Search

In traditional notarization processes, the correctness of the activities between the parties is guaranteed by a central authority or guaranteeing institution. In this case, the authority is not able to quickly establish the originality of the content to be notarized, or at least to have a large degree of certainty without the use of automated systems. This paper presents a new notarization platform that uses blockchain technology and integrates advanced anti-plagiarism approaches able to effectively detect copyright violations of documents that users want to notarize. In addition, our proposal includes the use of models, methods, and techniques, through which a very high level of privacy and information security can be guaranteed.

Background: During transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI), secondary access is required for angiographic guidance and temporary pacing. The most commonly used secondary access sites are the femoral artery (angiographic guidance) and the femoral vein (temporary pacing). An upper extremity approach using the radial artery and an upper arm vein instead of the lower extremity approach using the femoral artery and femoral vein may reduce clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications, but robust evidence is lacking., Trial Design: The TAVI XS trial is a multicentre, randomised, open-label clinical trial with blinded evaluation of endpoints. A total of 238 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI will be included. The primary endpoint is the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding (i.e. Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding) of the randomised secondary access site (either diagnostic or pacemaker access, or both) within 30 days after TAVI. Secondary endpoints include time to mobilisation after TAVI, duration of hospitalisation, any BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding, and early safety at 30 days according to Valve Academic Research Consortium‑3 criteria., Conclusion: The TAVI XS trial is the first randomised trial comparing an upper extremity approach to a lower extremity approach with regard to clinically relevant secondary access site-related bleeding complications. The results of this trial will provide important insights into the safety and efficacy of an upper extremity approach in patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aims: Screening logs have the potential to appraise the actual prevalence and distribution of predefined patient subsets, avoiding selection biases, which are inevitably and potentially present in randomised trials and real-world registries, respectively. We aimed to assess the prevalence of high bleeding risk (HBR) characteristics in the real world and the external validity of the MASTER DAPT trial., Methods and Results: All consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for at least two consecutive weeks across 65 sites participating in the trial were entered into a screening log. Of 2,847 consecutive patients, 1,098 (38.6 %) were HBR and 109 (9.9 %) consented for trial participation. PRECISE-DAPT score ≥ 25 was the most frequent HBR feature, followed by advanced age, use of oral anticoagulation (OAC) and anaemia. Compared with consecutive HBR patients, consenting patients were older (≥ 75 years: 69 % versus 62 %, absolute standardized difference [SD] 0.16), more frequently male (78 % versus 71 %, absolute SD 0.18), had higher use of OAC (38 % versus 20 %, absolute SD 0.39), treatment with steroids or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (10 % versus 5 %, SD 0.16), and prior cerebrovascular events (10 % versus 6 %, absolute SD 0.18) but lower PRECISE DAPT score ≥ 25 (54 % versus 66 %, absolute SD 0.24)., Conclusions: The HBR criteria distribution differed between consecutive versus selectively included HBR patients, suggesting the existence of selection biases in the trial population., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: In patients with low-gradient aortic stenosis (AS) and low transvalvular flow, dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) is recommended to determine AS severity, whereas the degree of aortic valve calcification (AVC) supposedly correlates with AS severity according to current European and American guidelines., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the relationship between AVC and AS severity as determined using echocardiography and DSE in patients with aortic valve area <1 cm 2 and peak aortic valve velocity <4.0 m/s., Methods: All patients underwent DSE to determine AS severity and multislice computed tomography to quantify AVC. Receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis was used to assess the diagnostic value of AVC for AS severity grading as determined using echocardiography and DSE in men and women., Results: A total of 214 patients were included. Median age was 78 years (25th-75th percentile: 71-84 years) and 25% were women. Left ventricular ejection fraction was reduced (<50%) in 197 (92.1%) patients. Severe AS was diagnosed in 106 patients (49.5%). Moderate AS was diagnosed in 108 patients (50.5%; in 77 based on resting transthoracic echocardiography, in 31 confirmed using DSE). AVC score was high (≥2,000 for men or ≥1,200 for women) in 47 (44.3%) patients with severe AS and in 47 (43.5%) patients with moderate AS. AVC sensitivity was 44.3%, specificity was 56.5%, and positive and negative predictive values for severe AS were 50.0% and 50.8%, respectively. Area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve was 0.508 for men and 0.524 for women., Conclusions: Multi-slice computed tomography-derived AVC scores showed poor discrimination between grades of AS severity using DSE and cannot replace DSE in the diagnostic work-up of low-gradient severe AS., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Van Mieghem has received grant support/research contracts from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Daiichy Sankyo, AstraZeneca, and PulseCath BV; and has received consulting/speaker fees from Abbot Vascular, Boston Scientific Corporation, Medtronic, Daiichy Sankyo, PulseCath BV, JenaValve, and Amgen. Dr Mehran has received grant support/research contracts from Abbott, Abiomed, Alleviant Medical, Amgen, AM-Pharma, Arena Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, Atricure Inc, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CardiaWave, CeloNova, Chiesi, Concept Medical, Cytsorbents, Daiichy-Sankyo, Element Science, Faraday, Humacyte, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Magenta, MedAlliance, Mediasphere, Medtelligence, Medtronic, MJH Healthcare, Novartis, OrbusNeich, Penumbra, PhaseBio, Philips, Pi-Cardia, PLx Pharma, Protembis, RenalPro, RM Global, Shockwave Medical, Vivasure, and Zoll; has received consulting/speaker fees from AstraZeneca, E.R. Squibb and Sons LLC, Esperion Science/Innovativa Biopharma, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, IQVIA, J-Calc, McVeigh Global, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Overcome, Primer Healthcare of New Jersey, Radcliffe, SL Solutions, TARSUS Cardiology, Vectura, and WebMD; and she has equity in Applied Therapeutics, Elixir, and STEL. Dr Mehran’s spouse has equity in ControlRad. Dr Kodali has received grant support/research contracts from Admedus, Dura Biotech, Edwards Lifesciences, Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and JenaValve; has received consulting/speaker fees from Admedus, Dura Biotech, TriCares, X-Dot, Tioga, Helix Valve Repair, and Moray Medical; and has equity in Dura Biotech, Microinterventional Devices, Thubrika Aortic Valve Inc, Supira, Admedus, Triflo, and Adona. Dr Hahn has received consulting/speaker fees from Abbott Structural, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, Baylis Medical, Navigate, Philips Healthcare, Siemens Healthcare, and 3mensio; and has equity in Navigate. Dr Bax has received grant support/research contracts from Biotronic, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Bayer AG, and Edwards Lifesciences; and has received consulting/speaker fees from Abbott Vascular and Edwards Lifesciences. Drs Veulemans and Zeus have received consulting fees, travel expenses, or study honoraria from Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In 5%-25% of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, coronary angiography reveals no obstructive coronary arteries (MINOCA). Coronary microvascular disease (CMD) is a potential causal pathophysiological mechanism in these patients and can be diagnosed by continuous thermodilution assessment. Recently, the microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) has been introduced as a novel index to assess the vasodilatory capacity of the microcirculation. However, continuous thermodilution and MRR have never been investigated in the acute setting in MINOCA patients and invasive assessment of the microcirculation in these patients are currently lacking., Aims: The objectives of the study were to investigate the incidence of CMD (MRR ≤ 2.7) in patients with MINOCA and to evaluate the feasibility and safety of continuous thermodilution-based assessment during index coronary angiography in the acute setting., Methods: This study was a prospective, observational, pilot study investigating coronary physiology in the acute setting in MINOCA patients. Patients admitted with a diagnosis of NSTE-ACS were eligible for inclusion., Results: In total, 19 MINOCA patients were included in this analysis; the mean age was 70 ± 9 years, and 79% were females. CMD was present in 6 patients (32%). Q rest was significantly higher in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR > 2.7 group (0.076 [0.057-0.100] vs. 0.049 [0.044-0.071] L/min, p = 0.03). R µ,rest was significantly lower in the MRR ≤ 2.7 group compared to the MRR > 2.7 group (1083 [710-1510] vs. 1563 [1298-1970] WU, p = 0.04). No periprocedural complications or hemodynamic instability have occurred during continuous thermodilution assessment during the index coronary angiography., Conclusion: In patients admitted for MINOCA undergoing immediate coronary angiography, continuous thermodilution assessment and MRR are feasible and safe in the acute setting, and evidence of functional CMD could be observed in one-third of the MINOCA patients., (© 2024 The Author(s). Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Fluid-filled pressure guidewires are unaffected by the previously inevitable hydrostatic pressure gradient (HPG). This study aimed to compare simultaneous pressure measurements with fluid-filled and sensor-tipped pressure guidewires., Methods: Fifty patients underwent fractional flow reserve (FFR) and P d /P a measurement with a fluid-filled and a sensor-tipped pressure guidewire simultaneously. To assess maneuverability, patients were randomized with respect to which pressure guidewire was used to cross the lesion first. Lateral fluoroscopy was used to estimate height difference between catheter tip and distal wire position (and thus HPG). Agreement between pressure measurements was studied., Results: Measurements were performed in LM (4% (n = 2)), LAD (44% (n = 22)), LCX (26% (n = 13)), and RCA (26% (n = 13)). Simultaneous pressure measurements showed excellent agreement (mean FFR difference - 0.01 ± 0.03 (r = 0.959, p < 0.001), mean P d /P a difference - 0.01 ± 0.04 (r = 0.929, p < 0.001)). FFR was ≤0.80 in 42.6% (n = 20) with fluid-filled FFR measurements versus 46.8% (n = 22) by sensor-tipped FFR measurements. Mean height difference was 15 ± 34 mm, and strongly dependent on the coronary artery (LAD 45 ± 10 mm, LCX -23 ± 16 mm, RCA -13 ± 17 mm). There was a strong correlation between height difference and difference in pressure ratios between sensor-tipped and fluid-filled pressure guidewires (FFR r = -0.850, p < 0.001; P d /P a r = -0.641, p < 0.001). Largest FFR differences were present in the LAD (-0.04 ± 0.02). After HPG correction, mean difference between HPG-corrected sensor-tipped FFR and fluid-filled FFR was 0.00 ± 0.02, mean P d /P a difference was 0.01 ± 0.03., Conclusions: This study shows excellent overall correlation between FFR and P d /P a measurements with both pressure guidewires. Differences measured with fluid-filled and sensor-tipped pressure guidewires are vessel-specific and attributable to hydrostatic pressure gradients (NCT04802681)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest PT received research grants from Cavis Technologies AB, Biosensors, OpSens Medical and lecture fees from Medtronic. NvR received personal fees from Abbott, Rainmed, Microport and Bayer and received research grants from Philips, Biotronik, Abbott, and Medtronic. EH is a former employee of Cavis Technologies AB. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: While experimental data suggest that selective intracoronary hypothermia decreases infarct size, studies in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are lacking., Aims: We investigated the efficacy of selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to decrease infarct size in patients with STEMI., Methods: In this multicentre randomised controlled trial, 200 patients with large anterior wall STEMI were randomised 1:1 to selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI or primary PCI alone. Using an over-the-wire balloon catheter for infusion of cold saline and a pressure-temperature wire to monitor the intracoronary temperature, the anterior myocardium distal to the occlusion was selectively cooled to 30-33°C for 7-10 minutes before reperfusion (occlusion phase), immediately followed by 10 minutes of cooling after reperfusion (reperfusion phase). The primary endpoint was infarct size as a percentage of left ventricular mass on cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging after 3 months., Results: Selective intracoronary hypothermia was performed in 94/100 patients randomised to cooling. Distal coronary temperature decreased by 6°C within 43 seconds (interquartile range [IQR] 18-113). The median duration of the occlusion phase and reperfusion phase were 8.2 minutes (IQR 7.2-9.0) and 9.1 minutes (IQR 8.2-10.0), respectively. The infarct size at 3 months was 23.1±12.5% in the selective intracoronary hypothermia group and 21.6±12.2% in the primary PCI alone group (p=0.43). The left ventricular ejection fraction at 3 months in each group were 49.1±10.2% and 50.1±10.4%, respectively (p=0.53)., Conclusions: Selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary PCI in patients with anterior wall STEMI was feasible and safe but did not decrease infarct size compared with standard primary PCI. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03447834).

