Resumo Fundamento Os limiares de corte para a “relação do ciclo completo de repouso” (RFR) oscilam em diferentes séries, sugerindo que as características da população podem influenciá-los. Da mesma forma, foram documentados preditores de discordância entre a RFR e a reserva de fluxo fracionado (FFR). O Estudo RECOPA, mostrou que a capacidade diagnóstica está reduzida na “zona cinzenta” da RFR, tornando necessária a realização de FFR para descartar ou confirmar isquemia. Objetivos Determinar os preditores de discordância, integrar as informações que eles fornecem em um índice clínico-fisiológico: a “RFR Ajustada”, e comparar sua concordância com o FFR. Métodos Usando dados do Estudo RECOPA, os preditores de discordância em relação à FFR foram determinados na “zona cinzenta” da RFR (0,86 a 0,92) para construir um índice (“RFR Ajustada”) que pesaria a RFR juntamente com os preditores de discordância e avaliar sua concordância com a FFR. Resultados Foram avaliadas 156 lesões em 141 pacientes. Os preditores de discordância foram: doença renal crônica, cardiopatia isquêmica prévia, lesões não envolvendo a artéria descendente anterior esquerda e síndrome coronariana aguda. Embora limitada, a “RFR Ajustada” melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em comparação com a RFR na “zona cinzenta” (AUC-RFR = 0,651 versus AUC-“RFR Ajustada” = 0,749), mostrando também uma melhora em todos os índices diagnósticos quando foram estabelecidos limiares de corte otimizados (sensibilidade: 59% a 68%; especificidade: 62% a 75%; acurácia diagnóstica: 60% a 71%; razão de verossimilhança positiva: 1,51 a 2,34; razão de verossimilhança negativa: 0,64 a 0,37). Conclusões Ajustar a RFR integrando as informações fornecidas pelos preditores de discordância para obter a “RFR Ajustada” melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em nossa população. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar se os índices clínico-fisiológicos melhoram a capacidade diagnóstica da RFR ou de outros índices coronarianos.

Abstract Background Cutoff thresholds for the “resting full-cycle ratio” (RFR) oscillate in different series, suggesting that population characteristics may influence them. Likewise, predictors of discordance between the RFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been documented. The RECOPA Study showed that diagnostic capacity is reduced in the RFR “grey zone”, requiring the performance of FFR to rule out or confirm ischemia. Objectives To determine predictors of discordance, integrate the information they provide in a clinical-physiological index, the “Adjusted RFR”, and compare its agreement with the FFR. Methods Using data from the RECOPA Study, predictors of discordance with respect to FFR were determined in the RFR “grey zone” (0.86 to 0.92) to construct an index (“Adjusted RFR”) that would weigh RFR together with predictors of discordance and evaluate its agreement with FFR. Results A total of 156 lesions were evaluated in 141 patients. Predictors of discordance were: chronic kidney disease, previous ischemic heart disease, lesions not involving the anterior descending artery, and acute coronary syndrome. Though limited, the “Adjusted RFR” improved the diagnostic capacity compared to the RFR in the “grey zone” (AUC-RFR = 0.651 versus AUC-“Adjusted RFR” = 0.749), also showing an improvement in all diagnostic indices when optimal cutoff thresholds were established (sensitivity: 59% to 68%; specificity: 62% to 75%; diagnostic accuracy: 60% to 71%; positive likelihood ratio: 1.51 to 2.34; negative likelihood ratio: 0.64 to 0.37). Conclusions Adjusting the RFR by integrating the information provided by predictors of discordance to obtain the “Adjusted RFR” improved the diagnostic capacity in our population. Further studies are required to evaluate whether clinical-physiological indices improve the diagnostic capacity of RFR or other coronary indices.

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.

