Search

Background: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the number of diseased vessels may affect the efficacy of a complete revascularisation strategy., Aims: The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of immediate complete revascularisation (ICR) and staged complete revascularisation (SCR) in patients presenting with ACS stratified by the number of diseased vessels., Methods: In this prespecified analysis of the BIOVASC trial, ICR was compared with SCR in patients with two-vessel disease (2VD) or three-vessel disease (3VD). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Comparisons were performed using Cox regression., Results: A total of 1,525 patients were enrolled in the BIOVASC trial, of whom 1,177 presented with 2VD and 265 with 3VD. In the 2VD group, 613 patients were assigned to ICR and 564 to SCR. In the 3VD group, 117 patients were assigned to ICR and 148 to SCR. ICR and SCR led to similar results in both the 2VD (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-1.13; p=0.18) and 3VD groups (HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.39-1.59; p=0.51) (p interaction =0.91) in terms of the primary endpoint. ICR was associated with a lower rate of MI in patients with 3VD (HR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.046-0.93; p=0.04) (p interaction =0.30)., Conclusions: ICR might be an option in patients presenting with extensive 3VD and might be associated with a lower rate of myocardial infarction compared with SCR.

Background: Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear., Objectives: This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD., Methods: This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year., Results: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018)., Conclusions: ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The BIOVASC trial was funded by the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and Biotronik SE & Co KG, Berlin. Dr Diletti has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. Dr den Dekker has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi-Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. Dr Bennett has received institutional grants from Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Shockwave Medical. Dr Daemen has received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical Systems, Medtronic, Microport, Pie Medical, and ReCor Medical; and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, ACIST Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, Cardialysis BV, CardiacBooster, Kaminari Medical, ReCor Medical, PulseCath, Pie Medical, Sanofi, Siemens Healthineers, and Medtronic. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) treated by percutaneous coronary intervention., Objectives: Contrast media (CM) volume minimization has been advocated for prevention of AKI. The DyeVert CM diversion system (Osprey Medical, Inc) is designed to reduce CM volume during coronary procedures., Methods: In this randomized, single-blind, investigator-driven clinical trial conducted in 4 Italian centers from February 4, 2020 to September 13, 2022, 550 participants with ACS were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the following: 1) the contrast volume reduction (CVR) group (n = 276), in which CM injection was handled by the CM diversion system; and 2) the control group (n = 274), in which a conventional manual or automatic injection syringe was used. The primary endpoint was the rate of AKI, defined as a serum creatinine (sCr) increase ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours after CM exposure., Results: There were 412 of 550 (74.5%) participants with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (211 of 276 [76.4%] in the CVR group and 201 of 274 [73.3%] in the control group). The CM volume was lower in the CVR group (95 ± 30 mL vs 160 ± 23 mL; P < 0.001). Seven participants (1 in the CVR group and 6 in the control group) did not have postprocedural sCr values. AKI occurred in 44 of 275 (16%) participants in the CVR group and in 65 of 268 (24.3%) participants in the control group (relative risk: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.47-0.93; P = 0.018)., Conclusions: CM volume reduction obtained using the CM diversion system is effective for prevention of AKI in patients with ACS undergoing invasive procedures. (REnal Insufficiency Following Contrast MEDIA Administration TriaL IV [REMEDIALIV]: NCT04714736)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose. The company providing the DyeVert system (Osprey Medical, Inc) was not involved in the trial design and conduction., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

This prespecified substudy of the randomized Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndromes and Multivessel Disease (BIOVASC) trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, stratified by gender. The primary end point consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, and cerebrovascular events at 1-year follow-up. The secondary end points included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used Cox regression models to relate randomized treatment with study end points. We evaluated the multiplicative and additive interactions between gender and randomized treatment. The BIOVASC trial enrolled 338 women and 1,187 men. Women were older than men (median age 71.6 vs 63.7 years, p <0.001) and had a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (10.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.003), renal insufficiency (7.7% vs 4.4%, p = 0.015), and hypertension (60.4% vs 51.7%, p = 0.005). In women, the composite primary outcome occurred in 7.3% versus 12.9% (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 1.08) in patients randomly allocated to ICR and SCR, respectively, and in men in 7.7% versus 8.4% (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.34), with no evidence of a differential effect (interaction p multiplicative = 0.20, p additive = 0.87). No evidence of heterogeneity between women and men was found when comparing ICR with SCR in terms of the secondary outcomes. In conclusion, no differential treatment effect was found when comparing ICR versus SCR in women or men presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Diletti has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. Dr. den Dekker has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. Dr. Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. Dr. Bennett has received institutional grants from Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Shockwave Medical. Dr. Daemen has received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical, Medtronic, MicroPort, Pie Medical, and ReCor medical and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, ACIST medical, Boston Scientific, Cardialysis BV, CardiacBooster, Kaminari Medical, ReCor Medical, PulseCath, Pie Medical, Sanofi, Siemens Health Care, and Medtronic. Dr. Sabaté has received consultancy fees from Abbott Vascular and iVascular. The remaining authors have no competing interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The role of coronary calcification on clinical outcomes among different revascularization strategies in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) has been rarely investigated. The aim of this investigation is to evaluate the role of coronary calcification, detected by coronary angiography, in the whole spectrum of patients presenting with acute ACS., Methods and Results: The present study was a post hoc analysis of the MATRIX programme. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke up to 365 days. Among the 8404 patients randomized in the MATRIX trial, data about coronary calcification were available in 7446 (88.6%) and therefore were included in this post hoc analysis. Overall, 875 patients (11.7%) presented with severe coronary calcification, while 6571 patients (88.3%) did not present severe coronary calcification on coronary angiography. Fewer patients with severe coronary calcification underwent percutaneous coronary intervention whereas coronary artery bypass grafting or medical therapy-only was more frequent compared with patients without severe calcification. At 1-year follow-up, MACE occurred in 237 (27.1%) patients with severe calcified coronary lesions and 985 (15%) patients without severe coronary calcified lesions [hazard ratio (HR) 1.91; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.66-2.20, P < 0.001]. All-cause mortality was 8.6% in patients presenting with and 3.7% in those without severe coronary calcification (HR 2.38, 1.84-3.09, P < 0.001). Patients with severe coronary calcification incurred higher rate of MI (20.1% vs. 11.5%, HR 1.81; 95% CI 1.53-2.1, P < 0.001) and similar rate of stroke (0.8% vs. 0.6%, HR 1.35; 95% CI 0.61-3.02, P = 0.46)., Conclusion: Patients with ACS and severe coronary calcification, as compared to those without, are associated with worse clinical outcomes irrespective of the management strategy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: J.S.S. has received minor speaking honoraria from Terumo, Cordis, Biotronik, and Medtronic. H.M.G.-G. reports the following institutional grant support: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abbott, Neovasc, Shockwave, Phillips, and Corflow. G.A. reports minor speaking honoraria from Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Boeringer Ingelheim, Bayer, Pfizer, and Biosensors. D.H. has participated on data safety monitoring board or advisory board of switch. S.L. has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS/Pfizer, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Icon, and Novonordisk. M.S. has received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular and iVascular. A.v.H. reports unrestricted grants from Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boehringer Ingelheim and consulting fees from Celecor Therapeutics. P.V. reports consulting fees from Daiichi Sankyo, CSL Behring, Pfizer/Bristol Meyers Squibb alliance, Bayer AG, and Novartis; minor speaking honoraria from Daicchi Sankyo and Pfizer/Bristol Meyers Squibb alliance. M.V. reports consulting fees from Abbott, Alvimedica, Bayer Healthcare, Biotronik, Boston Scientific Corporation, Chiesi Farmaceutici, CoreFlow, Daiichi Sankyo, Idorsia, Medtronic, Novartis Pharma, PHASEBIO, Terumo, University of Basel, Vesalio, and Vifor Pharma. The rest of authors have no disclosures to declare., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

