Posts Tagged ‘priamry pci vs thrombolysis’


Verdict ?

Only complicated or high risk  STEMI,  would require immediate anatomy based management. Please note, this population at worst is never beyond 20 % of all STEMI. Hence more than majority of  patients  can be managed effectively without CAG.

My reasoning tells me,though knowing the  coronary anatomy appear vital  , it is rather the physiological impact of those  anatomical lesions  that will determine the outcome. So,post STEMI, if at all , we need to investigate, it should be about the  adequacy of the over all blood supply to left ventricle.This is done by a pre or post discharge sub maximal stress /nuclear test .If it’s negative with a good exercise tolerance  CAG will never be required as any critical flow limiting lesion ( that would require intervention  )is excluded with near 100% surety.

Postamble :Try asking  any neurologist , how often they demand to know cerebral arterial  anatomy for managing stroke  ? You will get a real surprise answer !

Read Full Post »

Your clock starts  now !


clock gif  dr s venkatesan002

Chronic stable angina : Most can be effectively managed  by  optimal /intensive medicines and life style Interventions .About 10% will require PCI/CABG.

ACS – STEMI:  Primarily  managed  with  rapid and competent  pre-hospital care with prompt thrombolysis in or out of hospital .Patients  with  large STEMI who develop complications (Again about 10 %)   require PCI and few additional  lives can be saved.

ACS-NSTEMI : This is  the group that demand  an  important role for PCI . All true high risk UA/NSTEMI patients  should receive urgent coronary  angiogram and critical lesions  should either be stented or  sent for CABG  (If the lesions are multiple and complex ) The field of interventional  cardiology  is  expected  to play a major  role in  this category of  patients for the simple reason , we  not only give dramatic  relief from angina and also prevent a  potentially a huge MI that is waiting to happen !

* It is vital to emphasise  the “Aim and  objective” in  NSTEMI  management  is critically different from other two. We know ,  in CSA   the aim is to give relief  symptoms  and improve excercise capacity . Both PCI/CABG  are  unlikely  to prevent a future MI in CSA..In STEMI it has already occurred .The aim is to salvage myocardium  and prevent  future events. While PCI can do the former , it can’t do the later . In STEMI scenerio ,we have very good  alternate  modality called thrombolysis which can easily beat the  pPCI  in , cost , availability and time  (and  hence efficiency as well  in  most  countries !)

Counter thought

The above suggestion  is too simplified ,generalized , misleading , and  unscientific, should   strongly be disagreed. For those people who disagree , I provide an alternate scheme  .It is ultra short ,comes in  5 lines .Very practical  and  scientific too  !

In any  patient , who is  suspected to have either  acute or chronic  coronary syndromes ,take them to the cath lab in an  urgent or semi urgent fashion .Do an angiogram and stent all lesions  that you feel important . If  stenting is not possible  manage  with optimal medicines and /or send them to the surgeons.

Final message

The essence of catheter based coronary care is simple.We complicate it. To understand this concept  100’s of cardiology  journals  and as many conferences and infinite  number of books are churned out every year !





Read Full Post »