One-year access to more than 500 world journals available in the system
-
http://medilib.ir
- Duration of Time : 365 Day
Price : 300$- Special Price : 100$
Inside This Issue
doi : 10.1016/S1936-8798(21)00732-9
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages A11-A15
Mechanical Circulatory Support as a Bridge to Definitive Treatment in Post-Infarction Ventricular Septal Rupture
DanieleRoncoMDabMatteoMatteucciMDabJustine M.RavauxMDaSilviaMarracdFedericaTorchioMDabClaudioCorazzariMDabGiulioMassimiMDabCesareBeghiMDbJosMaessenMD, PhDaRobertoLorussoMD, PhDae
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.046
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1053-1066
Ventricular septal rupture (VSR) represents a rare complication of acute myocardial infarction, often presenting with cardiogenic shock and associated with high in-hospital mortality despite prompt intervention. Although immediate surgery is recommended for patients who cannot be effectively stabilized, the ideal timing of intervention remains controversial. Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) may allow hemodynamic stabilization and delay definitive treatment even in critical patients. However, the interactions between MCS and VSR pathophysiology as well as potentially related adverse effects remain unclear. A systematic review was performed, from 2000 onward, to identify reports describing MCS types, effects, complications, and outcomes in the pre-operative VSR-related setting. One hundred eleven studies (2,440 patients) were included. Most patients had well-known negative predictors (e.g., cardiogenic shock, inferior infarction). Almost all patients had intra-aortic balloon pumps, with additional MCS adopted in 129 patients (77.5% being venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation). Mean MCS bridging time was 6 days (range: 0 to 23 days). In-hospital mortality was 50.4%, with the lowest mortality rate in the extracorporeal membrane oxygenation group (29.2%). MCS may enhance hemodynamic stabilization and delayed VSR treatment. However, the actual effects and interaction of the MCS-VSR association should be carefully assessed to avoid further complications or incorrect MCS-VSR coupling.
Multivessel Versus Culprit-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock
Mohamed A.OmerMD, MSaEmmanouil S.BrilakisMD, PhDbKevin F.KennedyMScMohamadAlkhouliMDaIslam Y.ElgendyMDdPaul S.ChanMD, MSceJohn A.SpertusMD, MPHe
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.021
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1067-1078
The aim of this study was to compare in-hospital outcomes and long-term mortality of multivessel versus culprit vessel–only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), multivessel disease (MVD) and cardiogenic shock.
Nonculprit Disease in Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock?
M. BilalIqbalMD, PhD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.064
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1079-1081
Outcomes of Drug-Eluting Stent Thrombosis After Treatment for Acute Versus Chronic Coronary Syndrome
FumiYamamotoMDa?MasahiroNatsuakiMD, PhDb?ShoichiKuramitsuMD, PhDcMasanobuOhyaMD, PhDdHiromasaOtakeMD, PhDeKazunoriHorieMDfFutoshiYamanakaMDgHirokiShiomiMD, PhDhGakuNakazawaMD, PhDiKenjiAndoMDcKazushigeKadotaMD, PhDdShigeruSaitoMDgTakeshiKimuraMD, PhDhKoichiNodeMD, PhDbREAL-ST Registry Investigators
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.051
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1082-1090
The primary objective of the current analysis was to assess the association between the clinical presentation at index procedure and mortality in patients with second-generation drug-eluting stent thrombosis (G2-ST).
Stent Thrombosis in Patients Treated for Acute or Chronic Coronary Syndrome?
AdnanKastratiMDabJ.J.CoughlanMB BChbCostanzaPellegriniMDb
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.04.014
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1091-1093
Cancer Patients Have a Higher Risk of Thrombotic and Ischemic Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
WeiGuoMDa?XiminFanMDb?Bradley R.LewisMScMatthew P.JohnsonMScCharanjit S.RihalMDdAmirLermanMDdJoergHerrmannMDd
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.049
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1094-1105
This study sought to define the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) and myocardial infarction (MI) in cancer patients compared with noncancer patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Adding Precision to Defining Bleeding and Ischemic Risk With PCI in Cancer Patients?
