Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

oral boards > cardiac misc (incl misc AHA e.g. gen valve, arrhythmia, anticoag, endocarditis incl ppx, HOCM) > Flashcards

cardiac misc (incl misc AHA e.g. gen valve, arrhythmia, anticoag, endocarditis incl ppx, HOCM) Flashcards

1
Q

only class 1 recommendation for infxn ppx

A

Secondary Prevention of Rheumatic Fever
“In patients with rheumatic heart disease, secondary prevention of rheumatic fever is indicated.”

2° ppx = PCN G IM Q4W or PCN V PO BID
for whichever is longer of:
- rheumatic fever (RF) + carditis + residual valvular dz = 10y OR >40yo
- RF + carditis + NO valvular dz = 10y OR >21yo
- RF + NO carditis = 5y OR >21yo

“In pts with documented valvular heart disease, the duration of rheumatic fever prophylaxis should be ≥10 y or until the patient is 40 y of age (whichever is longer).
Lifelong prophylaxis may be recommended if the patient is at high risk of group A streptococcus exposure. Secondary rheumatic heart disease prophylaxis is required even after valve replacement.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Which types of dental procedures may require abx ppx for endocarditis?

A

“dental procedures that involve:
- manipulation of gingival tissue,
- manipulation of the periapical region of teeth, or
- perforation of the oral mucosa”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Which valvular dz entities require endocarditis abx ppx for dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A
  • h/o previous IE
  • prosthetic valves incl TAVI & homografts Prosthetic cardiac valves, including transcatheter-implanted prostheses and homografts.
  • non-valve prostheses Prosthetic material used for cardiac valve repair, such as annuloplasty rings, chords, or clips.
  • un-rx cyanotic congenital dz OR rx with residual shunts or regurg at/near prothetic material Unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart disease or repaired congenital heart disease, with residual shunts or valvular regurgitation at the site of or adjacent to the site of a prosthetic patch or prosthetic device.
  • structural regurg in transplanted heart Cardiac transplant with valve regurgitation attributable to a structurally abnormal valve.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

endocarditis abx ppx PO regimens

A

amoxicillin 2g x1
PCN/ampicillin allergy: Keflex 2g OR azithro 500mg OR clarithro 500mg OR doxy 100mg x1

30-60min before procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

endocarditis abx ppx non-PO regimens

A
  • ampicillin
  • Ancef/ceftrx if PCN allergy

ampicillin 2g IM/IV x1
PCN/ampicillin allergy:
Ancef OR ceftrx 1g IM/IV x1

30-60min before procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

preferred/default endocarditis abx ppx PO regimen

A

amoxicillin 2g x1

30-60min before procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

endocarditis abx ppx PO regimens with PCN/ampicillin allergy

A

one of:
- Keflex 2g
- azithro OR clarithro 500mg
- doxy 100mg
x1

30-60min before procedure

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Do high-IE-risk pts need endocarditis abx ppx for non-dental procedures (e.g. TEE, EGD, C-scope) in the absence of active infection?

A

NO
(3: no benefit)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Does a dental procedure that involves manipulation of gingival tissue require endocarditis abx ppx?

A

YES
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Does a dental procedure that involves manipulation of the periapical region of teeth require endocarditis abx ppx?

A

YES
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Does a dental procedure that involves perforation of the oral mucosa require endocarditis abx ppx?

A

YES
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Do patients with prosthetic valves incl TAVI & homografts require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

Prosthetic cardiac valves, including transcatheter-implanted prostheses and homografts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Do patients with non-valve prostheses require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

Prosthetic material used for cardiac valve repair, such as annuloplasty rings, chords, or clips.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Do patients with previous IE require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Do patients with un-rx cyanotic congenital dz require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

OR rx with residual shunts or regurg at/near prothetic material

Unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart disease or repaired congenital heart disease, with residual shunts or valvular regurgitation at the site of or adjacent to the site of a prosthetic patch or prosthetic device.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Do patients with rxed congenital heart dz with residual shunts or regurg at/near prothetic material require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

OR un-rx cyanotic congenital dz

Unrepaired cyanotic congenital heart disease or repaired congenital heart disease, with residual shunts or valvular regurgitation at the site of or adjacent to the site of a prosthetic patch or prosthetic device.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Do patients with structural regurg in a transplanted heart require endocarditis abx ppx for high-risk dental procedures?

involving manipulation of gingival tissue, manipulation of periapical region of teeth, or perforation of the oral mucosa

A

YES
(2a)

Cardiac transplant with valve regurgitation attributable to a structurally abnormal valve.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

post-valve-intervention periodic imaging

A

baseline post-proc TTE + periodic interval monitoring (1)
“In asymptomatic patients with any type of valve intervention, a baseline postprocedural TTE followed by periodic monitoring with TTE is recommended, depending on type of intervention, length of time after intervention, ventricular function, and concurrent cardiac conditions.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

initial evaluation/imaging study for suspected HCM

A

TTE
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

initial evaluation for suspected HCM

A

EKG (1)
TTE (1)
24-48h Holter (1)
SCD risk assessment (1)
± exercise stress test (2a)
FH (1) + cascade genetic testing (1)

“exercise stress testing is reasonable to determine functional capacity and to provide prognostic information as part of initial evaluation.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

initial evaluation/non-imaging study(ies) for suspected HCM

A

EKG (1)
24-48h Holter (1)
± exercise stress test (2a)

“exercise stress testing is reasonable to determine functional capacity and to provide prognostic information as part of initial evaluation.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

ongoing/subsequent imaging monitoring in HCM pts

(assuming no change in clinical status)

A

TTE Q1-2Y
(1)

to assess myocardial hypertrophy, dynamic LVOTO, MR, & myocardial fxn

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

ongoing/subsequent non-imaging monitoring in HCM pts

(assuming no change in clinical status)

A

EKG Q1-2Y (1)
24-48h Holter (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

ongoing/subsequent monitoring in HCM pts

(assuming no change in clinical status)

A

EKG Q1-2Y (1)
24-48h Holter Q1-2Y (1)
TTE Q1-2Y (1)
SCD risk assessment Q1-2Y (1)

to assess myocardial hypertrophy, dynamic LVOTO, MR, & myocardial fxn

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

evaluation of clinical change or new event in HCM pt

A

TTE
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

further evaluation of HCM pts with resting LVOT gradient <50mmHg

A

TTE with provocative maneuvers
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

initial screening imaging for 1° relatives of HCM pts

A

TTE
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

initial screening for 1° relatives of HCM pts

A

EKG (1)
TTE (1)
cascade genetic testing (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

further evaluation of sx HCM pts with resting & provoked LVOT gradient <50mmHg

A

exercise TTE
(1)

for detection & quantification of dynamic LVOTO

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

further evaluation of asx HCM pts with resting & provoked LVOT gradient <50mmHg

A

exercise TTE
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

imaging during surgical septal myectomy

A

intraop TEE
(1)

to assess MV anatomy & fxn + myectomy adequacy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

f/u imaging after septal redux tx

EtOH septal ablation OR septal myectomy

A

TTE within 3-6mo
(1)

to evaluate procedural results

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

ongoing/subsequent monitoring for 1° relatives of HCM pts who are genotype-positive, phenotype-negative

A

serial exam, EKG, TTE:
Q1-2Y <18yo
Q3-5Y adults
+ PRN clinical change
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts if TTE is inconclusive OR pre-proc planning

A

TEE
(2a)

“TEE can be useful if TTE is inconclusive in clinical decision-making regarding medical therapy, and in situations such as planning for myectomy, exclusion of subaortic membrane or MR 2/2 structural abnormalities of the valve apparatus, or in the assessment of feasibility of EtOH septal ablation.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts if ECHO is inconclusive

A

cardiac MRI
(1)

“For patients suspected to have HCM in whom echocardiography is inconclusive, CMR imaging is indicated for diagnostic clarification.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts if alternative dxs are suspected

A

cardiac MRI
(1)

“For patients with LVH in whome there is a suspicion of alternative diagnoses, including infiltrative or storage disease as well as athlete’s heart, CMR imaging is useful.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts not otherwise high-risk or decision still uncertain for ICD

A

cardiac MRI
(1)

to assess for LV wall thickness, EF, LV apical aneurysm, & LGE extent

LGE = fibrosis, ≥15% of LV mass = high-risk

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts if anatomic mechanism of obstruction is inconclusive on ECHO

A

cardiac MRI
(1)

to inform selection & planning of septal redux tx

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

ongoing/subsequent imaging of HCM pts for SCD risk stratification

A

cardiac MRI Q3-5Y
(2b)

to eval Δs in LGE, EF, morphology incl apical aneurysm or LV thickness

“for the purpose of SCD risk stratification”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

additional/further imaging evaluation of HCM pts if ECHO is inconclusive & cardiac MRI is not available

A

cardiac CT
(2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

evaluation of new palpitations or lightheadedness in HCM pts

A

>24h Holter
(1)

“extended (>24h) EKG monitoring or event recording is recommended, which should not be considered diagnostic unless pts have had symptoms while being monitored.”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

evaluation of HCM pts who may be candidates for SRT but with uncertainty re: presence or severity of LVOTO on non-invasive imaging studies

A

cardiac cath
(1)

for invasive hemodynamic assessment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

evaluation of HOCM pts who are being considered for SRT but with uncertainty re: fxnal capacity or sx status

A

exercise stress test
(2b)

may be reasonable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

ongoing/subsequent evaluation of HCM pts in whom fxnal capacity or sx status is uncertain

