Search

Background The COMPLETE (Complete vs Culprit-only Revascularization to Treat Multi-vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI) trial demonstrated that staged nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduced major cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Objectives The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of nonculprit-lesion PCI timing on major CV outcomes and also the time course of the benefit of complete revascularization. Methods Following culprit-lesion PCI, 4,041 patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD were randomized to staged nonculprit-lesion PCI or culprit-lesion only PCI. Randomization was stratified according to investigator-planned timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI: during or after the index hospitalization. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of CV death or myocardial infarction (MI). In pre-specified analyses, hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for each time stratum. Landmark analyses of the entire population were performed within 45 days and after 45 days. Results For nonculprit-lesion PCI planned during the index hospitalization (actual time: median 1 day), CV death or MI was reduced with complete revascularization compared with culprit-lesion only PCI (HR: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 1.00). For nonculprit lesion PCI planned to occur after hospital discharge (actual time: median 23 days), CV death or MI was also reduced with complete revascularization (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.97; interaction p = 0.62). Landmark analyses demonstrated an HR of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.24) during the first 45 days and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.54 to 0.89) from 45 days to the end of follow-up for intended nonculprit lesion PCI versus culprit lesion only PCI. Conclusions Among STEMI patients with multivessel disease, the benefit of complete revascularization over culprit-lesion only PCI was consistent irrespective of the investigator-determined timing of nonculprit-lesion intervention. The benefit of complete revascularization on hard clinical outcomes emerged mainly over the long term.

BACKGROUND The Shockless IMPLant Evaluation (SIMPLE) trial showed that defibrillation testing (DT) at the time of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implant did not improve shock efficacy or reduce mortality. There are no data regarding the risk of complications, including stroke, among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo DT. OBJECTIVE The purpose of this prospectively planned substudy of SIMPLE was to evaluate the effect of DT vs no DT on clinical outcomes among patients with AF. METHODS We compared efficacy (failed appropriate shock/arrhythmic death) and safety between patients who had AF on their immediate preprocedural ECG to the rest of the study patients. Then among patients with AF we compared these outcomes between patients randomized to DT vs no DT. RESULTS Of the 2500 patients enrolled in SIMPLE, 251 (10%) were in AF immediately before ICD implant. AF patients had an increased risk of failed appropriate shock/arrhythmic death adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-2.39; P = .009) and higher all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.2-2.08; P = .001). Among AF patients, perioperative complications and stroke did not significantly differ between DT vs no-DT groups (9.2% vs 5.4 0 /0; P = .2; and 1.7% vs 1.5%; P >.999, respectively). Failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death occurred in 35 of 251 AF patients (14%), and the no-DT group proved not inferior to the DT group (HR 0.58; 95 0 /0 CI 0.30-1.15; P-noninferiority = .006). CONCLUSION ICD recipients with AF are at increased risk for adverse outcomes; however, DT does not improve arrhythmic survival or shock efficacy. There is no evidence that DT increased the occurrence of perioperative stroke.

Background: Complete revascularization with routine percutaneous coronary intervention of nonculprit lesions after primary percutaneous coronary intervention improves outcomes in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction. Whether this benefit is associated with nonculprit lesion vulnerability is unknown. Methods: In a prospective substudy of the COMPLETEs trial (Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multi-Vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI), we performed optical coherence tomography of at least 2 coronary arteries before nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention in 93 patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; and the ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction culprit vessel if there was unstented segment amenable to imaging. Nonculprit lesions were categorized as obstructive (≥70% stenosis by visual angiographic assessment) or nonobstructive, and as thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) or non-TCFA by optical coherence tomography criteria. TCFA was defined as a lesion with mean fibrous cap thickness 90°. Results: On a patient level, at least one obstructive TCFA was observed in 44/93 (47%) of patients. On a lesion level, there were 58 TCFAs among 150 obstructive nonculprit lesions compared with 74 TCFAs among 275 nonculprit lesions (adjusted TCFA prevalence: 35.4% versus 23.2%, P =0.022). Compared with obstructive non-TCFAs, obstructive TCFAs had similar lesion length (23.1 versus 20.8 mm, P =0.16) but higher lipid quadrants (55.2 versus 19.2, P P P P P =0.11), but more lipid quadrants (36.4 versus 13.5, P P Conclusions: Among patients who underwent optical coherence tomography imaging in the COMPLETE trial, nearly 50% had at least one obstructive nonculprit lesion containing complex vulnerable plaque. Obstructive lesions more commonly harbored vulnerable plaque morphology than nonobstructive lesions. This may help explain the benefit of routine percutaneous coronary intervention of obstructive nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01740479s.

