Search

Purpose: Dual antiplatelet therapy is standard for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stents. Traditionally, patients swallow the loading dose of a P2Y12 inhibitor before or during PCI. Time to achieve adequate platelet inhibition after swallowing the loading dose varies significantly. Chewed tablets may allow more rapid inhibition of platelet aggregation. However, data for this strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease or non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) are less robust. Methods: In this single-center prospective trial, 112 P2Y12-naïve patients with stable ischemic heart disease or NSTE-ACS on aspirin therapy and who received ticagrelor after coronary angiography but before PCI were randomized to chewing (n = 55) or swallowing (n = 57) the ticagrelor loading dose (180 mg). Baseline variables were compared using 2-sample t-test and chi-squared/Fisher’s exact tests as appropriate, with alpha set at 0.05. P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) were compared at baseline, 1 hour, and 4 hours using Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Patients then received standard ticagrelor dosing. Results: After exclusions, P2Y12 PRU in the chewed and swallowed groups at baseline, 1 hour, and 4 hours after ticagrelor loading dose were 243 vs 256 (P = 0.75), 143 vs 210 (P = 0.09), and 28 vs 25 (P = 0.89), respectively. No differences were found in major adverse cardiac events (MACE) or major bleeding at 30 days and 1 year. Conclusions: In patients with stable ischemic heart disease or NSTE-ACS, chewing rather than swallowing ticagrelor may lead to slightly faster inhibition of platelet aggregation at 1 hour with no increase in MACE or major bleeding.

Background: In patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable ischemic heart disease, recent guidelines recommend oral anticoagulant (OAC) monotherapy in preference to OAC + single antiplatelet agent (SAPT) dual therapy. However, these data are based on the results of only two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and a relatively small group of patients. Thus, the safety and efficacy of this approach may be underpowered to detect a significant difference. We hypothesized that OAC monotherapy will have a reduced risk of bleeding, but similar all-cause mortality and ischemic outcomes as compared to dual therapy (OAC + SAPT). Methods: A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus was conducted. Safety outcomes included total bleeding, major bleeding, and others. Efficacy outcomes included all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RCTs and observational studies were pooled separately (study design stratified meta-analysis). Subgroup analyses were performed for vitamin K antagonists and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Pooled risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Mantel–Haenszel method. Results: Meta-analysis of 2 RCTs comprising a total of 2905 patients showed that dual therapy (OAC + SAPT) vs. OAC monotherapy was associated with a statistically significant increase in major bleeding (RR 1.51; 95% CI [1.10, 2.06]). There was no significant reduction in MACE (RR 1.10; [0.71, 1.72]), stroke (RR 1.29; [0.85, 1.95]), myocardial infarction (RR 0.57; [0.28, 1.16]), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.22; [0.63, 2.35]), or all-cause mortality (RR 1.18 [0.52, 2.68]). Meta-analysis of 20 observational studies comprising 47,451 patients showed that dual therapy (OAC + SAPT) vs. OAC monotherapy was associated with a statistically significant higher total bleeding (RR 1.50; [1.20, 1.88]), major bleeding (RR = 1.49; [1.38, 1.61]), gastrointestinal bleeding (RR = 1.62; [1.15, 2.28]), and myocardial infarction (RR = 1.15; [1.05, 1.26]), without significantly lower MACE (RR 1.10; [0.97, 1.24]), stroke (RR 0.93; [0.73, 1.19]), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.11; [0.95, 1.29]), or all-cause mortality (RR 0.93; [0.78, 1.11]). Subgroup analysis showed similar results for both vitamin K antagonists and DOACs, except a statistically significant higher intracranial bleeding with vitamin K antagonist + SAPT vs. vitamin K antagonist monotherapy (RR 1.89; [1.36–2.63]). Conclusions: In patients with AF and stable ischemic heart disease, OAC + SAPT as compared to OAC monotherapy is associated with a significant increase in bleeding events without a significant reduction in thrombotic events, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: After the results of the ISCHEMIA Trial, the role of myocardial ischemia in the prognosis of coronary artery disease was under debate. We sought to comparatively evaluate the long-term prognosis of patients with multivessel CAD with or without documented myocardial ischemia.Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective, observational cohort study that included patients with CAD obtained from the research protocols database of "The Medicine, Angioplasty or Surgery Study," the MASS Study Group. Patients were stratified according to the presence or absence of myocardial ischemia. Cardiovascular events (overall mortality and myocardial infarction) were tracked from the registry entry up to a median follow-up of 8.7 years. Myocardial ischemia was assessed at baseline by a functional test with or without imaging.Results: From 1995 to 2018, 2015 patients with multivessel CAD were included. Of these, 1001 presented with conclusive tests at registry entry, 790 (79%) presenting with ischemia and 211 (21%) without ischemia. The median follow-up was 8.7 years (IQR 4.04 to 10.07). The primary outcome occurred in 228 (28.9%) patients with ischemia and in 64 (30.3%) patients without ischemia (plog-rank=0.60). No significant interaction was observed with the presence of myocardial ischemia and