Search

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.)

Objectives: Several volume expansion protocols have been proposed to prevent contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI). The aim of our study was to seek the ideal intravenous volume expansion to prevent CA-AKI in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing invasive cardiovascular procedures., Methods: We analyzed 1927 CKD patients enrolled in 6 studies that took place from September 15, 2000 to June 6, 2019. Four volume expansion regiments were included: (1) conventional group (n=625); (2) bicarbonate group (n=255); (3) left ventricular end-diastolic pressure-guided group (n=355); and (4) urine flow rate-guided group (n=500)., Results: CA-AKI (serum creatinine increase ≥0.3 mg/dL at 48 hours) occurred in 224 (11%) patients. In patients with CA-AKI, volume expansion was lower (2090 ± 1382 mL vs 2551 ± 1716 mL; P less than .001) and acute pulmonary edema occurred more often (3.5% vs 0.29%; P less than .001). By ROC curve analysis, an absolute volume expansion greater than or equal to 1430 mL (AUC = 0.70) and a volume expansion to contrast media volume ratio greater than or equal to 17 (AUC = 0.57) were the best thresholds for freedom from CA-AKI., Conclusions: In our comprehensive pooled analysis, an absolute volume expansion greater than or equal to 1430 mL and a volume expansion to contrast media volume ratio greater than or equal to 17 are the best dichotomous thresholds for CA-AKI prevention. These cutoffs should be formally tested in a dedicated trial as a pragmatic means to prevent CA-AKI.

Background: Nearly 20% of patients on ticagrelor experience dyspnea, which may lead to treatment discontinuation in up to one-third of cases., Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of dyspnea-related ticagrelor discontinuation after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: In the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial, after 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were maintained on ticagrelor and randomized to aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The occurrence of dyspnea associated with ticagrelor discontinuation was evaluated among all patients enrolled in the trial. A landmark analysis was performed at 3 months after PCI, that is, the time of randomization. Predictors of dyspnea-related ticagrelor discontinuation were obtained from multivariable Cox regression with stepwise selection of candidate variables., Results: The incidence of dyspnea-related ticagrelor discontinuation was 6.4% and 9.1% at 3 and 15 months after PCI, respectively. Independent predictors included Asian race (lower risk), smoking, prior PCI, hypercholesterolemia, prior coronary artery bypass, peripheral artery disease, obesity, and older age. Among 179 patients who discontinued ticagrelor because of dyspnea after randomization, ticagrelor monotherapy was not associated with a higher risk of subsequent ischemic events (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin (5.0% vs 7.1%; P = 0.566)., Conclusions: In the TWILIGHT trial, dyspnea-related ticagrelor discontinuation occurred in almost 1 in 10 patients and tended to occur earlier rather than late after PCI. Several demographic and clinical conditions predicted its occurrence, and their assessment may help identify subjects at risk for therapy nonadherence., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by an investigator-initiated grant from AstraZeneca. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, and Sanofi; and has received institutional research grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry Co., Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Baber has received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boston Scientific. Dr Dangas has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Biosensors; has received advisory board fees from AstraZeneca; and has held stock in Medtronic. Dr Cohen has received institutional grant support and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, and Boston Scientific. Dr Gibson has received grant support from Angel Medical, Bayer, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, and Portola Pharmaceuticals; has received consulting fees from Angel Medical, Bayer, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Portola Pharmaceuticals, The Medicines Company, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Novo Nordisk, WebMD, UpToDate Cardiovascular Medicine, Amarin Pharma, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Merck, PharmaMar, Sanofi, Somahlution, Verreseon Corporation, Boston Scientific, Impact Bio, MedImmume, Medtelligence, MicroPort, PERT Consortium, and GE Healthcare; holds equity in inference; and serves as chief executive officer of Baim Institute, receiving grant support, paid to Baim Institute, from Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca. Dr Huber has received lecture fees from AstraZeneca and Bayer. Dr Mehta has received grant support from and serves on an executive committee and as site investigator for AstraZeneca. Dr Ohman has received consulting fees from 3D Communications, Abiomed, ACI Clinical, Biotie, Cara Therapeutics, Cardinal Health, Faculty Connection, Imbria, Impulse Medical, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medscape, Milestone Pharmaceuticals, and XyloCor; and has received grant support from Abiomed, Chiesi, and Portola. Dr Escaned has received consulting fees from Abbott, Philips, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received lecture fees from Abbott, Philips, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abiomed, Terumo, and Biosensors. Dr Steg has received consulting fees from Sanofi, Amarin, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Regeneron, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and AstraZeneca; has received grant support from Bayer/Janssen, Merck, Sanofi, Amarin, and Servier; has received lecture fees from Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Sanofi, Amgen, and AstraZeneca; has received fees for serving on steering, critical event, or data monitoring committees from Bayer/Janssen, Amarin, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Pfizer, Novartis, Servier, and Idorsia; and has received fees for serving as cochair of trials from Sanofi and chair of a registry from Servier. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, DSI, Insel Gruppe AG, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, OrbusNeich, Philips, Transverse Medical, Zoll; personal fees from ACC, Boston Scientific, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), Cine-Med Research, Janssen, WebMD, SCAI; institutional consulting fees from Abbott, Abiomed, AM-Pharma, Alleviant Medical, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, DSI, Duke University, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Novartis, Philips; and holds equity <1% in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, STEL, CONTROLRAD (spouse); and has served on a scientific advisory board for AMA and Biosensors (spouse). 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.)

Background: Contrast associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) can lead to an increased risk of adverse events. Contrast media (CM) volume reduction has been advocated as a pivotal strategy to prevent CA-AKI in stable patients undergoing percutaneous coronary procedures., Aims: To compare the effectiveness of CM volume reduction with the DyeVert TM system versus conventional strategy in reducing the risk of CA-AKI., Methods: We prospectively collected data from 136 patients with stable coronary artery disease at high risk of CA-AKI treated with left ventricular end diastolic pressure (LVEDP)- guided hydration and undergoing interventions with the use of the DyeVert TM (Osprey Medical Inc.) system. Patients previously enrolled in the LVEDP-guided hydration arm of the "Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast MEDIA Administration triaL III" (REMEDIAL III) were considered as controls. Propensity score was used to perform 1:1 matching to adjust for major confounders. The primary outcome was the occurrence of CA-AKI, as defined by an absolute increase of creatinine values ≥0.3 mg/dL at 48 h., Results: Patients in the DyeVert group were treated with a significant lower CM volume (median: 47.5 vs. 84.0 mL, p < 0.001). The trend in creatinine increase was lower (p = 0.004) and the Δ of creatinine (0-48 h) showed a higher drop (-0.18 vs. -0.10 mg/dL, p = 0.036) in the DyeVert group. The risk of CA-AKI was significantly lower in DyeVert group compared to control group (5.1% vs. 16.8%; odds ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval [0.12-0.61])., Conclusions: CM volume reduction with the DyeVert TM system seems to be superior to conventional strategies in reducing the occurrence of CA-AKI., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Few studies compared paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) versus sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) in the treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) instent restenosis (ISR)., Methods: Between November 5, 2009, and October 14, 2020, in our center 212 patients with first DES-ISR were treated with PCB (Restore ® ; Cardionovum GmbH, Bonn, Germany), whereas 230 patients were treated with SCB (Devoir ® ; MINVASYS SAS, Gennevilliers, France). Following a propensity matching, 186 patients were included into PCB group (PCB group), and in the SCB group (SCB group). The primary purpose of the study was the 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) rate, including cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and repeated target lesion or target vessel revascularization., Results: Procedural success occurred in all cases. Fully optimal predilation (that is, balloon-to-stent ratio >0.91, time of DCB inflation >60 sec, and residual percent diameter stenosis after lesion preparation <20%) was observed more often in the SCB group (126 [68%] patients versus 106 [57%] patients; P=0.042). One-year TLF occurred in 29 (15.5%) patients in the SCB group and in 32 (17%) patients in the PCB group (OR=1.12 [0.65-1.95]; P=0.78). By logistic Cox regression analysis fully optimal predilation (OR=0.06; 95% CI: 0.01-0.21; P<0.001) but not DCB type (OR=0.74; 95% CI: 0.41-1.31; P=0.29) was independent predictor of 1-year TLF., Conclusions: The current study suggests that 1-year TLF is not statistically and clinically different in patients with DES ISR treated with a PCB and a SCB.

