Abstract In the presence of the left ventricle hypertrophy (LVH), the differential diagnosis with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) or some phenocopy must be always considered, which can be easily suspected when the hypertrophy is markedly asymmetric. However, when the hypertrophy is homogeneous, especially if the patient has concomitant hypertension, it may be a challenge to distinguish between hypertensive and HCM, although some clinical features may help us to suspect it. In addition, patients with HCM may present with exertional angina due to microcirculation involvement in the setting of the hypertrophy itself or dynamic obstruction in the left ventricular outflow tract, but in some cases, the presence of concomitant coronary artery disease must be suspected as the cause of angina, especially if the patient has an intermediate or high-risk probability of having ischemic heart disease. We present the case of a 46-year-old Afro-American man with poorly controlled hypertension who was found to have severe LVH, and who presented with symptoms of exertional angina during follow-up. We will review the clinical features that can help us in the differential diagnosis in this context.

Resumen Ante la presencia de hipertrofia del ventrículo izquierdo (HVI), siempre se debe considerar el diagnóstico diferencial con la miocardiopatía hipertrófica (MCH) o alguna fenocopia, que puede sospecharse fácilmente cuando la hipertrofia es marcadamente asimétrica. Además, los pacientes con MCH pueden presentar angina de esfuerzo debido a la afectación de la microcirculación en el contexto de la propia hipertrofia o si ésta condiciona obstrucción dinámica al tracto de salida del ventrículo izquierdo, pero en algunos casos debe sospecharse la presencia de enfermedad coronaria concomitante como causa de la angina, especialmente si el paciente tiene una probabilidad de riesgo intermedio o alto de padecer cardiopatía isquémica. Presentamos el caso de un varón de 46 años de afroamericana con hipertensión arterial mal controlada a quien se le detectó una HVI severa, y que durante el seguimiento presentó síntomas de angina de esfuerzo. Revisaremos las características clínicas que nos pueden ayudar en el diagnóstico diferencial en este contexto.

Abstract: Case report: A 57-year-old man consulted for chest pain suggestive of angina. The electrocardiogram (ECG) showed a right bundle branch block (RBBB), not present in previous ECGs, with secondary abnormalities of repolarization without meeting the criteria for ischemia. Due to persistent angina despite treatment, an emergent coronary angiography was performed, which showed an acute thrombotic occlusion of the right coronary artery (RCA) with good collateral circulation (CC) from the left coronary tree, which did not present significant stenosis. After reperfusion, angina progressively disappeared, and RBBB resolved. The infarct size was smaller than expected, as well as the poor electrocardiographic expressiveness, due to the good heterocoronary CC that was observed in the infarcted territory. Conclusion: Myocardial infarction with acute occlusion of a coronary artery must be kept in mind in patients with persistent angina despite treatment, and the ECG does not show the typical abnormalities.

Resumen: Caso clínico: Paciente de 57 años que consultó por dolor torácico sugestivo de angina, con un electrocardiograma (ECG) que mostraba un bloqueo de rama derecha (BRD) no presente previamente, con las correspondientes alteraciones de la repolarización en contexto de bloqueo de rama sin cumplir criterios de isquemia. Por persistencia de angina a pesar del tratamiento se decidió realizar coronariografía emergente objetivando una oclusión trombótica aguda de la arteria coronaria derecha con buena circulación colateral (CC) heterocoronaria desde el árbol coronario izquierdo, el cual no presentaba lesiones significativas. Después de la revascularización, la angina desapareció progresivamente y se resolvió el BRD. Dada la buena CC heterocoronaria del territorio infartado, el tamaño del infarto fue menor de lo esperado y esto justificaría la escasa expresividad del ECG. Conclusión: El infarto de miocardio con oclusión aguda de una arteria coronaria debe tenerse en cuenta en pacientes con angina persistente a pesar del tratamiento y que el ECG no muestre las anomalías típicas.

Resumen Antecedentes: La estrategia de catéter único permite explorar ambas coronarias con un solo catéter. Nuestro objetivo es realizar la primera revisión sistemática y meta-análisis de ensayos clínicos aleatorizados para cuantificar adecuadamente los beneficios de la estrategia de catéter único, con catéteres multipropósito, sobre la estrategia convencional de dos catéteres. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en PubMed, CINALH y CENTRAL, identificando ensayos aleatorizados que compararan estrategias de un catéter y dos catéteres. El resultado primario fue volumen de contraste administrado. Los secundarios, que evaluaron el rendimiento del cateterismo, incluyeron: espasmo radial, tiempo de fluoroscopia y de procedimiento. Resultados: Se incluyeron cinco ensayos, totalizando 1,599 pacientes (802 con estrategia de un catéter y 797 con estrategia de dos catéteres). La estrategia de catéter único requirió menos contraste (diferencia-de-medias; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL a −1.496 mL], p = 0.001), presentando menos espasmo radial (odds ratio, 0.484 [0.363 a 0.644], p < 0.001) y menos tiempo de procedimiento (diferencia-de-medias; −72.471 s [−99.694 s a −45.249 s], p < 0.001). No hubo diferencias en el tiempo de fluoroscopia. Conclusiones: La estrategia de catéter único induce una reducción mínima en la administración de contraste, pero mejora el rendimiento del cateterismo al reducir el espasmo radial y el tiempo de procedimiento en comparación con la estrategia convencional.