treatment strategies in the occurrence of the combined primary outcome (pinteration=0.14).Conclusions: In this sample, myocardial ischemia was not associated with a worse prognosis compared with no ischemia in patients with multivessel CAD. These results refer to debates about the role of myocardial ischemia in the occurrence of cardiovascular events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ISCHEMIA trial showed similar cardiovascular outcomes of an initial conservative strategy as compared with invasive management in patients with stable ischemic heart disease without left main stenosis. We aim to assess the feasibility of predicting significant left main stenosis using extensive clinical, laboratory and non-invasive tests data.Methods: All adult patients who had stress testing prior to undergoing an elective coronary angiography for stable ischemic heart disease in Ontario, Canada, between April 2010 and March 2019, were included. Candidate predictors included comprehensive demographics, comorbidities, laboratory tests, and cardiac stress test data. The outcome was stenosis of 50% or greater in the left main coronary artery. A traditional model (logistic regression) and a machine learning algorithm (boosted trees) were used to build prediction models.Results: Among 150,423 patients included (mean age: 64.2 ± 10.6 years; 64.1% males), there were 9,225 (6.1%) with left main stenosis. The final logistic regression model included 24 predictors and 3 interactions, had an optimism-adjusted c-statistic of 0.72 and adequate calibration (optimism-adjusted Integrated Calibration Index 0.0044). These results were consistent in subgroups of males and females, diabetes and non-diabetes, and extent of ischemia. The boosted tree algorithm had similar accuracy, also resulting in a c-statistic of 0.72 and adequate calibration (Integrated Calibration Index 0.0054).Conclusions: In this large population-based study of patients with stable ischemic heart disease using extensive clinical data, only modest prediction of left main coronary artery disease was possible with traditional and machine learning modelling techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Potent P2Y 12 agents such as ticagrelor and prasugrel are increasingly utilized across the clinical spectrum of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is a paucity of data supporting their use in a patient population inclusive of both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients. The authors compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world contemporary PCI cohort. Consecutive patients undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2019 discharged on either prasugrel or ticagrelor were included from the prospectively collected institutional PCI registry. Primary endpoint was the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with secondary outcomes including rates of bleeding, stroke, and target vessel revascularization at 1 year. Overall, 3,858 patients were included in the study (ticagrelor: n = 2,771; prasugrel: n = 1,087), and a majority (48.4%) underwent PCI in the context of CCS. Patients prescribed ticagrelor were more likely to be female, have a history of cerebrovascular disease, and have ACS presentation, while those receiving prasugrel were more likely to be White with a higher prevalence of prior revascularization. No difference in the risk of death or MI was noted across the groups (ticagrelor vs prasugrel: 3.3% vs 3.1%; HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.54-1.43; P = 0.59). Rates of target vessel revascularization were significantly lower in the ticagrelor cohort (9.3% vs 14.0%; adjusted HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55-0.91; P = 0.007) with no differences in stroke or bleeding. The results were consistent in patients with CCS (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54) and ACS (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54), without evidence of interaction (P = 0.37), and confirmed across multivariable adjustment and propensity score stratification analysis. In this contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar 1-year efficacy and safety. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When choosing tactics for the treatment of patients with stable coronary artery disease, invasive coronary angiography remains the gold standard for diagnosis and is a crucial method in choosing tactics and volume of revascularization. However, in the presence of borderline (>50-70%), multilevel lesions of the coronary artery, there is a need for additional assessment of the physiological significance of each stenosis. The aim. To develop an algorithm to optimize the use of fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement in interventional treatment of borderline (>50-70%), multilevel lesions of coronary arteries, to show the safety of “functional revascula­ rization” in comparison with traditional angiography. Materials and methods. The study included 32 patients who were treated at the National Amosov Institute of Cardiovascular Surgery in the period from 2017 to 2021 (the vast majority were men – 25 patients (67%) and 7 (33%) women) aged 60.3±8.3 years who had >50-75% multilevel lesions of one of the main coronary arteries according to selective invasive coronary angiography. The patients were divided into two groups: 1) Angiographic group (n = 17, 53%), where the volume and tactics of revascularization were determined only by angiography (maximum complete anatomical revascularization); 2) Functional group (n=15, 47%) (combination of angiography data and FFR measurement, the so-called “functional revascularization”). Conclusions. An effective and safe algorithm for measuring FFR in multilevel lesions (reducing the number of implanted stents) is shown.