Background: In TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention), among high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), ticagrelor monotherapy vs continuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and ticagrelor after completing a 3-month course of DAPT was associated with reduced bleeding, without an increase in ischemic events., Objectives: This investigation sought to study the clinical benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy vs DAPT by simultaneously modeling its associated potential bleeding benefits and ischemic harms on an individual patient basis., Methods: Multivariable Cox regression models for: 1) Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 (BARC-2/3/5); and 2) cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal ischemic stroke (major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event [MACCE]) were developed using stepwise forward variable selection. The coefficients in the BARC-2/3/5 and MACCE models were used to calculate bleeding and ischemic risk scores, respectively, for each patient (excluding the coefficient for randomized treatment)., Results: In the total study group (N = 7,119), BARC-2/3/5 occurred in 391 (5.5%) patients, and MACCE occurred in 258 (3.6%). There was a consistent reduction in bleeding events associated with ticagrelor monotherapy compared with DAPT across both bleeding and ischemic risk strata (P interaction = 0.54 and 0.11, respectively). Importantly, this benefit associated with ticagrelor monotherapy was not offset by an increase in MACCE at any level of bleeding or ischemic risk., Conclusions: Three months after PCI, discontinuing aspirin and maintaining ticagrelor monotherapy reduces bleeding in both higher-bleeding risk and lower-bleeding risk patients compared with continued DAPT. This benefit does not appear to be offset by greater ischemic risk. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This work was supported by an investigator-initiated grant from AstraZeneca. Dr Mehta has received grant support from and has served on an executive committee and as site investigator for AstraZeneca. Dr Mendieta has received the post–Cardiology Residency Training Fellowship of the Spanish Society of Cardiology (SEC)-National Center of Cardiovascular Investigations (CNIC) Cardiojoven 2020. Dr Baber has received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boston Scientific. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Haemonetics, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Pfizer, Sanofi, and Vectura; and has received institutional grants from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Idorsia, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Briguori has received grants from Mount Sinai during the conduct of the study. Dr Cohen has received grant support, paid to his institution, from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott Vascular; and has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott Vascular. Dr Collier has served on data monitoring committees sponsored by AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Daiichi-Sankyo, Devax, Infraredx, Medtronic, Pfizer, and Zoll. Dr Dangas has received consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Biosensors; has received advisory board fees from AstraZeneca; and has held stock in Medtronic. Dr Escaned has received personal fees from Abbott, Philips, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Abiomed, Terumo, and Biosensors. Dr Huber has received personal fees from AstraZeneca and Bayer. Dr Krucoff has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Celonova, Medtronic, and OrbusNeich. Dr Kunadian has received personal fees or honoraria from Bayer, AstraZeneca, Abbott, Amgen, and Daiichi-Sankyo. Dr Moliterno has received institutional support from AstraZeneca during the conduct of the TWILIGHT trial; and has served on data safety and monitoring boards in trials organized by Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Bristol Myers Squibb. Dr Ohman has received grants from Chiesi and Portola; and has received personal fees from Cytokinetics, Abiomed, Pfizer, 3D Communications, ACI Clinical, Biotie, Cara Therapeutics, Cardinal Health, Faculty Connection, Imbria, Impulse Medical, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medscape, Milestone Pharmaceuticals, XyloCor, and Otsuka outside the submitted work. Dr Sharma has received personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Cardiovascular Systems; and has served on an advisory board for Boston Scientific outside the submitted work. Dr Steg has received grant support from Bayer/Janssen, Merck, Sanofi, Amarin, and Servier; has received fees for serving on a steering committee or executive steering committee from Bayer/Janssen, Amarin, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Idorsia; has received lecture fees from Merck, Sanofi, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, and AstraZeneca; has received fees for serving as co-chair of trials from Sanofi; has received consulting fees from Sanofi, Amarin, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, Regeneron, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, and AstraZeneca; has received fees for serving on critical event committees from Bristol Myers Squibb and Pfizer; has received fees for serving as chair of a data monitoring committee from Servier; and has received fees for serving as chair of a registry from Servier. Dr Pocock has received grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. Dr Gibson has received grant support from Angel Medical, Bayer, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, and Portola Pharmaceuticals; has received consulting fees from Angel Medical, Bayer, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, Portola Pharmaceuticals, the Medicines Company, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Novo Nordisk, WebMD, UpToDate Cardiovascular Medicine, Amarin Pharma, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Merck, PharmaMar, Sanofi, Somahlution, Verreseon Corporation, Boston Scientific, Impact Bio, MedImmume, Medtelligence, MicroPort, PERT Consortium, and GE Healthcare; has held equity in inference in Baim Institute; has served as chief executive officer of Baim Institute; and has received grant support, paid to Baim Institute, from Bristol Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, European Center for Cardiovascular Research, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Insel Gruppe AG, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, OrbusNeich, Philips, Transverse Medical, and Zoll; has received personal fees from the American College of Cardiology, Boston Scientific, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM), Cine-Med Research, Janssen, WebMD, and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions; has received consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, AM-Pharma, Alleviant Medical, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, Daiichi-Sankyo, Duke University, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Novartis, and Philips; has held equity (<1%) in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, STEL, and CONTROLRAD (spouse); and has served on scientific advisory boards for and American Medical Association and Biosensors (spouse). 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.)

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.

Background: Body mass index (BMI) is a known confounder for natriuretic peptides, but its influence on other biomarkers is less well described. We investigated whether BMI interacts with biomarkers' association with prognosis in patients with acute heart failure (AHF)., Methods and Results: B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP), high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hs-cTnI), galectin-3, serum neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (sNGAL), and urine NGAL were measured serially in patients with AHF during hospitalization in the AKINESIS (Acute Kidney Injury Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin Evaluation of Symptomatic Heart Failure) study. Cox regression analysis was used to determine the association of biomarkers and their interaction with BMI for 30-day, 90-day and 1-year composite outcomes of death or HF readmission. Among 866 patients, 21.2%, 29.7% and 46.8% had normal (18.5-24.9 kg/m 2 ), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m 2 ) or obese (≥ 30 kg/m 2 ) BMIs on admission, respectively. Admission values of BNP and hs-cTnI were negatively associated with BMI, whereas galectin-3 and sNGAL were positively associated with BMI. Admission BNP and hs-cTnI levels were associated with the composite outcome within 30 days, 90 days and 1 year. Only BNP had a significant interaction with BMI. When BNP was analyzed by BMI category, its association with the composite outcome attenuated at higher BMIs and was no longer significant in obese individuals. Findings were similar when evaluated by the last-measured biomarkers and BMIs., Conclusions: In patients with AHF, only BNP had a significant interaction with BMI for the outcomes, with its association attenuating as BMI increased; hs-cTnI was prognostic, regardless of BMI., Competing Interests: Disclosures CM has previously received grant funding and other support from Abbott Laboratories and Alere and research support and speaker/consulting honoraria from several diagnostic companies by Roche, Singulex, and Sphingotec. CMC's institution has received research support from Abbott Laboratories and Alere. RB has received grant funding from Alere. AM has previously received grant funding from Abbott Laboratories and Alere. PTM has received research funding from Abbott Laboratories and Alere. PTM's institution receives funding from Abbott Laboratories. All other authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Debulking lesions with severe coronary artery calcification (CAC) is highly recommended to obtain good procedural and long-term success. Utilization and performance of coronary intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) after rotational atherectomy (RA) has not been thoroughly studied. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IVL with the Shockwave Coronary Rx Lithotripsy System in lesions with severe CAC as elective or bail-out strategy after RA. This observational, prospective, single-arm, multicenter, international, open-label Rota-Shock registry included patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease and lesions with severe CAC treated by percutaneous coronary intervention, including lesion preparation with RA and IVL, at 23 high-volume centers. Primary efficacy end point was procedural success, defined as final diameter stenosis <30% by quantitative coronary angiography. Primary safety end point was freedom from serious angiographic complications, which included >National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute type B dissection, perforation, abrupt closure, slow or no flow, final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow <3, and acute thrombosis. A total of 160 patients were enrolled between June 2020 and June 2022. The primary efficacy end point was observed in 155 patients (96.9%). The primary safety end point occurred in 145 cases (90.6%). Dissections >National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute type B occurred in 3 patients (1.9%), whereas slow or no flow occurred in 8 (5.0%), final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow <3 in 3 (1.9%), and perforation in 4 patients (2.5%). Free from inhospital major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, cerebrovascular accident, definite/probable stent thrombosis, and major bleeding, occurred in 158 patients (98.7%). In conclusion, IVL after RA in lesions with severe CAC was effective and safe, with a very low incidence of complications as either elective or bail-out strategy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Stefanini discloses speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Pfizer/Bristol-Myers Squibb. Dr. Van Mieghem discloses research grant support by Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, PulseCath BV, Daiichi Sankyo, and Pie Medical and consultancy fees from Siemens, Amgen, Daiichi Sankyo, Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Medtronic, and Abiomed. The remaining authors have no conflicts of interests to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy among high-risk patients with anaemia undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods and Results: In the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, after 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, high-risk patients were maintained on ticagrelor and randomized to aspirin or placebo for 1 year. Anaemia was defined as haemoglobin <13 g/dL for men and <12 g/dL for women. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.Out of 6828 patients, 1329 (19.5%) had anaemia and were more likely to have comorbidities, multivessel disease, and to experience bleeding or ischaemic complications than non-anaemic patients. Among anaemic patients, BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding occurred less frequently with ticagrelor monotherapy than with ticagrelor plus aspirin [6.4% vs. 10.7%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.60; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-0.88; P = 0.009]; the rate of the key secondary endpoint was similar in the two arms (5.2% vs. 4.8%; HR 1.07; 95% CI 0.66-1.74; P = 0.779). These effects were consistent in patients without anaemia (interaction P values 0.671 and 0.835, respectively)., Conclusion: In high-risk patients undergoing PCI, ticagrelor monotherapy after 3 months of ticagrelor-based dual antiplatelet therapy was associated with a reduced risk of clinically relevant bleeding without any increase in ischaemic events irrespective of anaemia status (TWILIGHT: NCT02270242)., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