There is a paucity of data regarding the safety of a 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients at HBR with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) or ACS treated with PCI using bioresorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (BP-EES) followed by 1-month DAPT. Patients at HBR who underwent PCI with BP-EES were prospectively enrolled in 10 Italian centers. All patients were treated with 1-month DAPT. In case of need for anticoagulation, patients received an oral anticoagulant in addition to a P2Y12 inhibitor for 1 month, followed by oral anticoagulation only after that. The primary end point was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite/probable stent thrombosis at 12 months. Overall, 263 patients (59.4%) with CCS and 180 patients (40.6%) with ACS were enrolled. No significant difference was evident between patients with CCS and ACS for the primary end point (4.3% vs 5.6%, respectively, p = 0.497) and for each isolated component. The risk for Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 1 to 5 or type 3 to 5 bleedings was also similar between patients with CCS and ACS (4.3% vs 5.2%, p = 0.677, and 1.6% vs 2.9%, p = 0.351, respectively). In conclusion, among HBR patients with ACS who underwent PCI with BP-EES, a 1-month DAPT strategy is associated with a similar risk of ischemic and bleeding events compared with those with CCS., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Testa has received consulting fees, personal and institutional honoraria, and has served on the advisory board participation from Abbott, Medtronic, Biotronik, Boston Scientific Corporation, Terumo Lifesciences, Meril, Cardionovum, Concept Medical. Dr. Piccolo has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Biotronik and has served on the advisory board for Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr. De Luca has received speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo and Sanofi. Dr. Stefanini has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Pfizer (New York, NY, United States)/BMS. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Elderly status is steadily increasing among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor is the cornerstone of treatment to prevent recurrent thrombotic complications in patients with ACS. However, DAPT in older patients is challenged by a concurrent heightened risk of ischemia and bleeding. The aim of this study is to evaluate the pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profile of a lower dose of ticagrelor (60 mg twice daily) among elderly patients during the early phase of ACS., Study Design: PLINY THE ELDER (PLatelet INhibition with two different doses of potent P2y12 inhibitors in THE ELDERly population) (NCT04739384) is a prospective, randomized, open-label, crossover trial to evaluate the non-inferiority of a lower dose of ticagrelor (60 mg twice daily) compared with a standard dose (90 mg twice daily) among elderly patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A total of 50 patients, aged 75 years or more, with indication to potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitors will be randomized within 3 days from PCI for the index ACS. Patients with indication to oral anticoagulant therapy, treatment with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, or active bleeding will be excluded. The primary endpoint is platelet reactivity determined by P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) (VerifyNow, Accumetrics, San Diego, CA, USA) after treatment with ticagrelor 60 or 90 mg twice daily for 14 days. Secondary endpoints will include other pharmacodynamic tests of ADP-induced aggregation (light transmittance aggregometry and multiple electrode aggregometry) and determination of pharmacokinetic profile (plasma levels of ticagrelor and its metabolite AR-C124910XX) by high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry., Conclusions: The PLINY THE ELDER trial will determine whether a lower dose of ticagrelor confers non-inferior platelet inhibition compared with the standard dose in the early phase of ACS among elderly patients undergoing PCI, informing future clinical investigation., (© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: In patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease, complete revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PCI for non-culprit lesions should be attempted during the index procedure or staged., Methods: This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial was done at 29 hospitals across Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. We included patients aged 18-85 years presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel (ie, two or more coronary arteries with a diameter of 2·5 mm or more and ≥70% stenosis based on visual estimation or positive coronary physiology testing) coronary artery disease with a clearly identifiable culprit lesion. A web-based randomisation module was used to randomly assign patients (1:1), with a random block size of four to eight, stratified by study centre, to undergo immediate complete revascularisation (PCI of the culprit lesion first, followed by other non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator during the index procedure) or staged complete revascularisation (PCI of only the culprit lesion during the index procedure and PCI of all non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator within 6 weeks after the index procedure). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 1 year after the index procedure. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients by intention to treat. Non-inferiority of immediate to staged complete revascularisation was considered to be met if the upper boundary of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not exceed 1·39. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03621501., Findings: Between June 26, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021, 764 patients (median age 65·7 years [IQR 57·2-72·9] and 598 [78·3%] males) were randomly assigned to the immediate complete revascularisation group and 761 patients (median age 65·3 years [58·6-72·9] and 589 [77·4%] males) were randomly assigned to the staged complete revascularisation group, and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 57 (7·6%) of 764 patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 71 (9·4%) of 761 patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, p non-inferiority =0·0011). There was no difference in all-cause death between the immediate and staged complete revascularisation groups (14 [1·9%] vs nine [1·2%]; HR 1·56, 95% CI 0·68-3·61, p=0·30). Myocardial infarction occurred in 14 (1·9%) patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 34 (4·5%) patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·76, p=0·0045). More unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisations were performed in the staged complete revascularisation group than in the immediate complete revascularisation group (50 [6·7%] patients vs 31 [4·2%] patients; HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·39-0·95, p=0·030)., Interpretation: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, immediate complete revascularisation was non-inferior to staged complete revascularisation for the primary composite outcome and was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation., Funding: Erasmus University Medical Center and Biotronik., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests RD has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. WKdD has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. NMVM has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

In the last decades, advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies have significantly reduced the risk of procedural complications and in-hospital mortality of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), thus increasing the population of stable post-ACS patients. This novel epidemiological scenario emphasizes the importance of implementing secondary preventive and follow-up strategies. The follow-up of patients after ACS or elective PCI should be based on common pathways and on the close collaboration between hospital cardiologists and primary care physicians. However, the follow-up strategies of these patients are still poorly standardized. This SICI-GISE/SICOA consensus document was conceived as a proposal for the long-term management of post-ACS or post-PCI patients based on their individual residual risk of cardiovascular adverse events. We defined five patient risk classes and five follow-up strategies including medical visits and examinations according to a specific time schedule. We also provided a short guidance for the selection of the appropriate imaging technique for the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and of non-invasive anatomical or functional tests for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease. Physical and pharmacological stress echocardiography was identified as the first-line imaging technique in most of cases, while cardiovascular magnetic resonance should be preferred when an accurate evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction is needed. The standardization of the follow-up pathways of patients with a history of ACS or elective PCI, shared between hospital doctors and primary care physicians, could result in a more cost-effective use of resources and potentially improve patient's long-term outcome.

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is a cornerstone in the management of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The use of intensified or prolonged antithrombotic regimens is invariably associated with a reduction in ischemic risk yet an increase in the risk of bleeding complications. The selection of the optimal antiplatelet therapy in each individual patient remains therefore crucial. In recent years, novel approaches alternative to the conventional DAPT and based on the escalation or de-escalation of P2Y12 antagonists have been proposed. These strategies, chosen according to clinical features, genetic factors, and platelet function, have been developed to optimize and individualize the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease and improve their prognosis. In this review, we summarize recent evidence about escalation and de-escalation strategies (guided and unguided), and discuss the utility of genetic and platelet function tests in patients with ACS and/or undergoing PCI.

