Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Food intake has an immediate effect on the cardiovascular system. However, the effect of a large meal as an immediate trigger for the acute coronary syndrome has not been assessed.

Objectives: To assess the relative risk for an ACS[1] within a few hours after the ingestion of a heavy meal.

Methods: In a case-crossover study 209 patients were interviewed a median of 2 days after an ACS. Ingestion of a large meal in the few hours immediately before the onset of ACS was compared with the comparable few hours the day before and with the usual frequency of large meals over the past year. Large meals were assessed by a 5 level scale.

Results: The relative risk of an acute coronary event during the first hour after a heavy meal ingestion was RR[2] = 7 (95% confidence interval 0.75–65.8) when the day before the ACS served as the control data and RR = 4 (95% CI[3] 1.9–8.6) when the usual frequency of heavy meals ingestion during the previous year served as the control data. 

Conclusions: The ingestion of heavy meals can trigger the onset of an ACS. Education of the population to avoid heavy meals, especially in people at high risk for coronary heart disease, should be included in the prevention of ACS. Research on specific nutrients that may act as potential triggers for ACS should be considered.

Background: Advances in surgical techniques and retractor-stabilizer devices allowing access to all coronary segments have resulted in increased interest in off-pump coronary artery bypass. The residual motion in the anastomotic site and potential hemodynamic derangements, however, render this operation technically more demanding.

Objectives: To evaluate the OPCAB[1] experience in a single Israeli center.

Methods: Between 2000 and 2003 in our institution, 1,000 patients underwent off-pump operations. Patients were grouped by the type of procedure, i.e., minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass or mid-sternotomy OPCAB.

Results: One hundred MIDCAB[2] operations were performed. Of the 900 OPCAB, 767 patients received multiple grafts with an average of 2.6 ± 0.6 grafts per patient (range 2–4) and the remaining patients underwent single grafting during hybrid or emergency procedures. In the multiple-graft OPCAB group, complete revascularization was achieved in 96%. Multiple arterial conduits were used in 76% of the patients, and total arterial revascularization without aortic manipulation, using T-graft (35%) or in situ configurations, was performed in 61%. The respective rates for early mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke in the MIDCAB were 1%, 0% and 2%, and 2%, 1.3% and 0.9% in the multiple-vessel OPCAB groups. Multivariate analysis identified renal dysfunction (odds ratio 11.5, confidence interval 3.02–43.8; P < 0.0001) and emergency operation (OR[3] 8.74, CL[4] 1.99–38.3; P = 0.004) as predictors of mortality. The proportion of off-pump procedures increased from 9% prior to the study period to 59%.

Conclusions: The use of OPCAB does not compromise the ability to achieve complete myocardial revascularization. Our procedure of choice is OPCAB using arterial conduits, preferably the 'no-touch' aorta technique.

Background: Left main coronary artery disease is considered a surgical indication in most centers. However, in some cases prohibited from surgery or in patients with prior bypass grafting, there is a need for percutaneous coronary intervention in LMCA[1] disease scenarios.

Objectives: To assess the clinical outcomes among patients undergoing stent-based LMCA angioplasty.

Methods: We identified 34 consecutive patients who underwent PCI[2] in LMCA at our institution. Procedural data and clinical outcomes were obtained for all patients.

Results: The mean age was 71 ± 12 years. There were 27 elective and 7 emergent procedures performed on 23 “protected” LMCA and 11 “unprotected” LMCA. In emergent procedures, the prevalence of cardiogenic shock (29% vs. 0%, P = 0.04) in patients with prior coronary bypass (29% vs. 8.5%, P = 0.007) was significantly higher compared to elective cases. Procedural success in emergent procedures was significantly lower than in elective procedures (71 vs. 100%, P = 0.04). In emergent versus elective procedures, the in-hospital mortality rate was higher (43 vs. 0%, P = 0.006). The rate of cumulative major adverse cardiac events at 1 and 6 months was 43% and 71% in emergent cases versus 0% and 33% in elective cases (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). In patients with “unprotected” LMCA the overall major cardiac events at 1 month was higher compared to “protected” LMCA patients (27 vs. 0%, P = 0.02). Multivariate analysis revealed emergent procedure as an independent predictor for mortality and adverse cardiac events (odds ratio 6.7; 95% confidence interval 1.2–36; P = 0.02).

Conclusions: Percutaneous interventions in LMCA are feasible and relatively safe in carefully selected cases. Procedural outcomes and clinical prognosis is highly dependent on the nature of disease prior to angioplasty (e.g., elective vs. emergent procedure) as well as on protection of the LMCA by patent grafts.