A

exercise stress test Q2-3Y
(2b)

may be reasonable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
45
Q

ICD indications in HCM pts

A

h/o cardiac arrest, VF, sustained VT (1)
OR at least 1 of: (2a)
- h/o unexplained syncope
- FH SCD
- massive LVH (≥3cm)
- apical aneurysm
- EF<50%
OR NSVT in children (2a) / in adults (2b)
OR extensive LGE (≥15% of LV mass) on cardiac MRI (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
46
Q

class 1 ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

A

h/o cardiac arrest, VF, sustained VT (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
47
Q

class 1 ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

(1)

A

h/o cardiac arrest, VF, sustained VT (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
48
Q

class 2a ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

A

at least 1 of: (2a)
- h/o unexplained syncope
- FH SCD
- massive LVH (≥3cm)
- apical aneurysm
- EF<50%
- NSVT in children (2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
49
Q

class 2a ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

(6)

A

at least 1 of: (2a)
- h/o unexplained syncope
- FH SCD
- massive LVH (≥3cm)
- apical aneurysm
- EF<50%
- NSVT in children (2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
50
Q

class 2b ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

A

NSVT in adults (2b)
OR extensive LGE (≥15% of LV mass) on cardiac MRI (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
51
Q

class 2b ICD indication(s) in HCM pts

(2)

A

NSVT in adults (2b)
OR extensive LGE (≥15% of LV mass) on cardiac MRI (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
52
Q

class 3 ICD recommendation(s) in HCM pts

(2)

A

without risk factors
[and/]OR for sole purpose of competitive sports participation
(3: HARM)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
53
Q

class 3 ICD recommendation(s) in HCM pts

A

without risk factors
[and/]OR for sole purpose of competitive sports participation
(3: HARM)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
54
Q

SCD risk factors in HCM pts

A
  • h/o cardiac arrest, VF, sustained VT
  • h/o unexplained syncope
  • FH SCD
  • massive LVH
  • apical aneurysm
  • EF<50%
  • NSVT in children (2a) / in adults
  • extensive LGE on cardiac MRI
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
55
Q

SCD risk factors in HCM pts

(8)

A
  • h/o cardiac arrest, VF, sustained VT
  • h/o unexplained syncope
  • FH SCD
  • massive LVH
  • apical aneurysm
  • EF<50%
  • NSVT in children (2a) / in adults
  • extensive LGE on cardiac MRI
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
56
Q

ICD type in HCM

A

SDM for transvenous single-chamber OR subQ (1)
with single-coil leads (1)

based on preferences, lifestyle, expected need for brady or VT pacing

versus dual-coil leads

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
57
Q

HOCM medical mgmt

in order of preference

A
  1. β-blockers
  2. non-dihydropyridine Ca channel blockers (e.g. verapamil, diltiazem)
    • disopyramide (in combo with #1 or #2)

“1. [In patients with HOCM and symptom attributable to LVOTO], nonvasodilating beta-blockers, titrated to effectiveness or maximally tolerated doses, are recommended. (1)”
“2. […], for whom beta-blockers are ineffective or not tolerated, substitution with non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (e.g., verapamil, diltiazem) is recommended. (1)
“3. […persistent severe symptoms…] despite beta-blockers or non-dhydropyridine calcium channel blockers, either adding disopyramide in combination with 1 of the other drugs, or SRT performed at experienced centers, is recommended. (1)”
“6. For patients with HOCM and severe dyspnea at rest, hypotension, very high resting gradients (e.g., >100mmHg), as well as all children <6w old, verapamil is potentially harmful. (3: HARM)”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
58
Q

pressor of choice in HOCM

A

Neo (phenylephrine)
(1)

after failure to respond to fluids; alone or with β-blocker

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
59
Q

cardiac drugs to avoid in HOCM

A

vasodilators & digoxin
(2b)

vasodil e.g. ACE-Is, ARBs, dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers

can worsen sxs 2/2 dynamic LVOTO

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
60
Q

indications for surgical SRT in HOCM

A
  • severe sxs despite GDMT† (1)
  • sx + concomitant cardiac surgery† (1)
  • NYHA II + severe & progressive pHTN OR LA enlargement with ≥1 episode sx afib OR poor fxnal capacity on treadmill exercise testing OR young with very high resting gradients (>100mmHg)‡ (2b)
  • severe sxs as an alternative to escalation of medical tx† (2b)

†at experienced (primary HCM) centers
‡at comprehensive HCM centers

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
61
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
30d mortality

with surgery & with EtOH

A

≤1% & ≤1%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
62
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
30d morbidity

with surgery & with EtOH

“adverse complications (tamponade, LAD dissection, infection, major bleeding)”

A

≤10% & ≤10%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
63
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
30d PPM

with surgery & with EtOH

A

≤5% myectomy & ≤10% ablation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
64
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
MVR ≤1y

with surgery & with ablation

A

≤5% & N/A

not specified for ablation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
65
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
≥mod residual MR

with surgery & with ablation

A

≤5% & ≤5%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
66
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
repeat proc rate

with surgery & with ablation

A

≤3% & ≤10%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
67
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
improvement ≥1 NYHA class

with surgery & with ablation

A

>90% & >90%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
68
Q

expected/goal

SRT in primary/comprehensive HCM centers:
rest & provoked LVOT gradient <50mmHg

with surgery & with ablation

A

>90% & >90%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
69
Q

2 main outcomes differences in EtOH septal ablation v surgical myectomy

A

in EtOH ablation compared to myectomy:
1. PPM rate ≥2x
2. repeat proc rate ≥3x

PPM: ≤5% v ≤10% / repeat proc: ≤3% v ≤10%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
70
Q

highest risk factor for complete heart block / PPM after septal myectomy for HOCM

A

RBBB
(which can be caused by EtOH septal ablation)
⇒10-33% risk (SESATS)
because LBB can be resected in myectomy

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
71
Q

post-septal myectomy LVOT gradient threshold to re-resect

A

> 25mmHg (provoked)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
72
Q

recommendation re: mild- to moderate-intensity recreational exercise in HCM

A

YES
beneficial to improve cardioresp fitness, physical fxn, QoL, & overall health
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
73
Q

recommendation re: moderate- to high-intensity competitive sports OR high-intensity recreational exercise in HCM

A

may be considered after comprehensive eval & SDM
(2b)

initial + repeated annually with an expert provider

who conveys that the risk of sudden death and ICD shocks may be increased

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
74
Q

recommendation re: low-intensity competitive sports in HCM

A

is reasonable
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
75
Q

recommendation re: any intensity competitive sports in genotype-positive, phenotype-negative HCM

A

is reasonable
(2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
76
Q

class 1 recommendation(s) re: planned valve surgery in pts with afib

A

potential benefits & added procedural risk of concomitant arrhythmia surgery should be discussed
(1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
77
Q

class 2a recommendation(s) re: planned valve surgery in pts with sx paroxysmal or persistent afib

A

concomitant PVI or maze
can be beneficial
(2a)

to reduce sxs & prevent recurrent arrhythmia

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
78
Q

class 2a recommendation(s) re: planned valve surgery in pts with afib or aflutter

A

LAA lig/exc
is reasonable
(2a)

to reduce risk of thromboembolic events

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
79
Q

recommendation re: postop anticoag after LA arrhythmia surgery and/or LAAL/LAAE

“LA surgical ablation of atrial arrhythmias and/or LAA lig/excision”

A

anticoag ≥3mo
is reasonable
(2a)

“anticoagulation therapy” NOS

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
80
Q

Do indications for valve intervention in severe valvular dz differ before planned pregnancy?

A

NO
(1)

“In symptomatic women with severe VHD who are considering pregnancy, intervention before pregnancy is recommended on the basis of standard indications.”

HOWEVER, there are 3 class <1 recs that conflict with this guideline.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
81
Q

indication(s) for valve intervention in asx women considering pregnancy

A
  • severe rheumatic MS with favorable morphology: PMBC @ CVC (2a)
  • severe AS: “intervention” (2a)
  • severe MR suitable for rx: MVRx @ CVC (2b)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
82
Q

indication(s) for valve intervention in asx women considering pregnancy

(3)

A
  • severe rheumatic MS with favorable morphology: PMBC @ CVC (2a)
  • severe AS: “intervention” (2a)
  • severe MR suitable for rx: MVRx @ CVC (2b)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
83
Q

recommendation re: valve choice in women of childbearing age

A

bp > mech d/t increased maternal & fetal risks a/w mech during preg (2a)

can still choose mechanical (SDM valve choice=class 1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
84
Q

How is PPM (patient-prosthesis mismatch) measured/assessed?