Background: The occurrence of acute kidney injury (AKI) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive management is associated with worse outcomes. However, the prognostic implications of transient or in-hospital persistent AKI may differ., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic implications of transient or in-hospital persistent AKI in patients with ACS., Methods: In the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox) trial, 203 subjects were excluded because of incomplete information or end-stage renal disease, with a study population of 8,201 patients. Transient and persistent AKI were defined as renal dysfunction no longer or still fulfilling the AKI criteria (>0.5 mg/dL or a relative >25% increase in creatinine) at discharge, respectively. Thirty-day coprimary outcomes were the out-of-hospital composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE]) and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE), defined as the composite of MACE or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding., Results: Persistent and transient AKI occurred in 750 (9.1%) and 587 (7.2%) subjects, respectively. After multivariable adjustment, compared with patients without AKI, the risk for 30-day coprimary outcomes was higher in patients with persistent AKI (MACE: adjusted HR: 2.32; 95% CI: 1.48-3.64; P < 0.001; NACE: adjusted HR: 2.29; 95% CI: 1.48-3.52; P < 0.001), driven mainly by all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 3.43; 95% CI: 2.03-5.82; P < 0.001), whereas transient AKI was not associated with higher rates of MACE or NACE. Results remained consistent when implementing the KDIGO (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes) criteria., Conclusions: Among patients with ACS undergoing invasive management, in-hospital persistent but not transient AKI was associated with higher risk for 30-day MACE and NACE. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox [MATRIX]; NCT01433627)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The trial was sponsored by Società Italiana di Cardiologia Invasiva (a nonprofit organization), which received grant support from The Medicines Company and Terumo. This substudy did not receive any direct or indirect funding. Prof Leonardi has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca; and has received personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, Bayer, Pfizer/Bristol Myers Squibb, ICON, Chiesi, and Novo Nordisk (all outside the submitted work). Prof Vranckx has received personal fees from Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, and CLS Behring (all outside the submitted work). Dr Tebaldi has received research grants from GADA and Abbott Vascular; and has received personal fees from Abbott (all outside the submitted work). Prof Andò has received personal fees and nonfinancial support from Daiichi Sankyo, Boeringer Ingelheim, and Amgen; and has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Chiesi, and Biosensors (all outside the submitted work). Dr Brugaletta has received a research grant to the institution from AstraZeneca; has received personal fees from Abbott Vascular (outside the submitted work); and has served as an advisory board member for Boston Scientific, iVascular, and Teleflex. Dr Adamo has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Medtronic (all outside the submitted work). Prof Windecker has received research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardinal Health, Cardiovalve, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, Infraredx, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sinomed, Terumo, and V-Wave; has served as an unpaid advisory board member and/or unpaid member of the steering or executive groups of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, Terumo, V-Wave, and Xeltis (but has not received personal payments from pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers); and is a member of the steering or executive committee groups of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding from industry without impact on his personal remuneration. Prof Valgimigli has received grants and personal fees from Abbott, Terumo, and AstraZeneca; has received personal fees from Chiesi, Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Alvimedica, Biosensors, and Idorsia; and has received grants from Medicure (outside the submitted work). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) strongly reduce restenosis and repeat revascularization compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) for percutaneous coronary intervention. There is residual uncertainty as to whether other prognostically relevant outcomes are affected by DES versus BMS concerning initial presentation (chronic coronary syndrome [CCS] vs acute coronary syndrome [ACS]). We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing new-generation DES versus BMS (CRD42017060520). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI). Outcomes were examined at maximum follow-up and with a 1-year landmark. Risk estimates are expressed as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 22,319 patients were included across 14 trials; 7,691 patients (34.5%) with CCS and 14,628 patients (65.5%) with ACS. We found evidence that new-generation DES versus BMS consistently reduced the risk of cardiac death or MI in both patients with CCS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.98, p <0.001) and ACS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.92, p <0.001) (p-interaction = 0.931). This benefit was mainly driven by a similar reduction in the risk of MI (p-interaction = 0.898) for both subsets (HR CCS 0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; HR ACS 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.89). In CCS and ACS, we found a time-dependent treatment effect, with the benefit from DES accumulating during 1-year follow-up, without offsetting effects after that. In conclusion, patients with CCS were slightly underrepresented in comparative clinical trials. Still, they benefited similarly to patients with ACS from new-generation DES instead of BMS with a sustained reduction of cardiac death or MI because of lower event rates within 1 year., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The comparative effectiveness of transradial (TRA) compared with transfemoral (TFA) access in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear., Methods: Among 8404 ACS patients in the Minimising Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX)-Access trial, 5233 underwent noncomplex (TRA: n = 2590; TFA: n = 2643) and 1491 complex (TRA: n = 777; TFA: n = 714) PCI. Co-primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and the composite of MACE and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding (net adverse cardiovascular events [NACE]) at 30 days., Results: Rates of 30-day MACE (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.72-1.22) or NACE (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69-1.14) did not significantly differ between groups in the complex PCI group, whereas both primary end points were lower (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70-1.00; HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.98; respectively) with TRA among noncomplex PCI patients, with negative interaction testing (P int  = 0.473 and 0.666, respectively). Access-site BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding was lower with TRA, consistently among complex (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.05-0.63) and noncomplex (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.85) PCI patients, whereas the former group had a greater absolute risk reduction of 1.7% (number needed to treat: 59) owing to their higher absolute risk., Conclusions: Among ACS patients, PCI complexity did not affect the comparative efficacy and safety of TRA vs TFA, whereas the absolute risk reduction of access-site major bleeding was greater with TRA compared with TFA in complex as opposed to noncomplex PCI., (Copyright © 2022 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with acetylsalicylic acid and oral P2Y12 inhibitor (P2Y12-I) represents the standard of care for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or with chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Cangrelor, the first intravenous P2Y12-I, is deemed to overcome the drawbacks of the oral administration; nevertheless, real world data on this new drug are scanty. We sought to investigate routine clinical use of cangrelor in four interventional centers of Italy., Methods: We enrolled 241 consecutive patients (196 ACS, 45 CCS) treated with cangrelor during PCI. Drug administration modalities and in-hospital clinical outcomes were evaluated. A subanalysis in patients selected based on the CHAMPION Phoenix trial inclusion/exclusion criteria (CHAMPION-like subpopulation) was also performed., Results: Cangrelor was mainly utilized in ACS patients, who presented poorer clinical conditions and higher bleeding risk. Cangrelor was given only in P2Y12-I naïve patients; switch to clopidogrel was always done at the end of the infusion, while ticagrelor or prasugrel were prevalently given 30 minutes before. In-hospital mortality was 10.0% and GUSTO moderate/severe bleeding was 2.5%. Bleeding data showed nevertheless to be in line with the CHAMPION Phoenix results in the "CHAMPION-like" subpopulation., Conclusions: Cangrelor was predominantly used in ACS with modalities substantially in accord with the label indications. Poor clinical outcomes are due to the prevalent utilization in highly challenging clinical settings, nevertheless the rate of bleeding and stent thrombosis are in line with the randomized trials if analyzed in a subpopulation of comparable risk profile.

Background: The radial artery is recommended by international guidelines as the default vascular access in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) managed invasively. However, crossover from radial to femoral access is required in 4-10% of cases and has been associated with worse outcomes. No standardised algorithm exists to predict the risk of radial crossover., Aims: We sought to derive and externally validate a risk score to predict radial crossover in patients with ACS managed invasively., Methods: The derivation cohort consisted of 4,197 patients with ACS undergoing invasive management via the randomly allocated radial access from the MATRIX trial. Using logistic regression, we selected predictors of radial crossover and developed a numerical risk score. External validation was accomplished among 3,451 and 491 ACS patients managed invasively and randomised to radial access from the RIVAL and RIFLE-STEACS trials, respectively., Results: The MATRIX score (age, height, smoking, renal failure, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, Killip class, radial expertise) showed a c-index for radial crossover of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.67-0.75) in the derivation cohort. Discrimination ability was modest in the RIVAL (c-index: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.59-0.67) and RIFLE-STEACS (c-index: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.57-0.75) cohorts. A cut-off of ≥41 points was selected to identify patients at high risk of radial crossover., Conclusions: The MATRIX score is a simple eight-item risk score which provides a standardised tool for the prediction of radial crossover among patients with ACS managed invasively. This tool can assist operators in anticipating and better addressing difficulties related to transradial procedures, potentially improving outcomes.

Background: Bleeding is the principal safety concern of antithrombotic therapy and occurs frequently among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD)., Aims: We aimed to evaluate the prognostic impact of bleeding on mortality compared with that of myocardial infarction (MI) in patients with CAD., Methods: We searched Medline and Embase for studies that included patients with CAD and that reported both the association between the occurrence of bleeding and mortality, and between the occurrence of MI and mortality within the same population. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for mortality associated with bleeding and MI were extracted and ratios of hazard ratios (rHRs) were pooled by using inverse variance weighted random effects meta-analyses. Early events included periprocedural or within 30-day events after revascularisation or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Late events included spontaneous or beyond 30-day events after revascularisation or ACS., Results: A total of 141,059 patients were included across 16 studies; 128,660 (91%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Major bleeding increased the risk of mortality to the same extent as MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.10, 95% CI: 0.71-1.71, p=0.668). Early bleeding was associated with a higher risk of mortality than early MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.46, 95% CI: 1.13-1.89, p=0.004), although this finding was not present when only randomised trials were included. Late bleeding was prognostically comparable to late MI (rHRsbleedingvsMI 1.14, 95% CI: 0.87-1.49, p=0.358)., Conclusions: Compared with MI, major and late bleeding is associated with a similar increase in mortality, whereas early bleeding might have a stronger association with mortality.

