Search

Background: When comparing effects of on- versus off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), it is important to assess the long-term clinical outcomes. However, most research conducted thus far has concentrated on short-term outcomes and ignored the long-term clinical outcomes, especially the 5-year outcomes of the largest randomized controlled trials.Objectives: The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the long-term clinical outcomes of on- versus off-pump CABG.Methods: To identify potential studies systematic searches were carried out using various databases. The search strategy included the key concepts of cardiopulmonary bypass AND off-pump AND long term OR 5-year outcomes. This was followed by a meta-analysis investigating mortality, incidence of myocardial infarction, incidence of angina, need for revascularization, and incidence of stroke.Results: Six studies totaling 8,145 participants were analyzed. In the on-pump group mortality was 12.3%, compared with 13.9% in the off-pump group. The odds ratio (OR) for this comparison was 1.16 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02 to 1.32; p = 0.03; 13.9% vs. 12.3%). In contrast, there were no differences in the incidence of myocardial infarction (OR: 1.06: 95% CI: 0.91 to 1.25; p = 0.45; 8.4% vs. 7.9%), incidence of angina (OR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.57; p = 0.65; 2.3% vs. 2.1%), need for revascularization (OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.95 to 1.40; p = 0.16; 5.9% vs. 5.1%), and the incidence of stroke (OR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.10; p = 0.16; 2.2% vs. 2.8%).Conclusions: Statistically, on-pump CABG appeared to offer superior long-term survival, although the clinical significance of this may be more uncertain. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Limited data are available on the relative performances between different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) for obstructive left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD).Objectives: This study sought to compare effectiveness and safety profiles of various second-generation DES for LMCAD in real-world clinical practice.Methods: Among 4,470 patients in 3, multicenter, prospective registries (IRIS-DES [Interventional Cardiology Research Incorporation Society-Drug-Eluting Stents] registry, the IRIS-MAIN [Interventional Cardiology Research Incorporation Society-Left MAIN Revascularization] registry, and the PRECOMBAT [PREmier of Randomized COMparison of Bypass Surgery versus AngioplasTy Using Drug-Eluting Stent in Patients with Left Main Coronary Artery Disease] study) treated between July 2007 and July 2015, the authors identified 2,692 patients with significant LMCAD who received second-generation DES; 1,254 with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES), 232 with biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES), 616 with platinum-chromium EES (PtCr-EES), and 590 with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (Re-ZES). The primary outcome was target-vessel failure.Results: The observed 3-year rates of target-vessel failure were not significantly different for the different types of DES (16.7% for the CoCr-EES, 13.2% for the BP-BES, 18.7% for the PtCr-EES, and 14.7% for the Re-ZES; p = 0.15). In multiple treatment propensity score analysis, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for target-vessel failure were similar in between-group comparisons of the different DES, except for the PtCr-EES versus the BP-BES (reference; HR: 1.60; 95% confidence interval: 1.01 to 2.54; p = 0.046). There were no significant differences in risk of composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization and its individual components according to the different types of DES. Although the 3-year incidence of stent thrombosis was considerably low (≤1.0%) for all types of DES, between-group differences were observed, generally favoring the EES platforms.Conclusions: In this pooled analysis of 3 prospective registries involving unrestricted use of various second-generation DES for LMCAD, we found no significant between-group differences in 3-year risk of target-vessel failure, except for a higher risk of primary outcome with PtCr-EES compared to BP-BES. (Evaluation of the First, Second, and New Drug-Eluting Stents in Routine Clinical Practice [IRIS-DES]; NCT01186133). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In patients with a myocardial infarction (MI) 1 to 3 years earlier, treatment with ticagrelor + low-dose aspirin (ASA) reduces the risk of cardiovascular (CV) death, MI, or stroke compared with low-dose aspirin alone, but at an increased risk of major bleeding.Objectives: The authors evaluated cost-effectiveness of ticagrelor + low-dose ASA in patients with prior MI within the prior 3 years.Methods: The authors performed a prospective economic substudy alongside the PEGASUS-TIMI 54 (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin-Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 54) trial, which randomized 21,162 patients to ASA alone, ticagrelor 60 mg twice daily + low-dose ASA, or ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily + low-dose ASA. Medical resource use data were collected over a median 33-month follow-up. Costs were assessed from the U.S. health care system perspective. In-trial data relating to survival, utility, and costs were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate lifetime cost-effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration-approved lower-dose ticagrelor regimen (60 mg twice daily).Results: Hospitalization costs were similar for ticagrelor 60 mg and placebo ($2,262 vs. $2,333; 95% confidence interval for difference -$303 to $163; p = 0.54); after inclusion of a daily ticagrelor 60 mg cost of $10.52, total costs were higher for ticagrelor ($10,016 vs. $2,333; 95% CI: $7,441 to $7,930; p < 0.001). In-trial quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were similar (2.28 vs. 2.27; p = 0.34). Over a lifetime horizon, ticagrelor was associated with QALY gains of 0.078 and incremental costs of $7,435, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $94,917/QALY gained. Several high-risk groups had more favorable ICERs, including patients with >1 prior MI, multivessel disease, diabetes, renal dysfunction (all with ICERs $50,000 to $70,000/QALY gained), patients age <75 years (ICER = $44,779/QALY gained), and patients with peripheral artery disease (ICER = $13,427/QALY gained).Conclusions: For patients with a history of MI >1 year previously, long-term treatment with ticagrelor 60 mg + low-dose ASA yields a cost-effectiveness ratio suggesting intermediate value based on current guidelines. Ticagrelor appears to provide higher value for patients in several recognized high-risk subgroups. (Prevention of Cardiovascular Events [e.g., Death From Heart or Vascular Disease, Heart Attack, or Stroke] in Patients With Prior Heart Attack Using Ticagrelor Compared to Placebo on a Background of Aspirin [PEGASUS]; NCT01225562). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD) is the most common cause of pregnancy-associated myocardial infarction and remains poorly characterized.Objectives: This study sought to assess presentation, clinical factors, and outcomes of pregnancy-associated spontaneous coronary artery dissection (P-SCAD) compared with spontaneous coronary artery dissection not associated with pregnancy (NP-SCAD).Methods: A Mayo Clinic registry was established in 2010 to include comprehensive retrospective and prospective SCAD data. Records were reviewed to identify women who were pregnant or ≤12 weeks postpartum at time of SCAD. Complete records were available for 323 women; 54 women met criteria for P-SCAD (4 during pregnancy) and they were compared with 269 women with NP-SCAD.Results: Most events occurred within the first month postpartum (35 of 50). Compared with NP-SCAD, P-SCAD patients more frequently presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (57% vs. 36%; p = 0.009), left main or multivessel SCAD (24% vs. 5%; p < 0.0001; and 33% vs. 14%; p = 0.0027, respectively), and left ventricular function ≤35% (26% vs. 10%; p = 0.0071). Among women with imaging of other vascular territories, P-SCAD was less likely with a diagnosis of fibromuscular dysplasia and extracoronary vascular abnormalities (42% vs. 64%; p = 0.047; and 46% vs. 77%; p = 0.0032, respectively). Compared with U.S. birth data, women with P-SCAD were more often multiparous (p = 0.0167), had a history of infertility therapies (p = 0.0004), and had pre-eclampsia (p = 0.001). On long-term follow-up (median 2.3 years) recurrent SCAD occurred in 51 patients, with no difference in the Kaplan Meier 5-year recurrence rates (10% vs. 23%; p = 0.18).Conclusions: P-SCAD patients had more acute presentations and high-risk features than women with NP-SCAD did. The highest frequency of P-SCAD occurred during the first postpartum month and P-SCAD patients less often had extracoronary vascular abnormalities. Hormonal, hemodynamic variations, and yet-undefined mechanisms might be significant contributors to P-SCAD. (The "Virtual" Multicenter Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection [SCAD] Registry [SCAD]; NCT01429727; Genetic Investigations in Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection [SCAD]; NCT01427179). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: First-generation drug-eluting coronary stents (DES) were introduced in 2003 to 2004, and their use resulted in a considerable reduction in the development of in-stent restenosis at the cost of an increased risk of late stent thromboses.Objectives: This study followed clinical outcomes of patients included in a large randomized trial for 10 years to enable detection of late changes in annual event rates that could necessitate medical attention.Methods: A total of 2,098 unselected all-comer patients (50% with acute coronary syndrome) were randomly assigned to have a first-generation DES implanted. This study recorded the occurrence of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE) assessed as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. Stent thromboses were also assessed.Results: Of the 2,098 unselected patients, 73.1% were still alive after 10 years. During the follow-up period, MACE occurred in 346 (32.5%) in the group receiving a sirolimus-eluting stent and in 342 (33.1%) in the group receiving a paclitaxel-eluting stent (hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.83 to 1.11; p = 0.60), with a steady annual rate of 2.6% after the first year. Definite, probable, and possible stent thrombosis appeared in 279 patients (13.3%), with no difference between stent types and with a steady annual rate of 1.3% after the first year.Conclusions: Among the surviving patients, the long-term annual MACE rate and the stent thrombosis rate appeared constant for both stent types, with no apparent late changes. Although there is no need for extraordinary medical attention for these patients, the absence of declines in annual event rates calls for continuous surveillance. (Danish Organization on Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome II [SORT OUT II]; NCT00388934). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Blood pressure (BP) targets from the SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) differ from targets of the 2014 hypertension (HTN) recommendations of the Eighth Joint National Committee.Objectives: The goal of this study was to estimate the proportion of hypertensive adults with who would meet BP goals under the SPRINT criteria and under the 2014 recommendations, and to determine related effects on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.Methods: We used data from the Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey of 2008 to 2013 (n = 13,346), as well as the Korean National Health Insurance Service health examinee cohort of 2007 (n = 67,965), to estimate the proportion of subjects meeting BP goals of each of the criteria. Using data from the Korean National Health Insurance Service health examinee cohort of 2007 (n = 67,965), we compared risks of major cardiovascular events (composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) associated with different BP control goals.Results: A substantially lower proportion of hypertensive adults met BP goals of the SPRINT criteria compared with the 2014 recommendations (11.9% vs. 70.8%, respectively). Ten-year predicted cardiovascular risks were lowest in the intensive control group (below SPRINT BP goals), intermediate in the less-intensive group (above SPRINT goals but below 2014 recommendation goals), and highest in the uncontrolled group (above 2014 recommendations) (6.15%, 7.65%, and 9.39%, respectively; p < 0.001). After multivariable adjustment, the less-intensive and uncontrolled groups had a greater risk of major cardiovascular events (hazard ratios 1.17 and 1.62, respectively; p value for trend, <0.001) than the intensive group.Conclusions: Substantially fewer hypertensive adults would meet SPRINT BP goals than would meet 2014 recommendation goals. Stricter BP control is associated with a decreased risk of major cardiovascular events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pre-reperfusion administration of intravenous (IV) metoprolol reduces infarct size in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Objectives: This study sought to determine how this cardioprotective effect is influenced by the timing of metoprolol therapy having either a long or short metoprolol bolus-to-reperfusion interval.Methods: We performed a post hoc analysis of the METOCARD-CNIC (effect of METOprolol of CARDioproteCtioN during an acute myocardial InfarCtion) trial, which randomized anterior STEMI patients to IV metoprolol or control before mechanical reperfusion. Treated patients were divided into short- and long-interval groups, split by the median time from 15 mg metoprolol bolus to reperfusion. We also performed a controlled validation study in 51 pigs subjected to 45 min ischemia/reperfusion. Pigs were allocated to IV metoprolol with a long (-25 min) or short (-5 min) pre-perfusion interval, IV metoprolol post-reperfusion (+60 min), or IV vehicle. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) was performed in the acute and chronic phases in both clinical and experimental settings.Results: For 218 patients (105 receiving IV metoprolol), the median time from 15 mg metoprolol bolus to reperfusion was 53 min. Compared with patients in the short-interval group, those with longer metoprolol exposure had smaller infarcts (22.9 g vs. 28.1 g; p = 0.06) and higher left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (48.3% vs. 43.9%; p = 0.019) on day 5 CMR. These differences occurred despite total ischemic time being significantly longer in the long-interval group (214 min vs. 160 min; p < 0.001). There was no between-group difference in the time from symptom onset to metoprolol bolus. In the animal study, the long-interval group (IV metoprolol 25 min before reperfusion) had the smallest infarcts (day 7 CMR) and highest long-term LVEF (day 45 CMR).Conclusions: In anterior STEMI patients undergoing primary angioplasty, the sooner IV metoprolol is administered in the course of infarction, the smaller the infarct and the higher the LVEF. These hypothesis-generating clinical data are supported by a dedicated experimental large animal study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) improve outcome in the setting of post-myocardial infarction (MI) heart failure (HF).Objectives: The study sought to assess the benefit of an early MRA regimen in acute MI irrespective of the presence of HF or left ventricular (LV) dysfunction.Methods: We randomized 1,603 patients to receive an MRA regimen with a single intravenous bolus of potassium canrenoate (200 mg) followed by oral spironolactone (25 mg once daily) for 6 months in addition to standard therapy or standard therapy alone. The primary outcome of the study was the composite of death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, significant ventricular arrhythmia, indication for implantable defibrillator, or new or worsening HF at 6-month follow-up. Key secondary/safety outcomes included death and other individual components of the primary outcome and rates of hyperkalemia at 6 months.Results: The primary outcome occurred in 95 (11.8%) and 98 (12.2%) patients in the treatment and control groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.28). Death occurred in 11 (1.4%) and 17 (2.1%) patients in the treatment and control groups, respectively (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.30 to 1.38). In a non-pre-specified exploratory analysis, the odds of death were reduced in the treatment group (3 [0.5%] vs. 15 [2.4%]; HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06 to 0.70) in the subgroup of ST-segment elevation MI (n = 1,229), but not in non-ST-segment elevation MI (p for interaction = 0.01). Hyperkalemia >5.5 mmol/l(-1) occurred in 3% and 0.2% of patients in the treatment and standard therapy groups, respectively (p < 0.0001).Conclusions: The study failed to show the benefit of early MRA use in addition to standard therapy in patients admitted for MI. (Aldosterone Lethal effects Blockade in Acute myocardial infarction Treated with or without Reperfusion to improve Outcome and Survival at Six months follow-up; NCT01059136). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), especially those receiving medical management without revascularization, are at high risk for spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI), but its frequency and predictors are unknown.Objectives: This study sought to characterize spontaneous MI events in a randomized population during 30 months of follow-up and develop a prediction model for spontaneous MI to assign risk of spontaneous MI events in ACS populations.Methods: We analyzed data from the randomized TRILOGY ACS (TaRgeted platelet Inhibition to cLarify the Optimal strateGy to medically manage Acute Coronary Syndromes) trial of aspirin plus prasugrel or clopidogrel following ACS. The trial included 9,326 patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)/unstable angina (UA) who were managed medically without planned revascularization. Our study population included 9,294 patients. A multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was developed to determine predictors of time to first spontaneous MI event through 30 months. After model validation, we developed a calculator for model implementation.Results: Among 9,294 patients, 695 spontaneous MI events occurred over a median of 17 months, representing 94% of adjudicated MI events (n = 737). The Kaplan-Meier event rate of spontaneous MI through 30 months was 10.7%. The strongest predictors of spontaneous MI were older age, NSTEMI versus UA as index event, diabetes mellitus, no pre-randomization angiography, and higher baseline creatinine values. The model exhibited good predictive capabilities (c-index = 0.732) and had good calibration, especially for patients with low-to-moderate risk of spontaneous MI.Conclusions: Spontaneous MI following a medically managed UA/NSTEMI event is common. Baseline characteristics can be used to predict subsequent risk of spontaneous MI in this population. These findings provide insight into the long-term natural history of medically managed UA/NSTEMI patients and could be used to optimize risk stratification and treatment of these patients. (A Comparison of Prasugrel and Clopidogrel in Acute Coronary Syndrome Subjects [TRILOGY ACS]; NCT00699998). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Whether cyclosporine A (CsA) has beneficial effects in reperfused myocardial infarction (MI) is debated.Objectives: This study investigated whether CsA improved ST-segment resolution in a randomized, multicenter phase II study.Methods: The authors randomly assigned 410 patients from 31 cardiac care units, age 63 ± 12 years, with large ST-segment elevation MI within 6 h of symptom onset, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade 0 to 1 in the infarct-related artery, and committed to primary percutaneous coronary intervention, to 2.5 mg/kg intravenous CsA (n = 207) or control (n = 203) groups. The primary endpoint was incidence of ≥70% ST-segment resolution 60 min after TIMI flow grade 3. Secondary endpoints included high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) on day 4, left ventricular (LV) remodeling, and clinical events at 6-month follow-up.Results: Time from symptom onset to first antegrade flow was 180 ± 67 min; a median of 5 electrocardiography leads showed ST-segment deviation (quartile [Q]1 to Q3: 4 to 6); 49.8% of MIs were anterior. ST-segment resolution ≥70% was found in 52.0% of CsA patients and 49.0% of controls (p = 0.55). Median hs-cTnT on day 4 was 2,160 (Q1 to Q3: 1,087 to 3,274) ng/l in CsA and 2,068 (1,117 to 3,690) ng/l in controls (p = 0.85). The 2 groups did not differ in LV ejection fraction on day 4 and at 6 months. Infarct site did not influence CsA efficacy. There were no acute allergic reactions or nonsignificant excesses of 6-month mortality (5.7% CsA vs. 3.2% controls, p = 0.17) or cardiogenic shock (2.4% CsA vs. 1.5% controls, p = 0.33).Conclusions: In the CYCLE (CYCLosporinE A in Reperfused Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial, a single intravenous CsA bolus just before primary percutaneous coronary intervention had no effect on ST-segment resolution or hs-cTnT, and did not improve clinical outcomes or LV remodeling up to 6 months. (CYCLosporinE A in Reperfused Acute Myocardial Infarction [CYCLE]; NCT01650662; EudraCT number 2011-002876-18). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Complete revascularization may improve outcomes compared with an infarct-related artery (IRA)-only strategy in patients being treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) who have multivessel disease presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, there is concern that non-IRA PCI may cause additional non-IRA myocardial infarction (MI).Objectives: This study sought to determine whether in-hospital complete revascularization was associated with increased total infarct size compared with an IRA-only strategy.Methods: This multicenter prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint clinical trial evaluated STEMI patients with multivessel disease having PPCI within 12 h of symptom onset. Patients were randomized to either IRA-only PCI or complete in-hospital revascularization. Contrast-enhanced cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) was performed following PPCI (median day 3) and stress CMR at 9 months. The pre-specified primary endpoint was infarct size on pre-discharge CMR. The study had 80% power to detect a 4% difference in infarct size with 100 patients per group.Results: Of the 296 patients in the main trial, 205 participated in the CMR substudy, and 203 patients (98 complete revascularization and 105 IRA-only) completed the pre-discharge CMR. The groups were well-matched. Total infarct size (median, interquartile range) was similar to IRA-only revascularization: 13.5% (6.2% to 21.9%) versus complete revascularization, 12.6% (7.2% to 22.6%) of left ventricular mass, p = 0.57 (95% confidence interval for difference in geometric means 0.82 to 1.41). The complete revascularization group had an increase in non-IRA MI on the pre-discharge CMR (22 of 98 vs. 11 of 105, p = 0.02). There was no difference in total infarct size or ischemic burden between treatment groups at follow-up CMR.Conclusions: Multivessel PCI in the setting of STEMI leads to a small increase in CMR-detected non-IRA MI, but total infarct size was not significantly different from an IRA-only revascularization strategy. (Complete Versus Lesion-Only Primary PCI Pilot Study [CvLPRIT]; ISRCTN70913605). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]