Search

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text. Background: Recent trials suggest that complete revascularization in patients with acute ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease is associated with better outcomes than infarct-related artery (IRA)–only revascularization. There are different methods to select non-IRA lesions for revascularization procedures. We assessed the clinical outcomes of complete angiographically guided revascularization versus stress echocardiography–guided revascularization in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Methods: We performed a randomized clinical trial in patients with multivessel disease who underwent a successful percutaneous coronary intervention of the IRA to test differences in prognosis (composite end point included cardiovascular mortality, nonfatal reinfarction, coronary revascularization, and readmission for heart failure after 12 months of follow-up) between complete angiographically guided revascularization (n=154) or stress echocardiography–guided revascularization (n=152) of the non-IRA lesions in an elective procedure before hospital discharge. Results: The trial was prematurely stopped after the inclusion of 77% of the planned study population. As many as 152 (99%) patients in the complete revascularization group and 44 (29%) patients in the selective revascularization group required a percutaneous coronary intervention procedure of a non-IRA lesion before discharge. The primary end point occurred in 21 (14%) patients of the stress echocardiography–guided revascularization group and 22 (14%) patients of the complete angiographically guided revascularization group (hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.52–1.72; P =0.85). Conclusions: In patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, stress echocardiography–guided revascularization may not be significantly different to complete angiographically guided revascularization, thereby reducing the need for elective revascularization before hospital discharge. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01179126. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the safety and the serological response after two doses of mRNA-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in people with HIV (PWH)., Methods: Participants were evaluated 4 weeks after the second dose of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 vaccine. Tolerability was evaluated with a specific adverse event questionnaire. Patient's sera were analysed using LIAISON SARS-CoV-2 TrimericS IgG (DiaSorin)., Results: One-hundred PWH were included, 75% of them men, with a mean age of 44 ± 11 years old, all receiving antiretroviral treatment and mostly with controlled viral loads (98% with HIV RNA <50 copies/ml) and 96% had >200 CD4+/μl. All patients seroconverted after vaccination (antibody concentration ≥33.8 binding antibody units [BAU]/ml). Only 3% of the patients had a low antibody concentration (<520 BAU/ml), whereas 67% of them had concentrations above the assay's detection range (>2080 BAU/ml). Fifty-six patients had local or systemic symptoms, with mild arthromyalgia being the most common systemic symptom. No severe adverse events were reported., Conclusions: Vaccination with two doses of mRNA-1273 or BNT162b2 is well tolerated in PWH under effective antiretroviral treatment and it leads to a successful antibody response., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)