Search

Background The relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel based dual antiplatelet therapy strategies according to the platelet count (PC) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) have not been defined. Methods This is a posthoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial, in which patients presenting with ACS were randomized to treatment with ticagrelor versus prasugrel. Patients were divided into quartiles according to PC. The primary endpoint was incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and the safety endpoint was incidence of BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) type 3 to 5 bleeding at 12 months. Results A total of 3,943 patients with known PC (997 patients in quartile 1 (Q1), 1,003 in quartile 2 (Q2) [205 ± 10.3 × 109/L], 961 patients in quartile 3 (Q3) [241 ± 11.7 × 109/L], and 982 patients in quartile 4 (Q4) [317 ± 68.6 × 109/L]). There was no significant interaction between treatment arm (ticagrelor vs. prasugrel) and PC group with respect to primary endpoint (Q1: 8.8 vs. 6.3%, hazard ratio [HR] =1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89–2.23; p = 0.148; Q2: 9.9 vs. 5.8%, HR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.06–2.66; p = 0.027; Q3: 7.8 vs. 5.5%, HR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.87–2.37; p = 0.159; Q4: 10.1 vs. 10.1%, HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.71–1.57; p = 0.799; p for interaction [p int] = 0.482) and with respect to bleeding endpoint (Q1: 5.8 vs. 4.2%, HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.76–2.63; p = 0.279; Q2: 6.4 vs. 3.7%, HR = 1.62, 95% CI: 0.85–2.06; p = 0.140; Q3: 4.4 vs. 3.0%, HR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.73–3.18; p = 0.258; Q4: 5.6 vs. 8.5%, HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.40–1.14; p = 0.138, p int = 0.102). Conclusions In this analysis, incidences of ischemic and bleeding events at 12 months are comparable across quartiles of platelet count.

Aims The effect of a prasugrel vs. a ticagrelor based strategy on total (including both first and recurrent) ischaemic and bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) has not been evaluated. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the treatment effect of a prasugrel vs. a ticagrelor based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing an invasive management strategy when both first and recurrent non-fatal ischaemic and bleeding events are taken into account. Methods and results This is a post-hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 randomized control trial, including all 4018 patients in the trial. The main clinical endpoints of interest included ischaemic events [myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke] and bleeding events [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding]. An additional endpoint of interest was definite/probable stent thrombosis. The effect of the prasugrel vs. ticagrelor based strategies on these endpoints was evaluated on both time-to-first event and total events analyses. Patients in the prasugrel group had a lower risk of MI in comparison to the ticagrelor group on both time-to-first event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61; 95% confidence interval 0.44–0.85] and total events [HR = 0.62 (0.45–0.86)] analysis. The risk of BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding was comparable between the prasugrel and ticagrelor groups on both time-to-first event [HR = 0.96 (0.75–1.25)] and total events [HR = 0.99 (0.76–1.31)] analysis. Conclusion A prasugrel based strategy was associated with a reduction in total MI events in comparison to a ticagrelor based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing invasive assessment. Total BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding events were comparable between the two groups. Given the importance of this topic, future studies to confirm these findings would be welcome. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01944800

The association between aspartate aminotransferase to alanine aminotransferase ratio (De Ritis ratio) and prognosis of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains poorly investigated.This study included 3000 patients with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were categorized in groups according to tertiles of the De Ritis ratio: tertile 1 (De Ritis ratio 1.11; 905 patients), tertile 2 (De Ritis ratio 1.11 to 1.95; 1003 patients) and tertile 3 (De Ritis ratio 1.95; 1002 patients). The primary endpoint was 3-year all-cause mortality.At 3 years, all-cause deaths occurred in 487 patients: 119 deaths (13.2%) in patients of 1st tertile, 164 deaths (17.8%) in patients of 2nd tertile and 204 deaths (21.9%) in patients of 3rd tertile of the De Ritis ratio (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02 to 1.31], P = 0.023 per unit increment in the logarithmic scale of the De Ritis ratio); cardiac deaths occurred in 328 patients: 76 deaths (8.2%) in patients of 1st tertile, 110 deaths (12.0%) in patients of 2nd tertile and 142 deaths (15.4%) in patients of 3rd tertile of the De Ritis ratio (adjusted HR = 1.20 [1.04-1.40], P = 0.014 per unit increment in the logarithmic scale of De Ritis ratio). The C-statistic of the multivariable model(s) with baseline data without and with De Ritis ratio was 0.822 [0.805-0.839] and 0.823 [0.805-0.840], (P = 0.419) for all-cause mortality and 0.831[0.811-0.852] and 0.832 [0.811-0.853], P = 0.621) for cardiac mortality.In patients with AMI, elevated De Ritis ratio was associated with increased risk of 3-year mortality.

The association between alkaline phosphatase (ALP) and mortality in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and ischemic heart disease (IHD) remains poorly investigated.The study included 1426 patients with DM and IHD who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were divided in groups according to tertiles of ALP activity: a group with ALP activity in 1st tertile (ALP activity: 20.8-65.0 U/L; n = 478), a group with ALP activity in 2nd tertile (ALP activity: 65.1-87.0 U/L; n = 473) and a group with ALP activity in 3rd tertile (ALP activity: 87.1-1520 U/L; n = 475). The primary endpoint was 3-year all-cause mortality.At 3 years, all-cause deaths occurred in 182 patients: 50 deaths (12.4%) in patients of 1st tertile, 47 deaths (11.7%) in patients of 2nd tertile and 85 deaths (20.8%) in patients of 3rd tertile of ALP activity (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02 to 1.42, P = 0.031); cardiac deaths occurred in 110 patients: 28 deaths (7.0%) in patients of 1st tertile, 30 deaths (7.6%) in patients of 2nd tertile and 52 deaths (12.7%) in patients of 3rd tertile of ALP activity (adjusted HR = 1.27 [1.04-1.56], P = 0.021, with both risk estimates calculated for unit increment in the log scale of ALP activity). The C-statistic of the multivariable model with baseline data without and with ALP was 0.787 [0.750-0.818] and 0.804 [0.757-0.851], (P = 0.575) for all-cause mortality and 0.832 [0.798-0.864] and 0.876 [0.833-0.918], (P = 0.115) for cardiac mortality.In patients with DM and IHD, elevated ALP activity was associated with increased risk of 3-year mortality.