Background: The microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) has recently been introduced as a novel index to assess the vasodilatory capacity of the microcirculation, independent of epicardial disease. The prognostic value of MRR in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is unknown., Objectives: The aim of this analysis was to investigate the prognostic value of MRR in patients with STEMI and to compare MRR with cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging parameters., Methods: From a pooled analysis of individual patient data from 6 cohorts that measured the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) directly after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with STEMI (n = 1,265), a subgroup analysis was performed in patients in whom both MRR and IMR were available. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure., Results: Both MRR and IMR could be calculated in 446 patients. The optimal cutoff of MRR to predict the primary endpoint in this STEMI population was 1.25. During a median follow-up of 3.1 years (Q1-Q3: 1.5-6.1 years), the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 27.3% and 5.9% of patients (HR: 4.16; 95% CI: 2.31-7.50; P < 0.001) in the low MRR (≤1.25) and high MRR (>1.25) groups, respectively. Both IMR and MRR were independent predictors of the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure., Conclusions: MRR measured directly after primary percutaneous coronary intervention was an independent predictor of the composite of all-cause mortality or hospitalization for heart failure during long-term follow-up., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr De Maria has received consultancy fees from Miracor Medical SA and Corflow; and has received grants from Abbott, Philips, Medtronic, Terumo, Miracor Medical SA, and Opsens. Dr van Royen has received research grants from Philips, Abbott, Medtronic, and Biotronik; and has received speaker fees from Abbott, Bayer, Rainmed, and Microport. Dr van Leeuwen has received speakers/consulting services honoraria from Terumo, Daiichi-Sankyo, and Abbott; and has received research grants from AstraZeneca, Top Sector Life Sciences & Health, Terumo, Top Medical B.V., and Abbott. Dr Pijls has received institutional research grants from Abbott and Hexacath; is a consultant for Abbott and Opsens; holds minor equity interest in Philips, ASML, HeartFlow, and GE; is a member of the scientific advisory board for HeartFlow; and has patents pending on diagnostic methods for quantifying aortic valve stenosis and microvascular physiology. Dr Fineschi has received speaker honoraria and consulting fees from St Jude Medical Italia (now Abbott). Dr Oldroyd has received honoraria from Abbott, Biosensors International, and Boston Scientific; has received an institutional research grant from Boston Scientific that supported the present manuscript; and has been a full-time employee of Biosensors International since May 2020. Dr Berry has received institutional grants/contracts from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartFlow, Novartis, Siemens Healthcare; has received consulting fees from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartFlow, Menarini, and Novartis; and has received honoraria from Abbott, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartFlow, Philips, and Valo Health. Dr Fearon has received research support from Abbott, Boston, Edwards, and Medtronic; has consulting agreements with CathWorks and Siemens; and has equity options with HeartFlow. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Myocardial ischaemia results from insufficient coronary blood flow. Computed virtual fractional flow reserve (vFFR) allows quantification of proportional flow loss without the need for invasive pressure-wire testing. In the current study, we describe a novel, conductivity model of side branch flow, referred to as 'leak'. This leak model is a function of taper and local pressure, the latter of which may change radically when focal disease is present. This builds upon previous techniques, which either ignore side branch flow, or rely purely on anatomical factors. This study aimed to describe a new, conductivity model of side branch flow and compare this with established anatomical models., Methods and Results: The novel technique was used to quantify vFFR, distal absolute flow (Qd) and microvascular resistance (CMVR) in 325 idealised 1D models of coronary arteries, modelled from invasive clinical data. Outputs were compared to an established anatomical model of flow. The conductivity model correlated and agreed with the reference model for vFFR (r = 0.895, p < 0.0001; ＋0.02, 95% CI 0.00 to ＋ 0.22), Qd (r = 0.959, p < 0.0001; -5.2 mL/min, 95% CI -52.2 to ＋13.0) and CMVR (r = 0.624, p < 0.0001; ＋50 Woods Units, 95% CI -325 to ＋2549)., Conclusion: Agreement between the two techniques was closest for vFFR, with greater proportional differences seen for Qd and CMVR. The conductivity function assumes vessel taper was optimised for the healthy state and that CMVR was not affected by local disease. The latter may be addressed with further refinement of the technique or inferred from complementary image data. The conductivity technique may represent a refinement of current techniques for modelling coronary side-branch flow. Further work is needed to validate the technique against invasive clinical data., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. This independent research was carried out at the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Sheffield Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care., (Crown Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Objective: Prehospital risk stratification and triage are currently not performed in patients suspected of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). This may lead to prolonged time to revascularisation, increased duration of hospital admission and higher healthcare costs. The preHEART score (prehospital history, ECG, age, risk factors and point-of-care troponin score) can be used by emergency medical services (EMS) personnel for prehospital risk stratification and triage decisions in patients with NSTE-ACS. The aim of the current study was to evaluate the effect of prehospital risk stratification and direct transfer to a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centre, based on the preHEART score, on time to final invasive diagnostics or culprit revascularisation., Methods: Prospective, multicentre, two-cohort study in patients with suspected NSTE-ACS. The first cohort is observational (standard care), while the second (interventional) cohort includes patients who are stratified for direct transfer to either a PCI or a non-PCI centre based on their preHEART score. Risk stratification and triage are performed by EMS personnel. The primary endpoint of the study is time from first medical contact until final invasive diagnostics or revascularisation. Secondary endpoints are time from first medical contact until intracoronary angiography (ICA), duration of hospital admission, number of invasive diagnostics, number of inter-hospital transfers and major adverse cardiac events at 7 and 30 days., Results: A total of 1069 patients were included. In the interventional cohort (n=577), time between final invasive diagnostics or revascularisation (42 (17-101) hours vs 20 (5-44) hours, p<0.001) and length of hospital admission (3 (2-5) days vs 2 (1-4) days, p=0.007) were shorter than in the observational cohort (n=492). In patients with NSTE-ACS in need for ICA or revascularisation, healthcare costs were reduced in the interventional cohort (€5599 (2978-9625) vs €4899 (2278-5947), p=0.02)., Conclusion: Prehospital risk stratification and direct transfer to a PCI centre, based on the preHEART score, reduces time from first medical contact to final invasive diagnostics and revascularisation, reduces duration of hospital admission and decreases healthcare costs in patients with NSTE-ACS in need for ICA or revascularisation., Trial Registration: NCT05243485., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the reasons for emergent cardiac surgery (ECS) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and assess outcomes of these patients., Methods: All patients undergoing ECS following a complicated TAVI procedure at a high-volume TAVI centre in the Netherlands from 1 January 2008 to 1 April 2022 were included. Baseline and procedural characteristics and outcome data (procedural, 30-day and 1‑year mortality, in-hospital stroke, 30-day pacemaker implantation, 30-day vascular complications, 30-day deep sternal wound infections and 30-day re-exploration) were collected from patient files and analysed using descriptive statistics., Results: During the study period, 16 of 1594 patients (1.0%) undergoing TAVI required ECS. The main reason for ECS was valve embolisation (n = 9; 56.3%), followed by perforation of the left/right ventricle with guide wire/pacemaker lead (n = 3; 18.8%) and annular rupture (n = 3; 18.8%). Procedural, 30-day and 1‑year mortality was 0%, 18.8% (n = 3) and 31.3% (n = 5), respectively. In-hospital stroke occurred in 1 patient (6.3%), a pacemaker was implanted at 30 days in 2 patients (12.5%), and major vascular complications did not occur., Conclusion: ECS following complicated TAVI was performed in only a small number of cases. It had a high but acceptable perioperative and 30-day mortality, taking into account the otherwise lethal consequences. In case of valve embolisation, no periprocedural or 30-day mortality was observed for surgical aortic valve replacement (even in a redo setting), which supported the necessity to perform TAVI in centres with cardiac surgical backup on site., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: The importance of revascularisation of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unclear. Despite the lack of randomised controlled trials comparing different revascularisation strategies, guidelines currently recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with significant proximal CAD undergoing TAVI., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a systematic search was conducted to identify studies comparing TAVI with and without PCI in patients with significant CAD on pre-TAVI coronary angiography. Endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, stroke, myocardial infarction and major bleeding., Results: In total, 14 studies were included, involving 3838 patients, of whom 1806 (47%) underwent PCI before TAVI. All-cause mortality did not differ significantly between TAVI with and without preceding PCI at 30 days, 1 year and > 1 year. There were no significant differences in risk of cardiac death, stroke or myocardial infarction between the groups. However, TAVI performed with PCI resulted in a higher risk of major bleeding within 30 days after TAVI (odds ratio: 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.46-0.94)., Conclusion: This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with concomitant significant CAD who were treated with TAVI with and without preceding PCI at both short- and long-term follow-up. However, there was a higher risk of major bleeding at 30 days in patients undergoing TAVI with preceding PCI. In the context of serious risk of bias in the included studies, results of randomised controlled trials are warranted., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

