Subclinical diastolic impairment without systolic involvement was observed in patients with SARS. This impairment may be reversible on clinical recovery.

Background Intracoronary imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) allows better delineation of lesion characteristics and more accurate vessel sizing compared with angiogram alone. However, the benefit and safety of its use in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is uncertain. Purpose To determine whether the use of intracoronary imaging with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT)/ optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) in PPCI is associated with better outcome. Method From Jan 2014 to Dec 2018, all patients with PPCI performed in our hospital were retrospectively studied. Baseline and procedural characteristics of angiographic-guided versus imaging-guided PCI were analyzed. Primary endpoint was target vessel failure, and procedural outcomes were contrast volume, number of stents implanted, mean stent length and diameter and use of post-dilatation. Safety outcomes were post-operative acute kidney injury (AKI), need for renal replacement therapy (RRT) and occurrence of no/slow reflow. Results A total of 408 patients were included, of which 223 (54.7%) used IVUS (n=176 80.3%) or OCT/OFDI (n=44 19.7%) during the procedure. Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar between both groups except more patients had history of PCI (12.6% vs 4.3% p=0.004) and left-main/ bifurcation lesions (12.6% vs 2.7% p<0.001). Intra-coronary imaging was associated with less target vessel failure during a median follow up of 22 months (Hazard ratio (HR): 0.59; 95% Confidence interval (CI): 0.36–0.97; p=0.036). Patients who had intra-coronary imaging during PPCI received more post-dilatation (77.1% vs 55.1% p<0.001), had longer (53mm vs 42mm p<0.001) and more stents (2 vs 1.67 p=0.003) implanted but had more contrast injected (151.2ml vs 130.6ml p=0.002). There was no statistically significant difference in mean stent diameter (3.07mm vs 3.02mm p=0.53), occurrence of slow/now reflow (15.3% vs 18.4% p=0.409), incidence of AKI (7.2% vs 10.8% p=0.197) or need for RRT (3.1% vs 5.4% p=0.254) between both groups. Conclusion Use of intra-vascular imaging during PPCI was associated with less target vessel failure, longer and more stents implanted and more frequent use of post-dilatation. Further prospective randomized controlled trial is suggested to confirm this benefit. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

On Behalf Cardiac Team, Department of Medicine, Queen Elizabeth Hospital Background Management of significant pericardial effusion in cancer patients is controversial. These patients have poor prognosis, and avoiding unnecessary intervention is important. Close monitoring of symptoms and echocardiogram is often a reasonable option, but inherits risk of cardiac tamponade. Whether pericardial drainage by means of percutaneous pericardiocentesis or surgical pericardiotomy could prevent future deterioration or affect survival is unknown. Purpose To evaluate the benefit of elective pericardial drainage in malignancy associated pericardial effusion without echocardiographic or clinical evidence of tamponade effect. Methods From 1st Jul 2014 to 31st Dec 2017, all patients with new onset malignancy-associated pericardial effusion with size more than 1cm were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with clinical or echocardiographic evidence of cardiac tamponade were excluded. We compared pericardial drainage versus monitoring for short-term (30-day), mid-term (90-day) and long term (1 year) survival without need for drainage. Results 101 patients were retrospectively analyzed. 40 (39.6%) patients underwent drainage. Overall median survival free from drainage was 4 months. There were no significant difference in short-term (30-day), mid-term (90-day) and long term (1-year) survival free from drainage or mortality between treatment and monitoring group. Size of pericardial effusion did not predict mortality or future need of drainage. Chemotherapy was associated with improved 30-day mortality (RR 0.53 CI 0.32-0.87 p = 0.025) but not survival free from drainage or longer term mortality. Conclusion Close monitoring could be a feasible strategy in cancer patients with significant pericardial effusion without tamponade effect. Baseline characteristics Factor Drainage (n = 40) monitoring (n = 61) p-value method of drainage pericardiocentesis alone 17 NA pericardiotomy alone 13 both 10 Male 19 (47.5%) 27 (44.3%) 0.749 mean size (cm) 1.93 2.77 <0.001 mean age 60.9 63.1 0.357 on chemotherapy 27 (67.5%) 38 (62.3%) 0.593 Abstract 224 Figure. Survival free from drainage