Jan-06

Dear Readers, This issue of the Journal of Invasive Cardiology commences our 18th year of publication. There has been incredible growth in the field of invasive cardiology during 2005. Many of these growth areas have challenged the boundaries of traditional medical specialties. The year 2006 will undoubtedly include continued evolution in the areas of cardiac imaging, carotid artery stenting, percutaneous approaches to valve repair, genomics and stem cell research. My goal for the journal is to see that it continues to adapt and provide information that is critically important to our readership. The growth of the journal over the past year would not have been possible without the commitment of HMP Communications. I want to thank the HMP leadership and staff for all of the support they have provided. I also want to thank our editorial board members and reviewers who have spent countless hours reviewing manuscripts submitted to the journal. And finally, I want to thank the authors who contributed such excellent manuscripts for publication in the Journal of Invasive Cardiology during the year 2005. In addition to the original research, rapid communication, and articles from the journal special sections, there are also 7 excellent case reports that are being published online at www.invasivecardiology.com. I encourage you to visit the website to read these informative case reports. Two new sessions from the International Andreas Gruentzig Society 8th biennial meeting entitled Percutaneous Abdominal Aortic Disease Management and Industry Roundtable: Where are the New Drugs? can also be found on the website. The first research article presents results from the Integrilin Reduces Inflammation in Peripheral Vascular Interventions (INFLAME) trial, submitted by Dr. Nicolas Shammas and collaborators. They found no significant difference in markers of acute inflammation, comparing patients who received low-dose heparin and Integrilin versus those receiving high-dose unfractionated heparin. Dr. John Young of the editorial board has provided a commentary that extends the discussion of the issues surrounding inflammatory markers. In the second original contribution, Dr. Raul Moreno and colleagues from the Hospital Clinico San Carlos in Madrid, assess the prognostic impact of a chronic occlusion in a noninfarct vessel in patients presenting with AMI and multivessel disease who undergo primary PCI. Patients with a chronic occlusion in a noninfarct artery had poorer clinical outcomes during the 2-year follow up compared to those with single-vessel disease or those with multivessel disease and no chronic occlusion in the noninfarct vessel. Dr. David Ramsdale provides a commentary to accompany this paper. Next, Stephen Worthley and colleagues from the Royal Adelaide Hospital, report their work related to arterial remodeling with serological evidence of inflammation in patients with chronic stable angina pectoris. Using IVUS to quantify arterial modeling, they demonstrated a correlation between positive coronary artery remodeling and serologic markers of inflammation. In the Acute Coronary Syndromes section, Dr. Carlos Gottschall and colleagues from the Institute of Cardiology of Rio Grande do Sul, present their approach to predicting target vessel revascularization rates using a unique scoring system. Drs. Frederick Welt and Douglas Losordo of the editorial board have provided a commentary to accompany this article. Next in this section, Dr. Alberto Hendler and associates from the Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, present research assessing the efficacy of different agents (nitroprusside, adenosine or verapamil) in increasing myocardial perfusion in patients with no myocardial opacification. They found that nitroprusside was most effective in reaching a myocardial blush grade 3 in the setting of primary angioplasty for AMI, with subsequent improvement in left ventricular ejection fraction at 30 days. This issue also includes a Rapid Communication submission. Dr. Nuccia Morici, et al. from San Raffaele Hospital, describe a novel approach to implanting DES that involves placing two stents, one inside the other, as a “sandwich” in lesions at high risk for plaque prolapse or stent recoil. They showed that this technique is safe and the follow-up results at 9 months appear promising. In the Clinical Images special section, Drs. Martin, Lazano and Moris from the Hospital Central de Asturias, present an interesting illustration of the occurrence of myocardial staining during left ventriculography with a pigtail catheter. This issue also includes excellent case reports that can be found online. Two of these focus on pediatric conditions. Drs. Shenoy and colleagues from the Manipal Heart Foundation describe their treatment of a young child with tetrology of Fallot with a restrictive septal defect that was successfully managed with right ventricular outflow tract stenting. Second, Dr. Mark Hoyer from the Indiana University School of Medicine, describes his experience of transcatheter closure of atypical right-to-left shunts after Fontan surgery. Several of the cases focus on issues in the use of DES. In the first, Drs. Anandaraja and colleagues from the All India Institute, describe a patient who experienced coronary artery aneurysm following DES implantation. Next, Drs. Rashid, Saucedo and Hennebry report the one-year follow up in a cardiac transplant patient who received a sirolimus DES. Drs. Justin Levisay and Paul Vaitkus from the University of Illinois describe their management of a patient who had recurrent chest pain from an unrecognized stent embolization. Drs. Zajarias, Thanigaraj and Taniuchi from the Washington University School of Medicine describe a patient with acute coronary occlusion and MI secondary to blunt chest trauma from an automobile air bag deployment. Drs. Josef Veselka and David Zemanek from the University Hospital Motol, describe a double-catheter technique in a patient with an aneurysm of the ascending aorta. It is my hope that all of the articles in this issue provide information that is useful for cardiovascular specialists in their daily care of patients with cardiovascular disease. Sincerely, Richard E. Shaw, PhD, FACC, FACA Editor-in-Chief