Background Routine thrombus aspiration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) does not improve clinical outcomes. However, there is remaining uncertainty about the potential benefit in those patients with high thrombus burden, where there is a biological rationale for greater benefit. Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefit of thrombus aspiration among STEMI patients with high thrombus burden. Methods TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy with PCI vs. PCI ALone in patients with STEMI) was a randomized trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone in patients with STEMI (n = 10,732). High thrombus burden (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction thrombus grade ≥3) was a pre-specified subgroup. Results The primary outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death, MI, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure was not different at 1 year with thrombus aspiration in patients with high thrombus burden (8.1% vs. 8.3% thrombus aspiration; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.13) or low thrombus burden (6.0% vs. 5.0% thrombus aspiration; HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.73 to 2.05; interaction p = 0.41). However, among patients with high thrombus burden, stroke at 30 days was more frequent with thrombus aspiration (31 [0.7%] thrombus aspiration vs. 16 [0.4%] PCI alone, HR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.04 to 3.48). In the high thrombus burden group, thrombus aspiration did not significantly improve CV mortality at 30 days (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.01; p = 0.06) and at 1 year (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.09; p = 0.25). Irrespective of treatment assignment, high thrombus burden was an independent predictor of death (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.05 to 3.01). Conclusions In patients with high thrombus burden, routine thrombus aspiration did not improve outcomes at 1 year and was associated with an increased rate of stroke. High thrombus burden is still an important predictor of outcome in STEMI. (A Trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI vs. PCI ALone in patients with STEMI [TOTAL]; NCT01149044)

In patients with a ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the prevalence of chronic total occlusion (CTO) in a non–infarct-related artery (non-IRA) is 8% to 15% [(1)][1] with 2-fold greater morbidity and mortality than in those with single-vessel disease (SVD) [(2)][2]. The TOTAL (

Robust comparisons between oral P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention are lacking. We sought to evaluate outcomes on the basis of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in patients from the Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI Undergoing Primary PCI (TOTAL) trial.We grouped 9932 patients according to P2Y12 inhibitor at hospital discharge: clopidogrel (n = 6500; 65.5%), prasugrel (n = 1244; 12.5%), or ticagrelor (n = 2188; 22.0%). The primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association class IV heart failure was examined at 1 year. Secondary efficacy and safety end points were also assessed. Cox proportional hazard ratios were determined and adjusted for confounders via propensity scoring.Baseline characteristics differing between the 3 groups were mainly age 75 years or older, diabetes, and previous stroke. After adjustment, ticagrelor use was associated with a lower rate of the primary composite outcome compared with clopidogrel (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.91; P0.02) and prasugrel (aHR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89; P = 0.02). Prasugrel use was not associated with a lower rate of the primary outcome compared with clopidogrel (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.86-1.39; P 0.99). Neither prasugrel nor ticagrelor were associated with increased risk of stroke compared with clopidogrel. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with significantly lower rates of major bleeding.In this observational analysis of STEMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor was associated with improved outcomes compared with clopidogrel and prasugrel. An appropriately powered randomized trial is needed to confirm these findings.

