Search

There is a dearth of research on immunophenotyping in peripheral artery disease (PAD). This study aimed to describe the baseline characteristics, immunophenotypic profile, and quality of life (QoL) of participants with PAD in the Project Baseline Health Study (PBHS). The PBHS study is a prospective, multicenter, longitudinal cohort study that collected clinical, molecular, and biometric data from participants recruited between 2017 and 2018. In this analysis, baseline demographic, clinical, mobility, QoL, and flow cytometry data were stratified by the presence of PAD (ankle brachial index [ABI] ≤0.90). Of 2,209 participants, 58 (2.6%) had lower-extremity PAD, and only 2 (3.4%) had pre-existing PAD diagnosed prior to enrollment. Comorbid smoking (29.3% vs 14%, P <.001), hypertension (54% vs 30%, P <.001), diabetes (25% vs 14%, P =.031), and at least moderate coronary calcifications (Agatston score >100: 32% vs 17%, P =.01) were significantly higher in participants with PAD than in those with normal ABIs, as were high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels (5.86 vs 2.83, P <.001). After adjusting for demographic and risk factors, participants with PAD had significantly fewer circulating CD56-high natural killer cells, IgM+ memory B cells, and CD10/CD27 double-positive B cells (P <.05 for all). This study reinforces existing evidence that a large proportion of PAD without claudication may be underdiagnosed, particularly in female and Black or African American participants. We describe a novel immunophenotypic profile of participants with PAD that could represent a potential future screening or diagnostic tool to facilitate earlier diagnosis of PAD. NCT03154346, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03154346 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization improves cardiovascular outcomes compared with culprit-only revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction ([MI]; ST-segment-elevation MI or non-ST-segment-elevation MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease. However, the timing of complete revascularization (single-setting versus staged revascularization) is uncertain. The aim was to compare the outcomes of single-setting complete, staged complete, and culprit vessel-only revascularization in patients with acute MI and multivessel disease. METHODS: PubMed, EMBASE, and clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared 3 revascularization strategies. RESULTS: From 16 randomized controlled trials that randomized 11 876 patients with acute MI and multivessel disease, both single-setting complete and staged complete revascularization reduced primary outcome (cardiovascular mortality/MI; odds ratio [OR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.41-0.65]; OR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62-0.88]), composite of all-cause mortality/MI (OR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.40-0.67]; OR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.67-0.91]), major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.32-0.56]; OR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.47-0.82]), MI (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.26-0.57]; OR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59-0.90]), and repeat revascularization (OR, 0.30 [95% CI, 0.18-0.47]; OR, 0.46 [95% CI, 0.30-0.71]) compared with culprit-only revascularization. Single-setting complete revascularization reduced cardiovascular mortality/MI (OR, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.91]), major adverse cardiovascular event (OR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.50-0.91]), and all-cause mortality/MI driven by a lower risk of MI (OR, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.36-0.77]) compared with staged complete revascularization. Single-setting complete revascularization ranked number 1, followed by staged complete revascularization (number 2) and culprit-only revascularization (number 3) for all outcomes. The results were largely consistent in subgroup analysis comparing ST-segment-elevation MI versus non-ST-segment-elevation MI cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Single-setting complete revascularization may offer the greatest reductions in cardiovascular events in patients with acute MI and multivessel disease. A large-scale randomized trial of single-setting complete versus staged complete revascularization is warranted to evaluate the optimal timing of complete revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The American College of Cardiology Reduce the Risk: PCI Bleed Campaign was a hospital-based quality improvement campaign designed to reduce post-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) bleeding events. The aim of the campaign was to provide actionable evidence-based tools for participants to review, adapt, and adopt, depending upon hospital resources and engagement. METHODS: We used data from 8 757 737 procedures in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry between 2015 and 2021 to compare patient and hospital characteristics and bleeding outcomes among campaign participants (n=195 hospitals) and noncampaign participants (n=1384). Post-PCI bleeding risk was compared before and after campaign participation. Multivariable hierarchical logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted association between campaign participation and post-PCI bleeding events. Prespecified subgroups were examined. RESULTS: Campaign hospitals were more often higher volume teaching facilities located in urban or suburban locations. After adjustment, campaign participation was associated with a significant reduction in the rate of bleeding (bleeding: adjusted odds ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.53-0.71]). Campaign hospitals had a greater decrease in bleeding events than noncampaign hospitals. In a subgroup analysis, the reduction in bleeding was noted in non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome and ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients, but no significant reduction was seen in patients without acute coronary syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Participation in the American College of Cardiology Reduce the Risk: PCI Bleed Campaign was associated with a significant reduction in post-PCI bleeding. Our results underscore that national quality improvement efforts can be associated with a significant impact on PCI outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a result of increasing adoption of imaging screening, the number of adult patients with a diagnosis of anomalous aortic origin of the coronary arteries (AAOCA) has grown in recent years. Existing guidelines provide a framework for management and treatment, but patients with AAOCA present with a wide range of anomalies and symptoms that make general recommendations of limited applicability. In particular, a large spectrum of interventions can be used for treatment, and there is no consensus on the optimal approach to be used. In this paper, a multidisciplinary group of clinical and interventional cardiologists and cardiac surgeons performed a systematic review and critical evaluation of the available evidence on the interventional treatment of AAOCA in adult patients. Using a structured Delphi process, the group agreed on expert recommendations that are intended to complement existing clinical practice guidelines. