Coronary heart disease (CHD) is the leading cause of death and disability in Europe. For patients presenting with an acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), timely myocardial reperfusion using either thrombolytic therapy or primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) is the most effective therapy for limiting myocardial infarct (MI) size, preserving left-ventricular systolic function and reducing the onset of heart failure. Despite this, the morbidity and mortality of STEMI patients remain significant, and novel therapeutic interventions are required to improve clinical outcomes in this patient group. Paradoxically, the process of myocardial reperfusion can itself induce cardiomyocyte death—a phenomenon which has been termed ‘myocardial reperfusion injury’ (RI), the irreversible consequences of which include microvascular obstruction and myocardial infarction. Unfortunately, there is currently no effective therapy for preventing myocardial RI in STEMI patients making it an important residual target for cardioprotection. Previous attempts to translate cardioprotective therapies (antioxidants, calcium-channel blockers, and anti-inflammatory agents) for reducing RI into the clinic, have been unsuccessful. An improved understanding of the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying RI has resulted in the identification of several promising mechanical (ischaemic post-conditioning, remote ischaemic pre-conditioning, therapeutic hypothermia, and hyperoxaemia), and pharmacological (atrial natriuretic peptide, cyclosporin-A, and exenatide) therapeutic strategies, for preventing myocardial RI, many of which have shown promise in initial proof-of-principle clinical studies. In this article, we review the pathophysiology underlying myocardial RI, and highlight the potential therapeutic interventions which may be used in the future to prevent RI and improve clinical outcomes in patients with CHD.

Background— The prognostic relevance of the collateral circulation is still controversial. The goal of this study was to assess the impact on survival of quantitatively obtained, recruitable coronary collateral flow in patients with stable coronary artery disease during 10 years of follow-up. Methods and Results— Eight-hundred forty-five individuals (age, 62±11 years), 106 patients without coronary artery disease and 739 patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease, underwent a total of 1053 quantitative, coronary pressure–derived collateral measurements between March 1996 and April 2006. All patients were prospectively included in a collateral flow index (CFI) database containing information on recruitable collateral flow parameters obtained during a 1-minute coronary balloon occlusion. CFI was calculated as follows: equation where P _occl is mean coronary occlusive pressure, P _ao is mean aortic pressure, and CVP is central venous pressure. Patients were divided into groups with poorly developed (CFI <0.25) or well-grown collateral vessels (CFI ≥0.25). Follow-up information on the occurrence of all-cause mortality and major adverse cardiac events after study inclusion was collected. Cumulative 10-year survival rates in relation to all-cause deaths and cardiac deaths were 71% and 88%, respectively, in patients with low CFI and 89% and 97% in the group with high CFI ( P =0.0395, P =0.0109). Through the use of Cox proportional hazards analysis, the following variables independently predicted elevated cardiac mortality: age, low CFI (as a continuous variable), and current smoking. Conclusions— A well-functioning coronary collateral circulation saves lives in patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease. Depending on the exact amount of collateral flow recruitable during a brief coronary occlusion, long-term cardiac mortality is reduced to one fourth compared with the situation without collateral supply.

The coronary collateral circulation as an alternative source of blood supply has shown benefits regarding several clinical endpoints in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) such as infarct size and left ventricular remodelling. However, its impact on hard endpoints such as mortality and its impact in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) is more controversial. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to explore the impact of collateral circulation on all-cause mortality. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science (2001 to 25 April 2011), and conference proceedings for studies evaluating the effect of coronary collaterals on mortality. Random-effect models were used to calculate summary risk ratios (RR). A total of 12 studies enrolling 6529 participants were included in this analysis. Patients with high collateralization showed a reduced mortality compared with those with low collateralization [RR 0.64 (95% confidence interval 0.45–0.91); P= 0.012]. The RR for ‘high collateralization’ in patients with stable CAD was 0.59 [0.39–0.89], P= 0.012, in patients with subacute MI it was 0.53 [0.15–1.92]; P= 0.335, and for patients with acute MI it was 0.63 [0.29–1.39]; P= 0.257. In patients with CAD, the coronary collateralization has a relevant protective effect. Patients with a high collateralization have a 36% reduced mortality risk compared with patients with low collateralization.

The hypothesis of this study was that local anesthesia with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is not harmful in comparison to general anesthesia (GA) for patients undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (TAVR).