Search

Background The ULISSE registry evaluated the real-world performance of the Ultimaster® biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in a multicenter-independent cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, including a large proportion of diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. Methods In this subgroup analysis, 1,660 consecutive patients, 2,422 lesions, treated with BP-SES enrolled in the ULISSE registry were divided in two groups: DM (485 patients, 728 lesions) and non-DM (1,175 patients, 1,694 lesions). Primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite endpoint of cardiac-death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1-year. Secondary endpoint was TLR at 1-year. Results At 1-year follow-up TLF occurred in 5% overall patients and was significantly higher in DM patients (8 vs. 3.7%; p = .001), due to more cardiac deaths (3.4 vs. 1.1%; p = .002). TLR occurred in 3.2% overall patients, and it was not significantly higher in DM compared to non-DM patients (4.4 vs. 2.8%; p = .114). The incidence of stent thrombosis was low and similar between groups (0.4 vs. 0.9%; p = .526). Insulin-treated DM (ITDM) patients showed higher rate of TLF as compared to non-ITDM patients (13 vs. 6.5%; p = .041), but similar rate of TLR (6 vs. 4%; p = .405). After adjustment for relevant comorbidities, DM was not significantly associated with TLF or cardiac death in patients undergoing BP-SES implantation. Conclusions This study is the first all-comers evaluation of BP-SES in DM patients. Our findings show that DM patients, mostly those with ITDM, still represent a vulnerable population and experience significantly higher rate of TLF. Overall BP-SES efficacy is considerable, although not statistically significant higher rate of TLR is still present in DM compared to non-DM patients.

Background: This studywas designed to confirmin a large population of unselected patients the promising results of Ultimaster (R) biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) already shown in previous trial.Methods: ULISSE is an observational, multicenter, national registry evaluating all patients undergoing PCI with the Ultimaster (R) BP-SES. Incidence of 1-year TLF (cardiac death or target vessel MI or clinically indicated TLR) was the primary endpoint. Pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed for diabetic patients and for those with lesion longer than 25 mm, bifurcation and CTO lesions.Results: 1660 patients were enrolled in 9 Italian cardiology centers, 82% weremales, mean age of 68 +/- 10 years, and 29% were diabetics. Overall 2422 lesions were treated, 65% type B2/C lesions, 7% CTOs, 17% bifurcations and 38% long lesions. The incidence of 1-year TLF was 5%, with 3.2% of clinically indicated TLR. TLF occurred in 8% of the patientswith diabetes mellitus, and 7% in bifurcation, 6.7% in CTO and 6.2% in long lesions. Definite overall ST was 0.9%, and 1.2% in patients treated for type B2/C lesions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified stenting on unprotected LMT (OR = 4.80), stenting on ISR lesion (OR = 3.19) and need for rotational atherectomy (OR = 6.24) as the strongest independent predictors of TLF.Conclusions: The results of this national all-comers registry show that the Ultimaster (R) BP-SES real-world performance was comparable with that observed in the clinical trial, with low rate of primary endpoint and TLR. Long term follow-up will be necessary to prove the theoretical advantage of the BP-SES over time. (c) 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Background This study aimed to evaluate real-world clinical outcome of patients needing short dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) following PCI with Ultimaster® thin-strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES), which was supposed to induce faster stent endothelialization and reduce device thrombogenicity. Methods In this sub-group analysis of patients enrolled in the ULISSE registry, two groups were identified: 1) patients discharged with S-DAPT (≤3-month) due to high bleeding risk or need for urgent major non-cardiac surgery and 2) patients discharged with recommended DAPT (R-DAPT) duration (≥6-month). The primary ischemic-safety and bleeding-safety endpoints were TLF (composite of cardiac-death, target vessel MI, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization), and BARC major bleedings (≥type-3a) at 1-year follow-up. To account for events occurring before DAPT discontinuation we performed 3-month landmark analysis. Results 82 patients (5%) were discharged with ≤3-month DAPT (57 ± 27 days), and 1558 patients (94%) were discharged with ≥6-month DAPT (318 ± 75 days). No significant differences between S-DAPT and R-DAPT group were observed in TLF at 1-year (7.9% vs. 4.6%). The rate of BARC major bleeding resulted significantly higher in S-DAPT group (3.9% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.001), with the majority of bleeding events occurring within 3 months. The landmark analysis showed no significant differences in BARC major bleedings between groups (1.4% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.142). Conclusions As compared to those treated with R-DAPT (≥6-month), patients needing -S-DAPT (≤3-month) after PCI with Ultimaster® BP-SES had similar rates of 1-year TLF and BARC major bleedings following early DAPT discontinuation.