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In the COMPLETE trial (Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multivessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI), a strategy of complete revascularization reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events compared with culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with ST-segment--elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease. Patients with diabetes have a worse prognosis following STEMI. We evaluated the consistency of the effects of complete revascularization in patients with and without diabetes. METHODS: The COMPLETE trial randomized a strategy of complete revascularization, consisting of angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention of all suitable nonculprit lesions, versus a strategy of culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (guideline-directed medical therapy alone). In prespecified analyses, treatment effects were determined in patients with and without diabetes on the first coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death or new myocardial infarction and the second coprimary outcome of cardiovascular death, new myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. Interaction P values were calculated to evaluate whether there was a differential treatment effect in patients with and without diabetes. RESULTS: Of the 4041 patients enrolled in the COMPLETE trial, 787 patients (19.5%) had diabetes. The median HbA1c (glycated hemoglobin) was 7.7% in the diabetes group and 5.7% in the nondiabetes group. Complete revascularization consistently reduced the first coprimary outcome in patients with diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.59--1.29]) and without diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55--0.90]), with no evidence of a differential treatment effect (interaction P=0.36). Similarly, for the second coprimary outcome, no differential treatment effect (interaction P=0.27) of complete revascularization was found in patients with diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.43--0.87]) and without diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.39--0.60]). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients presenting with STEMI and multivessel disease, the benefit of complete revascularization over a culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention strategy was consistent regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. GRAPHIC ABSTRACT: A graphic abstract is available for this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outcomes of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention have considerably improved during the last decade with continued emphasis on improving procedural safety. Vascular access site bleeding remains one of the most frequent complications. Several procedural strategies have been implemented to reduce the rate of vascular access site complications. This state-of-the-art review summarizes and describes the current evidence on optimal vascular access strategies for chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: In patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis, percutaneous debulking is a treatment option. However, the outcomes of this approach are less well known. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent percutaneous vegetation debulking for tricuspid valve infective endocarditis from August 2020 to November 2022 at a large academic tertiary care public hospital. The primary efficacy outcome was procedural success defined by clearance of blood cultures. The primary safety outcome was any procedural complication. For the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or heart block, outcomes were compared (sequential noninferiority and superiority) with published surgical outcomes data. RESULTS: Of the 29 patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis who underwent percutaneous debulking, the average age was 41.3±10.1 years, all patients had septic pulmonary emboli with 27 (93.1%) patients having cavitary lung lesions before the procedure. For the efficacy outcomes, 28 patients (96.6%) had clearance of cultures after their procedure, mean white blood cell count significantly decreased from 16.8±1.4×103 to 12.6±1.0×103 per µL (P<0.01), and mean body temperature significantly decreased from 99.8F ±0.30 to 98.3F ±0.20 (P<0.001) post-procedure. For safety outcomes, there were no procedural complications (0%). Two patients (6.9%) died during the follow-up period, both during the index hospitalization due to severe necrotizing pneumonia. When compared with published data on surgical outcomes, percutaneous debulking was noninferior and superior for the composite of in-hospital death or heart block (noninferiority, P<0.001; superiority, P=0.016). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous debulking is feasible, effective, and safe in treating patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis refractory to medical therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary data comparing the outcomes of transradial access (TRA) vs transfemoral access (TFA) among patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock (AMI-CS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are limited. This study examines in-hospital outcomes and institutional variation among patients with AMI-CS undergoing TRA-PCI vs TFA-PCI. Patients admitted with AMI-CS from the NCDR CathPCI registry between April 2018 and June 2021 were included. Multivariable logistic regression and inverse probability weighting models were used to assess the association between access site and in-hospital outcomes. A falsification analysis using non-access site–related bleeding was performed. Among 35,944 patients with AMI-CS undergoing PCI, 25.6% were performed with TRA. The proportion of TRA-PCI increased over the study period (22.0% in the second quarter of 2018 vs 29.1% in the second quarter of 2021; P -trend <0.001). Significant institutional-level variability in the use of TRA-PCI was also observed: 20.9% of all sites using TRA in <2% of PCIs (low utilization) vs 1.9% of all sites using TRA in >80% of PCIs (high utilization). Patients undergoing TRA-PCI had a significantly lower