Abstract Aims Many patients with coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), particularly from the pandemic’s early phase, have been reported to have evidence of cardiac injury such as cardiac symptoms, troponinaemia, or imaging or ECG abnormalities during their acute course. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) and transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) have been widely used to assess cardiac function and structure and characterize myocardial tissue during COVID-19 with report of numerous abnormalities. Overall, findings have varied, and long-term impact of COVID-19 on the heart needs further elucidation. Methods and results We performed TTE and 3 T CMR in survivors of the initial stage of the pandemic without pre-existing cardiac disease and matched controls at long-term follow-up a median of 308 days after initial infection. Study population consisted of 40 COVID-19 survivors (50% female, 28% Black, and 48% Hispanic) and 12 controls of similar age, sex, and race-ethnicity distribution; 35% had been hospitalized with 28% intubated. We found no difference in echocardiographic characteristics including measures of left and right ventricular structure and systolic function, valvular abnormalities, or diastolic function. Using CMR, we also found no differences in measures of left and right ventricular structure and function and additionally found no significant differences in parameters of tissue structure including T1, T2, extracellular volume mapping, and late gadolinium enhancement. With analysis stratified by patient hospitalization status as an indicator of COVID-19 severity, no differences were uncovered. Conclusion Multimodal imaging of a diverse cohort of COVID-19 survivors indicated no long-lasting damage or inflammation of the myocardium.
Background. There is a high incidence of inconclusive cytopathology at initial EUS-FNA (endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration) for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. To obtain appropriate preoperative or palliative chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer, definitive cytopathology is often required. The utility of repeat EUS-FNA is not well established. Methods . A retrospective cohort study was conducted evaluating the yield of repeat EUS-FNA in determining a cytological diagnosis in patients who had undergone a prior EUS-FNA for diagnosis of suspected malignant pancreatic lesions with inconclusive cytopathology. The wait times to the second procedure and to decisions regarding therapy were calculated. Results. Overall, 45 repeat EUS-FNA procedures were performed over seven years for suspected malignant pancreatic lesions. Cytopathological class (I to IV) changed between first and second EUS-FNA in 32 patients (71%). Of 34 patients with an initially nonconclusive diagnosis, 20 had a conclusive diagnosis (59%) on repeat EUS-FNA. The cumulative yield after repeat EUS-FNA for definite pancreatic adenocarcinoma was 7 (16%). The median time interval between first and second EUS-FNA was 31 (7–175) days. Conclusions . A substantial number of patients had a definitive diagnosis of adenocarcinoma on repeat FNA and were, therefore, subsequently able to access appropriate care.
Introduction: Targeted temperature management (TTM) is a recommended treatment modality to improve neurologic outcomes in patients with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). The impact of the dura...
Aims: The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic review, and where applicable meta-analyses, examining the evidence underpinning the use of targeted temperature management following resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Methods and results: Multiple databases were searched for publications between January 2000–February 2016. Nine Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome questions were developed and meta-analyses were performed when appropriate. Reviewers extracted study data and performed quality assessments using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology, the Cochrane Risk Bias Tool, and the National Institute of Health Study Quality Assessment Tool. The primary outcomes for each Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome question were mortality and poor neurological outcome. Overall, low quality evidence demonstrated that targeted temperature management at 32–36°C, compared to no targeted temperature management, decreased mortality (risk ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.61–0.92) and poor neurological outcome (risk ratio 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.60–0.88) amongst adult survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial shockable rhythm. Targeted temperature management use did not benefit survivors of in-hospital cardiac arrest nor out-of-hospital cardiac arrest survivors with a non-shockable rhythm. Moderate quality evidence demonstrated no benefit of pre-hospital targeted temperature management initiation. Low quality evidence showed no difference between endovascular versus surface cooling targeted temperature management systems, nor any benefit of adding feedback control to targeted temperature management systems. Low quality evidence suggested that targeted temperature management be maintained for 18–24 h. Conclusions: Low quality evidence supports the in-hospital initiation and maintenance of targeted temperature management at 32–36°C amongst adult survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest with an initial shockable rhythm for 18–24 h. The effects of targeted temperature management on other populations, the optimal rate and method of cooling and rewarming, and effects of fever require further study.
The concept of significant lesions has substantially evolved over the last decade. With growing evidence for use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) as a determinant of lesion-specific ischemia and its superiority to angiography-guided revascularization and medical therapy, the field of percutaneous revascularization has shifted to rely exclusively on FFR instead of luminal stenosis alone in guiding revascularization. This transition to physiological assessment has not yet made it to the realm of surgical revascularization. FFR-guided therapy has been shown to be superior to angiography-guided therapy mainly by safe deferral of about 1/3rd of lesions, leading to less periprocedural events and better outcomes. Is it possible that utilization of FFR-guided CABG would lead to less complicated procedures, shorter operating times, more frequent off pump CABG procedures and more hybrid procedures? Can FFR-guided CABG improve the cardiovascular outcomes as compared to current standard of practice? In the following paragraphs we review the concept of FFR, the evidence behind FFR-guided therapy, the emerging data regarding use FFR-guided CABG and discuss where the revascularization field is headed.
