate  speciality called allergic medicine .

Further ,the transplantation  science have   taught us  an  organ or cell can be rejected at any point of time after implantation (Hyperacute -chronic) .With advancement of science we have started implanting a variety of devices  with complex metallurgy ,inside human body, metal clips, prosthesis, valves, wires, etc .How the body handles them .The consequences can be a mild reaction to major ones occasionally.

Consider ,a local allergy due to a orthopedic prosthesis  in one of the leg bones  is far less serious than a metal within a coronary artery  irritating the intima .

Remember hypersensitivity reactions can be severe . This lady reacted  like this to a sandal slipper -A  fiery red  infiltration

contact dermatits stent allergy pci coronary

Imagine  if a stented coronary artery react like this what would be the possible consequence ?

In susceptible  individuals  , can a metal cause

  • Intimal hyperemia
  • Intimal induration
  • Intimo-medial edema  following stent deployment

pci stent coronary angiogram thrombosis des

Why drug eluting stents are more prone for hypersensitivity ?

The answer is simple , while metal allergy is a comparatively rare phenomenon, the drugs we  coat and the polymers used are  many fold likely to result in hypersensitivity reaction.

While  the world is worried  more  about penicillin , sulpha allergy which occurs in 1 in 100000 ,  we tend to ignore the metal and drug  reactions within  the tender coronary arteries.

stent des rejection virmani  pci

What is  the clinical expression of  stent hypersensitivity ?

It is  often a coronary event in the acute phase and restenosis in chronic phase.

How much of acute stent thrombosis is related to stent allergy mediated reaction ?

The exact incidence  will  never be known. It could be high. Whenever a sudden unexpected early stent occlusion can be a suspect .

Is stent allergy a local reaction or systemic reaction ?

It is most often local .The drugs the stent elute can elicit a systemic reaction occasionally.

So what can be done to prevent this complication ?

Drug companies in it’s  package regularly  include the warning  message ! What does it imply to have a caution  on the covers ? .This warning simply represent about our ignorance in this issue. We presume it is a minor problem.

pci stent thrombosis stent allergy metal

Questions unanswered

  1. How does a cardiac patient knows whether he is hypersensitive to stainless steel or nickel ?
  2. Is it practical to have a stent allergic test in every patient before PCI ?
  3. Is routine administration of corticosteroids for few days after PCI an answer ?

Reference

R.Virmani , circulation 2004

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/109/6/701?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=stent+%27allergy%22+&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT

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 »

Left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) often evokes  a panic reaction  among cardiologists .Not every LMD deserve that re. To  label  it as  significant, we have a criteria ,  that is 50% diameter stenosis.  So what you do , for a tapering  or narrowed left main with 40% stenosis. Isolated insignificant left main is rare *, but real incidence is not known.  LMCAD  is  most often due to  , atherosclerosis of left main coronary artery without limiting the flow.

What are the options ?

  • Leave it alone, with intensive medical management assisted by high dose statin(80mg)
  • Elective PCI with stenting , even though the lesion is not significant.

*If associated LAD  or LCX is there decision making is easier .

How  significant is a coronary stenosis ?

The significance of a coronary lesion with reference to “lumen diameter obstruction” is basically flawed. The significance of a coronary stenosis, by tradition is  based on it’s hemodynamic impact ,right from the  CASS days in early seventies.Unfortunately our mind set has not changed even after realising    non obstructive – sub critical lesion is more prone for acute coronary syndrome.  Is it not ironical to call a  40% lesion a non significant one !

So, the  significance of coronary stenosis is two fold.

  1. Hemodynamic  significance
  2. Clinical and  pathologic significance

The former predisposes to often chronic stable angina, later likely to result in ACS.

How will you approach a apparently insignificant left main disease ?

A 40 % lesion in left main is hemodynamically not significant , but pathologically very significant.It needs intensive treatment. Plaque passification with medical approach is first choice.If the lesion morphology is eccentric,  has irregular margins or involves  LAD  or LCX ostium doing a PCI or even a CABG is to be considered in spite of the lesion is  hemodynamically insignificant .

Why , PCI is   considered  “not appropriate”  for   less tighter lesions , even though these lesions  have great clinical significance ?

The answer is simple, The risks  and the  potential cost are more than the benefit !

And further ,  stents are  not innocuous devices  either  , they  always carry a risk of sudden occlusion as like  a sub critical lesion  !

Answer to the title question

True incidence is not known . Our experince (Class 1 c evidence) would suggest Left main disease constitutes up to 10 % of CAD.Among this one third would be hemodynamically insignificant

Suggested reading

Handbook of Left Main Stem Disease


edited by Seung-Jung Park

hbleftmn

//

Read Full Post »

                                                    Drugs are poisons , whenever it is administered without valid purpose. it can enter human body  in many ways (Oral, intravenous, percutaneous etc ) And now we have another route namely intracoronary !

