Search

Introduction: For acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the choice of the duration and kind of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) offering the most accurate balance between ischemic and bleeding risk remains unknown., Evidence Acquisition: A network meta-analysis was performed including all Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing different DAPT regimens and duration in ACS patients undergoing PCI. Trial-defined MACE and major bleedings were the primary endpoints. Stroke, stent thrombosis (ST), all-cause and cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) represented secondary endpoints., Evidence Synthesis: 13 RCTs encompassing 46145 patients were included. Mean age was 62 (61-64) years old, 42% being admitted with STEMI, 33% with NSTEMI and 25% with UA. The competitive arms were: clopidogrel and aspirin for 12 months (6 arms/18183 patients), clopidogrel and aspirin for 6 months (4/3329), clopidogrel and aspirin >12 months (3/2238), ticagrelor and aspirin for 12 months (6/12942) and prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months (3/9453). Trial-defined MACE and major bleedings, stroke and death were similar among the different arms. DAPT with prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months reduced MI compared to aspirin and clopidogrel for 12 months (OR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.54.0.94) and reduced the risk of ST compared to ticagrelor (OR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.49-0.90). Both prasugrel and ticagrelor reduced ST as compared to clopidogrel and aspirin for 12 months., Conclusions: Different DAPT strategies yield similar risk of MACE, major bleeding, death and stroke in ACS patients. Prasugrel and aspirin for 12 months proved to be the most effective strategy regarding ST and MI.

Aims: The aim of the present study was to establish the safety and efficacy profile of prasugrel and ticagrelor in real-life acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients with renal dysfunction., Methods and Results: All consecutive patients from RENAMI (REgistry of New Antiplatelets in patients with Myocardial Infarction) and BLEEMACS (Bleeding complications in a Multicenter registry of patients discharged with diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome) registries were stratified according to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) lower or greater than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Death and myocardial infarction (MI) were the primary efficacy endpoints. Major bleedings (MBs), defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding types 3 to 5, constituted the safety endpoint. A total of 19 255 patients were enrolled. Mean age was 63 ± 12; 14 892 (77.3%) were males. A total of 2490 (12.9%) patients had chronic kidney disease (CKD), defined as eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Mean follow-up was 13 ± 5 months. Mortality was significantly higher in CKD patients (9.4% vs. 2.6%, P < 0.0001), as well as the incidence of reinfarction (5.8% vs. 2.9%, P < 0.0001) and MB (5.7% vs. 3%, P < 0.0001). At Cox multivariable analysis, potent P2Y12 inhibitors significantly reduced the mortality rate [hazard ratio (HR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.96; P = 0.006] and the risk of reinfarction (HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.30-0.95; P = 0.033) in CKD patients as compared to clopidogrel. The reduction of risk of reinfarction was confirmed in patients with preserved renal function. Potent P2Y12 inhibitors did not increase the risk of MB in CKD patients (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.59-1.68; P = 0.985)., Conclusion: In ACS patients with CKD, prasugrel and ticagrelor are associated with lower risk of death and recurrent MI without increasing the risk of MB., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Limited data are available concerning differences in clinical outcomes for real-life patients treated with ticagrelor versus prasugrel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Objective: Our objective was to determine and compare the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world population., Methods: RENAMI was a retrospective, observational registry including the data and outcomes of consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent primary PCI and were discharged with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) between January 2012 and January 2016. The mean follow-up period was 17 ± 9 months. In total, 11 university hospitals from six European countries participated. After propensity-score matching, there were no substantial differences in the baseline clinical and interventional features. All patients were treated with acetylsalicylic acid plus prasugrel 10 mg once daily or acetylsalicylic acid plus ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily. Mean duration of DAPT was 12.04 ± 3.4 months with prasugrel and 11.90 ± 4.1 months with ticagrelor (p = 0.47). The primary and secondary endpoints were long-term net adverse clinical events (NACE) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), respectively, along with their single components. Subgroup analysis for freedom from NACE and MACE was performed according to length of DAPT and clinical presentation [ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)-ACS versus non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)-ACS]., Results: In total, 4424 patients (2725 ticagrelor, 1699 prasugrel) were enrolled. After propensity-score matching, 1290 patients in each cohort were included in the analysis. At 12 months, the incidence of both NACE and MACE was lower with prasugrel (NACE: 5.3% vs. 8.5% [p = 0.001]; MACE: 5% vs. 8.1% [p =  0.001]) mainly driven by a reduction in recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) (2.4 vs. 4.0%; p = 0.029) and a lower rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3-5 bleeding (1.5 vs. 2.9%; p = 0.011). The benefit of prasugrel was confirmed for patients with NSTEMI and for those discharged with a DAPT regimen of ≤ 12 months. Only a trend in the reduction of NACE and MACE was noted for STEMI or for those treated with longer DAPT., Conclusions: Comparison of these drugs suggested that prasugrel is safer and more efficacious than ticagrelor in combination with aspirin after NSTEMI but not STEMI. No differences were found for events occurring after 12 months. The nonrandomized design of the present research means further studies are required to support these findings.