The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trial is the latest in a series of studies evaluating the role of coronary revascularization plus optimal medical therapy (invasive management) as compared to optimal medical therapy alone (conservative management) in the management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease. The "headline" results suggested invasive management did not reduce overall major adverse cardiac events in the intermediate term (~ 3.2 years), although it did sustainably reduce angina. In addition, invasive management reduced spontaneous myocardial infarction, with potentially important beneficial consequences on both long-term mortality and quality of life. This review puts the ISCHEMIA trial into historical context, explores the trial's results and limitations and shows why revascularization remains an important adjunct to optimal medical therapy that should be considered by all patients with stable ischemic heart disease and the physicians who care for them. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of Review: For decades, the standard of care for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) has been an ischemia-centric approach based on largely observational data suggesting a survival benefit of revascularization in patients with moderate-or-severe ischemia. In this article, we will objectively review the evolution of the ischemia paradigm, the trial evidence comparing revascularization to medical therapy in SIHD, and what contemporary practice should be in 2022. Recent Findings: Randomized trials, including COURAGE and, most recently, the ISCHEMIA trial, have shown no reduction in "hard outcomes" like death and myocardial infarction (MI) in SIHD compared to medical therapy. The trial excluded high-risk patients with left main disease, low ejection fraction (EF) < 35%, and severe unacceptable angina. Irrespective of the severity of ischemia and the extent of coronary artery disease (CAD), revascularization did not offer any prognostic advantage over medical therapy. On the other hand, there was a durable improvement in symptoms. While there are many caveats to the ISCHEMIA trial, the overall strengths of the trial outweigh these limitations. The findings of ISCHEMIA are consistent with previous trials. Summary: It is time for the cardiology community to pivot towards medical therapy as the initial step for most patients with SIHD. Physicians should have the "COURAGE" to embrace "ISCHEMIA" and be comfortable with treating ischemia medically. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Guidelines and international appropriate use criteria increasingly endorse non-invasive stress testing to evaluate patients with suspected chronic coronary disease (CCD). We sought to review the real-world utilisation of non-invasive stress testing and investigate whether their use prior to PCI associates with outcomes in patients with CCD., Methods: Consecutive patients from a multicentre registry who underwent PCI for CCD between 2006 and 2018 were included. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were stratified according to whether stress testing was performed prior to PCI (stress vs no-stress groups). The primary outcome was 3-year all-cause mortality., Results: Among the 8251 patients included, 4970 (60.2 %) underwent pre-PCI stress testing and this proportion increased over time (p-for-trend<0.001). The stress group had a lower prevalence of prior revascularization, myocardial infarction, or heart failure, and a lower incidence of triple vessel disease, in stent re-stenosis, and ACC/AHA class B2/C lesions (all p < 0.001). When comparing post-procedural outcomes, the stress group had lower rates of arrhythmia (1.5 % vs 2.6 %, p = 0.001), new heart failure (0.2 % vs 0.8 %, p = 0.001), renal impairment, and a shorter length of stay (1.6 vs 2.1 days, p < 0.001). Mortality at 3-years was lower in those undergoing PCI following stress testing (5.8 % vs 8.8 %, p < 0.001). After adjusting for key clinical variables, stress guided revascularization was associated with a significantly lower risk of 3-year mortality (adjusted Hazard Ratio 0.77, 95 % CI 0.64-0.92)., Conclusions: In patients with CCD, PCI guided by non-invasive stress testing is increasingly utilized and associated with improved survival. Further studies are necessary to investigate whether this