Search

Background: For patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS), prasugrel was recommended over ticagrelor in a recent randomized controlled trial, although more data are needed on the rationale. Here, the effects of P2Y12 inhibitors on ischemic and bleeding events in patients with NSTE-ACS were investigated., Methods: Clinical trials that enrolled patients with NSTE-ACS were included, relevant data were extracted, and a network meta-analysis was performed., Results: This study included 37,268 patients with NSTE-ACS from 11 studies. There was no significant difference between prasugrel and ticagrelor for any end point, although prasugrel had a higher likelihood of event reduction than ticagrelor for all end points except cardiovascular death. Compared with clopidogrel, prasugrel was associated with decreased risks of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.71-0.99) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.68-0.99) but not an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.97-1.74). Similarly, compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with a reduced risk of cardiovascular death (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.94) and an increased risk of major bleeding (HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.00-1.77; P = .049). For the primary efficacy end point (MACE), prasugrel showed the highest likelihood of event reduction (P = .97) and was superior to ticagrelor (P = .29) and clopidogrel (P = .24)., Conclusion: Prasugrel and ticagrelor had comparable risks for every end point, although prasugrel had the highest probability of being the best treatment for reducing the primary efficacy end point. This study highlights the need for further studies to investigate optimal P2Y12 inhibitor selection in patients with NSTE-ACS., (© 2023 by the Texas Heart® Institute, Houston.)

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has impacted many aspects of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care, including timely access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI)., Objectives: The goal of the NACMI (North American COVID-19 and STEMI) registry is to describe demographic characteristics, management strategies, and outcomes of COVID-19 patients with STEMI., Methods: A prospective, ongoing observational registry was created under the guidance of 3 cardiology societies. STEMI patients with confirmed COVID+ (group 1) or suspected (person under investigation [PUI]) (group 2) COVID-19 infection were included. A group of age- and sex-matched STEMI patients (matched to COVID+ patients in a 2:1 ratio) treated in the pre-COVID era (2015 to 2019) serves as the control group for comparison of treatment strategies and outcomes (group 3). The primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital death, stroke, recurrent myocardial infarction, or repeat unplanned revascularization., Results: As of December 6, 2020, 1,185 patients were included in the NACMI registry (230 COVID+ patients, 495 PUIs, and 460 control patients). COVID+ patients were more likely to have minority ethnicity (Hispanic 23%, Black 24%) and had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (46%) (all p < 0.001 relative to PUIs). COVID+ patients were more likely to present with cardiogenic shock (18%) but were less likely to receive invasive angiography (78%) (all p < 0.001 relative to control patients). Among COVID+ patients who received angiography, 71% received PPCI and 20% received medical therapy (both p < 0.001 relative to control patients). The primary outcome occurred in 36% of COVID+ patients, 13% of PUIs, and 5% of control patients (p < 0.001 relative to control patients)., Conclusions: COVID+ patients with STEMI represent a high-risk group of patients with unique demographic and clinical characteristics. PPCI is feasible and remains the predominant reperfusion strategy, supporting current recommendations., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by an American College of Cardiology Accreditation Grant, Saskatchewan Health Research Foundation (SHRF), and grants from Medtronic and Abbott Vascular to SCAI. Dr. Garcia has received institutional research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, BSCI, Medtronic, and Abbott Vascular; has served as a consultant for Medtronic and BSCI; and has served as a proctor for Edwards Lifesciences. Dr. Saw has received unrestricted research grant support from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, National Institutes of Health, AstraZeneca, Abbott Vascular, St. Jude Medical, Boston Scientific, and Servier; has received salary support from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research; has received speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Bayer; has received consultancy and advisory board honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Gore, Abiomed, and Baylis; and has received proctorship honoraria from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. Dr. Jaffer has received research grants from Siemens, Canon, Shockwave, and Teleflex; has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific, Siemens, Biotronik, and Magenta Medical; owns equity interest in Intravascular Imaging; and Massachusetts General Hospital has patent licensing arrangements with Canon, Terumo, and Spectrawave, and Dr. Jaffer has a right to receive licensing royalties. 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. All rights reserved.)