Background: The ULISSE registry has demonstrated the real-world performance of the Ultimaster biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in a large cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, including a large proportion of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: We performed a subgroup analysis of the ULISSE registry in AMI patients and compared the outcomes of this vulnerable cohort with that of patients presenting without AMI (non-AMI). The primary end point was the incidence of 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: Of 1,660 patients included in the ULISSE registry, 381(23%) presented with AMI, 207(54.3%) non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and 174(45.7%) ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Compared with non-AMI patients, those with AMI were more frequently female and smokers, with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. At 1 year, TLF rate was significantly higher in AMI than non-AMI patients (7.9 vs. 4.1%; HR 1.98, CI 95% 1.22–3.23; p =.005) driven by higher rate of cardiac death (4.0 vs. 1.1%; HR 3.59, CI 95% 1.64–7.88; p =.01) and TV-MI (2.8 vs 0.9%; HR 2.99,CI 95% 1.22–7.37; p =.01), without differences in TLR rate (4.3 vs. 2.9%,HR 0.66, CI95% 0.35–1.25; p =.2). At multivariate Cox regression analysis, eGFR

Current recommendations for the antithrombotic management of patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI-S) are based on limited and relatively weak data. To broaden and strengthen available evidence, the management and 1-year outcomes of OAC patients who underwent PCI-S and were included in a prospective, multicenter registry from 2003 to 2007 were evaluated. Among the 632 patients receiving OAC, mostly because of atrial fibrillation (58%), who underwent PCI-S, mostly because of acute coronary syndromes (63%), dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel was the most frequently prescribed at discharge (48%), followed by triple therapy with OAC, aspirin, and clopidogrel (32%) and OAC plus aspirin (18%). The choice of antithrombotic therapy largely matched the thromboembolic risk profiles of patients, with the prescription of regimens including OAC predicted by the presence of non-low-risk features. The cumulative 1-year occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events was as high as 27% and was not significantly different among the 3 treatment groups. Stroke and stent thrombosis were limited to 2% and 3%, respectively, and although no significant differences were found among the 3 groups, stroke was 4 times less frequent when OAC, with either 1 or 2 antiplatelet agents, was administered. Major bleeding was also limited to 3%, with no significant differences among the 3 groups. In conclusion, these findings suggest overall real-world management of OAC patients who undergo PCI-S that is in accordance with their clinical risk profiles and give further support to the reported efficacy and safety of triple therapy for the optimal treatment of these patients.

Objectives This study sought to assess whether transradial intervention, by minimizing access-site bleeding and vascular events, improves outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with the transfemoral approach. Background Bleeding and consequent blood product transfusions have been causally associated with a higher mortality rate in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing coronary angioplasty. Methods We identified all adults undergoing percutaneous intervention for acute myocardial infarction in Emilia-Romagna, a region in the north of Italy of 4 million residents, between January 1, 2003, and July 30, 2009, at 12 referral hospitals using a region-mandated database of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures. Differences in the risk of death at 2 years between patients undergoing transfemoral versus transradial intervention, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis, were determined from vital statistics records and compared based on propensity score adjustment and matching. Results A total of 11,068 patients were treated for acute myocardial infarction (8,000 via transfemoral and 3,068 via transradial route). According to analysis of matched pairs, the 2-year, risk-adjusted mortality rates were lower for the transradial than for the transfemoral group (8.8% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.0250). The rate of vascular complications requiring surgery or need for blood transfusion were also significantly decreased in the transradial group (1.1% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0052). Conclusions In patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction, transradial treatment is associated with decreased 2-year mortality rates and a reduction in the need for vascular surgery and/or blood transfusion compared with transfemoral intervention.

Background The long-term safety and efficacy of drug eluting stents (DES) implanted during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcome of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI with DES vs. bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. Methods In the present analysis 4764 patients were enrolled (706, 15%, received DES). We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis (ST). Results Overall, no significant difference emerged for the rates of death and reinfarction. DES implantation was associated to a reduction of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.47–0.91; p =0.01), leading to a MACE reduction (HR 0.7, 95%CI 0.56–0.86; p p p =0.01). On the contrary, during the third year, adverse events tended to be higher in the DES group. ST did not differ between DES and BMS groups ( p =0.6). No differences were observed between sirolimus eluting stents and paclitaxel eluting stents. Conclusions DES implantation during primary PCI is safe and associated with a significant TVR and MACE reduction in the first two years, whereas a trend to have more adverse events in the third year is observed. More data about long-term follow-up are needed to better evaluate both safety and efficacy of DES in the setting of STEMI.

In this study we investigated the impact of acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) on clinical outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents (DESs). In this multicenter, retrospective, observational study we enrolled 1,101 patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with DESs. Six hundred eleven patients presented with ACS and 490 had stable coronary artery disease. ACS was defined as the presence of unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI). During 2-year follow-up, the adjusted hazard ratio of cardiac mortality and MI of patients with ACS versus stable patients was 2.42 (95% confidence interval 1.37 to 4.28, p = 0.002). We observed a stepwise risk increase, namely patients with stable coronary disease had the lowest risk, patients with unstable angina an intermediate risk, and patients with non-ST-segment elevation MI the highest risk. The increased risk of cardiac mortality and MI of patients with ACS was concentrated in the first year after DES implantation. In conclusion, patients with ULMCA stenosis and ACS treated with DESs have an increased risk of cardiac mortality and MI during the first year after the intervention compared to stable patients.

