Faculty Bibliography

Single coronary artery (SCA) is an unusual congenital anomaly, seen by diagnostic coronary angiography. Absence of the right coronary artery (RCA) is one of the rarest coronary artery anomalies occurring when the artery fails to develop in the right atrioventricular (AV) groove. Herein, we describe the case of a 58-year-old man presenting with new onset decompensated congestive heart failure found to have a congenitally absent right coronary ostium. The AV groove extended such that the left circumflex artery supplied the domain of the RCA. Such coronary artery anomalies are rare, and we aim to shed further insight into these congenital processes so that operators may remain vigilant of them in their practice.

Door to balloon (DTB) time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a predictive indicator of outcomes and mortality. Traditional gender-related differences that existed in the provision of DTB in STEMI had been allegedly improving until recent controversial data showed re-emergence of longer DTB in females. The objective of our study was to compare circadian disparities in PCI for STEMI according to gender in our institution. We compared DTB and symptom to balloon (STB) as well as mortality outcomes in a registry of 514 patients. We studied 117 females and 397 males. Baseline characteristics and cardiovascular risk factors were similar among both populations. Men used more self-transportation (51% vs 38%) compared to women. Both had similar DTB median times; males 63 (47-79) min and females 61 (44-76) min. In addition, STB median times were also similar; males: 155 (116-264) min; and females 165 (115-261) min. Mortality outcomes at 1 month were comparable at 3% in males vs 0.9% in females (p=0.164). In a review of a tertiary care center in New York; we observed no gender differences in DTB and STB; endorsing the role of EMS transportation in eliminating disparities.

BACKGROUND:The healthcare burden posed by the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the New York Metropolitan area has necessitated the postponement of elective procedures resulting in a marked reduction in cardiac catheterization laboratory (CCL) volumes with a potential to impact interventional cardiology (IC) fellowship training. METHODS:We conducted a web-based survey sent electronically to 21 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education accredited IC fellowship program directors (PDs) and their respective fellows. RESULTS:Fourteen programs (67%) responded to the survey and all acknowledged a significant decrease in CCL procedural volumes. More than half of the PDs reported part of their CCL being converted to inpatient units and IC fellows being redeployed to COVID-19 related duties. More than two-thirds of PDs believed that the COVID-19 pandemic would have a moderate (57%) or severe (14%) adverse impact on IC fellowship training, and 21% of the PDs expected their current fellows' average percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) volume to be below 250. Of 25 IC fellow respondents, 95% expressed concern that the pandemic would have a moderate (72%) or severe (24%) adverse impact on their fellowship training, and nearly one-fourth of fellows reported performing fewer than 250 PCIs as of March 1st. Finally, roughly one-third of PDs and IC fellows felt that there should be consideration of an extension of fellowship training or a period of early career mentorship after fellowship. CONCLUSIONS:The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a significant reduction in CCL procedural volumes that is impacting IC fellowship training in the NY metropolitan area. These results should inform professional societies and accreditation bodies to offer tailored opportunities for remediation of affected trainees.

Coronary artery aneurysm (CAA) is a rare disease that is associated with dangerous dormant complications. It is associated with atherosclerotic heart disease in half of the cases during a coronary angiogram. Currently, there are no guidelines for the management of such cases. We present a case of acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in a male patient who was found to have diffuse aneurysmal dilation of the coronary arteries along with 100% occlusion of the right coronary artery. The complexity of the lesions caused him not to be a candidate for either percutaneous or surgical intervention. This raises an important question regarding treatment options in such a rare case.

BACKGROUND:The incidence of patients with previous history of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) presenting for aortic valvular replacement has been consistently on the rise. Repeat sternotomy for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) carries an inherent risk of morbidity and mortality when compared to Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). METHODS:The Nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) from 2012 to 2014 was queried using the International Classification of Diseases-Ninth edition, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) codes to identify all patients ≥ 18 years with prior CABG who underwent TAVR (35.05 and 35.06) or SAVR (35.21 and 35.22). Propensity score matching (1:1) was performed and in-hospital outcomes were compared between matched cohorts. RESULTS: < 0.0001) in the above population. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality rates. Compared to SAVR, TAVR was associated with lower risk of stroke (1.2% vs. 3.3%, P = 0.009), AKI (12.9% vs. 21.3%, P < 0.0001), myocardial infarction (0.9% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.01) and major bleeding (9.1% vs. 25.1%, P < 0.0001). TAVR was associated with higher risk of pacemaker implants (9.6% vs. 4.9%, P = 0.001) and trend toward lower risk of vascular complications (2.3% vs. 4.1%, P = 0.05). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this large cohort of patients with previous CABG, there is no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between TAVR and SAVR. TAVR was associated with lower risk of in-hospital outcomes.

BACKGROUND:Bioprosthetic (BP) valves have been increasingly used for aortic valve replacement over the last decade. Due to their limited durability, patients presenting with failed BP valves are rising. Valve in Valve - Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (ViV-TAVI) emerged as an alternative to the gold standard redo-Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement (redo-SAVR). However, the utility of ViV-TAVI is poorly understood. METHODS:A systematic electronic search of the scientific literature was done in PubMed, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Only studies which compared the safety and efficacy of ViV-TAVI and redo-SAVR head to head in failed BP valves were included. RESULTS:Six observational studies were eligible and included 594 patients, of whom 255 underwent ViV- TAVI and 339 underwent redo-SAVR. There was no significant difference between ViV-TAVI and redo- SAVR for procedural, 30 day and 1 year mortality rates. ViV-TAVI was associated with lower risk of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) (OR: 0.43, CI: 0.21-0.89; P = 0.02) and a trend toward increased risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) (OR: 5.45, CI: 0.94-31.58; P = 0.06). There was no significant difference for stroke, major bleeding, vascular complications and postprocedural aortic valvular gradients more than 20 mm-hg. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our results reiterate the safety and feasibility of ViV-TAVI for failed aortic BP valves in patients deemed to be at high risk for surgery. VIV-TAVI was associated with lower risk of permanent pacemaker implantation with a trend toward increased risk of paravalvular leak.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Impella is a catheter-based micro-axial flow pump placed across the aortic valve, and it is currently the only percutaneous left ventricular assist device approved for high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention and cardiogenic shock. Areas Covered: Even though several studies have repeatedly demonstrated the excellent hemodynamic profile of Impella in high-risk settings, it remains underutilized. Here we aim to provide an up-to-date summary of the available literature on Impellas use in High risk settings as well as the practical aspects of its usage. Expert Commentary: Percutaneous coronary interventions in high rsk settings have always been challenging for a physician. Impella 2.5 and CP, have been proven safe, cost effective and feasible in High Risk Percutaneous coronary Interventions with an excellent hemodynamic profile.