Aims: Adherence to medical therapy following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) affects a patient's prognosis. In this cohort study, we sought to assess the factors that could affect a patient's adherence to therapy after ACS., Methods: We prospectively collected information from patients (N = 964) hospitalized at the coronary care unit of the Federico II University Hospital, from 1 January 2015 to 30 June 2017, for ACS. Adherence to three classes of drugs including statins, antiplatelets [dual or single antiplatelet agent (SAPT)] and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (ACE-I/ARB) and their composites were assessed at 1 month, 1 and 2 years after discharge., Results: At 30 days adherence to prescribed therapy was 94.4% for dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), 78.2% for statins, 92.7% for ACE-I/ARB and 70.7% for multitherapy. At 1 year, it was 91.1% for DAPT, 81.2% for ACE-I/ARB, 84.9% for statins and 71.4% for multitherapy. At 2 years, it was 97.1% for SAPT, 78.1% for ACE-I/ARB, 91.8% for statins, 72.8% for multitherapy. Multivariable logistic analysis demonstrated that at each time point, a telephone follow-up assessment predicts nonadherence to multitherapy and that a percutaneous coronary intervention at the index hospitalization is an independent predictor of adherence to composite therapy at 1 month and 1 year., Conclusion: Up to 2 years after ACS, three out of four patients are adherent to multitherapy prescription; percutaneous coronary intervention during the index hospitalization improves a patient's adherence, whereas telephone follow-up is associated with reduced adherence to multitherapy.Campania Salute Network Registry (Clinical Trials.gov Identifier: NCT02211365)., (Copyright © 2021 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may differ based on clinical presentation. We sought to compare double vs. triple antithrombotic therapy (DAT vs. TAT) in AF patients with or without acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing PCI., Methods and Results: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed to search for non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (NOAC)-based randomized clinical trials. Data on subgroups of ACS or elective PCI were obtained by published reports or trial investigators. A total of 10 193 patients from four NOAC trials were analysed, of whom 5675 presenting with ACS (DAT = 3063 vs. TAT = 2612) and 4518 with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD; DAT = 2421 vs. TAT = 2097). The primary safety endpoint of ISTH major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding was reduced with DAT compared with TAT in both ACS (12.2% vs. 19.4%; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.56-0.71; P < 0.0001; I2 = 0%) and SCAD (14.6% vs. 22.0%; RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.55-0.85; P = 0.0008; I2 = 66%), without interaction (P-int = 0.54). Findings were consistent for secondary bleeding endpoints, including intra-cranial haemorrhage. In both subgroups, there was no difference between DAT and TAT for all-cause death, major adverse cardiovascular events, or stroke. Myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were numerically higher with DAT vs. TAT consistently in ACS and SCAD (P-int = 0.60 and 0.86, respectively). Findings were confirmed by multiple sensitivity analyses, including a separate analysis on dabigatran regimens and a restriction to PCI population., Conclusions: DAT, compared with TAT, is associated with lower bleeding risks, including intra-cranial haemorrhage, and a small non-significant excess of cardiac ischaemic events in both patients with or without ACS., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Contemporary definitions of bleeding endpoints are restricted mostly to clinically overt events. Whether hemoglobin drop per se, with or without overt bleeding, adversely affects the prognosis of patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains unclear., Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine in the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox) trial the incidence, predictors, and prognostic implications of in-hospital hemoglobin drop in patients with ACS managed invasively stratified by the presence of in-hospital bleeding., Methods: Patients were categorized by the presence and amount of in-hospital hemoglobin drop on the basis of baseline and nadir hemoglobin values and further stratified by the occurrence of adjudicated in-hospital bleeding. Hemoglobin drop was defined as minimal (<3 g/dl), minor (≥3 and <5 g/dl), or major (≥5 g/dl). Using multivariate Cox regression, we modeled the association between hemoglobin drop and mortality in patients with and without overt bleeding., Results: Among 7,781 patients alive 24 h after randomization with available hemoglobin data, 6,504 patients (83.6%) had hemoglobin drop, of whom 5,756 (88.5%) did not have overt bleeding and 748 (11.5%) had overt bleeding. Among patients without overt bleeding, minor (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.37; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.32 to 4.24; p = 0.004) and major (HR: 2.58; 95% CI: 0.98 to 6.78; p = 0.054) hemoglobin drop were independently associated with higher 1-year mortality. Among patients with overt bleeding, the association of minor and major hemoglobin drop with 1-year mortality was directionally similar but had wider CIs (minor: HR: 3.53 [95% CI: 1.06 to 11.79]; major: HR: 13.32 [95% CI: 3.01 to 58.98])., Conclusions: Among patients with ACS managed invasively, in-hospital hemoglobin drop ≥3 g/dl, even in the absence of overt bleeding, is common and is independently associated with increased risk for 1-year mortality. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox; NCT01433627)., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures The MATRIX trial was sponsored by Società Italiana di Cardiologia Invasiva (a nonprofit organization), which received grant support from The Medicines Company and Terumo. This substudy did not receive any direct or indirect funding. Dr. Leonardi has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, and Chiesi; and has received personal fees from Bayer outside the submitted work. Dr. Gragnano has received research grant support from the European Society of Cardiology outside the submitted work. Dr. Gargiulo has received consultant fees from Daiichi-Sankyo outside the submitted work. Dr. Vranckx has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Terumo, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Bayer Health Care outside the submitted work. Dr. Frigoli is affiliated with CTU Bern, University of Bern, which has a staff policy of not accepting honoraria or consultancy fees. However, CTU Bern is involved in the design, conduct, or analysis of clinical studies funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations. In particular, pharmaceutical and medical device companies provide direct funding to some of these studies. For an up-to-date list of CTU Bern’s conflicts of interest, visit the University of Bern Web site (and see Research, Declaration of Interest). Dr. Windecker has received research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, and Sinomed outside the submitted work. Dr. Valgimigli has received grants and personal fees from Abbott, Terumo, AstraZeneca; has received personal fees from Chiesi, Bayer, Daiichi-Sankyo, Amgen, Alvimedica, Biosensors, and Idorsia; and has received grants from Medicure outside the submitted work. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Although oral P2Y 12 inhibitors are key in the management of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome, the optimal timing of their administration is not well defined., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare downstream and upstream oral P2Y 12 inhibitors administration strategies in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive treatment., Methods: We performed a randomized, adaptive, open-label, multicenter clinical trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive pre-treatment with ticagrelor before angiography (upstream group) or no pre-treatment (downstream group). Patients in the downstream group undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were further randomized to receive ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary hypothesis was the superiority of the downstream versus the upstream strategy on the combination of efficacy and safety events (net clinical benefit)., Results: We randomized 1,449 patients to downstream or upstream oral P2Y 12 inhibitor administration. A pre-specified stopping rule for futility at interim analysis led the trial to be stopped. The rate of the primary endpoint, a composite of death due to vascular causes; nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke; and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3, 4, and 5 bleeding through day 30, did not differ significantly between the downstream and upstream groups (percent absolute risk reduction: -0.46; 95% repeated confidence interval: -2.90 to 1.90). These results were confirmed among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (72% of population) and regardless of the timing of coronary angiography (within or after 24 h from enrollment)., Conclusions: Downstream and upstream oral P2Y 12 inhibitor administration strategies were associated with low incidence of ischemic and bleeding events and minimal numeric difference of event rates between treatment groups. These findings led to premature interruption of the trial and suggest the unlikelihood of enhanced efficacy of 1 strategy over the other. (Downstream Versus Upstream Strategy for the Administration of P2Y 12 Receptor Blockers In Non-ST Elevated Acute Coronary Syndromes With Initial Invasive Indication [DUBIUS]; NCT02618837)., Competing Interests: Author Relationship With Industry This work was funded by the Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE). Dr. Tarantini has received Speakers Bureau fees from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Eli Lilly. Dr. Mojoli has received individual payments for participating on the Advisory Boards of The Medicines Company and Abbott Vascular; and has been a speaker at scientific congresses from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Chiesi Farmaceutici, and Servier; and his institution has received an unconditioned research grant from Chiesi Farmaceutici. Dr. Varbella has received consulting fees/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, Pfizer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Servier, Amgen, Sanofi, Piam, Alvi Medica, Teleflex, and Stenty. Dr. Caporale has received an Advisory Board fee from AstraZeneca. Dr. Rigattieri has received a consulting fee from AstraZeneca; and has received a Speakers Bureau fee from Eli Lilly. Dr. Andò has received individual payments as a consultant, for serving on the Advisory Board, or as a speaker at scientific congresses from AstraZeneca, Daiichi-Sankyo, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Pfizer–Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Biosensors. Dr. Saia has received Speakers Bureau fees from AstraZeneca and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr. Ferlini has received individual payment as a consultant, for serving on the Advisory Board, or as a speaker at scientific congresses from AstraZeneca, Chiesi Farmaceutici, Bayer, Biosensors, Sanofi, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr. Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria as an individual from Abbott, Amgen, Aralez, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and The Medicines Company; has received payment as an individual for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St. Jude Medical; and has received institutional payments for grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli-Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Introduction and Objectives: Patients who are vulnerable to hemodynamic or electrical disorders (VP) are often excluded from clinical trials and data on the optimal access-site or antithrombotic treatment are limited. We assessed outcomes of transradial vs transfemoral access and bivalirudin vs unfractionated heparin (UFH) in VP with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management., Methods: The MATRIX trial randomized 8404 patients to radial or femoral access and 7213 patients to bivalirudin or UFH. Among them, 934 (11.1%) were deemed VP due to advanced Killip class (n = 808), cardiac arrest (n = 168), or both (n = 42). The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACE: death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (NACE: MACE or major bleeding)., Results: MACE and NACE were similarly reduced with radial vs femoral access in VP and non-VP. Transradial access was also associated with consistent relative benefits in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding with greater absolute benefits in VP. The effects of bivalirudin vs UFH on MACE and NACE were consistent in VP and non-VP. Bivalirudin was associated with lower all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in VP but not in non-VP, with borderline interaction testing. Bivalirudin reduced bleeding in both VP and non-VP with a larger absolute benefit in VP., Conclusions: In acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management, the effects of randomized treatments were consistent in VP and non-VP, but absolute risk reduction with radial access and bivalirudin were greater in VP, with a 5- to 10-fold lower number needed to treat for benefits. Trial registry number: NCT01433627., (Copyright © 2020 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with increased thrombotic events and seems to influence platelet reactivity. Conflicting results have been published on platelet response in CKD patients with stable coronary artery disease. The aim of our study was to investigate the impact of CKD on platelet aggregation in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy, included the more potent P2Y12 inhibitors., Methods: We enrolled 206 patients with ACS, divided in two groups, according to the presence or the absence of moderate/severe CKD. Platelet aggregation was performed with light transmission aggregometry and results are expressed as percentage of maximum platelet aggregation. High residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) was defined as maximum platelet aggregation more than 59%., Results: Patients with CKD [estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 ml/min/1.73 m, n = 28] were prevalent older, diabetic, had previous coronary revascularization. In these patients, platelet aggregation was significantly higher than in those with eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m (ADP 10 μmol/l: 28.46 ± 26.19 vs. 16.64 ± 12.79, P < 0.001; ADP 20 μmol/l: 30.07 ± 25.89 vs. 17.46 ± 12.82, P < 0.001). HRPR was observed in 4.4% of patients, with higher prevalence in those with eGFR less than 60 ml/min/1.73 m [21.4 vs. 1.7%, P < 0.001, odds ratio (OR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 15.91 (3.71-68.17), P < 0.001]. At multivariate analysis, after correction for baseline confounders, eGFR [adjusted OR (95% CI) = 0.95 (0.91-0.98), P = 0.007], together with the use of clopidogrel [adjusted OR (95% CI) = 23.59 (4.01-138.82), P < 0.001], emerged as determinants of HRPR., Conclusion: In patients with ACS receiving dual antiplatelet therapy, CKD is associated with an increasing ADP-induced platelet aggregation and higher prevalence of HRPR, which is mainly correlated to clopidogrel use.