A significant proportion of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Following successful culprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI, the question of whether to routinely revascularize non-culprit lesions or manage them conservatively with optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone is a common dilemma facing clinicians. METHODS: COMPLETE is a prospective, randomized, international, multicenter, parallel group, open-label trial with blinded evaluation of outcomes. Following successful PCI (contemporary drug eluting stents recommended) of the culprit lesion for STEMI, a total of 4041 patients from 140 centers in 31 countries were randomized to receive either complete revascularization, consisting of staged PCI of all suitable non-culprit lesions plus optimal medical therapy (OMT), or to culprit lesion-only PCI, consisting of OMT alone. OMT comprises evidence-based therapy for STEMI, including and dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, HTN and lipid management. All coronary angiograms in the trial are being evaluated in a central angiographic core lab to assess quality and completeness of revascularization. The co-primary outcomes are (1): the composite of CV death or new non-fatal MI and (2 the composite of CV death, new non-fatal MI or ischemia-driven revascularization at a median follow-up of 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: The COMPLETE trial is an international multicenter randomized trial that will help determine whether complete revascularization involving staged PCI of non-culprit lesions improves outcomes in patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD. (clinicaltrials.govNCT01740479).

The primary outcome occurred in 347 of 5033 patients (6.9%) in the thrombectomy group versus 351 of 5030 patients (7.0%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio in the thrombectomy group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.15; P = 0.86). The rates of cardiovascular death (3.1% with thrombectomy vs. 3.5% with PCI alone; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12; P = 0.34) and the primary outcome plus stent thrombosis or target-vessel revascularization (9.9% vs. 9.8%; hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P = 0.95) were also similar. Stroke within 30 days occurred in 33 patients (0.7%) in the thrombectomy group versus 16 patients (0.3%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.75; P = 0.02). Conclusions In patients with STEMI who were undergoing primary PCI, routine manual thrombectomy, as compared with PCI alone, did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA class IV heart failure within 180 days but was associated with an increased rate of stroke within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; TOTAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149044.)

Aims Preliminary studies suggest that direct stenting (DS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may reduce microvascular obstruction and improve clinical outcome. Thrombus aspiration may facilitate DS. We assessed the impact of DS on clinical outcome and myocardial reperfusion and its interaction with thrombus aspiration among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing PCI. Methods and results Patient-level data from the three largest randomized trials on routine manual thrombus aspiration vs. PCI only were merged. A 1:1 propensity matched population was created to compare DS and conventional stenting. Synergy between DS and thrombus aspiration was assessed with interaction P-values in the final models. In the unmatched population (n= 17 329), 32% underwent DS and 68% underwent conventional stenting. Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration as compared with PCI only (41% vs. 22%; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing DS required less contrast (162mL vs. 172mL; P< 0.001) and had shorter fluoroscopy time (11.1min vs. 13.3 min; P< 0.001). After propensity matching (n= 10 944), no significant differences were seen between DS and conventional stenting with respect to 30-day cardiovascular death [1.7% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.41; P=0.60; Pinteraction = 0.96) and 30-day stroke or transient ischaemic attack (0.6% vs. 0.4%; odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.14-7.54; P=0.99; Pinteraction = 0.81). One-year results were similar. No significant differences were seen in electrocardiographic and angiographic myocardial reperfusion measures. Conclusion Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration. Clinical outcomes and myocardial reperfusion measures did not differ significantly between DS and conventional stenting and there was no interaction with thrombus aspiration.

The safety and efficacy of drug eluting stents (DES) in the setting of ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is not well established.In the TOTAL trial, patients presenting with STEMI were randomized to routine thrombectomy versus PCI alone. In this post-hoc analysis, propensity matching was used to assess relative safety and efficacy according to type of stent used.Each propensity-matched cohort included 2313 patients. The composite primary outcome of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, cardiogenic shock or class IV heart failure within one year was lower in the DES group (HR 0.67; 95% CI 0.54 to 0.84, p=0.0004). Cardiovascular death (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.43 to 0.86, p=0.005), recurrent MI (HR 0.51; 95% CI 0.35 to 0.75, p=0.0005), target vessel revascularization (HR 0.47; 95% CI 0.36 to 0.62, p0.0001) and stent thrombosis (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.40 to 0.89, p=0.01) were lower in the DES group. There was no difference in major bleeding between groups.In this observational analysis, the use of DES was associated with improvement in cardiovascular outcomes compared to the use of BMS. These results support the use of DES during primary PCI for STEMI.

