BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome due to coronary artery embolism in the setting of ascending aortic thrombus is an uncommon condition, even rarer when there is no aortic pathology such as aneurysm, severe atherosclerosis, aortic dissection, or thrombophilia (whether inherited or acquired).
METHODS: We report a case of a 58-year-old male presented with acute chest pain, electrocardiogram showing non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. The computed tomography angiography of coronary artery revealed a mural thrombus in the proximal part of ascending aorta, located above the left coronary artery ostium, without any aortic pathologies. With the exception of hypertension and cigarette smoking, no other risk factors were identified in this patient that may increase the risk of thrombosis. Given the life-threatening risk of interventional therapy and surgery, the patient determinedly opted for anticoagulant and dual antiplatelet therapy. Then he experienced the reoccurrence of chest pain after 6-day treatment, progressed to anterior and inferior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Coronary artery embolism originating from the ascending aortic thrombus was suspected. Considering the hemodynamic instability of the patient, the medical treatment was continued and bridged to warfarin and aspirin after discharge. Follow-up computed tomography angiography at 6 months showed no obstruction in coronary artery and complete resolution of the thrombus. No thromboembolic events occurred henceforward.
CONCLUSIONS: Acute coronary syndrome could be a manifestation of secondary coronary embolism due to ascending aortic thrombus. Currently, there is no standardized guideline for the treatment of aortic mural thrombus, individualized treatment is recommended. When surgical therapy is not applicable for the patient, anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet treatment are alternative treatments that may successfully lead to the resolution of the aortic thrombus.

UNASSIGNED: Anticoagulants play a vital role as part of the antithrombotic therapy of myocardial infarction and are complementary to antiplatelet therapies. In the acute setting, the rationale for their use is to antagonize the ongoing clotting cascade including during percutaneous coronary intervention. Anticoagulation may be an important part of the longer-term antithrombotic strategy especially in patients who have other existing indications (e.g. atrial fibrillation) for their use.
UNASSIGNED: In this narrative review, the authors provide a contemporary summary of the anticoagulation strategies of patients presenting with NSTEMI, both in terms of anticoagulation during the acute phase as well as suggested antithrombotic regimens for patients who require long-term anticoagulation for other indications.
UNASSIGNED: Patients presenting with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) should be initiated on anticoagulation (e.g. heparin/low molecular weight heparin) for the initial hospitalization period for those medically managed or until percutaneous coronary intervention. Longer term management of NSTEMI for patients with an existing indication for long-term anticoagulation should comprise triple antithrombotic therapy of anticoagulant (preferably DOAC) with aspirin and clopidogrel for up to 1 month (typically 1 week or until hospital discharge), followed by DOAC plus clopidogrel for up to 1 year, and then DOAC monotherapy thereafter.

UNASSIGNED: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) comprises a spectrum of diseases ranging from unstable angina (UA), non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (non-STEMI) and ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Treatment of ACS without STEMI (NSTEMI-ACS) can vary, depending on the severity of presentation and multiple other factors.
UNASSIGNED: Analyze the NSTEMI-ACS patients in our institution.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective observational.
UNASSIGNED: A tertiary care institution with accredited chest pain center.
UNASSIGNED: The travel time from ED booking to the final disposition for patients presenting with chest pain was retrieved over a period of 6 months. The duration of each phase of management was measured with a view to identify the factors that influence their management and time from the ED to their final destination. The data was analyzed using descriptive statistics.
UNASSIGNED: Travel time from ED to final destination.
UNASSIGNED: 300 patients.
UNASSIGNED: The majority of patients were males (64%) between 61 and 80 years of age (45%). The median disposition time (from ED booking to admission order by the cardiology team) was 5 hours and 19 minutes. Cardiology admissions took 10 hours and 20 minutes from ED booking to the inpatient bed. UA was diagnosed in 153 (51%) patients and non-STEMI in 52 (17%). Coronary catheterization was required in 79 (26%) patients, 24 (8%) had coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and 8 (3%) had both catheterization and CABG.
UNASSIGNED: The time from ED booking to final destination for NSTEMI-ACS patients is delayed due to multiple factors, which caused significant delays in overall management. Additional interventional steps can help improve the travel times, diagnosis, management and disposition of these patients.
UNASSIGNED: Single center study done in a tertiary care center so the results from this study may not be extrapolated to other centers.