Background: Complete revascularization in patients with an acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease is superior compared to culprit-only treatment. However, it is unknown whether direct complete or staged complete revascularization should be pursued., Methods: The BIOVASC study is an investigator-initiated, prospective, multicenter, randomized, 2-arm, international, open-label, noninferiority trial. We will randomize 1,525 patients 1:1 to immediate complete revascularization (experimental arm) or culprit-only plus staged complete revascularization (control arm). Patients will be enrolled in approximately 30 sites in Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. The primary end point is a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (excluding staged procedures in the control arm at the predetermined time), and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) at 1 year post index procedure., Conclusions: The BIOVASC study aims to further refine the treatment algorithm for acute coronary syndrome patients with multivessel disease in terms of optimal timing for complete revascularization (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03621501)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To assess the long-term outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting Stentys stent in a real-life setting., Background: Few data regarding the safety and effectiveness of self-apposing sirolimus-eluting Stentys stent are available., Methods: 278 patients (30% stable coronary artery disease, 70% acute coronary syndromes, and 54% on unprotected left main) treated with sirolimus eluting Stentys stent were retrospectively included in the self-aPposing, bAlloon-delivered, siRolimus-eluting stent for the Treatment of the coronary Artery disease multicenter registry. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis) were the primary end-point, single components of MACE were the secondary ones., Results: After 13 months (interquartile range 5-32), MACE was 14%. Stent thrombosis occurred in 3.9% of the patients (2.5% definite stent thrombosis and 1.4% probable stent thrombosis), 66% of them presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) at admission. Cardiovascular death, target lesion revascularization and myocardial infarction was 4.7%, 8.3%, and 7.2%, respectively. At multivariate analysis, risk of MACE was increased by diabetes (hazard ratios 4.76; P = 0.002) but was not affected by the indication leading to sirolimus-eluting Stentys stent implantation (marked vessel tapering vs. coronary ecstasies, hazard ratios 0.74, P = 0.71)., Conclusion: Sirolimus-eluting Stentys stent may represent a potential solution for specific coronary anatomies such as bifurcation, ectasic, or tapered vessels. Risk of stent thrombosis appears related to clinical presentation with STEMI and to anatomic features, stressing the importance of the use of intracoronary imaging for self-expandable stents implantation.

Complex coronary artery bifurcation lesions occurred in hard clinical scenarios, such as acute coronary syndromes, may represent a challenge for interventional cardiologists, with not-defined general consensus on treatment. Even if provisional stenting is the most common option used to restore rapidly the coronary branches flow, improvements in industrial technologies and design of new dedicated bifurcation devices might open new modalities of treatment in these complex cases. The Axxess stent (Biosensors Europe SA, Morges, Switzerland) is a self-expanding biolimus-eluting conical V-shape stent, specifically designed to treat "easily" coronary artery bifurcation lesions, with reported favorable long-term clinical results in stable patients compared to a provisional technique. We report for the first time the feasibility to use this device in a case of "true double coronary bifurcation lesion" occurred in the context of acute coronary syndrome. Moreover, we reviewed studies with bifurcation dedicated devices and available cases of "true double bifurcation lesions", underlying advantages/disadvantages of using one device over the others during acute coronary syndrome., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The value of prolonged bivalirudin infusion after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with or without ST-segment elevation remains unclear., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of a full or low post-PCI bivalirudin regimen in ACS patients with or without ST-segment elevation., Methods: The MATRIX program assigned bivalirudin to patients without or with a post-PCI infusion at either a full (1.75 mg/kg/h for ≤4 h) or reduced (0.25 mg/kg/h for ≤6 h) regimen at the operator's discretion. The primary endpoint was the 30-day composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, or major bleeding)., Results: Among 3,610 patients assigned to bivalirudin, 1,799 were randomized to receive and 1,811 not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Post-PCI full bivalirudin was administered in 612 (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction [STEMI], n = 399; non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes [NSTE-ACS], n = 213), whereas the low-dose regimen was administered in 1,068 (STEMI, n = 519; NSTE-ACS, n = 549) patients. The primary outcome did not differ in STEMI or NSTE-ACS patients who received or did not receive post-PCI bivalirudin. However, full compared with low bivalirudin regimen remained associated with a significant reduction of the primary endpoint after multivariable (rate ratio: 0.21; 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.35; p < 0.001) or propensity score (rate ratio: 0.16; 95% CI: 0.09 to 0.26; p < 0.001) adjustment. Full post-PCI bivalirudin was associated with improved outcomes consistently across ACS types compared with the no post-PCI infusion or heparin groups., Conclusions: In ACS patients with or without ST-segment elevation, the primary endpoint did not differ with or without post-PCI bivalirudin infusion but a post-PCI full dose was associated with improved outcomes when compared with no or low-dose post-PCI infusion or heparin (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by TRansradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX [MATRIX]; NCT01433627)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is a cornerstone of treatment for patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Mounting evidences have opened the debate about the optimal DAPT duration. Considering the ACS-pathophysiology, the most recent guidelines recommend DAPT in all ACS patients for at least 12 months unless there are contraindications such as excessive risk of bleeding. Thus, it can be considered acceptable earlier discontinuation if the risk of morbidity from bleeding outweighs the anticipated benefit. On the other hand, several studies have clearly indicated that a significant burden of platelet related-events, such as stroke and new ACS might occur after this period, suggesting that potential benefits might derive by prolonging DAPT beyond 12 months (Long DAPT). Indeed, although current guidelines give some indications about patients eligible for Long DAPT, they do not embrace several real-life clinical scenarios. Thus, in such scenarios, how to decide whether a patient is eligible for Long DAPT or not might be still challenging for clinicians. This position paper presents and discusses various "real-life" clinical scenarios in ACS patients, in order to propose several possible recommendations to overcome guidelines potential limitations.