BonnieKyMD, MSCEabcAlexander C.FanaroffMD, MHSade
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.04.011
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1106-1108
Association Between Timing of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Clinical Outcomes in Refractory Cardiogenic Shock
Hyeok-HeeLeeMDabHyeon ChangKimMD, PhDabChul-MinAhnMD, PhDbSeung-JunLeeMD, PhDbSung-JinHongMD, PhDbJeong HoonYangMD, PhDcJung-SunKimMD, PhDbByeong-KeukKimMD, PhDbYoung-GukKoMD, PhDbDonghoonChoiMD, PhDdHyeon-CheolGwonMD, PhDcMyeong-KiHongMD, PhDbYangsooJangMD, PhDb
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.048
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1109-1119
The aim of this study was to investigate whether earlier extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock (CS).
Left Ventricular Support for the Management of Cardiogenic Shock: Sooner May Be Better?
E. MagnusOhmanMDaBrittany A.ZwischenbergerMDbHolgerThieleMDc
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.04.016
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1120-1122
1-Year Results From the RANGER II SFA Randomized Trial of the Ranger Drug-Coated Balloon
RavishSacharMDaYoshimitsuSogaMDbMohammad M.AnsariMDcAmaneKozukiMDdLouisLopezMDeMarianneBrodmannMDfHermanSchroëMDgVijay S.RamanathMDhJuanDiaz-CartelleMDiThomasZellerMDjRANGER II SFA Investigators
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.021
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1123-1133
This study sought to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Ranger drug-coated balloon (DCB) (paclitaxel dose density 2 ?g/mm2) for treating superficial femoral artery or proximal popliteal artery lesions.
The Ranger “Low-Dose” Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloon: Is Less Really More??
Krishna J.Rocha-SinghMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.04.006
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1134-1136
Clinical Impact of Stent Graft Thrombosis in Femoropopliteal Arterial Lesions
ShigeoIchihashiMDaMitsuyoshiTakaharaMDbOsamuIidaMDcKenjiSuzukiMDdTerutoshiYamaokaMDeKojiMaedaMDfKazukiTobitaMDgTairaKobayashiMDhTatsuyaNakamaMDiMasamiShingakiMDjShunsukeOzakiMDkDaisukeAkagiMDlYoshimitsuSogaMDmShinichiIwakoshiMDaNaokiFujimuraMDnKimihikoKichikawaMDa
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.030
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1137-1147
This study sought to elucidate the clinical impact and prognosis of stent graft (SG) thrombosis.
Stent Graft Thrombosis in Femoropopliteal Arterial Lesions?
