CRUSADE score is a good predictor for major bleeding in Egyptian patients with ACS. It is applicable in UA/NSTEMI as well as in STEMI patients and in women as well as in men.
Even in the absence of hypertension, MetS patients had significantly higher LV wall thickness, LV mass and LVMI, and incidence of LVH than control subjects.
Background: The benefit and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to chronic total occlusions (CTO) in patients with low and mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) continue to be evidence limited. The aim of our study was to investigate the impact of LVEF in patients undergoing CTO PCI and to evaluate the mid-term clinical outcome of those with low and mid-range LVEF. We assessed the periprocedural and mid-term outcomes of 75 patients undergoing CTO PCIs according to pre-procedural LVEF: group (N), ≥ 50% (normal, nom.= 25); group (M), 40-49% (mid-range, nom.= 25); and group (L), < 40% (low, nom.= 25); within 6 months of follow-up. Results: The prevalence of DM and chronic kidney disease (CKD) was significantly higher in low LVEF group (60%, p = 0.04 and 48%, p = 0.01 respectively). Apart from significantly lower contrast volume in patients with low LVEF (p = 0.04), there was no significant difference between the three groups regarding the procedural time, SYNTAX score and J-CTO score. We noticed similar procedural success in the three groups (88% vs. 84% vs. 76%, p = 0.521). LVEF category failed to predict procedural success (OR = 0.652, p = 0.268). There was a highly significant improvement in angina 6 months following intervention in normal LVEF group (p value < 0.001). Grade of dyspnea significantly improved 6 months following intervention in mid-range LVEF and low LVEF groups (p value = 0.04 and 0.031 respectively). There was no significant difference between the three groups regarding the reported MACCEs (12% vs. 16% vs. 28%, p = 0.268). Conclusion: CTO PCI represents an efficient and safe strategy in patients with low and mid-range LVEFs. Mid-term outcomes in these patients were significantly improved following successful CTO PCI, without higher risk of MACCE at 6 months follow-up.
BackgroundCoronary artery disease (CAD) is a leading cause of morbidity and death. Early diagnosis of patients with left main and/or three-vessel disease (LM/3VD) among acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients is beneficial. The relation between erectile dysfunction (ED) and cardiovascular diseases was previously noticed. The aim of our work was to find out if the severity of ED could predict the presence of LM/3VD in ACS patients.Patients and methodsEighty-five male patients with ACS were included in the study. Clinical assessment, estimation of international index of erectile function (IIEF) score, and coronary angiography were performed in all patients. Gensini score was calculated to assess the severity of CAD. Based on IIEF score, the patients were divided into two groups: Group 1: patients with mild or no ED (IIEF score ≥17), Group 2: patients with moderate or severe ED (IIEF score <17).ResultsPatients with IIEF score <17 had significantly higher prevalence of LM CAD (4.3% versus 18.4%, p = 0.035), 3VD (17% versus 39.5%, p = 0.021) and LM/3VD (21.3% versus 55.3%, p = 0.0012), as well as higher mean Gensini score (23.5 ± 10.8 versus 34.1 ± 12.7, p = 0.0001). The independent predictors of LM/3VD in order of significance were: age, heart rate, IIEF <17, Killip class >1, and ST-depression or ST-elevation in lead aVR ≥1 mV. There was a significant negative correlation between IIEF score and Gensini score (r = −0.383, p = 0.0003).ConclusionThe presence of moderate or severe ED in men with ACS is associated with higher Gensini score and more incidence of LM/3VD. IIEF score <17 was an independent predictor of LM/3VD.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.