(1) Background: Percutaneous left ventricle assist devices (pLVADs) demonstrated an improvement in mid-term clinical outcomes in selected patients with severely depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. However, the prognostic impact of in-hospital LVEF recovery is unclear. Accordingly, the present sub-analysis aims to evaluate the impact of LVEF recovery in both cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR PCI) supported with pLVADs in the IMP-IT registry. (2) Methods: A total of 279 patients (116 patients in CS and 163 patients in HR PCI) treated with Impella 2.5 or CP in the IMP-IT registry were included in this analysis, after excluding those who died while in the hospital or with missing data on LVEF recovery. The primary study objective was a composite of all-cause death, rehospitalisation for heart failure, left ventricle assist device (LVAD) implantation, or heart transplantation (HT), overall referred to as the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year. The study aimed to evaluate the impact of in-hospital LVEF recovery on the primary study objective in patients treated with Impella for HR PCI and CS, respectively. (3) Results: The mean in-hospital change in LVEF was 10 ± 1% ( p < 0.001) in the CS cohort and 3 ± 7% ( p < 0.001) in the HR PCI group, achieved by 44% and 40% of patients, respectively. In the CS group, patients with less than 10% in-hospital LVEF recovery experienced higher rates of MACE at 1 year of follow-up (FU) (51% vs. 21%, HR 3.8, CI 1.7-8.4, p < 0.01). After multivariate analysis, LVEF recovery was the main independent protective factor for MACE at FU (HR 0.23, CI 0.08-0.64, p = 0.02). In the HR PCI group, LVEF recovery (>3%) was not associated with lower MACE at multivariable analysis (HR 0.73, CI 0.31-1.72, p = 0.17). Conversely, the completeness of revascularisation was found to be a protective factor for MACE (HR 0.11, CI 0.02-0.62, p = 0.02) (4) Conclusions: Significant LVEF recovery was associated with improved outcomes in CS patients treated with PCI during mechanical circulatory support with Impella, whereas complete revascularisation showed a significant clinical relevance in HR PCI.

Background: Although the pathogenesis of acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive treatment is multifactorial, the role of iodinated contrast media (CM) has been well established. The DyeVert system (Osprey Medical) is designed to reduce the CM volume during invasive coronary procedures while maintaining fluoroscopic image quality., Objective: The aim of the Renal Insufficiency Following Contrast Media Administration Trial IV (REMEDIAL IV) is to test whether the use of the DyeVert system is effective in reducing contrast-associated acute kidney injury (CA-AKI) rate in patients with ACS undergoing urgent invasive procedures., Trial Design: Patients with ACS treated by urgent invasive approach will be enrolled. Participants will be randomly assigned into one of the following groups: (1) DyeVert group and (2) control group. In participants enrolled in the DyeVert group, CM injection will be handled by the DyeVert system. On the contrary, in the control group, CM injection will be performed by a conventional manual or automatic injection syringe. In all cases, iobitridol (a low-osmolar, nonionic CM) will be administered. Participants will receive intravenous 0.9% sodium chloride as soon as moved to the catheterization laboratory. The primary end points are CM volume administration and CA-AKI rate (ie, an increase in serum creatinine concentration of ≥0.3 mg/dL within 48 hours after CM exposure). A sample size of at least 522 randomized participants (261 in each group) is needed to demonstrate an 8.5% difference in the CA-AKI rate between the groups (that is, from 19% in the control group to 10.5% in the DyeVert group), with a 2-sided 95% confidence interval and 80% power ( P < .05)., (© 2023 The Author(s).)

Background: Galectin-3, a biomarker of inflammation and fibrosis, can be associated with renal and myocardial damage and dysfunction in patients with acute heart failure (AHF)., Methods and Results: We retrospectively analyzed 790 patients with AHF who were enrolled in the AKINESIS study. During hospitalization, patients with galectin-3 elevation (> 25.9 ng/mL) on admission more commonly had acute kidney injury (assessed by KDIGO criteria), renal tubular damage (peak urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin [uNGAL] > 150 ng/dL) and myocardial injury (≥ 20% increase in the peak high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I [hs-cTnI] values compared to admission). They less commonly had ≥ 30% reduction in B-type natriuretic peptide from admission to last measured value. In multivariable linear regression analysis, galectin-3 was negatively associated with estimated glomerular filtration rate and positively associated with uNGAL and hs-cTnI. Higher galectin-3 was associated with renal replacement therapy, inotrope use and mortality during hospitalization. In univariable Cox regression analysis, higher galectin-3 was associated with increased risk for the composite of death or rehospitalization due to HF and death alone at 1 year. After multivariable adjustment, higher galectin-3 levels were associated only with death., Conclusions: In patients with AHF, higher galectin-3 values were associated with renal dysfunction, renal tubular damage and myocardial injury, and they predicted worse outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of a bifurcation stenosis is still debated. We evaluated the impact of DAPT duration on clinical outcomes in all-comers patients undergoing bifurcation PCI included in the European Bifurcation Club (EBC) registry., Methods: We enrolled 2284 consecutive patients who completed at least 18 months follow-up. The cumulative occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cardiovascular events (MACCE), defined as a composite of overall-death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR) and stroke were evaluated. Bleedings classified as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) ≥3 were evaluated too., Results: Patients were divided into 3 groups: short DAPT (<6-months, N.=375); standard DAPT (≥6-months but ≤12-months, N.=636); prolonged DAPT (>12-months, N.=1273). At 24 months follow-up MACCE-free survival was significantly lower in short DAPT patients (Log-Rank: 45.23, P for trend <0.001). MACCE occurred less frequently in the prolonged DAPT group (148 [11.6%]) as compared with both the short (83 [22.1%] HR: 0.48 [0.37-0.63], P<0.001) and standard DAPT groups (137 [21.5%] HR:0.51 [0.41-0.65], P<0.001). These differences remain after propensity score adjustment (respectively, HR: 0.27 [0.20-0.36] and HR: 0.44 [0.34-0.57]). Such finding was consistent in patients presenting with both acute and chronic coronary syndromes. BARC≥3 bleedings were 0.3% in the standard DAPT, 1.6% in short and 1.9% in prolonged DAPT groups., Conclusions: In the "real-world" EBC registry of patients undergoing PCI of coronary artery bifurcation stenosis, a prolonged DAPT duration was associated with a significantly lower risk of MACCE and a potential increased risk of major bleedings.

Objectives: The objective of this study is to investigate the use of cutting balloon (CB) inflated at high pressure compared with noncompliant balloon (NCB) for the treatment of calcified coronary lesions., Background: No data are available regarding the safety and efficacy of CB inflated at high pressure in coronary artery calcifications., Methods: Patients with calcified lesions (more than 100° of calcium demonstrated at baseline intravascular ultrasound) were randomized. Primary endpoint of the study was the final minimal stent area (MSA) and stent symmetry in the calcific segment. Secondary endpoints included rate of device failure and the 1-year rate of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiovascular events., Results: From September 2019 to June 2021, a total of 100 patients were included and randomized; 13 patients were excluded for major protocol deviations. Lesions were complex (type B2/C n = 61 [71.2%]) with a mean arch of calcium of 266 ± 84°, a calcium length of 12 ± 6.6 mm. CB was inflated at comparable atmospheres when compared with NCB (18.3 ± 5 vs. 19 ± 4.5, p = 0.46). In the per-protocol population, the final MSA at the level of the calcium site was significantly higher in the CB group (8.1 ± 2 vs. 7.3 ± 2.1, p = 0.035) with a higher eccentricity index achieved in the CB group (0.84 ± 0.07 vs. 0.8 ± 0.08, p = 0.013). Three device failure occurred in the CB group. One-year follow-up outcomes were comparable., Conclusions: Treatment of calcified lesions with high-pressure CB has a good safety profile and is associated with a larger MSA and higher eccentricity of the stent at the level of the calcium site compared with NCB., (© 2023 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Aims: Kidney function changes dynamically during AHF treatment, but risk factors for and consequences of worsening renal function (WRF) at hospital admission are uncertain. We aimed to determine the significance of WRF at admission for acute heart failure (AHF)., Methods and Results: We evaluated a subgroup of 406 patients from The Acute Kidney Injury Neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin Evaluation of Symptomatic heart failure Study (AKINESIS) who had serum creatinine measurements available within 3 months before and at the time of admission. Admission WRF was primarily defined as a 0.3 mg/dL or 50% creatinine increase from preadmission. Alternative definitions evaluated were a ≥0.5 mg/dL creatinine increase, ≥25% glomerular filtration rate decrease, and an overall change in creatinine. Predictors of admission WRF were evaluated. Outcomes evaluated were length of hospitalization, a composite of adverse in-hospital events, and the composite of death or HF readmission at 30, 90, and 365 days. Biomarkers' prognostic ability for these outcomes were evaluated in patients with admission WRF. One-hundred six patients (26%) had admission WRF. These patients had features of more severe AHF with lower blood pressure, higher BUN, and lower serum sodium concentrations at admission. Higher BNP (odds ratio [OR] per doubling 1.16-1.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.55) and lower diastolic blood pressure (OR 0.97-0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99) were associated with a higher odds for the three definitions of admission WRF. The primary WRF definition was not associated with a longer hospitalization, but alternative WRF definitions were (1.3 to 1.6 days longer, 95% CI 1.0-2.2). WRF across definitions was not associated with a higher odds of adverse in-hospital events or a higher risk of death or HF readmission. In the subset of patients with WRF, biomarkers were not prognostic for any outcome., Conclusions: Admission WRF is common in AHF patients and is associated with an increased length of hospitalization, but not adverse in-hospital events, death, or HF readmission. Among those with admission WRF, biomarkers did not risk stratify for adverse events., (© 2022 The Authors. ESC Heart Failure published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Society of Cardiology.)