Abstract Background: One-catheter strategy, based in multipurpose catheters, allows exploring both coronary arteries with a single catheter. This strategy could simplify coronary catheterization and reduce the volume of contrast administration, by reducing radial spasm. To date, observational studies showed greater benefits regarding contrast consumption and catheterization performance than controlled trials. The aim of this work is to perform the first systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT) to adequately quantify the benefits of one-catheter strategy, with multipurpose catheters, over conventional two-catheter strategy on contrast consumption, and catheterization performance. Methods: A search in PubMed, CINALH, and CENTRAL databases was conducted to identify randomized trials comparing one-catheter and two-catheter strategies. The primary outcome was volume of iodinated contrast administrated. Secondary endpoints, evaluating coronary catheterization performance included: arterial spasm, fluoroscopy time, and procedural time. Results: Five RCT were included for the final analysis, with a total of 1599 patients (802 patients with one-catheter strategy and 797 patients with two-catheter strategy). One-catheter strategy required less administration of radiological contrast (difference in means [DiM] [95% confidence interval (CI)]; −3.831 mL [−6.165 mL to −1.496 mL], p = 0.001) as compared to two-catheter strategy. Furthermore, less radial spasm (odds ratio [95% CI], 0.484 [0.363 to 0.644], p < 0.001) and less procedural time (DiM [95% CI], −72.471 s [−99.694 s to −45.249 s], p < 0.001) were observed in one-catheter strategy. No differences on fluoroscopy time were observed. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy induces a minimal reduction on radiological contrast administration but improves coronary catheterization performance by reducing arterial spasm and procedural time as compared to conventional two-catheter strategy.

Resumo Fundamento: A cineangiocoronariografia com dois cateteres é a estratégia tradicional para procedimentos coronarianos de diagnóstico. O cateter TIG I permite canular ambas as artérias coronárias, evitando a troca de cateteres durante a cineangiocoronariografia por acesso transradial. Objetivo: O objetivo deste estudo é avaliar o impacto da estratégia de um cateter, evitando a troca de cateter, no desempenho da coronariografia por cateterismo e nos seus custos econômicos. Métodos: Foram coletados os procedimentos diagnósticos coronarianos transradiais realizados entre janeiro de 2013 e junho de 2017. A estratégia de um cateter (cateter TIG I) e a estratégia de dois cateteres (cateteres coronários direito e esquerdo de Judkins) foram comparadas. O volume de contraste iodado administrado foi o endpoint primário. Os endpoints secundários eram espasmo radial, duração do procedimento (tempo de fluoroscopia) e exposição a radiações ionizantes (produto dose-área e kerma no ar). Os custos econômicos diretos também foram avaliados. Para as análises estatísticas, valores de p < 0,05 bicaudais foram considerados estatisticamente significativos. Resultados: De um total de 1.953 procedimentos em 1.829 pacientes, 252 procedimentos foram atribuídos à estratégia de um cateter e 1.701 procedimentos à estratégia de dois cateteres. Não houve diferenças nas características basais entre os grupos. A estratégia de um cateter exigiu menos contraste iodado [endpoint primário; (60-105) -mL vs. 92 (64-120) -mL; p < 0,001] em comparação com a estratégia de dois cateteres. Além disso, o grupo da estratégia de um cateter apresentou menos espasmo radial (5,2% vs. 9,3%, p = 0,022) e menor tempo de fluoroscopia [3,9 (2,2-8,0) -min vs. 4,8 (2,9-8,3) -min, p = 0,001] e economia de custos [149 (140-160)-€/procedimento vs. 171 (160-183) -€/procedimento; p < 0,001]. Não foram detectadas diferenças no produto dose-área e kerma no ar entre os grupos. Conclusões: A estratégia de um cateter, com cateter TIG I, melhora o desempenho da coronariografia por cateterismo e reduz os custos econômicos em comparação com a estratégia tradicional de dois cateteres em pacientes encaminhados para cineangiocoronariografia.

Abstract Background: Coronary angiography with two catheters is the traditional strategy for diagnostic coronary procedures. TIG I catheter permits to cannulate both coronary arteries, avoiding exchanging catheters during coronary angiography by transradial access. Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of one-catheter strategy, by avoiding catheter exchange, on coronary catheterization performance and economic costs. Methods: Transradial coronary diagnostic procedures conducted from January 2013 to June 2017 were collected. One-catheter strategy (TIG I catheter) and two-catheter strategy (left and right Judkins catheters) were compared. The volume of iodinated contrast administered was the primary endpoint. Secondary endpoints included radial spasm, procedural duration (fluoroscopy time) and exposure to ionizing radiation (dose-area product and air kerma). Direct economic costs were also evaluated. For statistical analyses, two-tailed p-values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: From a total of 1,953 procedures in 1,829 patients, 252 procedures were assigned to one-catheter strategy and 1,701 procedures to two-catheter strategy. There were no differences in baseline characteristics between the groups. One-catheter strategy required less iodinated contrast [primary endpoint; (60-105)-mL vs. 92 (64-120)-mL; p < 0.001] than the two-catheter strategy. Also, the one-catheter group presented less radial spasm (5.2% vs. 9.3%, p = 0.022) and shorter fluoroscopy time [3.9 (2.2-8.0)-min vs. 4.8 (2.9-8.3)-min, p = 0.001] and saved costs [149 (140-160)-€/procedure vs. 171 (160-183)-€/procedure; p < 0.001]. No differences in dose-area product and air kerma were detected between the groups. Conclusions: One-catheter strategy, with TIG I catheter, improves coronary catheterization performance and reduces economic costs compared to traditional two-catheter strategy in patients referred for coronary angiography.