A

iEOA = indexed effective orifice area ≈ AVA:BSA
- mild >0.85
- mod 0.65-0.85
- sev <0.65

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
85
Q

iEOA (~AVA:BSA) <0.65

A

severe PPM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
86
Q

iEOA (~AVA:BSA) = 0.65-0.85

A

moderate PPM

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
87
Q

iEOA (~AVA:BSA) >0.85

A

mild PPM / “at risk”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
88
Q

location of Manouguian root enlargement

A

L-non (LCC-NCC) commissure into the inter-leaflet triangle & AMC

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10U7clNgAMS3P8ZZUWH4j–aytUB02oQ1/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10dvR70BSSF7sNMwU1PtJQ_bkkV9KBrFI/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
89
Q

location of Manouguian root enlargement

A

L-non (LCC-NCC) commissure into the inter-leaflet triangle, aorto-mitral curtain, and anterior mitral valve leaflet

1-1.5cm into the leaflet; do not enter LA roof (sweep away from root)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10U7clNgAMS3P8ZZUWH4j–aytUB02oQ1/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10dvR70BSSF7sNMwU1PtJQ_bkkV9KBrFI/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
90
Q

farthest proximal (deepest) extent of Manouguian root enlargement

A

onto the anterior mitral valve leaflet

1-1.5cm into the leaflet; do not enter LA roof (sweep away from root)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10U7clNgAMS3P8ZZUWH4j–aytUB02oQ1/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10dvR70BSSF7sNMwU1PtJQ_bkkV9KBrFI/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
91
Q

farthest proximal (deepest) extent of Manouguian root enlargement

A

onto the anterior mitral valve leaflet

1-1.5cm into the leaflet; do not enter LA roof (sweep away from root)

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10U7clNgAMS3P8ZZUWH4j–aytUB02oQ1/view
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10dvR70BSSF7sNMwU1PtJQ_bkkV9KBrFI/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
92
Q

maximum increase in annular size achievable with Manouguian root enlargement

A

4mm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
93
Q

maximum increase in valve size achievable with Manouguian root enlargement

A

+2 valve sizes

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
94
Q

location of Nicks root enlargement

A

through the midpoint of non (NCC) sinus

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10rQzLHVuQDElGEBX91M-yoY-k2DrAAHq/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
95
Q

location of Nicks root enlargement

A

through the midpoint of non (NCC) sinus into the fibrous subaortic curtain

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10rQzLHVuQDElGEBX91M-yoY-k2DrAAHq/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
96
Q

farthest proximal (deepest) extent of Nicks root enlargement

A

up to but not into mitral valve

“as far as the origin of the mitral valve”

https://drive.google.com/file/d/10gKWb9g-ToZNXP3VNAQ5KcvluEPe8uO-/view

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
97
Q

maximum increase in annular size achievable with Nicks root enlargement

A

2mm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
98
Q

maximum increase in valve size achievable with Nicks root enlargement

A

+1 valve size

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
99
Q

location of Konno root enlargement

A

through R (RCC) sinus (4-5mm lateral to/leftward of RCA) into interventricular septum + 2nd incision in anterior wall of RVOT

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
100
Q

What structure do you have to worry about under the L-non (LCC-NCC) AV commissure?

A

anterior mitral valve leaflet / aorto-mitral curtain

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
101
Q

What structure do you have to worry about under the R-non (RCC-NCC) AV commissure?

A

membranous septum, which contains LBB/bundle of His

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
102
Q

What structure do you have to worry about behind the non sinus / non-R (NCC-LCC) commissure?

A

AV node

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
103
Q

AVR sutures (normal)

A

pledgeted horizontal mattress from ventricular->aortic

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
104
Q

AVR sutures at a root enlargement patch

A

pledgeted horizontal mattress from outside->in

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
105
Q

standard quantity of Del Nido cardioplegia (total)

A

1200mL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
106
Q

interval to re-dose Del Nido cardioplegia

A

Q1H

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
107
Q

quantity of Del Nido cardioplegia for retrograde

A

500mL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
108
Q

quantity of Del Nido cardioplegia for antegrade

A

700mL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
109
Q

quantity of Del Nido cardioplegia for ostial

A

RCA: 300mL
LCA: 400mL
total: 700mL

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
110
Q

ONLY valve(s) for which intervention on moderate regurg is indicated

A

AR
- concomitant <3 surg (2a)
TR
- progressive + concomitant <3 L valve surg + annulus EDD>40mm OR prior RH fail sxs (2a)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
111
Q

ONLY valve(s) for which intervention on moderate dysfxn is indicated

A

AS
- concomitant <3 surg (2b)
AR
- concomitant <3 surg (2a)
TR
- concomitant <3 L valve surg + annulus EDD>40mm (2a)
- concomitant <3 (L valve) surg + prior RH fail sxs (2a)
MS
- NYHA ≥II + MVA>1.5 + PAWP>25 OR mean grad >15 with exercise ⇒ PBMC (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
112
Q

ONLY valve(s) for which intervention on moderate stenosis is indicated

A

AS
- concomitant <3 surg (2b)
MS
- NYHA ≥II + MVA>1.5 + PAWP>25 OR mean grad >15 with exercise ⇒ PBMC (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
113
Q

ONLY valve(s) for which intervention outside of concomitant <3 surg on moderate dysfxn is indicated

A

MS
- NYHA ≥II + MVA>1.5 + PAWP>25 OR mean grad >15 with exercise ⇒ PBMC (2b)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
114
Q

only AHA recommendation for warfarin over DOAC for anticoag for afib

A

afib + rheumatic MS (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
115
Q

AHA recommendation for anticoag for afib with rheumatic MS

A

warfarin (1)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
116
Q

AHA recommendation for anticoag for afib with any valvular dz except rheumatic MS

A

DOAC (1)
(per CHADS-VASc score)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
117
Q

STS risk score (%):
low-risk

A

<4%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
118
Q

STS risk score (%):
intermediate-risk

A

4-8%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
119
Q

STS risk score (%):
high-risk

A

>8%

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
120
Q

STS risk score = risk of what outcome/endpoint (for risk-stratification)

A

death

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
121
Q

Modified Duke criteria for definite endocarditis dx

A

definite IE criteria:
- 2 major
- 1 major + 3 minor
- 5 minor

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
122
Q

Modified Duke criteria for possible endocarditis dx

A

poss IE criteria:
- 1 major + 1 minor
- 3 minor

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
123
Q

Modified Duke major criteria for endocarditis dx

A
  • ⊕blood cxs x2 with common bx
  • ECHO (updated: or cardiac CT) signs (veg, leaflet perf, valve aneurysm, abscess, pseudoaneurysm, intracard fistula, NEW regurg, new partial dehisc of prosthetic valve)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
124
Q

Modified Duke minor criteria for endocarditis dx

A
  • predisposition: incl heart condition, IVDU, h/o endocarditis, prosthetic valve, h/o valve rx, CHD, HOCM
  • fever >100.4°F (38°C)
  • vascular phenomena: septic emboli (incl Janeway lesions), mycotic aneurysm
  • immunologic phenomena: glomerulonephritis, Osler’s nodes, Roth’s spots, rheumatoid factor
  • micro: ⊕blood cx not meeting major criterion OR ⊕serology for organism c/w IE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
125
Q

AHA indication(s) for “early surgery” in endocarditis

early = during initial hospitalization & before abx course completed

A
  • valve dysxfn ⇒ HF sxs (1)
  • L-sided highly-resistant organism (S. aureus, fungus) (1)
  • heart block / annular or Ao abscess / destructive penetrating lesions (1)
  • persistent bacteremia or fevers >5d after abx (1)
  • recurrent emboli/persistent veg (2a)
  • L-sided native valve with mobile veg >1cm length (2b)

AHA “early surgery (during initial hospitalization and before completion of a full therapeutic course of antibiotics)”

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
126
Q

AHA mgmt of permanent/implanted cardiac devices in definite endocarditis

A

complete removal (incl all leads & generator)

(1)

127
Q

mgmt of relapsing prosthetic valve endocarditis (i.e. recurrent bacteremia after abx course & blood cx clearance)

A

“surgery”

(1)

128
Q

recommendation re: consideration of redo surgery in endocarditis with ongoing IVDU

A

addiction med c/s re: long-term prognosis

(1)

129
Q

AHA recommendation for timing of endocarditis surgery in setting of stroke

A
  • non-major & no ICH: no delay (2b)
  • major stroke and/or ICH: if HDS, delay ≥4w (2b)

“11. In patients with IE and an indication for surgery who have suffered a stroke but have no evidence of intracranial hemorrhage or extensive neurological damage, operation without delay may be considered. (2b)
\12. For patients with IE and major ischemic stroke with extensive neurological damage or intracranial hemorrhage, if the patient is hemodynamically stable, delaying valve surgery for at least 4 weeks may be considered. (2b)”

130
Q

AATS recommendation for timing of endocarditis surgery in setting of stroke (with neuro deficits)

A
  • non-hemorrhagic/no ICH: delay 1-2w (2a)
  • hemorrhagic/ICH: delay 3-4w (2a)

(surgery 1-7d after ischemic stroke NOT a/w ￪ in-hosp mort)

“In patients with stroke and neurologic deficits, timing is decided by weighing the need for cardiac surgery against the risk of expanding the stroke or provoking intracranial bleeding during the operation.”

131
Q

AHA definition of “early surgery” in endocarditis

A

during initial hospitalization and before completion of a full therapeutic course of antibiotics

132
Q

AATS recommendation for timing of surgery in endocarditis

A

“within days” (1)
earlier surgery i.e. emergent or ≤48h for high embolism risk (2a)

“Once an indication for surgery is established, the patient should be operated on within days. (1)
Earlier surgery (emergency or within 48 hours) is reasonable for patients with large mobile vegetations at imminent risk of embolism. (2a)”

“Once an indication for surgery has been established and effective antimicrobial therapy initiated, there is little reason to delay operation. Surgery to prevent embolism mainly is relevant early, during the first few days after antimicrobial therapy is initiated, when the risk of embolism is greatest.”