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.)

Background: In ISCHEMIA-CKD, 777 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and chronic coronary disease had similar all-cause mortality with either an initial invasive or conservative strategy (27.2% vs 27.8%, respectively)., Objectives: This prespecified secondary analysis from ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease) was conducted to determine whether an initial invasive strategy compared with a conservative strategy decreased the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) vs non-CV causes of death., Methods: Three-year cumulative incidences were calculated for the adjudicated cause of death. Overall and cause-specific death by treatment strategy were analyzed using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. The association between cause of death, risk factors, and treatment strategy were identified., Results: A total of 192 of the 777 participants died during follow-up, including 94 (12.1%) of a CV cause, 59 (7.6%) of a non-CV cause, and 39 (5.0%) of an undetermined cause. The 3-year cumulative rates of CV death were similar between the invasive and conservative strategies (14.6% vs 12.6%, respectively; HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.75-1.70). Non-CV death rates were also similar between the invasive and conservative arms (8.4% and 8.2%, respectively; HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.75-2.09). Sudden cardiac death (46.8% of CV deaths) and infection (54.2% of non-CV deaths) were the most common cause-specific deaths and did not vary by treatment strategy., Conclusions: In ISCHEMIA-CKD, CV death was more common than non-CV or undetermined death during the 3-year follow-up. The randomized treatment assignment did not affect the cause-specific incidences of death in participants with advanced CKD and moderate or severe myocardial ischemia. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease [ISCHEMIA-CKD]; NCT01985360)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This project was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health grants U01H117904 and U01HL117905; Arbor Pharmaceuticals, LLC; and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP. Devices or medications were provided by Abbott Vascular (previously St. Jude Medical, Inc); Medtronic, Inc; Phillips (previously Volcano Corporation); Omron Healthcare, Inc; Arbor Pharmaceuticals, LLC; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP; Espero Pharmaceuticals; Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp; and Sunovion Pharmaceuticals. The manuscript contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent official views of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, the National Institutes of Health, or the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Dr Sidhu has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; and has received personal fees from AstraZeneca and Sanofi-Regeneron outside the submitted work. Dr Alexander has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Mr Huang has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Mathew has received grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr Newman has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr O’Brien has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Pellikka has received grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Bockeria has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Briguori has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr Kretov has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Mazurek has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr Orso has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Roik has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Sajeev has received grants from National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study. Dr Shutov has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Rockhold reports grants from the National Institutes of Health, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, American Regent, Gates Foundation, and Eidos during the conduct of the study; has received consulting fees from Janssen, Clover, Doctor Evidence, and Intercept; and equity ownership in GlaxoSmithKline, Clover, Athira, Doctor Evidence, DataVant, Spencer Health Solutions, and Adaptic Health. Dr Borrego has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Balter has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Stone has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; has received speaker honoraria from Pulnovo and Infraredx; has served as a consultant to Valfix, TherOx, Robocath, HeartFlow, Ablative Solutions, Vectorious, Miracor, Neovasc, Abiomed, Ancora, Elucid Bio, Occlutech, CorFlow, Apollo Therapeutics, Impulse Dynamics, Vascular Dynamics, Shockwave, V-Wave, Cardiomech, Gore, and Amgen; and has equity/options from Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, Valfix, and Xenter. Dr Stone’s daughter is an employee at Medtronic. Dr Stone’s employer, Mount Sinai Hospital, receives research support from Abbott, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, Phillips, Biosense-Webster, Shockwave, Vascular Dynamics, and V-wave. Dr Chaitman has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; and has received personal fees from Merck, NovoNordisk, Sanofi, Lilly, Johnson and Johnson, Daiichi Sankyo, Tricida, Relypsa, Imbria, and Xylocor outside the submitted work. Dr Goodman has received grants and personal fees from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Amgen; AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim/Eli Lilly, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, CSL Behring/PERFUSE, Daiichi Sankyo/American Regent/DCRI, Ferring, Novartis, and Regeneron/Sanofi; and has received personal fees from Esperion/C5, GlaxoSmithKline, HLS Therapeutics, Merck, NovoNordisk, and Servier outside the submitted work. Dr Fleg has reports employment by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Reynolds has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; and has received nonfinancial support from Abbott Vascular, Siemens, and BioTelemetry outside the submitted work. Dr Maron has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study. Dr Hochman is the principal investigator for the ISCHEMIA trial for which, in addition to support by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute grant, devices and medications were provided by Abbott Vascular; Medtronic, Inc; Abbott Laboratories (formerly St. Jude Medical, Inc); Royal Philips NV (formerly Volcano Corporation); Arbor Pharmaceuticals, LLC; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, LP; Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp; Omron Healthcare, Inc, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc Espero BioPharma; and Amgen, Inc; and has received financial donations from Arbor Pharmaceuticals LLC and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP. Dr Bangalore has received grants from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute during the conduct of the study; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular; and has received personal fees from Biotronik, Pfizer, Amgen, and Reata outside the submitted work. Dr Lyubarova has reported that she has no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are often older and present with multiple comorbidities. Ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as an effective bleeding-avoidance strategy among high-risk patients., Aims: We aimed to examine the effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin in prior CABG patients undergoing PCI within the TWILIGHT trial., Methods: After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were randomised to either aspirin or placebo, in addition to ticagrelor, for 12 months and compared by prior CABG status. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke., Results: Out of 7,119 patients, a total of 703 (10.8%) patients had prior CABG within the randomised cohort. Prior CABG patients had more comorbidities and a higher incidence of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding and death, MI or stroke at 1 year after randomisation, compared with patients without prior CABG. Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with significantly less BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding among prior CABG patients compared with DAPT (4.9% vs 9.6%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.90; p interaction =0.676) and similar rates of death, MI or stroke (10.0% vs 8.7%, HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.87; p interaction =0.484). When comparing target vessel type, treatment effects were consistent among graft- and native-vessel interventions., Conclusions: In high-risk patients with prior CABG, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced bleeding without compromising ischaemic outcomes compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.