                                                   In quest for prevention of restenosis, many of the anti cancer drugs are now delivered directly inside the coronary arteries .These drugs are secreted  like a sustained release  tablet from the drug coated stents.These drugs are expected to prevent restenosis within the stented segment.But, after years of  intense debate and research  , we realised that ,  drugs  eluted from the stent  could damage the distal coronary vascular bed and coronary microcirculation.( And thus came the epidemic of acute stent thrombosis ! )

                                                The tender and sensitive coronary microvasculature  is constantly exposed to  these  powerful anticancer and immmunosuppresive  drugs .It is a great surprise , no body thought of  this dangerous drug -coronary artery interaction ! It required the genius of Renu virmani and others to point out this.

But still , the cardiology community by and large , fails to consider  this an important issue.This is proven by the fact, usage of DES is  still increasing  and used mainly as an off label indication.

Read this land mark article from circulation

picture1

http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/full/115/8/1051?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&author1=renu+virmani&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fdate=1/1/2007&tdate=12/31/2007&resourcetype=HWCIT

 

Questions that need to be answered

  • What is the long term effects of drugging a coronary artery ?
  • Is no reflow or slow flow  more common after DES , because of the adverse drug reaction in the distal vascular bed ?
  • If a patient  with  DES  undergoes a CABG later what  would be  the impact of the  drug on the graft ? Will the functional vasodilatation   affected ?

Final message

                                  A drug , to get a legal clearance it has to undergo  hundreds of rigorous tests . Finally it is cleared for that  specific indication for which it is tested  .Just because a drug is cleared for one purpose ( Paclitaxel for malignancy ) it does not mean it is safe to use for any other  purpose for which it is deemed to be useful . Exactly the  opposite is happening   in the  the field of interventional cardiology . No body wondered to think what would be the effect of these drugs on the normal coronary endothelial cells and vasculature.Is it not a crime ,  without analysing this particular issue  , dozens of drug eluting stents have been released in the market . And now,  sounds of crying  foul is heard world wide !

Let us thank  , the so called negative forces in cardiology  for making this an  issue . In science ,  the watch dogs should bark  at  times of danger not wag the tail !

Read Full Post »

Stents are mechanical  devices like  a  spring ,  used to  keep an artery open after a PTCA or PCI.

des-why4

                                Bare metal stents(BMS) were found to have restenois rate of about 25%.  So it was perceived a stent should have it’s own protective coat , so that it won’t get restenosed.For this the researchers thought  anti cancer drugs are ideal as they block cell proliferation and thus neovascualrisation and restenosis.Alas, they were found dismally wrong ,  after all , neointiaml proliferation is only a part of the problem of restenosis  and simple blocking of cell growth is insufficient . The issue doesn’t stop with that, the anti cancer drugs incorporated within the stent simply can not differentiate normal from abnormal cells and

DES effectively blocks the normal endothelisation over the stents and make this highly vulnerable for acute stent thrombosis .

This complication is unique to DES and can result in SCD.Further ,during the last 6 years of DES , we recognised the restenosis rate has increased form the much hyped O % to almost 15% and it’s still growing . These  complications  has made a huge question mark over the future of drug eluting stents !

des-coverage

The concept of DES may not die , but which drug it should elute should be answered ! This  again is  going to be a long battle. So it is currently   adviced,  based  on common sense ( With due respects to  those RCTs  funded by industry )

Whenever you encounter a block within the coronary artery* Ask the following  questions in sequence  ,

  • Whether we can leave it alone  with medical therapy  ,  if the answer is no , proceed  to the next step !
  • Is there a possibility for plain balloon angioplasty in a given vessel (POBA, Yes !  the concept is not dead yet !)
  • If you decide a stent is required , Will  the  bare metal  do the job ?
  • In multivessel CAD  , Did the issue of increased metal load on the  long term outcome was considered ?
  • If lesions appear complex,  should we  not strongly consider CABG as an option ?

However  if we  have the habit of  ask ing the following  question  you are likely to deviate from scientific approach  

Is it possible to put a stent  across  the block ?

Yes , will be the answer most of the time ,and the patient will invariably get one or more stents  and carry a life long  stent related problems.

*The rule does not apply in Acute coronary syndromes

Also read this letter  posted by the author published in  British medical journal

Read Full Post »

                                      One of the important principles of  post PCI care is,   we need  to be very careful  till the metal struts are fully endothelialised . This is of vital importance as improper endothelialisation  is a powerful trigger and nidus for a  imminent thrombosis and  acute coronary syndrome.

stent

It is a billion dollor irony , the much hyped DES does exactly what we don’t want ! and still it’s  usage is  increasing world wide .  The drugs (Anti cancer agents)  which coat the DES   are the villains as it  prevents  the  metal struts  from being endothelialised  and  keep the metal surface  raw and vulnerable , while the  much maligned  bare metal stents allow  this natural endothelialisation  process  without any interruption ! So right now it is mandatory  to administer dual antiplatelet agents  life long( life of the stent !)   for the patients with DES.

 Just look , at the following image of  a stent in vitro at  30 days follow up

des

des-2

Read Full Post »

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 »