Background: The Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox (MATRIX) programme was designed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of radial versus femoral access and of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin with optional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with the whole spectrum of acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management. Here we describe the prespecified final 1-year outcomes of the entire programme., Methods: MATRIX was a programme of three nested, randomised, multicentre, open-label, superiority trials in patients with acute coronary syndrome in 78 hospitals in Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were simultaneously randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and to bivalirudin, with or without post-percutaneous coronary intervention infusion or unfractionated heparin (one-step inclusion). Patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and, only if deemed eligible to percutaneous coronary intervention after angiography (two-step inclusion), entered the antithrombin type and treatment duration programmes. Randomisation sequences were computer generated, blocked, and stratified by intended new or current use of P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel vs ticagrelor or prasugrel), and acute coronary syndrome type (ST-elevation myocardial infarction, troponin-positive, or troponin-negative non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome). Bivalirudin was given as a bolus of 0·75 mg/kg, followed immediately by an infusion of 1·75 mg/kg per h until completion of percutaneous coronary intervention. Heparin was given at 70-100 units per kg in patients not receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and at 50-70 units per kg in patients receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Clinical follow-up was done at 30 days and 1 year. Co-primary outcomes for MATRIX access and MATRIX antithrombin type were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke up to 30 days; and net adverse clinical events, defined as the composite of non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major bleeding, or major adverse cardiovascular events up to 30 days. The primary outcome for MATRIX treatment duration was the composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events up to 30 days. Analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627., Findings: Between Oct 11, 2011, and Nov 7, 2014, we randomly assigned 8404 patients to receive radial (4197 patients) or femoral (4207 patients) access. Of these 8404 patients, 7213 were included in the MATRIX antithrombin type study and were randomly assigned to bivalirudin (3610 patients) or heparin (3603 patients). Patients assigned to bivalirudin were included in the MATRIX treatment duration study, and were randomly assigned to post-procedure infusion (1799 patients) or no post-procedure infusion (1811 patients). At 1 year, major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ between patients assigned to radial access compared with those assigned to femoral access (14·2% vs 15·7%; rate ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-1·00; p=0·0526), but net adverse clinical events were fewer with radial than with femoral access (15·2% vs 17·2%; 0·87, 0·78-0·97; p=0·0128). Compared with heparin, bivalirudin was not associated with fewer major adverse cardiovascular (15·8% vs 16·8%; 0·94, 0·83-1·05; p=0·28) or net adverse clinical events (17·0% vs 18·4%; 0·91, 0·81-1·02; p=0·10). The composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events did not differ with or without post-procedure bivalirudin infusion (17·4% vs 17·4%; 0·99, 0·84-1·16; p=0·90)., Interpretation: In patients with acute coronary syndrome, radial access was associated with lower rates of net adverse clinical events compared with femoral access, but not major adverse cardiovascular events at 1 year. Bivalirudin with or without post-procedure infusion was not associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events or net adverse clinical events. Radial access should become the default approach in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management., Funding: Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology, The Medicines Company, Terumo, amd Canada Research Chairs Programme., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Platelet aggregation plays a pivotal role in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In this setting, β-blockers (BBs) are used to counteract the effects of catecholamines on heart. Circulating catecholamines can also potentiate platelet reactivity, mainly through α 2 - and β 2 -adrenoceptors on human platelets' surface, thus BB may affect platelet aggregation; however, the effects of different BBs on platelet aggregation in contemporary-treated patients with ACS have been poorly investigated. One hundred patients with ACS on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and ticagrelor were randomized to receive treatment with carvedilol, a nonselective BB (n = 50), or metoprolol, a selective β 1 -blocker (n = 50), at maximum tolerated dose. Light transmission aggregometry was performed at randomization (T0) and at 30-day follow-up (T30), and the results were expressed as a percentage of maximum platelet aggregation (MPA). The primary end point was epinephrine-induced MPA at 30 days. Patients were predominantly men (80%), and mean age was 57.3 ± 9.7 years. The 2 randomized groups were well balanced for baseline characteristics. At T0, mean MPA was similar between the groups (18.96 ± 9.05 vs 18.32 ± 9.21 with 10 µM epinephrine, 14.42 ± 9.43 vs 15.98 ± 10.08 with 20 µM adenosine diphophate (ADP), and 13.26 ± 9.83 vs 14.30 ± 9.40 with 10 µM ADP for carvedilol and metoprolol, respectively, all p = NS). At 30 days, platelet aggregation induced by epinephrine was significantly lower in the carvedilol group than in the metoprolol group (23.52 ± 10.25 vs 28.72 ± 14.37, p = 0.04), with a trend toward the lower values of ADP-induced MPA (20 µM ADP 19.42 ± 13.84 vs 24.16 ± 13.62, p = 0.09; 10 µM ADP 19.12 ± 12.40 vs 22.57 ± 13.59, p = 0.19). In conclusion, carvedilol, a nonselective BB, reduces residual platelet reactivity in patients with ACS compared with the selective BB, metoprolol., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Dual-axis rotational coronary angiography (DARCA) has already been shown to reduce both the amount of contrast medium and radiation exposure compared with conventional coronary angiography (CCA). However, a clinical benefit of such imaging modality has never been demonstrated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of DARCA to prevent acute kidney injury (AKI) compared with CCA. Consecutive patients who underwent coronary angiography were enrolled to DARCA (n = 80) or CCA (n = 80). Patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or previously underwent coronary artery bypass graft were excluded. The 2 groups were homogeneous in terms of both clinical and procedural characteristics. Total x-ray time and total amount of contrast medium were significantly lower in the DARCA group compared with the CCA group (x-ray time 3.2 minutes [1.8 to 7.0] vs 5.1 minutes [2.6 to 9.9], p = 0.002; contrast medium amount 40 ml [31 to 116] vs 80 ml [50 to 150], p <0.001). AKI more often occurred in the CCA group compared with the DARCA group (16 [20%] vs 4 [5%], p = 0.007). Moreover, in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), AKI more often occurred in the CCA group compared with the DARCA group (ACS patients, 6 [29%] vs 2 [6%], p = 0.04, and PCI patients, 11 [33%] vs 0 [0%], p <0.001). In addition, in patients with high pretest probability of coronary artery disease, AKI more often occurred in the CCA group compared with the DARCA group (11 [55%] vs 2 [6%], p <0.001). In conclusion, DARCA significantly reduces both x-ray exposure and amount of contrast medium usage, thereby reducing the occurrence of AKI compared with CCA., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Contrasting evidence exists on the comparative efficacy and safety of bivalirudin and unfractionated heparin (UFH) in relation to the planned use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPIs)., Objectives: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin compared with UFH with or without GPIs in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent invasive management., Methods: In the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of AngioX) program, 7,213 patients were randomly assigned to receive either bivalirudin or UFH with or without GPIs at discretion of the operator. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), and net adverse clinical events (NACEs) (a composite of MACEs or major bleeding)., Results: Among 3,603 patients assigned to receive UFH, 781 (21.7%) underwent planned treatment with GPI before coronary intervention. Bailout use of GPIs was similar between the bivalirudin and UFH groups (4.5% and 5.4%) (p = 0.11). At 30 days, the 2 coprimary endpoints of MACEs and NACEs, as well as individual endpoints of mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis or stroke did not differ among the 3 groups after adjustment. Compared with the UFH and UFH+GPI groups, bivalirudin reduced bleeding, mainly the most severe bleeds, including fatal and nonaccess site-related events, as well as transfusion rates and the need for surgical access site repair. These findings were not influenced by the administered intraprocedural dose of UFH and were confirmed at multiple sensitivity analyses, including the randomly allocated access site., Conclusions: In patients with ACS, the rates of MACEs and NACEs were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with UFH, irrespective of planned GPI use. However, bivalirudin significantly reduced bleeding complications, mainly those not related to access site, irrespective of planned use of GPIs. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of AngioX [MATRIX]; NCT01433627)., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to assess whether transradial access (TRA) compared with transfemoral access (TFA) is associated with consistent outcomes in male and female patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management., Background: There are limited and contrasting data about sex disparities for the safety and efficacy of TRA versus TFA for coronary intervention., Methods: In the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by TRansradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX) program, 8,404 patients were randomized to TRA or TFA. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events (NACE), defined as MACCE or major bleeding., Results: Among 8,404 patients, 2,232 (26.6%) were women and 6,172 (73.4%) were men. MACCE and NACE were not significantly different between men and women after adjustment, but women had higher risk of access site bleeding (male vs. female rate ratio [RR]: 0.64; p = 0.0016), severe bleeding (RR: 0.17; p = 0.0012), and transfusion (RR: 0.56; p = 0.0089). When comparing radial versus femoral, there was no significant interaction for MACCE and NACE stratified by sex (p int  = 0.15 and 0.18, respectively), although for both coprimary endpoints the benefit with TRA was relatively greater in women (RR: 0.73; p = 0.019; and RR: 0.73; p = 0.012, respectively). Similarly, there was no significant interaction between male and female patients for the individual endpoints of all-cause death (p int  = 0.79), myocardial infarction (p int  = 0.25), stroke (p int  = 0.18), and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 (p int  = 0.45)., Conclusions: Women showed a higher risk of severe bleeding and access site complications, and radial access was an effective method to reduce these complications as well as composite ischemic and ischemic or bleeding endpoints., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of sex on 2-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients randomly allocated to 24-month versus 6-month dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)., Background: The optimal duration of DAPT after PCI is highly debated. Whether sex per se should drive decision making on DAPT duration remains unclear., Methods: The primary efficacy endpoint of PRODIGY (Prolonging Dual Antiplatelet Treatment After Grading Stent-Induced Intimal Hyperplasia Study) was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accident at 24-month follow-up. The key safety endpoint was type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria., Results: Women (n = 459 [23.3%]) were older and more likely to have hypertension, lower creatinine clearance, and acute coronary syndrome but had a lower severity of coronary artery disease. After adjustment, prolonged DAPT, compared with 6-month treatment, did not reduce the primary endpoint in both men (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.080; 95% confidence interval: 0.766 to 1.522; p = 0.661) and women (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.013; 95% confidence interval: 0.588 to 1.748; p = 0.962) (interaction p = 0.785). No sex disparity was identified across multiple secondary ischemic endpoints, including overall or cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis. There was also no clear sex-related effect on clinically relevant bleeding, including Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5, TIMI (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction), and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) scales., Conclusions: The present findings suggest that men and women undergoing PCI have similar adjusted 2-year ischemic and bleeding outcomes, despite being characterized by different clinical presentation. Sex failed to emerge as a treatment modifier with respect to DAPT duration, suggesting that decision making on DAPT duration in female patients should weigh ischemic versus bleeding risks., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Atherosclerosis is a systemic disease and coronary artery disease is frequently associated with peripheral artery disease. As aortic and mitral valvular calcification (VC) share some etiopathogenetic mechanisms with atherosclerosis, we analyzed the risk profile and the echocardiographic characteristics of patients admitted for first acute coronary syndrome (ACS) to investigate whether the presence of VC could be a marker of asymptomatic hemodynamically significant peripheral atherosclerosis., Methods: A total of 151 patients admitted for ACS without previous history of cardiovascular disease were consecutively enrolled. The presence of VC was identified by echocardiography; a carotid stenosis ≥50% by ultrasound identified carotid artery disease (CarAD); an ankle-brachial index ≤0.9 or ≥1.4 identified lower extremity artery disease (LEAD). Significant peripheral atherosclerosis was defined by the presence of CarAD and/or LEAD., Results: Peripheral atherosclerosis was diagnosed in 82 (54.3%) patients; isolated CarAD in 24, isolated LEAD in 20, both diseases in 38 patients. VC was present in 103 (68.2%) patients. By multivariate analysis, age (OR = 1.059, 95% CI 1.007-1.113, P = 0.025), diabetes mellitus (OR = 5.068, 95% CI 1.480-17.351, P = 0.010), VC (OR = 7.422, 95% CI 2.421-22.880, P < 0.001), and multivessel CAD (OR = 3.317, 95% CI 1.281-8.586, P = 0.013) were the only independent predictors of having peripheral atherosclerosis. C-statistic for VC was not inferior to that obtained by age (0.728, 95% CI 0.649-0.797 vs. 0.800, 95% CI 0.727-0.861, P = 0.101) and to that obtained by the combination of multivessel CAD with diabetes (0.750; 95% CI 0.673-0.817, P = 0.635), and, furthermore, it was higher than that obtained by diabetes alone (0.620, 95% CI 0.538-0.698, P = 0.036)., Conclusion: Ruling out the presence of significant peripheral atherosclerosis should be routinely considered in patients with ACS showing VC at echocardiography., (© 2015, Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Conflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome., Methods: We randomly assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event). The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events., Results: The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (10.3% and 10.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.09; P=0.44), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (11.2% and 12.4%, respectively; relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.03; P=0.12). Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (11.0% and 11.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P=0.34)., Conclusions: In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin. The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion. (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01433627.).