Background: There is a paucity of data regarding the safety and efficacy of different antiplatelet regimens according to standardized body mass index (BMI) categories., Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate bleeding and ischemic outcomes according to BMI in the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial., Methods: The TWILIGHT trial randomized high-risk patients to ticagrelor plus aspirin or ticagrelor plus placebo at 3 months after percutaneous coronary intervention. In this secondary analysis, patients were stratified by standard BMI categories, as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis (normal weight [BMI 18.5-24.99 kg/m 2 ], overweight [BMI 25-29.99 kg/m 2 ], and obese [BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ]) and by median BMI, as prespecified in the protocol., Results: Among 7,038 patients randomized and with available BMI, 1,807 (25.7%) were normal weight, 2,927 (41.6%) were overweight, and 2,304 (32.7%) were obese. In normal-weight, overweight, and obese patients, ticagrelor monotherapy, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, reduced the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (normal weight: HR: 0.48 [95% CI: 0.32-0.73]; overweight: HR: 0.57 [95% CI: 0.41-0.78]; obese: HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.44-0.91]; P for interaction = 0.627), without any increase in the composite ischemic endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (normal weight: HR: 1.36 [95% CI: 0.84-2.19]; overweight: HR: 0.92 [95% CI: 0.63-1.35]; obese: HR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.56-1.25]; P for interaction = 0.290). These findings were consistent with the prespecified analysis by median BMI., Conclusions: Among high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, reduced bleeding events without any increase in ischemic risk across different BMI categories., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This research was supported by an investigator-initiated grant from AstraZeneca. Dr Baber has received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boston Scientific. Dr Cohen has received grant support, paid to his institution, and consulting fees from AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Abbott Vascular; and has received grant support, paid to his institution, from Boston Scientific. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria 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 payments for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St. Jude Medical, outside the present work; and has received research grants to the institution from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Dangas has received consulting fees and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca; has received consulting fees from Biosensors; and previously held stock in Medtronic. Dr Escaned has received consulting and lecture fees from Abbott, Philips, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic; and has received lecture fees from Abiomed, Terumo, and Biosensors. Dr Gurbel has received grant support and consulting fees from Bayer, Medicure, US WorldMeds, and Merck; has received grant support from Instrumentation Laboratory, Haemonetics, Amgen, Idorsia, Janssen, and Ionis; and holds patent 9188597 on detection of restenosis risk in patients receiving stents by measuring the characteristics of blood clotting, including measurement of maximum thrombin-induced clot strength. Dr Hamm has received lecture and advisory board fees from AstraZeneca. Dr Huber has received lecture fees from AstraZeneca and Bayer. Dr Mehta has received grant support from and has served on an executive committee and as site investigator for AstraZeneca. Dr Ohman has received consulting fees from 3D Communications, ACI Clinical, Biotie, Cara Therapeutics, Cardinal Health, Faculty Connection, Imbria, Impulse Medical, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medscape, Milestone Pharmaceuticals, and XyloCor; has received grant support and consulting fees from Abiomed; and has received grant support from Chiesi and Portola. Dr Oldroyd has received grant support and lecture fees from AstraZeneca. Dr Steg has received grant support and fees for serving on a steering committee from Bayer/Janssen; has received grant support and lecture fees from Merck; has received grant support, fees for serving as co-chair of trials, consulting fees, and lecture fees from Sanofi; has received grant support, fees for serving on an executive steering committee, and consulting fees from Amarin; has received consulting and lecture fees from Amgen; has received consulting fees, lecture fees, and fees for serving on a critical event committee from Bristol Myers Squibb; has received fees for serving on an executive steering committee from Boehringer Ingelheim; has received fees for serving on a critical event committee from Pfizer; has received fees for serving on a steering committee and consulting fees from Novartis; has received consulting fees from Regeneron, Eli Lilly, and Novo Nordisk; has received consulting and lecture fees from AstraZeneca; has received grant support, fees for serving as chair of a data monitoring committee, and fees for serving as chair of a registry from Servier; and has received fees for serving on a steering committee from Idorsia. Dr. Gibson has received grant support and consulting fees from Angel Medical, Bayer, CSL Behring, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Johnson & Johnson, and Portola Pharmaceuticals; has received consulting fees from The Medicines Company, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences, Novo Nordisk, WebMD, UpToDate Cardiovascular Medicine, Amarin Pharma, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chiesi, Merck, PharmaMar, Sanofi, Somahlution, Verreseon, Boston Scientific, Impact Bio, MedImmume, Medtelligence, MicroPort, the PERT Consortium, and GE Healthcare; holds equity in Inference; serves as chief executive officer of the Baim Institute; and has received grant support, paid to the Baim Institute, from Bristol Myers Squibb and Astra Zeneca. Dr Mehran has received institutional research grants from Abbott, Abiomed, Applied Therapeutics, Arena, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CellAegis, CERC, Chiesi, Concept Medical, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Insel Gruppe, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, OrbusNeich, Philips, Transverse Medical, and Zoll; has received personal fees from the American College of Cardiology, Boston Scientific, the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Cine-Med Research, Janssen, WebMD, and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions; has received consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott, Abiomed, AM-Pharma, Alleviant Medical, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, Daiichi Sankyo, Duke University, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Novartis, and Philips; holds equity (<1%) in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir Medical, STEL, and CONTROLRAD (spouse); and is a scientific advisory board member for the American Medical Association and Biosensors (spouse). All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Managing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) presents challenges given that there are several potential antithrombotic therapy (ATT) strategies., Aims: We examined ATT patterns, agreement between subjective physician ratings and validated risk scores, physician-patient perceptions influencing ATT and 1-year outcomes., Methods: The AVIATOR 2 prospective registry enrolled 514 non-valvular AF-PCI patients from 11 sites. Treating physicians selected ATT and completed smartphone surveys rating stroke and bleeding risks, compared against CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc and HAS-BLED scores. Patients completed surveys regarding treatment understanding. Primary outcomes were 1-year major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE: composite of death, myocardial infarction, definite/probable stent thrombosis, stroke, target lesion revascularisation) and actionable bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5)., Results: The mean patient age was 73.2±9.0 years, including 25.8% females. Triple therapy (TT: 1 anticoagulant and 2 antiplatelet agents) was prescribed in 66.5%, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in 20.7% and dual therapy (1 anticoagulant+1 antiplatelet agent) in 12.8% of patients. Physician ratings and validated risk scores showed poor agreement (stroke: kappa=0.03; bleeding: kappa=0.07). Physicians rated bleeding-related safety (93.8%) as the main factor affecting ATT choice. Patients worried about stroke over bleeding (50.6% vs 14.8%). No group differences by ATT strategy were observed in 1-year MACCE (TT 14.1% vs dual therapy 12.7% vs DAPT 18.5%; p=0.25), or actionable bleeding (14.7% vs 7.9% vs 15.1%, respectively; p=0.89)., Conclusions: The AVIATOR 2 study is the first digital health study examining physician-patient perspectives on ATT choices after AF-PCI. TT was the most common strategy without differences in 1-year outcomes in ATT strategy. Physicians rated safety first when prescribing ATT; patients feared stroke over bleeding., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT02362659.

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: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis (CKD G5D) have worse cardiovascular outcomes than patients with advanced nondialysis CKD (CKD G4-5: estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/[min·1.73m 2 ]). Our objective was to evaluate the relationship between achievement of cardiovascular guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) goals and clinical outcomes for CKD G5D versus CKD G4-5., Methods: This was a subgroup analysis of ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease) participants with CKD G4-5 or CKD G5D and moderate-to-severe myocardial ischemia on stress testing. Exposures included dialysis requirement at randomization and GDMT goal achievement during follow-up. The composite outcome was all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction. Individual GDMT goal (smoking cessation, systolic blood pressure <140 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL, statin use, aspirin use) trajectory was modeled. Percentage point difference was estimated for each GDMT goal at 24 months between CKD G5D and CKD G4-5, and for association with key predictors. Probability of survival free from all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction by GDMT goal achieved was assessed for CKD G5D versus CKD G4-5., Results: A total of 415 CKD G5D and 362 CKD G4-5 participants were randomized. Participants with CKD G5D were less likely to receive statin (-6.9% [95% CI, -10.3% to -3.7%]) and aspirin therapy (-3.0% [95% CI, -5.6% to -0.6%]), with no difference in other GDMT goal attainment. Cumulative exposure to GDMT achieved during follow-up was associated with reduction in all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.87-0.90]; per each GDMT goal attained over 60 days), irrespective of dialysis status., Conclusions: CKD G5D participants received statin or aspirin therapy less often. Cumulative exposure to GDMT goals achieved was associated with lower incidence of all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction in participants with advanced CKD and chronic coronary disease, regardless of dialysis status., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01985360.

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the treatment effects of ticagrelor monotherapy in the very high risk cohort of patients with concomitant diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods and Results: In the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor with Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor and aspirin post-PCI, event-free patients were randomized to either aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor for 12 months. Those with available information on DM and CKD status were included in this subanalysis and were stratified by the presence or absence of either condition: 3391 (54.1%) had neither DM nor CKD (DM-/CKD-), 1822 (29.0%) had DM only (DM+/CKD-), 561 (8.9%) had CKD only (DM-/CKD+), and 8.0% had both DM and CKD (DM+/CKD+). The incidence of the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding did not differ according to DM/CKD status (P-trend = 0.13), but there was a significant increase in BARC 3 or 5 bleeding (P-trend &lt; 0.001) as well as the key secondary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (P-trend &lt; 0.001). Ticagrelor plus placebo reduced bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin across all four groups, including DM+/CKD+ patients with respect to BARC 2-5 [4.5% vs. 8.7%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.49, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-1.01] as well as BARC 3-5 (0.8% vs. 5.3%; HR 0.15, 95% CI 0.03-0.53) bleeding, with no evidence of heterogeneity. The risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was similar between treatment arms across all groups., Conclusion: Irrespective of the presence of DM, CKD, and their combination, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the risk of bleeding without a significant increase in ischaemic events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

The use of percutaneous right ventricular assist devices (pRVADs) to support patients with right ventricular (RV)-predominant cardiogenic shock (CS) refractory to optimal medical therapy is increasing progressively, and the Impella RP is the first FDA-approved pRVAD in such a clinical scenario. The aim of the present study is to report the outcomes of patients treated with Impella RP in the IMP-IT (IMPella Mechanical Circulatory Support Device in Italy) registry, a multicenter registry that evaluated the trends in use and clinical outcomes of the Impella in the setting of CS and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention in Italy. A total of 15 patients who received Impella RP were enrolled. In 40% of the patients, the main cause was ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A total of 40% of patients required biventricular support with a left Impella. Device-related complications were reported in 46.7% of patients. Overall, the in-hospital mortality was 46.7%, whereas the one-year mortality was 53.3%. The composite rate of all-cause death, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and heart transplant at one year was 60%. The Impella RP has favorable survival outcomes in RV-predominant cardiogenic shock. However, the device-related complications are frequent and should be carefully weighed when considering escalation to Impella RP.