The optimal antiplatelet therapy of patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) remains unknown. This study included 2,364 patients with NSTE-ACS undergoing predominantly percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), who were randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel in the ISAR-REACT 5 trial. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) was calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation. The primary end point was 1-year mortality. Overall, there were 85 deaths (3.6%): 6 deaths (17.1%) in patients with eGFR30, 31 deaths (6.9%) in patients with eGFR 30 to60, 34 deaths (3.0%) in patients with eGFR 60 to90, and 14 deaths (2.0%) in patients with eGFR ≥90 ml/min/1.73 m

Aims Aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of increasing neointimal inhomogeneity and neoatherosclerosis as well as of treatment modality of in-stent restenosis (ISR) on the occurrence of periprocedural myocardial injury (PMI). Methods and results Patients with normal or stable/falling increased baseline high-sensitivity troponin T (hs-cTnT) undergoing intravascular optical coherence tomography (OCT) and subsequent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of ISR by means of drug-coated balloon (DCB) or drug-eluting stent (DES) were included. Overall, 128 patients were subdivided into low (n = 64) and high (n = 64) inhomogeneity groups, based on the median of distribution of non-homogeneous quadrants. No significant between-group differences were detected in terms of hs-cTnT changes (28.0 [12.0–65.8] vs. 25.5 [9.8–65.0] ng/L; p = 0.355), or the incidence of major PMI (31.2 vs. 31.2%; p = 1.000). Similarly, no differences were observed between DCB- and DES-treated groups in terms of hs-cTn changes (27.0 [10.0–64.0] vs. 28.0 [11.0–73.0] ng/L; p = 0.795), or the incidence of major PMI (28.9 vs. 35.6%; p = 0.566). Additionally, no significant interaction was present between optical neointimal characteristics and treatment modality in terms of changes in hs-cTnT (Pint = 0.432). No significant differences in PMI occurrence were observed between low and high neoatherosclerosis subgroups. Conclusions In patients undergoing PCI for ISR, there was no association between increasing neointimal inhomogeneity, or increasing expression of neoatherosclerotic changes and occurrence of PMI. PMI occurrence was not influenced by the treatment modality (DCB vs. DES) of ISR lesions, a finding that supports the safety of DCB treatment for ISR. Graphical abstract

Introduction: Trials investigating aspirin omission in patients taking oral anticoagulation (OAC) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were not powered to assess rates of major bleeding or ischemic events.Methods: We performed an updated meta-analysis and network analysis of randomized trials comparing treatment with or without aspirin in patients taking OAC and a P2Y12-inhibitor after PCI or ACS. The primary outcome was TIMI major bleeding.Results: Five trials enrolling 11,542 patients allocated to antithrombotic regimens omitting (n = 5795) or including aspirin (n = 5747) were included. Aspirin omission was associated with a lower risk of TIMI major bleeding (RR = 0.56, 95% CI [0.44-0.71]; P < 0.001) but a trend towards a higher risk of MI (RR = 1.21, 95% CI [0.99-1.47]; P = 0.06), which was significantly higher when only non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC)-based trials were considered (Pinteraction = 0.02). The risk of stent thrombosis was comparable with both strategies (RR = 1.29, 95% CI [0.87-1.90]; P = 0.20), with a trend towards a higher risk of ST with aspirin omission when only NOAC-based trials were considered (Pinteraction = 0.06). Risks of stroke and death were similar with both strategies. Network meta-analysis ranked dabigatran (low dose) without aspirin as the best strategy for bleeding reduction (P-score = 0.86) and apixaban with aspirin as the best strategy for MI reduction (P-score = 0.66).Conclusions: In patients taking OAC after PCI or ACS, aspirin omission is associated with a lower risk of TIMI major bleeding, with a numerically increased risk of MI, which is statistically significant when only NOAC-based trials are considered. This supports individualization of the treatment regimen based on patient risk.

Objective The aim of this study was to assess the association between high on-aspirin treatment platelet reactivity (HAPR) and the subsequent risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with predominantly drug-eluting stents. Background The association between HAPR and subsequent risk of restenosis after PCI is unclear. Methods This study included 4839 patients undergoing PCI (02/2007–12/2011) in the setting of the Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen-ASpirin and Platelet Inhibition (ISAR-ASPI) registry. Platelet function was assessed with impedance aggregometry using the multi-plate analyzer immediately before PCI and after intravenous administration of aspirin (500 mg). The primary outcome was clinical restenosis, defined as target lesion revascularization at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included binary angiographic restenosis and late lumen loss at 6- to 8-month angiography. Results The upper quintile cut-off of platelet reactivity measurements (191 AU × min) was used to categorize patients into a group with HAPR (platelet reactivity > 191 AU × min; n = 952) and a group without HAPR (platelet reactivity ≤ 191 AU × min; n = 3887). The primary outcome occurred in 94 patients in the HAPR group and 405 patients without HAPR (cumulative incidence, 9.9% and 10.4%; HR = 0.96, 95% CI 0.77–1.19; P = 0.70). Follow-up angiography was performed in 73.2% of patients. There was no difference in binary restenosis (15.2% vs. 14.9%; P = 0.79) or late lumen loss (0.32 ± 0.57 vs. 0.32 ± 0.59 mm; P = 0.93) between patients with HAPR versus those without HAPR. Conclusions This study did not find an association between HAPR, measured at the time of PCI, and clinical restenosis at 1 year after PCI. Graphical abstract

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs). Background The outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined. Methods Patients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR ( Results Patients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding. Conclusions These results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800 )

Background The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel according to smoking status in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are not known. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel according to smoking status in patients with ACS undergoing invasive management. Methods This pre-specified analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 1349 smokers and 2652 nonsmokers randomized to receive ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the secondary endpoint was the incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding (both endpoints assessed at 12 months). Results There was no significant treatment arm-by-smoking status interaction regarding the efficacy outcome. The primary endpoint occurred in 47 patients (7.0%) in the ticagrelor group and 41 patients (6.2%) in the prasugrel group in smokers (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–1.75; P = 0.510) and in 133 patients (10.2%) in the ticagrelor group and 94 patients (7.2%) in the prasugrel group in nonsmokers (HR = 1.44 [1.10–1.87]; P = 0.007; P for interaction = 0.378). The secondary endpoint occurred in 27 patients (4.6%) in the ticagrelor group and 33 patients (5.6%) in the prasugrel group in smokers (HR = 0.81 [0.49–1.35]; P = 0.412) and in 66 patients (6.0%) in the ticagrelor group and 46 patients (4.4%) in the prasugrel group in nonsmokers (HR = 1.38 [0.94–2.01]; P = 0.097). Conclusions In patients with ACS undergoing an invasive management strategy, the smoking status did not significantly interact with the relative treatment effect of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel. Clinical trial registration NCT01944800