133
Q

AATS indication(s) for surgery in endocarditis

A
  • valve dysxfn ⇒ HF sxs† (1)
  • highly-resistant organism (S. aureus, fungus)† (1)
  • heart block / annular or Ao abscess / destructive penetrating lesions† (1)
  • persistent bacteremia or fevers >5-7d after abx† (1)
  • recurrent systemic emboli/persistent veg‡ (2a)
  • mobile veg >1cm length with e/o embolic phenomena‡ (2b)
  • R-sided + severe valve dysfxn + HF sxs + veg >2cm length + persistent bacteremia or fevers >5-7d OR septic PE (2b)
  • relapsing prosthetic valve infxn (2a)

† during initial hospitalization
‡ urgent or emergent

AHA “early surgery (during initial hospitalization and before completion of a full therapeutic course of antibiotics)”

134
Q

AATS recommendation for coronary imaging before endocarditis surgery

A

guided by normal criteria
with lg AV veg, coronary CTA is an alternative
(1)

“The need for preoperative coronary angiography should be guided by normal criteria. This is particularly important if the patient has had coronary artery bypass grafting. In patients with large aortic valve vegetations, CT angiography is an alternative to assess the coronary arteries. (1)”

135
Q

AATS mgmt of permanent/implanted cardiac devices in endocarditis

A
  • infected: complete removal (1)
  • resistent organisms: complete removal reasonable (2a)
  • any organisms: complete removal reasonable (2b)
  • R-sided + affected TV: complete removal (?)
  • L-sided without convincing device infxn: optional/reasonable (?)
  • epicardial lead implantation can be considered (2b)

  • “Complete removal of pacemaker or defibrillator systems, including all leads and the generator, is indicated as part of the early management plan in patients with IE and likely infection of the device or leads. (1)
  • Complete removal of pacemaker or defibrillator systems, including all leads and the generator, is reasonable in patients with right- or left-sided valvular IE caused by S. aureus or fungi, even without evidence of device or lead infection. (2a)
  • Complete removal of pacemaker or defibrillator systems, including all leads and the generator, is reasonable in patients undergoing surgery for valvular IE caused by any organism. (2b)”
  • “At the time of surgery for IE, implantation of a new pacemaker system with epicardial leads may be considered when the patient is pacer dependent and has effective antimicrobial coverage. (2b)”

“If infected, and in right-sided IE affecting the tricuspid valve, leads and pacemaker should be removed. In the case of left-sided IE with no convincing evidence of pacemaker and lead involvement, removal is still reasonable but adds to complexity postoperatively and the question of if, when, and how the system should be replaced.”

136
Q

endocarditis R-sided veg size indication for surgery

A

>2cm

137
Q

endocarditis L-sided veg size indication for surgery

A

>1cm

138
Q

INR goal for standard [modern] mech AVR

modern = bileaflet or current-generation single-tilting disk

A

2.5
(2.0-3.0)

(1)

“For patients with a mechanical bileaflet or current-generation single-tilting disk AVR and no risk factors for thromboembolism, anticoagulation with a VKA to achieve an INR of 2.5 is recommended. (1)”

139
Q

INR goal for On-X mech AVR

A

≥3mo postop:
1.5-2.0 + ASA81
(early postop: still 2.5 / 2.0-3.0 + ASA81 x3mo)

(2b)

“For patients with a mechanical bileaflet or current-generation single-tilting disk AVR and no risk factors for thromboembolism, anticoagulation with a VKA to achieve an INR of 2.5 is recommended. (1)”

“In patients without risk factors who receive a mechanical On-X aortic heart valve, targeting the INR to a lower goal (1.5–2.0) in conjunction with aspirin 81 mg daily may be a strategy for long-term management. Warfarin dosing is targeted to an INR of 2.5 (range, 2.0–3.0) for the first 3 months after surgery, during which low-dose aspirin is also used. This recommendation is based on a single RCT of lower- versus standard-intensity VKA therapy (with low-dose aspirin) in patients undergoing On-X AVR. The lower-intensity INR group experienced significantly less major and minor bleeding, whereas the rates of stroke, transient ischemic attack, total neurological events, and all-cause mortality were similar between the 2 groups.”

140
Q

INR goal for older-gen mech AVR with add’l TE risk factors

e.g. afib, previous thromboembolism, LV dysfxn, hypercoag state

older-generation = ball-in-cage
[modern = bileaflet or current-generation single-tilting disk]

A

3.0
(2.5-3.5)

(1)

“For patients with a mechanical AVR and additional risk factors for thromboembolism (eg, AF, previous thromboembolism, LV dysfunction, hypercoagulable state) or an older-generation prosthesis (eg, ball-in-cage), anticoagulation with a VKA is indicated to achieve an INR of 3.0. (1)”

141
Q

INR goal for mech MVR

A

3.0
(2.5-3.5)

(1)

142
Q

anticoag for bp TAVI

A

ASA81
(2a)

143
Q

anticoag for bp SAVR

A

ASA81
(2a)

144
Q

anticoag for bp MVR

A

ASA81
(2a)

145
Q

optional early postop anticoag for bp TAVI at low bleeding risk (2 options)

A
  1. DAPT (ASA81 + Plavix) x3-6mo (2b)
  2. warfarin with INR goal 2.5 (2.00-3.0) x3+mo

  • “For patients with a bioprosthetic TAVI who are at low risk of bleeding, dualantiplatelet therapy with aspirin 75 to 100 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg may be reasonable for 3 to 6 months after valve implantation. (2b)
  • For patients with a bioprosthetic TAVI who are at low risk of bleeding, anticoagulation with a VKA to achieve an INR of 2.5 may be reasonable for at least 3 months after valve implantation. (2b)”
146
Q

optional early postop anticoag for bp SAVR at low bleeding risk

A

warfarin with INR goal 2.5 (2.0-3.0) x3-6mo (2a)

147
Q

optional early postop anticoag for bp MVR at low bleeding risk

A

warfarin with INR goal 2.5 (2.0-3.0) x3-6mo (2a)

148
Q

anticoag contraindicated in bp TAVI

A

low-dose rivaroxaban (10mg QD) + ASA81
3: HARM

149
Q

indication(s) for bridging mech valve anticoag when holding for non-cardiac procedure

A
  • mech AVR + risk factors (2a)
  • mech MVR (2a)

RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn

150
Q

anticoag when warfarin is already indicated for a mech valve (either AVR or MVR) & there are concurrent indications for ASA, at low bleeding risk

A

warfarin with same INR goal + ASA81 (2b)

151
Q

procedures in which holding mech valve anticoag is indicated

A

major procedures and/or in which bleeding may not easily be controlled

“For patients with a bileaflet mechanical AVR and no other risk factors for thromboembolism who are undergoing invasive procedures, temporary interruption of VKA anticoagulation, without bridging agents while the INR is subtherapeutic, is recommended. (1)”
RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn

152
Q

procedures in which holding mech valve anticoag is NOT indicated

A

minor procedures in which bleeding is easily controlled
(e.g. dental extractions, cataracts)

“For patients with mechanical heart valves who are undergoing minor procedures (eg, dental extractions or cataract removal) where bleeding is easily controlled, continuation of VKA anticoagulation with a therapeutic INR is recommended. (1)”

153
Q

reversal of mech valve anticoag (warfarin)

A

4-factor PCC

prothrombin complex concentrate

“For patients with a mechanical valve prosthesis receiving VKA therapy who require immediate/emergency noncardiac surgery or an invasive procedure, administration of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (or its activated form) is reasonable. (2a)”

154
Q

mech valve anticoag recommendation for major procedures and/or in which bleeding may not easily be controlled

A

HOLD & NO bridge (1)
unless RFs: hold & BRIDGE (2a)

RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn, MVR

“For patients with a bileaflet mechanical AVR and no other risk factors for thromboembolism who are undergoing invasive procedures, temporary interruption of VKA anticoagulation, without bridging agents while the INR is subtherapeutic, is recommended. (1)”
“For patients who are undergoing invasive procedures and have 1) a mechanical AVR and any thromboembolic risk factor, 2) an older-generation mechanical AVR, or 3) a mechanical mitral valve replacement, bridging anticoagulation therapy during the preoperative time interval when the INR is subtherapeutic is reasonable on an individualized basis, with the risks of bleeding weighed against the benefits of thromboembolism prevention. (2a)”

155
Q

mech valve (with no addl’ RFs) anticoag recommendation for major procedures and/or in which bleeding may not easily be controlled

A

HOLD & NO bridge (1)

RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn, MVR

“For patients with a bileaflet mechanical AVR and no other risk factors for thromboembolism who are undergoing invasive procedures, temporary interruption of VKA anticoagulation, without bridging agents while the INR is subtherapeutic, is recommended. (1)”

156
Q

mech valve (with add’l RFs) anticoag recommendation for major procedures and/or in which bleeding may not easily be controlled

RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn, MVR

A

hold & BRIDGE (2a)

RFs=older-gen valve, afib, previous TE, hypercoag state, LV dysfxn, MVR

“For patients who are undergoing invasive procedures and have 1) a mechanical AVR and any thromboembolic risk factor, 2) an older-generation mechanical AVR, or 3) a mechanical mitral valve replacement, bridging anticoagulation therapy during the preoperative time interval when the INR is subtherapeutic is reasonable on an individualized basis, with the risks of bleeding weighed against the benefits of thromboembolism prevention. (2a)”

157
Q

mech valve anticoag recommendation for minor procedures in which bleeding is easily controlled

(e.g. dental extractions, cataracts)

A

CONTINUE
(1)

“For patients with mechanical heart valves who are undergoing minor procedures (eg, dental extractions or cataract removal) where bleeding is easily controlled, continuation of VKA anticoagulation with a therapeutic INR is recommended. (1)”

158
Q

INR goal for mech AVR with systemic embolic event (incl stroke) while therapeutic

A

increase by 0.5:
2.5 (2.0-3.0)
OR add ASA81

“In patients with a mechanical AVR who experience a stroke or systemic embolic event while in therapeutic range on VKA anticoagulation, it is reasonable to increase the INR goal from 2.5 (range, 2.0–3.0) to 3.0 (range, 2.5–3.5) or to add daily low-dose aspirin (75–100 mg), with assessment of bleeding risk. (2a)”

159
Q

INR goal for mech AVR with systemic embolic event (incl stroke) while therapeutic

A

increase by 0.5:
3.0 (2.5-3.5)
OR add ASA81

“In patients with a mechanical mitral valve replacement who experience a stroke or systemic embolic event while in therapeutic range on VKA anticoagulation, it is reasonable to increase the INR goal from 3.0 (range, 2.53.5) to 4.0 (range, 3.5–4.0) or to add daily low-dose aspirin (75–100 mg), with assessment of bleeding risk. (2a)”

