Percutaneous Endovascular Salvage Techniques for Implanted Venous Access Device Dysfunction.

PURPOSE: Implanted venous access devices (IVADs) are often used in patients who require long-term intravenous drug administration. The most common causes of device dysfunction include occlusion by fibrin sheath and/or catheter adherence to the vessel wall. We present percutaneous endovascular salvage techniques to restore function in occluded catheters. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of these techniques. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Through a femoral or brachial venous access, a snare is used to remove fibrin sheath around the IVAD catheter tip. If device dysfunction is caused by catheter adherences to the vessel wall, a new "mechanical adhesiolysis" maneuver was performed. IVAD salvage procedures performed between 2005 and 2013 were analyzed. Data included clinical background, catheter tip position, success rate, recurrence, and rate of complication. RESULTS: Eighty-eight salvage procedures were performed in 80 patients, mostly women (52.5 %), with a mean age of 54 years. Only a minority (17.5 %) of evaluated catheters were located at an optimal position (i.e., cavoatrial junction ±1 cm). Mechanical adhesiolysis or other additional maneuvers were used in 21 cases (24 %). Overall technical success rate was 93.2 %. Malposition and/or vessel wall adherences were the main cause of technical failure. No complications were noted. CONCLUSION: These IVAD salvage techniques are safe and efficient. When a catheter is adherent to the vessel wall, mechanical adhesiolysis maneuvers allow catheter mobilization and a greater success rate with no additional risk. In patients who still require long-term use of their IVAD, these procedures can be performed safely to avoid catheter replacement.

ASTRAL-R score predicts non-recanalisation after intravenous thrombolysis in acute ischaemic stroke.

Intravenous thrombolysis (IVT) as treatment in acute ischaemic strokes may be insufficient to achieve recanalisation in certain patients. Predicting probability of non-recanalisation after IVT may have the potential to influence patient selection to more aggressive management strategies. We aimed at deriving and internally validating a predictive score for post-thrombolytic non-recanalisation, using clinical and radiological variables. In thrombolysis registries from four Swiss academic stroke centres (Lausanne, Bern, Basel and Geneva), patients were selected with large arterial occlusion on acute imaging and with repeated arterial assessment at 24 hours. Based on a logistic regression analysis, an integer-based score for each covariate of the fitted multivariate model was generated. Performance of integer-based predictive model was assessed by bootstrapping available data and cross validation (delete-d method). In 599 thrombolysed strokes, five variables were identified as independent predictors of absence of recanalisation: Acute glucose > 7 mmol/l (A), significant extracranial vessel STenosis (ST), decreased Range of visual fields (R), large Arterial occlusion (A) and decreased Level of consciousness (L). All variables were weighted 1, except for (L) which obtained 2 points based on β-coefficients on the logistic scale. ASTRAL-R scores 0, 3 and 6 corresponded to non-recanalisation probabilities of 18, 44 and 74 % respectively. Predictive ability showed AUC of 0.66 (95 %CI, 0.61-0.70) when using bootstrap and 0.66 (0.63-0.68) when using delete-d cross validation. In conclusion, the 5-item ASTRAL-R score moderately predicts non-recanalisation at 24 hours in thrombolysed ischaemic strokes. If its performance can be confirmed by external validation and its clinical usefulness can be proven, the score may influence patient selection for more aggressive revascularisation strategies in routine clinical practice.

Short-Term Heparin Kinetics during Catheter Ablation of Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (CA-AF) is a treatment option for symptomatic drug-refractory atrial fibrillation (AF). CA-AF carries a risk for thromboembolic complications that has been minimized by the use of intraprocedural intravenous unfractionated heparin (UFH). The optimal administration of UFH as well as its kinetics are not well established and need to be precisely determined. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total 102 of consecutive patients suffering from symptomatic drug-refractory AF underwent CA-AF. The mean age was 61 ± 10 years old. After transseptal puncture of the fossa ovalis, weight-adjusted UFH bolus (100 U/kg) was infused. A significant increase in activated clotting time (ACT) was observed from an average value of 100 ± 27 seconds at baseline, to 355 ± 94 seconds at 10 min (T10), to 375 ± 90 seconds at 20 min (T20). Twenty-four patients failed to reach the targeted ACT value of ≥300 seconds at T10 and more than half of these remained with subtherapeutic ACT values at T20. This subset of patients showed similar clinical characteristics and amount of UFH but were more frequently prescribed preprocedural vitamin K1 than the rest of the study population. CONCLUSIONS: In a typical intervention setting, UFH displays unexpected slow anticoagulation kinetics in a significant proportion of procedures up to 20 minutes after infusion. These findings support the infusion of UFH before transseptal puncture or any left-sided catheterization with early ACT measurements to identify patients with delayed kinetics. They are in line with recent guidelines to perform CA-AF under therapeutic anticoagulation.

A Lead-In with Silibinin Prior to Triple-Therapy Translates into Favorable Treatment Outcomes in Difficult-To-Treat HIV/Hepatitis C Coinfected Patients.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of first-generation protease inhibitor based triple-therapy against hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is limited in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with advanced liver fibrosis and non-response to previous peginterferon-ribavirin. These patients have a low chance of achieving a sustained virologic response (SVR) using first generation triple-therapy, with a success rate of only 20%. We investigated the efficacy and safety of lead-in therapy with intravenous silibinin followed by triple-therapy in this difficult-to-treat patient group. METHODOLOGY: Inclusion criteria were HIV/HCV coinfection with advanced liver fibrosis and documented previous treatment failure on peginterferon-ribavirin. The intervention was a lead-in therapy with intravenous silibinin 20 mg/kg/day for 14 days, followed by triple-therapy (peginterferon-ribavirin and telaprevir) for 12 weeks, and peginterferon-ribavirin alone for 36 weeks. Outcome measurements were HCV-RNA after silibinin lead-in and during triple-therapy, SVR data at week 12, and safety and tolerability of silibinin. RESULTS: We examined sixteen HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with previous peginterferon-ribavirin failure, of whom 14 had a fibrosis grade METAVIR ≥F3. All were on successful antiretroviral therapy. Median (IQR) HCV-RNA decline after silibinin therapy was 2.65 (2.1-2.8) log10 copies/mL. Fifteen of sixteen patients (94%) had undetectable HCV RNA at weeks 4 and 12, eleven patients (69%) showed end-of-treatment response (i.e., undetectable HCV-RNA at week 48), and ten patients (63%) reached SVR at week 12 (SVR 12). Six of the sixteen patients (37%) did not reach SVR 12: One patient had rapid virologic response (RVR) (i.e., undetectable HCV-RNA at week 4) but stopped treatment at week 8 due to major depression. Five patients had RVR, but experienced viral breakthroughs at week 21, 22, 25, or 32, or a relapse at week 52. The HIV RNA remained below the limit of detection in all patients during the complete treatment period. No serious adverse events and no significant drug-drug interactions were associated with silibinin. CONCLUSION: A lead-in with silibinin before triple-therapy was safe and highly effective in difficult-to-treat HIV/HCV coinfected patients, with a pronounced HCV-RNA decline during the lead-in phase, which translates into 63% SVR. An add-on of intravenous silibinin to standard of care HCV treatment is worth further exploration in selected difficult-to-treat patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01816490.