Objectives The aim of this study was to investigate whether there is a temporal pattern of ischemic events in relation to dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background Identifying which periods during follow-up of patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with PCI are associated with higher risk of clinical events might help to improve therapeutic strategies. Methods We analyzed data from 15 centers involved in an observational study conducted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with PCI. Eight hundred ninety-four patients were enrolled. Results At 30-day follow-up, the rate of cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) was 5.4%. In patients still taking dual antiplatelet therapy, the adjusted incidence rate ratio/10,000 patient-days of the combination of cardiac mortality and MI in the 31- to 180-day interval compared with the 181- to 360-day interval after PCI was 3.64 (p = 0.035). This risk was particularly high in patients with acute coronary syndromes. After stopping clopidogrel, the adjusted incidence rate ratio of cardiac mortality and MI in the 0- to 90-day interval compared with the 91- to 180-day interval was 4.20 (p = 0.009). Conclusions In patients with ULMCA stenosis taking dual antiplatelet therapy there is an increased hazard of cardiac mortality and MI between 31 and 180 days compared with 181 to 360 days. Furthermore, there is an increased hazard of cardiac mortality and MI in the first 90 days after stopping clopidogrel.

Percutaneous revascularization of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remains a challenging task. Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have been shown to decrease the incidence of restenosis in de novo native coronary artery lesions. However, their clinical value in SVGs remains to be established. We compared long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention with DESs and bare metal stents (BMSs) for de novo lesions in SVGs. In a large prospective, multicenter registry, 360 patients underwent stenting of a de novo lesion in SVGs using BMSs (288 patients) or DESs (72 patients). Incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality, reinfarction, and target vessel revascularization, was recorded at a 12-month follow-up. Compared with the DES group, patients receiving BMSs were more likely to be men, to have chronic renal insufficiency or higher Charlson scores, but less likely to have undergone previous percutaneous coronary intervention. Incidence of MACEs at 12-month follow-up was similar in the 2 groups (17.8% in DES group vs 20.3% in BMS group, respectively, p = 0.460). Cox regression analysis identified age, chronic renal failure, cardiogenic shock at presentation, and ostial location of stenosis as independent predictors of long-term MACEs. In conclusion, our data suggest that rates of 12-month MACEs associated with the use of DESs and BMSs are similar in patients undergoing treatment of de novo lesions in SVGs.

Background— The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) have been questioned recently. Methods and Results— Between July 2002 and June 2005, 10 629 patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention with either DES (n=3064) or bare-metal stents (BMS, n=7565) were enrolled in a prospective registry comprising 13 hospitals. We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, acute myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) and angiographic stent thrombosis during 2-year follow-up. A propensity score analysis to adjust for different baseline clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics was performed. The 2-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 17.8% in the DES group and 21.0% in the BMS group ( P =0.003 by log-rank test). Angiographic stent thrombosis was 1.0% in the DES group and 0.6% in the BMS group ( P =0.09). After adjustment, the 2-year cumulative incidence of death was 6.8% in the DES group and 7.4% in the BMS group ( P =0.35), whereas the rates were 5.3% in DES and 5.8% in BMS for acute myocardial infarction ( P =0.46), 9.1% in DES and 12.9% in BMS for target-vessel revascularization ( P P Conclusions— In this large real-world population, the beneficial effect of DES in reducing the need for new revascularization compared with BMS extends to 2 years without evidence of a worse safety profile.

Objective: We compared the outcome of drug eluting stent (DES) implantation (Sirolimus or Paclitaxel) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction with the outcome of a similar group of patients undergoing coronary artery by-pass grafting (CABG). Background: Revascularization provides long-term benefits in patients with severe LV dysfunction. However the modality to achieve it is still unsettled in this high risk group of patients. Methods: Two-hundred-twenty patients (20% women) with severe LV dysfunction (LV Ejection Fraction ≤35%) underwent revascularization with either coronary stent implantation or CABG between May 2002 and May 2005. One-hundred-twenty-eight patients received DES (Sirolimus in 72 and Paclitaxel in 54) and 92 patients underwent surgery. Patients with acute STEMI were excluded. The primary endpoint was all cause mortality. A composite endpoint of major cardiac adverse events (MACCE), including all cause mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (STEMI), and TVR was the secondary endpoint. Results: Mean follow-up was 15 ± 9 months. No differences were noted in age (69 ± 10 years vs. 68 ± 10 years, P = NS), LVEF (28 ± 6 vs. 27 ± 8, P = NS) history of diabetes (48% vs. 45%, P = NS), congestive heart failure (47% vs. 37%, P = NS) or MI (60% vs. 50%, P = NS) between the DES and CABG groups. The NYHA class was also similar between the two groups (2.6 ± 0.9 vs. 2.7 ± 0.8). More patients in DES group had previous CABG (24% vs. 7%. P = 0.001). Patients undergoing CABG had a greater number of vessel disease (2.8 ± 0.5 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7, P = 0.001) and received a mean of 3.0 ± 0.8 graft per patient. Most of the CABG patients had a left internal mammary artery (83%) graft and 24% had off-pump surgery. The DES group had 1.3 artery/patient treated and 1.3 stents were implanted per artery. During the follow-up there were a total of 20 deaths of which three were cancer related (two in DES group and one in the CABG group). Ten deaths (8%) occurred in the DES group and 10 (11%) in the CABG group (P = NS by log-rank test). The 30-day mortality was significantly greater in patients undergoing CABG than DES (five patients in the CABG vs. only one patient in DES group, P = 0.04). At 6 months there was only a trend toward better survival in DES group (97% vs. 93%, P = 0.2). At 2 years follow-up however both groups had the same survival probability from death (83% in both groups). The 2 years MACCE free survival rate was 76% in DES group and 79% in the CABG cohort (P = NS by log rank test). Eight (6%) DES patients needed additional PCI in nontarget vessel during follow-up. The magnitude of NYHA class improvement was greater for the CABG than DES patients (0.9 vs. 1.5, P = 0.01). Conclusion: In selected high risk patients with severe LV dysfunction revascularization with DES implantation offers comparable long term mortality and MACCE rate to CABG patients. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