160
Q

anticoag for bp AVR (either TAVI or SAVR) with systemic embolic event (incl stroke) while on α-PLT tx

A

warfarin (usu INR goals)
(2b)

“In patients with a bioprosthetic surgical or transcatheter aortic valve or bioprosthetic mitral valve who experience a stroke or systemic embolic event while on antiplatelet therapy, VKA anticoagulation, instead of antiplatelet therapy may be considered after assessment of bleeding risk. (2b)”

161
Q

mgmt of thrombosed L-sided mech valves with sxs of valve obstruction

A

urgent slow-infusion low-dose thrombolysis
OR
emergency surgery
(1)

162
Q

mgmt of thrombosed bp valves that are HDS

A

warfarin
(2a)

163
Q

recommendation for risk-stratification before valve intervention

A

risk calculator
i.e. STS risk score
(1)

164
Q

typical adequate/minimum AVR size for men/women

A

♀21mm
♂23mm

165
Q

AVR size range available

A

19-29mm
(technically 17 avail but is TINY)
21mm still pretty small, but 21 may be OK for most ♀, 23 for most ♂

166
Q

typical adequate/minimum MVR size for men/women

A

♀/♂ 27mm
25mm still pretty small, 27+ prob OK for most, both ♀/♂
(range: 23?-33mm)

167
Q

typical adequate/minimum MVRx band size for men/women

A

♀30-32mm
♂32-34mm

168
Q

How do you size an AVR?

A

using the manufacturer’s sizers, to the annulus

169
Q

How do you size a MVR?

A

using the manufacturer’s sizers, to the annulus

170
Q

How do you size a MVRx?

A

using the manufacturer’s sizers, to the anterior leaflet

171
Q

MVR size range available

A

23?-33mm
25mm still pretty small, 27+ prob OK for most, both ♀/♂

172
Q

STS risk score low/intermediate/high cutoffs

A

<4% = low-risk
4-8% = intermediate risk
>8% = high-risk
(by risk of death)

173
Q

standard/default ECMO (VA) cannula sizes

A

17Fr arterial
21-25Fr venous (multi-stage)
7Fr DPC

174
Q

standard/default bicaval venous cannula sizes

A

28Fr x2 OR
28Fr SVC + 32Fr IVC

175
Q

Are peripheral cannula sizes odd or even?

A

odd

176
Q

Are central cannula sizes odd or even?

A

even

177
Q

standard/default central CPB cannula sizes

A

20Fr aortic
32/40-36/42Fr venous (dual-stage)
BTK: 21Fr arterial
28Fr venous (dual-stage)

178
Q

standard/default LH bypass cannula sizes

A

20Fr LAA/LSPV
17Fr distal aortic (periph cannula)

179
Q

standard/default axillary artery cannulation graft size

A

8-10mm

180
Q

Qp:Qs

(formula/how to calculate)

A

Qp/Qs = systemic extremes / pulmonary extremes:
arterial sat - mixed venous sat
-——————————————
PV sat - PA sat
(OR arterial sat - Swan PA sat)

quotient over quotient
so instead of P/S, it’s:
1/P / 1/S
= S/P
= extremes systemic / extremes Pulmonary
(e.g. 100-60 / 100-80 for 60 SVC sat & 80 PA sat = 40/20 = 2:1)

181
Q

initial heparin dose for wires/sheaths/cannulas

A

10,000u
to ACT≥250

182
Q

heparin dose before going on bypass

A

300u/kg

183
Q

adequate retrograde cardioplegia pressure/flow

A

coronary sinus pressure = 40mmHg
(for both continuous & intermittent)
50-100mL/min (BTK)
v 150-200 mL/min??? (Julie)
- Delivered through the coronary sinus, should not exceed the pressure of 50mmHg

184
Q

appropriate RCP pressure/flow

A

CVP = 25-35 (BTK: <25)
300mL/min (BTK: 500mL-1.5L/min)
OR ~5-10mL/kg/min

185
Q

appropriate ACP pressure/flow

A

R radial a-line MAP = 50-70 (~60) (CTS 2e: 40-50)
500mL/min
OR ~10-15mL/kg/min
check contralateral carotid for backbleeding

186
Q

adequate/appropriate antegrade cardioplegia pressure/flow

A

minimum = enough to close AV
line pressure < 300
200-300mL/min

187
Q

adequate/appropriate ostial cardioplegia pressure/flow

A

???
100-150mL/min per coronary ostium

188
Q

standard MAP goal on CPB

A

65-70

189
Q

MAP goal on CPB with special concerns e.g. carotid stenosis

A

75-80

190
Q

Where can you find the L SVC?

A

base of LA appendage, often draining into coronary sinus
(involuted L SVC = ligament of Marshall = fibrous connxn bet/ LA & L PVs)

191
Q

mgmt of patent LIMA (or SVG) during redo sternotomy

A

dissect out & clamp (with risk of inj)
OR
cool to 28°C (moderate hypothermia) +:
frequent (at least Q20min Del Nido) cardioplegia
OR continuous retrograde cardioplegia
± systemic KCl

outcomes may be better without dissecting it out, likely d/t risk of injury during dissxn or clamping

192
Q

redo sternotomy precxns

A
  • redo pads (external defibrillator pads)
  • blood X-matched & in the room
  • groin access (at least sheaths)
193
Q

type of saw for redo sternotomy (i.e. entering anterior then posterior table separately)

A

oscillating saw

194
Q

type of saw for usual sternotomy (i.e. opening in one cut)

A

reciprocating saw

195
Q

OS (all-comers) after emergency (VA-???)ECMO

A

~50%
(per Davis lecture)

196
Q

Which is more common: systolic or diastolic murmurs?

A

systolic (almost everything)

197
Q

Are systolic murmurs always pathological, or sometimes benign?

A

NO
sometimes benign

198
Q

Are diastolic murmurs always pathological, or sometimes benign?

A

ALWAYS pathological

199
Q

only cause of a continuous murmur

A

PDA
(systemic to pulmonary or systemic to RH shunts)

200
Q

only causes of diastolic murmur (specific)

A
  • AR
  • PR
  • MS
  • TS
201
Q

only causes of diastolic murmur (general/big-picture)

A

valvular dz causing abnormal flow into the ventricles during diastole:
- ventric outflow valve regurg (AR,PR)
- ventric inflow valve stenosis (MS,TS)

202
Q

VSD murmur

A

loud/harsh
holosystolic
@ precordium/L lower sternal border (TV ausc window)

203
Q

PDA murmur

A

machine-like
continuous
@ precordium/L lower sternal border (TV ausc window)

204
Q

MR murmur (non-prolapse)

A

high-pitched, “blowing”
holosystolic
@ apex
radiating to axilla

205
Q

AS murmur

A

harsh, crescendo-decrescendo
systolic ejection, following ejection/opening click
@ R upper sternal border
radiating to carotids & apex

206
Q

ASD murmur

A

mid-systolic
pulmonary ejection
@
with wide, fixed split S2

207
Q

MR murmur (r/t prolapse)

A

high-pitched, “blowing”
late/mid-systolic
@ apex
radiating to axilla

208
Q

fixed split S2

A

ASD

209
Q

murmur(s) ￪ with valsalva (￬venous return/preload)

A

HOCM

210
Q

murmur(s) ￪ with hand grip/fist clench (￪SVR/afterload)

A

MR,AR
VSD

211
Q

AR murmur

A

high-pitched, “blowing,” decrescendo
immediate/early diastolic
@ L sternal border/Erb’s point

212
Q

HOCM murmur

A

high-pitched, crescendo-decrescendo
mid-systolic
@ L sternal border/Erb’s point
NOT radiating to carotids (v AS)
￪ with valsalva (￬venous return/preload)

213
Q

MS murmur

A

low-pitched, rumbling
late diastolic after opening snap
@ apex

214
Q

effect of inspiration on murmurs

A

⇒ ￬intrathoracic pressure ⇒ ￪venous return ⇒ ￪RH preload & ￬LH preload ⇒ ￪RH sounds (& ￪HOCM)

215
Q

effect of expiration on murmurs

A

⇒ ￪intrathoracic pressure ⇒ ￬venous return ⇒ ￬RH preload & ￪LH preload (from inspiration? incr pulm venous return?) ⇒ ￪LH sounds (& ￬HOCM)

216
Q

effect of hand grip/fist clench on murmurs

A

⇒ ￪SVR ⇒ ￪afterload ⇒ ￪LV pressure (& ￪MR,VSD)

217
Q

effect of valsalva on murmurs

A

⇒ ￬venous return ⇒ ￬most murmurs (except ￪HOCM)

218
Q

Are there any indications for valvular stenosis based on ventricular morphology (e.g. LVESD, LVEDD)?

A

NO

219
Q

For which valve pathologies is consideration of LVESD or LVEDD part of the indications for intervention?

A

AR (severe)
- LVESD>50mm (2a)
- progressive on 3 studies ￪LVEDD to >65mm (2b)
1° MR (severe)
- LVESD≥40 (1)
- progressive on 3 studies: ￪LVESD (2b)

220
Q

LVESD threshold for severe AR

A

>50mm (2a)

221
Q

LVEDD threshold for severe AR

A

progressive on 3 studies to >65mm (2b)

222
Q

LVESD threshold for severe MR

A

≥40 (1)
OR progressive ￪ on 3 studies (2b)

223
Q

For which valve(s) pathology is LVEDD considered in the indications for intervention?

A

AR
- progressive on 3 studies ￪LVEDD to >65mm (2b)

224
Q

For which valve(s) pathology is LVESD considered in the indications for intervention?