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD), whereas those with established CVD are at risk of incident or progressive CKD. Compared with individuals with normal or near normal kidney function, there are fewer data to guide the management of patients with CVD and CKD. As a joint effort between the National Kidney Foundation and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, a workshop and subsequent review of the published literature was held. The present document summarizes the best practice recommendations of the working group and highlights areas for further investigation.

Background: In patients with acute heart failure (AHF), the development of worsening renal function with appropriate decongestion is thought to be a benign functional change and not associated with poor prognosis. We investigated whether the benefit of decongestion outweighs the risk of concurrent kidney tubular damage and leads to better outcomes., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data from the AKINESIS study, which enrolled AHF patients requiring intravenous diuretic therapy. Urine neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (uNGAL) and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) were serially measured during the hospitalization. Decongestion was defined as ≥30% BNP decrease at discharge compared to admission. Univariable and multivariable Cox models were assessed for one-year mortality., Results: Among 736 patients, 53% had ≥30% BNP decrease at discharge. Levels of uNGAL and BNP at each collection time point had positive but weak correlations (r ≤ 0.133). Patients without decongestion and with higher discharge uNGAL values had worse one-year mortality, while those with decongestion had better outcomes regardless of uNGAL values (p for interaction 0.018). This interaction was also significant when the change in BNP was analyzed as a continuous variable (p < 0.001). Although higher peak and discharge uNGAL were associated with mortality in univariable analysis, only ≥30% BNP decrease was a significant predictor after multivariable adjustment., Conclusions: Among AHF patients treated with diuretic therapy, decongestion was generally not associated with kidney tubular damage assessed by uNGAL. Kidney tubular damage with adequate decongestion does not impact outcomes; however, kidney injury without adequate decongestion is associated with a worse prognosis., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the TWILIGHT trial, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was shown to be a safe bleeding avoidance strategy in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES)., Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after three-month DAPT in patients undergoing PCI, according to DES type., Methods: In the current sub-analysis from TWILIGHT, patients were stratified into three groups based on DES type: durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES), durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DP-ZES), and biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES). Bleeding and ischaemic outcomes were assessed at one year after randomisation., Results: Out of 5,769 patients, 3,014 (52.2%) had DP-EES, 1,350 (23.4%) had DP-ZES and 1,405 (24.4%) had BP-DES. Compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy had significantly lower BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding compared with DAPT; DP-EES (3.8% vs 6.7%; HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41-0.78), DP-ZES (4.6% vs 6.9%; HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.42-1.04) and BP-DES (4.2% vs 7.9%; HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.81; p interaction =0.76). Ticagrelor monotherapy resulted in similar rates of death, MI, or stroke: DP-EES (4.2% vs 4.3%; HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68-1.37); DP-ZES (4.1% vs 3.1%; HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.75-2.33); BP-DES (3.9% vs 4.2%; HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.54-1.55; p interaction =0.60). In both unadjusted and covariate-adjusted analyses, DES type was not associated with any differences in ischaemic or bleeding complications., Conclusions: As compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short DAPT duration lowered bleeding complications without increasing the ischaemic risk, irrespective of DES type. We observed no significant differences among DES types.

Background In participants with concomitant chronic coronary disease and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD), the effect of treatment strategies on the timing of dialysis initiation is not well characterized. Methods and Results In ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease), 777 participants with advanced CKD and moderate or severe ischemia were randomized to either an initial invasive or conservative management strategy. Herein, we compare the proportion of randomized participants with non-dialysis-requiring CKD at baseline (n=362) who initiated dialysis and compare the time to dialysis initiation between invasive versus conservative management arms. Using multivariable Cox regression analysis, we also sought to identify the effect of invasive versus conservative chronic coronary disease management strategies on dialysis initiation. At a median follow-up of 23 months (25th-75th interquartile range, 14-32 months), dialysis was initiated in 18.9% of participants (36/190) in the invasive strategy and 16.9% of participants (29/172) in the conservative strategy (P= 0.22). The median time to dialysis initiation was 6.0 months (interquartile range, 3.0-16.0 months) in the invasive group and 18.2 months (interquartile range, 12.2-25.0 months) in the conservative group (P= 0.004), with no difference in procedural acute kidney injury rates between the groups (7.8% versus 5.4%; P =0.26). Baseline clinical factors associated with earlier dialysis initiation were lower baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (hazard ratio [HR] associated with 5-unit decrease, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.72-2.56]; P <0.001), diabetes (HR, 2.30 [95% CI, 1.28-4.13]; P =0.005), hypertension (HR, 7.97 [95% CI, 1.09-58.21]; P =0.041), and Hispanic ethnicity (HR, 2.34 [95% CI, 1.22-4.47]; P =0.010). Conclusions In participants with non-dialysis-requiring CKD in ISCHEMIA-CKD, randomization to an invasive chronic coronary disease management strategy (relative to a conservative chronic coronary disease management strategy) is associated with an accelerated time to initiation of maintenance dialysis for kidney failure. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01985360.

Background It is unknown whether contemporary drug-eluting stents have a similar safety profile in high bleeding risk patients treated with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary interventions. Methods and Results We performed an interventional, prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial, powered for noninferiority with respect to an objective performance criterion to evaluate the safety of percutaneous coronary interventions with Synergy bioresorbable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent followed by 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with high bleeding risk. In case of need for an oral anticoagulant, patients received an oral anticoagulant in addition to a P2Y 12 inhibitor for 1 month, followed by an oral anticoagulant only. The primary end point was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1-year follow-up. The study was prematurely interrupted because of slow recruitment. From April 2017 to October 2019, 443 patients (age, 74.8±9.2 years; women, 29.1%) at 10 Italian centers were included. The 1-year primary outcome occurred in 4.82% (95% CI, 3.17%-7.31%) of patients, meeting the noninferiority compared with the predefined objective performance criterion of 9.4% and the noninferiority margin of 3.85% ( P noninferiority <0.001) notwithstanding the lower-than-expected sample size. The rates of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and definite or probable stent thrombosis were 1.88% (95% CI, 0.36%-2.50%), 3.42% (95% CI, 2.08%-5.62%), and 0.94% (95% CI, 0.35%-2.49%), respectively. Conclusions Among high bleeding risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions with the Synergy bioresorbable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent, a 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy regimen is safe, with low rates of ischemic and bleeding events. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03112707.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate if patients with prior myocardial infarction (MI) could benefit from ticagrelor monotherapy in terms of bleeding reduction without any compromise in ischemic event prevention., Background: Patients with history of MI who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain at risk for recurrent ischemic events. The optimal antithrombotic strategy for this cohort remains debated., Methods: In this prespecified analysis of the randomized TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial, the authors evaluated the impact of history of MI on treatment effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin in patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent with at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk feature and free from adverse events at 3 months after index PCI. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, and the key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, MI, or stroke, both at 12 months after randomization., Results: A total of 1,937 patients (29.7%) with and 4,595 patients (70.3%) without prior MI were randomized to ticagrelor and placebo or ticagrelor and aspirin. At 1 year after randomization, patients with prior MI experienced higher rates of death, MI, or stroke (5.7% vs 3.2%; P < 0.001) but similar BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding (5.0% vs 5.5%; P = 0.677) compared with patients without prior MI. Ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced the risk for the primary bleeding outcome in patients with (3.4% vs 6.7%; HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.33-0.76) and without (4.2% vs 7.0%; HR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.45-0.76; P interaction  = 0.54) prior MI. Rates of the key secondary ischemic outcome were not significantly different between treatment groups irrespective of history of MI (prior MI, 6.0% vs 5.5% [HR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.75-1.58]; no prior MI, 3.1% vs 3.3% [HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.67-1.28]; P interaction  = 0.52)., Conclusions: Ticagrelor monotherapy is associated with significantly lower risk for bleeding events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, without any compromise in ischemic prevention, among high-risk patients with history of MI undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This research was conducted with support from AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP. Dr Baber has received honoraria from AstraZeneca and Boston Scientific. Dr Sharma has received Speakers Bureau fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Cardiovascular Systems. Dr Dangas has received personal fees from Biosensors and Philips. Dr Angiolillo has received consulting fees or honoraria 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 payments for participation in review activities from CeloNova and St Jude Medical, outside the present work; and has received research grants to his institution from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosensors, CeloNova, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Matsutani Chemical Industry, Merck, Novartis, Osprey Medical, Renal Guard Solutions, and the Scott R. MacKenzie Foundation. Dr Stefanini has received a research grant from Boston Scientific; and has received speaker and consulting fees from Bayer, Braun, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Daiichi-Sankyo and GADA, outside the submitted work. Dr Gibson has received grants and personal fees from Johnson & Johnson, Janssen, and CSL Behring; has received personal fees from Bayer, AstraZeneca (during the conduct of the study), Angel Medical Corporation, The Medicines Company, the Boston Clinical Research Institute, the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Gilead Sciences, WebMD, UpToDate in Cardiovascular Medicine, Boehringer Ingelheim, Somahlution, Vereseon, Boston Scientific, the Duke Clinical Research Institute, Medtelligence, Microport, PERT Consortium, Caladrius Biosciences, CeleCor Therapeutics, Thrombolytic Science, Eidos Therapeutics, Kiniksa Pharmaceuticals, Microdrop, MD Magazine, MJ Health, Samsung, the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Revance Therapeutics, Pfizer, GenTech, CytoSorbents, AMAG Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Syneos Health, and Amarin; has received other compensation from nference, Dyad Medical, and Absolutys, and PhaseBio; has received nonfinancial support from the Baim Institute; and has received grants from the SCAD Alliance, outside the submitted work. Dr Mehran has received institutional grants from Abbott Laboratories, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beth Israel Deaconess, Bristol Myers Squibb, Chiesi, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo Inc, Medtronic, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, and OrbusNeich; has received personal fees from Boston Scientific, Janssen, Scientific Affairs, Sanofi, and Siemens Medical Solutions; has received consulting fees paid to the institution from Abbott Laboratories and Bristol Myers Squibb; and is an advisory board member (funding paid to the institution) for Spectranetics/Philips/Volcano. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease and have a worse prognosis after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The BioFreedom polymer-free biolimus-A9-eluting stent (PF-BES) has shown promising results in patients at high bleeding risk; however, its performance in CKD patients has yet to be analyzed., Methods: The all-comers RUDI-FREE registry documented patients undergoing PCI with PF-BES in routine clinical practice. Patients were stratified into three groups according to their estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR): preserved renal function, mild renal insufficiency (RI), and with moderate to severe RI (eGFR ≥ 90, between 90 and 45, and <45 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively). The primary safety end point was a patient-oriented composite end point of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). The primary efficacy end point was target lesion revascularization (TLR)., Results: The registry documented 1,104 consecutive patients treated with PF-BES: 258 (23.4%) with preserved renal function, whereas 712 (64.7%) and 131 (11.9%) had mild and moderate to severe RI, respectively. At 1 year, the primary safety end point was significantly higher in patients with moderate to severe RI (3.5% vs. 2.8% vs. 11.5%; P < 0.001). Conversely, TLR proved similar among groups (0.4% vs. 1.8% vs. 0.8%; P = 0.235)., Conclusions: Patients with worse renal function had increased risk of the composite of cardiovascular deaths, MI, and definite or probable ST. However, the PF-BES showed similar efficacy despite differences in renal function. These findings need to be confirmed in large-scale randomized trials., (Copyright © 2021 Italian Federation of Cardiology - I.F.C. All rights reserved.)

