Search

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is the final common pathway of impaired cardiovascular performance that results in ineffective forward cardiac output producing clinical and biochemical signs of organ hypoperfusion. CS represents the most common cause of shock in the cardiac intensive care unit (CICU) and accounts for a substantial proportion of CICU patient deaths. Despite significant advances in revascularization techniques, pharmacologic therapeutics and mechanical support devices, CS remains associated with a high mortality rate. Indeed, the prevalence of CS within the CICU appears to be increasing. CS can be differentiated as phenotypes reflecting different metabolic, inflammatory, and hemodynamic profiles, depending also on anatomic substrate and congestion profile. Future prospective studies and clinical trials may further characterize these phenotypes and apply targeted intervention for each phenotype and SCAI SHOCK stage rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. Overall, there are 8 key concepts of CS; 1) the mortality associated with CS; 2) Shock attributed to AMI may be declining in both incidence and associated mortality; 3) providers should think about hemodynamic, metabolic, inflammation and cardiac function in totality to assess CS; 4) CS is a dynamic process; 5) no randomized trials evaluating use of the PAC in patients with CS; 6) most data supporting neosynephrine as first line agent in CS; 7) most registries suggest that almost half of CS patients do not have any mechanical support, and the vast majority of the remainder utilize the IABP; and 8) patients with AMI CS should receive emergent PCI of the culprit vessel., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patterns of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use beyond 1 year post-myocardial infarction (MI) have not been well studied., Methods: TIGRIS (NCT01866904) was a prospective, multi-center (369 centers in 24 countries), observational study of patients 1 to 3 years post-MI. We sought to identify the prevalence and determinants of DAPT use ≥1 year post-MI in patients enrolled in TIGRIS. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify determinants of DAPT use at 396 days post-MI (365 days plus a 31day overrun period to account for intended DAPT discontinuation at 1 year). Patients treated with an oral anticoagulant were excluded., Results: Of 7708 patients (median age 67 years, women 25%, ST-elevation MI 50%), 39% and 16% were on DAPT at 396 days and 5 years post-MI, respectively. DAPT use at 396 days post-MI was more prevalent in patients <65 years of age, treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (versus coronary artery bypass grafting or medical therapy), and with multivessel disease or a history of angina. Additional clinical determinants of ischemic and/or bleeding events following MI (diabetes, second prior MI, hypertension, peripheral artery disease, heart failure, smoking, and renal insufficiency) were not independently associated with DAPT use at 396 days. There were geographic variations in the use of DAPT at 396 days (p<0.001), with the lowest use in Europe and the highest in Asia and Australia., Conclusion: In a contemporary patient cohort, DAPT use beyond 1 year post MI was prevalent and associated with patient and index event characteristics. There were marked geographical variations in DAPT use beyond 1 year post MI., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest J.J.R. has received consulting honoraria from AstraZeneca. S.J.P. has received research grant support from AstraZeneca. A.T.Y. has received research grant support from AstraZeneca D.B. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Merck, and Sanofi. R.O. has received research grant support from AstraZeneca. K.A.S. is an employee of AstraZeneca. C.B.G. has received consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Gilead, GSK, Hoffmann La Roche, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Pfizer, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Takeda, and The Medicines Company. M.G.C. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Abiomed, and Merit Medical. S.Y. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Takeda, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers. J.C.N. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi. G.B-W. is an employee of AstraZeneca. D.W. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin Chemie, Biotronik, and Novartis. T.S. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Astellas, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sanofi. S.G.G. has received speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Fenix Group International, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Matrizyme, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, and Tenax Pharmaceuticals., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)