The cardiotoxic effects of synthetic cathinones remain largely unknown. In this study, we present two cases, a case series and a scoping review, to explore synthetic cathinone associated cardiotoxicity. Case 1 involved a 28-year-old male with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction after ingesting a substance containing 4-methylmethcathinone (4-MMC), 3-methylmethcathinon (3-MMC), and methcathinone. Case 2 involved a 49-year-old male with ventricular fibrillation after 4-methylmethcathinone ingestion, who was diagnosed with severe three-vessel disease. A retrospective analysis was performed on self-reported synthetic cathinone poisonings reported to the Dutch Poisons Information Centre from 2012 to 2022. A total of 222 mono-intoxications with cardiotoxicity were included, mostly involving 3-methylmethcathinon (63%). Often tachycardia, hypertension, palpitations, and chest pain were reported. A comprehensive literature search was performed on PubMed to identify the studies reporting cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, cardiac inflammation, cardiomyopathy, and life-threatening arrhythmias following synthetic cathinone use. A total of 30 articles reporting 40 cases were included. The reported complications included cardiac arrest (n = 28), ventricular tachycardia (n = 4), supraventricular tachycardia (n = 1), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (n = 2), non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (n = 2), cardiomyopathy (n = 1), and myocarditis (n = 2). A total of ten different associated synthetic cathinones were identified. Cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, and ventricular arrhythmias have been reported following the use of synthetic cathinones, underscoring the importance of obtaining a detailed recreational drug use history from patients presenting with syncope, chest pain, or palpitations.

The prevalence of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients underscores the need for optimal revascularization strategies. The ongoing debate surrounding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid interventions, or medical-only management adds complexity to decision-making, particularly in specific angiographic scenarios. The article critically reviews existing literature, providing evidence-based perspectives on non-culprit lesion revascularization in ACS. Emphasis is placed on nuances such as the selection of revascularization methods, optimal timing for interventions, and the importance of achieving completeness in revascularization. The debate between culprit-only revascularization and complete revascularization is explored in detail, focusing on ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), including patients with cardiogenic shock. Myocardial revascularization guidelines and recent clinical trials support complete revascularization strategies, either during the index primary PCI or within a short timeframe following the culprit lesion PCI (in both STEMI and NSTEMI). The article also addresses the complexities of decision-making in NSTEMI patients with multivessel CAD, advocating for immediate multivessel PCI unless complex coronary lesions require a staged revascularization approach. Finally, the article provided contemporary data on chronic total occlusion revascularization in ACS patients, highlighting the prognostic impact. In conclusion, the article addresses the evolving challenges of managing multivessel CAD in ACS patients, enhancing thoughtful integration into the clinical practice of recent data. We provided evidence-based, individualized approaches to optimize short- and long-term outcomes. The ongoing refinement of clinical and interventional strategies for non-culprit lesion management remains dynamic, necessitating careful consideration of patient characteristics, coronary stenosis complexity, and clinical context.

Atorvastatin is widely recommended for long-term secondary prevention in STEMI patients with no contraindication. Although high-dose atorvastatin has been shown to reduce important patient outcomes such as MACE, there is still doubt that high-dose atorvastatin could have the same protective effect in patients undergoing PCI in the short and long term. We searched the following electronic databases: Scopus, Web of Science, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central considering studies that enrolled adult patients with a confirmed diagnosis of STEMI or NSTEMI undergoing PCI. The intervention must have been atorvastatin alone compared to a placebo, standard care, or a different atorvastatin dose. A total of (n = 11) studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Information on (N = 5,399) patients was available; 2,654 were assigned to receive high-dose atorvastatin therapy, and 2,745 comprised the control group. High-dose atorvastatin pre-loading significantly reduced MACE at one month of follow-up (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.67-0.91; p = 0.014) in both STEMI and NSTEMI. All-cause mortality was reduced in patients with STEMI (RR: 0.28; 95% CI: 0.10-0.81; p = 0.029). The quality of the body of evidence was rated overall as moderate. Patients presenting with STEMI or NSTEMI benefit from high-dose atorvastatin pre-loading before PCI by reducing MACE at 30 days. The use of high-dose atorvastatin in STEMI patients reduced all-cause mortality. The beneficial effects of atorvastatin pre-loading are limited to 30 days post-PCI.