Background: Physiology-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has demonstrated to improve clinical outcomes. Previous trials showed the agreement between iFR and FFR is approximately 80%, however the details of discordance pattern remain to be elucidated., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 1024 consecutive intermediate stenotic lesions for which functional evaluation using both iFR and FFR were performed between January 2015 and June 2016. The lesions were classified into 4 groups according to iFR and FFR concordance [(iFR+/FFR+) and (iFR-/FFR-)] or discordance [(iFR+/FFR-) and (iFR-/FFR+)]., Results: Our study evaluated 451 lesions, 264 lesions (58.5%) from men and 187 lesions (41.5%) from women. iFR was similar between women and men, however FFR was significantly higher in women than men. The rate of discordance between iFR and FFR was 21.3% (iFR+/FFR- 12.4% and iFR-/FFR+ 8.9%) in overall cohort. The prevalence of overall concordance and discordance were similar between men and women, however iFR+/FFR- discordance was significantly higher in women (17.1% vs. 9.1%) whereas iFR-/FFR+ discordance was significantly higher in men (11.3% vs. 4.8%). In multivariable analysis, female sex and older age were significantly associated with iFR+/FFR- discordance (odds ratio 1.88 and 1.48, respectively). Conversely, younger age, higher stenosis, and concomitant chronic total occlusion were independent predictors for iFR-/FFR+ discordance (odds ratio 0.67, 1.82, and 4.32, respectively)., Conclusions: Despite similar prevalence of overall concordance and discordance between men and women, iFR+/FFR- discordance was higher in women and iFR-/FFR+ discordance was higher in men. Multivariable analysis showed female sex to be independent predictor of iFR+/FFR- discordance., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Previous studies have reported lower rates of coronary angiography and revascularization, and significantly higher mortality among patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This observational study was designed to evaluate characteristics and inpatient outcomes of patients with seropositive HIV infection presenting with AMI., Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, we identified patients (admissions) with a primary diagnosis of myocardial infarction and a co-occurring HIV. We described baseline characteristics and outcomes. Our primary outcomes of interest were prevalence of coronary angiography, revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or CABG), and mortality., Results: From 2010 to 2014, of about 2,977,387 patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI, 10,907 (0.4%) were HIV seropositive. Patients with HIV were younger and more likely to be African American or Hispanic. Coronary angiography and revascularization were performed more frequently in the HIV population. The higher prevalence of revascularization was driven by a higher incidence of PCI. In a multivariable model, patients with HIV were no more likely to undergo revascularization than the general population. This was also the case for PCI. Unadjusted all-cause mortality was lower among patients with HIV. After controlling for confounders, this finding was not significant (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.25, p = 0.79). The length of stay between both groups was comparable., Conclusion: In this current analysis, we did not note any treatment bias or difference in the rate of in-hospital total mortality for HIV-seropositive patients presenting with AMI compared with the general population.

The optimal treatment strategy for coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) has not been well established. The benefit of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was inferred mainly from observational studies comparing successful versus failed PCI without a control group receiving optimal medical therapy (OMT). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing PCI using drug-eluting stent (DES) versus OMT alone in patients with CTO. Eight studies were identified: 3 RCTs and 5 observational studies. Among a total of 4784 included patients, 2461 patients underwent PCI and 2323 patients received OMT. There was a significant association between PCI and lower cardiac mortality (odds ratio = 0.62; 95% confidence interval 0.42-0.93; P = .02). There was no significant difference between PCI and OMT regarding major adverse cardiac events, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, or stroke. In the RCT subset (1399 patients), there was no significant difference between PCI and OMT regarding clinical outcomes. Compared with OMT alone, PCI with DES for CTO was associated with lower cardiac mortality, mainly driven by observational studies, without significant difference in recurrent MI or repeated revascularization. Further RCTs are needed to investigate the role of PCI for management of patients with CTO.

