The pros and cons of the Heart Team

The lost balloon at midnight: a case report reveals the inevitability of heart team existence

BACKGROUND

Dislodgement of a coronary stent-balloon catheter during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is rare but is a life-threatening complication. A 57- year-old male presented with a non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Coronary angiography revealed total thrombotic occlusion of the Right coronary artery (RCA). Following the balloon dilatation of the RCA and while trying to retrieve the balloon catheter, the balloon was dislodged from the catheter shaft and entrapped in the coronary vessel. Under cardiopulmonary bypass, with antegrade cardioplegic arrest, the balloon was extracted through a coronary arteriotomy. Right coronary revascularization was done with reversed saphenous vein graft (SVG).

DISCUSSION

Given the variety of equipment that can be retained in the coronary artery and the multitude of mechanisms by which it may be entrapped, there are no straightforward techniques applicable to all situations. Specific guidelines or recommendations on properly managing these potentially life-threatening complications do not exist. However, the most crucial issue in the management of these cases is the hemodynamic status of the patient as well as the coronary flow in the vessel with entrapped device or stent. In our case, the RCA was retrogradely perfused from the left coronary artery, which provided time to transfer the patient to cardiovascular surgical backup.

Quality and process improvement of the multidisciplinary Heart Team meeting using Lean Six Sigma

INTRODUCTION

The Heart Team is a multidisciplinary meeting for shared decision-making in cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery. A quality improvement project to optimise the Heart Team was initiated after the merger of the cardiac centres of Amsterdam University Medical Centre.

METHODS

Lean Six Sigma was applied with the purpose of improving efficiency and quality of care. Qualitative and quantitative analyses supported the multidisciplinary team during quality improvement sessions. Lean Six Sigma tools included process mapping, gemba walks, root cause analysis, line balancing, first time right, standardised work and poka-yoke.

INTERVENTIONS

Seven areas of improvement were introduced. Key elements were the improvement of the patient referral process, introduction of a structured agenda, task division and balanced planning of patients, better exchange of information, improved availability of diagnostics and supportive tools and information technology. Work agreements were introduced to support a positive work culture and mutual respect.

RESULTS

Lean Six Sigma designed an optimised Heart Team to improve efficiency by better resource utilisation, first time right decision-making, patient selection, complete and better access to information and elimination of waste. It leads to higher quality of decision-making by involving physicians in a more structured preparation, attendance of an imaging cardiologist, meeting duration within limits, installation of standard operating procedures, increased involvement of the referring cardiologists and a better engaged team.

CONCLUSIONS

Heart Teams are essential to make evidence-based, patient-centred treatment plans for optimal patient outcomes. However, clinical practice and experience showed that it is challenging to have an efficient and effective discussion with complete patient information and to bring together healthcare professionals. The application of Lean Six Sigma resulted in an optimised Heart Team and created a best practice design for patient-centred, evidence-based decision-making. After implementation and process stability, a postintervention analysis could clarify long-term success and sustainability.

Cardionephrology from the point of view of the cardiologist: no more agree to disagree-getting to 'yes' for every patient

Whether one wants to or not, interactions between the heart and the kidneys exist and manifest nevertheless. Both from theoretical and clinical perspectives, it seems the need for a subspecialty of cardionephrology seems justified. Our editorial is a cardiologist perspective on the article by Diez and Ortiz published in Clinical Kidney Journal related to the 'need for a cardionephrology subspecialty'. We analysed the historical similarities of the emergence of already ingrained clinical fields with the current needs in the cardionephrology sector. We motivated our approach based on novel cardiovascular diagnostic and therapeutic developments and significant pathophysiological differences from a cardiological perspective, accounting for the foundation of a novel sustainable medical field. One of the sensitive issues we also addressed was the operationality and applicability of the principles. We answered with some examples from high-risk debatable contexts the question of where a cardionephrologist should be integrated. Clarifying the operationality aspects would be a positive shift towards improving guidelines adherence in managing complex patients. In conclusion, we underline that the necessity of a cardionephrologist must be addressed from an operational and scientific perspective, with the ultimate goal of reducing mortality and complications in cardiorenal patients.

Shifting Paradigms in Cardiovascular Therapeutic Strategies During the COVID-19 Era

The coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) period have dictated a different approach to cardiac interventions at our medical institution. We prioritize emergent care geared toward lesser invasive approaches while minimizing hospitalization duration. This reflects upon coronary and structural/valvular cases altogether. Despite potential criticism of this approach, we believe it is the most appropriate therapeutic strategy for this unique period. Further investigation is needed to examine the external validity of our approach in other medical centers worldwide.