Multivessel disease (MVD) affects approximately 50% of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and is significantly burdened by poor outcomes and high mortality. It represents a clinical challenge in patient management and decision making and subtends an evolving research area related to the pathophysiology of unstable plaques and local or systemic inflammation. The benefits of complete revascularization are established in hemodynamically stable ACS patients with MVD, and guidelines provide some reference points to inform clinical practice, based on an evidence level that is solid for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and less robust for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. However, several areas of uncertainty remain, such as the optimal timing for complete revascularization or the best guiding strategy for intermediate stenoses. We performed a systematic review of current evidence in the field of percutaneous revascularization in ACS and MVD, also including future perspectives from ongoing trials that will directly compare different timing strategies and investigate the role of invasive and noninvasive guidance techniques. (Complete percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; CRD42022383123).

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have traditionally been excluded from randomized trials. We aimed to compare percutaneous coronary intervention versus conservative management, and early intervention (EI; within 24 hours of admission) versus delayed intervention (DI; after 24 to 72 hours of admission) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and concomitant CKD. An electronic literature search was performed to search for studies comparing invasive management to conservative management or EI versus DI in patients with NSTEMI with CKD. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury (AKI) or dialysis, major bleeding, and recurrent MI. Hazard ratios (HRs) for the primary outcome and odds ratios for secondary outcomes were pooled in random-effects meta-analyses. Eleven studies (140,544 patients) were analyzed. Invasive management was associated with lower mortality than conservative management (HR 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 0.67, p <0.001, I2 = 47%), with consistent benefit across all CKD stages, except CKD 5. There was no significant mortality difference between EI and DI, but subgroup analyses showed significant benefit for EI in stage 1 to 2 CKD (HR 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.58 to 0.97, p = 0.03, I2 = 0%), with no significant difference in stage 3 and 4 to 5 CKD. Invasive strategy was associated with higher odds of AKI or dialysis and major bleeding, but lower odds of recurrent MI compared with conservative management. In conclusion, in patients with NSTEMI and CKD, an invasive strategy is associated with significant mortality benefit over conservative management in most patients with CKD, but at the expense of higher risk of AKI and bleeding. EI appears to benefit those with early stages of CKD. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42023405491.

Takayasu arteritis (TA) is now recognized worldwide and is a disease that mainly affects the aorta and its main branches. TA rarely involves the small or medium-sized vessels. Certain vascular lesions, such as arterial stenosis, occlusion, and aneurysm are common with TA. However, patients with new-onset TA who present with left main trunk acute non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction are extremely rare. We report a 16-year-old female patient with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction due to severe stenosis of the left main coronary artery that was caused by TA. She was eventually diagnosed with TA and underwent successful coronary artery stenting combined with glucocorticoids and folate reductase inhibitor therapy. Over the 1-year follow-up, she experienced two episodes of chest pain and was admitted to the hospital. During the second hospitalization, coronary angiography (CAG) revealed 90% stenosis of the original left main trunk (LM) stent. Following percutaneous coronary angiography (PTCA), drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty was performed. Fortunately, a clear diagnosis of TA was made, and treatment was initiated with an interleukin-6 (IL-6) receptor inhibitor. Early diagnosis and therapy for TA are emphasized.

For patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), prasugrel was recommended over ticagrelor in a recent randomized controlled trial, although more data are needed on the rationale. Here, the effects of P2Y12 inhibitors on ischemic and bleeding events in patients with NSTE-ACS were investigated.
Clinical trials that enrolled patients with NSTE-ACS were included, relevant data were extracted, and a network meta-analysis was performed.
This study included 37,268 patients with NSTE-ACS from 11 studies. There was no significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor for any end point, although prasugrel had a higher likelihood of event reduction than ticagrelor for all end points except cardiovascular death. Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel was associated with decreased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99) but not an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.97-1.74). Similarly, compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94) and an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.77; P = .049). For the primary efficacy end point (MACE), prasugrel showed the highest likelihood of event reduction (P = .97) and was superior to ticagrelor (P = .29) and clopidogrel (P = .24).
Prasugrel and ticagrelor had comparable risks for every end point, although prasugrel had the highest probability of being the best treatment for reducing the primary efficacy end point. This study highlights the need for further studies to investigate optimal P2Y12 inhibitor selection in patients with NSTE-ACS.