Search

BACKGROUND: A polypill that includes key medications associated with improved outcomes (aspirin, angiotensin-converting-enzyme [ACE] inhibitor, and statin) has been proposed as a simple approach to the secondary prevention of cardiovascular death and complications after myocardial infarction. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, controlled clinical trial, we assigned patients with myocardial infarction within the previous 6 months to a polypill-based strategy or usual care. The polypill treatment consisted of aspirin (100 mg), ramipril (2.5, 5, or 10 mg), and atorvastatin (20 or 40 mg). The primary composite outcome was cardiovascular death, nonfatal type 1 myocardial infarction, nonfatal ischemic stroke, or urgent revascularization. The key secondary end point was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal type 1 myocardial infarction, or nonfatal ischemic stroke. RESULTS: A total of 2499 patients underwent randomization and were followed for a median of 36 months. A primary-outcome event occurred in 118 of 1237 patients (9.5%) in the polypill group and in 156 of 1229 (12.7%) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.96; P = 0.02). A key secondary-outcome event occurred in 101 patients (8.2%) in the polypill group and in 144 (11.7%) in the usual-care group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.90; P = 0.005). The results were consistent across prespecified subgroups. Medication adherence as reported by the patients was higher in the polypill group than in the usual-care group. Adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a polypill containing aspirin, ramipril, and atorvastatin within 6 months after myocardial infarction resulted in a significantly lower risk of major adverse cardiovascular events than usual care. (Funded by the European Union Horizon 2020; SECURE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02596126; EudraCT number, 2015-002868-17.).

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of fractional flow reserve (FFR)–guided revascularization compared with culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) on infarct size, left ventricular (LV), function, LV remodeling, and the presence of nonculprit infarctions. Background: Patients with STEMI with multivessel disease might have improved clinical outcomes after complete revascularization compared with PCI of the infarct-related artery only, but the impact on infarct size, LV function, and remodeling as well as the risk for periprocedural infarction are unknown. Methods: In this substudy of the DANAMI-3 (Third Danish Trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction)–PRIMULTI (Primary PCI in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: Treatment of Culprit Lesion Only or Complete Revascularization) randomized trial, patients with STEMI with multivessel disease were randomized to receive either complete FFR-guided revascularization or PCI of the culprit vessel only. The patients underwent cardiac magnetic resonance imaging during index admission and at 3-month follow-up. Results: A total of 280 patients (136 patients with infarct-related and 144 with complete FFR-guided revascularization) were included. There were no differences in final infarct size (median 12% [interquartile range: 5% to 19%] vs. 11% [interquartile range: 4% to 18%]; p = 0.62), myocardial salvage index (median 0.71 [interquartile range: 0.54 to 0.89] vs. 0.66 [interquartile range: 0.55 to 0.87]; p = 0.49), LV ejection fraction (mean 58 ± 9% vs. 59 ± 9%; p = 0.39), and LV end-systolic volume remodeling (mean 7 ± 22 ml vs. 7 ± 19 ml; p = 0.63). New nonculprit infarction occurring after the nonculprit intervention was numerically more frequent among patients treated with complete revascularization (6 [4.5%] vs. 1 [0.8%]; p = 0.12). Conclusions: Complete FFR-guided revascularization in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease did not affect final infarct size, LV function, or remodeling compared with culprit-only PCI.

BACKGROUND: Although recent studies suggest that measuring coronary artery calcification (CAC) may be superior to indirect atherosclerotic markers in predicting cardiac risk, there are limited data evaluating imaging-based biomarkers that directly quantify atherosclerosis in different vascular beds performed in a single cohort.OBJECTIVES: The BioImage Study (A Clinical Study of Burden of Atherosclerotic Disease in an At-Risk Population) sought to identify imaging biomarkers that predict near-term (3-year) atherothrombotic events.METHODS: The BioImage Study enrolled 5,808 asymptomatic U.S. adults (mean age: 69 years, 56.5% female) in a prospective cohort evaluating the role of vascular imaging on cardiovascular risk prediction. All patients were evaluated by CAC and novel 3-dimensional carotid ultrasound. Plaque areas from both carotid arteries were summed as the carotid plaque burden (cPB). The primary endpoint was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic stroke). A broader secondary MACE endpoint also included all-cause death, unstable angina, and coronary revascularization.RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 2.7 years, MACE occurred in 216 patients (4.2%), of which 82 (1.5%) were primary events. After adjustment for risk factors, and compared with individuals without any cPB, hazard ratios for MACE were 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31 to 1.91), 1.45 (95% CI: 0.67 to 3.14), and 2.36 (95% CI: 1.13 to 4.92) with increasing cPB tertile, with similar results for CAC. Net reclassification significantly improved with either cPB (0.23) or CAC (0.25). MACE rates increased simultaneously with higher levels of both cPB and CAC.CONCLUSIONS: Detection of subclinical carotid or coronary atherosclerosis improves risk predictions and reclassification compared with conventional risk factors, with comparable results for either modality. Cost-effective analyses are warranted to define the optimal roles of these complementary techniques. (BioImage Study: A Clinical Study of Burden of Atherosclerotic Disease in an At-Risk Population; NCT00738725).