Background: A polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent (PF-BES) and a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) recently showed similar clinical profiles and appear to be competing options in specific clinical settings of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether they perform similarly also in complex procedural settings as coronary bifurcation lesions remains unaddressed., Methods: All consecutive patients undergoing coronary bifurcation PCI with PF-BES or the new iteration of the ZES from three large multicenter real-world registries were included. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stent thrombosis (ST). Multiple analyses to adjust for baseline differences were carried out including propensity-score matching, propensity-score stratification and inverse-probability-weighting. Outcomes are reported according to Cox proportional hazard models censored at 400-day follow-up., Results: 1169 patients treated with PF-BES (n = 440) or ZES (n = 729) on the main branch of a coronary bifurcation lesion were included (mean age 69 ± 11 years, 75.4% male, 53.8% acute coronary syndrome at presentation, 26.6% left main bifurcation, median dual antiplatelet therapy duration 12 [range 12-12] months). MACE, all-cause death, TLR and ST tended towards non-statistically higher rates with the PF-BES as compared to the ZES. Higher MI and target vessel revascularization occurrence was observed with PF-BES., Conclusions: In this large contemporary cohort of patients undergoing coronary bifurcation PCI, the occurrence of MACE was non-statistically different with the use of PF-BES and ZES devices. However, differences favoring the ZES device that may entail clinical relevance were observed. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore whether they remain valid when a short dual antiplatelet therapy is adopted., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a critical complication among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive management. The value of adjunctive antithrombotic strategies, such as bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin (UFH) on the risk of AKI is unclear., Methods and Results: Among 7213 patients enrolled in the MATRIX-Antithrombin and Treatment Duration study, 128 subjects were excluded due to incomplete information on serum creatinine (sCr) or end-stage renal disease on dialysis treatment. The primary endpoint was AKI defined as an absolute (>0.5 mg/dL) or a relative (>25%) increase in sCr. AKI occurred in 601 patients (16.9%) treated with bivalirudin and 616 patients (17.4%) treated with UFH [odds ratio (OR): 0.97; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.85-1.09; P = 0.58]. A >25% sCr increase was observed in 597 patients (16.8%) with bivalirudin and 616 patients (17.4%) with UFH (OR: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.85-1.08; P = 0.50), whereas a >0.5 mg/dL absolute sCr increase occurred in 176 patients (5.0%) with bivalirudin vs. 189 patients (5.4%) with UFH (OR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.75-1.14; P = 0.46). By implementing the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria, the risk of AKI was not significantly different between bivalirudin and UFH groups (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.72-1.07; P = 0.21). Subgroup analyses of the primary endpoint suggested a benefit with bivalirudin in patients randomized to femoral access., Conclusion: Among ACS patients undergoing invasive management, the risk of AKI was not significantly lower with bivalirudin compared with UFH., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT01433627., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: To report the incidence, the predictors and clinical impact of device-related complications (DRCs) in the IMP-IT (IMPella Mechanical Circulatory Support Device in Italy) registry. Impella is percutaneous left ventricular assist devices, which provides mechanical circulatory support both in cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). The IMP-IT registry is a multicentre registry evaluating the trends in use and clinical outcomes of Impella in Italy., Methods and Results: A total of 406 patients have been included in this registry: 56.4% in the setting of CS, while 43.6% patients in the setting of HR-PCI. DRCs were defined as a composite endpoint of access-site bleeding, limb ischaemia, vascular complication requiring treatment, haemolysis, aortic injury, and left ventricular perforation. DRC incidence in the overall population was 25.6%, with significantly higher rate in the CS (37.1%) than in the HR-PCI (10.7%) group. The most frequent complication was haemolysis (11.8%), which occurred almost exclusively in CS population. Access-site bleeding was observed in 9.6% of the overall population, with no significant difference between the two groups. Limb ischaemia was observed in 8.3% of the overall population, with significantly higher rate in the CS group. CS and right ventricular dysfunction appear as the strongest independent predictors of DRC. One-year mortality in patients with DRC appears higher than in patients with no DRC. However, DRC was not confirmed as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality at multivariate analysis., Conclusion: In the IMP-IT registry, the rate of DRC was 25.6%, with CS being the strongest independent predictor. DRC was not found as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Culprit lesions of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients are friable, soft, and prone to disruption during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI). The presence of dissections in reference vessel segments (RVSs), adjacent to stented culprit lesions, and dynamic luminal changes in proximal or distal RVSs have not yet been investigated. We therefore sought to assess the healing patterns of edge dissections and the changes of lumen area at RVSs within 1 week post stent implantation in patients with STEMI., Methods: In the MATRIX trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01433627), optical coherence tomography (OCT) was performed at the end of pPCI and within 1 week during staged PCI. The RVS dissection was defined as: type 1 = flap; type 2 = cavity; type 3 = double barrel; and type 4 = fissure. We compared separately the fate of residual dissection and luminal area/dimension by OCT in the target vessel between pPCI and staged PCI, including 1-year clinical outcomes., Results: Out of 151 patients, 46 patients had dissections in 50 RVSs and did not experience worse clinical outcome. Dissections were 44% type 1, 28% type 2, 12% type 3, and 16% type 4. Overall, 18% of the dissections healed. The mean lumen area of the RVS enlarged in 82 patients (59%) from pPCI to staged PCI. Compared with the proximal RVS, there was a significant increase in the lumen diameter at the distal RVS (0.06 ± 0.25 mm vs -0.01 ± 0.21 mm; P=.01)., Conclusion: Dissections occur frequently after pPCI. One-fifth of them heal within 1 week and do not seem to negatively impact clinical outcomes. Distal RVS lumen area increased compared with proximal RVS, likely reflecting a different vasoconstriction pattern over time.