Aims: The benefit of complete or incomplete percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease remains debated. The aim of our study was to compare a complete vs. a "culprit only" revascularisation strategy in patients with myocardial infarction distinguishing the different clinical subsets (STEMI and NSTEMI) and to provide one-year clinical outcome from the "real-life" BleeMACS (Bleeding complications in a Multicenter registry of patients discharged with diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry., Methods and Results: We conducted a multicentre study including all patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary disease included in the BleeMACS (Bleeding complications in a Multicenter registry of patients discharged with diagnosis of Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry. They were divided into two groups, complete revascularisation (CR) and incomplete revascularisation (IR). The primary endpoint was the death rate at one-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints were in-hospital repeat myocardial infarction (re-AMI), in-hospital heart failure (HF), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and myocardial infarction at one year. Four thousand five hundred and twenty patients were included in our analysis, with a diagnosis of STEMI in 67.7% and NSTEMI in 32.3%. CR was performed in 27.2% and 42.4%, respectively. At univariate analysis, in-hospital and one-year outcomes were similar between CR and IR in STEMI patients (all p-values >0.05). In NSTEMI patients, CR was associated with a lower one-year death rate (4.5% vs. 8.5%; p=0.002), re-AMI (3.7% vs. 6.6%; p=0.016) and MACE (8.1% vs. 13.9%; p=0.001). After propensity score matching, CR also reduced events in STEMI patients, including one-year mortality (5.3% vs. 13.8%; p<0.001), re-AMI (4.9% vs. 17.4%; p<0.001) and MACE (8.5% vs. 24.6%; p<0.001)., Conclusions: This multicentre retrospective registry showed the benefit of CR in terms of reduction of one-year mortality in patients with myocardial reinfarction and multivessel coronary disease. Randomised controlled trials including functional evaluation of the lesions should be performed to confirm our results.

Background: Appropriate management for patients with multivessel coronary disease presenting with ST segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) remains to be defined., Methods and Results: Medline and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or observational studies adjusted with multivariate analysis, reporting about STEMI patients with multivessel coronary disease treated with either a culprit only or complete revascularization strategy, excluding patients in cardiogenic shock. Prespecified analysis was performed according to the strategy of complete revascularization, either during the same procedure of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or during the index hospitalization. MACE (a composite and mutually exclusive end point of death or myocardial infarction or revascularization) at follow-up of at least one year was the primary end point. 9 studies with 4686 patients compared culprit only versus complete PCI performed during the primary PCI. Rates of MACE did not differ at 90 days (OR 0.70 [0.38, 1.27], I(2)=0%) or at 1 year (1-2.5) (OR 0.70 [0.47, 1.03], I(2)=0%). No significant difference was found for the components of the primary outcome, apart from a reduction in repeated revascularization for patients undergoing complete PCI during the STEMI procedure (OR 0.62 [0.39, 0.98], I(2)=0%). 6 studies (1 RCT) with 5855 patients compared culprit only lesions versus complete PCI performed during index hospitalization. 90 day risk of MACE did not differ nor 1 year (1-2.5) MACE (OR 0.86 [0.62, 1.08], I(2)=0%), with a similar reduction in repeated revascularization (0.60 [0.40, 0.90], I(2)=0%)., Conclusions: Complete revascularization performed during primary PCI or index hospitalizations for patients presenting with STEMI appears safe at short term follow-up and offers a reduction in repeated revascularization at one year., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims Chronic pre-treatment with statins may reduce mortality and morbidity in patients experiencing acute coronary syndromes (ACS), but mechanisms accounting for these findings are not completely understood. Methods and results The optical coherence tomography (OCT)-Formidable registry retrospectively enrolled 285 consecutive patients with ACS undergoing OCT in 9 European centres. Mean age was 60.4 ° 12.8 years, 148 (51.9%) patients had hyperlipemia, 45 (15.8%) diabetes mellitus and 142 (49.8%) presented with ST Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI). Patients were stratified according to statin prescription: 150 (52.6%) were on chronic pretreatment with statins before ACS and were more likely to present with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) at admission (111, 74%) rather than STEMI, while the opposite was observed for patients not on statins. The primary end-point of ruptured plaque at OCT occurred significantly less frequently in the patients on chronic pre-treatment with statins [odds ratio (OR) 0.375, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.185-0.759, P = 0.006]. The secondary end-point of thin-cap fibro-atheroma (TCFA) at any site was significantly less frequent in the statin group (OR 0.423, 95%CI 0.213-0.840, P = 0.014). No differences were observed for the secondary endpoint of not-ruptured TCFA as the culprit lesion. Pre-specified sensitivity analysis was conducted according to the pattern of ACS: the reported differences were confirmed for NSTE-ACS patients, with a trend towards less plaque