Yu CW, et al. Korean Circ J. 2016 Sep;48:e75. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2018.0117

The incidence and impact of malnutrition on acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, clinical relevance, and prognostic outcomes of malnutrition in patients with ACS treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. This retrospective study included 1930 consecutive patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and assessed their nutritional status using 3 scoring systems: Controlling Nutritional Status score, nutritional risk index (NRI), and prognostic nutritional index (PNI). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. The Controlling Nutritional Status, NRI, and PNI scores showed that 5.2%, 17.5%, and 3.9% of patients were moderately or severely malnourished, respectively. During a median follow-up of 67.2 months (interquartile range: 46.8–88.5 months), 74 (3.8%) patients died. Malnutrition was associated with a significantly increased risk for all-cause mortality compared with good nutrition (adjusted hazard ratios for moderate and severe malnutrition, respectively: 5.65 [95% confidence interval: 3.27–9.78] and 15.26 [7.50–31.05] for the NRI score, 5.53 [2.10–14.49] and 11.08 [5.69–21.59] for the PNI; P < .001). The current findings demonstrated that malnutrition is prevalent among patients with ACS and is closely associated with increased mortality. Further study is needed to evaluate the effects of nutritional interventions on the outcomes of patients with ACS.

Kang SH, et al. Korean Circ J. 2017 May;47(3):354-360. https://doi.org/10.4070/kcj.2016.0439

Subaortic stenosis (SAS) is a rare heart disease in adults with an unclear etiology and variable clinical presentation. In some cases, SAS appears as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy with obstruction due to the accompanying systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve. A 46-year-old male with dizziness for several months presented in the outpatient department. Two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography demonstrated a slightly hypertrophic left ventricle with normal systolic function without wall-motion abnormalities. Just below the aortic valve, a linear structure protruding from the septum side and the left-ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) side of the mitral valve was confirmed, which was causing a significant pressure gradient (mean and maximum of 91 mmHg and 138 mmHg, respectively). A diagnosis of SAS with subaortic membrane was made, and surgical myomectomy and subaortic membrane removal surgery were performed. Postoperative transthoracic echocardiography did not show flow acceleration through the LVOT, nor a significant pressure gradient across the aortic valve. This case report highlights the clinical significance of SAS with subaortic membrane, which can be confused with aortic stenosis of other etiology.

The aim of this study was to determine how trial-based findings of EXCEL and NOBLE might be interpreted and generalizable in 'real-world' settings with comparison of data from the large-scaled, all-comer Interventional Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization (IRIS-MAIN) registry. We compared baseline clinical and procedural characteristics and also determined how the relative treatment effect of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was different in EXCEL and NOBLE, compared with those of the multicenter, IRIS-MAIN registry (n=2481). The primary outcome for between-study comparison was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. There were between-study differences in patient risk profiles (age, BMI, diabetes, and clinical presentation), lesion complexities, and procedural characteristics (stent type, the use of off-pump surgery, and radial artery); the proportion of diabetes and acute coronary syndrome was particularly lower in NOBLE than in other studies. Although there was interstudy heterogeneity for the protocol definition of MI, the risks for serious composite outcome of death, MI, or stroke were similar between PCI and CABG in EXCEL [hazard ratio (HR): 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.79-1.26; P=0.98] and in the matched cohort of IRIS-MAIN (HR: 1.08; 95%CI: 0.85-1.38; P=0.53), whereas it was significantly higher after PCI than after CABG in NOBLE (HR: 1.47; 95%CI: 1.06-2.05; P=0.02), which was driven by more common MI and stroke after PCI. In the comparison of a large-sized, all-comer registry, the EXCEL trial might represent better generalizability with respect to baseline characteristics and observed clinical outcomes compared with the NOBLE trial.