[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) activity has increased more than 6 fold in the last 15 years. Increased demand has been met by PCI centres without on-site surgical facilities. To improve communication between cardiologists and surgeons at a remote centre, we have developed a video conferencing system using standard internet links. The effect of this video data link (VDL) on referral pattern and patient selection for revascularisation was assessed prospectively after introduction of a joint cardiology conference (JCC) using the system.
Between 1st October 2005 and 31st March 2007, 1346 patients underwent diagnostic coronary angiography (CA). Of these, 114 patients were discussed at a cardiology conference (CC) attended by three consultant cardiologists (pre-VDL). In April 2007, the VDL system was introduced. Between 1st April 2007 and 30th September 2008, 1428 patients underwent diagnostic CA. Of these, 120 patients were discussed at a JCC attended by four consultant cardiologists and two consultant cardiothoracic surgeons (post-VDL). Following case-matching for patient demographics and coronary artery disease (CAD) severity and distribution, we assessed the effect upon management decisions arising from both the pre- and post-VDL JCC meetings.
When comparing decision-making outcomes of post-VDL JCC with pre-VDL CC, significantly fewer patients were recommended for PCI (36.8% vs. 17.2% respectively, p = 0.001) and significantly more patients were recommended for surgery (21.1% vs. 48.4% respectively, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in waiting times for PCI following JCC discussion; however, waiting times for surgical revascularisation were significantly reduced (140.9 ± 71.8 days vs. 99.4 ± 56.6 days respectively, p = 0.045). Conclusions: The VDL system provides a highly practical method for PCI centres without onsite surgical cover to discuss complex patients requiring coronary revascularisation and significantly increases the number of patients referred for surgical revascularisation rather than PCI.
International Journal of Clinical Practice 06/2011; 65(6):658-63. · 2.43 Impact Factor
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The practise of catheter ablation for atrial fibrillation (AF) is increasing rapidly and is recommended as the treatment of choice in many patient subgroups. At present, the efficacy of this procedure has been assessed by means of electrocardiographic recording, intermittent Holter monitoring and evaluation of patient symptoms. We sought to evaluate the true efficacy of this procedure in patients with sophisticated permanent pacemakers capable of continuous long-term cardiac rhythm monitoring.
Twenty-five patients (aged 63.7 (9.4), 20 men), seven with persistent AF and 18 with prolonged paroxysmal AF, underwent a mean of 1.7 AF ablation procedures. All the patients had previously been implanted with a pacemaker or atrial defibrillator device. Data were downloaded from the device Holter before catheter ablation and at 2, 4, 6 and 8 months postprocedure(s). The primary outcome measure was AF burden. The secondary outcomes were patient symptom and quality-of-life measures.
Initial AF burden was 43.8 (35.5)%. After catheter ablation(s), this was significantly reduced at 2 months to 23.8 (35.4)% (p=0.023), at 4 months to 21.4 (34.1)% (p=0.008), at 6 months to 14.5 (28.1)% (p=0.002) and at 8 months to 15.0 (29.4%) (p=0.003). Only nine (36%) of 25 patients demonstrated no recurrence of arrhythmia during follow-up completion, consistent with a long-term cure. Quality-of-life indices showed significant improvement after ablation.
Catheter ablation for AF significantly improves patient symptoms and reduces AF burden after long-term beat-to-beat monitoring by implanted cardiac pacemaker and defibrillator devices. However, AF recurrence is common after these procedures.
[show abstract][hide abstract] ABSTRACT: AngioSeal and StarClose are vascular closure devices (VCDs) that can be used following cardiac catheterisation via the femoral artery to achieve haemostasis. Both devices have been demonstrated to be superior to conventional manual pressure, which reduce time to haemostasis and time to patient ambulation. We sought to compare these devices in a prospective, randomised trial.
Patients undergoing elective coronary angiography were randomised to receive either AngioSeal VIP or StarClose VCD with immediate postprocedure mobilisation. Bruising was recorded at 30 min, 60 min and at 1 week postprocedure. Patient satisfaction surveys were taken at 1 h and 1 week postprocedure. Complications for both groups were compared.
Four hundred and one patients were included. Arteriotomy closure was achieved in 144 of 208 (69.2%) patients randomised to AngioSeal and 134 of 193 (69.3%) patients randomised to StarClose (p = ns). There was no significant bruising in either group at either 30 or 60 min postprocedure. However, at 1 week, there was significantly more bruising in the AngioSeal group than the StarClose group (63.1 vs. 38.5cm2, p = 0.02). Patient satisfaction and pain perception with the procedure at closure were not significantly different between the groups. Deployment success and instant mobilisation rates were significantly lower for junior, as compared with senior, operators.
Achievement of haemostasis is similar with both AngioSeal and StarClose. The StarClose vascular closure device results in significantly less bruising at 1 week postprocedure as compared with AngioSeal, with no significant differences in complication rates. Patients' pain perception and satisfaction are similar with both VCDs.
International Journal of Clinical Practice 07/2008; 62(6):912-8. · 2.43 Impact Factor