OBJECTIVES We compared the clinical outcome of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in a real-world scenario. BACKGROUND In selected patients, SES has been associated with lower late luminal loss than PES. Whether this emerging biological difference could translate into different clinical efficacy in daily practice is presently unknown. METHODS This analysis included 1,676 consecutive patients with de novo coronary lesions treated solely with drug-eluting stents (SES = 992; PES = 684). All patients were enrolled in a dynamic prospective registry comprising 13 hospitals. We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) during follow-up. RESULTS Overall, 29% of the patients had diabetes, 23% had prior MI, and 9% had poor left ventricular function. ST-segment elevation MI was diagnosed at admission in 12%. Multivessel intervention was performed in 16%. At 1-year follow-up, SES was associated with a reduced incidence of MACE (9.2% SES vs. 14.1% PES; p = 0.007) and TVR (5.0% SES vs. 10.0% PES; p = 0.0008) compared to PES. A propensity analysis with many clinical and angiographic variables was carried out to adjust for baseline differences. In this analysis, SES was associated with a 44% risk reduction of MACE (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.78) and a 55% reduction of TVR (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.70). This result was consistent across most subgroups tested. Similar rates of death and MI were observed in the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS In this large real-world population, SES improved 1-year clinical results as compared to PES.

We evaluated the clinical effect of selective use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) in real-world, high-risk patients. A total of 4,237 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (SES, n = 872, bare metal stents [BMSs], n = 3,365) was enrolled in a prospective regional survey. A prespecified high-risk subset of patients was selected on the basis of clinical and angiographic characteristics. A propensity score analysis was performed to compare patients who received SESs with those who received BMSs. Patients in the SES group more often had diabetes and more frequently had previous myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization, type C lesions, and multivessel procedures. Patients who presented with acute myocardial infarction were treated more often with BMSs. At 9 months, the use of SESs was associated with fewer major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization; hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.85) and target lesion revascularizations (hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.91). This decrease was more evident in a prespecified high-risk subgroup of patients (major adverse cardiac events, 8.0% SES vs 15.6% BMS, hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.72). We conclude that selective SES use in real-world patients who have high-risk clinical and angiographic characteristics is associated with significant decreases in major adverse cardiac events and repeat revascularizations compared with BMS use.

Introduction: β-Blockers have been shown to be effective in the treatment of both arterial hypertension and heart failure. However, slow titration of β-blockers over several weeks and rigorous supervision are essential to minimise antiadrenergic adverse effects in patients with heart failure. α1-Blockers are well tolerated and effectively lower blood pressure by reducing peripheral resistance. Patients and methods: This study assessed changes in left ventricular function and quality of life in hypertensive patients with mild heart failure treated with enalapril and furosemide combined with a β-blocker with peripheral vasodilating activity (carvedilol) or an α-blocker (doxazosin), over a 1-year period. Sixty patients aged 45–65 years with untreated essential arterial hypertension and mild heart failure were randomised to receive enalapril + furosemide in combination with carvedilol or doxazosin. Results: In the carvedilol compared with the doxazosin group, ejection fraction diminished significantly (38% vs 42%, p < 0.05) and quality of life worsened significantly (Minnesota Living Heart Failure score 54 vs 47, p < 0.05) during the first 3 weeks of treatment. Ejection fraction and quality of life had significantly improved from baseline in both groups by 12 months. Conclusion: Doxazosin in combination antihypertensive therapy rapidly improves clinical status and haemodynamics in hypertensive patients with mild heart failure by reducing afterload. After 1 year, doxazosin and carvedilol improve clinical and haemodynamic parameters.

This study sought to assess whether transradial intervention, by minimizing access-site bleeding and vascular events, improves outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with the transfemoral approach.Bleeding and consequent blood product transfusions have been causally associated with a higher mortality rate in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing coronary angioplasty.We identified all adults undergoing percutaneous intervention for acute myocardial infarction in Emilia-Romagna, a region in the north of Italy of 4 million residents, between January 1, 2003, and July 30, 2009, at 12 referral hospitals using a region-mandated database of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures. Differences in the risk of death at 2 years between patients undergoing transfemoral versus transradial intervention, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis, were determined from vital statistics records and compared based on propensity score adjustment and matching.A total of 11,068 patients were treated for acute myocardial infarction (8,000 via transfemoral and 3,068 via transradial route). According to analysis of matched pairs, the 2-year, risk-adjusted mortality rates were lower for the transradial than for the transfemoral group (8.8% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.0250). The rate of vascular complications requiring surgery or need for blood transfusion were also significantly decreased in the transradial group (1.1% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0052).In patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction, transradial treatment is associated with decreased 2-year mortality rates and a reduction in the need for vascular surgery and/or blood transfusion compared with transfemoral intervention.