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods and Results: In this prespecified subanalysis of the TWILIGHT trial, we evaluated the treatment effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin according to renal function. The trial enrolled patients undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation who fulfilled at least one clinical and one angiographic high-risk criterion. Chronic kidney disease, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, was a clinical study entry criterion. Following a 3-month period of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomly assigned to aspirin or placebo on top of ticagrelor for an additional 12 months. Of the 6835 patients randomized and with available eGFR at baseline, 1111 (16.3%) had CKD. Ticagrelor plus placebo reduced the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in both patients with [4.6% vs. 9.0%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.80] and without (4.0% vs. 6.7%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.75; Pinteraction = 0.508) CKD, but the absolute risk reduction was greater in the former group. Rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were not significantly different between the two randomized groups irrespective of the presence (7.9% vs. 5.7%; HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.88-2.22) or absence of (3.2% vs. 3.6%; HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68-1.20; Pinteraction = 0.111) CKD., Conclusion: Among CKD patients undergoing PCI, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the risk of bleeding without a significant increase in ischaemic events as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) represent a prevalent subgroup among those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Early aspirin discontinuation after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as a bleeding avoidance strategy. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT in a contemporary HBR population., Methods and Results: This prespecified analysis of the TWILIGHT trial evaluated the treatment effects of early aspirin withdrawal followed by ticagrelor monotherapy in HBR patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents. After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomized to 12 months of aspirin or placebo in addition to ticagrelor. A total of 1064 (17.2%) met the Academic Research Consortium definition for HBR. Ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in HBR (6.3% vs. 11.4%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.53, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-0.82) and non-HBR patients (3.5% vs. 5.9%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.77) with similar relative (Pinteraction = 0.67) but a trend towards greater absolute risk reduction in the former [-5.1% vs. -2.3%; difference in absolute risk differences (ARDs) -2.8%, 95% CI -6.4% to 0.8%, P = 0.130]. A similar pattern was observed for more severe BARC 3 or 5 bleeding with a larger absolute risk reduction in HBR patients (-3.5% vs. -0.5%; difference in ARDs -3.0%, 95% CI -5.2% to -0.8%, P = 0.008). There was no significant difference in the key secondary endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between treatment arms, irrespective of HBR status., Conclusions: Among HBR patients undergoing PCI who completed 3-month DAPT without experiencing major adverse events, aspirin discontinuation followed by ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced bleeding without increasing ischaemic events, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. The absolute risk reduction in major bleeding was larger in HBR than non-HBR patients., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2021. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Crossover balloon occlusion technique (CBOT) has been proposed to ensure adequate closure of the arterial access used for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). However, the CBOT performed through the contralateral femoral artery could be challenging in cases of excessively tortuous and calcified vessels or in the presence of narrow iliac carina angles. We describe a novel technique to facilitate the advancement the peripheral balloon through the contralateral femoral artery up to the target iliofemoral system in order to facilitate access site hemostasis. The present "locking and drugging" technique takes advantages from two mechanical aspects: (a) the locking of the 0.018″ wire between the vessel wall and the TAVR delivery system or the dedicated sheath, which facilitate the crossover of the balloon in the contralateral iliofemoral system, preventing its prolapse into the aorta at the carina level and (b) the dragging of the balloon advanced into the contralateral iliofemoral system during the retrieve of the TAVR delivery system or the dedicated sheath., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Among patients with diabetes and chronic coronary disease, it is unclear if invasive management improves outcomes when added to medical therapy., Methods: The ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trials (ie, ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA-Chronic Kidney Disease) randomized chronic coronary disease patients to an invasive (medical therapy + angiography and revascularization if feasible) or a conservative approach (medical therapy alone with revascularization if medical therapy failed). Cohorts were combined after no trial-specific effects were observed. Diabetes was defined by history, hemoglobin A1c ≥6.5%, or use of glucose-lowering medication. The primary outcome was all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI). Heterogeneity of effect of invasive management on death or MI was evaluated using a Bayesian approach to protect against random high or low estimates of treatment effect for patients with versus without diabetes and for diabetes subgroups of clinical (female sex and insulin use) and anatomic features (coronary artery disease severity or left ventricular function)., Results: Of 5900 participants with complete baseline data, the median age was 64 years (interquartile range, 57-70), 24% were female, and the median estimated glomerular filtration was 80 mL·min -1 ·1.73 -2 (interquartile range, 64-95). Among the 2553 (43%) of participants with diabetes, the median percent hemoglobin A1c was 7% (interquartile range, 7-8), and 30% were insulin-treated. Participants with diabetes had a 49% increased hazard of death or MI (hazard ratio, 1.49 [95% CI, 1.31-1.70]; P <0.001). At median 3.1-year follow-up the adjusted event-free survival was 0.54 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.48-0.60) and 0.66 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.61-0.71) for patients with diabetes versus without diabetes, respectively, with a 12% (95% bootstrapped CI, 4%-20%) absolute decrease in event-free survival among participants with diabetes. Female and male patients with insulin-treated diabetes had an adjusted event-free survival of 0.52 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.42-0.56) and 0.49 (95% bootstrapped CI, 0.42-0.56), respectively. There was no difference in death or MI between strategies for patients with diabetes versus without diabetes, or for clinical (female sex or insulin use) or anatomic features (coronary artery disease severity or left ventricular function) of patients with diabetes., Conclusions: Despite higher risk for death or MI, chronic coronary disease patients with diabetes did not derive incremental benefit from routine invasive management compared with initial medical therapy alone. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.

Importance: Shortened dual antiplatelet therapy followed by potent P2Y12 receptor inhibitor monotherapy reduces bleeding without increasing ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Objective: To explore sex differences and evaluate the association of sex with outcomes among patients treated with ticagrelor monotherapy vs ticagrelor plus aspirin., Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of TWILIGHT, an investigator-initiated, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial conducted at 187 sites across 11 countries. Study participants included patients who underwent successful PCI with drug-eluting stents, were planned for discharge with ticagrelor plus aspirin, and who had at least 1 clinical and at least 1 angiographic feature associated with high risk of ischemic or bleeding events. Data were analyzed from May to July 2020., Interventions: At 3 months after PCI, patients adherent to ticagrelor and aspirin without major adverse event were randomized to either aspirin or placebo for an additional 12 months along with ticagrelor., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding at 12 months after randomization. The primary ischemic end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke., Results: Of 9006 enrolled patients, 7119 underwent randomization (mean [SD] age, 63.9 [10.2] years; 5421 [76.1%] men). Women were older (mean [SD] age, 65.5 [9.6] years in women vs 63.4 [10.3] years in men) with higher prevalence of chronic kidney disease (347 women [21.2%] vs 764 men [14.7%]). The primary bleeding end point occurred more often in women than men (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% CI, 1.06-1.64; P = .01). After multivariate adjustment, incremental bleeding risk associated with female sex was no longer significant (adjusted HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.95-1.52; P = .12). Ischemic end points were similar between sexes. Ticagrelor plus placebo vs ticagrelor plus aspirin was associated with lower risk of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding in women (adjusted HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.42-0.92; P = .02) and men (adjusted HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.44-0.73; P < .001; P for interaction = .69). Ischemic end points were similar between treatment groups in both sexes., Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the higher bleeding risk in women compared with men was mostly attributable to baseline differences, whereas ischemic events were similar between sexes. In this high-risk PCI population, the benefits of early aspirin withdrawal with continuation of ticagrelor were generally comparable in women and men., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02270242.

Objective: To evaluate the role of the microaxial percutaneous mechanical circulatory support device (Impella® pump) implantation pre-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus during/after PCI in cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk PCI populations., Background: A better understanding of the safety and effectiveness of the Impella and the role of timing of this support initiation in specific clinical settings is of utmost clinical relevance., Methods: A total of 365 patients treated with Impella 2.5/CP in the 17 centers of the IMP-IT Registry were included. Through propensity-score weighting (PSW) analysis, 1-year clinical outcomes were assessed separately in CS and HR-PCI patients, stratified by timing of Impella support., Results: Pre-procedural insertion was associated with an improvement in 1-year survival in patients with CS due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with PCI (p = .04 before PSW, p = .009 after PSW) and HR-PCI (p < .01 both before and after PSW). Among patients undergoing HR-PCI, early Impella support was also associated with a lower rate of the composite of mortality, re-hospitalization for heart failure, and need for left-ventricular assist device/heart transplantation at 1-year (p = .04 before PSW, p = .01 after PSW). Furthermore, Impella use during/after PCI was associated with an increased in-hospital life-threatening and severe bleeding among patients with AMI-CS receiving PCI (7 vs. 16%, p = .1) and HR-PCI (1 vs. 9%, p = .02)., Conclusions: Our findings suggested a survival benefit and reduced rates of major bleeding when a pre-PCI Impella implantation instead of during-after procedure was used in the setting of HR-PCI and AMI-CS., (© 2021 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)