The optimal treatment strategy for coronary bifurcation lesions by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is complex and remains a subject of debate. Current guidelines advise a stepwise provisional approach with optional two-stent strategy. However, a two-stent strategy, both upfront and stepwise provisional, is technically demanding. Therefore, there is increasing interest in the use of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) in bifurcation lesions, mainly after a provisional approach with unsatisfactory result of the side branch. Some small pilot studies already showed that the use of DEB in bifurcation lesions is safe and feasible. However, a randomized comparison of this hybrid DEB strategy with a two-stent strategy is currently lacking., Trial Design: The Hybrid DEB study is a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial investigating noninferiority of a hybrid DEB approach, using a combination of a drug-eluting stent (DES) in the main vessel and DEB in the side branch, compared to stepwise provisional two-stent strategy in patients with true bifurcation lesions. A total of 500 patients with de novo true coronary bifurcation lesions, treated with a stepwise provisional approach and an unsatisfactory result of the side branch after main vessel stenting (≥ 70% stenosis and/or < thrombolysis in myocardial infarction III flow), will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either treatment with a DEB or with a DES in the side branch. The primary endpoint is a composite endpoint of the occurrence of all-cause death, periprocedural or spontaneous myocardial infarction and/or target vessel revascularization at the anticipated median 2-year follow-up., Conclusion: The Hybrid DEB study will compare in a multicenter, randomized fashion a hybrid DEB approach with a stepwise provisional two-stent strategy in patients with true bifurcation lesions., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT05731687., Competing Interests: Disclosure Koen Teeuwen reports research grant from DaVinci Medical B.V. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Low fractional flow reserve (FFR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been associated with adverse clinical outcomes. Hitherto, this assessment has been independent of the epicardial vessel interrogated., Objectives: This study sought to assess the predictive capacity of post-PCI FFR for target vessel failure (TVF) stratified by coronary artery., Methods: We performed a systematic review and individual patient-level data meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials and observational studies with protocol-recommended post-PCI FFR assessment. The difference in post-PCI FFR between left anterior descending (LAD) and non-LAD arteries was assessed using a random-effect models meta-analysis of mean differences. TVF was defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization., Results: Overall, 3,336 vessels (n = 2,760 patients) with post-PCI FFR measurements were included in 9 studies. The weighted mean post-PCI FFR was 0.89 (95% CI: 0.87-0.90) and differed significantly between coronary vessels (LAD = 0.86; 95% CI: 0.85 to 0.88 vs non-LAD = 0.93; 95% CI: 0.91-0.94; P < 0.001). Post-PCI FFR was an independent predictor of TVF, with its risk increasing by 52% for every reduction of 0.10 FFR units, and this was mainly driven by TVR. The predictive capacity for TVF was poor for LAD arteries (AUC: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.47-0.58) and moderate for non-LAD arteries (AUC: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.59-0.73; LAD vs non-LAD arteries, P = 0.005)., Conclusions: The LAD is associated with a lower post-PCI FFR than non-LAD arteries, emphasizing the importance of interpreting post-PCI FFR on a vessel-specific basis. Although a higher post-PCI FFR was associated with improved prognosis, its predictive capacity for events differs between the LAD and non-LAD arteries, being poor in the LAD and moderate in the non-LAD vessels., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Collet received research grants from Biosensors, HeartFlow Inc, Abbott Vascular, Insight Lifetech, GE Healthcare, Siemens and Shockwave Medical. Dr Johnson has received internal funding from the Weatherhead PET Center for Preventing and Reversing Atherosclerosis; has received significant institutional research support from St. Jude Medical (CONTRAST, NCT02184117) and Philips Volcano (DEFINE-FLOW, NCT02328820) for studies using intracoronary pressure and flow sensors; has an institutional licensing agreement with Boston Scientific for the smart-minimum FFR algorithm commercialized under 510(k) K191008; and has pending patents on diagnostic methods for quantifying aortic stenosis and TAVI physiology and also algorithms to correct pressure tracings from fluid-filled catheters. Dr Mizukami has received consultancy fees from Zeon Medical. Dr Fearon receives institutional research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; he has a consulting relationship with CathWorks and Siemens; and he owns minor stock options in HeartFlow. Dr Berry receives research funding from the British Heart Foundation grant (RE/18/6134217); and is employed by the University of Glasgow, which holds consultancy and research agreements for his work with Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Causeway Therapeutics, Coroventis, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartFlow, Menarini, Neovasc, Siemens Healthcare, and Valo Health. Dr Sonck is supported by a grant provided by the CardioPath PhD program. Dr Collison has received honoraria/speaker fees from Abbott. Dr Koo has received an institutional research grant from St. Jude Medical (Abbott Vascular) and Philips Volcano. Dr Meneveau has received consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Edwards Lifesciences, Terumo, Boston Scientific, Bayer Healthcare, BMS-Pfizer, Boehringer, and AstraZeneca. Dr Oldroyd is an employee of Biosensors International. Dr Leipsic is a consultant for and holds stock options in Circle CVI and HeartFlow; and has a research grant from GE Healthcare. Dr Taylor is an employee of HeartFlow Inc. Dr Ko has received consultancy fees from Abbott Vascular and Medtronic; and has received research support from Canon Medical. Dr Perera has received research grant support from Abbott Vascular, HeartFlow, and Philips. Dr Leone received consultant fees and honoraria for lectures in sponsored symposia with Abbott Vascular and Bracco Imaging/ACIST Medical. Dr Matsuo has received consultancy fees from Zeon Medical; and has received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular Japan, Philips, and Boston Scientific. Dr Amabile reports consulting/proctoring fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and Shockwave Medical; and has received an institutional research grant from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. Dr Piróth has received consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Opsens, and Boston Scientific. Dr Toth has received consultancy fees and research support from Abbott, Biotronik, Medtronic, and Terumo. Dr Ihdayhid reports receiving consulting honorarium from Abbott Medical, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, Artrya Pty Ltd (including equity interest). Dr West is an employee of Abbott Vascular. Dr Munhoz is supported with a PhD grant from CardioPath. Dr Barbato has received speaker fees from Abbott and Boston Scientific. Dr Engstrøm has received consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Novo Nordisk, and Bayer AS. Dr Escaned is supported by the Intensification of Research Activity project INT22/00088 from Spanish Instituto de Salud Carlos III, and served as speaker and advisory board member for Abbott and Philips. Dr Ali has received institutional grant support Abbott, Abiomed, ACIST Medical, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cathworks, Canon, Conavi, Heartflow, Inari, Medtronic Inc, National Institute of Health, Nipro, Opsens Medical, Medis, Philips, Shockwave, Siemens, Spectrawave, Teleflex; and consulting fees from Abiomed, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, Cathworks, Opsens, Philips, Shockwave and equity in Elucid, Lifelink, Spectrawave, Shockwave, VitalConnect. Dr Kern has received speaker fees from Abbott, ACIST Medical, Boston Scientific, Opsens, and Philips. Dr Pijls has received research grants from Abbott and Hexacath and consultancy fees from Abbott, GE, Philips, and HeartFlow and have equity in GE, Philips, and Heartflow. Dr De Bruyne has received institutional consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Siemens, and GE; has received institutional grant support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Biotronic, CathWorks, Pie Medical, and HeartFlow; and holds minor equities in Philips, Siemens, GE, Bayer, HeartFlow, Edwards Lifesciences, and Ceyliad. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous studies comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with multivessel coronary disease not involving the left main have shown significantly lower rates of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke after CABG. These studies did not routinely use current-generation drug-eluting stents or fractional flow reserve (FFR) to guide PCI., Methods: FAME 3 (Fractional Flow Reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, international, randomized trial involving patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease (not involving the left main coronary artery) in 48 centers worldwide. Patients were randomly assigned to receive FFR-guided PCI using zotarolimus drug-eluting stents or CABG. The prespecified key secondary end point of the trial reported here is the 3-year incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke., Results: A total of 1500 patients were randomized to FFR-guided PCI or CABG. Follow-up was achieved in >96% of patients in both groups. There was no difference in the incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke after FFR-guided PCI compared with CABG (12.0% versus 9.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.3 [95% CI, 0.98-1.83]; P =0.07). The rates of death (4.1% versus 3.9%; HR, 1.0 [95% CI, 0.6-1.7]; P =0.88) and stroke (1.6% versus 2.0%; HR, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.4-1.7]; P =0.56) were not different. MI occurred more frequently after PCI (7.0% versus 4.2%; HR, 1.7 [95% CI, 1.1-2.7]; P =0.02)., Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, there was no difference in the incidence of the composite of death, MI, or stroke after FFR-guided PCI with current-generation drug-eluting stents compared with CABG. There was a higher incidence of MI after PCI compared with CABG, with no difference in death or stroke. These results provide contemporary data to allow improved shared decision-making between physicians and patients with 3-vessel coronary artery disease., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique identifier: NCT02100722., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Pijls receives research funding from Abbott, has consulting relationships with Abbott and Opsens, and has stock or stock options with ASML, General Electric, HeartFlow, Hexacath, and Philips. Dr Mansour has consulting relationships with Abbott Vascular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Pfizer, and Servier Affaires, and received a research grant from Opsens Inc and Abbott Vascular. Dr Kala has a consulting relationship with Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Servier Affaires, and receives honoraria from AstraZeneca and Bayer. Dr Angeras receives research funding from Abbott Vascular and AstraZeneca and has a consulting relationship with Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. Dr Miner has a consulting relationship with Abbott, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer, Novartis, Opsens, Pfizer, and Servier Affaires Medicales. Dr Engstrøm has a consulting relationship with Abbott Vascular, Bayer, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Christiansen has a consulting relationship with Abbott Vascular and has received research grants from Abbott Vascular. Dr Tonino has received research grants from Biosensors and Opsens. Dr Reardon has a consulting relationship with Boston Scientific and W.L. Gore & Associates. Dr Otsuki has received research grants from the Uehara Memorial Foundation, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Terumo. Dr Kobayashi has a consulting relationship with Abbott Vascular. Dr Hlatky has a consulting relationship with Blue Cross and Blue Shield and research support from HeartFlow. Dr Mahaffey has received research grants or contracts from the American Heart Association, Apple, Inc, Bayer, California Institute Regenerative Medicine, Eidos, Ferring, Gilead, Google (Verily), Idorsia, Johnson & Johnson, Luitpold, PAC-12, Precordior, and Sanifit; has provided consulting or other services for Amgen, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, CSL Behring, Elsevier, FibroGen, Inova, Johnson & Johnson, Lexicon, MyoKardia, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Otsuka, PhaseBio, Portola, Quidel, Sanofi, and Theravance; and has equity in Precordior. Dr Yeung has a consulting relationship with Medtronic. Dr De Bruyne has an institutional consulting relationship with Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, CathWorks, Siemens, GE Healthcare, and Coroventis Research; receives institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular, Coroventis Research, CathWorks, and Boston Scientific; and holds minor equities in Philips, Siemens, GE Healthcare, CathWorks, Edwards Life Sciences, HeartFlow, Opsens, Celyad, Xenter, Medyria, Bayer, and Sanofi. Dr Fearon receives research funding from Abbott, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific and has a consulting relationship with Siemens and CathWorks and stock options with HeartFlow. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.