Background: The Scoreflex NC scoring angioplasty catheter is designed with a short rapid-exchange tip distal to a non-compliant, high-pressure balloon and an integral wire outside of the balloon, such that the guidewire and the integral wire act as scoring elements during balloon inflation. The external scoring elements enable a focal stress pattern facilitating expansion of resistant lesions at lower pressures using a focused force angioplasty effect., Methods: Patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled in a prospective, single-arm study conducted at 12 centers in the United States. The primary endpoint was device procedural success, defined as the composite of successful device delivery to the target lesion with balloon inflation and deflation; absence of vessel perforation, flow-limiting dissection or reduction in TIMI flow from baseline; and achievement of final TIMI 3 flow., Results: Among 200 patients (234 lesions), lesion complexities included: bifurcation disease (37.6%), moderate/severe calcification (36.6%), and total occlusions (5.0%). Successful delivery to the target lesion, inflation and removal of the balloon catheter was achieved in 95.5% of patients (191/200). Procedural success was achieved in 93.5% (187/200) of patients, and final TIMI 3 flow was observed in 99.0% of cases (198/200). No unanticipated device-related events occurred. In-hospital major adverse events were reported in 4.5% of patients (9/200), related to periprocedural myocardial infarction (8/200, 4.0%) and target lesion revascularization (1/200, 0.5%)., Conclusions: Among patients undergoing elective PCI and with varied lesion complexity, these results support the safety and effectiveness of a dilation strategy using the Scoreflex NC scoring catheter., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The following authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Dr. Kandzari reports institutional research/grant support from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., OrbusNeich, Medtronic and Ablative Solutions; and personal consulting honoraria from Cardiovascular Systems, Inc., Magenta Medical and Medtronic. Dr. Sanghvi reports institutional research/graft support from Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular system Inc., Recor Medical, Ablative solutions and personal consulting honoraria and royalty payments from Cordis Cardinal Health. Dr. Cohen reports personal consulting honoraria from Medtronic, Merit Medical, Terumo Medical, Astra Zeneca, Zoll, and Abiomed and ownership in Accumed Radial Systems. Dr. Almonacid reports institutional grants from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, COOK, and Terumo. Drs. Hearne, Kumar, Sachdeva, Adams, Blossom, Dahle, Imperi and Riley declare no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Evidence is lacking on long-term outcomes in unselected patients surviving the first year following myocardial infarction (MI)., Methods and Results: The TIGRIS (long-Term rIsk, clinical manaGement and healthcare Resource utilization of stable coronary artery dISease in post-myocardial infarction patients) prospective registry enrolled 9176 eligible patients aged ≥50 years, 1-3 years post-MI, from 25 countries. All had ≥1 risk factor: age ≥ 65 years, diabetes mellitus, second prior MI, multivessel coronary artery disease, chronic kidney disease (CKD). Primary outcome was a composite of MI, unstable angina with urgent revascularization, stroke, or all-cause death at 2-year follow-up. Bleeding requiring hospitalization was also recorded. 9027 patients (98.4%) provided follow-up data: the primary outcome occurred in 621 (7.0%), all-cause mortality in 295 (3.3%), and bleeding in 109 (1.2%) patients. Events accrued linearly over time. In multivariable analyses, qualifying risk factors were associated with increased risk of primary outcome (incidence rate ratio [RR] per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval]): CKD 2.06 (1.66, 2.55), second prior MI 1.71 (1.38, 2.10), diabetes mellitus 1.63 (1.39, 1.92), age ≥ 65 years 1.53 (1.28, 1.83), and multivessel disease 1.24 (1.05, 1.48). Risk of bleeding events was greater in older patients (vs <65 years) 65-74 years 2.68 (1.53, 4.70), ≥75 years 4.62 (2.57, 8.28), and those with CKD 1.99 (1.18, 3.35)., Conclusion: In stable patients recruited 1-3 years post-MI, recurrent cardiovascular and bleeding events accrued linearly over 2 years. Factors independently predictive of ischemic and bleeding events were identified, providing a context for deciding on treatment options., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest D.B. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck, Novartis, Sanofi. S.J.P. Statistical consulting honoraria from AstraZeneca. S.B. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Abbott, Abbott Diagnostics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Medtronic, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Siemens, Siemens Diagnostics, Thermo Fisher Scientific. J.-Y.C. Research grant support from AstraZeneca; consulting honoraria from MicroPort, APT Medical and JW Medical. M.G.C. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Abiomed, Merit Medical. C.B.G. Consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Armetheon, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Company, Gilead, GlaxoSmithKline, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Metronic, Pfizer, Salix Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, The Medicines Company. R.G. None. J.C.N. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS, CLS Behring, Pfizer, Sanofi. T.S. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Astellas, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi. D.W. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from AstraZeneca, Bayer, Berlin-Chemie, Biotronik, Novartis. S.Y. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Daiichi-Sankyo, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb. J.G. Grants from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work. K.L.R. Employee of OXON Epidemiology Ltd., and paid consultant to AstraZeneca in connection with the conduct, data management and analyses of this study. K.H. Employee of AstraZeneca. K.A.S. Employee of AstraZeneca. S.G.G. Speaker/consulting honoraria and/or research grant support from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Company, Fenix Group International, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen/Johnson & Johnson, Luitpold Pharmaceuticals, Matrizyme, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, Tenax Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Novo-Nordisk., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Transradial artery access (TRA) is associated with reduced bleeding risk, length of stay, costs, and increased patient satisfaction. Approximately one-third of TRA failures are due to lack of guiding catheter support. Catheter selection and engagement technique are crucial for obtaining good-quality angiograms and successfully completing percutaneous coronary intervention. The maneuvers required for catheter manipulation and coronary engagement differ between TRA and transfemoral arterial access. One of the advantages of TRA is the ability to use a universal catheter, saving time, radiation, and contrast. This review discusses practical learning points to improve operator understanding of catheter selection and coronary engagement technique., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous studies comparing outcomes between culprit vessel only percutaneous coronary intervention (CV-PCI) versus multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) in patients with cardiogenic shock in the setting of acute myocardial infarction have shown conflicting results. This meta-analysis investigates the optimal approach for management of these patients considering recently published data., Methods: Electronic databases including MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library were searched for all clinical studies published until May 1, 2018, which compared outcomes in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. Studies comparing CV-PCI versus MV-PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were screened for inclusion in final analysis. The primary end point was in-hospital/30 day mortality. Secondary endpoints included long term (>6 months) mortality, renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy, stroke, bleeding, and recurrent myocardial infarction. Odds ratio (OR) with 95% of confidence interval (CI) were computed and p values <0.05 were considered significant., Results: Patient who underwent CV-PCI had significantly lower short-term mortality (in-hospital or 30-day mortality) (OR: 0.73, CI: 0.61-0.87, p = 0.0005), and lower odds of severe renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy (OR: 0.76, CI: 0.59-0.98, p = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in long-term mortality, stroke, bleeding, and recurrent myocardial infarction between two groups., Conclusion: This meta-analysis showed lower short-term mortality and decreased odds of renal failure requiring renal replacement therapy with CV-PCI compared to MV-PCI. However, subgroup analysis including studies exclusively assessing STEMI patients revealed no statistically significant difference in outcomes. Further randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings and evaluate long term results., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Over the recent years, there has been increased interest in the use of transradial (TR) access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including rotational atherectomy (RA). However, a large proportion of operators seem to be reluctant to use TR access for complex PCI including rotational atherectomy for heavily calcified coronary lesions., Methods: We searched MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov and the Cochrane Library for studies comparing radial versus femoral access in patients undergoing RA. Studies were included if they reported at least one of the following outcomes in each group separately: major adverse cardiac events (MACE), major bleeding, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction (MI), hospital length of stay, radiation exposure, procedure time, procedure success and all-cause mortality. Odds ratio (OR) or mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated and a p-value of <0.05 was considered as a level of significance., Results: This meta-analysis included 5 