Background: It is unclear whether radial compared with femoral access improves outcomes in unselected patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management., Methods: We did a randomised, multicentre, superiority trial comparing transradial against transfemoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were about to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to radial or femoral access with a web-based system. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, blocked, and stratified by use of ticagrelor or prasugrel, type of acute coronary syndrome (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, troponin positive or negative, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome), and anticipated use of immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events, defined as major adverse cardiovascular events or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The analysis was by intention to treat. The two-sided α was prespecified at 0·025. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627., Findings: We randomly assigned 8404 patients with acute coronary syndrome, with or without ST-segment elevation, to radial (4197) or femoral (4207) access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. 369 (8·8%) patients with radial access had major adverse cardiovascular events, compared with 429 (10·3%) patients with femoral access (rate ratio [RR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·74-0·99; p=0·0307), non-significant at α of 0·025. 410 (9·8%) patients with radial access had net adverse clinical events compared with 486 (11·7%) patients with femoral access (0·83, 95% CI 0·73-0·96; p=0·0092). The difference was driven by BARC major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1·6% vs 2·3%, RR 0·67, 95% CI 0·49-0·92; p=0·013) and all-cause mortality (1·6% vs 2·2%, RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·53-0·99; p=0·045)., Interpretation: In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality., Funding: The Medicines Company and Terumo., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transfemoral approach (TFA) remains the most common vascular access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in many countries. However, in the last years several randomized trials compared transradial approach (TRA) with TFA in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but only few studies were powered to estimate rare events. The aim of the current study was to clarify whether TRA is superior to TFA approach in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A meta-analysis, meta-regression and trial sequential analysis of safety and efficacy of TRA in ACS setting was performed., Methods and Results: Medline, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, scientific session abstracts and relevant websites were searched. Data concerning the study design, patient characteristics, risk of bias, and outcomes were extracted. The primary endpoint was death. Secondary endpoints were: major bleeding and vascular complications. Outcomes were assessed within 30 days. Eleven randomized trials involving 9,202 patients were included. Compared with TFA, TRA significantly reduced the risk of death (odds ratio [OR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.94; p = 0.016), but this finding was not confirmed in trial sequential analysis, indicating that sufficient evidence had not been yet reached. Furthermore, TRA compared with TFA reduced the risk of major bleeding (OR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41-0.88; p = 0.008) and vascular complications (OR 0.35; 95% CI, 0.28-0.46; p<0.001); these findings were supported by trial sequential analyses., Conclusions: In patients with ACS undergoing PCI, a lower risk of death was observed with TRA. Nevertheless, the association between mortality and TRA in ACS setting should be interpreted with caution because it is based on insufficient evidence. However, because of the clinical relevance associated with major bleeding and vascular complications reduction, TRA should be recommended as first-choice vascular access in patients with ACS undergoing cardiac catheterization.