The first transcatheter aortisc valve replacement (TAVR) was performed in 2002, and has been proven beneficial in inoperable and high-risk patients for open heart surgery. Stroke occurrence after TAVR, both periprocedure and at follow-up, has not been well described. We sought to review incidence, pathophysiology, predictors, prognosis, and current preventive strategies of cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) after TAVR. Studies were selected from a Medline search if they contained clinical outcomes data after TAVR. Acute and subacute CVAs after TAVR have been reported in 3% to 6% of patients. Approximately 45% of CVAs occur within 2 days after TAVR; 28% between 3 and 10 days; 4% between 10 and 30 days; and 10.5% occur from 1 month to 2 years. Clinically silent cerebral embolisms have been reported, with an incidence greatly exceeding that of overt CVAs. Underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms for CVAs can be broadly categorized into embolic and nonembolic causes, as well as procedural and postprocedural (early and late). Important predictors of early CVAs are small aortic valve area, atrial fibrillation, and balloon postdilation, whereas late CVAs are mostly influenced by chronic atrial fibrillation, prior cerebrovascular disease, and transapical approach. Following stroke, patients exhibit increased morbidity and mortality. A multilevel approach for the prevention of CVAs includes improved interventional techniques, embolic protection devices, antithrombotic treatment, close monitoring, and aggressive management of modifiable risk factors. Technology advances notwithstanding stroke morbidity and mortality remains steady. The significance of silent cerebral embolism on prognosis remains uncertain, and optimal medical treatment during and after TAVR should be further investigated.

BackgroundThe prospective, randomized FREEDOM (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With Diabetes) trial found coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) was associated with better clinical outcomes than percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes and multivessel disease, managed with or without insulin.ObjectivesIn this subgroup analysis of the FREEDOM trial, we examined the association of long-term clinical outcomes after revascularization in patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) compared with patients not treated with insulin.MethodsA total of 1,850 FREEDOM subjects had an index revascularization procedure performed: 956 underwent PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES), and 894 underwent CABG. A total of 602 patients (32.5%) had ITDM (PCI/DES n = 325, 34%; CABG n = 277, 31%). Subjects were classified according to ITDM versus non-ITDM, with comparison of PCI/DES versus CABG for each group. Interaction analyses were performed for treatment by diabetes mellitus (DM) status alone and for treatment by DM status by coronary lesion complexity. Analyses were performed for the primary outcome composite of death/stroke/myocardial infarction (MI) using all available follow-up data.ResultsThe overall 5-year event rate of death/stroke/MI was significantly higher in ITDM versus non-ITDM patients (28.7% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.001), which persisted even after adjustment for multiple baseline factors, angiographic complexity, and revascularization treatment group (death/stroke/MI hazard ratio [HR]: 1.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06 to 1.73, p = 0.014). With respect to the primary composite endpoint, CABG was superior to PCI/DES in both DM types and the magnitude of treatment effect was similar (interaction p = 0.40) for ITDM (PCI vs. CABG HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.69) and non-ITDM patients (PCI vs. CABG HR: 1.46; 95% CI 1.10 to 1.94), even after adjusting for the angiographic SYNTAX score level. Based on 5-year event rates, the number needed to treat with CABG versus PCI to prevent 1 event is 12.7 in ITDM and 13.2 in non-ITDM.ConclusionsIn patients with diabetes and multivessel coronary artery disease, the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (death, MI, or stroke) is higher in patients treated with insulin than in those not treated with insulin. Furthermore, we did not detect a significant difference in the magnitude of PCI versus CABG treatment effect for patients treated with insulin and those not treated with insulin. (Comparison of Two Treatments for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in Individuals With Diabetes [FREEDOM]; NCT00086450).

Temporary interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is not infrequently required in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to describe the procedures and outcomes associated with DAPT interruption in patients treated with DAPT following successful PCI from the Patterns of non-adherence to anti-platelet regimens in stented patients registry (n = 5018). DAPT interruption was prespecified as physician recommended cessation for