Whether aspartate aminotransferase (AST) to alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ratio (De Ritis ratio) with AST and ALT activities within the reference range has prognostic value is unknown.This study included 3392 patients with stable coronary artery disease and AST and ALT activities within the reference range. Patients are categorized in groups according to tertiles of the De Ritis ratio: a group with De Ritis ratio in the 1st tertile (De Ritis ratio: 0.22 to 0.81; n = 1131), a group with De Ritis ratio in the 2nd tertile (De Ritis ratio:0.81 to 1.09; n = 1130) and a group with De Ritis ratio in the 3rd tertile (De Ritis ratio:1.09 to 3.40; n = 1131). The primary endpoint was 3-year mortality.The mean value of De Ritis ratio was 1.00 ± 0.39 (range: 0.22-3.40). Overall, there were 234 deaths at 3 years: 43 deaths in patients of 1st tertile, 75 deaths in patients of 2nd tertile and 116 deaths in patients of 3rd tertile of De Ritis ratio (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 3-year mortality, 4.4 %, 7.8 % and 12.5 %, respectively; (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.24, 95 % confidence interval 1.12 to 1.38; P 0.001 for 1 unit higher De Ritis ratio). The C-statistic of the risk prediction model for mortality with baseline demographical and clinical variables without De Ritis ratio was 0.803 [0.774-0.832] and it increased to 0.810 [0.782-0.839] after inclusion of De Ritis ratio into the model (P = 0.038).An elevated De Ritis ratio with aminotransferase levels within the reference range was associated with the increased risk of mortality.

Background Whether plasma levels of soluble glycoprotein VI (sGPVI) are able to predict ischemic or bleeding risk in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is not known. The objective of this study was to answer this question. Material and methods The present study included 317 patients out of 334 patients of the ISAR-PLASTER trial (randomized trial of 2 doses of revacept vs. placebo), who underwent PCI for CCS and had baseline plasma sGPVI levels available. Patients were categorized into three groups according to tertiles of sGPVI: low (n = 106; sGPVI ≤ 9.5 ng/ml), intermediate (n = 106; sGPVI ≤ 16.2 ng/ml) and high tertile of sGPVI (n = 105; sGPVI ≥ 16.5 ng/ml). The composite of death and myocardial injury (MI) at 48 hours after randomization served as a measure of ischemic risk, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 1 to 5 bleeding at 30 days as a measure of bleeding risk. Results and conclusions Baseline plasma levels of sGPVI (before PCI and revacept administration) correlated with bleeding (bleeding incidence among low, intermediate and high sGPVI tertile: 11.8%, 13.6%, and 25.8%, respectively; P = 0.005), but not with ischemic events (incidence of death/MI among low, intermediate and high sGPVI tertile: 25.0%, 21.9%, and 26.9%, respectively; P = 0.70). Revacept did not interact with these associations. Elevated plasma sGPVI levels are associated with an increased risk of bleeding but not ischemic complications after PCI in patients with CCS. Funding German Center for Cardiovascular Research, Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Federal Ministry of Education and Research, and advanceCOR.

Background: The relative efficacy and safety of more potent P2Y 12 inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome and high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains unclear. We aimed to study the treatment effect of ticagrelor and prasugrel in percutaneous coronary intervention patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and HBR. Methods: This post hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5) included patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel, in whom HBR was defined as per Academic Research Consortium criteria. The primary (efficacy) end point was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary (safety) end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed 12 months after randomization. Results: Out of the 3239 patients included in this analysis, 486 fulfilled the criteria for Academic Research Consortium-HBR definition (HBR group; ticagrelor, n=230 and prasugrel, n=256), while 2753 did not (non-HBR group; ticagrelor, n=1375 and prasugrel, n=1378). Compared with the non-HBR group, the HBR group had a higher risk for the primary (hazard ratio [HR]=3.57 [95% CI, 2.79–4.57]; P P P for interaction=0.12) or secondary ( P for interaction=0.80) end points. Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, HBR status increased both ischemic and bleeding risk without significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of either ticagrelor or prasugrel. These results warrant confirmation in larger cohorts. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) and drug-eluting stents (DES) represent the currently recommended treatments for in-stent restenosis (ISR). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) allows detailed neointimal characterisation which can guide treatment strategies. AIMS: The aims of this study were first, to assess the relation between neointimal pattern and clinical outcomes following in-stent restenosis (ISR) treatment, and second, to explore a potential interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality relative to clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients undergoing OCT-guided treatment (DCB or DES) of ISR in three European centres were included. Based on the median of distribution of non-homogeneous neointima quadrants, patients were categorised into low and high inhomogeneity groups. RESULTS: A total of 197 patients (low inhomogeneity=100 and high inhomogeneity=97) were included. There were no significant differences in terms of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (p=0.939) or target lesion revascularisation (TLR) (p=0.732) between the two groups. The exploratory analysis showed a significant interaction between neointimal pattern and treatment modality regarding MACE (pint=0.006) and TLR (pint=0.022). DES showed a significant advantage over DCB in the high (MACE: HR 0.26 [0.10-0.65], p=0.004; TLR: HR 0.28 [0.11-0.69], p=0.006), but not in the low inhomogeneity group (MACE: p=0.917; TLR: p=0.797). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR treated with DCB or DES, there were no significant differences in terms of MACE or TLR between the low and high inhomogeneity groups. A significant interaction was observed between treatment modality and neointimal pattern with an advantage of DES over DCB in the high and no difference in the low inhomogeneity group. This warrants confirmation from prospective dedicated studies.

Despite a timely mechanical reperfusion with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) display an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. Several studies have demonstrated that guideline-directed antithrombotic therapy is effective to reduce this risk. However, there is still much to be accomplished to improve antithrombotic therapies in this clinical setting.This paper reviews current data on antithrombotic therapy in STEMI patients undergoing pPCI.Antithrombotic therapy for STEMI patients undergoing pPCI should take into account the variability of thrombotic and bleeding risk in the short and long term. Patients with STEMI profit from the administration of early onset antiplatelet agents and anticoagulation to achieve sufficient and predictable antithrombotic effect at the time of pPCI. Thereafter, antithrombotic therapies should be tailored to individual risk of recurrence over the long term, to avoid excess bleeding, while ensuring adequate secondary ischemic prevention.