In the largest reported series of patients, the overall angiographical incidence of congenital coronary anomalies was 1.3%. Among these anomalies, an isolated single coronary artery is a rare, congenital coronary anomaly with an incidence of 0.044-0.23%. In this kind of anomaly, the coronary arteries arise by a single coronary ostium in the right or left sinus of Valsalva. Percutaneous coronary revascularization plays an important role in the management of acute coronary syndrome, and coronary anomalies may determine a lower success rate of this intervention. We report two cases of isolated single coronary arteries who underwent successful coronary angioplasty and stenting for acute coronary syndrome.

Older age is an independent predictor of mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with Non-ST elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS). GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors are proved to improve outcome in high risk patients, but conflicting data are available about the effects of these inhibitors in elderly. Accordingly, we studied a consecutive population of elderly patients undergoing PCI for Non-ST elevation ACS. A total of 500 patients were divided in: GPI group (247 pts; mean age 77+/-1.9 years) treated by stenting plus abciximab and, no GPI group (253 pts; mean age 77+/-2.4 years) treated by stenting alone. Propensity analysis was used to account for the nonrandomized use of GPIIb/IIIa inhibitors. During hospitalization, incidence of death was similar among groups (3.2% vs 4.6%) without difference regarding incidence of major (1.6% vs 1.1%) and minor bleedings (4% vs 3%). At long-term follow-up the rate of death was significantly lower in GPI group (4.5% vs 12.3%; p=0.002) as well as the rate of acute myocardial infarction (2.8% vs 11.1%; p=0.0001), and pre-PCI (5.7% vs 13.4%; p=0.003). Cox regression analysis identified abciximab use as an independent predictor of lower long-term major adverse cardiac event (MACE) after adjustment for propensity score (Exp (B) 0.620, 95%CI 0.394-0.976, p=0.039). Our results suggest that addition of abciximab to stenting improves outcome in elderly patients with Non-ST elevation ACS, leading to an absolute benefit for reduction of death and MACE, with an acceptable rate of major and minor bleedings.

Artificial intelligence (AI) applied to cardiovascular disease (CVD) is enjoying great success in the field of scientific research. Electrocardiograms (ECGs) are the cornerstone form of examination in cardiology and are the most widely used diagnostic tool because they are widely available, inexpensive, and fast. Applications of AI to ECGs, especially deep learning (DL) methods using convolutional neural networks (CNNs), have been developed in many fields of cardiology in recent years. Deep learning methods provide valuable support for rapid ECG interpretation, demonstrating a diagnostic capability overlapping with specialists in the diagnosis of CVD by a classical analysis of macroscopic changes in the ECG trace. Through photoplethysmography, wearable devices can obtain single-derivative ECGs for the recognition of AI-diagnosed arrhythmias. In addition, CNNs have been developed that recognize no macroscopic electrocardiographic changes and can predict, from a 12-lead ECG, atrial fibrillation, even from sinus rhythm; left and right ventricular function; hypertrophic cardiomyopathy; acute coronary syndromes; or aortic stenosis. The fields of application are many, but numerous are the limitations, mainly associated with the reliability of the acquired data, an inability to verify black box processes, and medico-legal and ethical problems. The challenge of modern medicine is to recognize the limitations of AI and overcome them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A simple, contemporary risk score for the prediction of contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was recently updated, although its external validation is lacking. The aim of this study was to validate the updated CA-AKI risk score in a large cohort of acute coronary syndrome patients from the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX) trial. The risk score identifies 4 risk categories for CA-AKI. The primary endpoint was to appraise the receiver-operating characteristics of an 8-component and a 12-component CA-AKI model. Independent predictors of Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes–based acute kidney injury and the impact of CA-AKI on 1-year mortality and bleeding were also investigated. The MATRIX trial included 8,201 patients with complete creatinine values and no end-stage renal disease. CA-AKI occurred in 5.5% of the patients, with a stepwise increase of CA-AKI rates from the lowest to the highest of the 4 risk categories. The receiver-operating characteristic area under the curve was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.64-0.70) with model 1 and 0.71 (95% CI: 0.68-0.74) with model 2. CA-AKI risk was systematically overestimated with both models (Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test: P < 0.05). The 1-year risks of all-cause mortality and bleeding were higher in CA-AKI patients (HR: 7.03 [95% CI: 5.47-9.05] and HR: 3.20 [95% CI: 2.56-3.99]; respectively). There was a gradual risk increase for mortality and bleeding as a function of the CA-AKI risk category for both models. The updated CA-AKI risk score identifies patients at incremental risks of acute kidney injury, bleeding, and mortality. (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX [MATRIX]; NCT01433627) [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review aims to examine the complex interaction between dyslipidemia, platelet function, and related drug treatments. In particular, the manuscript provides an overview of the effects of major hypolipidemic drugs on platelet function. Indeed, growing evidence supports the view that statins, ezetimibe, PCSK9 inhibitors, inclisiran, and icosapent ethyl also act as antithrombotics. It is known that platelets play a key role not only in the acute phase of coronary syndromes but also in the early phase of atherosclerotic plaque formation. The goal of cholesterol-lowering therapy is to reduce cardiovascular events. The direct effects of cholesterol-lowering drugs are widely described in the literature. Lowering LDL-c (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) by 1 mmol/L results in a 22–23% reduction in cardiovascular risk. Numerous studies have examined the direct antithrombotic effects of these drugs on platelets, endothelium, monocytes, and smooth muscle cells, and thus, potentially independent of blood LDL-cholesterol reduction. We reviewed in vitro and in vivo studies evaluating the complex interaction between hypercholesterolemia, hypertriglyceridemia, platelet function, and related drug treatments. First, we discussed the role of statins in modulating platelet activation. Discontinuation of statin therapy was associated with increased cardiovascular events with increased ox-LDL, P-selectin, and platelet aggregation. The effect of PCSK9-I (inhibitors of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9, PCSK9 involved in the degradation of LDL receptors in the liver) was associated with a statistically significant reduction in platelet reactivity, calculated in P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), in the first 14 days and no difference at 30 days compared to placebo. Finally, in patients with hypertriglyceridemia, the REDUCE-IT study showed that icosapent ethyl (an ethyl ester of eicosapentaenoic acid that reduces triglyceride synthesis and improves triglyceride clearance) resulted in a 25% reduction in ischemic events and cardiovascular death. However, to date, there is not yet clear clinical evidence that the direct antithrombotic effects of the drugs may have a beneficial impact on outcomes independently from the reduction in LDL-C or triglycerides. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the gold standard for the antithrombotic management of patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Implementation of intensified or prolonged DAPT regimens has proven to lower the risk of ischemic events but at the expense of increased bleeding. Importantly, bleeding is a predictor of poor prognosis. Risk stratification and selection of tailored antiplatelet strategies to maximize the net clinical benefit in individual patients with ACS or undergoing PCI is therefore potentially beneficial. Recently, novel approaches including DAPT de-escalation or escalation have been proposed as possible alternatives to standard DAPT. These strategies, which are generally based on patient's risk profile, genetics, and/or platelet function have been proposed to offer more tailored treatments in patients with ACS or PCI, with the ultimate goal of providing adequate ischemic protection while mitigating the risk of bleeding. This review summarizes the available evidence on DAPT de-escalation or escalation (both guided and unguided) and discusses the practical implications of these strategies in the contemporary management of patients with ACS and/or undergoing PCI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite the improvement of revascularization procedures, patients with acute coronary syndrome often develop recurrent ischemic events, suggesting a high residual cardiovascular risk in these patients, which requires a strict clinical monitoring as well as an optimal control of modifiable risk factors. To this aim, an optimal management of index event and appropriate preventive measures are equally important. Hospital care by cardiologists should be followed by outpatient management by general practitioners, as established by specific diagnostic and therapeutic pathways, which should warrant an optimal support to the patient. A strict collaboration between hospital and primary care is crucial to monitor and adapt drug therapy after the acute event and improve adherence of the patients to prescribed treatments and implementation of life-style modifications, with benefits also in term of cost-effectiveness. In this context, individualized rehabilitation programs should also be offered to patients with acute coronary syndromes, in order to improve survival and quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From the topics addressed in the articles of this Special Issue, dedicated to acute coronary syndromes (ACS), some priorities have emerged summarizing the complexity of the management of these patients, which must take into account not only clinical and pharmacological factors but also logistical and organizational aspects, as well as elements of health policy. Only the synergy between these different aspects can bring out the solution for the optimization of ACS management, in terms of prevention, diagnosis, treatment and improvement of the patient's quality of life. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]