retrospective studies with 3315 patients undergoing RA via radial access and 5838 patients via femoral access. Radial access was associated with lower major access site bleeding (OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.31-0.67, p < 0.001), and radiation exposure (MD: -16.1, 95%CI: -25.4--6.7 Gy cm 2 , p = 0.0007). There were no significant differences observed in all-cause in-hospital mortality (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.69-1.23, p = 0.58); MACE (OR: 0.80, CI: 0.63, 1.02, p = 0.08), stent thrombosis (OR: 0.28, 95%CI: 0.06-1.33 p = 0.11); and MI (OR: 0.43, 95%CI: 0.15-1.24, p = 0.12). There were no significant differences in hospital stay, procedure time or procedure success between the two groups (p > 0.05)., Conclusion: This meta-analysis of 9153 patients from observational studies demonstrates similar all-cause mortality, MACE, procedural success and procedural time during RA performed using TR access and TF access. However, TR access was associated with decreased access site bleeding and radiation exposure. Given the observational nature of these findings, a randomized controlled trial is warranted for further evidence., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Transfemoral access (TFA) is widely used for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The influence of operator age, gender, experience, and procedural volume on performance of femoral arterial access has not been studied., Methods: A survey instrument was developed and distributed via e-mail from professional societies to interventional cardiologists worldwide from March to December 2016., Results: A total of 988 physicians from 88 countries responded to the survey. TFA is the preferred approach for patients with cardiogenic shock, left main or bifurcation PCI, and procedures with mechanical circulatory support. Older (<50years: 56.4%; ≥50years: 66.8%, p<0.0039) and high PCI volume operators (<100 PCI: 57.3%; 100-299 PCI: 58.7%; ≥300 PCI: 64.3%, p<0.134) preferred palpation only without imaging (fluoroscopy or ultrasound (US)) for TFA. Most respondents preferred not to use micropuncture needle to puncture the femoral artery. Older (≥50years: 64.4%; <50years: 71.5%, p<0.04) and high PCI volume operators (≥300 PCI: 64.1%; 100-299 PCI: 72.6%; <100 PCI: 67.9%, p<0.072) tended not to perform femoral angiography (FA). Of those performing FA, the majority opted to do it at the end of the procedure., Conclusion: Despite best practice guideline recommendations, older and high PCI volume interventional cardiologists prefer not to use imaging for femoral access or perform femoral angiography during TF procedures. These data highlight opportunities to further reduce TFA complications., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the current practice and use of transfemoral approach (TFA) for coronary angiography and intervention., Background: Wide variability exists in TFA techniques for coronary procedures., Methods: The authors developed a survey instrument that was distributed via e-mail lists from professional societies to interventional cardiologists from 88 countries between March and December 2016., Results: Of 987 operators, 18% were femoralists, 38% radialists, 42% both, and 2% neither. Access using femoral pulse palpation alone was preferred by 60% of operators, fluoroscopy guidance by 11%, and a combination of palpation, fluoroscopy, or ultrasound by 27%. Only 11% used micropuncture in >90% of their cases. Performing femoral angiography immediately after access was preferred by 23% and at the end of the procedure by 47%, and not done at all by 31% of operators. Hemostasis by manual compression was preferred by 50%, collagen plug vascular closure device by 31%, and suture-based vascular closure device by 11% of operators. Judkins left and right catheters were preferred for diagnostic angiography of the left (99%) and right (94%) coronary arteries. Extra backup curves (XB or EBU) were most commonly preferred for percutaneous coronary intervention of the left anterior descending (80%) and left circumflex (80%), whereas the Judkins right catheter was preferred for percutaneous coronary intervention of the right coronary artery (86%)., Conclusions: There is significant variability in preferences for femoral access technique. Even though recommended best practices advocate for fluoroscopic and ultrasound guidance, most operators use palpation alone. Femoral angiography is also not consistently used despite guideline recommendations. The lack of adoption of imaging guidance for vascular access deserves further investigation., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Importance: Optimal strategies for glucose control in very old adults with diabetes and stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) are unclear., Objective: To compare the effects of insulin provision (IP) therapy versus insulin sensitizing (IS) therapy for glycemic control in older (≥75years) and younger (<75years) adults with type II diabetes (DM) and SIHD., Design, Setting, and Participants: Adults enrolled in the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) were studied. The BARI 