p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Narra J
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Nearly catastrophe coronary perforation: Is it second drug-eluting stent effective? Munirwan, Haris; Hadi, Tjut F.; Purnawarman, Adi; Latief, Muhammad H.; Wattanasiriporn, Wittawat; Yusrizal, Teuku
Narra J Vol. 4 No. 1 (2024): April 2024
Publisher : Narra Sains Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52225/narra.v4i1.637

Abstract

Coronary artery perforation (CAP) is an uncommon yet serious complication. Although severe perforations (Ellis III) have become more frequent, the overall mortality rate associated with perforations (7.5%) has decreased in recent years. Unfortunately, our medical facility cannot always access a cover stent. The aim of this case report was to demonstrate the effectiveness of using a second drug-eluting stent as an alternative and successful treatment approach in a CAP patient. This is the case of a 67-year-old female with stable angina pectoris Canadian Cardiovascular Society classification III (CCS III), three-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), who declined CABG (Syntax score of 44) and had type II diabetes mellitus. The patient underwent elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and we identified diffuse stenosis in the proximal to distal portions of the left anterior descending artery (LAD) with extensive calcification. Furthermore, there was a chronic total occlusion (CTO) in obtuse marginal (OM) 2, as well as critical stenosis in OM3, 80% stenosis in the proximal part of right coronary artery (RCA), 90% stenosis in the middle of the RCA, 90–95% in the distal RCA, and diffuse stenosis ranging from 70–80% in the distal posterolateral. During the procedure to alleviate the stenosis in the left circumflex artery (LCx), we encountered a coronary perforation classified as Ellis type III while using a 2.5/20 mm NC balloon inflated to 12 atm for 12 seconds. In response, we performed stent placement from the proximal LCx to OM2 using the Xience Xpedition drug-eluting stent (DES) measuring 2.5/28 mm. Subsequently, we conducted extended balloon inflation (intermittent) for five minutes. Despite these efforts, the coronary perforation, still classified as Ellis type III, persisted. We decided to employ intrastent stenting (a second DES strategy) with the Coroflex Isar DES measuring 2.5/28 mm, followed by prolonged balloon inflation. The outcome revealed no remaining perforation, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) III flow, and no complications such as pericardial effusion after 48 hours of monitoring. The implantation of a second DES proved to be a practical approach for managing a significant CAP.
ACE inhibitors versus angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors for HFrEF management: A prospective cohort study from Indonesia Heriansyah, Teuku; Lestari, Nova D.; Hadi, Tjut F.; Novia, Rizki; Munawarah, Iffah; Taufiqurrahman, Taufiqurrahman; Yuvhendmindo, Shahcoga L.; Bashori, Ahmad A.
Narra J Vol. 4 No. 3 (2024): December 2024
Publisher : Narra Sains Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52225/narra.v4i3.978

Abstract

Previous studies have reported that angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI) are superior to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) in treating heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Unfortunately, previously published studies predominantly focused on Western populations, while the data remains insufficient in developing countries. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacies of ARNI and ACEI on patients with HFrEF in Indonesia. A prospective cohort study was conducted among heart failure patients at Dr. Zainoel Abidin Hospital, Banda Aceh, Indonesia. Both ACEI and ARNI each consisted of 40 subjects receiving standard treatment for heart failure. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), quality of life (QoL), suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (ST2), and troponin T were measured upon admission and at the end of the follow-up. In addition, the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was observed during 6 months of follow-up. Paired t-test was used to compare the outcomes of ACEI and ARNI. The results revealed that KKCQ score and LVEF were improved in both ARNI and ACEI groups (each with p<0.001). A higher KCCQ overall score was observed in the ARNI group in contrast to the ACEI group (p=0.01). ARNI demonstrated superior results in improving the ejection fraction as compared with ACEI (p=0.001). Troponin T and ST2 levels exhibited no significant difference between the two groups (p=0.07 and 0.286, respectively). MACE-associated mortality (p=0.696) and rehospitalization (p=0.955) were identical between both groups. In conclusion, ARNI was more efficacious than ACEI in improving the quality of life and left ventricular ejection fraction of patients with HFrEF. However, the efficacy was not significantly different in reducing the risk of MACE.