Background: Blood sampling for diagnostic testing can result in significant blood loss, particularly in critically ill patients who undergo frequent testing and in whom anemia and red blood cell (RBC) transfusion are frequent. Only 10% of blood collected is used for testing procedures suggesting that small-volume tubes may reduce the incidence/severity of anemia and RBC transfusion without compromising care. Small-volume Vacutainer® tubes for blood collection (2-3 mL) have the same cost, physical dimensions, and blood draw techniques as standard-draw tubes (4-10 mL), and are compatible with laboratory equipment. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility of a pragmatic randomized trial to determine whether a policy of small-volume tubes reduces RBC transfusion compared to standard tubes in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Methods: We performed a mixed-methods prospective pilot study (before-after design) in the cardiovascular ICU in Hamilton, Canada. The study consisted of a 6-week control period (current practice of standard-volume tubes) and a 6-week intervention period (small-volume tubes) separated by a 2-week washout period. All patients admitted to the ICU were included and followed for 30 days, or until discharge or death. The primary outcome was feasibility as follows: (i) successful switch to small-volume tubes; (ii) adherence to correct tube size; (iii) sufficient volume for testing (less than 3% inadequate); (iv) user acceptance (nurses, lab techs, etc.); (v) assessment of barriers and facilitators to implementation; and (vi) 95% complete primary data collection. Secondary outcomes were reduction in blood loss with small-volume tubes, change in hemoglobin (Hb) level from ICU admission to discharge (adjusted for RBC transfusion), RBC transfusion, ICU/hospital mortality and ICU/hospital length of stay. End-user acceptability and barriers/facilitators to implementation were explored using focus group discussions (FGD). Thematic analysis from FGDs was conducted using NVivo software (QSR International). Results: From December 1 to February 6, 2018, 369 patients were included in the study, 165 in the control and 204 in the intervention periods. The median (IQR) age was 70 yrs (61 - 76) in the control group and 67 yrs (59 - 74) in the intervention group. The median (IQR) ICU stay was 1 day (1-35) for both groups. Random audits demonstrated 100% compliance with allocated tube size. Median (IQR) estimated blood loss due to laboratory testing per patient per day in ICU was 11 mL (8-17) in the control period and 6 mL (4-8) mL intervention period, corresponding to a 45% reduction in blood loss. Total median (IQR) estimated blood loss was 24 mL (16-58) and 15 mL (11-26), in the control and intervention periods, respectively. The median (IQR) adjusted Hb at discharge was 62 g/L (43 - 70) in the control period and 63 g/L (56 - 70) in the intervention period. The proportion of samples with inadequate volume for testing was similar for both groups (0.2% vs. 0.2%, p= 0.72). RBC transfusions were administered to 46 patients (28%) in the control group and 41 (20%) patients in the intervention group (p=0.084). The median (IQR) number of transfusions in the control and intervention periods was 2 units (1-4) and 2 units (1-2) units, respectively. There were 9 deaths (5.5%) in the control group and 3 deaths (1.5%) in the intervention group (0.04). Based on 10 FGDs with 24 ICU nurses and 9 laboratory staff, small-volume tubes were acceptable with no significant barriers to implementation identified. Conclusion: In this pilot study, small-volume tubes were successfully implemented for routine laboratory testing with acceptability to end-users and without significant barriers. Use of small-volume tubes resulted in a reduction in blood loss for laboratory testing by 45% with no increased frequency of inadequate samples. Our results suggest that small-volume tubes are a feasible intervention to reduce the volume of blood taken for laboratory testing in adult ICU patients. These results will inform a full-scale stepped wedge cluster randomized trial to determine whether a policy of small-volume tubes reduces RBC transfusion in adult ICU patients. Disclosures Siegal: Portola Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; BMS-Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria.

