Search

Background: The benefit of complete revascularization in older patients (≥75 years of age) with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease remains unclear., Methods: In this multicenter, randomized trial, we assigned older patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease who were undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion to receive either physiology-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or to receive no further revascularization. Functionally significant nonculprit lesions were identified either by pressure wire or angiography. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any revascularization at 1 year. The key secondary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. Safety was assessed as a composite of contrast-associated acute kidney injury, stroke, or bleeding., Results: A total of 1445 patients underwent randomization (720 to receive complete revascularization and 725 to receive culprit-only revascularization). The median age of the patients was 80 years (interquartile range, 77 to 84); 528 patients (36.5%) were women, and 509 (35.2%) were admitted for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A primary-outcome event occurred in 113 patients (15.7%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 152 patients (21.0%) in the culprit-only group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.93; P = 0.01). Cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction occurred in 64 patients (8.9%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 98 patients (13.5%) in the culprit-only group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.88). The safety outcome did not appear to differ between the groups (22.5% vs. 20.4%; P = 0.37)., Conclusions: Among patients who were 75 years of age or older with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, those who underwent physiology-guided complete revascularization had a lower risk of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 1 year than those who received culprit-lesion-only PCI. (Funded by Consorzio Futuro in Ricerca and others; FIRE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03772743.)., (Copyright © 2023 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: The characteristics and outcome of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-positive patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) are still poorly known., Methods: The PANDEMIC study was an investigator-initiated, collaborative, individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis of registry-based studies. MEDLINE, ScienceDirect, Web of Sciences, and SCOPUS were searched to identify all registry-based studies describing the characteristics and outcome of SARS-CoV-2-positive STEMI patients undergoing PPCI. The control group consisted of SARS-CoV-2-negative STEMI patients undergoing PPCI in the same time period from the ISACS-STEMI COVID 19 registry. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality; the secondary outcome was postprocedural reperfusion assessed by TIMI flow., Results: Of 8 registry-based studies identified, IPD were obtained from 6 studies including 941 SARS-CoV-2-positive patients; the control group included 2005 SARS-CoV-2-negative patients. SARS-CoV-2-positive patients showed a significantly higher in-hospital mortality (p < 0.001) and worse postprocedural TIMI flow (<3, p < 0.001) compared with SARS-CoV-2-negative subjects. The increased risk for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients was significantly higher in males compared to females for both the primary (p interaction  = 0.001) and secondary outcome (p interaction  = 0.023). In SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, age ≥ 75 years (OR = 5.72; 95%CI: 1.77-18.5), impaired postprocedural TIMI flow (OR = 11.72; 95%CI: 2.64-52.10), and cardiogenic shock at presentation (OR = 11.02; 95%CI: 2.84-42.80) were independent predictors of mortality., Conclusions: In STEMI patients undergoing PPCI, SARS-CoV-2 positivity is independently associated with impaired reperfusion and with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality, especially among male patients. Age ≥ 75 years, cardiogenic shock, and impaired postprocedural TIMI flow independently predict mortality in this high-risk population., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) and mitral regurgitation (MI) have a prohibitive risk that contraindicates surgical treatment. Although the feasibility of transcatheter edge-to-edge therapy (TEER) has been demonstrated in this setting, the benefit of the combined use of TEER with mechanical circulatory support devices (MCS) has not been studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes of TEER in patients with MCS. Methods: The MITRA-ASSIST study is a retrospective multicentre Spanish registry that included patients with MR and CS who underwent TEER in combination with MCS. The primary endpoint was death from any cause at 12 months. The secondary endpoint was a composite of death from any cause or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months. Results: A total of twenty-four patients in nine high-volume Spanish centres (66.2 (51–82) years, 70.8% female, EuroSCORE II 20.4 ± 17.8) were included. Acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction was the main CS aetiology (56%), and the most implanted MCS was the intra-aortic balloon pump (82.6%), followed by ECMO (8.7%), IMPELLACP® (4.3%), or a combination of both (4.3%). Procedural success was 95.8%, with 87.5% in-hospital survival. At 12-month follow-up, 25.0% of patients died, and 33.3% had a composite event of death from any cause or hospitalisation for heart failure. Conclusions: TEER in patients with concomitant CS and MR who require MCS appears to be a promising therapeutic alternative with a high device procedural success rate and acceptable mortality and heart failure readmission rates at follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The usefulness of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) has not been fully elucidated in calcified coronary lesions (CCLs). This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of DEBs compared to a drug-eluting stent (DES) in this setting. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane were searched through December 2023. The primary endpoint was 12 months major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes and angiographic results after PCI and at a 12-month follow-up. Results: Five studies and a total of 1141 patients with 1176 coronary lesions were included. Overall, the DEB was comparable to DES in MACE (RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.62–1.19, p = 0.36), cardiac death (RR = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.23–1.53, p = 0.28), myocardial infarction (RR = 0.89, 95% CI: 0.25–3.24, p = 0.87) and target lesion revascularization (RR = 1.1, 95% CI: 0.68–1.77, p = 0.70). Although the DEB was associated with worse acute angiographic outcomes (acute gain; MD = −0.65, 95% CI: −0.73, −0.56 and minimal lumen diameter; MD = −0.75, 95% CI: −0.89, −0.61), it showed better results at 12 months follow-up (late lumen loss; MD = −0.34, 95% CI: −0.62, −0.07). Conclusions: This meta-analysis showed that the DEB strategy is comparable to DES in the treatment of CCLs in terms of clinical outcomes. Although the DEB strategy had inferior acute angiographic results, it may offer better angiographic results at follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]