scholarly journals TCT-282 Feasibility and Safety of Transradial Coronary Intervention Using 6.5 French Sheathless Guiding Catheter during ST-segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome (STEACS) in Patients with Small Radial Artery: A Multi Center Registry.

2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (18) ◽  
pp. B92
Author(s):  
Radi Cheaito ◽  
Hakim Benamer ◽  
Bernard Chevalier ◽  
Youssef Derraz ◽  
Philippe Garot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Radial Artery ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Sheathless Guiding Catheter ◽  
Guiding Catheter

scholarly journals Anticoagulant therapy for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in China: A multi-center observational study

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-huan Gong ◽  
Jin-ming Yu ◽  
Yong Mao ◽  
Da-yi Hu
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Anticoagulant Therapy ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Lower Incidence Rate

Abstract Objective To assess the anticoagulant therapy for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) in China and to offer the rationale for establishing reasonable strategies to improve the prognosis of NSTE-ACS. Methods A total of 1,502 patients with NSTE-ACS were recruited from 28 third-grade hospitals distributed in 14 provinces and cities in China from December 2009 to December 2011. The strategies for diagnosis and treatment, decided by each hospital respectively, were used for further analysis and comparison of medication, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and end points for efficacy and safety assessment at 9 and 30 days following PCI. Results A lower incidence rate (P < 0.05) was noted for efficacy and safety in patients with unstable angina (UA) than those with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTE-MI). The prescription rate of unfractionated heparin (UFH), low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), fondaparinux, PCI, and single medication was 0.61%, 66.42%, 30.61%, 69.64%, and 70.74%, respectively. Conclusion Compared with NSTE-MI, UA is featured with better prognosis, less severity, and different outcome. However, in clinical practice, the therapies for NSTE-MI and UA show no differences, which deserves great attention. In China, the most common anticoagulant therapies for NSTE-ACS are single medication, mainly based on LMWH and PCI.

Sheathless guiding catheter versus “slender” sheath/guiding catheter combination in acute coronary syndrome: a propensity-matched analysis of two downsized devices

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
T Isawa ◽  
K Horie ◽  
T Honda
Keyword(s):  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Radial Artery ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
Artery Occlusion ◽  
Access Site ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Radial Artery Occlusion ◽  
Transradial Pci ◽  
Sheathless Guiding Catheter ◽  
Guiding Catheter

Abstract Purpose We investigated the differences between a sheathless guiding catheter and a Glidesheath slender/guiding catheter combination regarding access-site complications in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods We enrolled consecutive 1108 patients undergoing transradial primary PCI for ACS at our hospital using either a 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheter (Sheathless group) or a 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination (Glidesheath group); 1:1 propensity score matching was performed, and 718 subjects (359 in each group) were included in the propensity-matched sample. Results Compared with the Sheathless group, the Glidesheath group had significantly less frequent ultrasound-diagnosed radial artery occlusion at 30 days (Sheathless: 4.7% vs. Glidesheath: 1.4%, p=0.015). No significant differences were observed in severe radial spasm (Sheathless: 1.4% vs. Glidesheath: 2.0%, p=0.77) or access-site bleeding (Sheathless: 9.8% vs. Glidesheath: 8.6%, p=0.70). Conclusion Thus, 7-Fr Glidesheath slender/7-Fr guiding catheter combination is clearly more advantageous than 7.5-Fr sheathless guiding catheters for decreased risk of radial artery occlusion in transradial PCI for ACS. “Sheathless” vs. “Glidesheath slender” Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

Should the primary percutaneous coronary intervention pathway be redesigned?

2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (8) ◽  
pp. 1-15
Author(s):  
Sue Dean
Keyword(s):  
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Acute Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Coronary Artery ◽  
Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention ◽  
Coronary Intervention ◽  
St Segment Elevation ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
St Segment ◽  
Percutaneous Coronary ◽  
Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background/Aims The primary percutaneous coronary intervention pathway for patients experiencing an ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome excludes patients with aVR ST elevation. These patients are treated on the non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome pathway, which means that they have a coronary angiogram +/− intervention during their inpatient stay. Patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome have worse outcomes nationally. As such, research is required to demonstrate areas for improvement. This article examines the association between aVR ST segment elevation on the electrocardiogram and significant left main stem, proximal left anterior descending, or 3-vessel coronary artery stenosis in acute coronary syndrome to establish whether the primary percutaneous coronary intervention pathway should be redesigned. Methods Existing literature was searched, and relevant studies were considered and evaluated. Data were collected within local NHS Trusts on patients who had aVR ST segment elevation on the electrocardiogram. The data were analysed, and the findings were compared and synthesised with the literature. Results The study demonstrated a relationship between aVR ST segment elevation and significant disease. However, because of the numbers involved, analysis to demonstrate statistical significance was not possible, with the exception of aVR ST segment elevation and left main stem coronary artery, left anterior descending coronary artery and triple vessel disease, where p<0.05 in the population with left main stem coronary artery occlusion +/− other disease. The study demonstrated that aVR ST segment elevation should be treated as an ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome equivalent, as it is a high-risk finding. These patients should go immediately to the cardiac catheter laboratory for a primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Conclusion The need for a change in the primary percutaneous coronary intervention pathway was established.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document