Background— We investigated the long-term impact of different stent types and diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of bifurcation lesions, based on a large multicenter survey endorsed by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology. Methods and Results— Relative benefits of drug eluting stent (DES) over bare metal stent (BMS) in patients with (n=1049) and without (n=3020) DM were analyzed with extensive multivariable adjustment. At 3 years, stenting with DES was associated with lower adjusted risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15 to 0.49, P Conclusions— In a large observational registry with admitted potential for selection bias and residual confounding, DES in DM patients with coronary bifurcation lesions were associated with improved outcomes in terms of MACE, cardiac death, and repeat revascularization at long-term follow up. These figures were not replicated in non-DM subjects.

Background: Despite the well-known prognostic impact of systolic dysfunction in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), limited data are available on its current predictive role after PCI for unprotected left main disease (ULM). We thus appraised the prognostic role of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in patients undergoing PCI for ULM with drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods: Consecutive eligible subjects were retrospectively enrolled in a national registry. Patients were divided into three groups: LVEF < 30%, LVEF 30-45%, and LVEF > 45%. Relevant baseline and outcome data were compared with bivariate and multivariable tests. Results: A total of 975 subjects was included (LVEF < 30%: 46, LVEF 30-45%: 208, LVEF > 45%: 721). Patients with LVEF < 30% had several other unfavorable clinical features, including older age and higher EuroSCORE. Adverse event rates were different already at 7 days (p = 0.012 for all-cause death and p = 0.015 for major adverse cardiac events [MACE]), with even more significant trends up to 30 days and at long-term (p < 0.001 for death, and p < 0.001 for MACE). After a median of 18 months, risk of death totaled 39 versus 13 versus 8% (p < 0.001) and risk of MACE 44 versus 24 versus 22% (p = 0.003). Multivariable analyses showed however that reduced LVEF was not an independent predictor of adverse events at any time-point. Conclusions: Whereas reduced LVEF is apparently a significant predictor of adverse events after PCI with DES for ULM, its prognostic impact is mostly due to clustering with other adverse feature

Aims: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is increasingly being used for unprotected left main (ULM) disease. Limited data are available on sex-related differences in this setting. We investigated gender-associated differences in patients undergoing stent-based PCI for ULM. Methods and results: We analysed baseline, procedural and long-term data of patients with ULM undergoing stent-based PCI at participating centres. The primary end-point was the long-term rate of major cardiovascular events rate (MACE, i.e., the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularisation). The study population included 1,452 cases, with 27.8% females and 72.2% males. Women were older, more frequently diabetic, hypertensive or presenting with an acute coronary syndrome, and thus with a higher EuroSCORE, but were less commonly treated with drug-eluting stents (DES), in comparison to men (all p

Aims To compare long-term clinical outcome following drug-eluting stents (DES) or bare-metal stents (BMS) implantation on lesions located at the ostium or the shaft of the left main in a large real-world population. The advent of DES decreased the risk of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) restenosis when compared with BMS, but it is unclear if this advantage continues when non-bifurcational lesions are considered. Methods and results The GISE-SICI registry is a retrospective, observational multicentre registry promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology in which 19 high-volume participating centres enrolled 1453 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention on ULMCA between January 2002 and December 2006. From the registry, a total of 479 consecutive patients with ostial and shaft lesions who underwent DES ( n = 334) or BMS ( n = 145) implantation were analysed with extensive multivariable and propensity score adjustments. At 3-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival rates were higher in patients treated with DES than in those treated with BMS. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of mortality after DES implantation relative to BMS implantation was 0.37 (95% CI: 0.15–0.96, P = 0.04). The adjusted HR for the risk of cardiac mortality was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.09–1.04, P = 0.06). The adjusted 3-year rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were not significantly lower in the DES group than in the BMS group ( P = 0.60). Conclusion In a large population of patients with lesions located at the ostium or the shaft of the left main in a real-world setting, DES were associated with favourable clinical outcomes when compared with BMS, although there was no evidence of a significant reduction in TLR with DES vs. BMS.

Aims In this study, we compared the cumulative risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) of patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis with those of patients with ostial and midshaft lesions treated with drug-eluting stent (DES). Methods and results The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study involving 19 high-volume Italian centres. We enrolled 1111 patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with DES. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Three hundred and thirty-four patients had ostial or midshaft lesions (group 1) and 777 bifurcations (group 2). The adjusted hazards ratio of the risk of 2 year MACE of patients in group 2 vs. patients in group 1 was 1.50 ( P = 0.024). However, we observed that there was a significant difference between patients with bifurcations treated with two stents and those in group 1 ( P = 0.001), but not between patients with bifurcations treated with one stent and those in group 1 ( P = 0.38). Conclusion Patients with bifurcations have a worse outcome than patients with ostial and midshaft lesions. However, the technique used to treat bifurcations has a significant impact on clinical outcomes.