Background: Patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at increased risk for subsequent ischemic events., Hypothesis: Short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (≤6 months) is inferior to standard or long-term DAPT in patients who undergo PCI for ACS events., Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared short-term (≤6 months) to long-term (≥12 months) DAPT after PCI for ACS. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database., Results: Ten randomized controlled trials, including a total of 12 696 patients, met our inclusion criteria. For short-term DAPT, duration of therapy ranged from 3 to 6 months, while long-term DAPT ranged from 12 to 24 months. The majority of studies used clopidogrel and second-generation drug-eluting stents. No statistically significant difference was found between short-term and long-term DAPT with regard to myocardial infarction (odds ratio 1.21; 95% confidence interval 0.94-1.57; P = 0.14), stent thrombosis (odds ratio 1.54; 95% confidence interval 1.00-2.38; P = 0.052), or major bleeding events (odds ratio 0.74; 95% confidence interval 0.49-1.11; P = 0.14). There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality, cardiac death, or net adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events., Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that short-term DAPT (<6 months) after PCI for ACS was not associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis when compared to long-term DAPT., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Studies have reported sex differences in the management of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the general population. This observational study is designed to evaluate whether sex differences exist in the contemporary management of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) patients admitted for diagnosis of AMI., Hypothesis: There is no difference in management of HIV patients with AMI., Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample database, we identified patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI and a secondary diagnosis of HIV. We described baseline characteristics and outcomes using NIS documentation. Our primary areas of interest were revascularization and mortality., Results: Among 2 977 387 patients presenting from 2010 to 2014 with a primary diagnosis of AMI, 10907 (0.4%) had HIV (mean age, 54.1 ± 9.3 years; n = 2043 [18.9%] female). Females were younger, more likely to be black, and more likely to have hypertension, diabetes, obesity, and anemia. Although neither males nor females were more likely to undergo coronary angiography in multivariate analysis, revascularization was performed less frequently in females than in males (45.4% vs 62.7%; P < 0.01), driven primarily by lower incidence of PCI. In a multivariate model, females were less likely to undergo revascularization (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.45-0.78, P < 0.01), a finding driven solely by PCI (OR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.49-0.83, P < 0.01). All-cause mortality was similar in both groups., Conclusions: AMI was more common in males than females with HIV. Females with HIV were more likely to be younger and black and less likely to be revascularized by PCI., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: Prior studies have shown that routine follow-up coronary angiography (CAG) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) increases the incidence of revascularization without a clear reduction in major adverse clinical events. However, none of these prior studies were adequately powered to evaluate hard clinical endpoints such as myocardial infarction (MI) or death and thus the clinical utility of such practice remains to be determined.Methods and Results:We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials that compared clinical outcomes after PCI between patients who underwent routine follow-up CAG and those who only had clinical follow-up. Five randomized trials, totaling 4,584 patients met our inclusion criteria, including studies that used sub-randomization and ones that assigned consecutive patients per study protocol. Our results showed that routine follow-up CAG was associated with a lower rate of MI (odds ratio [OR] 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.46-0.91; P=0.01) without reduction in all-cause mortality (OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.59-1.28; P=0.48), and a higher rate of target lesion revascularization (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.42-2.11; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Our meta-analysis demonstrated that routine follow-up CAG after PCI was associated with a higher rate of revascularization, but also with a reduction in the rate of subsequent MI. Further studies investigating the potential role of routine follow-up angiography may be warranted.