Background: Data on the comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention are limited. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in a head-to-head comparison in patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods: In this prespecified subgroup analysis, we included 1653 patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction randomized to receive ticagrelor or prasugrel in the setting of the ISAR REACT-5 trial (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5). The primary end point was the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year after randomization. The secondary end point was the incidence of bleeding defined as BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) type 3 to 5 bleeding at 1 year after randomization. Results: The primary end point occurred in 83 patients (10.1%) in the ticagrelor group and in 64 patients (7.9%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 0.95–1.82]; P =0.10). One-year incidence of all-cause death (4.9% versus 4.7%; P =0.83), stroke (1.3% versus 1.0%; P =0.46), and definite stent thrombosis (1.8% versus 1.0%; P =0.15) did not differ significantly in patients assigned to ticagrelor or prasugrel. One-year incidence of myocardial infarction (5.3% versus 2.8%; hazard ratio, 1.95 [95% CI, 1.18–3.23]; P =0.010) was higher with ticagrelor than with prasugrel. BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 46 patients (6.1%) in the ticagrelor group and in 39 patients (5.1%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio, 1.22 [95% CI, 0.80–1.87]; P =0.36). Conclusions: In patients with ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, there was no significant difference in the primary end point between prasugrel and ticagrelor. Ticagrelor was associated with a significant increase in the risk for recurrent myocardial infarction. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.

Aims The prognostic importance of cardiac procedural myocardial injury and myocardial infarction (MI) in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still debated. Methods and results We analysed individual data of 9081 patients undergoing elective PCI with normal pre-PCI baseline cardiac troponin (cTn) levels. Multivariate models evaluated the association between post-PCI elevations in cTn and 1-year mortality, while an interval analysis evaluated the impact of the size of the myocardial injury on mortality. Our analysis was performed in the overall population and also according to the type of cTn used [52.0% had high-sensitivity cTn (hs-cTn)]. Procedural myocardial injury, as defined by the Fourth Universal Definition of MI (UDMI) [post-PCI cTn elevation ≥1 × 99th percentile upper reference limit (URL)], occurred in 52.8% of patients and was not associated with 1-year mortality [adj odds ratio (OR), 1.35, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.84–1.77), P = 0.21]. The association between post-PCI cTn elevation and 1-year mortality was significant starting ≥3 × 99th percentile URL. Major myocardial injury defined by post-PCI ≥5 × 99th percentile URL occurred in 18.2% of patients and was associated with a two-fold increase in the adjusted odds of 1-year mortality [2.29, 95% CI (1.32–3.97), P = 0.004]. In the subset of patients for whom periprocedural evidence of ischaemia was collected (n = 2316), Type 4a MI defined by the Fourth UDMI occurred in 12.7% of patients and was strongly associated with 1-year mortality [adj OR 3.21, 95% CI (1.42–7.27), P = 0.005]. We also present our results according to the type of troponin used (hs-cTn or conventional troponin). Conclusion Our analysis has demonstrated that in CCS patients with normal baseline cTn levels, the post-PCI cTn elevation of ≥5 × 99th percentile URL used to define Type 4a MI is associated with 1-year mortality and could be used to detect ‘major’ procedural myocardial injury in the absence of procedural complications or evidence of new myocardial ischaemia.

Evidence on the association between aspartate aminotransferase (AST) activity and mortality of patients with ischemic heart disease (IHD) is limited. We investigated whether there is an association between AST activity and mortality in IHD patients.The study included 6857 patients with coronary angiography-proven IHD and AST activity within the reference range. AST activity measurements were available in all patients. The primary outcome was 3-year cardiac mortality. Patients were categorized in groups according to the AST activity tertiles: a group with AST within the 1st tertile (AST 17.0 U/L), a group with AST within the 2nd tertile (AST 17-24.5 U/L) and a group with AST within the 3rd tertile (AST 24.5 U/L). Cardiac death (n = 297) occurred in 109, 69 and 119 patients in the 1st to 3rd AST tertiles (Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality: 5.3%, 3.6% and 5.9%; univariable hazard ratio [HR] = 1.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-2.36, P 0.001 for tertile 3 vs. 2; HR = 1.13 [0.87-1.46], P = 0.370 for tertile 3 vs. 1; and HR = 0.65 [0.48-0.87], P = 0.004 for tertile 2 vs. 1). The association between AST and cardiac mortality was U-shaped. AST values15 U/L (HR = 1.118 [1.009-1.238]) and23 U/L (HR = 1.029 [1.003-1.056]) were associated with higher cardiac mortality compared with the reference value (21 U/L). After adjustment, the association between AST and cardiac mortality was attenuated (P = 0.133) but remained non-linear (P = 0.047).In patients with IHD, AST activity was associated with the risk of cardiac mortality with a U-shaped relationship. After adjustment, the association between AST and mortality was attenuated.

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS)...

The association between hypocholesterolemia and diabetes mellitus (DM) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) remains poorly investigated. We undertook this study to investigate whether there is an association between hypocholesterolemia and odds of DM in these patients. This observational study included 14,952 patients with CAD: 8,592 without statins (statin-naive group) and 6,360 with statins on admission (statin-treated group). Hypocholesterolemia was defined as a total cholesterol within the first quintile of the total cholesterol concentration (total cholesterol157 mg/dl). The primary outcome measure of this study was presence of DM. Hypocholesterolemia was present in 2,926 patients (20%; 1,102 statin-naive patients and 1,824 statin-treated patients). DM was present in 1,029 patients with hypocholesterolemia and 2,793 patients without hypocholesterolemia (35% vs 23%; odds ratio [OR] 1.79, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.64 to 1.96; p0.001). After adjustment, hypocholesterolemia was independently associated with the odds of DM in all patients (adjusted OR 1.55 [1.38 to 1.74]; p0.001), statin-naive patients (adjusted OR 1.51 [1.25 to 1.82]; p0.001) and statin-treated patients (adjusted OR 1.64 [1.41 to 1.91]; p0.001). For every 20 mg/dl lower total cholesterol, the odds of being with DM increased by 14% (adjusted OR 1.14 [1.11 to 1.16]; p0.001) with no cholesterol-by-statin interaction (P