Background: Few data are available on diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the context of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. The main goal of this study was to present the long-term relative benefits of using drug-eluting stent (DES) instead of bare-metal stent (BMS) for diabetic patients submitted to percutaneous ULMCA treatment in a large real world multicenter registry. Methods: The GISE-SICI registry is a retrospective, observational multicenter registry promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology in which 19 high-volume participating centers enrolled 1,453 consecutive patients who underwent PCI on ULMCA between January 2002 and December 2006. From the registry, a total of 398 consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus who underwent DES (n = 321) or BMS (n = 77) implantation were analyzed, with extensive multivariable adjustments. Results: At 3-years, use of DES in diabetic patients resulted in no significant differences with respect to death (HR 0.56, 95% CIs 0.24–1.28), myocardial infarction (HR 0.82, 95% CIs 0.21–3.26), and the composite end-point of death or myocardial infarction (HR 0.56, 95% CIs 0.27–1.20). Conversely, DES were associated with significant reduction of target lesion revascularization (TLR, HR 0.33; 95% CIs 0.14–0.80, P = 0.001) rates. Conclusions: Patients presenting with ULMCA disease in the context of diabetes mellitus who are treated with stent-supported PCI have a significant reduction in the rate of TLR with no increased risk of death or myocardial infarction. © 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Background: Small randomized trials have shown short-term improved outcome with drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare metal stent (BMS) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions by reducing in-stent restenosis and target vessel revascularization (TVR). It is not clear, however, if these benefits are maintained long term. The aim of this study is to compare the outcome in a larger cohort of patients undergoing SVG stent implantation with DES or BMS, at 2 years. Methods: From among 250 patients who underwent SVG stenting, 225 patients with available follow-up were selected from data bases at the three participating institutions. One-hundred-six patients had DES (sirolimus, paclitaxel or tacrolimus eluting stent) and 119 patients had any available BMS from April 2002 to December 2006. The primary endpoint was MACE rate, a combination of cardiac death, S-T elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and target lesion revascularization. Secondary end points were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Follow-up was obtained by mailed interviews or telephone calls and review of the hospital chart. Results: The DES and BMS groups had similar age (71 ± 8 years vs. 70 ± 7 years, P = 1.0), diabetes (45% vs. 36%, P = 0.3), history of MI (58% vs. 51%, P = 0.6), EF (44% vs. 47%, P = 0.2) and previous PCI (40% vs. 35%, P = 0.4). Reference vessel diameter (3.15 ± 0.5 mm vs. 3.5 ± 0.5 mm. P = 0.001) and stent size (3.3 ± 0.4 mm vs. 3.9 ± 0.5 mm, P = 0.001) were smaller in the DES group; however, the BMS were longer (24 ± 10 mm vs. 21 ± 6 mm, P = 0.05). At one year there was a trend (P = 0.1) for lower MACE rate in the DES group, but at two years there was no difference in MACE free survival between the DES and BMS groups (81 % vs. 82%, P = 0.9). The death rate was similar (6% each) with three patients having STEMI (two in the DES and one in the BMS). TVR was also similar (14% in each group). Conclusion: In patients undergoing treatment of SVG disease with a stent, the marginal benefit of DES seen at 1 year was lost at 2-year follow-up. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

The long-term safety and efficacy of drug eluting stents (DES) implanted during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the long-term outcome of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI with DES vs. bare metal stent (BMS) implantation.In the present analysis 4764 patients were enrolled (706, 15%, received DES). We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis (ST).Overall, no significant difference emerged for the rates of death and reinfarction. DES implantation was associated to a reduction of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (HR 0.65, 95%CI 0.47-0.91; p=0.01), leading to a MACE reduction (HR 0.7, 95%CI 0.56-0.86; p0.01). In particular, during the first 2 years we observed less adverse events in the DES group, mainly because of a lower TVR rate (TVR: HR 0.56, 95%CI 0.37-0.83, p0.01; MACE: HR 0.71, 95%CI 0.54-0.94, p=0.01). On the contrary, during the third year, adverse events tended to be higher in the DES group. ST did not differ between DES and BMS groups (p=0.6). No differences were observed between sirolimus eluting stents and paclitaxel eluting stents.DES implantation during primary PCI is safe and associated with a significant TVR and MACE reduction in the first two years, whereas a trend to have more adverse events in the third year is observed. More data about long-term follow-up are needed to better evaluate both safety and efficacy of DES in the setting of STEMI.

Data are limited about the relative efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus bare-metal stents (BMSs) for the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis. The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study involving 19 high-volume Italian centers of patients with ULMCA stenosis treated using percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). From January 2002 to December 2006, of 1,453 patients identified with ULMCA stenosis treated with PCI, 1,111 were treated with DESs and 342 were treated with BMSs. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from cardiac death was significantly higher in patients treated with DESs than in those treated with BMSs. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for risk of 2-year cardiac mortality after DES versus BMS implantation was 0.49 (95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.77). The benefit of DESs in reducing cardiac mortality was obtained in the period from 3 to 6 months and maintained up to 2 years. In conclusion, for patients with ULMCA stenosis undergoing PCI, DES implantation was associated with higher adjusted rates of 2-year survival free from cardiac death. The benefit of DESs in reducing cardiac mortality was obtained in the period in which clinical manifestations of restenosis usually peak.

Stent thrombosis (ST) is an infrequent (0.5% to 1.5%) complication of intracoronary stenting, with severe clinical consequences. This multicenter, randomized study evaluated the clinical outcome in 479 patients (598 lesions treated) who underwent elective coronary stenting with a Carbofilm-coated stent (CarboStent) who met prespecified eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin alone (n = 235) or aspirin plus a thienopyridine antiplatelet regimen (n = 244). Clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics were similar between groups. The primary end point was the incidence of 30-day ST; secondary end points included major vascular or bleeding complications within 30 days and death, acute myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 6 months. ST occurred in 4 patients (1.4%) in the aspirin-only group and in 1 patient (0.3%) in the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 2.08, p = NS). After careful review of cases, 89 patients (19%) with protocol deviations were identified. When they were excluded from the analysis, no ST was observed in either group. Secondary end points were reached by 4% of the aspirin-alone group and 8% of the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 2.35, 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 5.85, p = NS). In conclusion, after optimal intracoronary implantation of the CarboStent, antiplatelet therapy with aspirin alone was safe and provided efficacy comparable to aspirin plus a thienopyridine in the prevention of ST.

