Background: Acute fulminant myocarditis (AFM) is a serious disease that progresses rapidly, and leads to failing respiratory and circulatory systems. When medications fail to reverse the patient’s clinical course, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is considered the most effective, supportive and adjunct strategy. In this paper we analyzed our experience in managing AFM with ECMO support. Methods: During October 2003 and February 2017, a total of 35 patients (≥18 years) were enrolled in the study. Twenty patients survived, and another 15 patients expired. General demographics, the hemodynamic condition, timing of ECMO intervention, and laboratory data were compared for the survival and non-survival groups. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify the associations with in-hospital mortality following ECMO use in this situation. Results: The survival rate was 57.1% during the in-hospital period. The average age, gender, severity of the hemodynamic condition, and cardiac rhythm were similar between the survival and non-survival groups. Higher serum lactic acid (initial and 24 h later), higher peak cardiac biomarkers, higher incidence of acute kidney injury and the need for hemodialysis were noted in the non-survival group. Higher 24-h lactic acid levels and higher peak troponin-I levels were associated with in-hospital mortality. Conclusions: When ECMO was used for AFM, related cardiogenic shock and decompensated heart failure, higher peak serum troponin-I levels and 24-h serum lactic acid levels following ECMO use were independently associated with in-hospital mortality.

Objectives: To examine the impact of revascularization and associated clinical outcomes of chronic kidney disease (CKD) chronic total occlusion (CTO) and non-CKD CTO groups. Background: The influence of CKD on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for CTO lesions is unknown, and there is no systemic review of this topic to date. Methods: We searched the PubMed, Embase, ProQuest, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, ClinicalKey, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials Databases for articles published between 1 January 2010 and 31 March 2020. CKD was defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate of <60 mL/min/1.73 m² according to the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease formula. Data included demographics, lesion distributions, incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN), acute kidney injury (AKI), procedural success rate, mortality, and target lesion revascularization (TLR)/target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: Six studies were ultimately included in this systematic review. A high prevalence (25.5%; range, 19.6–37.9%) of CKD was noted in the CTO population. In the non-CKD group, outcomes were better: less incidence of CIN or AKI (odds ratio (OR), 2.860; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.775–4.608), higher procedural success rate (OR, 1.382; 95% CI, 1.036–1.843), and lower long-term mortality (OR, 4.502; 95% CI, 3.561–5.693). The incidence of TLR/TVR (OR, 1.118; 95% CI, 0.888–1.407) did not differ between groups. Conclusions: In the CKD CTO PCI population, a lower procedural success rate, a higher incidence of CIN or AKI, and higher in-hospital and long-term mortality rate were noted due to more complex lesions and more comorbidities. However, the incidence of TLR/TVR did not differ between groups.

Background: Impaired renal function is frequently observed in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The differential effect of sacubitril/valsartan and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ACEIs/ARBs) on the clinical and renal outcomes in patients with HFrEF and chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains unknown. Aims: This study aimed to explore the differential effect of sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB on the clinical and renal outcomes as well as renal function over a 12-month follow-up period in HFrEF patients with and without CKD. Methods: Patients with HfrEF (LVEF ≤35%) and NYHA class ≥II were enrolled from the Chang Gung Research Database between 2017 and 2020. Baseline characteristics were compared between patients prescribed sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB. After propensity score matching, the following clinical and renal outcomes were compared between the two groups in patients with and without CKD over a 12-month follow-up period: acute kidney injury (AKI), emergent dialysis/renal death, HF hospitalization, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. Results: This study enrolled 3735 HFrEF patients with a mean left ventricular EF of 27.56 ± 5.86%, who had been prescribed sacubitril/valsartan (N = 1708) or ACEI/ARB (N = 2027). After propensity score matching, the clinical and renal outcomes did not differ between the sacubitril/valsartan and ACEI/ARB groups in patients without CKD. In patients with CKD, the ACEI/ARB group had a significantly higher incidence of all-cause mortality than the sacubitril/valsartan group (14.89% vs. 10.50%; hazard ratio 1.46; 95% confidence interval 1.06–2.00; p = 0.02), and the incidence of AKI, HF hospitalization, and CV mortality did not differ between the two groups. Conclusions: Sacubitril/valsartan had a lower all-cause mortality compared to ACEI/ARB in symptomatic HFrEF patients with CKD. Further prospective randomized studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

(1) Background: This study aimed to evaluate the etiologies and clinical outcomes of patients with pericardial effusion (PE) treated with echo-guided percutaneous pericardiocentesis. (2) Methods: Between July 2010 and December 2020, a total of 502 patients underwent echo-guided percutaneous pericardiocentesis for PE at our hospital. The reasons for PE were malignancy (N = 277), and non-malignancy (N = 225). The comorbidities, complications, and all-cause mortality were compared between the malignancy and non-malignancy groups. (3) Results: In multivariable Cox regression analyses for 1-year mortality, malignancy related PE, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancer, and metastatic status were positive predictors. A higher incidence of in-hospital and 1-year mortality were observed in patients with malignancy-related PE than with non-malignancy-related PE. In patients with malignancy-related PE, the Kaplan-Meier curve of 1-year all-cause mortality significantly differed between patients with or without metastasis; however, PE with or without malignant cells did not influence the prognosis. (4) Conclusions: In the patients with large PE requiring percutaneous pericardiocentesis, malignancy-related PE, nasopharyngeal and oropharyngeal cancer, and metastatic status were positive predictors of 1-year mortality. In patients with malignancy, a higher incidence of all-cause mortality was noted in patients with metastasis but did not differ between the groups with and without malignant cells in PE.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total occlusion (CTO) has recently become popular among interventional cardiologists. CTO originating from the ostium has been one of the most difficult CTO lesions to treat with PCI for a number of reasons. Our aim was to illustrate a specific technique during retrograde CTO PCI referred to as the “snare technique.” We retrospectively examined the use of “snare technique” among 371 consecutive retrograde CTO PCIs performed at our institution between 2006 and 2015. “Snare technique” was used in 10 patients among the 371 retrograde CTO PCIs. The baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics of patients with or without “snare technique” were similar. The “snare technique” group had significantly fewer side branches at occlusion (30.0% vs 71.2%, P = 0.01) and a higher incidence of externalization (90% vs 25.5%, P < 0.001). The contrast volume was significantly lower in the “snare technique” group (285.0 ± 68.5 vs 379.2 ± 144.0, P = 0.04). The incidence of major complications, retrograde success, or final success did not differ between the groups. The “snare technique” is safe and feasible in retrograde CTO PCI, especially in cases of difficult coronary engagement in cases such as ostial occlusion, challenging coronary anatomy, or retrograde guidewire cannot get in antegrade guiding catheter.