Abstract Background: Invasive coronary procedures involve the administration of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations, increasing morbidity and mortality. The rotational coronary angiography (RCA) allows acquiring multiple projections with a unique injection of iodinated contrast. To date, there are no meta-analyses specifically comparing RCA and conventional coronary angiography (CCA) in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures, whether diagnostic or diagnostic and therapeutic. The aim of this meta-analysis is to assess the impact of RCA on the amount of iodinated contrast and the exposure to ionising radiations during invasive coronary procedures. Methods: A search in PubMed and Ovid databases was conducted to identify studies, including diagnostic and diagnostic and therapeutic studies, comparing RCA and CCA. The manuscripts were evaluated on quality and biases, and were included if they analysed any of the following endpoints: volume of contrast and exposure to ionising radiations measured as dose-area product, and Kerma-air or fluoroscopy time. Results: Sixteen studies, with a total of 2,327 patients, were included in the final analysis (1,146 patients underwent RCA and 1,181 patients underwent CCA), with significant differences being detected in volume of contrast (standard difference in means (95% confidence interval) −1.887 (−2.472 to −1.302); P < .001), dose-area product (−0.726 (−1.034 to −0.418); P < .001), Kerma-air (−0.842 (−1.104 to −0.581); P < .001), and fluoroscopy time (0.263 (−0.496 to −0.030); P = .027). Conclusions: RCA reduces the volume of contrast and the exposure to radiation, evaluated as dose-area product, Kerma-air, and fluoroscopy time, in patients undergoing invasive coronary procedures.

Resumen Antecedentes: Los procedimientos coronarios invasivos conllevan la administración de contraste y la exposición a radiaciones ionizantes, comportando un incremento de la morbimortalidad. La angiografía coronaria rotacional (ACR) permite adquirir múltiples proyecciones con una inyección de contraste. Hasta la fecha, no hay metaanálisis específicos comparando la ACR y la angiografía coronaria convencional (ACC) en pacientes en los que se realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos, tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos. El objetivo de este metaanálisis es evaluar el impacto de la ACR en la cantidad de contraste, y la radiación ionizante en procedimientos coronarios invasivos. Métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed y Ovid para identificar estudios tanto diagnósticos como diagnósticos y terapéuticos que comparasen ACR y ACC. Los estudios fueron evaluados sobre la calidad y los sesgos, y fueron incluidos si contemplaban alguna de las siguientes variables de valoración: volumen de contraste, radiación ionizante medida como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire o tiempo de fluoroscopia. Resultados: Dieciséis estudios, totalizando 2,327 pacientes, fueron incluidos en el análisis final (1,146 pacientes recibieron ACR y 1,181, ACC), objetivándose diferencias significativas en volumen de contraste (diferencia estándar de medias (intervalo de confianza al 95%) −1.887 (−2.472 a −1.302); p < 0.001), producto dosis-área (−0.726 (−1.034 a −0.418); p < 0.001), Kerma-aire (−0.842 (−1.104 a −0.581); p < 0.001) y tiempo de fluoroscopia (0.263 (−0.496 a −0.030); p = 0.027). Conclusiones: La ACR permite reducir el volumen de contraste y la radiación, evaluada como producto dosis-área, Kerma-aire y tiempo de fluoroscopia en pacientes a los que se les realizan procedimientos coronarios invasivos.

Objective: The ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction network "Codi Infart" was implemented in Catalonia (Spain) in June 2009. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of the implementation of the Codi Infart on women. Method: Women referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention, were divided into two groups according to Codi Infart: Non-Codi Infart group (January 2003 to May 2009) and Codi Infart group (June 2009 to December 2012). Place of first medical contact, time intervals in diagnosis and treatment, treatments received and rate of major cardiovascular adverse events defined as all-cause death, reinfarction or stroke in-hospital, at 30 and 180 days were compared. Results: From a total population of 2,426 patients, 501 (20.7%) were women. One-hundred eighty-six women (2.09 cases/month) belonged to Non-Codi Infart group and 315 women (10.16 cases/month) to Codi Infart group. The percentage of women attended increased since the introduction of CI (22.2% vs. 18.5%, P = .028). In addition, the Codi Infart group had a higher percentage of women initially attended outside our institution (84.1% vs. 16.7%, P < .001), and lower total ischemia time (220 [155-380] vs. 272 [196-456], P = .003). However, no differences in 180-day major cardiovascular adverse events were detected (14.2% vs. 15.6%, P = .692). Conclusions: The implementation of the major cardiovascular adverse events allowed to increase the rate and the percentage of women with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention and reducing total ischemic time.

