| Literature DB >> 34255294 |
Yuya Taguchi1, Shunsuke Kubo2, Akihiro Ikuta2, Kohei Osakada2, Makoto Takamatsu2, Kotaro Takahashi2, Masanobu Ohya2, Takenobu Shimada2, Katsuya Miura2, Ryosuke Murai2, Takeshi Tada2, Hiroyuki Tanaka2, Yasushi Fuku2, Tsuyoshi Goto2, Tatsuhiko Komiya3, Kazushige Kadota2.
Abstract
The clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for left main coronary artery (LMCA) malperfusion caused by acute type A aortic dissection (AAAD) remains largely unexplored. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing PCI for LMCA malperfusion caused by AAAD. We examined nine consecutive patients undergoing PCI for LMCA malperfusion caused by AAAD between 1995 and 2020. The mean age was 55.4 ± 7.7 years. Eight patients presented cardiogenic shock, and five patients cardiopulmonary arrest. Two patients were diagnosed with AAAD before coronary angiography using computed tomography and transthoracic echocardiography, respectively, and in the other seven patients after coronary angiography using other modalities. Four patients underwent PCI on intra-aortic balloon pumping support, and four patients on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) support, including one patient on both. PCI was successful in eight patients, with final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction grade 2 or 3. The four patients on VA-ECMO did not undergo aortic dissection repair due to poor recovery of cardiac function and died during the hospital stay, and the other five patients had successful PCI, underwent aortic dissection repair, and remained alive at 5 year follow-up. In conclusion, LMCA malperfusion caused by AAAD seemed to have clinical presentations and electrocardiogram changes similar to acute coronary syndrome. PCI and subsequent surgical aortic repair saved the lives of all AAAD patients with LMCA malperfusion who had not required VA-ECMO.Entities:
Keywords: Acute type A aortic dissection; Left main coronary artery malperfusion; Percutaneous coronary intervention
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34255294 PMCID: PMC8926951 DOI: 10.1007/s12928-021-00793-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cardiovasc Interv Ther ISSN: 1868-4297
Baseline patient characteristics
| Age, yrs | 55.4 ± 8.2 |
| Men | 8 (89) |
| Body mass index, kg/m2 | 25.1 ± 5.9 |
| History | |
| Hypertension | 6 (67) |
| Dyslipidemia | 3 (33) |
| Diabetes | 0 (0) |
| Smoking | 6 (67) |
| Atrial fibrillation | 1 (11) |
| Prior myocardial infarction | 1 (11) |
| Prior cardiac surgery | 0 (0) |
| Patient status | |
| ST elevation myocardial infarction | 7 (78) |
| Ventricular fibrillation | 5 (56) |
| Cardiogenic shock | 8 (89) |
| Moderate to severe aortic regurgitation | 1 (11) |
| Cardiac tamponade | 0 (0) |
| Laboratory data | |
| Creatinine, mg/dL | 1.13 ± 0.31 |
| Hemoglobin, mg/dL | 12.4 ± 3.5 |
Values are n (%) or mean ± standard deviation
Clinical characteristics and diagnoses
| Case no | Age | Sex | Chief complaint | Electrocardiogram | TTE | pH | BE | D-dimer | Diagnosis before CAG | Diagnostic modality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 52 | M | NA | NA | Asynergy at anteroseptal/posterolateral | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
| Mild aortic regurgitation | ||||||||||
| EF 35% | ||||||||||
| 2 | 49 | F | Chest pain | ST elevation in I, aVL, V1–V4 | Asynergy at anteroseptal | 7.359 | + 1.7 | 0.6 | − | TEE |
| Mild aortic regurgitation | ||||||||||
| EF 40% | ||||||||||
| 3 | 46 | M | Chest pain | ST elevation in I, aVL, V3–V6 | Asynergy at anteroseptal | 7.246 | − 10.0 | 47 | − | AoG |
| Small pericardial effusion | ||||||||||
| EF 20% | ||||||||||
| 4 | 49 | M | Chest pain | ST elevation in I, aVL, V2–V6 | Asynergy at anterolateral | 7.357 | − 2.0 | 2.8 | + | CT |
| EF 25% | ||||||||||
| 5 | 51 | M | Chest pain | ST depression in V2–V6 | Asynergy at anterior | 7.469 | − 4.1 | 0.8 | − | AoG |
| EF 30% | ||||||||||
| 6 | 58 | M | Chest pain | ST elevation in global induction | Asynergy at anteroseptal/posterolateral | NA | NA | NA | − | AoG |
| Mild aortic regurgitation | ||||||||||
| EF 15% | ||||||||||
| 7 | 67 | M | Chest and back pain | ST elevation in I, aVR, aVL, V2–V6 | Asynergy at anteroseptal | 7.379 | − 3.3 | 6.6 | + | TTE |
| Moderate aortic regurgitation | ||||||||||
| Syncope | EF 40% | |||||||||
| Flap | ||||||||||
| 8 | 69 | M | Chest pain | ST elevation in I, aVR, aVL, V1–V6 | Asynergy at anteroseptal/posterolateral | 7.385 | − 11.6 | 671 | − | IVUS |
| Bilateral leg pain | Small pericardial effusion | |||||||||
| EF 30% | ||||||||||
| 9 | 58 | M | Dyspnea | ST elevation in I, aVR, aVL, V1–V5 | Asynergy at anteroseptal/posterolateral | 7.028 | − 20.4 | 346 | − | AoG |
| EF 20% |
AoG aortography, BE base excess, CAG coronary angiography, CT computed tomography, EF ejection fraction, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, NA not available, TEE transesophageal echocardiography, TTE transthoracic echocardiography