Benznidazole is recommended for treatment of Chagas infection. Effects of combination therapy with benznidazole and posaconazole have not been tested in Trypanosoma cruzi carriers.The purpose of this study was to determine whether posaconazole alone or combined with benznidazole were superior to benznidazole monotherapy in eliminating T. cruzi parasites measured by real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) in asymptomatic Chagas carriers.A prospective, multicenter randomized placebo-controlled study was conducted in 120 subjects from Latin America and Spain who were randomized to 4 groups: posaconazole 400 mg twice a day (b.i.d.); benznidazole 200 mg + placebo b.i.d.; benznidazole 200 mg b.i.d. + posaconazole 400 mg b.i.d.; or placebo 10 mg b.i.d. T. cruzi deoxyribonucleic acid was detected by RT-PCR at 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 180, and 360 days. The primary efficacy outcome is the proportion of subjects with persistent negative RT-PCR by day 180; the secondary outcome was negative RT-PCR at 360 days.Only 13.3% of those receiving posaconazole and 10% receiving placebo achieved the primary outcome, compared with 80% receiving benznidazole + posaconazole and 86.7% receiving benznidazole monotherapy (p 0.0001 vs. posaconazole/placebo). Posaconazole monotherapy or posaconazole combined with benznidazole achieved high RT-PCR conversion rates during treatment (30 days; 93.3% and 88.9% and 60 days; 90%, and 92.3%) that were similar to benznidazole (89.7% and 89.3%); all were superior to placebo or posaconazole (10% and 16.7%, p 0.0001). This was not observed at 360 days; benznidazole + posaconazole and benznidazole monotherapy (both 96%) versus placebo (17%) and posaconazole (16%, p 0.0001). Serious adverse events were rare (6 patients) and were observed in the benznidazole-treated patients. Permanent discontinuation was reported in 19 patients (31.7%) receiving either benznidazole monotherapy or combined with posaconazole.Posaconazole demonstrated trypanostatic activity during treatment, but it is ineffective long-term in asymptomatic T. cruzi carriers. Benznidazole monotherapy is superior to posaconazole, with high RT-PCR conversion rates sustained at 1 year. Side effects lead to therapy discontinuation in 32%. No advantages were observed with combined therapy versus benznidazole monotherapy. (A Study of the Use of Oral Posaconazole [POS] in the Treatment of Asymptomatic Chronic Chagas Disease [P05267] [STOP CHAGAS]: NCT01377480).

Summary Background Two large trials have reported contradictory results at 1 year after thrombus aspiration in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In a 1-year follow-up of the largest randomised trial of thrombus aspiration, we aimed to clarify the longer-term benefits, to help guide clinical practice. Methods The trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI versus PCI ALone in Patients with STEMI (TOTAL) was a prospective, randomised, investigator-initiated trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone in 10 732 patients with STEMI. Eligible adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 87 hospitals in 20 countries were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) within 12 h of symptom onset to receive routine manual thrombectomy with PCI or PCI alone. Permuted block randomisation (with variable block size) was done by a 24 h computerised central system, and was stratified by centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The trial did not show a difference at 180 days in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure. However, the results showed improvements in the surrogate outcomes of ST segment resolution and distal embolisation, but whether or not this finding would translate into a longer term benefit remained unclear. In this longer-term follow-up of the TOTAL study, we report the results on the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure) and secondary outcomes at 1 year. Analyses of the primary outcome were by modified intention to treat and only included patients who underwent index PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149044. Findings Between Aug 5, 2010, and July 25, 2014, 10 732 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to thrombectomy followed by PCI (n=5372) or to PCI alone (n=5360). After exclusions of patients who did not undergo PCI in each group (337 in the PCI and thrombectomy group and 331 in the PCI alone group), the final study population comprised 10 064 patients (5035 thrombectomy and 5029 PCI alone). The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 395 (8%) of 5035 patients in the thrombectomy group compared with 394 (8%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·00 [95% CI 0·87–1·15], p=0·99). Cardiovascular death within 1 year occurred in 179 (4%) of the thrombectomy group and in 192 (4%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·76–1·14], p=0·48). The key safety outcome, stroke within 1 year, occurred in 60 patients (1·2%) in the thrombectomy group compared with 36 (0·7%) in the PCI alone group (HR 1·66 [95% CI 1·10–2·51], p=0·015). Interpretation Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for STEMI did not reduce longer-term clinical outcomes and might be associated with an increase in stroke. As a result, thrombus aspiration can no longer be recommended as a routine strategy in STEMI. Funding Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Network and Centre for Trials Internationally, and Medtronic Inc.