adjusted incidence of major bleeding (odds ratio [OR]: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67-0.76), mortality (OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.69-0.78), vascular complications (OR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.54-0.84), and new dialysis (OR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.77-0.97). There was no difference in non-access site related bleeding (OR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.84-1.03). Sensitivity analyses revealed similar benefit with TRA-PCI among patients without arterial cross-over. There were no significant interactions observed between TRA-PCI with mechanical circulatory support and in-hospital outcomes. In this large nationwide contemporary analysis of patients with AMI-CS, about quarter of PCIs were performed via TRA with wide variability across US institutions. TRA-PCI was associated with significantly lower incidence of in-hospital major bleeding, mortality, vascular complications, and new dialysis. This benefit was observed irrespective of mechanical circulatory support use. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accumulating evidence from clinical trials suggests that a lower (restrictive) hemoglobin threshold (<8% g/dL) for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, compared with a higher (liberal) threshold (≥10 g/dL) is safe. However, in anemic patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI), maintaining a higher hemoglobin level may increase oxygen delivery to vulnerable myocardium resulting in improved clinical outcomes. Conversely, RBC transfusion may result in increased blood viscosity, vascular inflammation, and reduction in available nitric oxide resulting in worse clinical outcomes. We hypothesize that a liberal transfusion strategy would improve clinical outcomes as compared to a more restrictive strategy.Methods: We will enroll 3500 patients with acute MI (type 1, 2, 4b or 4c) as defined by the Third Universal Definition of MI and a hemoglobin <10 g/dL at 144 centers in the United States, Canada, France, Brazil, New Zealand, and Australia. We randomly assign trial participants to a liberal or restrictive transfusion strategy. Participants assigned to the liberal strategy receive transfusion of RBCs sufficient to raise their hemoglobin to at least 10 g/dL. Participants assigned to the restrictive strategy are permitted to receive transfusion of RBCs if the hemoglobin falls below 8 g/dL or for persistent angina despite medical therapy. We will contact each participant at 30 days to assess clinical outcomes and at 180 days to ascertain vital status. The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause death or recurrent MI through 30 days following randomization. Secondary endpoints include all-cause mortality at 30 days, recurrent adjudicated MI, and the composite outcome of all-cause mortality, nonfatal recurrent MI, ischemia driven unscheduled coronary revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting), or readmission to the hospital for ischemic cardiac diagnosis within 30 days. The trial will assess multiple tertiary endpoints.Conclusions: The MINT trial will inform RBC transfusion practice in patients with acute MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Randomized trials have compared percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with left main coronary artery disease undergoing nonemergent revascularization. However, there is a paucity of real-world contemporary observational studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and CABG. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of CABG versus PCI in patients with left main coronary disease. Clinical and administrative databases for Ontario, Canada, were linked to obtain records of all patients with angiographic evidence of left main coronary artery disease (≥50% stenosis) treated with either isolated CABG or PCI from 2008 to 2020. Emergent, cardiogenic shock, and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients were excluded. Baseline characteristics of patients were compared and 1:1 propensity score matching was performed. Late mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were compared between the matched groups using a Cox proportional hazard model. After exclusions, 1,299 and 21,287 patients underwent PCI and CABG, respectively. Prior to matching, PCI patients were older (age 75.2 vs 68.0 years) and more likely to be women (34.6% vs 20.1%), although they had less CAD burden. Propensity score matching on 25 baseline covariates yielded 1,128 well-matched pairs. There was no difference in early mortality between PCI and CABG (5.5% vs 3.9%; P = 0.075). Over 7-year follow-up, all-cause mortality (53.6% vs 35.2%; HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.42-1.87; P < 0.001) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (66.8% vs 48.6%; HR: 1.77; 95% CI: 1.57-2.00) were significantly higher with PCI than CABG. CABG was the most common revascularization strategy in this real-world registry. Patients undergoing PCI were much older and of higher risk at baseline. After matching, there was no difference in early mortality but improved late survival and freedom from major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events with CABG. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Appropriate use criteria (AUC) have been developed to promote the rational use of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among clinicians and to provide benchmarking feedback to hospitals. The original AUC were published in 2012 and subsequently updated in 2017 to reflect emerging, contemporary evidence however the degree to which the updated guidance re-classifies PCI appropriateness is unknown.Methods: Elective PCI cases from March 1, 2018 until June 30, 2021 were identified from within the NCDR CathPCI database. PCI cases were classified as 'appropriate,' 'uncertain' or 'inappropriate' under 2012 AUC and 'appropriate,' 'may be appropriate' or 'rarely appropriate' under 2017 AUC; those with missing data elements were termed 'not mappable.' Groups that 'remained appropriate' (appropriate in both 2012 and 2017), 'became non-appropriate' ('appropriate' in 2012 but became either 'may be appropriate' or 'rarely appropriate in 2017) and 'became appropriate' ('appropriate' in 2017 but were 'uncertain' or 'inappropriate' in 2012) were descriptively compared. Concordance was assessed by calculation of Cohen's Kappa.Results: A total of 245,196 patients underwent elective PCI across 1669 centers. By 2012 AUC, 44% were classified 'appropriate,' 28% were 'uncertain' and 16% were 'inappropriate' compared with 2017 AUC which considered 34% 'appropriate', 56% may be 'appropriate' and 4% 'rarely appropriate'. Overall fair agreement was observed with a Kappa statistic of 0.40 (95%CI 0.396-0.403). Compared