When measuring hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure ratios with traditional sensor-tipped wires, the inevitable hydrostatic pressure gradient (HPG) may influence treatment decisions. This study aimed to simulate and analyze the effect of a hydrostatic pressure gradient on different indices of functional lesion severity. A hypothetical P d -P a height difference and subsequent hydrostatic pressure gradient based on previous literature was applied to the pressure measurements from the CONTRAST study. The effect on three indices of functional lesion severity (FFR, P d /P a , and dPR) was assessed and possible reclassifications in functional significance by the different indices were analyzed. In 602 pressure tracings, simulated hydrostatic pressure gradients led to an absolute change in P d of 3.18 ± 1.30 mmHg, resulting in an overall increase in FFR, P d /P a, and dPR of 0.02 ± 0.04 for all indices ( P = 0.69). Reclassification due to the hydrostatic pressure gradient when using dichotomous cutoff values occurred in 13.4, 22.3, and 20.6% for FFR, P d /P a , and dPR, respectively. The effect of hydrostatic pressure gradient correction differed among the coronary arteries and was most pronounced in the left anterior descending. When considering the gray zone for the different functional indices, the hydrostatic pressure gradient resulted in reclassification in only one patient out of the complete patient population (1/602; 0.17%). The hydrostatic pressure gradient can influence functional lesion assessment when using dichotomous cutoff values. When taking the gray zone into account, its effect is limited. NEW & NOTEWORTHY This study systematically simulated the effect of hydrostatic pressure gradients (HPG) on real-world hyperemic and nonhyperemic pressure ratios, showing correction for HPG leads to reclassification in functional significance from 13.4 to 22.3% for different functional indices. This was most pronounced in nonhyperemic pressure ratios. A new pressure guidewire (Wirecath) is unaffected by HPG. The ongoing PW-COMPARE study (NCT04802681) prospectively analyzes the magnitude and importance of HPG by simultaneous FFR measurements.

Aims: Central to the practice of precision medicine in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a risk-stratification tool to predict outcomes following the procedure. This study is intended to assess machine learning (ML)-based risk models to predict clinically relevant outcomes in PCI and to support individualized clinical decision-making in this setting., Methods and Results: Five different ML models [gradient boosting classifier (GBC), linear discrimination analysis, Naïve Bayes, logistic regression, and K-nearest neighbours algorithm) for the prediction of 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) were trained on an extensive data set of 35 389 patients undergoing PCI and enrolled in the global, all-comers e-ULTIMASTER registry. The data set was split into a training (80%) and a test set (20%). Twenty-three patient and procedural characteristics were used as predictive variables. The models were compared for discrimination according to the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) and for calibration. The GBC model showed the best discriminative ability with an AUC of 0.72 (95% confidence interval 0.69-0.75) for 1-year TLF on the test set. The discriminative ability of the GBC model for the components of TLF was highest for cardiac death with an AUC of 0.82, followed by target vessel myocardial infarction with an AUC of 0.75 and clinically driven target lesion revascularization with an AUC of 0.68. The calibration was fair until the highest risk deciles showed an underestimation of the risk., Conclusion: Machine learning-derived predictive models provide a reasonably accurate prediction of 1-year TLF in patients undergoing PCI. A prospective evaluation of the predictive score is warranted., Registration: Clinicaltrial.gov identifier is NCT02188355., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: M.A.M. receives unrestricted educational grant and consulting fees from Terumo; M.R. receives unrestricted educational grant from Terumo, Cordis/Cardinal Health, Medtronic, and Biotronik; O.F. receives speaker fees from Sanofi Pasteur; A.C. receives speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Biosensor, and Boston Scientific, as well as consulting fees from Abiomed and Shock Wave Medical; D.P. is a former employee of Terumo Europe NV (Belgium); L.J. is an employee of Terumo Europe NV (Belgium); R.D. is a former employee of Terumo Europe NV (Belgium)., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Paravalvular leak (PVL) is a shortcoming that can erode the clinical benefits of transcatheter valve replacement (TAVR) and therefore a readily applicable method (aortography) to quantitate PVL objectively and accurately in the interventional suite is appealing to all operators. The ratio between the areas of the time-density curves in the aorta and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT-AR) defines the regurgitation fraction (RF). This technique has been validated in a mock circulation; a single injection in diastole was further tested in porcine and ovine models. In the clinical setting, LVOT-AR was compared with trans-thoracic and trans-oesophageal echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. LVOT-AR > 17% discriminates mild from moderate aortic regurgitation on echocardiography and confers a poor prognosis in multiple registries, and justifies balloon post-dilatation. The LVOT-AR differentiates the individual performances of many old and novel devices and is being used in ongoing randomized trials and registries., Competing Interests: PWS reports personal fees from Philips/Volcano, SMT, Novartis, Xeltis, Merillife. PCR has no conflict of interest. Aben is an employee of Pie Medical Imaging. MC is employed by and holds shares of Xeltis BV CS is an employee of Philips Healthcare. MA-W reports other from Medtronic, other from Boston Scientific, outside the submitted work. NP is a consultant to Medtronic, Peijia, and MicroPort. RM is an employee of Boston Scientific. AR reports grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences, outside the submitted work. KK reports personal fees from Abbott, personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences, personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Meril Life Sciences, outside the submitted work. NVR reports grants and personal fees from Abbott, grants from Philips, grants from Biotronik, and personal fees from Microport, outside the submitted work. Rudolph is a proctor, speaker’s honoraria of JenaValve. FJN reports personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, grants and personal fees from Pfizer, grants and personal fees from Biotronic, grants and personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences, grants from Medtronic, grants and personal fees from Bayer Healthcare, personal fees from Novartis, grants from GlaxoSmithKline, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from Ferrer, outside the submitted work. IJA-S is a proctor for Medtronic, Boston Scientific and Meril Life. OS and YO report several institutional research grants, outside the submitted work. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (© 2023 Abdelshafy, Serruys, Tsai, Revaiah, Grag, Aben, Schultz, Abdelghani, Tonino, Miyazaki, Rutten, Cox, Sahyoun, Teng, Tateishi, Abdel-Wahab, Piazza, Pighi, Modolo, van Mourik, Wykrzykowska, de Wintet, Lemos, de Brito, Kawashima, Søendergaard, Rosseel, Wang, Gao, Tao, Rück, Kim, van Royen, Terkelsen, Nissen, Adam, Rudolph, Wienemann, Torii, Neuman, Schoechlin, Chen, Elkoumy, Elzomor, Amat-Santos, Mylotte, Soliman and Onuma.)

Importance: Titanium-nitride-oxide (TiNO)-coated stents show faster strut coverage compared with drug-eluting stents without excessive intimal-hyperplasia observed in bare metal stents. It is important to study long-term clinical outcomes after treatment of patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) by TiNO-coated stents, which are neither drug-eluting stents nor bare metal stents., Objective: To compare the rate of main composite outcome of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 5 years in patients with ACS randomized to receive either a TiNO-coated stent or a third-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES)., Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label trial was conducted in 12 clinical sites in 5 European countries and enrolled patients from January 2014 to August 2016. Patients presenting with ACS (ST-segment elevation MI, non-ST-segment elevation MI, and unstable angina) with at least 1 de novo lesion were randomized to receive either a TiNO-coated stent or an EES. The present report analyzes the long-term follow-up for the main composite outcome and its individual components. Analysis took place between November 2022 to March 2023., Main Outcome: The primary end point was a composite of cardiac death, MI, or target lesion revascularization at 12-month follow-up., Results: A total of 1491 patients with ACS were randomly assigned to receive either TiNO-coated stents (989 [66.3%]) or EES (502 [33.7%]). The mean (SD) age was 62.7 (10.8) years, and 363 (24.3%) were female. At 5 years, the main composite outcome events occurred in 111 patients (11.2%) in the TiNO group vs 60 patients (12%) in the EES group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.69-1.28; P = .69). The rate of cardiac death was 0.9% (9 of 989) vs 3.0% (15 of 502) (HR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.13-0.69; P = .005), the rate of MI was 4.6% (45 of 989) vs 7.0% (35 of 502) (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.41-0.99; P = .049), the rate of stent thrombosis was 1.2% (12 of 989) vs 2.8% (14 of 502) (HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.20-0.93; P = .034), and the rate of target lesion revascularization was 7.4% (73 of 989) vs 6.4% (32 of 502) (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.77-1.76; P = .47) in the TiNO-coated stent arm and in the EES arm, respectively., Conclusion and Relevance: In this study, patients with ACS had a main composite outcome that was not different 5 years after TiNO-coated stent or EES., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02049229.