A

AR
- LVESD>50mm (2a)
1° MR
- LVESD≥40 (1)
- progressive on 3 studies: ￪LVESD (2b)

225
Q

which of LVEDD & LVESD is considered in AR & MR

A

LVEDD = AR
LVESD = MR + AR
(A & D closer in alphabet;
M & S closer in alphabet)
but want more excuses to operate on AV

226
Q

indication(s) for intervention in [isolated] secundum ASD (adult)

A
  • ￬fxnal capacity AND
  • RA and/or RV enlargement AND
  • L🠆R shunt ⇒ physio sequelae / Qp:Qs≥1.5

if:
NO cyanosis AND
PASP < 50% SBP AND
PVR < 1/3 SVR

rx (transcath OR surgical) ⇒ ￬RV vol & ￪exercise tolerance (1)
same if asx (2a)
same if asx & no RA/RV dil with concomitant <3 surg (2a)
can consider with ￪PASP/PVR if < 2/3 SBP/SVR (2b)

227
Q

indication(s) for intervention in VSD (adult)

A
  • LV overload AND
  • L🠆R shunt ⇒ physio sequelae / Qp:Qs≥1.5

if:
PASP < 50% SBP AND
PVR < 1/3 SVR

rx (transcath OR surgical) (1)
same if no LV overload (2b)

surgical rx if perimembranous or supracristal causing worse AR (2a)
surgical rx if h/o IE attributable to VSD (2b)

228
Q

contraindication(s) intervention in of ASD (adult)

A

relative:
PASP > 50% SBP
PVR > 1/3 SVR

absolute:
PASP > 2/3 SBP
PVR > 2/3 SVR
R🠆L shunt
(3: HARM)

229
Q

contraindication(s) intervention in of VSD (adult)

A

relative:
PASP > 50% SBP
PVR > 1/3 SVR

absolute:
PASP > 2/3 SBP
PVR > 2/3 SVR
R🠆L shunt
(3: HARM)

230
Q

contraindication(s) for intervention in AVSD (adult)

A

relative:
PASP > 50% SBP
PVR > 1/3 SVR

absolute:
PASP > 2/3 SBP
PVR > 2/3 SVR
R🠆L shunt
(3: HARM)

231
Q

contraindication(s) for intervention in ASD (relative), VSD (relative), AVSD (relative), PAPVR, sinus venosus, coronary sinus defect (adult)

A
  • PASP > 50% SBP
  • PVR > 1/3 SVR
232
Q

relative contraindication(s) for intervention in ASD/VSD/AVSD (adult)

A
  • PASP > 50% SBP
  • PVR > 1/3 SVR
233
Q

absolute contraindication(s) for intervention in ASD/VSD/AVSD (adult)

A
  • PASP > 2/3 SBP
  • PVR > 2/3 SVR
  • R🠆L shunt

(3: HARM)

234
Q

indication(s) for intervention in primum ASD/sinus venosus/coronary sinus defect (adult)

A
  • ￬fxnal capacity AND
  • RA and/or RV enlargement AND
  • L🠆R shunt ⇒ physio sequelae / Qp:Qs≥1.5

if:
NO cyanosis AND
PASP < 50% SBP AND
PVR < 1/3 SVR

surgical rx (1)
primum ASD only: can consider with ￪PASP/PVR if < 2/3 SBP/SVR (2b)

235
Q

indication(s) for intervention in PAPVR incl scimitar vein (adult)

A
  • ￬fxnal capacity AND
  • RV enlargement/overload AND
  • L🠆R shunt ⇒ physio sequelae / Qp:Qs≥1.5

if:
PASP < 50% SBP AND
PVR < 1/3 SVR

surgical rx (1)
or PAPVR with concomitant ASD/sinus venosus rx (1)
or if asx (2a)

236
Q

indication(s) for intervention in severe L AV valve regurg in AVSD (adult)

A

same as for regular MR (1)

237
Q

indication(s) for intervention in AVSD (adult)

A

surgical rx of primary AVSD/residual shunts (1) if:
* L🠆R shunt with Qp:Qs≥1.5 AND
* PASP < 50% SBP AND
* PVR < 1/3 SVR
can consider with ￪PASP/PVR if < 2/3 SBP/SVR (2b)

surgical rx of LVOTO if max gradient ≥50mmHg OR <50 with HF sxs or mod+ MR or AR (2a)

238
Q

indication(s) for intervention in PDA (adult)

A
  • LA or LV enlargement (attributable to PDA) AND
  • L🠆R shunt ⇒ physio sequelae / Qp:Qs≥1.5

if:
PASP < 50% SBP AND
PVR < 1/3 SVR

rx (1)
can consider with ￪PASP/PVR if < 2/3 SBP/SVR (2b)

“Pulmonary blood flow and thus Qp:Qs can be difficult to calculate accurately because of differences in right/left PA blood flow caused by the flow from the PDA. […] Surgical closure can be performed but is potentially hazardous in adults because of calcification and tissue fragility.”

239
Q

indication(s) for intervention in subaortic stenosis (subAS) (adult)

A
  • attributable sxs + LVOT max gradient ≥50mmHg (1)
  • HF or ischemic sxs OR attributable LV systolic dysfxn + <50mmHg (1)
  • asx <50mmHg + mild+ AR ⫤ AR progression (2b)

“Pulmonary blood flow and thus Qp:Qs can be difficult to calculate accurately because of differences in right/left PA blood flow caused by the flow from the PDA. […] Surgical closure can be performed but is potentially hazardous in adults because of calcification and tissue fragility.”

240
Q

indication(s) for intervention on PR s/p rx of PS (adult)

A

PVR for:
* sxs + ≥mod PR + RV enlargement/dysfxn (1)
* asx + ≥mod PR + progressive RV enlargement/dysfxn OR progressive ￬exercise capacity (2b)

serial f/u for any PR not meeting above criteria

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 3. Isolated PR after repair of PS
https://drive.google.com/file/d/12YEO9s5RsgP5NWqfCRqR-V4VhDFJKXrJ/view
*Significant PR causes RV dilation. If a patient has moderate or greater PR and normal RV size, most likely the estimation of PR severity is inaccurate or there may be restrictive RV physiology, which would warrant further investigation.
†Symptoms may include dyspnea, chest pain, and/or exercise intolerance referable to PR or otherwise unexplained.

241
Q

mgmt of PR s/p rx of PS (adult)

A
  1. ECHO for PR severity & RV size/fxn:
    - mild PR & RV enlargement ⇒ surveil (1)
    - ≥mod PR & RV enlargement:
  2. sxs (incl exercise test):
    - +sxs ⇒ PVR (1)
    - asx ⇒ more w/u
  3. cMRI + CPET:
    - progressive RV dil/dysfxn and/or progressive ￬exercise capacity ⇒ PVR (2b)
    - stable ⇒ surveil

PVR for:
* sxs + ≥mod PR + RV enlargement/dysfxn (1)
* asx + ≥mod PR + progressive RV enlargement/dysfxn OR progressive ￬exercise capacity (2b)

serial f/u for any PR not meeting above criteria

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 3. Isolated PR after repair of PS
https://drive.google.com/file/d/12YEO9s5RsgP5NWqfCRqR-V4VhDFJKXrJ/view
*Significant PR causes RV dilation. If a patient has moderate or greater PR and normal RV size, most likely the estimation of PR severity is inaccurate or there may be restrictive RV physiology, which would warrant further investigation.
†Symptoms may include dyspnea, chest pain, and/or exercise intolerance referable to PR or otherwise unexplained.

242
Q

What determines R/L heart dominance?

A

PDA origin off RCA v LCx > LAD
= R v L dominant
= 90% v 9% v 1% co-dominant

243
Q

What is the most common heart dominance (coronary circulation)?

A

R-dominant = 90%
L = 9%
co- = 1%

244
Q

imaging recommendation for evaluating post-rx ToF

A

cMRI to quantify ventric size/fxn, PV fxn, PA anatomy, LH abnormalities (1)

245
Q

mandatory pre-intervention testing before RV-PA conduit stenting or transcatheter PVR

A

coronary artery compression testing (1)

246
Q

indication(s) for intervention on PR in ToF (adult/post-rx)

A

PVR (surgical or transcatheter) for ≥mod PR AND:

➢ +CV sxs (1)
⇒ ￬sxs

➢ asx + ≥2 of: (2a)
- ≥mild RV/LV dysfxn
- RV dil
(RVEDVI≥160mL/m2 /
RVESVI≥80mL/m2 /
RVEDV ≥2x LVEDV)
- RVSP 2/2 RVOTO ≥2/3 SBP
- progressive ￬exercise tolerance
⇒ preserve RV size/fxn

➢ sustained [ventricular] tachyarrhythmias (2b)
➢ surg PVR for concomitant <3 surg (other residual lesions requiring surgical rx) (2b)

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 4. Pulmonary valve replacement in patients with TOF repair and PR
https://drive.google.com/file/d/12bncSXwY_LVaRkXGWUbrYB0nL2J7lqgv/view

247
Q

indication(s) for ICD in ToF (adult/post-rx)

A

multiple RFs: ICD ⇒ 1° ppx of SCD (2a)

RFs:
- LV systolic or diastolic dysfxn
- non-sustained VT
- QRS≥180
- extensive RV scarring/fibrosis (on CMR)
- inducible sustained VT on EP

248
Q

indications for RV-PA conduit intervention (adult)

A
  • ≥mod PR/PS + ￬fxnal capacity OR arrhythmia (2a)
  • asx + severe PR/PS + ￬RV RF or RV dil (2b)
249
Q

“classic”/old definition of PAH/pHTN

A

mPAP≥25 & PVR≥3.0 Wu

mean PA pressure (mPAP) ≥ 25 mmHg + pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) ≥ 3.0 Woods units (WU)