Objectives To assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presenting during off- and on-hours. Background The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to time of hospital presentation remain unknown. Methods This post hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 1565 patients with ACS presenting off-hours and 2453 patients presenting on-hours, randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3–5 bleeding, both at 12 months. Results The primary endpoint occurred in 80 patients (10.4%) in the ticagrelor group and 57 patients (7.3%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting off-hours (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03–2.03; P = 0.033), and 104 patients (8.5%) in the ticagrelor group and 80 patients (6.7%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting on-hours (HR = 1.29 [0.97–1.73]; P = 0.085), without significant treatment arm-by-presentation time interaction (Pint = 0.62). BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 35 patients (5.1%) in the ticagrelor group and 37 patients (5.3%) in the prasugrel group (P = 0.84) in patients presenting off-hours, and 60 patients (5.9%) in the ticagrelor group and 43 patients (4.6%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting on-hours (P = 0.17). Conclusions In patients with ACS planned to undergo an invasive treatment strategy, time of presentation (off-hours vs. on-hours) does not interact significantly with the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel. Clinical trial registration. NCT01944800. Graphical abstract

Background: The aspartate aminotransferase (AST) to alanine aminotransferase (ALT) ratio (De Ritis ratio), obtained from AST and ALT activities in the healthy range, has not been studied in association with mortality. Methods: This study included 3392 patients with stable coronary heart disease and aminotransferase activity in the reference range. Patients are categorized into two groups: a group with AST and ALT activity in the healthy range (n = 1697), and a group with AST and/or ALT activity outside the healthy range but in the reference range (n = 1695). The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at three years. Results: The De Ritis ratio (median 5th–95th percentile] was 0.94 [0.61–1.41] in patients with AST and ALT in the healthy range and 0.93 [0.45–1.96] in patients with AST and/or ALT outside the healthy range (p = 0.700). At three years, there were 86 deaths in patients with AST and ALT in the healthy range: 27 deaths (3.9%) in patients with a De Ritis ratio ≤median, and 59 deaths (8.2%) in patients with the De Ritis ratio >median (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 1.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94 to 1.42; p = 0.159); in patients with AST and/or ALT outside the healthy range, there were 148 deaths: 49 deaths (6.6%) in patients with a De Ritis ratio ≤median, and 99 deaths (14.1%) in patients with De Ritis ratio >median (adjusted HR = 1.27 [1.09–1.48], p = 0.002), with both HRs calculated per unit higher values of the De Ritis ratio. Conclusions: The De Ritis ratio obtained from AST and ALT activity in the healthy range was not independently associated with higher risk of mortality. The De Ritis ratio obtained from aminotransferase activity outside the healthy range (but still in the reference range) was independently associated with the risk of mortality.

Aims To assess whether the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) are influenced by pre-admission treatment with aspirin and/or clopidogrel. Methods and results Patients (n = 4018) were categorized into two groups: pre-admission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group (n = 1455) and no pre-admission aspirin or clopidogrel group (n = 2563). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3–5 bleeding, both at 1 year. Patients in the pre-admission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group had a higher risk of ischaemic events, but a similar risk of bleeding to patients in the no pre-admission aspirin or clopidogrel group (cumulative incidences 10.5% vs. 6.7%, and 5.7% vs. 5.7%, respectively). The primary endpoint occurred in 81/717 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 69/738 patients assigned to prasugrel in the pre-admission aspirin and/or clopidogrel group [11.5% vs. 9.5%; hazard ratio (HR) = 1.23; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89–1.69], and in 103/1295 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 68/1268 patients assigned to prasugrel in the no pre-admission aspirin or clopidogrel group [8.0% vs. 5.4%; HR = 1.50 (1.10–2.03); Pint = 0.38]. BARC type 3–5 bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients in the pre-admission aspirin and/or clopidogrel (6.2% vs. 4.5%) or no pre-admission aspirin or clopidogrel (5.3% vs. 5.1%) group (Pint = 0.54). Conclusion In patients with ACS, pre-admission therapy with aspirin and/or clopidogrel has no influence on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel.

Background The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel according to smoking status in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are not known. Purpose The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel according to smoking status in patients with ACS undergoing invasive evaluation. Methods This pre-specified analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 1349 smokers and 2652 nonsmokers randomised to receive ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was the incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the secondary endpoint was the incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding. Both endpoints were assessed at 12 months after randomisation. Results There was no significant treatment arm-by-smoking status interaction regarding the efficacy outcome. The primary endpoint occurred in 47 patients (7.0%) in the ticagrelor group and 41 patients (6.2%) in the prasugrel group in smokers (hazard ratio [HR]=1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76–1.75; P=0.510) and in 133 patients (10.2%) in the ticagrelor group and 94 patients (7.2%) in the prasugrel group in nonsmokers (HR=1.44 [1.10–1.87], P=0.007; Pint=0.378). The secondary endpoint occurred in 27 patients (4.6%) in the ticagrelor group and 33 patients (5.6%) in the prasugrel group in smokers (HR=0.81 [0.49–1.35]; P=0.412) and in 66 patients (6.0%) in the ticagrelor group and 46 patients (4.4%) in the prasugrel group in nonsmokers (HR=1.38 [0.94–2.01]; P=0.097). Conlusions Although there was no significant interaction between smoking and treatment effect, the present findings suggest a greater advantage of prasugrel over ticagrelor in nonsmoker vs. smoker patients with ACS. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): German Centre for Cardiovascular Research;Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Germany

Background The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) according to body mass index (BMI) remain unknown. Purpose To assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to BMI. Methods This post-hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 3987 patients with BMI data available. BMI was grouped in 3 categories: low (BMI Results There was no significant treatment arm-by-BMI interaction regarding the primary endpoint (Pint=0.578). However, the primary endpoint occurred in 63 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 39 patients assigned to prasugrel in the low BMI group (11.7% vs. 7.5%; hazard ratio [HR]=1.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09–2.42; P=0.018), 78 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 58 patients assigned to prasugrel in the intermediate BMI group (8.3% vs. 6.2%; HR=1.36 [0.97–1.91]; P=0.076), and 43 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 37 patients assigned to prasugrel in the high BMI group (8.6% vs. 7.3%; HR=1.18 [0.76–1.84]; P=0.451). BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with low (6.5% vs. 6.6%), intermediate (5.6% vs. 5.0%), or high (4.4% vs. 2.8%) BMI. Conclusions BMI of patients with ACS did not impact significantly on the treatment effect of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel in terms of both efficacy and safety. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: Public grant(s) – National budget only. Main funding source(s): German Center for Cardiovascular Research;Deutsches Herzzentrum München, Germany

BACKGROUND The prognostic value of in-hospital haemoglobin drop in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive therapy remains insufficiently investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS This observational study included 3838 patients with ACS with admission and in-hospital nadir haemoglobin values available. Haemoglobin drop was defined as a positive difference between admission and nadir haemoglobin values. The primary endpoint was one-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS In-hospital haemoglobin drop occurred in 3142 patients (82%). Patients were categorized into 4 groups: no haemoglobin drop (n = 696 patients)

Randomized trials did not consistently support superiority of ticagrelor, as monotherapy or in combination with aspirin, in terms of efficacy or safety, in patients with atherosclerotic artery disease.Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and scientific session abstracts were searched for trials of patients with coronary or peripheral artery disease (with1,000 participants and a follow-up ≥3 months) randomly assigned to ticagrelor-based or conventional antiplatelet therapies. Trial-level hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled using a fixed- or random-effect model (in case of significant heterogeneity) with the inverse variance weighting. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Other outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and major bleeding.Overall 77,489 patients received either ticagrelor-based (n = 38,721) or conventional antiplatelet regimens (n = 38,768) in 6 trials. The primary outcome occurred in 4.5% of patients treated with experimental therapy and 4.9% of patients treated with control therapy (HR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.81-1.01; P = .07). Overall, patients treated with ticagrelor-based versus conventional antiplatelet regimens showed no significant difference in terms of all-cause death, MI, stroke, or major bleeding after 20 months. However, in trials of patients with coronary artery disease as primary diagnosis, the risk for all-cause death (HR = 0.84 [0.77-0.91], P .001) and MI (HR = 0.87 [0.80-0.94], P = .007) was significantly reduced by experimental therapy.In patients with atherosclerotic artery disease, the benefit of ticagrelor-based therapies was confined to patients treated for coronary artery disease. The drug significantly reduced the risk for all-cause death and MI without excess risk of bleeding in these patients. In consideration of limitations of subgroup analyses, these results need further validation.

Background The relative merits of ticagrelor as compared with prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes for whom invasive evaluation is planned are uncertain. Methods In this mul...

Objectives The aim of this study was to compare angiographic and optical coherence tomography findings following subintimal as opposed to intraplaque recanalization of chronic total occlusions (CTOs). Background There is ongoing controversy regarding outcomes of intraplaque versus subintimal CTO recanalization. Methods Consecutive patients undergoing angiography and intravascular optical coherence tomography following CTO recanalization were included in the ISAR-OCT-CTO (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results - Optical Coherence Tomography for Chronic Total Occlusions) registry. The study endpoints were percent diameter stenosis and late lumen loss as well as rate of uncovered and malapposed struts. Independent correlates of uncovered and malapposed struts were assessed by multivariate analysis. Results The study included 75 patients. Intraplaque and dissection and re-entry techniques (DART) were used in 46 and 29 patients, respectively. There were no differences in terms of in-segment percent diameter stenosis (median 36.9 [interquartile range (IQR): 26.4 to 43.1] vs. 31.2 [IQR: 23.2 to 49.5]; p = 0.656), in-stent late lumen loss (0.215 mm [IQR: 0.063 to 0.495 mm] vs. 0.230 mm [IQR: 0.060 to 0.645 mm]; p = 0.837), or in-segment late lumen loss (0.030 mm [IQR: −0.278 to 0.510 mm] vs. 0.130 mm [IQR: −0.120 to 0.500 mm]; p = 0.395) at follow-up between the 2 techniques. Optical coherence tomography analysis showed comparable strut coverage (79.9% vs. 71.3%; p = 0.255) but significantly higher strut malapposition (6.6% vs. 13.6%; p Conclusions Intraplaque and subintimal recanalization techniques are associated with comparable mid-term angiographic results. Although the rate of uncovered struts is high following CTO recanalization, the recanalization technique does not independently correlate with presence of uncovered struts. There is a high rate of strut malapposition following CTO recanalization, particularly if achieved by means of DART.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the procedural and clinical performance of dual- versus single-catheter strategy for transradial coronary angiography. BACKGROUND: The radial artery (RA) is recommended as the vascular access of choice in patients undergoing coronary angiography and intervention. The procedural and clinical performance of dual- versus single-catheter strategy in patients undergoing transradial coronary angiography remains a matter of debate. METHODS: This is a study-level meta-analysis of randomized trials. The primary outcome was procedure time. The main secondary outcome was fluoroscopy time. Other outcomes of interest were contrast volume, crossover to other catheter strategy and RA spasm. RESULTS: A total of 2,062 patients (978 randomly assigned to dual-catheter and 1,084 to single-catheter strategy) included in seven trials were available for the quantitative synthesis. A dual-catheter strategy was associated with procedure time (standardized mean difference [95% confidence intervals (CI)], 0.55 [-0.69, 1.78]; p = .32), fluoroscopy time (-0.36 [-2.39, 1.67]; p = .68) and contrast volume (-0.93 [-3.79, 1.94]; p = .44) comparable to a single-catheter strategy. The risk for crossover was lower (risk ratio [95% CI], 0.14 [0.03, 0.70]; p = .025) while the risk for RA spasm was higher (1.81 [1.54, 2.12]; p

Despite dual antiplatelet therapy patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) continue to experience periprocedural ischemic events. In addition, all currently used antithrombotic drugs increase the bleeding risk. Thus, there is an unmet clinical need for antithrombotic strategies with improved efficacy and no increase in bleeding. Revacept is a novel, lesion-directed antithrombotic drug that does not interfere with the function of circulating platelets. This dimeric fusion protein of the extracellular domain of glycoprotein VI (the major platelet collagen receptor) and the human Fc-fragment inhibits collagen-mediated platelet adhesion and subsequent aggregation at the site of vascular injury. The randomized, double-blinded, phase II ISAR-PLASTER trial is based on extensive preclinical evaluation of Revacept and a favorable first-in-man trial. A total of 332 patients with stable coronary artery disease undergoing elective PCI will be randomized to either Revacept 160 mg, Revacept 80 mg, or placebo administered as single intravenous infusion directly before the intervention, on top of standard dual antiplatelet therapy and either heparin or bivalirudin, based on local practice and current guidelines. The primary endpoint is the composite of death or myocardial injury (defined as increase in high sensitivity troponin T ≥ 5 times the upper limit of normal) at 48 hours. The safety endpoint is bleeding of class 2 or higher according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium at 30 days. This phase II randomized, double blind trial will assess for the first time the efficacy and safety of Revacept—a lesion-directed inhibitor of platelet adhesion—in patients undergoing elective PCI.

The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) according to body mass index (BMI) remain unstudied. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in patients with ACS according to BMI.Patients (n=3987) were grouped into 3 categories: normal weight (BMI 25kg/mThe primary endpoint occurred in 63 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 39 patients assigned to prasugrel in the normal weight group (11.7% vs 7.5%; HR, 1.62; 95%CI, 1.09-2.42; P=.018), 78 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 58 patients assigned to prasugrel in the overweight group (8.3% vs 6.2%; HR, 1.36; 95%CI, 0.97-1.91; P=.076), and 43 patients assigned to ticagrelor and 37 patients assigned to prasugrel in the obesity group (8.6% vs 7.3%; HR, 1.18; 95%CI, 0.76-1.84; P=.451). The 1-year incidence of bleeding events did not differ between ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with normal weight (6.5% vs 6.6%; P=.990), overweight (5.6% vs 5.0%; P=.566) or obesity (4.4% vs 2.8%; P=.219). There was no significant treatment arm-by-BMI interaction regarding the primary endpoint (PIn patients with ACS, BMI did not significantly impact the treatment effect of ticagrelor vs prasugrel in terms of efficacy or safety.NCT01944800.

Background It remains unknown which equation used to assess the glomerular function is better for risk stratification in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods This study included 3985 patients with ACS. Glomerular function was assessed using 4 equations: the Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance (C-GCrCl), Modification of Diet in Renal Disease-4 (MDRD-4), Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) and European Kidney Function Consortium (EKFC) equations. The primary outcome was one-year all-cause mortality. Results For each 30 ml/min decrement, the adjusted hazard ratio [HR] with 95% confidence interval [CI] for one-year mortality was 1.67 [1.27–2.25] for C-GCrCl, 1.45 [1.16–1.81] for MDRD-4, 1.76 [1.35–2.30] for CKD-EPI and 1.94 [1.44–2.63] for EKFC equation. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) for one-year mortality was 0.748 [0.709–0.788] for C-GCrCl, 0.670 [0.621–0.718] for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculated by MDRD-4 equation, 0.725 [0.684–0.765] for eGFR calculated by CKD-EPI equation and 0.741 [0.703–0.779] for eGFR calculated by EKFC equation (P = 0.342 for C-GCrCl, vs. EKFC equation and P ≤ 0.009 for all other AUC comparisons). Conclusions In patients with ACS, C-GCrCl and EKFC equations showed a similar discriminatory power regarding prediction of one-year mortality. Both equations were better than MDRD-4 and CKD-EPI equations for risk discrimination for mortality. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01944800.

A substantial number of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) experience periprocedural myocardial injury or infarction. Accurate diagnosis of these PCI-related complications is required to guide further management given that their occurrence may be associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Due to lack of scientific data, the cut-off thresholds of post-PCI cardiac troponin (cTn) elevation used for defining periprocedural myocardial injury and infarction, have been selected based on expert consensus opinions, and their prognostic relevance remains unclear. In this Consensus Document from the ESC Working Group on Cellular Biology of the Heart and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), we recommend, whenever possible, the measurement of baseline (pre-PCI) cTn and post-PCI cTn values in all CCS patients undergoing PCI. We confirm the prognostic relevance of the post-PCI cTn elevation >5× 99th percentile URL threshold used to define type 4a myocardial infarction (MI). In the absence of periprocedural angiographic flow-limiting complications or electrocardiogram (ECG) and imaging evidence of new myocardial ischaemia, we propose the same post-PCI cTn cut-off threshold (>5× 99th percentile URL) be used to define prognostically relevant ‘major’ periprocedural myocardial injury. As both type 4a MI and major periprocedural myocardial injury are strong independent predictors of all-cause mortality at 1 year post-PCI, they may be used as quality metrics and surrogate endpoints for clinical trials. Further research is needed to evaluate treatment strategies for reducing the risk of major periprocedural myocardial injury, type 4a MI, and MACE in CCS patients undergoing PCI., Graphical Abstract An overview of the suggested approach to diagnosing the presence of ‘minor’ and prognostically relevant ‘major’ periprocedural myocardial injury (as defined in this Consensus document) and type 4a myocardial infarction (as defined by the 4th Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction) in chronic coronary syndrome patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. CCS, chronic coronary syndrome; MI, myocardial infarction; PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention.

Importance It is unclear whether ticagrelor or prasugrel hydrochloride is superior for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Objective To assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor vs prasugrel for patients with ACS treated with PCI. Design, Setting, and Participants A prespecified analysis was performed of a postrandomization subgroup of 3377 patients who presented with ACS and were treated with PCI in the investigator-initiated, multicenter, phase 4, open-label Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5 randomized clinical trial, conducted from September 1, 2013, to February 28, 2018. Statistical analysis was performed from September 1, 2020, to January 30, 2021. Analysis was performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned to a ticagrelor-based or prasugrel-based strategy. This analysis focuses on the subgroup of patients who underwent PCI that was formed after randomization. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was a composite consisting of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 12 months. The safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding. Results The ticagrelor group comprised 1676 patients (1323 men [78.9%]; mean [SD] age, 64.4 [12.0] years), and the prasugrel group comprised 1701 patients (1341 men [78.8%]; mean [SD] age, 64.7 [12.0] years). The primary end point occurred for 162 patients (9.8%) in the ticagrelor group and 120 patients (7.1%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.78;P = .005). Myocardial infarction occurred in 88 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor group compared with 55 patients (3.8%) in the prasugrel group (HR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.19-2.34;P = .003). The safety end point, BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding, occurred in 84 of 1672 patients (5.3%) in the ticagrelor group and 78 of 1680 patients (4.9%) in the prasugrel group (HR; 1.10; 95% CI, 0.81-1.50;P = .54). Conclusions and Relevance Among patients presenting with ACS who were treated with PCI, the incidence of the primary composite end point occurred less frequently for patients who received prasugrel compared with those who received ticagrelor. The incidence of bleeding events was comparable between the 2 groups. These results suggest that, for patients presenting with ACS who undergo PCI, a prasugrel-based strategy is superior to a ticagrelor-based strategy. However, because these observations are based on a postrandomization subgroup, these findings should be regarded as hypothesis generating and dedicated randomized clinical trials may be warranted to confirm these findings. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT01944800

Background: The comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has not been defined. Methods: This post hoc analysis included all patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with PCI and randomized to either ticagrelor or prasugrel in the ISAR-REACT 5 trial (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment). Complex PCI was defined as at least one of the following: multivessel PCI, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, and total stented length >60 mm. The primary efficacy end point was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed out to 12 months after randomization. Results: Among the 3377 patients treated with PCI in the ISAR-REACT 5 trial, 1429 underwent complex PCI (ticagrelor, N=696 and prasugrel, N=733) and 1948 underwent noncomplex PCI (ticagrelor, N=980 and prasugrel, N=968). There was no interaction between PCI complexity, assignment to either ticagrelor or prasugrel, and the primary efficacy or safety end points ( P for interaction: ≥0.13). In the complex PCI group, the primary efficacy end point (11.0% versus 9.2%, hazard ratio: 1.19 [0.85–1.66], P =0.303) and the safety end point (5.2% versus 6.1%, hazard ratio: 0.83 [0.53–1.31], P =0.419) were not statistically different in patients receiving either ticagrelor or prasugrel. In the noncomplex PCI group, the primary efficacy end point occurred more frequently in patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to prasugrel (8.9% versus 5.5%, hazard ratio: 1.66 [1.18–2.34], P =0.004) without significant difference in terms of the safety end point (5.4% versus 4.1%, hazard ratio: 1.41 [0.92–2.17], P =0.110). Conclusions: In patients with acute coronary syndrome, PCI complexity does not influence the comparative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel. The observed comparable performance of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing complex PCI requires further confirmation. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.

AIM Sex-specific analyses of direct head-to-head comparisons between newer P2Y12 inhibitors are limited. This study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in women and men with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) planned for an invasive strategy. METHODS This pre-specified analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 956 women and 3,062 men with ACS randomly assigned to either ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was the 12-month incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety endpoint was the 12-month incidence of bleeding (type 3-5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC]). RESULTS The primary endpoint occurred in 42 women (8.9%) in the ticagrelor group and 39 women (8.3%) in the prasugrel group (hazard ratio [HR]=1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.70, P=0.657) and in 142 men (9.4%) in the ticagrelor group and 98 men (6.5%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.47 [1.13-1.90], P=0.004; P for interaction [Pint]=0.275). BARC type 3-5 bleeding occurred in 36 women (9.7%) in the ticagrelor group and 34 women (9.7%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.04 [0.65-1.67], P=0.856) and in 59 men in the ticagrelor group (4.4%) and 46 men (3.6%) in the prasugrel group (HR=1.24 [0.85-1.83], P=0.266; Pint=0.571). CONCLUSIONS Although there was no significant interaction between sex and treatment effect of study drugs, the superior efficacy of prasugrel was more evident among men. No difference in bleeding between the two study groups was seen for both women and men.

Importance The assessment of new antithrombotic agents with a favorable safety profile is clinically relevant. Objective To test the efficacy and safety of revacept, a novel, lesion-directed antithrombotic drug, acting as a competitive antagonist to platelet glycoprotein VI. Design, Setting, and Participants A phase 2 randomized clinical trial; patients were enrolled from 9 centers in Germany from November 20, 2017, to February 27, 2020; follow-up ended on March 27, 2020. The study included patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Interventions Single intravenous infusion of revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, or placebo prior to the start of PCI on top of standard antithrombotic therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was the composite of death or myocardial injury, defined as an increase in high-sensitivity cardiac troponin to at least 5 times the upper limit of normal within 48 hours from randomization. The safety end point was bleeding type 2 to 5 according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 30 days. Results Of 334 participants (median age, 67.4 years; interquartile range, 60-75.1 years; 253 men [75.7%]; and 330 White participants [98.8%]), 120 were allocated to receive the 160-mg dose of revacept, 121 were allocated to receive the 80-mg dose, and 93 received placebo. The primary end point showed no significant differences between the revacept and placebo groups: 24.4%, 25.0%, and 23.3% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .98). The high dose of revacept was associated with a small but significant reduction of high-concentration collagen-induced platelet aggregation, with a median 26.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 0.5-62.2 AU × min) in the revacept, 160 mg, group; 43.5 AU × min (interquartile range, 22.8-99.5 AU × min) in the revacept, 80 mg, group; and 41.0 AU × min (interquartile range, 31.2-101.0 AU × min) in the placebo group (P = .02), while adenosine 5′-diphosphate–induced aggregation was not affected. Revacept did not increase Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2 or higher bleeding at 30 days compared with placebo: 5.0%, 5.9%, and 8.6% in the revacept, 160 mg, revacept, 80 mg, and placebo groups, respectively (P = .36). Conclusions and Relevance Revacept did not reduce myocardial injury in patients with stable ischemic heart disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. There were few bleeding events and no significant differences between treatment arms. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:NCT03312855

BACKGROUND: Clinical and angiographic outcomes following recanalisation of coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) through contemporary dissection and re-entry techniques (DART) as opposed to intraplaque techniques remain controversial. AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare clinical and angiographic outcomes following subintimal and intraplaque CTO recanalisation. METHODS: A total of 454 consecutive patients undergoing successful CTO recanalisation (473 vessels) were included. Intraplaque techniques were used in 403 (85.2%) and DART in 70 (14.8%) vessels. Surveillance angiography was scheduled at 6-9 months and clinical follow-up was performed up to 12 months. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in terms of the cumulative incidence of MACE (p=0.908) or binary restenosis (p=0.320) between the two groups. There was no independent correlation between recanalisation technique and MACE occurrence or in-segment binary restenosis. Target lesion revascularisation (TLR) was performed in 60 (17.5%) and 12 (18.1%) (p=0.719) lesions, respectively. The occurrence of occlusive restenosis was low (7 [2.3%] vs 1 [1.6%]; p=0.824) and comparable between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Contemporary DART are associated with similar midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes compared to intraplaque recanalisation. The rate of occlusive restenosis was low and comparable in both groups. Regardless of recanalisation technique, the overall incidences of binary restenosis and TLR following CTO recanalisation remain higher than those reported for non-CTO PCI.