Background: Multisite artery disease is considered a 'malignant' type of atherosclerotic disease associated with an increased cardiovascular risk, but the impact of multisite artery disease on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown., Methods: Patients enrolled in the large, prospective e-Ultimaster study were grouped into (1) those without known prior vascular disease, (2) those with known single-territory vascular disease, and (3) those with known two to three territories (i.e coronary, cerebrovascular, or peripheral) vascular disease (multisite artery disease). The primary outcome was coronary target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year. Inverse propensity score weighted (IPSW) analysis was performed to address differences in baseline patient and lesion characteristics., Results: Of the 37 198 patients included in the study, 62.3% had no prior known vascular disease, 32.6% had single-territory vascular disease, and 5.1% had multisite artery disease. Patients with known vascular disease were older and were more likely to be men and to have more co-morbidities. After IPSW, the TLF rate incrementally increased with the number of diseased vascular beds (3.16%, 4.44%, and 6.42% for no, single, and multisite artery disease, respectively, P < 0.01 for all comparisons). This was also true for all-cause death (2.22%, 3.28%, and 5.29%, P < 0.01 for all comparisons) and cardiac mortality (1.26%, 1.91%, and 3.62%, P ≤ 0.01 for all comparisons)., Conclusions: Patients with previously known vascular disease experienced an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events and mortality post-PCI. This risk is highest among patients with multisite artery disease., Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02188355., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Background: Randomized data comparing outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with surgery in low-surgical risk patients at time points beyond 2 years is limited. This presents an unknown for physicians striving to educate patients as part of a shared decision-making process., Objectives: The authors evaluated 3-year clinical and echocardiographic outcomes from the Evolut Low Risk trial., Methods: Low-risk patients were randomized to TAVR with a self-expanding, supra-annular valve or surgery. The primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or disabling stroke and several secondary endpoints were assessed at 3 years., Results: There were 1,414 attempted implantations (730 TAVR; 684 surgery). Patients had a mean age of 74 years and 35% were women. At 3 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 7.4% of TAVR patients and 10.4% of surgery patients (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.49-1.00; P = 0.051). The difference between treatment arms for all-cause mortality or disabling stroke remained broadly consistent over time: -1.8% at year 1; -2.0% at year 2; and -2.9% at year 3. The incidence of mild paravalvular regurgitation (20.3% TAVR vs 2.5% surgery) and pacemaker placement (23.2% TAVR vs 9.1% surgery; P < 0.001) were lower in the surgery group. Rates of moderate or greater paravalvular regurgitation for both groups were <1% and not significantly different. Patients who underwent TAVR had significantly improved valve hemodynamics (mean gradient 9.1 mm Hg TAVR vs 12.1 mm Hg surgery; P < 0.001) at 3 years., Conclusions: Within the Evolut Low Risk study, TAVR at 3 years showed durable benefits compared with surgery with respect to all-cause mortality or disabling stroke. (Medtronic Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Risk Patients; NCT02701283)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Medtronic (Minneapolis, Minnesota) supplied funding for this study. Dr Forrest has received grant support/research contracts and consultant fees/honoraria/Speakers Bureau fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Deeb has served on an advisory board for Medtronic; has received institutional grant support from Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic; and has received fees as a proctor for the Medtronic-sponsored SMART (Small Annuli Randomized to Evolut or SAPIEN Trial). Dr Yakubov has received grants and personal fees from Medtronic and Boston Scientific. Dr Gada has received personal fees from Medtronic, Abbott Vascular, Becton Dickenson, and Boston Scientific. Dr Mumtaz has served as a consultant to and has received honoraria and research grants from Edwards Lifesciences, the Japanese Organization for Medical Device Development, Medtronic, and Z-Medical. Dr Ramlawi has received grants, personal fees, and nonfinancial support from Medtronic, Liva Nova, and AtriCure. Dr Bajwa has received fees for consulting and proctoring from Medtronic. Dr Teirstein has received research grant and honoraria from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Cordis, and Medtronic; and has served on an advisory board for Boston Scientific and Medtronic. Dr Rutkin has served as a consultant to and has received speaking honoraria from Edwards Lifesciences and Medtronic. Dr Chawla has served as a proctor for Medtronic. Dr Chetcuti has received grants from Edwards Lifesciences, WL Gore Medical, Medtronic, and Boston Scientific; and has received personal fees from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, and Jena. Dr Stoler has served as a consultant to and has received honoraria from Biotronik Inc, Boston Scientific Corporation, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Levack has received personal fees from Medtronic. Dr Goel has received personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences and Abbott; and has served as a consultant for Medtronic. Dr Tchétché has received honoraria or consultation fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and Medtronic. Dr Oh has received grants from Medtronic Echo Core; and has received personal fees from Medtronic Consulting. Dr Huang is a full-time employee and shareholder for Medtronic. Dr Popma is a full-time employee and shareholder for Medtronic. Dr Kleiman has received research grants from Medtronic, Abbott, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific. Dr Reardon has received research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, WL Gore Medical, and Medtronic. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hypertension is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. In the Netherlands, there are approximately 2.8 million people with hypertension. Despite treatment recommendations including lifestyle changes and antihypertensive drugs, most patients do not meet guideline-recommended blood pressure (BP) targets. In order to improve BP control and lower the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events, renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) has been introduced and studied as a non-pharmacological approach. While early data on the efficacy of RDN showed conflicting results, improvements in treatment protocols and study design resulted in robust new evidence supporting the potential of the technology to improve patient care in hypertensive subjects. Recently, 5 randomised sham-controlled trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the technology. Modelling studies have further shown that RDN is cost-effective in the Dutch healthcare setting. Given the undisputable disease burden along with the shortcomings of current therapeutic options, we postulate a new, clearly framed indication for RDN as an adjunct in the treatment of hypertension. The present consensus statement summarises current guideline-recommended BP targets, proposed workup and treatment for hypertension, and position of RDN for those patients with primary hypertension who do not meet guideline-recommended BP targets (see central illustration)., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Female gender has been shown to be associated with worse clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the impact of gender on the clinical outcomes of complex PCI is still poorly understood. This study examined the differences in patient and coronary lesion characteristics and longer-term clinical outcomes in male and female patients who underwent complex PCI. This was a sub-analysis of the e-ULTIMASTER study, which was a large, multicontinental, prospective, observational study enrolling 37,198 patients who underwent PCI with the Ultimaster stent. Patients who underwent complex PCI were stratified by gender. The primary outcome was target lesion failure at 12 months, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months. A total of 13,623 patients underwent complex procedures, of which 35.7% were women. Women were twice as likely as men to be aged ≥80 years (17.6% vs 9%, p <0.0001) and had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors. Women had fewer lesions treated than men (1.5 ± 0.8 vs 1.6 ± 0.8, p <0.0001) and fewer stents implanted (2.0 ± 1.1 vs 2.1 ± 1.1, p <0.0001). There was no statistically significant difference in clinical outcomes at 12 months between women and men. Event rates were comparable in women and men for target lesion failure (4.7% vs 4.3%, p = 0.30), target vessel failure (5.1% vs 4.9%, p = 0.73), and cardiac death (1.8% vs 1.7%, p = 0.80).In conclusion, our findings suggest no significant differences in clinical outcomes between women and men who underwent complex PCI., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has put tremendous pressure on healthcare systems. Most transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) centres have adopted different triage systems and procedural strategies to serve highest-risk patients first and to minimise the burden on hospital logistics and personnel. We therefore assessed the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patient selection, type of anaesthesia and outcomes after TAVI., Methods: We used data from the Netherlands Heart Registration to examine all patients who underwent TAVI between March 2020 and July 2020 (COVID cohort), and between March 2019 and July 2019 (pre-COVID cohort). We compared patient characteristics, procedural characteristics and clinical outcomes., Results: We examined 2131 patients who underwent TAVI (1020 patients in COVID cohort, 1111 patients in pre-COVID cohort). EuroSCORE II was comparable between cohorts (COVID 4.5 ± 4.0 vs pre-COVID 4.6 ± 4.2, p = 0.356). The number of TAVI procedures under general anaesthesia was lower in the COVID cohort (35.2% vs 46.5%, p < 0.001). Incidences of stroke (COVID 2.7% vs pre-COVID 1.7%, p = 0.134), major vascular complications (2.3% vs 3.4%, p = 0.170) and permanent pacemaker implantation (10.0% vs 9.4%, p = 0.634) did not differ between cohorts. Thirty-day and 150-day mortality were comparable (2.8% vs 2.2%, p = 0.359 and 5.2% vs 5.2%, p = 0.993, respectively)., Conclusions: During the COVID-19 pandemic, patient characteristics and outcomes after TAVI were not different than before the pandemic. This highlights the fact that TAVI procedures can be safely performed during the COVID-19 pandemic, without an increased risk of complications or mortality., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Background: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy (APT) after coronary stenting in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) presenting with an acute coronary syndrome remains unclear., Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of an abbreviated APT regimen after coronary stenting in an HBR population presenting with acute or recent myocardial infarction., Methods: In the MASTER DAPT trial, 4,579 patients at HBR were randomized after 1 month of dual APT (DAPT) to abbreviated (DAPT stopped and 11 months single APT or 5 months in patients with oral anticoagulants) or nonabbreviated APT (DAPT for minimum 3 months) strategies. Randomization was stratified by acute or recent myocardial infarction at index procedure. Coprimary outcomes at 335 days after randomization were net adverse clinical outcomes events (NACE); major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE); and type 2, 3, or 5 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding., Results: NACE and MACCE did not differ with abbreviated vs nonabbreviated APT regimens in patients with an acute or recent myocardial infarction (n = 1,780; HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.61-1.12 and HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.62-1.19, respectively) or without an acute or recent myocardial infarction (n = 2,799; HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.77-1.38 and HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.80-1.59; P interaction  = 0.31 and 0.25, respectively). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was significantly reduced in patients with or without an acute or recent myocardial infarction (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.46-0.91 and HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.54-0.92; P interaction  = 0.72) with abbreviated APT., Conclusions: A 1-month DAPT strategy in patients with HBR presenting with an acute or recent myocardial infarction results in similar NACE and MACCE rates and reduces bleedings compared with a nonabbreviated DAPT strategy. (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen [MASTER DAPT]; NCT03023020)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The study was sponsored by the European Cardiovascular Research Institute, a nonprofit organization, and received grant support from Terumo. The sponsor and funder had no role in the study design, data collection, data monitoring, analysis, interpretation, or writing of the report. Dr Smits has received personal fees from Terumo and Opsense; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Microport, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and has received grants from SMT and Microport. Dr Heg reports that CTU Bern, University of Bern, has a staff policy of not accepting honoraria or consultancy fees; however, CTU Bern is involved in design, conduct, or analysis of clinical studies funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations—in particular, pharmaceutical and medical device companies provide direct funding to some of these studies. Dr Vranckx has received personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer AG, BLS Bering, and AstraZeneca. Dr Ozaki has received grants from Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, Daiichi-Sankyo Company Ltd, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, and Sanofi. Dr Morice is a shareholder and CEO of CERC, and a minor shareholder of Electroducer (a startup not involved in the MASTER DAPT trial). Dr Chevalier has received personal fees from Terumo and CERC; and holds stock options in Colibri. Dr Windecker has received research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Bayer, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardinal Health, CadioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, InfraRedx, Johnson & Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Sinomed, Terumo, and V-Wave; serves as an unpaid advisory board member and/or unpaid member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesiences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave, and Xeltis, but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers; and is a member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. Dr Roffi has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, GE Healthcare, and Terumo. Dr Mahfoud has received grants from Terumo, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (TRR 219), and Deutsche Gesellschaft für Kardiologie; has received grants and personal fees from Medtronic and Recor; and has received personal fees from Bayer and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Hildick-Smith has received personal fees from Terumo. Dr Schultz has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular. Dr Valgimigli has received grants and personal fees from Terumo; and has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, Idorsia pharmaceuticals LTD, Universität Basel, Dept Klinische Forschung, Vifor, Bristol Myers Squibb SA, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Vesalio, Novartis, Chiesi, and PhaseBio. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To identify angiographic predictors of aberrant left circumflex artery (LCx) by comparing left main (LM) length and bifurcation angle between patients with aberrant LCx and normal anatomy., Background: Failure to recognize aberrant LCx during a cardiac catheterization may hamper correct diagnosis, delay intervention in acute coronary syndromes, and result in increased contrast volume, radiation exposure, and infarct size., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed angiograms of aberrant LCx patients and normal anatomy matched controls, in three-participating centers. LM-length, bifurcation angle between the left anterior descending (LAD) and the first non-LAD branch of the LM, and procedural data were compared., Results: Between 2003 and 2020, 136 patients with aberrant LCx and 135 controls were identified. More catheters (2.4 ± 0.6 vs. 2.2 ± 0.9, p = 0.009), larger contrast volumes (169 ± 94 ml vs. 129 ± 68 ml, p < 0.0005), and prolonged fluoroscopy time (652.9 ± 623.7 s vs. 393.1 ± 332.1 s, p < 0.0005), were required in the aberrant LCx-group compared with controls. Patients with aberrant LCx had a longer LM-length and a more acute bifurcation angle, both in caudal and cranial views, compared with controls (24.7 ± 8.1 vs. 10.8 ± 4.5 mm, p < 0.0005 and 26.7 ± 7.4 vs. 12 ± 5.5 mm, p < 0.0005, respectively, and 45.2° ± 12° vs. 88.8° ± 23°, p < 0.0005 and 51.9° ± 21° vs. 68.2° ± 28.3°, p < 0.0005, respectively). In ROC analysis, LM-length showed the best diagnostic accuracy for detecting aberrant LCx. In multiple logistic regression analysis, a cranially measured LM-length > 17.7 mm was associated with a 5.3 times greater probability of predicting aberrant LCx [95% CI (3.4-8.1), p < 0.0001]., Conclusions: Our study suggests that a long LM-length and an acute bifurcation angle can indicate the presence of aberrant LCx. We present a practical algorithm for its rapid identification., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Nonadherence to antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is common, even in clinical trials., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of nonadherence to study protocol regimens in the MASTER DAPT (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen) trial., Methods: At 1-month after PCI, 4,579 high bleeding risk patients were randomized to single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for 11 months (or 5 months in patients on oral anticoagulation [OAC]) or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for ≥2 months followed by SAPT. Coprimary outcomes included net adverse clinical events (NACE), major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACE), and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (MCB) at 335 days. Inverse probability-of-censoring weights were used to correct for nonadherence Academic Research Consortium type 2 or 3., Results: In total, 464 (20.2%) patients in the abbreviated-treatment and 214 (9.4%) in the standard-treatment groups incurred nonadherence Academic Research Consortium type 2 or 3. At inverse probability-of-censoring weights analyses, NACE (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.88-1.27) or MACE (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.83-1.40) did not differ, and MCB was lower with abbreviated compared with standard treatment (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.60-0.73) consistently across OAC subgroups; among OAC patients, SAPT discontinuation 6 months after PCI was associated with similar MACE and lower MCB (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.22-0.99) compared with SAPT continuation., Conclusions: In the MASTER DAPT adherent population, 1-month compared with ≥3-month DAPT was associated with similar NACE or MACE and lower MCB. Among OAC patients, SAPT discontinuation after 6 months was associated with similar MACE and lower MCB than SAPT continuation (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen [MASTER DAPT]; NCT03023020)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The MASTER DAPT trial is conducted with support from Terumo. The study sponsor, European Cardiovascular Research Institute (ECRI), Rotterdam, the Netherlands, a nonprofit organization, received grant support from Terumo for the conduct of the MASTER DAPT trial. ECRI outsourced to Clinical trial Unit, Bern, Switzerland all statistical analyses of the present paper under a research contract agreement between the 2 institutions. None of the authors received personal or institutional payment for the present paper. Dr Valgimigli has received grants and personal fees from Terumo; and has received personal fees from AstraZeneca, Alvimedica/CID, Abbott Vascular, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, CoreFLOW, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Universität Basel, Department Klinische Forschung, Vifor, Bristol Myers Squibb SA, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Vesalio, Novartis, Chiesi, and PhaseBio. Dr Heg’s institution, CTU Bern, University of Bern, has a staff policy of not accepting honoraria or consultancy fees; however, CTU Bern is involved in design, conduct, or analysis of clinical studies funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organizations, and in particular, pharmaceutical and medical device companies provide direct funding to some of these studies. Dr Vranckx has received personal fees from Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer AG, BLS Bering, and AstraZeneca. Dr Ozaki has received grants from Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, Daiichi-Sankyo Company Ltd, Otsuka Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, and Sanofi. Dr Morice is a shareholder and CEO of CERC and a minor shareholder of Electroducer (a start-up not involved in the MASTER DAPT trial). Dr Chevalier has received personal fees from Terumo and CERC; and holds stock options in Colibri. Dr Windecker has received grants from Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Bayer, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardinal Health, CadioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Guerbet, InfraRedx, Johnson and Johnson, Medicure, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, OrPha Suisse, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Sinomed, Terumo, and V-Wave; serves as unpaid advisory board member and/or unpaid member of the steering/executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave, and Xeltis, but has not received personal payments by pharmaceutical companies or device manufacturers; is a member of the steering/executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration; is an unpaid member of the Pfizer Research Award selection committee in Switzerland and of the Women as One Awards Committee; is a member of the Clinical Study Group of the Deutsches Zentrum für Herz Kreislauf-Forschung and of the Advisory Board of the Australian Victorian Heart Institute; and is chairperson of the ESC Congress Program Committee, former chairperson of the ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee, and Deputy Editor of JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions. Dr Kala has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific; has received research support from Novartis; and has received honoraria from Bayer, Servier, AstraZeneca, Chiesi, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Schultz has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular. Dr Lopes has received institutional research grants and consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, Medtronic PLC, and Sanofi; and has received consulting fees from Amgen, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim. Dr Podolec has received grants and personal fees from Amgen, Terumo, The Medicines Company, AstraZeneca, and Meril. Dr Smits has received personal fees from Terumo and Opsense; has received grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, Microport, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and has received grants from SMT and Microport. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the TALENT study, the sirolimus-eluting ultrathin strut Supraflex stent was non-inferior to the XIENCE stent for a device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE: defined as cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation [CI-TLR]) at 12 months., Aims: This study investigated the 3-year outcomes of the TALENT trial and long-term impact of ultrathin drug-eluting stents (DES), compared to the XIENCE everolimus-eluting thin stent., Methods: The TALENT trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised all-comers trial comparing the Supraflex sirolimus-eluting stent with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent, with planned follow-up for 3 years., Results: The TALENT trial enrolled 1,435 patients (Supraflex n=720, XIENCE n=715) with 3-year follow-up data available in 97.8% in the Supraflex group, and in 98.9% in the XIENCE group. At 3 years, DoCE occurred in 57 patients (8.1%) in the Supraflex group, and in 66 patients (9.4%) in the XIENCE group (p=0.406). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of cardiac death, TV-MI or CI-TLR. The rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis were low and similar between groups (1.1% vs 1.4%; p=0.640). In a meta-analysis of long-term follow-up (3-5 years), ultrathin strut DES tended to reduce DoCE (relative risk 0.89 [0.79-1.01]; p=0.068), compared to thicker strut DES. The risks for cardiac death and definite or probable stent thrombosis were similar between ultrathin strut DES and thicker strut DES., Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, the use of the Supraflex stent was at least as safe and efficacious as the XIENCE stent in an all-comers population., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT02870140.

Background: Patients with suspected non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are currently transported and admitted to the nearest emergency department (ED) for risk stratification, diagnostic workup and treatment. Although such patients with NSTE-ACS can benefit from direct transfer to a PCI center for early invasive treatment, no reliable prehospital triage tools are available. Recently, the PreHEART score has been validated in the PreHEART study for prehospital triage of patients with suspected NSTE-ACS., Methods: The primary objective of the TRIAGE-ACS study, a prospective cohort study, is to determine whether prehospital triage using the PreHEART score can significantly reduce time from first medical contact to final diagnostics and revascularization in patients in need of coronary revascularization. The first cohort (control cohort; n = 500) is observatory and is used as a reference group for the second cohort. In the second cohort (interventional cohort; n = 500) patients are stratified in the ambulance for direct transfer to either a PCI or a non-PCI center, based on the PreHEART score. These two cohorts will be compared with each other. In total, 1000 patients will be included. Follow-up for endpoints will be performed by reviewing the medical record after 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years., Conclusion: The TRIAGE-ACS study is the first prospective study to investigate the impact of prehospital triage using the PreHEART score on time to final invasive diagnostics and treatment in patients with NSTE-ACS in need of revascularization by transferring high risk patients directly to a PCI center and patients at a low risk of having an NSTE-ACS to a non-PCI center. Such triage strategy could potentially result in optimization of regional care for all ACS patients., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: It is unknown whether computed tomographic coronary angiography (CTCA) can be used to perform ultraselective invasive coronary angiography (ICA) by only visualizing the abnormal coronary artery on CTCA and defer visualization of the normal contralateral coronary artery. This study assessed the accuracy of CTCA in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) on CTCA limited to either the left (LCA) or right coronary artery (RCA) in predicting a contralateral coronary artery without abnormalities on CTCA determined to be normal by ICA., Methods: This retrospective analysis included patients with CAD limited to the LCA or RCA on CTCA. Primary endpoint was the accuracy of CTCA to predict a contralateral coronary artery without abnormalities on CTCA to be normal by ICA. Secondary endpoints were potential reductions in procedure time and radiation exposure if an ultraselective ICA approach would be used compared to standard ICA., Results: In total, 202 patients were included. CTCA was correct in predicting a normal contralateral coronary artery in 201 of the 202 patients (99.5%). Deferring ICA of the normal contralateral coronary artery on CTCA resulted in a potential reduction in procedure time and dose area product of 4.22 ± 2.67 minutes (61 ± 16% reduction) and 1501 ± 1304 mGy•cm² (29 ± 13% reduction)., Conclusions: In this retrospective study, CTCA was extremely accurate in predicting a normal contralateral coronary artery in patients with LCA- or RCA-limited CAD on CTCA. A potential CTCA-guided ultraselective ICA approach was feasible and would have led to a considerable decrease in procedure time and radiation exposure.

Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose.

Objective: To review, inventory and compare available diagnostic tools and investigate which tool has the best performance for prehospital risk assessment in patients suspected of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS)., Methods: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Medline and Embase were searched up till 1 April 2021. Prospective studies with patients, suspected of NSTE-ACS, presenting in the primary care setting or by emergency medical services (EMS) were included. The most important exclusion criteria were studies including only patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and studies before 1995, the pretroponin era. The primary end point was the final hospital discharge diagnosis of NSTE-ACS or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 6 weeks. Risk of bias was evaluated by the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies Criteria., Main Outcome and Measures: Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratio of findings for risk stratification in patients suspected of NSTE-ACS., Results: In total, 15 prospective studies were included; these studies reflected in total 26 083 patients. No specific variables related to symptoms, physical examination or risk factors were useful in risk stratification for NSTE-ACS diagnosis. The most useful electrocardiographic finding was ST-segment depression (LR+3.85 (95% CI 2.58 to 5.76)). Point-of-care troponin was found to be a strong predictor for NSTE-ACS in primary care (LR+14.16 (95% CI 4.28 to 46.90) and EMS setting (LR+6.16 (95% CI 5.02 to 7.57)). Combined risk scores were the best for risk assessment in an NSTE-ACS. From the combined risk scores that can be used immediately in a prehospital setting, the PreHEART score, a validated combined risk score for prehospital use, derived from the HEART score (History, ECG, Age, Risk factors, Troponin), was most useful for risk stratification in patients with NSTE-ACS (LR+8.19 (95% CI 5.47 to 12.26)) and for identifying patients without ACS (LR-0.05 (95% CI 0.02 to 0.15))., Discussion: Important study limitations were verification bias and heterogeneity between studies. In the prehospital setting, several diagnostic tools have been reported which could improve risk stratification, triage and early treatment in patients suspected for NSTE-ACS. On-site assessment of troponin and combined risk scores derived from the HEART score are strong predictors. These results support further studies to investigate the impact of these new tools on logistics and clinical outcome., Funding: This study is funded by ZonMw, the Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development., Trial Registration Number: This meta-analysis was published for registration in PROSPERO prior to starting (CRD York, CRD42021254122)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: Quantification of coronary blood flow is used to evaluate coronary artery disease, but our understanding of flow through branched systems is poor. Murray's law defines coronary morphometric scaling, the relationship between flow (Q) and vessel diameter (D) and is the basis for minimum lumen area targets when intervening on bifurcation lesions. Murray's original law (Q α D P ) dictates that the exponent (P) is 3.0, whilst constant blood velocity throughout the system would suggest an exponent of 2.0. In human coronary arteries, the value of Murray's exponent remains unknown. Aim: To establish the exponent in Murray's power law relationship that best reproduces coronary blood flows (Q) and microvascular resistances (Rmicro) in a bifurcating coronary tree. Methods and Results: We screened 48 cases, and were able to evaluate inlet Q and Rmicro in 27 branched coronary arteries, taken from 20 patients, using a novel computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model which reconstructs 3D coronary anatomy from angiography and uses pressure-wire measurements to compute Q and Rmicro distribution in the main- and side-branches. Outputs were validated against invasive measurements using a Rayflow™ catheter. A Murray's power law exponent of 2.15 produced the strongest correlation and closest agreement with inlet Q (zero bias, r = 0.47, p = 0.006) and an exponent of 2.38 produced the strongest correlation and closest agreement with Rmicro (zero bias, r = 0.66, p = 0.0001). Conclusions: The optimal power law exponents for Q and Rmicro were not 3.0, as dictated by Murray's Law, but 2.15 and 2.38 respectively. These data will be useful in assessing patient-specific coronary physiology and tailoring revascularisation decisions., Competing Interests: PM is named as an inventor on a University of Sheffield patent that describes elements of the CFD method. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Taylor, Feher, Halliday, Hose, Gosling, Aubiniere-Robb, van ‘t Veer, Keulards, Tonino, Rochette, Gunn and Morris.)

Background: Randomized clinical trials have shown that transcatheter aortic valve replacement is noninferior to surgery in low surgical risk patients. We compared outcomes in patients treated with a sutured (stented or stentless) or sutureless surgical valve from the Evolut Low Risk Trial., Methods: The Evolut Low Risk Trial enrolled patients with severe aortic stenosis and low surgical risk. Patients were randomized to self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement or surgery. Use of sutureless or sutured valves was at the surgeons' discretion., Results: Six hundred eighty patients underwent surgical aortic valve implantation (205 sutureless, 475 sutured). The Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 30-day safety composite endpoint was similar in the sutureless and sutured group (10.8% vs 11.0%, P = .93). All-cause mortality between groups was similar at 30 days (0.5% vs 1.5%, P = .28) and 1 year (3.3% vs 2.6%, P = .74). Disabling stroke was also similar at 30 days (2.0% vs 1.5%, P = .65) and 1 year (2.6% vs 2.2%, P = .76). Permanent pacemaker implantation at 30 days was significantly higher in the sutureless compared with the sutured group (14.4% vs 2.9%, P < .001). Aortic valve-related hospitalizations occurred more often at 1 year with sutureless valves (9.1% vs 5.1%, P = .04). Mean gradients 1 year after sutureless and sutured aortic valve replacement were 9.9 ± 4.2 versus 11.7 ± 4.7 mm Hg (P < .001)., Conclusions: Among low-risk patients, sutureless versus sutured valve use did not demonstrate a benefit in terms of 30-day complications and produced marginally better hemodynamics but with an increased rate of pacemaker implantation and valve-related hospitalizations., (Copyright © 2022 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease have been found to have better outcomes with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG) than with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but studies in which PCI is guided by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been lacking., Methods: In this multicenter, international, noninferiority trial, patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo CABG or FFR-guided PCI with current-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary end point was the occurrence within 1 year of a major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular event, defined as death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. Noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI to CABG was prespecified as an upper boundary of less than 1.65 for the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. Secondary end points included a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; safety was also assessed., Results: A total of 1500 patients underwent randomization at 48 centers. Patients assigned to undergo PCI received a mean (±SD) of 3.7±1.9 stents, and those assigned to undergo CABG received 3.4±1.0 distal anastomoses. The 1-year incidence of the composite primary end point was 10.6% among patients randomly assigned to undergo FFR-guided PCI and 6.9% among those assigned to undergo CABG (hazard ratio, 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1 to 2.2), findings that were not consistent with noninferiority of FFR-guided PCI (P = 0.35 for noninferiority). The incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke was 7.3% in the FFR-guided PCI group and 5.2% in the CABG group (hazard ratio, 1.4; 95% CI, 0.9 to 2.1). The incidences of major bleeding, arrhythmia, and acute kidney injury were higher in the CABG group than in the FFR-guided PCI group., Conclusions: In patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided PCI was not found to be noninferior to CABG with respect to the incidence of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization at 1 year. (Funded by Medtronic and Abbott Vascular; FAME 3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02100722.)., (Copyright © 2021 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Objectives: We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of the Allegra transcatheter heart valve (THV) for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis in a large patient population treated under real-world conditions., Background: The Allegra is a novel self-expanding THV with supra-annular bovine leaflets. The valve is available in three different sizes (23, 27, and 31 mm), all are delivered through an 18F sheath., Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with the Allegra THV were enrolled in a multicenter-registry. Data were collected throughout initial hospital-stay and at 30-day follow-up. Clinical endpoints were defined according to the updated definitions of the Valve-Academic-Research-Consortium., Results: This registry included 255 patients (mean age 83 ± 6 years, 48% women) from four European centers. Median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score (EuroSCORE II) was 3.3% (IQR 1.9-5.8%). Acute device success was 95.7%. The remaining 11 patients had either moderate paravalvular regurgitation immediately after the procedure (7 patients) or the device could not be optimal positioned requiring implantation of a second THV (4 patients). Major vascular complications and major/life-threatening bleedings occurred in 10 (3.9%) and 12 (4.7%) patients, respectively. At 30 day follow-up, mean effective orifice area was 2.2 ± 0.5 cm 2 , mean gradient was 6.9 ± 3.8 mmHg, 7 (3.3%) patients had more than mild paravalvular leakage, 3 patients (1.2%) had died, 6 patients (2.4%) had a stroke and 30 (12.8%) patients had required implantation of a new permanent pacemaker., Conclusions: Transfemoral implantation of the Allegra THV resulted in favorable clinical and echocardiographic outcomes during hospitalization and short-term follow up., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Machine learning models have been developed for numerous medical prognostic purposes. These models are commonly developed using data from single centers or regional registries. Including data from multiple centers improves robustness and accuracy of prognostic models. However, data sharing between multiple centers is complex, mainly because of regulations and patient privacy issues. Objective: We aim to overcome data sharing impediments by using distributed ML and local learning followed by model integration. We applied these techniques to develop 1-year TAVI mortality estimation models with data from two centers without sharing any data. Methods: A distributed ML technique and local learning followed by model integration was used to develop models to predict 1-year mortality after TAVI. We included two populations with 1,160 (Center A) and 631 (Center B) patients. Five traditional ML algorithms were implemented. The results were compared to models created individually on each center. Results: The combined learning techniques outperformed the mono-center models. For center A, the combined local XGBoost achieved an AUC of 0.67 (compared to a mono-center AUC of 0.65) and, for center B, a distributed neural network achieved an AUC of 0.68 (compared to a mono-center AUC of 0.64). Conclusion: This study shows that distributed ML and combined local models techniques, can overcome data sharing limitations and result in more accurate models for TAVI mortality estimation. We have shown improved prognostic accuracy for both centers and can also be used as an alternative to overcome the problem of limited amounts of data when creating prognostic models., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 Lopes, Mamprin, Zelis, Tonino, van Mourik, Vis, Zinger, de Mol, de With and Marquering.)

