No abstract

Multiple new recommendations have been introduced in the 2020 ESC guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes with a focus on diagnosis, prognosis, and management of patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation. Most recommendations are supported by high-quality scientific evidence. The guidelines provide solutions to overcome obstacles presumed to complicate a convenient interpretation of troponin results such as age-, or sex-specific cutoffs, and to give practical advice to overcome delays of laboratory reporting. However, in some areas, scientific support is less well documented or even missing, and other areas are covered rather by expert opinion or subjective recommendations. We aim to provide a critical appraisal on several recommendations, mainly related to the diagnostic and prognostic assessment, highlighting the discrepancies between Guideline recommendations and the existing scientific evidence.

Coronary perforation is a potentially fatal complication during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Reports have shown that it occurs in 0.2 to 0.6% of all patients undergoing the procedures. [1-3] Though the frequency of coronary perforation is low, it is a serious and potentially life-threatening situation that warrants prompt recognition and management. Here we illustrate a case of coronary perforation, and review the incidence, causes, clinical sequelae and management of coronary perforation in the current contemporary practice.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with poorer short and long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Even after the commencement of haemodialysis in end stage renal failure patients, mortality exceeds 20% in the first year1. More than 50% of these deaths are contributed by cardiovascular diseases (CVD), of which 20% are caused by acute myocardial infarction2. Consequent to these findings, the degree and impact of coronary revascularization on CKD patients represents a clinical challenge, especially in the setting of advanced stages of CKD.

Background More than half of the world’s population lives in Asia. With current life expectancies in Asian countries, the burden of cardiovascular disease is increasing exponentially. Overcrowding in the emergency departments (ED) has become a public health problem. Since 2015, the European Society of Cardiology recommends the use of a 0/1-h algorithm based on high-sensitivity cardiac troponin (hs-cTn) for rapid triage of patients with suspected non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). However, these algorithms are currently not recommended by Asian guidelines due to the lack of suitable data. Methods The DROP-Asian ACS is a prospective, stepped wedge, cluster-randomized trial enrolling 4260 participants presenting with chest pain to the ED of 12 acute care hospitals in five Asian countries (UMIN; 000042461). Consecutive patients presenting with suspected acute coronary syndrome between July 2022 and Apr 2024 were included. Initially, all clusters will apply “usual care” according to local standard operating procedures including hs-cTnT but not the 0/1-h algorithm. The primary outcome is the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, unstable angina, or unplanned revascularization within 30 days. The difference in MACE (with one-sided 95% CI) was estimated to evaluate non-inferiority. The non-inferiority margin was prespecified at 1.5%. Secondary efficacy outcomes include costs for healthcare resources and duration of stay in ED. Conclusions This study provides important evidence concerning the safety and efficacy of the 0/1-h algorithm in Asian countries and may help to reduce congestion of the ED as well as medical costs.