In the early days of coronary angioplasty, follow-up coronary angiography was often performed to assess restenosis. Angiographic restenosis has been shown to be associated with worse clinical outcomes, though the exact causality has yet to be determined. Numerous studies have repeatedly demonstrated that routine follow-up coronary angiography increases the incidence of target lesion revascularization without a clear reduction in mortality or myocardial infarction. Despite the lack of proven benefit of angiographic follow-up, routine follow-up coronary angiography is still being performed in certain countries and facilities. There are several factors that might explain the lack of benefit of angiographic follow-up: 1) lower incidence of stent failure in the current drug-eluting stent era has attenuated the net clinical benefit of follow-up angiography. 2) Angiographic restenosis might not lead to myocardial ischemia. 3) Patients that do have functionally significant restenosis are often referred for coronary angiography due to clinical indications such as intractable angina. 4) Absence of restenosis at the time of follow-up angiography does not exclude future restenosis. The absence of proven benefit in unselected populations does not necessarily preclude the presence of benefit in selected population, and there may be a subgroup of patients who can benefit from angiographic follow-up such as those with a large myocardial ischemic territory or those at very high risk of restenosis. Until there is more clinical evidence with respect to follow-up angiography, the decision of whether or not to perform it routinely in selected high-risk population should entail an in-depth discussion with the patient., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background/purpose: Stent thrombosis is an infrequent yet one of the most feared complications after stent implantation. Stent thrombosis most commonly manifests as ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, thus the data regarding non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) resulting from stent thrombosis are still sparse. The aim of the study is to evaluate the prevalence and outcomes of NSTEMI resulting from stent thrombosis., Methods/materials: We performed a retrospective analysis of 378 consecutive NSTEMI patients who underwent coronary angiography. Patients were divided into those with and without stent thrombosis. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcome was the incidence of large myocardial infarction defined as a peak troponin I value greater than 90th percentile of the entire study population (26.5 μg/L)., Results: Among 378 patients with NSTEMI, 12 (3.2%) patients had angiographically confirmed definite stent thrombosis. With respect to the timing of stent thrombosis, 2 patients had early, 3 had late and 7 had very-late stent thrombosis. Patients with stent thrombosis had a higher incidence of large myocardial infarction (33% vs. 9%, p = 0.02) and a higher albeit statistically insignificant peak troponin value (interquartile, 4.62 [0.19-64.0] μg/L vs. 1.21 [0.14-7.12] μg/L, p = 0.25) compared to those without stent thrombosis. There was no significant difference in in-hospital mortality between the two groups (8% vs. 2%, p = 0.2)., Conclusions: Stent thrombosis accounted for 3.2% cases of NSTEMI in our cohort of patients and patients with NSTEMI resulting from stent thrombosis had a higher incidence of large myocardial infarction., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Previous studies have reported lower rates of coronary angiography and revascularization, and significantly higher mortality among patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). This observational study was designed to evaluate characteristics and inpatient outcomes of patients with seropositive HIV infection presenting with AMI.Methods: Using the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) database, we identified patients (admissions) with a primary diagnosis of myocardial infarction and a co-occurring HIV. We described baseline characteristics and outcomes. Our primary outcomes of interest were prevalence of coronary angiography, revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or CABG), and mortality.Results: From 2010 to 2014, of about 2,977,387 patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI, 10,907 (0.4%) were HIV seropositive. Patients with HIV were younger and more likely to be African American or Hispanic. Coronary angiography and revascularization were performed more frequently in the HIV population. The higher prevalence of revascularization was driven by a higher incidence of PCI. In a multivariable model, patients with HIV were no more likely to undergo revascularization than the general population. This was also the case for PCI. Unadjusted all-cause mortality was lower among patients with HIV. After controlling for confounders, this finding was not significant (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.75-1.25, p = 0.79). The length of stay between both groups was comparable.Conclusion: In this current analysis, we did not note any treatment bias or difference in the rate of in-hospital total mortality for HIV-seropositive patients presenting with AMI compared with the general population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The effect of oral beta-blocker therapy on long-term mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who are treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and who have preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) remains unclear.Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies evaluating the effect of oral beta-blocker therapy in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI and who had preserved LVEF. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Randomized controlled trials and the observational studies that reported an adjusted hazard ratio (or hazard ratio in the propensity score-matched patients) with follow-up duration equal to or more than 6 months were included. Pooled hazard ratio with 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using a random effect model.Results: No randomized controlled trials met the inclusion criteria. Seven observational studies totaling 10 857 patients met the inclusion criteria. Follow-up duration ranged from 6 months to 5.2 years. Preserved LVEF was defined as 40% in 4 studies and 50% in 3 studies. Based on the pooled estimate, oral beta-blocker therapy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (combined hazard ratio 0.79, 95% CI 0.65-0.97).Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that oral beta-blocker therapy is associated with decreased all-cause mortality in patients with STEMI who are treated with primary PCI and who have preserved LVEF. This supports the current American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association 2013 Guideline for the Management of STEMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]