2D study population (all with type II DM and SIHD) was randomized twice: (1) between revascularization plus intensive medical therapy versus intensive medical therapy alone, and (2) between IP versus IS therapies. The primary endpoint was all-cause-mortality over five-year follow-up. In this substudy outcomes related to IP vs. IS are assessed in relation to age. Adults aged ≥75years who received IP versus IS are compared to those <75years who received IP versus IS. Multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to evaluate the effects of IP vs. IS on outcomes in the two age groups., Results: 2368 subjects with SIHD and DM were enrolled in BARI 2D; 182 (8%) were ≥75years. Compared to younger subjects, the older cohort had lower BMI, higher diuretic use, worse kidney function, and increased history of heart failure. Within the older cohort, the IP and IS subgroups were similar in respect to baseline cardiovascular risk factors, medications, and coronary artery disease severity. During follow-up, the older subjects receiving IP therapy had higher cardiovascular mortality compared to those receiving IS therapy (16% vs. 11%, p=0.040). Using Cox proportional hazards analysis, the older IP subjects were at increased risk for all-cause-mortality (hazard ratio 1.89, CI 1.1-3.2, p=0.020). No mortality difference between IP and IS was observed in those <75years of age., Conclusion and Relevance: Among adults with diabetes and SIHD aged ≥75years, IP therapy may be associated with increased mortality compared to IS therapy. Additional studies are needed to further refine optimal treatment strategies for diabetes and SIHD in old age., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The effect of acute changes of hemoglobin during index heart failure admission on long-term outcomes remains unknown., Methods: We examined 433 patients enrolled in the ESCAPE trial., Results: Of the 433 patients, 324 (75%) had baseline and discharge hemoglobin available for analysis. Of those, 64 (20%) had at least 1g/dL drop of hemoglobin by time of discharge. Compared to patients without hemoglobin changes (g/dL), patients with hemoglobin drop were older (59 vs. 55, p=0.011), had lower systolic BP (mmHg) (99 vs. 106, p=0.017), lower sodium (mg/dL) (136 vs. 137 (mg/dL), p=0.025), higher BUN (mg/dL) (37 vs. 26, p<0.001), higher creatinine (mg/dL) (1.6 vs. 1.3, p<0.001) and higher hospital length of stay (10days vs. 6days, p=<0.001). Higher hemoglobin drop was observed in the pulmonary artery catheter (PACs) (vs. clinical care) randomized arm of the trial (2g/dL: 10% versus 3%, p=0.010; 3g/dL: 5% versus 0%, p=0.005). After adjustments, a drop of hemoglobin with at least 1g/dL was associated with increased mortality risk (Adjusted HR 2.38, p=0.003) and higher hemoglobin concentrations by the time of discharge was associated with lower mortality rate (Adjusted HR 0.79, p=0.003). PACs insertion was not associated with adverse clinical outcomes by quartiles of % change of hemoglobin. However, PACs use was an independent predictor of hemoglobin drop during heart failure admission (Adjusted OR: Hb Drop 1g/dL: 1.88, p=0.043; Hb Drop 2g/dL: 3.6 p=0.025)., Conclusion: In-hospital decrease in hemoglobin is independently associated with increased long-term mortality and hospital length of stay in ADHF. The ideal hemoglobin levels in ADHF patients should be investigated and the insertion of PACs to direct therapy should be weighed against bleeding risks., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: REG1 is a novel anticoagulation system consisting of pegnivacogin, an RNA aptamer inhibitor of coagulation factor IXa, and anivamersen, a complementary sequence reversal oligonucleotide. We tested the hypothesis that near complete inhibition of factor IXa with pegnivacogin during percutaneous coronary intervention, followed by partial reversal with anivamersen, would reduce ischaemic events compared with bivalirudin, without increasing bleeding., Methods: We did a randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre, superiority trial to compare REG1 with bivalirudin at 225 hospitals in North America and Europe. We planned to randomly allocate 13,200 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in a 1:1 ratio to either REG1 (pegnivacogin 1 mg/kg bolus [>99% factor IXa inhibition] followed by 80% reversal with anivamersen after percutaneous coronary intervention) or bivalirudin. Exclusion criteria included ST segment elevation myocardial infarction within 48 h. The primary efficacy endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and unplanned target lesion revascularisation by day 3 after randomisation. The principal safety endpoint was major bleeding. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT01848106. The trial was terminated early after enrolment of 3232 patients due to severe allergic reactions., Findings: 1616 patients were allocated REG1 and 1616 were assigned bivalirudin, of whom 1605 and 1601 patients, respectively, received the assigned treatment. Severe allergic reactions were reported in ten (1%) of 1605 patients receiving REG1 versus one (<1%) of 1601 patients treated with bivalirudin. The composite primary endpoint did not differ between groups, with 108 (7%) of 1616 patients assigned REG1 and 103 (6%) of 1616 allocated bivalirudin reporting a primary endpoint event (odds ratio [OR] 1·05, 95% CI 0·80-1·39; p=0·72). Major bleeding was similar between treatment groups (seven [<1%] of 1605 receiving REG1 vs two [<1%] of 1601 treated with bivalirudin; OR 3·49, 95% CI 0·73-16·82; p=0·10), but major or minor bleeding was increased with REG1 (104 [6%] vs 65 [4%]; 1·64, 1·19-2·25; p=0·002)., Interpretation: The reversible factor IXa inhibitor REG1, as currently formulated, is associated with severe allergic reactions. Although statistical power was limited because of early termination, there was no evidence that REG1 reduced ischaemic events or bleeding compared with bivalirudin., Funding: Regado Biosciences Inc., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Transradial catheterization and percutaneous coronary interventions have multiple advantages, including reduced bleeding risk, reduced length of stay and costs, and increased patient comfort. Transradial catheterization and interventions requires the acquisition of various additional skill sets including radial arterial puncture, the ability to navigate the upper extremity vasculature, and understanding catheter selection and coronary engagement technique. Although standard femoral catheter shapes perform adequately from the left or right radial approach for coronary angiography, for percutaneous coronary intervention guide catheter support is critical. This article summarizes some practical learning points pertaining to navigating the upper extremity vasculature, and understanding catheter selection and coronary engagement technique., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To examine (1) Latino patients' language preferences for receiving verbal and written medication information in community pharmacies, (2) the types of problems and concerns Latino patients report about using their medications, and (3) the factors that Latino patients believe are important when choosing a community pharmacy., Methods: Individuals were eligible to participate if they were 18 years of age or older, if they self-identified as being Latino, and if they or their children were currently taking prescription medications. All 93 participating individuals were interviewed in Spanish., Results: The majority of patients did not always receive their prescription labels or written medication information in Spanish. Approximately 52% of the respondents preferred to receive verbal information in Spanish without an interpreter, and 21.5% preferred to receive it in Spanish with an interpreter. Most respondents (70%) preferred written information in Spanish, and 21.5% preferred written information in both Spanish and English. The most commonly reported problems were difficulty paying for medications, difficulty reading the English on the prescription labels, and adverse effects. Participants valued pharmacies with friendly and respectful employees., Conclusion: Study participants reported many problems or concerns in using their medications, and the majority preferred receiving written and verbal information about their medication in Spanish. Pharmacies need to find better ways of providing services to the rapidly growing Latino population.

Objective: The objectives of this study were: (1) to investigate what predisposing, enabling, and need factors are related to the purchase of medicines from "tiendas" and other countries and (2) to describe who Latinos typically receive medication information from in the United States and their home countries. In the United States, Latino grocery stores are referred to as "tiendas"., Methods: Individuals were eligible to participate if they: were age 18 and over, self-identified as being Latino, and they or their children were currently taking prescription medications. Ninety-three individuals were interviewed in Spanish., Results: Forty-two percent of participants reported purchasing medicine in "tiendas" but only 5.4% reported that "tiendas" were their usual source of medicine. Ninety-one percent of individuals used U.S. pharmacies as their usual source of medicines. Individuals with health insurance were significantly less likely to have purchased medicine at a "tienda" (odds ratio=0.16, 95% confidence interval=0.03, 0.86). Thirty percent of individuals reported buying medicines in another country to bring back to the U.S. for their use. The most commonly purchased medicines included: antibiotics, vitamins, pain medicine, and herbal medicine. The Latinos in this sample preferred to receive verbal information about medications from their physicians (75.3%) followed by pharmacists (16.1%)., Conclusion: Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Latino patients reported using pharmacies as their usual source of medication, many participants reported having purchased medications from "tiendas" and other countries., Practice Implications: Providers need to make sure to ask patients from all ethnic backgrounds about all medicines they are taking, especially those purchased in "tiendas" or other countries.