Biomedical subjects

Juan Angel

Publications and source records attributed to Juan Angel.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Correspondence between left ventricular 17 myocardial segments and coronary arteries.

AIMS: The last guidelines recommend a standardized 17-segment model for tomographic imaging of the left ventricle. The aim of this study is to analyse the correspondence of the 17 left ventricular segments with each coronary artery by myocardial perfusion SPECT studies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty patients selected for percutaneous revascularization of one coronary artery [24 left anterior descending (LAD), 15 right coronary artery (RCA), and 11 left circumflex (LCX)] were included. The (99m)Tc-labelled compound was injected immediately after the inflation of the balloon during percutaneous coronary angioplasty. At least 90 s of complete occlusion time was required. Maximal contour of regions of hypoperfusion corresponding to each coronary artery occlusion were delineated over the polar map of 17 segments. Nine segments corresponded to only one coronary artery: eight to LAD (basal anterior, basal anteroseptal, mid-anterior, mid-anteroseptal, apical anterior, apical septal, apical lateral, and apex) and one to LCX (basal anterolateral). Basal inferoseptal, mid-inferoseptal, and apical inferior segments could correspond to LAD or RCA. Basal inferior, basal inferolateral, mid-inferior, and mid-inferolateral segments could correspond to RCA or LCX, whereas the mid-anterolateral segment could correspond to LAD or LCX. CONCLUSION: The most specific segments (anterior, anteroseptal, and all apical segments except the infero-apical) correspond to LAD but no segment can be exclusively attributed to the RCA. Inferoseptal segments can be attributed to LAD or RCA, inferior and inferolateral segments to RCA or LCX, and mid-anterolateral segment to LAD or LCX.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗

PubMed2004

Effusive-constrictive pericarditis.

BACKGROUND: Effusive-constrictive pericarditis is an uncommon pericardial syndrome characterized by concomitant tamponade, caused by tense pericardial effusion, and constriction, caused by the visceral pericardium. We conducted a prospective study of its clinical evolution and management. METHODS: From 1986 through 2001, all patients with effusive-constrictive pericarditis were prospectively evaluated. Combined pericardiocentesis and cardiac catheterization were performed in all patients, and pericardiectomy was performed in those with persistent constriction. Follow-up ranged from 1 month to 15 years (median, 7 years). RESULTS: A total of 1184 patients with pericarditis were evaluated, 218 of whom had tamponade. Of these 218, 190 underwent combined pericardiocentesis and catheterization. Fifteen of these patients had effusive-constrictive pericarditis and were included in the study. All patients presented with clinical tamponade; however, concomitant constriction was recognized in only seven patients. At catheterization, all patients had elevated intrapericardial pressure (median, 12 mm Hg; interquartile range, 7 to 18) and elevated right atrial and end-diastolic right and left ventricular pressures. After pericardiocentesis, the intrapericardial pressure decreased (median value, -5 mm Hg; interquartile range, -5 to 0), whereas right atrial and end-diastolic right and left ventricular pressures, although slightly reduced, remained elevated, with a dip-plateau morphology. The causes were diverse, and death was mainly related to the underlying disease. Pericardiectomy was required in seven patients, all of whom had involvement of the visceral pericardium. Three patients had spontaneous resolution. CONCLUSIONS: Effusive-constrictive pericarditis is an uncommon pericardial syndrome that may be missed in some patients who present with tamponade. Although evolution to persistent constriction is frequent, idiopathic cases may resolve spontaneously. In our opinion, extensive epicardiectomy is the procedure of choice in patients requiring surgery.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Therapeutic implications of in-stent restenosis located at the stent edge. Insights from the restenosis intra-stent balloon angioplasty versus elective stenting (RIBS) randomized trial.