Fig. 1Case diagnosed by transthoracic echocardiography (Case 7). The patient had chest pain, back pain, syncope, and ST segment elevation on electrocardiogram (a). ST elevation myocardial infarction was suspected; however, transthoracic echocardiography showed an intimal flap (white arrow) in the ascending aorta, indicating aortic dissection (b). A ventricular fibrillation occurred before computed tomography examination, and we immediately transferred him to the cardiac catheterization laboratory for coronary reperfusion. Aortography showed a mobile flap at the ascending to descending aorta (c), and coronary angiography showed a true lumen in the left main coronary artery to the left anterior descending and left circumflex arteries compressed by the flap (d). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 flow was achieved by deploying two stents in the left main coronary artery to the left anterior descending and left circumflex arteries (e). After percutaneous coronary intervention, total arch replacement was successfully performed [f (before) and g (after)]
Fig. 2Case diagnosed by transesophageal echocardiography (Case 2). The patient had chest pain and anteroseptal ST elevation myocardial infarction on electrocardiogram. Coronary angiography showed a significant stenosis in the left main coronary artery to the left anterior descending artery compressed by an intimal flap (a); however, the flap was not detected by aortography (b). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 3 flow was obtained by stent implantation in the left main coronary artery to the left anterior descending artery (c). After coronary reperfusion, transesophageal echocardiography showed a localized aortic root dissection (white arrow; d and e)
Fig. 3Case diagnosed by intravascular ultrasound (Case 8). The patient had chest pain, bilateral leg pain, and ST-segment elevation on electrocardiogram (a). He fell into cardiopulmonary arrest during transportation to the cardiac catheterization laboratory and required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and a percutaneous left ventricular support device. Coronary angiography showed significant stenosis in the left main coronary artery (b), and intravascular ultrasound showed a true lumen compressed by a false lumen (c). Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) 2 flow was obtained by stent implantation in the left main coronary artery to the left anterior descending artery (d). TL true lumen, FL false lumen
Procedures and outcomes
| Case no | Cardiogenic shock | Systolic blood pressure (mmHg) | CPA | MCS | System | CAG | Neri type | Percutaneous coronary intervention | Onset to balloon time | Final TIMI flow | Peak CK/CK-MB | Surgery | EF at discharge | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | + | NA | − | IABP | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT-LAD stenting (BMS × 2) | NA | 3 | NA | Ascending aorta replacement | NA | Alive |
| 7Fr JL 4.0 ST | #6 99% | CABG (SVG–LAD, SVG–LCx) | ||||||||||||
| 2 | − | 124 | − | – | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT-LAD stenting (BMS × 3) | 183 | 3 | 7017/273 | Closure of the false channel | 49 | Alive |
| 7Fr JL 3.5 ST | #6 99% | KBT | CABG (SVG–LCx) | |||||||||||
| 3 | + | 64 | + | VA-ECMO | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT stenting (BMS) | 278 | 3 | 13,901/300 < | – | – | Dead |
| IABP | 7Fr JL 4.0 ST | |||||||||||||
| 4 | + | 75 | − | IABP | Femoral.A | #5 100% | B | POBA + perfusion catheter for LAD and LCx | 250 | 2 | 9908/203 | Closure of the false channel | 29 | Alive |
| 8Fr JL 4.0 | CABG (SVG–LAD, SVG–LCx) | |||||||||||||
| 5 | + | 65 | − | IABP | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT stenting (BMS) | 153 | 2 | 3282/230 | Hemiarch replacement | 49 | Alive |
| 7Fr JL 5.0 | ||||||||||||||
| 6 | + | 52 | + | VA-ECMO | Femoral.A | #1 100% | C | Failure (guidewire failure) | – | 0 | NA | – | – | Dead |
| 7Fr AL 1.0 | #5 100% | |||||||||||||
| 7 | + | 80 | + | – | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT–LAD stenting (BMS) | 224 | 3 | 4951/213 | Total arch replacement | 48 | Alive |
| 7Fr AL 1.0 | #6 99% | LMT–LCx stenting (BMS) | ||||||||||||
| #11 99% | KBT | |||||||||||||
| 8 | + | 71 | + | VA-ECMO | Femoral.A | #5 99% | B | LMT stenting (DES) | 406 | 2 | NA | – | – | Dead |
| Impella | 7Fr SL 4.0 | |||||||||||||
| 9 | + | 90 | + | VA-ECMO | Brachial.A | #5 99% | B | LMT–LAD stenting (DES) | 206 | 2 | NA | – | – | Dead |
| 7Fr SL 4.0 | #6 99% |
BMS bare metal stent, CABG coronary artery bypass grafting, CK creatine kinase, CK-MB creatine kinase myocardial band, CPA cardiopulmonary arrest, DES drug-eluting stent, EF ejection fraction, IABP intra-aortic balloon pumping, KBT kissing balloon technique, LMT left main trunk, LAD left anterior descending coronary artery, LCx left circumflex coronary artery, MCS mechanical circulatory support, PCI percutaneous coronary intervention, POBA plain old balloon angioplasty, SVG saphenous vein graft; VA-ECMO venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation
Fig. 4Case where percutaneous coronary intervention was unsuccessful (Case 6). The patient had chest pain and ST segment elevation on electrocardiogram. He fell into cardiopulmonary arrest during transportation to the cardiac catheterization laboratory and required venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Aortography showed a mobile flap at the ascending to descending aorta, and coronary angiography showed total occlusion of both the left main coronary artery and right coronary artery (a). Percutaneous coronary intervention was performed but unsuccessful, because the guidewire failed to pass through the true lumen (b)