OBJECTIVE We examined the efficacy of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation (Sirolimus or Paclitaxel) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and compared the outcome with a similar group of patients undergoing bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. BACKGROUND Patients with severe LV dysfunction are a high risk group. DES may improve the long term outcomes compared with BMS. METHODS One hundred and ninety one patients (23% women) with severe LV dysfunction (LV ejection fraction < or =35%) underwent coronary stent implantation between May 2002 and May 2005 and were available for follow-up. One hundred and twenty eight patients received DES (Sirolimus in 72 and Paclitaxel in 54) and 63 patients had BMS. Patients with acute S-T elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were excluded. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular mortality. A composite endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) was the secondary endpoint. RESULTS Mean follow-up was 420 +/- 271 days. No differences were noted in age (69 +/- 10 years vs. 70 +/- 10 years, P = NS), number of vessel disease (2.3 +/- 0.7 vs. 2.2 +/- 0.8, P = NS), history of congestive heart failure (47% vs. 46%, P = NS), MI (60% vs. 61%, P = NS), or number of treated vessels (1.3 +/- 0.5 vs. 1.3 +/- 0.6, P = NS) for the DES and BMS group, respectively. Diabetes was more common among DES patients (45% vs. 25%, P = 0.01). The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was similar between the two groups (28% +/- 6% vs. 26% +/- 8%, P = NS for the DES and BMS, respectively). During the follow-up, there were a total of 25 deaths of which two were cancer related (2 in DES group). There were 23 cardiac deaths, 8/126 (6%) which occurred in the DES group and 15/63 (24%) in the BMS group (P = 0.05 by log-rank test). MACE rate was 10% for the DES group and 41% for the BMS group (P = 0.003). NYHA class improved in both groups (from 2.5 +/- 0.8 to 1.7 +/- 0.8 in DES and from 2 +/- 0.8 to 1.4 +/- 0.7 in the BMS, P = NS). CONCLUSION Compared with bare-metal stents, DES implantation reduces mortality and MACE in high risk patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction.

We compared the clinical outcome of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in a real-world scenario.In selected patients, SES has been associated with lower late luminal loss than PES. Whether this emerging biological difference could translate into different clinical efficacy in daily practice is presently unknown.This analysis included 1,676 consecutive patients with de novo coronary lesions treated solely with drug-eluting stents (SES = 992; PES = 684). All patients were enrolled in a dynamic prospective registry comprising 13 hospitals. We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) during follow-up.Overall, 29% of the patients had diabetes, 23% had prior MI, and 9% had poor left ventricular function. ST-segment elevation MI was diagnosed at admission in 12%. Multivessel intervention was performed in 16%. At 1-year follow-up, SES was associated with a reduced incidence of MACE (9.2% SES vs. 14.1% PES; p = 0.007) and TVR (5.0% SES vs. 10.0% PES; p = 0.0008) compared to PES. A propensity analysis with many clinical and angiographic variables was carried out to adjust for baseline differences. In this analysis, SES was associated with a 44% risk reduction of MACE (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.78) and a 55% reduction of TVR (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.70). This result was consistent across most subgroups tested. Similar rates of death and MI were observed in the 2 treatment groups.In this large real-world population, SES improved 1-year clinical results as compared to PES.

To evaluate the feasibility of cerebral protection during carotid artery stenting (CAS) using the Mo.Ma device, which prevents cerebral embolization by proximal endovascular blockage of blood flow in the internal and external carotid arteries.In 14 European centers, 157 patients (121 men; mean age 68.0+/-8.3 years) were enrolled in a prospective registry between March 2002 and March 2003. Eligible patients had a symptomatic (50%) or asymptomatic (70%) stenosis of the internal carotid artery suitable for carotid stenting. Protected carotid stenting was performed with the Mo.Ma system, which occludes both the common and external carotid arteries via 2 independently inflatable compliant low-pressure balloons before any device is advanced across the lesion. Blood is aspirated through the catheter intermittently or at the end of the procedure.The device was successfully positioned and stents were implanted in all cases. Diameter stenosis was reduced from 84.1%+/-7.8% to 6.7%+/-5.1%. The mean duration of flow blockage was 7.6+/-5.9 minutes. In 12 (7.6%) patients, transient intolerance to flow blockade was observed, but the procedures were completed successfully. In 124 (79.6%) cases, there was macroscopic evidence of debris after filtering the aspirated blood. In-hospital complications included 4 (2.5%) minor strokes, 8 (5.1%) transient ischemic attacks, no deaths, and no major strokes, resulting in a 2.5% death/stroke rate at discharge. At 30-day follow-up, there was 1 cardiac death, 1 major stroke, and 3 minor strokes, for an overall 5.7% 30-day death/stroke rate and a 30-day major stroke and death rate of 1.3%.Cerebral protection with proximal endovascular blood flow blockage during CAS is feasible, with a high procedural success rate.