AIMS: In patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) several anatomic subgroups have been identified. ISR affecting the stent edge (EDG) is a poorly characterised subgroup with undefined therapeutic implications. We sought to determine the implications of ISR affecting the stent EDG. METHODS AND RESULTS: 450 patients included in the "Restenosis Intra-stent: Balloon angioplasty vs elective Stenting" (RIBS) randomized study, were analysed. EDG ISR was predefined in the protocol and the pattern of ISR analysed in a centralized core-lab. Fifty-two patients (12%) had EDG ISR (29 stent group, 23 balloon arm). Patients with EDG ISR had less severe [minimal lumen diameter (MLD) (0.78+/-0.3 vs 0.66+/-0.3 mm, p=0.05)] and shorter lesions (lesion length 10.2+/-6 vs 13.2+/-7 mm, p=0.003). Patients with EDG ISR more frequently required crossover (12% vs 3%, p=0.006) but eventually the immediate angiographic result and the long-term clinical and angiographic outcome was similar to that found in patients without EDG ISR. Patients with EDG ISR treated in the balloon and stent arms had similar baseline characteristics. However, after intervention, the immediate angiographic result was better in the stent arm (MLD 2.79+/-0.4 vs 2.35+/-0.3 mm, p=0.001). This difference persisted at late follow-up: MLD (1.93+/-0.7 vs 1.39+/-0.7 mm, p=0.01), recurrent restenosis (20% vs 50%, p=0.03). In addition, the 1-year event-free survival was significantly better (83% vs 52%, log rank p=0.01; Cox HR 0.28, 95%CI 0.09-0.79) in the stent arm. Moreover, stent implantation was an independent predictor of freedom from target vessel revascularization (HR 0.15, 95%CI 0.03-0.67, p=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: EDG ISR constitutes a specific subgroup with relevant therapeutic implications. In patients with EDG ISR, repeat stent implantation provides better clinical and angiographic outcome than conventional balloon angioplasty.

Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary↗

PubMed2004

[Localization and quantification of myocardium at risk by myocardial perfusion SPECT during coronary artery occlusion].

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to analyze the distribution and extent of the myocardium at risk using polar maps obtained with myocardial perfusion SPECT. Myocardial perfusion of territories irrigated by the left anterior descending (LAD), right coronary (RCA) and left circumflex artery (CX) was studied with the help of a technetium-radiolabeled tracer during occlusion of the vessels in the course of percutaneous coronary angioplasty. PATIENTS AND METHOD: We studied 50 patients (24 LAD, 15 RCA and 11 CX). The 99mTc compound was injected immediately after inflation of the balloon, and the artery was occluded for approximately 90 seconds. Tomographic images were acquired, and polar maps showing the extent of the ischemic region (uptake < 50% of maximum) were generated. RESULTS: Mean percentage extent of the ischemic territory was 49.8 +/- 10.3% (minimum 35%, maximum 67%), for the proximal LAD, 39.8 (8.3%) (minimum 20%, maximum 51%) for the mid LAD, 20.3 (7.6%) (minimum 8.3%, maximum 35%) for the RCA, and 21.3 (10.8%) (minimum 10.2%, maximum 30%) for the CX. CONCLUSIONS: The contours and extent of the jeopardized myocardial territory found during coronary occlusion allowed us to generate polar maps that illustrated actual coronary risk. The distribution and extent of the areas at risk differed from those in polar maps generated by most current applications used with myocardial perfusion SPECT.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

A randomized comparison of repeat stenting with balloon angioplasty in patients with in-stent restenosis.

OBJECTIVES: This randomized trial compared repeat stenting with balloon angioplasty (BA) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: Stent restenosis constitutes a therapeutic challenge. Repeat coronary interventions are currently used in this setting, but the recurrence risk remains high. METHODS: We randomly assigned 450 patients with ISR to elective stent implantation (224 patients) or conventional BA (226 patients). Primary end point was recurrent restenosis rate at six months. Secondary end points included minimal lumen diameter (MLD), prespecified subgroup analyses, and a composite of major adverse events. RESULTS: Procedural success was similar in both groups, but in-hospital complications were more frequent in the balloon group. After the procedure MLD was larger in the stent group (2.77 +/- 0.4 vs. 2.25 +/- 0.5 mm, p < 0.001). At follow-up, MLD was larger after stenting when the in-lesion site was considered (1.69 +/- 0.8 vs. 1.54 +/- 0.7 mm, p = 0.046). However, the binary restenosis rate (38% stent group, 39% balloon group) was similar with the two strategies. One-year event-free survival (follow-up 100%) was also similar in both groups (77% stent vs. 71% balloon, p = 0.19). Nevertheless, in the prespecified subgroup of patients with large vessels (> or =3 mm) the restenosis rate (27% vs. 49%, p = 0.007) and the event-free survival (84% vs. 62%, p = 0.002) were better after repeat stenting. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR, repeat coronary stenting provided better initial angiographic results but failed to improve restenosis rate and clinical outcome when compared with BA. However, in patients with large vessels coronary stenting improved the long-term clinical and angiographic outcome.

Aged↗