Background— Patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction are at increased risk for adverse events. It is unclear if image guidance by optical coherence tomography (OCT) can improve outcomes in these patients. We compared OCT-guided versus angiography-guided primary PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction among patients in the Thrombectomy Versus PCI Alone (TOTAL) trial. Methods and Results— Among 10 732 patients enrolled in the TOTAL trial, OCT was used for PCI guidance as a part of a prospective substudy in 214 patients. Using 2:1 propensity matching, we identified 428 patients in the trial who had PCI performed with angiography guidance alone. The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included final in-stent angiographic minimum lumen diameter, procedure time, and contrast dose. The final in-stent angiographic minimum lumen diameter was 2.99±0.48 mm in the OCT-guided group versus 2.79±0.47 mm in the angiography-guided group ( P P P P =0.34). Conclusions— OCT-guided primary PCI for ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction was associated with a larger final in-stent minimum lumen diameter. There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes at 1 year; however, the study was underpowered to detect a treatment effect. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01149044.

Preliminary studies suggest that direct stenting (DS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may reduce microvascular obstruction and improve clinical outcome. Thrombus aspiration may facilitate direct stenting. We assessed the impact of DS on myocardial reperfusion and clinical outcome and

BACKGROUND:The role of trypanocidal therapy in patients with established Chagas´ cardiomyopathy is unproven.METHODS:We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized study involving 2854 patients with Chagas´ cardiomyopathy who received benznidazole or placebo for up to 80 days and were followed for a mean of 5.4 years. The primary outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first event of any of the components of the composite outcome of death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular tachycardia, insertion of a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, cardiac transplantation, new heart failure, stroke, or other thromboembolic event.RESULTS:The primary outcome occurred in 394 patients (27.5%) in the benznidazole group and in 414 (29.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.07; P=0.31). At baseline, a polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay was performed on blood samples obtained from 1896 patients; 60.5% had positive results for Trypanosoma cruzi on PCR. The rates of conversion to negative PCR results (PCR conversion) were 66.2% in the benznidazole group and 33.5% in the placebo group at the end of treatment, 55.4% and 35.3%, respectively, at 2 years, and 46.7% and 33.1%, respectively, at 5 years or more (P

Background— Interventional cardiologists receive one of the highest levels of annual occupational radiation exposure. Further measures to protect healthcare workers are needed. Methods and Results— We evaluated the efficacy of a pelvic lead shield and a novel surgical cap in reducing operators’ radiation exposure. Patients undergoing coronary angiography or percutaneous coronary intervention (n=230) were randomized to have their procedure with or without a lead shield (Ultraray Medical, Oakville, Canada) placed over the patient. During all procedures, operators wore the No Brainer surgical cap (Worldwide Innovations and Technology, Kansas City, KS) designed to protect the head from radiation exposure. The coprimary outcomes for the lead shield comparison were (1) operator dose (µSv) and (2) operator dose indexed for air kerma (µSv/mGy). For the cap comparison, the primary outcome was the difference between total radiation dose (µSv; internal and external to cap). The lead shield use resulted in a 76% reduction in operator dose (mean dose, 3.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.00–4.71 µSv lead shield group versus 12.57; 95% CI, 8.14–19.40 µSv control group; P P P Conclusions— The use of a pelvic lead shield and the cap reduced significantly the operator radiation exposure and can be easily incorporated into clinical practice. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02128035.