250
Q

new/current definition of PAH/pHTN

A

mPAP>20 & PVR>2.0 Wu

mean PA pressure (mPAP) > 20 mmHg + pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 2.0 Woods units (WU)

251
Q

indication(s) to operate on anomalous aortic origin of coronary artery (AAOCA)

A

LCA from R sinus: YES
- +sx/exercise test/ischemia (1)
- asx (2a)

RCA from L sinus: PROB
- +sx/exercise test/ischemia (1)
- +ventric arrhythmias (2a)
- asx (2b) OR obs (2b)

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 5. Anomalous aortic origin of the coronary artery
https://drive.google.com/file/d/137Gl6zTGTsGJNG_poFug5pePohBSIlMh/view

252
Q

indication(s) to operate on anomalous aortic origin of R coronary artery (R AAOCA)

A

RCA from L sinus: PROB
- +sx/exercise test/ischemia (1)
- +ventric arrhythmias (2a)
- asx (2b) OR obs (2b)

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 5. Anomalous aortic origin of the coronary artery
https://drive.google.com/file/d/137Gl6zTGTsGJNG_poFug5pePohBSIlMh/view

253
Q

indication(s) to operate on anomalous aortic origin of L coronary artery (L AAOCA)

A

LCA from R sinus: YES
- +sx/exercise test/ischemia (1)
- asx (2a)

AHA ACHD guideline
Figure 5. Anomalous aortic origin of the coronary artery
https://drive.google.com/file/d/137Gl6zTGTsGJNG_poFug5pePohBSIlMh/view

254
Q

w/u for anomalous aortic origin of coronary artery (AAOCA)

A
  • any or all of: CTA > LH cath (coronary angio) > cMRI (1)
  • “anatomic & physiologic” eval for LCA from R sinus OR RCA from L sinus (1)
255
Q

clinical considerations for risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in anomalous aortic origin of coronary artery (AAOCA)

A
  • <35yo (relative)
  • slit-like/fish-mouth-shaped orifice (more common with RCA from L sinus)
  • acute
  • acute angle take-off
  • intramural course
  • interarterial course
  • hypoplasia of prox coronary artery
  • LCA from R sinus (less common than RCA from L but ? ∝ higher risk of SCD; LCA from R also ∝ myocardial fibrosis)
  • SCD ∝ exercise

  • age: “AAOCA is more commonly invoked as the cause of SCD in patients <35 y of age than in patients >35 y of age, in whom atherosclerotic coronary disease becomes a more prevalent cause. However, death has been attributed to AAOCA in patients of all ages; there does not seem to be an age beyond which the AAOCA may not be relevant, even in the setting of atherosclerotic coronary disease and other concomitant conditions.”
  • anatomy: “Slit-like/fish-mouth-shaped orifice, acute angle takeoff, intramural course, interarterial course and hypoplasia of the proximal coronary artery have all been proposed as reasons for symptoms, ischemia and SCD in patients with AAOCA. The slitlike orifice is more commonly seen in anomalous right coronary artery arising from the left sinus. Each of these anatomic findings offers a pathophysiological mechanism for intermittent ischemia, particularly at times of high cardiac output and/or increased aortic wall tension, such as during exercise.”
  • anomalous origin: “Left coronary artery arising from the right cusp is less common than the right coronary artery arising from the left cusp but is more often found in autopsy series of SCD. This suggests that anomalous origin of the left coronary artery from the right cusp is more likely to cause SCD than anomalous origin of the right coronary artery from the left cusp. This may be due either to anatomic features that make anomalous aortic origin of the left coronary artery prone to coronary compromise or because a larger proportion of myocardium is supplied by the left coronary artery, or both.” / “Anomalous left coronary from the right sinus is less common than anomalous right coronary from the left sinus, but anomalous left coronary artery from the right is more commonly found in autopsy series of athletes and military recruits who had nontraumatic death than right coronary from the left sinus. The overrepresentation of the anomalous left coronary from the right sinus suggests a higher risk of SCD, particular at extremes of exertion and in patients <35 years of age.”
  • exercise: “Autopsy series suggest a most patients die during, or in close temporal association with, exercise.”
  • ischemia: “Autopsy series demonstrate myocardial fibrosis in a significant number of patients whose deaths were attributed to AAOCA, particularly in patients with anomalous left coronary artery arising from the right cusp. Surgical series describe patients with ischemia or MI before surgical repair in the absence of other CAD, suggesting a relation of the coronary anomaly to the ischemia. This suggests that had perfusion imaging been obtained before SCD, ischemia would have been found in such patients. However, other data indicate that a normal stress test does not preclude a SCD event, with the proviso that most of those studies used only stress ECG, rather than the more sensitive and specific modalities of nuclear perfusion imaging or stress echocardiography. In addition, postoperative studies have shown that ischemia may be found after surgical repair in the distribution not supplied by the abnormal coronary artery and may not persist on repeat testing.” / “However, there are patients in whom a SCD event occurred despite normal stress ECG, and consequently absence of ischemia is not reassuring. Autopsy series show that many patients whose death is attributed to anomalous coronary arteries are young, thus management of patients should take age into account, with heightened concern about the risk of sudden death in younger patients.”
  • symptoms: “In autopsy and surgical series, a significant number of patients reported cardiovascular symptoms, including before SCD events. Symptoms are more commonly reported in patients in whom the left coronary artery arises from the right sinus. Surgical series have described improvement in symptoms after surgical repair.”
    Table 34. Factors That May Relate to the Clinical Importance of AAOCA and Risk of SCD https://drive.google.com/file/d/1312p1L2P2nXBnWRC0DiHgfFpr8FMswI-/view
256
Q

approach(es)/intervention(s) for anomalous aortic origin of coronary artery (AAOCA)

A

AHA: unroofing OR coronary revascularization (bypass) for concomitant fixed obstruction
OR re-implantation???

257
Q

indication(s) to operate on anomalous origin of L coronary artery from PA (ALCAPA)

A

YES (1)

258
Q

indication(s) to operate on anomalous origin of R coronary artery from PA (ARCAPA)

A

+sx (1)
asx + ventric dysfxn or attributable myocardial ischemia (2a)

259
Q

approach(es)/intervention(s) for anomalous origin of L/R coronary artery from PA (ALCAPA/ARCAPA)

A

AHA: aortic reimplantation ± interposition graft OR ligation/closure @ level of PA + bypass (CABG: LIMA-LAD or RIMA-RCA/PDA)

260
Q

annual rate of stroke in CHA2DS2-VASc score = 2 ♂ / 3 ♀

A

>2%
(considered high, v 1-2% intermediate & <1% low)

261
Q

indication(s) for percutaneous LAAO (LA appendage occlusion)

A

afib + mod-high stroke risk (CHA2DS2-VASc≥2):
- + contraindication to long-term anticoag (2a)
- + high risk of major bleeding (2b)
(as alternative to anticoag)

262
Q

indication(s) for surgical LAAE (LA appendage exclusion/excision)

A

afib + concomitant <3 surg + CHA2DS2-VASc score≥2 or equivalent stroke risk:
- in add’n to anticoag ⇒ ￬stroke,syst embo (1)
- without ongoing anticoag (2b: uncertain)

[LAAE surgical technique should ⇒ ∅flow & stump <1cm by intraop TEE (1)]

263
Q

indication(s) for surgical ablation (Cox maze) for afib

A
  • afib + concomitant <3 surg (2a) ⇒ ￬recurrent afib
  • sx, persistent, Rx-refrx afib: hypbrid epicardial + endocardial ablation ⇒ ￬recurrent atrial arrhythmia (2b)

“Among patients with AF or AFL, concomitant surgical ablation at the time of cardiac surgery has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrent atrial arrhythmia. However, it is associated with an increased risk of renal dysfunction and pacemaker placement.”

264
Q

minimum ACT to go on bypass

A

480

265
Q

minimum ACT to cannulate

A

200-250
OR empiric hep dose of 5000-10000u OR 100u/kg
OR 300 (CTS 2e)

200 = Salim (“to manipulate the arch/prox Ao”)
250 = ???
5k empiric = BTK??? + JT or Julie
10k empiric = Kim
100u/kg = ~7k typical 70kg pt = Salim

266
Q

STICH

A

???
aneurysm rx no benefit
reduced EF benefit

267
Q

STICH-ES

A

???

268
Q

BARI

A

???
multivessel diabetic

269
Q

SYNTAX

A

???
CABG v PCI

270
Q

steps if ACT inadequate after heparin

A
  1. give more heparin
  2. check for a “bad batch”/new vial
  3. ATIII > FFP
271
Q

mgmt of air embolus on CPB

A
  1. STOP BYPASS (clamp lines)
  2. head down (reverse T) + 100% FiO2 + steroids ± barbiturate ± mannitol
  3. de-air circuit & resume CPB + cool to 18°
  4. RCP with aortic root vent on
  5. hyperbaric O2 if within 5h of OR
272
Q

minimum stenosis to use a radial artery bypass graft

A

90% R
80% L

273
Q

minimum stenosis to use a radial artery bypass graft on a R-sided lesion

A

90%

274
Q

minimum stenosis to use a radial artery bypass graft on a L-sided lesion

A

80%

275
Q

location/course of persistent L SVC

A

origin: L IJ & L subclv jxn
course: to L of desc Ao, crosses behind LA
drainage: coronary sinus

276
Q

incidence of persistent L SVC

A

~3%

277
Q

protamine dose

A

1mg/100u hep

278
Q

endovascular interventional wire sizing

A

diameter (in) x length (cm)

279
Q

most common cause of/etiology underlying spontaneous bloody/hemorrhagic pericardial effusion

A

CA (~1/3)

SESATS: “The presence of a hemorrhagic effusion is most likely due to malignancy. In a series of large symptomatic pericardial effusion, this was the cause in 1/3 of cases. Chronic-idiopathic (14%), acute pericarditis (12%), trauma (12%), and uremia (6%) were other causes of this type of effusion.”