with PCI that 'remained appropriate' under the 2017 AUC, PCI that 'became non-appropriate' in 2017 were more likely to be asymptomatic, less likely to be on anti-anginals and less likely to have complex lesions. Compared with PCI that 'became non-appropriate', PCI that 'became appropriate' had a higher proportion of atypical and non-anginal symptoms and were less likely to have had positive functional tests. Procedural related outcomes were similar across all groups. A total of 29 429 PCI (12.0%) were not mappable by 2012 AUC while 16 077 (6.6%) were not mappable by 2017 AUC.Conclusions: In this contemporary analysis of patients undergoing PCI in the United States, only fair agreement between the 2012 and updated 2017 AUC was observed. While some of this reflects the intention of the updated guidance, the large proportion that were considered 'maybe appropriate' or who 'became non-appropriate' reflect the difficulties of documenting and implementing contemporary AUC guidance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emerging evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing distal radial access (DRA) with conventional radial access (RA) is available. The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects of DRA) vs conventional RA for coronary angiography with or without intervention. The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for RCT comparing DRA vs conventional RA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was radial artery occlusion (RAO) at the longest available follow-up. Fourteen studies enrolling 6,208 participants were included. Compared with conventional RA, DRA was associated with a significant lower risk of RAO, either detected at latest follow-up (risk ratio [RR]: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.23-0.56; P < 0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30) or in-hospital (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.19-0.53; P < 0.001; NNT = 28), as well as EASY (Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries) ≥II hematoma (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96; P = 0.04; NNT = 107). By contrast, DRA was associated with a higher risk of access site crossover (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 1.88-5.06; P < 0.001; NNT = 12), a longer time for radial puncture (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 3.56; 95% CI: 0.96-6.16; P < 0.001), a longer time for sheath insertion (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.58; P < 0.001), and a higher number of puncture attempts (SMD: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.48-0.69; P < 0.001). Compared with conventional RA, DRA is associated with lower risks of RAO and EASY ≥II hematoma but requires longer time for radial artery cannulation and sheath insertion, more puncture attempts, and a higher access site crossover. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, the frequency of using percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock is increasing. These devices require large-bore vascular access to provide left, right, or biventricular cardiac support, frequently under urgent/emergent circumstances. Significant technical and logistical variability exists in device insertion, care, and removal in the cardiac catheterization laboratory and in the cardiac intensive care unit. This variability in practice may contribute to adverse outcomes observed in centers that receive patients with cardiogenic shock, who are at higher risk for circulatory insufficiency, venous stasis, bleeding, and arterial hypoperfusion. In this position statement, we aim to: 1) describe the public health impact of bleeding and vascular complications in cardiogenic shock; 2) highlight knowledge gaps for vascular safety and provide a roadmap for a regulatory perspective necessary for advancing the field; 3) propose a minimum core set of process elements, or "vascular safety bundle"; and 4) develop a possible study design for a pragmatic trial platform to evaluate which structured approach to vascular access drives most benefit and prevents vascular and bleeding complications in practice. [Display omitted] • Major bleeding and vascular complications are common in patients with AMI complicated by cardiogenic shock and contribute to morbidity and mortality. • There is substantial variability in practice relating to vascular access, cardiac critical care delivery, device removal, and vascular closure among institutions and individual operators. • Standardization of vascular access and closure techniques and approach to cardiac critical care management using "safety bundles" have the potential to favorably impact health outcomes during cardiogenic shock care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The decision to shorten the duration of DAPT following PCI in patients with ACS remains controversial because of the concern for increased ischemic events.Methods: We performed a comprehensive literature search in seven databases to explore the efficacy of 1 to 3 months of DAPT in patients who underwent PCI for ACS. Randomized controlled trials that compared 1 to 3 months with 6 to 12 months of DAPT after PCI for ACS were identified. Integrated hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated by random effects model for each prespecified outcome of interest. Meta-regression analyses were performed to examine the association of outcomes with select patient characteristics.Results: A total of 9 randomized controlled trials consisting of 25,907 patients were included. There was no difference in the hazard of NACE (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.79-1.07) and MACE (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.78-1.17) between 1 and 3 months of DAPT and 6 to 12 months of DAPT. However, implementing 1 to 3 months of DAPT was associated with lower hazard of both any bleeding (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.46-0.66) and major bleeding (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.36-0.62). Meta-regression revealed a nonsignificant but increasing trend of both NACE and MACE with greater proportion of left main and left anterior descending coronary artery lesions and greater proportion of STEMI included in the trials.Conclusion: Our findings suggest that 1 to 3 months of DAPT has similar efficacy for preventing ischemic events with reduced bleeding risk compared with 6 to 12 months of DAPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) is not fully defined. We aimed to compare the safety and effectiveness of short-term DAPT (S-DAPT) with longer duration DAPT (L-DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stents (DES) in patients at HBR.Methods: We searched for studies comparing S-DAPT (≤3 months) followed by aspirin or P2Y 12 inhibitor monotherapy against L-DAPT (6-12 months) after PCI in HBR patients. Primary end points of interest were major bleeding and myocardial infarction (MI). Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to calculate odds ratios with 95% CIs.Results: Six randomized trials and 3 propensity-matched studies (n = 16,848) were included in the primary analysis. Compared with L-DAPT (n = 8,422), major bleeding was lower with S-DAPT (n = 8,426) [OR 0.68; 95% CI 0.51-0.89] whereas MI did not differ significantly between the 2 groups [1.16; 0.94-1.44]. There were no significant differences in risks of death, stroke or stent thrombosis (ST) between S-DAPT and L-DAPT groups. These findings were consistent when propensity-matched studies were analysed separately. Finally, there was a numerically higher, albeit statistically non-significant, ST in the S-DAPT arm of patients without an indication for OAC [1.98; 0.86-4.58].Conclusions: Among HBR patients undergoing current generation DES implantation, S-DAPT reduces bleeding without an increased risk of death or MI compared with L-DAPT. More research is needed to (1) evaluate risks of late ST after 1 to 3 months DAPT among patients with high ischemic and bleeding risks, (2) defining the SAPT of choice after 1 to 3 months DAPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The benefit of an electronic support system for the prescription and adherence to oral anticoagulation therapy among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter at heightened risk for of stroke and systemic thromboembolism is unclear.Objective: To evaluate the effect of a combined alert intervention and shared decision-making tool to improve prescription rates of oral anticoagulation therapy and adherence.Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective single arm study of 939 consecutive patients treated at a large tertiary healthcare system.Exposures: An electronic support system comprising 1) an electronic alert to identify patients with AF or atrial flutter, a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2, and not on oral anticoagulation and 2) electronic shared decision-making tool to promote discussions between providers and patients regarding therapy.Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary endpoint was prescription rate of anticoagulation therapy. The secondary endpoint was adherence to anticoagulation therapy defined as medication possession ratio ≥ 80% during the 12 months of follow-up.Results: Between June 13, 2018 and August 31, 2018, the automated intervention identified and triggered a unique alert for 939 consecutive patients with AF or atrial flutter, a CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥2 who were not on oral anticoagulation. The median CHA2DS2-VASc score among all patients identified by the alert was 2 and the median untreated duration prior to the alert was 495 days (interquartile range 123 - 1,831 days). Of the patients identified by the alert, 345 (36.7%) initiated anticoagulation therapy and 594 (63.3%) did not: 68.7% were treated with a non-Vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC), 22.0% with warfarin, and 9.3 % combination of NOAC and warfarin. Compared with historical anticoagulation rates, the electronic alert was associated with a 23.6% increase in anticoagulation prescriptions. The overall 1-year rate of adherence to anticoagulant therapy was 75.4% (260/345).Conclusion and Relevance: An electronic automated alert can successfully identify patients with AF and atrial flutter at high risk for stroke, increase oral anticoagulation prescription, and support high rates of adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bleeding is a common and costly complication of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Bleeding avoidance strategies (BAS) are used paradoxically less in patients at high-risk of bleeding: "bleeding risk-treatment paradox" (RTP). We determined whether hospitals and physicians, who do not align BAS to PCI patients' bleeding risk (ie, exhibit a RTP) have higher bleeding rates.Methods: We examined 28,005 PCIs from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry for 7 hospitals comprising BJC HealthCare. BAS included transradial intervention, bivalirudin, and vascular closure devices. Patients' predicted bleeding risk was based on National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI bleeding model and categorized as low (<2.0%), moderate (2.0%-6.4%), or high (≥6.5%) risk tertiles. BAS use was considered risk-concordant if: at least 1 BAS was used for moderate risk; 2 BAS were used for high risk and bivalirudin or vascular closure devices were not used for low risk. Absence of risk-concordant BAS use was defined as RTP. We analyzed inter-hospital and inter-physician variation in RTP, and the association of RTP with post-PCI bleeding.Results: Amongst 28,005 patients undergoing PCI by 103 physicians at 7 hospitals, RTP was observed in 12,035 (43%) patients. RTP was independently associated with a higher likelihood of bleeding even after adjusting for predicted bleeding risk, mortality risk and potential sources of variation (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.44-1.92, P < .001). A higher prevalence of RTP strongly and independently correlated with worse bleeding rates, both at the physician-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9502, F-value 17.21, P < .0001) and the hospital-level (Wilk's Lambda 0.9899, F-value 35.68, P < .0001). All the results were similar in a subset of PCIs conducted since 2015 - a period more reflective of the contemporary practice.Conclusions: Bleeding RTP is a strong, independent predictor of bleeding. It exists at the level of physicians and hospitals: those with a higher rate of RTP had worse bleeding rates. These findings not only underscore the importance of recognizing bleeding risk upfront and using BAS in a risk-aligned manner, but also inform and motivate national efforts to reduce PCI-related bleeding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: The SVELTE fixed-wire and rapid exchange bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent systems (SVELTE sirolimus-eluting stent [SES]) are novel, low-profile devices designed to facilitate direct stenting, transradial access, and enhance procedural efficiencies. METHODS: Eligible subjects (N=1639) scheduled to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction or stable coronary artery disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with either SVELTE SES or a control durable polymer everolimus-eluting coronary stent. The primary end point was 12-month target lesion failure and a noninferiority margin was specified as 3.58% with an expected event rate of 6.5%. RESULTS: Target lesion failure was observed in 10.3% of SVELTE SES and 9.5% of control everolimus-eluting stent subjects under intention to treat analysis (difference=0.8%; PNI=0.034). Clinically indicated target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis were observed in 1.5% versus 1.9% (P=0.57) and 0.38% versus 0.51% (P=0.72) of SVELTE SES versus control everolimus-eluting stent-treated subjects, respectively. Protocol-defined target vessel myocardial infarction (9.4% versus 8.2%) was higher than anticipated and more frequent at sites that utilized troponin versus creatine kinase myocardial band assays. CONCLUSIONS: The SVELTE SES did not meet the prespecified threshold for noninferiority. Unexpectedly, high rates of target vessel myocardial infarction in both treatment groups contributed to higher than expected rates of target lesion failure, effectively underpowering the study. No differences between the SVELTE SES and control everolimus-eluting stent were observed for primary clinical or angiographic end point events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this study were to describe trends and hospital variation in same-day discharge following elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and to evaluate the association between trends in same-day discharge and patient outcomes. Insights on contemporary use of same-day discharge following elective PCI are limited. In a sequential cross-sectional analysis of 819,091 patients undergoing elective PCI at 1,716 hospitals in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry from July 1, 2009, to December 31, 2017, overall and hospital-level trends in same-day discharge were assessed. Among the 212,369 patients who linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data, the association between same-day discharge and 30-day mortality and rehospitalization was assessed. A total of 114,461 patients (14.0%) were discharged the same day as PCI. The proportion of patients with same-day discharge increased from 4.5% in the third quarter of 2009 to 28.6% in the fourth quarter of 2017. From 2009 to 2017, the rate of same-day discharge increased from 4.3% to 19.5% for femoral-access PCI and from 9.9% to 39.7% for radial-access PCI. Hospital-level variation in the use of same-day discharge persisted throughout (median odds ratio adjusted for year and radial access: 4.15). Risk-adjusted 30-day mortality did not change over time, while risk-adjusted rehospitalization decreased over time and more quickly for same-day discharge (P for interaction <0.001). In the past decade, a large increase in the use of same-day discharge following elective PCI was not associated with worse 30-day mortality or rehospitalization. Hospital-level variation in same-day discharge may represent an opportunity to reduce costs without compromising patient outcomes. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are at heightened risk of venous thromboembolic events (VTE), though there is no data examining when these events occur following a COVID-19 diagnosis. We therefore sought to characterize the incidence, timecourse of events, and outcomes of VTE during the COVID-19 pandemic in a national healthcare system using data from Veterans Affairs Administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; TRI) reduces adverse outcomes when compared with transfemoral PCI (TFI). However, TRI is also used less in high-risk patients. It remains unknown how baseline patient risk influences access-site choice among PCI operators and whether the absolute benefit of TRI is greater among patients at high risk for bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI), and death. METHODS: We analyzed 28 005 PCIs performed in a 7-hospital system between July, 01, 2009 and April 30, 2018, to assess the choice of access-site (TRI versus TFI) as a function of baseline risk for bleeding, AKI, and death, and examined whether the association between TRI use (versus TFI) and in-hospital outcomes is influenced by baseline risk. RESULTS: Among 28 005 PCIs, over a 9-year period, TRI increased over time, however, a risk-treatment paradox for TRI use was observed not only for bleeding risk, but also AKI, and mortality risks, where TRI use was lower in those at highest risk. Operator variability with TRI was large. The incidences of bleeding, AKI, and death were higher with TFI versus TRI. The absolute risk difference between TRI and TFI increased with increasing baseline risk. The number needed to treat to prevent one adverse event with TRI (versus TFI) in low-, moderate- and high-risk groups, respectively, was 259, 82, and 32 for bleeding; 194, 53, and 40 for AKI; and 957, 78, and 18 for death. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of a large multicenter cohort of patients with PCI demonstrates a risk-treatment paradox for TRI use, not only for bleeding, but also for AKI and death. Despite this, a greater absolute risk difference favoring TRI was observed among patients with the highest baseline risk. Addressing the risk-treatment paradox by preferentially selecting TRI across the spectrum of risk, but especially high-risk cases, may be an important potential strategy for improving outcomes with PCI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Optimal treatment of stable ischemic heart disease for those in the transportation industry is considered in the context of the individual's health, as well as with the perspective that sudden impairment could have catastrophic consequences for others. This article focuses on two high risk occupations that one may encounter in practice: commercial motor vehicle drivers and commercial pilots. This article discusses coronary heart disease in patients in high risk occupations and covers current guideline recommendations for screening, treatment, and secondary prevention. The importance of the complimentary perspectives of the regulatory agency, medical examiners, physicians, and pilot or driver are considered in this narrative review, as are considerations for future guideline updates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Revascularization of ischemic cardiomyopathy by coronary artery bypass grafting has been shown to improve survival among patients with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35%, but the role of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in this context is incompletely described. This study sought to evaluate the effect of PCI on mortality and hospitalization among patients with stable coronary artery disease and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction.Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis comparing PCI with medical therapy among patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy in the Veterans Affairs Health Administration. Patients with angiographic evidence of 1 or more epicardial stenoses amenable to PCI and LVEF ≤35% were included in the analysis. Outcome data were determined by VA and non-VA data sources on mortality and hospital admission.Results: From 2008 through 2015, a study sample of 4,628 patients was identified, of which 1,322 patients underwent ad hoc PCI. Patients were followed to a maximum of 3 years. Propensity score weighted landmark analysis was used to evaluate the primary and secondary outcomes. The primary outcome of all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the PCI cohort compared with medical therapy (21.6% vs 30.0%, P <.001). The secondary outcome of all-cause rehospitalization or death was also lower in the PCI cohort (76.5% vs 83.8%, P <.001).Conclusions: In this retrospective analysis of patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy with coronary artery disease amenable to PCI and LVEF ≤35%, revascularization by PCI was associated with decreased all-cause mortality and decreased all-cause death or rehospitalization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Interventional cardiologists receive feedback on their clinical care from a variety of sources including registry-based quality measures, case conferences, and informal peer interactions. However, the impact of this feedback on clinical care is unclear.Methods: We interviewed interventional cardiologists regarding the use of feedback to improve their care of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients. Interviews were assessed with template analysis using deductive and inductive techniques.Results: Among 20 interventional cardiologists from private, academic, and Department of Veterans Affairs practice, 85% were male, 75% performed at least 100 PCIs annually, and 55% were in practice for 5 years or more. All reported receiving feedback on their practice, including formal quality measures and peer learning activities. Many respondents were critical of quality measure reporting, citing lack of trust in outcomes measures and poor applicability to clinical care. Some respondents reported the use of process measures such as contrast volume and fluoroscopy time for benchmarking their performance. Case conferences and informal peer feedback were perceived as timelier and more impactful on clinical care. Respondents identified facilitators of successful feedback interventions including transparent processes, respectful and reciprocal peer relationships, and integration of feedback into collective goals. Hierarchy and competitive environments inhibited useful feedback.Conclusions: Despite substantial resources dedicated to performance measurement and feedback for PCI, interventional cardiologists perceive existing quality measures to be of only modest value for improving clinical care. Catherization laboratories should seek to integrate quality measures into a holistic quality program that emphasizes peer learning, collective goals and mutual respect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this study were to examine rates of radial artery access in post–coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients undergoing diagnostic catherization and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), whether operators with higher procedural volumes and higher percentage radial use were more likely to perform diagnostic catherization and/or PCI via the radial approach in post-CABG patients, and clinical and procedural outcomes in post-CABG patients who undergo diagnostic catherization and/or PCI via the radial or femoral approach. There are limited data comparing outcomes of patients with prior CABG undergoing transradial or transfemoral diagnostic catheterization and/or PCI. Using the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry, all diagnostic catheterizations and PCIs performed in patients with prior CABG from July 1, 2009, to March 31, 2018 (n = 1,279,058, 1,173 sites) were evaluated. Temporal trends in transradial access were examined, and mortality, bleeding, vascular complications, and procedural metrics were compared between transradial and transfemoral access. The rate of transradial access increased from 1.4% to 18.7% over the study period. Transradial access was associated with decreased mortality (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75 to 0.91), decreased bleeding (OR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.51 to 0.63), decreased vascular complications (OR: 0.38; 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.47), increased PCI procedural success (OR: 1.11; 95% CI: 1.06 to 1.16; p < 0.0001), and significantly decreased contrast volume across all procedure types. Transradial access was associated with shorter fluoroscopy time for PCI-only procedures but longer fluoroscopy time for diagnostic procedures plus ad hoc PCI and diagnostic procedures only. Operators with a higher rate of transradial access in non-CABG patients were more likely to perform transradial access in patients with prior CABG. The rate of transradial artery access in patients with prior CABG undergoing diagnostic catheterization and/or PCI has increased over the past decade in the United States, and it was more often performed by operators using a transradial approach in non-CABG patients. Compared with transfemoral access, transradial access was associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients with prior CABG. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accurate evaluation of the quality of invasive cardiology procedures requires appraisal of case selection, technical performance, and procedural and clinical outcomes. Regrettably, the medical care delivery system poses a number of obstacles to developing and sustaining a high-quality environment. The purposes of this viewpoint are to summarize the most common impediments, followed to summarize the most common impediments, followed by the optimal ways to design and sustain a quality assurance program to overcome these barriers. A 7-step program to create and implement an effective quality assurance program is outlined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiogenic shock (CS) complicating acute myocardial infarction (MI) is associated with high mortality. In the absence of data to support coronary revascularization beyond the infarct artery and selection of circulatory support devices or medications, clinical practice may vary substantially.Methods: We distributed a survey to interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons through relevant professional societies to determine contemporary coronary revascularization and circulatory support strategies for MI with CS and multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD).Results: A total of 143 participants completed the survey between 1/2019 and 8/2019. Overall, 55.2% of participants reported that the standard approach to coronary revascularization was single vessel PCI of the infarct related artery (IRA) with staged PCI of non-culprit lesions. Single vessel PCI of the IRA only (28.0%), emergency multi-vessel