rupture and a significant reduction of TCFA at any site with statins, but not for STEMI. Conclusions Chronic pre-treatment with statins is associated with a reduced prevalence of ruptured plaques in patients presenting with ACS, particularly in those with NSTE-ACS. Statins bear hence the potential to reduce morbidity during the acute phase of ACS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims The prevalence of plaque rupture at the culprit lesion identified by optical coherence tomography (OCT) in different clinical subset of patients undergoing coronary angiography and its clinical predictors remain to be defined. Methods All studies including patients with OCT evaluation of the culprit coronary plaque were included. The prevalence of culprit plaque rupture (CPR) and thin-cap fibro-atheroma (TCFA) were the primary endpoints. The factors associated with these findings were studied in a subset of patients with different clinical presentations [ST-elevation myocardial (STEMI) vs. nonST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) vs. unstable angina (UA) vs. stable angina pectoris (SAP)]. Results One hundred and fifty citations were initially appraised at the abstract level and 23 full-text studies were assessed. The mean prevalence of CPR and TCFA was 48.1% (40.5-55.8) and 48.7% (37.4-60.1), respectively. The prevalence of CPR and TCFA were higher in STEMI (70.4 and 76.6%) than in NSTEMI (55.6 and 56.3%) and UA (39.1 and 52.9%) or SAP (6.2 and 22.8%). In the overall population at meta-regression analysis, TCFA and current smoking were the only predictors of CPR (B 3.6:2.0-5.1, P < 0.001 and 0.06:0.02-0.1, P = 0.002, respectively). The factors associated with CPR were different depending on clinical presentation. Hypertension was the only clinical predictor for STEMI (B 3.3: 1.2.-5.3 P = 0.001), while advanced age (B 0.12: 0.02-0.22, P = 0.021), diabetes mellitus (B 0.04: 0.01-0.08, P = 0.012), and hyperlipidaemia (B 0.07:0.02-0.11, P = 0.005) were the predictors in NSTEMI and UA. No clinical predictor was found in SA. Conclusions Our analysis showed high rates of CPR and TCFA detected by OCT in CAD patients, especially in those with ACS, although their prevalence is not negligible in stable patients. TCFA seems to be a strong predictor of CPR in all the ACS scenarios. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Due to its negative impact on prognosis, a clear assessment of bleeding risk for patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains crucial. Different risk scores have been proposed and compared, although with inconsistent results. Aim: We performed a meta-analysis to evaluate the accuracy of different bleeding risk scores for ACS patients. Material and methods: All studies externally validating risk scores for bleeding for patients presenting with ACS were included in the present review. Accuracy of risk scores for external validation cohorts to predict major bleeding in patients with ACS was the primary end point. Sensitivity analysis was performed according to clinical presentation (ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI)). Results: Nine studies and 13 759 patients were included. CRUSADE, ACUITY, ACTION and GRACE were the scores externally validated. The rate of in-hospital major bleeding was 7.80% (5.5-9.2), 2.05% (1.5-3.0) being related to access and 2.70% (1.7-4.0) needing transfusions. When evaluating all ACS patients, ACTION, CRUSADE and ACUITY performed similarly (AUC 0.75: 0.72-0.79; 0.71: 0.64-0.80 and 0.71: 0.63-0.77 respectively) when compared to GRACE (0.66; 0.64-0.67, all confidence intervals 95%). When appraising only STEMI patients, all the scores performed similarly, while CRUSADE was the only one externally validated for NSTEMI. For ACTION and ACUITY, accuracy increased for radial access patients, while no differences were found for CRUSADE. Conclusions: ACTION, CRUSADE and ACUITY perform similarly to predict risk of bleeding in ACS patients. The CRUSADE score is the only one externally validated for NSTEMI, while accuracy of the scores increased with radial access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The first author's name which previously read. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims There is uncertainty on which stenting approach confers the best long-term outlook for unprotected left main (ULM) bifurcation disease. Methods and results This is a non-randomized, retrospective study including all consecutive patients with 50% stenosis of the left main involving at least 1 of the arteries stemming from the left main treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) in 9 European centers between 2002 and 2004. Patients were divided into two groups: those treated with provisional stentings vs. those treated with two stent strategy. The outcomes of interest were 10-year rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and their components (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction [MI], or repeat revascularization), along with stent thrombosis (ST). A total of 285 patients were included, 178 (62.5%) in the provisional stenting group and 87 (37.5%) in the two stent group. After 10 years, no differences in TLR were found at unadjusted analysis (19% vs 25%, p > 0.05) nor after propensity score matching (25% vs 28%, p > 0.05). Similar rates of MACE (60% vs 66%, p > 0.05), death (34% vs 43%, p > 0.05), MI (9% vs 14%, p > 0.05) and ST were also disclosed at propensity-based analysis. Conclusion Even after 10 year follow-up, patients treated with provisional stenting on left main showed comparable rates of target lesion revascularization compared to two stent strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]