280
Q

idiopathic(/viral) pericarditis mgmt

A
  1. NSAIDS (ASA650/ibu800 TID) + colchicine (0.6 QD/BID) ￫ taper NSAIDS once improved, complete 3mo colchicine
  2. steroids only if NSAIDS contraindicated or fails

UpToDate:
The daily maintenance dose of colchicine is weight-based:
●≥70 kg = 0.5 to 0.6 mg BID
●<70 kg = 0.5 to 0.6 mg QD
“Duration of treatment is based upon the resolution of symptoms, which usually occurs in two weeks or less, with tapering once the patient is symptom-free for at least 24 hours.”
“Failure to respond to aspirin or NSAID therapy within one week (defined as persistence of fever, pleuritic chest pain, a new pericardial effusion, or worsening of general illness) suggests that a cause other than idiopathic or viral pericarditis is present.”
“Recurrent pericarditis is manifested by recurrence of the symptoms and signs of acute pericarditis after a symptom-free interval of at least four to six weeks.”
“Symptoms of recurrent pericarditis occur at a variable time after the initial attack, but usually within 18 months.”

281
Q

recurrent idiopathic(/viral) pericarditis mgmt

A

same as 1st episode:
1. NSAIDS (ASA650/ibu800 TID) + colchicine (0.6 QD/BID) ￫ taper NSAIDS once improved, complete 3mo colchicine
2. steroids only if NSAIDS contraindicated or fails

SESATS:
“Recurrent pericarditis is a challenging problem for clinicians and is a disabling issue for patients. The most common presenting symptoms of recurrent pericarditis are generally the same as those which are seen during the initial episode. Recurrence after initially successful treatment typically occurs within 18 months and often adversely affects the patient’s quality of life.
While no specific clinical feature of an initial episode of acute pericarditis consistently predicts recurrence, an initial successful treatment with aspirin or NSAIDs is associated with a reduced risk of recurrence. In contradistinction, initial therapy with glucocorticoids is associated with a greater risk of recurrence. Most patients with recurrent pericarditis can be managed effectively with medical therapy on an outpatient basis.
Combination therapy with colchicine and NSAIDs for recurrent pericarditis has been evaluated in 3 randomized, placebo-controlled trials as well as 2 systematic reviews and shown to significantly benefit patients. Furthermore, it has been shown to lower the risk of further recurrent episodes. Intrapericardial steroids achieve high local steroid concentrations while limiting systemic toxicity, however, this treatment is viewed as a last resort, especially in patients who experienced severe side effects of systemic therapy. In the small amount of patients who do not respond to conventional therapy or who do not tolerate first- and second-line medications, the addition of immune therapy can be considered in the form of azathioprine, anakinra, or human IVIg.”

282
Q

differentiating features of constrictive pericarditis & restrictive cardiomyopathy

A

constrictive pericarditis v restrictive CM, respectively:
- ￪resp var in ventric filling v minimal
- rapid early diastolic filling v slow
- “square root” sign of rapid filling then rapid stop v gradual
- equalization of ventricular pressures v L>R
- ventricular interdependence v not

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19PZ8DYC_G3iDUAqdiGt6er67itYLA_Li/view

283
Q

diagnosis of CTEPH

A
  • PAP>25
  • PCWP<15
  • mult chronic/organized occlusive thrombi/emboli in PAs after ≥3mo anticoag
  • V/Q scan showing ≥1 segmental+ perfusion defect(s)
284
Q

predictors of afib recurrence after Cox maze

A
  • age
  • duration of preop afib
  • LA dil
285
Q

freedom from recurrent afib after concomitant Cox maze with MVRx

A

>80%
(SESATS: 3/6/12mo = 85%/81%/84%)

286
Q

risk of PPM with Cox maze (standalone/no concomitant procedures)

A

~5%
(￪ with add’l proc)

287
Q

risk of PPM with biatrial v L atrial Cox maze

A

14% v 6%

SESATS: “The need for permanent pacemaker (PPM) insertion after lone Cox Maze IV (CMIV) has been reported as 5% and increases when the CMIV is performed as a concomitant procedure, most commonly after valvular heart surgery. While many centers only offer surgical ablation as a biatrial procedure in order to address atrial fibrillation (AF) originating from the right atria, many centers offer a left atrial CMIV lesion set only. This reserves biatrial procedures to patients with prolonged AF history or with rightsided heart disease and right atrial enlargement. The biatrial lesion set is associated with an increased need for PPM (13.6% compared with 6.3%, P= 0.028).
Left atrial diameter and duration of atrial fibrillation are predictors of recurrent atrial fibrillation but are not predictors of the pacemaker requirement.
The primary indication for PPM after a biatrial lesion set after a CMIV was sinoatrial node dysfunction (40%–68%). Atrioventricular (AV) block, when present after concomitant surgical ablation, is typically reflective of AV nodal injury, which is most commonly attributed to the valvular procedure that is performed. Concomitant coronary artery bypass grafting does not increase the risk of pacemaker requirement.”

288
Q

ppx abx before cardiac surgery

A
  • 1st-gen ceph
  • +vanc if implanting prosthetic OR pt high-risk for Staph
289
Q

amount of aortic root you can repair before having to replace (e.g. in endocarditis)

A

up to 1/3 (BTK)

290
Q

max re-warming rate coming off DHCA

A

1°C/2min / 0.5°C/1min
max arterial outflow : venous inflow ∆ = 10°C
(BTK: max core : periph temp ∆ ≤5°C)

SESATS: “When cooling and rewarming, the temperature gradient from the arterial outlet to the venous blood temperature should not exceed 10° C to prevent the formation of gaseous emboli. The maximum arterial temperature should be 37° C to prevent cerebral hyperthermia. The maximum rewarming rate should be less than 0.5° C per minute.”

291
Q

mgmt of acute L-sided mech valve thrombosis +sx

A

urgent slow-infusion, low-dose fibronlysis (tPA) OR emergency surgery

292
Q

mgmt of bp valve thrombosis, hemodynamically stable

A

hep drip ￫ warfarin

293
Q

ECHO criteria in order of increasing #s for regurgitant valve criteria (in general/all 3)

A

alphabetical:
1. EROA
(0.1-0.3/0.2-0.4x2)
2. jet
(25-65/20-40/>50)
3. RF
(30-50/30-50/X)
4. RVol
(30-60/30-60/30-45)
5. vena contracta
(0.3-0.6/0.3-0.7x2)

294
Q
A
295
Q

peak gradient in mild RVOTO

A

<36

296
Q

peak gradient in moderate RVOTO

A

36-64

297
Q

peak gradient in severe RVOTO

A

>64

298
Q

peak gradient in severe RVOTO

A

>64

299
Q

vmax in mild RVOTO

A

<3

300
Q

vmax in moderate RVOTO

A

3-4

301
Q

vmax in severe RVOTO

A

>4

302
Q

secondary lesion a/w PA sling

A

tracheal stenosis/complete tracheal rings

303
Q

Cox maze IV lesions

A

Pulmonary vein box
LAA
Crossing mitral valve
SVC IVC
RAA
Crossing tricuspid valve
Corinary sinus?

304
Q

configuration of PA sling

A

ring around trachea only
- L PA anomalously arises from R PA instead of main PA & courses between trachea & esophagus (=R&posterior)
- normal R PA (=anterior)
- ligamentum arteriosum (=L)

only ring/sling that courses between trachea & esophagus

only ring/sling that creates anterior compression of esophagus

  • https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DD4xt3c3yaYBj3GN0K6AlgDw24xsOKP7/view
  • https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DEm-GXr3rW1JYlc-FG-TVGGXpOiGv_Wy/view
  • https://drive.google.com/file/d/1DFXtxr8JzewSV7q9mxk-duvDX-mKWltF/view
305
Q

indication(s) for rx of recurrent CoA (coarcation) in adult

A
  • peak to peak gradient >20
  • HTN
306
Q

mgmt of recurrent CoA (coarctation) in adult

A

stent > balloon
stent > surgery

SESATS: “The incidence of recoarctation is between 5% – 14%. It is most common when the repair is done in neonates (<30 days) and to a lesser extent infants (<1yo). The presence of hypoplasia in the transverse arch also increases the chance of recurrent arch gradient. Indications for intervention in the setting of recurrent coarctation include hypertension and a peak-topeak gradient across the area of stenosis >20 mmHg, both of which are present in the patient described. Guidelines from the American College of Cardiology and the American Heart Association recommend percutaneous catheter intervention as the preferred treatment of choice for the management of discrete recoarctation. This is based, in part, on the fact that mortality for re-operation is significant at 1% – 3%, and it can be as high as 5% – 10% if there is significant left ventricular dysfunction.”

307
Q

PAPi definition

A

PA pulsatility index = PAPP (pulse pressure) ÷ CVP

= “how much pressure is the RV able to generate relative to RA pressure” (BTK)

308
Q

PAPi normal limit

A

≥5.5

309
Q

SVR normal limit

A

800-1200

310
Q

definition of cardiogenic shock

A

CI<2.2

311
Q

PCWP normal limit

A

4-12

312
Q

type of valvular dysfxn with a diastolic murmur

A

regurg

313
Q

type of valvular dysfxn with a systolic murmur

A

stenosis
= systolic

314
Q

Where is the central fibrous body & what structures comprise it?

A

NCC base/nadir
membranous septum + R trigone

oral boards (15 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions