Search

Background: The influence of baseline HbA1c levels on vein graft outcomes post coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains unclear., Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the association between baseline HbA1c and 1-year vein graft patency, and the effects of antiplatelet therapy on the 1-year vein graft patency after CABG in patients with baseline HbA1c <6.5% vs ≥6.5%., Methods: We examined the subgroups with baseline HbA1c <6.5% vs ≥6.5% from the DACAB trial (NCT02201771), in which 500 patients were randomly allocated to receive ticagrelor plus aspirin (T+A), ticagrelor alone (T), or aspirin alone (A) for 1 year after CABG. The primary outcome was the vein graft patency (FitzGibbon grade A) at 1 year., Results: A total of 405 patients with available baseline HbA1c data were included in this subgroup analysis. Of them, there were 233 patients (678 vein grafts) with baseline HbA1c <6.5% and 172 patients (512 vein grafts) with baseline HbA1c ≥6.5%. Compared with the HbA1c <6.5% subgroup, the HbA1c ≥6.5% subgroup showed worse 1-year vein graft patency (adjusted odds ratio [OR] for nonpatency: 1.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.64). T+A showed higher vein graft patency than A in both HbA1c <6.5% (adjusted OR for nonpatency: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.15-0.75) and HbA1c ≥6.5% subgroups (adjusted OR for nonpatency: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.19-1.09), without an interaction effect ( P for interaction = 0.335), whereas T did not show more significant improvement than A in both subgroups., Conclusions: In the DACAB trial, lower baseline HbA1c was associated with higher vein graft patency 1 year after CABG. T+A improved 1-year vein graft patency vs A, irrespective of baseline HbA1c., Competing Interests: The DACAB was funded by AstraZeneca; this post hoc analysis was not. Dr Zhu has served as a speaker for AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis, and Sanofi; and as an investigator on clinical trials sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, and Sanofi. Dr Liu has served as a speaker for Pfizer. Dr R. Wang has served as a speaker for AstraZeneca; and as an investigator on clinical trials sponsored by Bayer. Dr. X. Wang has served as a speaker for AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson. Dr Cheng has served as a speaker for Medtronic. Dr Zhao has served as a speaker for AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, and Medtronic; and has been an investigator on clinical trials sponsored by AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novartis, and Sanofi. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) offer an effective treatment for in-stent restenosis (ISR). The Genoss DCB is a novel paclitaxel-coated balloon with a shellac plus vitamin E excipient that enhances drug delivery to the target lesion, minimizing restenosis., Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the angiographic efficacy, clinical safety, and effectiveness of the novel shellac plus vitamin E-based DCB in a randomized controlled trial designed to enable regulatory approval of this new device in South Korea., Methods: This noninferiority trial randomized patients experiencing their first ISR to the novel shellac plus vitamin E-based DCB or the reference SeQuent Please iopromide-based DCB in a 1:1 ratio. All patients underwent planned angiographic and clinical follow-up at 6 months. The study was powered for the primary endpoint of 6 months in-segment late lumen loss (LLL)., Results: A total of 82 patients from 7 centers were randomized to either the novel shellac plus vitamin E-based DCB group (n = 41) or the reference iopromide-based DCB group (n = 41). The 6-month in-segment LLL was 0.15 ± 0.43 mm with the novel DCB compared with 0.24 ± 0.39 mm with the reference device. The 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.13 mm, lower than the noninferiority limit of 0.29 mm, achieving noninferiority ( P for noninferiority = 0.001). Major cardiovascular events were comparable between 2 groups at 6 months (7.7% for the novel DCB vs 10.3% for the reference DCB; P = 0.692)., Conclusions: In this multicenter, head-to-head comparison randomized trial, the novel shellac plus vitamin E-based DCB showed a comparable result to the reference iopromide-based device for the primary endpoint of 6-month in-segment LLL for the treatment of coronary ISR. (Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Genoss® DCB and SeQuent® Please in Korean Patient With Coronary In-stent Restenosis; NCT04405063)., Competing Interests: This study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from GENOSS through an institutional research grant. The executive committee, together with the sponsor, designed the clinical trial. The sponsor had no role in data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, writing the manuscript, or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2022 The Authors.)

Background: Data regarding safety, efficacy, and outcome of intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) in comparison to standard techniques are lacking. This study sought to compare IVL with non-compliant high-pressure balloon percutaneous coronary angioplasty (PTCA)., Methods and Results: We performed a retrospective propensity-score-matched study to compare procedural success in 57 consecutive patients who received IVL-guided PCI in calcified coronary lesions with 171 matched patients who were treated with high-pressure PTCA with a non-compliant (NC)-balloon. The mean minimal lumen diameter (MLD) for the IVL group was 1.08 ± 0.51 mm, and the median percent diameter stenosis on quantitative angiography was 70.2% (interquartile range, 60.2-78.6%). MLD in the high-pressure dilatation group was 0.97 ± 0.43 mm, and the median percent diameter stenosis was 71.5% (interquartile range, 58.5-77.0%). IVL-guided PCI reduced median stenosis to 17.5% (interquartile range, 9.3-19.8%) with an acute gain of 0.93 ± 0.7 mm. High-pressure dilatation resulted in a final median stenosis of 19.3% (interquartile range, 13.33-28.5%). Procedural success was significantly higher (82.5% vs. 61.4%; p: 0.0035) in the IVL group. MACE through 12 months occurred in 10.5% of cases in the IVL group and in 11.1% of the high-pressure group (p = 0.22). Angiographic complications (coronary dissection, slow or no reflow, new coronary thrombus formation, abrupt vessel closure) were very low (0.2% vs. 0.12%)., Conclusion: IVL resulted in a significantly higher rate of procedural success compared to high- pressure NC-balloon dilatation in patients with calcified coronary lesions. The rate of MACE through 12 months was similar to the standard therapy., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Objective: To ensure compliance with optimal secondary prevention strategies and document the residual risk of patients following revascularization, we established a postrevascularization clinic for risk-factor optimization at 1 year, with outcomes recorded in a web-based registry. Although coronary revascularization can reduce ischemia, medical treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the cornerstone of ongoing risk reduction. While standardized referral pathways and protocols for revascularization are prevalent and well studied, post-revascularization care is often less formalized., Patients and Methods: The University of Ottawa Heart Institute is a tertiary-care center providing coronary revascularization services. From 2015 to 2019, data were prospectively recorded in the CAPITAL revascularization registry, and patient-level procedural, clinical, and outcome data are collected in the year following revascularization. Major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) was defined as death, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, or cerebrovascular accident. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to evaluate time-to-event data for clinical outcomes by risk-factor management, and comparisons were performed using log-rank tests and reported by hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Results: A cohort of 4147 patients completed 1-year follow-up after revascularization procedure that included 3462 undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), 589 undergoing coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and 96 undergoing both PCI and CABG. In the year following revascularization (median follow-up 13.3 months-interquartile range [IQR]: 11.9-16.5) 11% of patients experienced MACE, with female patients being disproportionately at risk. Moreover, 47.7% of patients had ≥2 risk factors (diabetes, dyslipidemia, overweight, active smoker) at the time of follow-up, with 45.0% of patients with diabetes failing to achieve target hemoglobin (Hb) A1c, 54.8% of smokers continuing to smoke, and 27.1% of patients failing to achieve guideline-directed lipid targets., Conclusion: Patients who have undergone revascularization procedures remain at elevated risk for MACE, and inadequately controlled risk factors are prevalent in follow-up. This highlights the need for aggressive secondary prevention strategies and implementation of programs to optimize postrevascularization care., (© 2021 THE Authors.)

Diagnosis of acute and late cardiotoxicity from cancer therapeutics has become increasingly important as the scope of cardio-oncology increases exponentially, both in terms of the number of people affected and the types of therapies it encompasses. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) is a tool that can offer unparalleled diagnostic information compared with other imaging modalities, but its utilization is often delayed, at the expense of patient care, due to the need for insurance pre-authorization. This paper highlights situations in which CMR is preferred as the diagnostic modality and provides examples of diagnoses more likely to be approved by insurance companies. It also provides specific cardio-oncology diagnoses or questions to help the clinical cardio-oncologist navigate the pre-authorization process., Competing Interests: Dr O’Quinn has received consulting fees for educational endeavors from AstraZeneca and Bracco. Dr Barac has received honoraria for participation in the CV Safety Advisory Board for Takeda Inc. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (© 2021 The Authors.)

Objectives: This study will compare the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) among men with advanced prostate cancer who are being treated with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist versus a GnRH agonist., Background: Treatment of advanced prostate cancer with ADT might increase the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events among men with known atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), but a recent meta-analysis suggested that this risk might be lower with ADT using a GnRH antagonist versus a GnRH agonist., Methods: PRONOUNCE is a multicenter, prospective, randomized, open, blinded endpoint trial that will enroll approximately 900 patients with advanced prostate cancer and pre-existing ASCVD who will be treated with ADT. Participants will be randomized to receive the GnRH antagonist degarelix or the GnRH agonist leuprolide as ADT for 12 months. The primary endpoint is time from randomization to first confirmed, adjudicated occurrence of a MACE, which is defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke through 12 months of ADT treatment. Baseline cardiovascular biomarkers (high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, high-sensitivity troponin T, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide), as well as serial inflammatory and immune biomarkers, will be evaluated in exploratory analyses., Results: As of October 1, 2019, a total of 364 patients have been enrolled. The mean age is 74 years, 90% are white, 80% have hypertension or dyslipidemia, 30% diabetes mellitus, 40% have had a previous myocardial infarction, and 65% have had previous revascularization. Regarding prostate cancer features at randomization, 48% of the patients had localized disease, 23% had locally advanced disease, and 18% had metastatic disease., Conclusions: PRONOUNCE is the first prospective cardiovascular outcomes trial in advanced prostate cancer that will delineate whether the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events associated with ADT is lower with a GnRH antagonist versus a GnRH agonist for men with pre-existing ASCVD. (A Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Degarelix Versus Leuprolide in Patients With Advanced Prostate Cancer and Cardiovascular Disease [PRONOUNCE]; NCT02663908)., (© 2020 The Authors.)