Search

Background: High-sensitivity troponin assays are increasingly being adopted to expedite evaluation of patients with suspected acute coronary syndromes. Few direct comparisons have examined whether the enhanced performance of these assays at low concentrations leads to changes in care that improves longer-term outcomes. This study evaluated late outcomes of participants managed under an unmasked 0/1-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) protocol compared with a 0/3-hour masked hs-cTnT protocol. Methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective patient-level randomized comparison of care informed by unmasked 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (reported to <5 ng/L) versus standard practice masked hs-cTnT testing (reported to ≤29 ng/L) assessed at 0/3 hours and followed participants for 12 months. Participants included were those presenting to metropolitan emergency departments with suspected acute coronary syndromes, without ECG evidence of coronary ischemia. The primary end point was time to all-cause death or myocardial infarction using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for clustering within hospitals. Results: Between August 2015 and April 2019, we randomized 3378 participants, of whom 108 withdrew, resulting in 12-month follow-up for 3270 participants (masked: 1632; unmasked: 1638). Among these, 2993 (91.5%) had an initial troponin concentration of ≤29 ng/L. Deployment of the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol was associated with reductions in functional testing. Over 12-month follow-up, there was no difference in invasive coronary angiography (0/1-hour unmasked: 232/1638 [14.2%]; 0/3-hour masked: 202/1632 [12.4%]; P=0.13), although an increase was seen among patients with hs-cTnT levels within the masked range (0/1-hour unmasked arm: 168/1507 [11.2%]; 0/3-hour masked arm: 124/1486 [8.3%]; P=0.010). By 12 months, all-cause death and myocardial infarction did not differ between study arms overall (0/1-hour: 82/1638 [5.0%] versus 0/3-hour: 62/1632 [3.8%]; hazard r

Background: Surgical aortic valve replacement and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are now both used to treat aortic stenosis in patients in whom life expectancy may exceed valve durability. The choice of initial bioprosthesis should therefore consider the relative safety and efficacy of potential subsequent interventions. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare TAVR in failed transcatheter aortic valves (TAVs) versus surgical aortic valves (SAVs). Methods: Data were collected on 434 TAV-in-TAV and 624 TAV-in-SAV consecutive procedures performed at centers participating in the Redo-TAVR international registry. Propensity score matching was applied, and 330 matched (165:165) patients were analyzed. Principal endpoints were procedural success, procedural safety, and mortality at 30 days and 1 year. Results: For TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV, procedural success was observed in 120 (72.7%) versus 103 (62.4%) patients (p = 0.045), driven by a numerically lower frequency of residual high valve gradient (p = 0.095), ectopic valve deployment (p = 0.081), coronary obstruction (p = 0.091), and conversion to open heart surgery (p = 0.082). Procedural safety was achieved in 116 (70.3%) versus 119 (72.1%) patients (p = 0.715). Mortality at 30 days was 5 (3%) after TAV-in-TAV and 7 (4.4%) after TAV-in-SAV (p = 0.570). At 1 year, mortality was 12 (11.9%) and 10 (10.2%), respectively (p = 0.633). Aortic valve area was larger (1.55 ± 0.5 cm2 vs. 1.37 ± 0.5 cm2; p = 0.040), and the mean residual gradient was lower (12.6 ± 5.2 mm Hg vs. 14.9 ± 5.2 mm Hg; p = 0.011) after TAV-in-TAV. The rate of moderate or greater residual aortic regurgitation was similar, but mild aortic regurgitation was more frequent after TAV-in-TAV (p = 0.003). Conclusions: In propensity score–matched cohorts of TAV-in-TAV versus TAV-in-SAV patients, TAV-in-TAV was associated with higher procedural success and similar procedural safety or mortality.

Background: High-sensitivity troponin assays promise earlier discrimination of myocardial infarction. Yet, the benefits and harms of this improved discriminatory performance when incorporated within rapid testing protocols, with respect to subsequent testing and clinical events, has not been evaluated in an in-practice patient-level randomized study. This multicenter study evaluated the noninferiority of a 0/1-hour high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT) protocol in comparison with a 0/3-hour masked hs-cTnT protocol in patients with suspected acute coronary syndrome presenting to the emergency department (ED). Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to either a 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (reported to the limit of detection [<5 ng/L]) or masked hs-cTnT reported to ≤29 ng/L evaluated at 0/3-hours (standard arm). The 30-day primary end point was all-cause death and myocardial infarction. Noninferiority was defined as an absolute margin of 0.5% determined by Poisson regression. Results: In total, 3378 participants with an emergency presentation were randomly assigned between August 2015 and April 2019. Ninety participants were deemed ineligible or withdrew consent. The remaining participants received care guided either by the 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol (n=1646) or the 0/3-hour standard masked hs-cTnT protocol (n=1642) and were followed for 30 days. Median age was 59 (49-70) years, and 47% were female. Participants in the 0/1-hour arm were more likely to be discharged from the ED (0/1-hour arm: 45.1% versus standard arm: 32.3%, P<0.001) and median ED length of stay was shorter (0/1-hour arm: 4.6 [interquartile range, 3.4-6.4] hours versus standard arm: 5.6 (interquartile range, 4.0-7.1) hours, P<0.001). Those randomly assigned to the 0/1-hour protocol were less likely to undergo functional cardiac testing (0/1-hour arm: 7.5% versus standard arm: 11.0%, P<0.001). The 0/1-hour hs-cTnT protocol was not inferior to standard care (0/1-hour arm: 17/1646 [1.0%] versus 16/1

Objective: Many meta-analyses have provided synthesised likelihood ratio data to aid clinical decision-making. However, much less has been published on how to safely combine clinical information in practice. We aimed to explore the benefits and risks of pooling clinical information during the ED assessment of suspected acute coronary syndrome. Methods: Clinical information on 1776 patients was collected within a randomised trial conducted across five South Australian EDs between July 2011 and March 2013. Bayes theorem was used to calculate patient-specific post-test probabilities using age- and gender-specific pre-test probabilities and likelihood ratios corresponding to the presence or absence of 18 clinical factors. Model performance was assessed as the presence of adverse cardiac outcomes among patients theoretically discharged at a post-test probability less than 1%. Results: Bayes theorem-based models containing high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-troponin) outperformed models excluding hs-troponin, as well as models utilising TIMI and GRACE scores. In models containing hs-troponin, a plateau in improving discharge safety was observed after the inclusion of four clinical factors. Models with fewer clinical factors better approximated the true event rate, tended to be safer and resulted in a smaller standard deviation in post-test probability estimates. Conclusions: We showed that there is a definable point where additional information becomes uninformative and may actually lead to less certainty. This evidence supports the concept that clinical decision-making in the assessment of suspected acute coronary syndrome should be focused on obtaining the least amount of information that provides the highest benefit for informing the decisions of admission or discharge.