Search

Introduction The implementation of a heart team still faces many challenges which may be facilitated with advanced communication technology. There is a knowledge gap to support the use of an electronic real-time heart team decision-making approach based on communication technology in the real clinical practice and evaluate its safety and feasibility in patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD).Methods and analysis The EHEART (Electronic HEArt team with Real-Time decision-making) trial is a prospective, multicentre, two-arm, randomised controlled trial that will randomise 490 patients with complex CAD to either an electronic real-time heart team group or conventional heart team group. For patients allocated to the real-time electronic group, heart team meetings will be initiated during the coronary angiography and guided by a supporting system based on communication technology to help with information synchronisation, real-time communication between specialists, meeting process recording and assistance and joint decision-making with patients’ families. The primary and safety endpoint is a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularisation or re-angina hospital admission at 1 year. The primary secondary outcome is the time interval from the coronary angiography to the final treatment, which is the major indicator of feasibility. We will also compare the practical feasibility from the specialist’s and patient’s perspectives (for example, specialist’s workload and patient’s decision results) between the two groups.Ethics and dissemination The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Fuwai Hospital (no. 2022-1749). Informed consent will be obtained from all participants. The results of this trial will be disseminated through manuscript publication and national/international conferences, and reported in the trial registry entry.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT05514210).

Introduction Current guidelines recommend moderate-intensity lipid lowering (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, LDL-C of

Objectives This study sought to investigate the relationship between occlusion length and long-term outcomes of patients with recanalised chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesion. Design A retrospective cohort study. Setting Fuwai Hospital, National Center for Cardiovascular Disease, Beijing, ChinaParticipants Consecutive patients with successfully recanalised CTO were included from January 2010 to December 2013. Primary and secondary outcome measures The primary endpoint of the present study was a composite event of all-cause death and myocardial infarction (MI). The secondary endpoints included target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and target vessel revascularisation (TVR). Results A total of 1987 patients were included and 1801 (90.6%) subjects completed 5-year follow-up in this study. Based on occlusion length, the patients were divided equally into two groups: short (length <15 mm, n=957) and long (length ≥15 mm, n=1030) CTO group. Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed no significant difference in the risk of the composite primary endpoint between short and long CTO groups (p=0.242). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis also established occlusion length ≥15 mm as a cut-off value for predicting TLR and TVR, with an area under the curve of 0.604 (95% CI: 0.569 to 0.638, p<0.001) and 0.605 (95% CI: 0.572 to 0.638; p<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the risks for TLR (p=0.002) and TVR (p=0.002) were higher in a patient with long CTO lesion. Multivariate Cox analysis also identified long CTO lesion as an independent predictor of TLR (HR: 1.539, 95% CI: 1.033 to 2.293; p=0.034) and TVR (HR: 1.476, 95% CI: 1.012 to 2.151; p=0.043). Conclusion Patients with long CTO lesion did not show a higher risk of death and MI after recanalisation, but had higher risks of TLR and TVR. Lesion with occlusion length ≥15 mm should be under close surveillance for restenosis after recanalisation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction The intentional strategy (aggressive side branch (SB) protection strategy: elective two-stent strategy or jailed balloon technique) is thought to be associated with lower SB occlusion rate than conventional strategy (provisional two-stent strategy or jailed wire technique). However, most previous studies showed comparable outcomes between the two strategies, probably due to no risk classification of SB occlusion when enrolling patients. There is still no randomised trial compared the intentional and conventional strategy when treating bifurcation lesions with high risk of SB occlusion. We aim to investigate if intentional strategy is associated with significant reduction of SB occlusion rate compared with conventional strategy in high-risk patients. Methods and analysis The Conventional versus Intentional straTegy in patients with high Risk prEdiction of Side branch OccLusion in coronary bifurcation interVEntion (CIT-RESOLVE) is a prospective, randomised, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial comparing the rate of SB occlusion between the intentional strategy group and the conventional strategy group (positive control group) in a consecutive cohort of patients with high risk of side branch occlusion defined by V-RESOLVE score, which is a validated angiographic scoring system to evaluate the risk of SB occlusion in bifurcation intervention and used as one of the inclusion criteria to select patients with high SB occlusion risk (V-RESOLVE score ≥12). A total of 21 hospitals from 10 provinces in China participated in the present study. 566 patients meeting all inclusion/exclusion criteria are randomised to either intentional strategy group or conventional strategy group. The primary endpoint is SB occlusion (defined as any decrease in thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow grade or absence of flow in SB after main vessel stenting). All patients are followed up for 12-month postdischarge. Ethics and dissemination The protocol has been approved by all local ethics committee. The ethics committee have approved the study protocol, evaluated the risk to benefit ratio, allowed operators with a minimum annual volume of 200 cases to participate in the percutaneous coronary intervention procedure and permitted them to perform both conventional and intentional strategies. Written informed consent would be acquired from all participants. The findings of the trial will be shared by the participant hospitals and disseminated through peer-reviewed journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]