Objetivo: El sistema de atención en red por infarto con elevación del segmento ST «Codi Infart» se implementó en Cataluña (España) en junio de 2009. El objetivo del estudio fue evaluar el beneficio de la instauración del Codi Infart para las mujeres atendidas en nuestra institución. Método: Las mujeres referidas para angioplastia primaria se dividieron en 2 grupos de acuerdo con el Codi Infart: grupo no-Codi Infart (enero de 2003 a mayo de 2009) y grupo Codi Infart (junio de 2009 a diciembre de 2012); y se compararon lugar de procedencia, periodos, tratamientos recibidos y tasa de eventos cardiovasculares mayores definida como muerte por todas las causas, reinfarto o accidente cerebrovascular durante el ingreso, a 30 y 180 días. Resultados: De una población total de 2,426 pacientes, 501 (20.7%) eran mujeres. De ellas, 186 mujeres (2,09 casos/mes) pertenecían al grupo no-Codi Infart y 315 mujeres (10,16 casos/mes) al grupo Codi Infart. El porcentaje de mujeres atendidas aumentó desde la introducción del Codi Infart(22.2% vs. 18.5%, p = 0.028). Además, inicialmente el grupo Codi Infart presentó mayor porcentaje de mujeres atendidas fuera de nuestra institución (84.1% vs. 16.7%, p < 0.001), y menores tiempos totales de isquemia (220 [155-380] vs. 272 [196-456], p = 0.003), pero no se detectaron diferencias en eventos cardiovasculares mayores a 180 días (14.2% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.692). Conclusiones: La instauración del Codi Infart permitió aumentar de manera notable la tasa y el porcentaje de mujeres con infarto de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST tratadas mediante angioplastia primaria y reducir los tiempos totales de isquemia.

Gastrointestinal bleeding of obscure origin or with an intractable cause is particularly common in patients with atrial fibrillation subject to oral anticoagulant therapy. This condition is highly recurrent and therefore gives rise to high morbidity and mortality rates, thus entailing a vicious cycle that is difficult to solve. Percutaneous left atrial appendage closure has become a therapeutic alternative for patients with atrial fibrillation and a contraindication for oral anticoagulation. This technique would allow the discontinuation of oral anticoagulants, thus helping to reduce the risk for gastrointestinal bleeding, and would also be protective against embolic events in this group of patients, thereby eventually breaking this vicious cycle. We report our experience with percutaneous left atrial appendage closure in the management of patients with atrial fibrillation who are subject to oral anticoagulation therapy and suffer from obscure or intractable gastrointestinal bleeding.

La hemorragia digestiva de origen oscuro o de causa no tratable es especialmente frecuente en los pacientes con fibrilación auricular subsidiarios de tratamiento con anticoagulantes orales. Esta condición conlleva una elevada recurrencia, la cual acarrea una elevada morbi-mortalidad, constituyendo un círculo vicioso de difícil solución. El cierre percutáneo de la orejuela de la aurícula izquierda se ha mostrado como una técnica terapéutica alternativa en los pacientes con fibrilación auricular y contraindicación para el tratamiento con anticoagulantes orales. Esta técnica posibilitaría la retirada de la anticoagulación oral, ayudando a disminuir el riesgo de sangrado digestivo, y protegería contra los eventos embólicos en este grupo de pacientes, pudiendo romper finalmente este círculo vicioso. Aquí describimos nuestra experiencia en el cierre percutáneo de la orejuela de la aurícula izquierda para el manejo de los pacientes con fibrilación auricular tributarios de tratamiento con anticoagulantes orales y hemorragia digestiva de origen oscuro o intratable.