PCI (11.9%), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (4.9%) were standard approaches at some centers. A plurality of survey respondents (46.9%) believed initial PCI with staged CABG for multi-vessel CAD would be associated with the most favorable outcomes. A minority of respondents believed PCI-only strategies (23.1%) and CABG alone (6.3%) provided optimal care, and 23.1% were unsure of the best strategy. After PCI for CS, Impella (76.9%), intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) (12.8%), and extra-corporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) (7.7%) were preferred. After CABG, IABP (34.3%), Impella (32.2%), and ECMO (28%) were preferred.Conclusions: This survey indicates substantial heterogeneity in clinical care in CS. There is evidence of provider uncertainty and clinical equipoise regarding the optimal management of patients with MI, multi-vessel CAD, and CS.Short Abstract: We sought to determine contemporary practice patterns of coronary revascularization and circulatory support in patients with MI, multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD), and cardiogenic shock. A survey was distributed to interventional cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons through relevant professional societies. Survey respondents identified substantial heterogeneity in clinical care and evidence of provider uncertainty and clinical equipoise regarding the optimal management of patients with MI, multi-vessel CAD, and CS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have yielded conflicting results about the impact of transradial access (TRA) versus transfemoral access (TFA) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Methods: We performed a trial sequential analysis (TSA) of RCTs comparing TRA and TFA in patients with STEMI. The outcomes of interest were 30-day mortality, major bleeding, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and access site complications.Results: A total of 17 studies with 11,992 patients were included in the current TSA. The TRA group had lower 30-day mortality (risk ratio [RR] 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90, P = .003), major bleeding (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.49-0.79, P = .0001), MACE (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58-0.93, P = .01), and access site complications (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.28-0.48, P < .00001). There was no difference in MI and stroke between the 2groups. Applying TSA boundaries, the z-curve for 30-day mortality, major bleeding, MACE and access site complications crossed the conventional and the TSA boundaries, indicating firm evidence for better outcomes in the TRA group. For MI and stroke, the z-curve failed to cross the conventional and the TSA boundaries for both outcomes, indicating lack of signals of benefit or harm.Conclusions: In the current TSA, the available data from RCTs support improved 30-day mortality, major bleeding, MACE and access site complication rates in STEMI patients treated by PCI through the radial access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of different anti-platelet regimens after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug eluting stent (DES) implantation using a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).Methods: RCTs comparing shorter duration (≤6 months) of dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) with either aspirin (ASA) or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy against longer duration (≥12 months) DAPT (L-DAPT) after PCI were searched in the MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE databases. End-points of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), major bleeding and major or minor bleeding. Network meta-analyses were performed using frequentist approach.Results: Eighteen RCTs with total of 57,942 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. This included 14 RCTs (N = 28,853) of S-DAPT with ASA monotherapy and 4 RCTs (N = 29,089) with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy. Compared with L-DAPT, the odds of MI were higher with S-DAPT with ASA monotherapy [OR 1.23; 95% CI 1.01-1.48], but not with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy [0.98; 0.85-1.14]. Both S-DAPT regimens lowered rates of major bleeding when compared with L-DAPT; ASA monotherapy [0.70; 0.49-1.00] and P2Y12 monotherapy [0.67; 0.45-0.98]. There were no differences in risks of all-cause or CV death between either regimen of S-DAPT and L-DAPT. However, in the acute coronary syndrome subgroup, ASA monotherapy was associated with increased risk of ST [1.55; 1.021-2.36] but P2Y12 monotherapy was not [0.93; 0.58-1.48].Conclusion: Amongst patients undergoing DES implantation, S-DAPT with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy reduces bleeding without increased risk of MI or ST compared with L-DAPT. Prospective trials are needed to evaluate if S-DAPT with P2Y12 monotherapy is superior to S-DAPT with ASA monotherapy for ischemic protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The evolution and clinical impact of cardiac remodeling after large ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is not well delineated in the current therapeutic era.Methods: The PRESERVATION I trial longitudinally assessed cardiac structure and function in STEMI patients receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Echocardiograms were performed immediately post-PCI and at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after STEMI. The extent of cardiac remodeling was assessed in patients with ejection fraction (EF) ≤ 40% after PCI. Patients were stratified by the presence or absence of reverse remodeling, defined as an increase in end-diastolic volume (EDV) of ≤10 mL or decrease in EDV at 1 month, and evaluated for an association with adverse events at 1 year.Results: Of the 303 patients with large STEMI enrolled in PRESERVATION I, 225 (74%) had at least moderately reduced systolic function (mean EF 32 ± 5%) immediately after primary PCI. In the following year, there were significant increases in EF and LV volumes, with the greatest magnitude of change occurring in the first month. At 1 month, 104 patients (46%) demonstrated reverse remodeling, which was associated with a significantly lower rate of death, recurrent myocardial infarction and repeat cardiovascular hospitalization at 1 year (HR 0.44; 95% CI: 0.19-0.99).Conclusion: Reduced EF after large STEMI and primary PCI is common in the current therapeutic era. The first month following primary reperfusion is a critical period during which the greatest degree of cardiac remodeling occurs. Patients demonstrating early reverse remodeling have a significantly lower rate of adverse events in the year after STEMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]