In 1 patient the diagnosis was further confirmed at operation. Normal pulmonary venous connection to the left atrium can usually be identified by 2-D echo in 3 views: apical, subcostal and suprasternal.1,3*5 However, failure in demonstrating pulmonary venous connection to the left atrium cannot by itself be construed as evidence for abnormal pulmonary venous drainage. Hence, demonstration of a dilated common pulmonary vein, usually behind the left atrium, is of paramount importance in the diagnosis of TAPVC. To achieve this, proper gain settings and careful scanning of the pulmonary veins in different echo planes by apical, subcostal and suprasternal approaches are mandatory, lest a diagnosis of normal pulmonary venous drainage be falsely made. This is exemplified in our experience with both patients. When examined initially from the subcostal position, we had a false impression of normal connection of the right upper pulmonary vein with the left atrium. Visualization of a dilated descending common pulmonary vein in the liver with subsequent scanning provided a clue for the diagnosis of TAPVC. The small, alleged pulmonary vein most likely represented 1 of the horizontal veins behind the left atrium just above the diaphragm. False connection of this pulmonary vein with the left atrium probably resulted from poor image resolution in this particular subcostal view. In a deeper subcostal cut of the long axis of the 2 atria, a mildly dilated pulmonary venous confluence, clearly separated from the left atrium, was demonstrated.

Two females mother and daughter, were affected by a neuromuscular disorder, characterized by slow progression, humeroperoneal weakness and wasting, limited neck flexion, elbow and ankle joint contractures, cardiopathy and myopathic pattern on EMG. Muscle histology and histochemistry showed type I fiber atrophy and predominance in both. Cardiac abnormalities, in the first case, were suggestive of a hypertrophic cardiomyopathy while in the second hypotension and chronic bradycardia were present. Neurological signs, EMG and morphology seemed to point to a genetic variant of the form of dystrophy named Emergy-Dreifuss disease. The mode of transmission and cardiac abnormalities, however, raise the problem of variability even in this well-defined, usually X-linked, disorder.

AIMS: To evaluate the long-term clinical outcome after drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation, and to test if patient selection could enhance their net clinical benefit. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE=death, acute myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation, TVR) and angiographic stent thrombosis (ST) during 3-year follow-up in a prospective multicentre registry. Propensity-score analysis to adjust for different clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics was performed. Overall, 14,115 patients enrolled in the registry received solely BMS (n=9,565) or DES (n=4,550). The incidence of definite ST was 0.6% for BMS and 1.3% for DES (p=0.003). The propensity-score adjusted incidence of cardiac death and myocardial infarction was similar between the two groups (DES 11.9% vs. BMS 12.1%, HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.77-1.04), whereas DES were associated with lower rates of TVR (DES 11.6% vs. BMS 15.2%, HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.59-0.76). The efficacy of DES in reducing TVR increased with increasing likelihood of TVR at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effect of DES in reducing new revascularisations compared to BMS extends out to three years without a significantly worse overall safety profile. The benefit seems more evident in patients with the highest baseline risk of clinical restenosis.

Amrinone, a new inotropic drug, was infused at a dosage of 2.5 mg/kg body weight in 14 patients affected by dilatative cardiomyopathy in New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class III and IV. Cardiac index, mean arterial pressure, and some echocardiographic parameters were evaluated. Cardiac index (CI) increased from 2.03 +/- 0.24 to 2.82 +/- 0.43 1/min/m2 (p less than 0.001). Fractional shortening (FS) increased from 16.4 +/- 5.2 to 21.5 +/- 5.3% (p less than 0.05). End-diastolic and end-systolic diameters showed a significant reduction. Mean arterial pressure decreased from 90.7 +/- 88 to 87.3 +/- 8.4 mmHg (p less than 0.001), the end-systolic stress (ESS) decreased from 5.8 +/- 1 to 5.2 +/- 1 g/cm (p less than 0.001). Analyzing the relationship between FS and ESS, it was possible in some cases to suppose the presence of an important vasodilator effect of the drug. The afterload in 7 patients was therefore modified before and after infusion of the drug to analyze FS at the same levels of afterload. This was done to evaluate the vasodilator effect of amrinone. Examining the regression line of FS/ESS ratio it was possible to observe a predominant vasodilator effect in some patients, but in most, a sinergic action was noted. This may be useful for chronic treatment of congestive heart failure, reducing amrinone doses, and using it in association with other vasodilator drugs.

Background— Distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis represents a technical challenge for interventional cardiologists. In this study, we compared 2-year clinical outcomes of different stenting strategies in patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Methods and Results— The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study on patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. In this study, we selected patients with distal ULMCA stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents. Seven hundred seventy-three patients were eligible for this study: 456 were treated with 1 stent (group 1) and 317 with 2 stents (group 2). The primary end point of the study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the occurrence of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. During a 2-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival free from MACE was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in patients in group 2. The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year MACE in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.53 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.76). The propensity-adjusted hazard ratio for the risk of 2-year cardiac mortality and myocardial infarction in patients in group 1 versus group 2 was 0.38 (95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85). Conclusions— Compared with the 2-stent technique, the 1-stent technique is associated with a better 2-year MACE-free survival. The stenting strategy is a prognostic factor that should be taken into account when deciding the optimal revascularization treatment.