Background: The appropriate duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients at high risk for bleeding after the implantation of a drug-eluting coronary stent remains unclear., Methods: One month after they had undergone implantation of a biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent, we randomly assigned patients at high bleeding risk to discontinue dual antiplatelet therapy immediately (abbreviated therapy) or to continue it for at least 2 additional months (standard therapy). The three ranked primary outcomes were net adverse clinical events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding), major adverse cardiac or cerebral events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke), and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding; cumulative incidences were assessed at 335 days. The first two outcomes were assessed for noninferiority in the per-protocol population, and the third outcome for superiority in the intention-to-treat population., Results: Among the 4434 patients in the per-protocol population, net adverse clinical events occurred in 165 patients (7.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 172 (7.7%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -0.23 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.80 to 1.33; P<0.001 for noninferiority). A total of 133 patients (6.1%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and 132 patients (5.9%) in the standard-therapy group had a major adverse cardiac or cerebral event (difference, 0.11 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.29 to 1.51; P = 0.001 for noninferiority). Among the 4579 patients in the intention-to-treat population, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 148 patients (6.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 211 (9.4%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -2.82 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.40 to -1.24; P<0.001 for superiority)., Conclusions: One month of dual antiplatelet therapy was noninferior to the continuation of therapy for at least 2 additional months with regard to the occurrence of net adverse clinical events and major adverse cardiac or cerebral events; abbreviated therapy also resulted in a lower incidence of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. (Funded by Terumo; MASTER DAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03023020.)., (Copyright © 2021 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

The need for a quantitative and operator-independent assessment of coronary microvascular function is increasingly recognized. We propose the theoretical framework of microvascular resistance reserve (MRR) as an index specific for the microvasculature, independent of autoregulation and myocardial mass, and based on operator-independent measurements of absolute values of coronary flow and pressure. In its general form, MRR equals coronary flow reserve (CFR) divided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) corrected for driving pressures. In 30 arteries, pressure, temperature, and flow velocity measurements were obtained simultaneously at baseline (BL), during infusion of saline at 10 mL/min (rest) and 20 mL/min (hyperemia). A strong correlation was found between continuous thermodilution-derived MRR and Doppler MRR (r = 0.88; 95% confidence interval: 0.72-0.93; P < 0.001). MRR was independent from the epicardial resistance, the lower the FFR value, the greater the difference between MRR and CFR. Therefore, MRR is proposed as a specific, quantitative, and operator-independent metric to quantify coronary microvascular dysfunction., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr De Bruyne has had a consulting relationship with Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, CathWorks, Siemens, and Coroventis Research; has received research grants from Abbott Vascular, Coroventis Research, Cathworks, and Boston Scientific; and holds minor equities in Philips-Volcano, Siemens, GE Healthcare, Edwards Life Sciences, HeartFlow, Opsens, and Celiad. Dr Pijls has received institutional grants from Abbott Vascular and Hexacath; has served as a consultant for Abbott Vascular, GE, and Opsens; and has minor equities in Philips, GE, ASML, and HeartFlow. Dr Collet has received research grants from Biosensor, GE Healthcare, Medis Medical Imaging, Pie Medical Imaging, Cathworks, Boston Scientific, Siemens, HeartFlow Inc, and Abbott Vascular; and has received consultancy fees from Heart Flow Inc, Opsens, Pie Medical Imaging, Abbott Vascular, and Philips-Volcano. Dr Barbato has received speaker’s fees from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, and GE. Dr Fearon has received institutional research support from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and Edwards Lifesciences; has had a consulting relationship with CathWorks; and holds minor stock options with HeartFlow. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients at high bleeding risk with or without oral anticoagulation (OAC) after coronary stenting remains unclear., Methods: In the investigator-initiated, randomize, open-label MASTER DAPT trial (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Standard DAPT Regimen), 4579 patients at high bleeding risk were randomized after 1-month dual APT to abbreviated or nonabbreviated APT strategies. Randomization was stratified by concomitant OAC indication. In this subgroup analysis, we report outcomes of populations with or without an OAC indication. In the population with an OAC indication, patients changed immediately to single APT for 5 months (abbreviated regimen) or continued ≥2 months of dual APT and single APT thereafter (nonabbreviated regimen). Patients without an OAC indication changed to single APT for 11 months (abbreviated regimen) or continued ≥5 months of dual APT and single APT thereafter (nonabbreviated regimen). Coprimary outcomes at 335 days after randomization were net adverse clinical outcomes (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding events); major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke); and type 2, 3, or 5 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding., Results: Net adverse clinical outcomes or major adverse cardiac and cerebral events did not differ with abbreviated versus nonabbreviated APT regimens in patients with OAC indication (n=1666; hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.60-1.15]; and HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.60-1.30], respectively) or without OAC indication (n=2913; HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.77-1.33]; or HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.79-1.44]; P interaction =0.35 and 0.45, respectively). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding did not significantly differ in patients with OAC indication (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.62-1.12]) but was lower with abbreviated APT in patients without OAC indication (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.41-0.74]; P interaction =0.057). The difference in bleeding in patients without OAC indication was driven mainly by a reduction in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2 bleedings (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.33-0.69]; P interaction =0.021)., Conclusions: Rates of net adverse clinical outcomes and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events did not differ with abbreviated APT in patients with high bleeding risk with or without an OAC indication and resulted in lower bleeding rates in patients without an OAC indication. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03023020.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the safety of selective intracoronary hypothermia during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) in patients with anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)., Background: Selective intracoronary hypothermia is a novel treatment designed to reduce myocardial reperfusion injury and is currently being investigated in the ongoing randomized controlled EURO-ICE (European Intracoronary Cooling Evaluation in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial (NCT03447834). Data on the safety of such a procedure during PPCI are still limited., Methods: The first 50 patients with anterior STEMI treated with selective intracoronary hypothermia during PPCI were included in this analysis and compared for safety with the first 50 patients randomized to the control group undergoing standard PPCI. In-hospital mortality, occurrence of rhythm or conduction disturbances, stent thrombosis, onset of heart failure during the procedure, and subsequent hospital admission were assessed., Results: In-hospital mortality was 0%. One patient in both groups developed cardiogenic shock. Atrial fibrillation occurred in 0 and 3 patients (P = 0.24), and ventricular fibrillation occurred in 5 and 3 patients (P = 0.72) in the intracoronary hypothermia group and control group, respectively. Stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients in the intracoronary hypothermia group; 1 instance was intraprocedural, and the other occurred following interruption of dual-antiplatelet therapy consequent to an intracranial hemorrhage 6 days after enrollment. No stent thrombosis was observed in the control group (P = 0.50)., Conclusions: Selective intracoronary hypothermia during PPCI in patients with anterior STEMI can be implemented within the routine of PPCI and seems to be safe. The final safety results will be reported at the end of the trial., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures Dr Engstrøm has received personal fees from Abbott and Bayer, outside the submitted work. Dr Oldroyd has received employee fees from Biosensors International, outside the submitted work. Dr Karamasis has received personal fees from Abbott Vascular, outside the submitted work. Dr Keeble has received grants from Abbott Vascular, Zoll, and AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work. Dr De Bruyne has received grant support from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, and St. Jude Medical; has received consulting fees from St. Jude Medical, Opsens, and Boston Scientific, outside the submitted work; and is a shareholder in Siemens, GE, Bayer, Philips, HeartFlow, Edwards Lifesciences, and Ceyliad. Dr Berry has received grants from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Coroventis, GlaxoSmithKline, HeartFlow, Medyria, Neovasc, Novartis, Siemens Healthcare, and Menarini, outside the submitted work; and is supported by research funding from the British Heart Foundation (RE/18/6134217). Dr Pijls has received personal fees from Abbott and Opsens; holds equity in Philips, ASML, HeartFlow and GE Healthcare; and has received institutional research grants from Abbott and Hexacath. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Performing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for fractional flow reserve (FFR) positive coronary lesions improves clinical outcomes and is recommended by international guidelines. It has been hypothesized that lesions with a positive FFR but a preserved coronary flow reserve (CFR) are less likely to be flow limiting and might best be treated medically. We investigated the association of CFR in FFR-positive lesions with clinical outcomes when treated medically, as well as the treatment effect of PCI vs medical therapy in FFR-positive lesions and a preserved CFR., Methods: We performed a substudy of the randomized, multicenter Compare-Acute trial, in which stabilized ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with non-culprit lesions were randomized to either FFR-guided PCI or medical therapy. Based on baseline and hyperemic pressure gradients, we computed physiologic limits of CFR, the so-called pressure-bounded CFR (pb-CFR), and classified lesions as low (<2) or preserved (≥2). The primary endpoint was 12-month major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate, defined as a composite of death from any cause, non-fatal myocardial infarction, revascularization, or cerebrovascular events., Results: A total of 980 lesions from 885 patients were included in this substudy. In lesions with FFR ≤0.80, a total of 249 patients had a pb-CFR <2 and 29 patients had a preserved CFR (pb-CFR ≥2). The rate of MACCE at 1 year was not significantly different between patients with FFR ≤0.80 and pb-CFR <2 vs patients with FFR ≤0.80 and pb-CFR ≥2 (25% vs 17%, respectively; P=.39). Because of randomization, baseline characteristics were well balanced between patients with FFR ≤0.80 and pb-CFR ≥2 treated by either by PCI or medical therapy. Importantly, in patients with FFR ≤0.80 and pb-CFR ≥2, MACCE occurred more frequently in patients treated medically vs patients treated by PCI (44% vs 0%, respectively; P=.01)., Conclusions: Preserved or low pb-CFR did not alter clinical outcomes in patients with a positive FFR. Patients with FFR-positive coronary lesions but a preserved CFR had more clinical events when treated medically vs those treated with PCI.