Eline Suzannevan HattumMDConstantijnHazenbergMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.04.023
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1148-1150
Novel Cinematic Rendering Use for Ventricular Septal Ruptures: “The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly”
Eduardo A.AriasMDaJuan PabloSandovalMDaJulio I.Farjat-PasosMDaHugoRodr?guez-ZanellaMDbRegina de laMora-CervantesMDc
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.032
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1151-1153
Multiple Distal Saccular Coronary Aneurysms Associated With Pheochromocytoma
SamuelLarue-GrondinMDaBernardChevalierMDbFabriceIeroncigMDcBenoitTremblayMDa
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.01.044
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1154-1156
Optical Frequency Domain Images of 3 Unique Femoral Artery Stents at 5 Months After Implantation
JunYoshimuraMDaMasayoshiKimuraMDaNarikoIkemuraMDbTakahisaSawadaMD, PhDa
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.12.015
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages e105-e106
Multimodality Imaging Approach for Transcatheter Closure of an Unroofed Coronary Sinus With a Covered Stent
DanielDuarteMDaPatcharapongSuntharosMDbJuan C.MunizMDaLourdes R.PrietoMDa
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2020.12.019
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages e107-e110
Rapid Transcoronary Pacing to Facilitate Ostial Stent Placement
KhaledMallekMD, PhDabRichard T.DaltonBMBSaNileshPareekMA, MBBSabRafalDworakowskiPhDab
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.010
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages e111-e112
Acute Compressive Coronary Artery Disease Due to Left Atrial Appendage Epicardial Occlusion
MohammedMhannaMDaSalikNazirMDbP. KasiRamanathanMDcJohn R.LetcherMDcMichael G.MorontMDd
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.01.018
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages e113-e114
Superior Mesenteric Artery Calcific Chronic Total Occlusion Recanalized With Retrograde Guidance and a Covered Stent
YosukeKiriiMDaMasayoshiKimuraMDaYukiMatsubaraMDbKinyaMatsubaraMD, PhDcTakahisaSawadaMD, PhDa
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.01.019
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages e115-e116
Meta-Analysis: Valve-in-Valve TAVR Versus Redo SAVR
BriceNoutheMDCM, MScJean JacquesNoubiapMD, MMedValery S.EffoeMS
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.001
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Page 1157
Reply: Meta-Analysis: Valve-in-Valve TAVR Versus Redo SAVR
Michel Pompeu B.O.S?MD, MSc, PhDJefVan den EyndeBScMatheusSimonatoMDPhilippePibarotDMV, PhDMarie-AnnickClavelDVM, PhDcoauthors
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.029
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1157-1158
Low HbA1c Level and High Mortality: A Reversal of Cause and Effect?
AtsushiTanakaMD, PhDKoichiNodeMD, PhD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.006
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1158-1159
Can HbA1c Levels Be Used as a Prognostic Tool for Patients Undergoing Coronary Interventions?
Amrutha VarshiniKoppulaiBScMomna SajjadRajaiBScMahmoodAhmadMBBS
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.012
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Page 1159
Reply: Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes According to HbA1c Levels
Samin K.SharmaMDUsmanBaberMD, MSLorenzoAzzaliniMD, PhD, MSc
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.046
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1159-1160
Prevention of Radial Artery Occlusion: Don't Forget the Basics
AdelAminianMDMaarten A.H.van LeeuwenMDJuan F.IglesiasMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.002
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1160-1161
When Distal Has Become Proximal
ThierryCorcosMDGregory A.SguegliaMD, PhD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.008
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Page 1161
Distal Radial Access for Preserving the Proximal Radial Artery: Is the Jury Out Yet?
YashasviChughMDSunitaChughMDSanjay KumarChughMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.013
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Page 1162
Reply: Distal Radial Artery Approach to Prevent Radial Artery Occlusion
GueringEid-LidtMDAgustin RiveraRodr?guezMDJoaqu?n JimenezCastellanosMDJulio I.Farjat PasosMDJorgeGasparMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.038
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1162-1163
Randomized Clinical Trial of Surgical Versus Percutaneous Versus Hybrid Multivessel Coronary Revascularization: 3 Years’ Follow-Up
Vladimir I.GanyukovMD, PhDNikita A.KocherginMD, PhDAleksandr A.ShilovMD, PhDRoman S.TarasovMD, PhDJanSkupienMD, PhD, MPHKirill A.KozyrinMD, PhDOlga L.BarbarashMD, PhDPiotrMusialekMD, DPhil
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.02.037
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1163-1165
Assessment of 5-Year Mortality Outcomes for Femoropoliteal Interventions Using Drug-Eluting Devices in the REAL-PTX Study
TimWittigMDThomasZellerMDMarcBosiersMDPatrickPeetersMDSteffenBrucksMDYvonneBausbackMDAndrejSchmidtMDDierkScheinertMDSabineSteinerMD
doi : 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.03.035
Volume 14, Issue 10, 24 May 2021, Pages 1165-1168