Aims Manual thrombectomy has been proposed as a strategy to reduce thrombus burden during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the effectiveness of manual thrombectomy in reducing thrombus burden is uncertain. In this substudy of the TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy versus PCI ALone) trial, we compared the thrombus burden at the culprit lesion using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients treated with thrombectomy vs. PCI-alone. Methods and results The TOTAL trial ( N = 10 732) was an international, multicentre, randomized trial of thrombectomy (using the Export catheter, Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) in STEMI patients treated with primary PCI. The OCT substudy prospectively enrolled 214 patients from 13 sites in 5 countries. Optical coherence tomography was performed immediately after thrombectomy or PCI-alone and then repeated after stent deployment. Thrombus quantification was performed by an independent core laboratory blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome of pre-stent thrombus burden as a percentage of segment analysed was 2.36% (95% CI: 1.73–3.22) in the thrombectomy group and 2.88% (95% CI: 2.12–3.90) in the PCI-alone group ( P = 0.373). Absolute pre-stent thrombus volume was not different (2.99 vs. 3.74 mm3, P = 0.329). Other secondary outcomes of pre-stent quadrants of thrombus, post–stent atherothrombotic burden, and post-stent atherothrombotic volume were not different between groups. Conclusion Manual thrombectomy did not reduce pre-stent thrombus burden at the culprit lesion compared with PCI-alone. Both strategies were associated with low thrombus burden at the lesion site after the initial intervention to restore flow.

International audience; Defibrillation testing by induction and termination of ventricular fibrillation is widely done at the time of implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation without defibrillation testing versus the standard of ICD implantation with defibrillation testing. In this single-blind, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial (Shockless IMPLant Evaluation [SIMPLE]), we recruited patients aged older than 18 years receiving their first ICD for standard indications at 85 hospitals in 18 countries worldwide. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy, awaiting transplantation, particpation in another randomised trial, unavailability for follow-up, or if it was expected that the ICD would have to be implanted on the right-hand side of the chest. Patients undergoing initial implantation of a Boston Scientific ICD were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to have either defibrillation testing (testing group) or not (no-testing group). We used random block sizes to conceal treatment allocation from the patients, and randomisation was stratified by clinical centre. Our primary efficacy analysis tested the intention-to-treat population for non-inferiority of no-testing versus testing by use of a composite outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock (ie, a shock that did not terminate a spontaneous episode of ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation). The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·5 calculated from a proportional hazards model with no-testing versus testing as the only covariate; if the upper bound of the 95% CI was less than 1·5, we concluded that ICD insertion without testing was non-inferior to ICD with testing. We examined safety with two, 30 day, adverse event outcome clusters. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00800384. Between Jan 13, 2009, and April 4, 2011, of 2500 eligible patients, 1253 were randomly assigned to defibrillation testing and 1247 to no-testing, and followed up for a mean of 3·1 years (SD 1·0). The primary outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock occurred in fewer patients (90 [7% per year]) in the no-testing group than patients who did receive it (104 [8% per year]; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·14; pnon-inferiority

Aims TOTAL ( N = 10 732), a randomized trial of routine manual thrombectomy vs. percutaneous coronary intervention alone in ST elevation myocardial infarction, showed no difference in the primary efficacy outcome but a significant increase in stroke. We sought to understand these findings. Methods and results A detailed analysis of stroke timing, stroke severity, and stroke subtype was performed. Strokes were adjudicated by neurologists blinded to treatment assignment. Stroke within 30 days, the primary safety outcome, was increased [33 (0.7%) vs. 16 (0.3%), hazard ratio (HR) 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13–3.75]. The difference in stroke was apparent within 48 h [15 (0.3%) vs. 5 (0.1%), HR 3.00; 95% CI 1.09–8.25]. There was an increase in strokes within 180 days with minor or no disability (Rankin 0–2) [18 (0.4%) vs. 13 (0.3%) HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.68–2.82] and in strokes with major disability or fatal (Rankin 3–6) [35 (0.7%) vs. 13 (0.3%), HR 2.69; 95% CI 1.42–5.08]. Most of the absolute difference was due to an increase in ischaemic strokes within 180 days [37 (0.7%) vs. 21 (0.4%), HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.03–3.00], but there was also an increase in haemorrhagic strokes [10 (0.2%) vs. 2 (0.04%), HR 4.98; 95% CI 1.09–22.7]. Patients that had a stroke had a mortality of 30.8% within 180 days vs. 3.4% without a stroke ( P < 0.001). A meta-analysis of randomized trials ( N = 21 173) showed an increase in risk of stroke (odds ratio 1.59; 95% CI 1.11–2.27) but a trend towards reduction in mortality odds ratio (odds ratio 0.87; 95% CI 0.76–1.00). Conclusion Thrombectomy was associated with a significant increase in stroke. Based on these findings, future trials must carefully collect stroke to determine safety in addition to efficacy.

Background: No-reflow during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been previously associated with worse outcomes. The TOTAL trial showed that routine thrombus aspiration did not reduce the incidence of no-reflow. We sought to understand the

Gold-coated polyurethanes were chemisorbed with three cell-adhesion peptides having an N-terminal cysteine: cys-arg-gly-asp (CRGD), cys-arg-glu-asp-val (CREDV), and the cyclic peptide cys-cys-arg-arg-gly-asp-try-leu-cys (CCRRGDWLC). The peptides were selected based on their presumed preferential interactions with the cell-surface integrins on vascular endothelial cells. The ability of the surfaces to support the preferential adhesion of human vascular endothelial cells was studied by comparing in vitro adhesion results for these cells with those from mouse 3T3 fibroblasts. Surface modification with the peptides was confirmed by water-contact angles and XPS. Surface morphology was determined by AFM and SEM. In vitro cell-culture studies in conjunction with plasma-protein adsorption and immunoblotting were performed on the various modified surfaces. The data suggest that peptide-modified surfaces have significant potential for supporting cell adhesion. Little or no cell adhesion was noted on gold- or cysteine-modified control surfaces. Human vascular endothelial cells showed the greatest adhesion to the CCRRGDWLC-modified surfaces, and the 3T3 fibroblasts adhered best to the CREDV-modified surfaces. Protein adsorption studies suggest that the preferential adsorption of the cell-adhesive proteins fibronectin and vitronectin is not likely mediating the differences noted. It is concluded that the cell-adhesive peptide-modified gold-coated polymers have significant potential for further development both as model substrates for fundamental studies and for use in biomaterials applications. © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res 54: 272–283, 2001

Background A major limitation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for the treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is impaired microvascular perfusion due to embolization and obstruction of microcirculation with thrombus. Manual thrombectomy has the potential to reduce distal embolization and improve microvascular perfusion. Clinical trials have shown mixed results regarding thrombectomy. Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of routine upfront manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI compared with percutaneous coronary intervention alone in patients with STEMI. Design This is a multicenter, prospective, open, international, randomized trial with blinded assessment of outcomes. Patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI are randomized to upfront routine manual aspiration thrombectomy with the Export catheter (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, CA) or to percutaneous coronary intervention alone. The primary outcome is the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or new or worsening New York Heart Association class IV heart failure up to 180 days. The trial uses an event-driven design and will recruit 10,700 patients. Summary The TOTAL trial will determine the effect of routine manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI on clinically important outcomes.