results from differences in patient characteristics, optimized patient selection, or refined choice of target vessel., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose of Review: The balance between efficacy and harm remains a challenge in the adoption of non-vitamin K antagonist direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) for secondary atherosclerotic disease prevention. We provide a comprehensive review of the evidence for and against the addition of DOACs to the current management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, including stable coronary artery disease (CAD), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), peripheral artery disease (PAD), and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). Recent Findings: The DOAC class exerts pleiotropic effects on atherosclerotic progression through coagulation and inflammatory pathways. In ACS, low-dose DOAC provides no added efficacy in the setting of dual antiplatelet therapy; however, full-dose DOAC increases bleeding. Efficacy-safety profile favor use of low-dose rivaroxaban in select stable CAD or PAD patients. Atrial fibrillation patients undergoing PCI resort to dual therapy with DOAC due to prohibitory bleeding with triple anti-thrombotic therapy. Summary: Evidence favors DOAC use in CAD and PAD; however, careful individual considerations must be undertaken. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Clinical outcomes of stable angina patients treated according to guidelines recommendations (medical therapy first, selective revascularization in high risk or unresponsive patients) are not fully known. Eight hundred thirty-three patients with newly diagnosed, stable angina were enrolled in a prospective, observational, nationwide registry and followed for 1 year. Symptoms and quality of life were evaluated with the CCS angina grading, with a self-assessment scale and with the SAQ-7. A composite end-point of MACEs (all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or hospitalization for unstable angina) at 1 year was considered. Upon enrollment, all patients were prescribed guidelines directed medical therapy. After one month of therapy, angina relieved or improved in 47% of the overall population. Patients in CCS class I significantly increased from 28.4% at enrollment to 67.1% at 12 months, and the SAQ-7 score from 58.4 ± 20 to 85.9 ± 14. The rate of MACEs was low (2.9%) in the overall population. After one month of medical therapy, 40.6% of patients were referred for coronary angiography and revascularization for resistant symptoms (invasive strategy). Among these, 38.2% had normal coronary arteries and 47% actually underwent revascularization. No difference between invasive and medical groups was found at 12 months in symptoms, quality of life and MACEs, except for a greater improvement in self-assessed symptoms in the invasive group. Combined medical and invasive strategies left 28.5% of patients still symptomatic at the end of the study. The study confirms the efficacy and safety of a tailored approach to stable angina, as recommended by guidelines, with medical therapy first followed by selective revascularization when needed. [Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To investigate ventriculo-arterial coupling (VAC) and its components (Ea, Ees) in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and changes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). 129 patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) undergoing PCI (study group) and 40 individuals without IHD (control group) were enrolled. VAC was calculated using echocardiography method at baseline and 1, 3, and 6 months after PCI. A linear mixed-effects models with restricted maximum likelihood were used to assess the impact of PCI on Ea, Ees, VAC over 6-month follow-up. Mean age of the SIHD group was 67.8 ± 8.1 (years), and predominantly men (73.6%). In the SIHD group, baseline median Ea, Ees and VAC were 2.52 (IQR 1.89–3.28) (mmHg/ml), 3.87 (IQR 2.90–4.95) (mmHg/ml), and 0.64 (IQR 0.54–0.79), respectively. Patients with SIHD had significantly lower Ees and higher VAC when compared to the control group (p < 0.05). Ees (p = 0.01) and VAC (p < 0.001) were significantly improved over 6 month follow-up after PCI. Notably, the degree of VAC improvement appears to be related to stented artery (Table 3). VAC obtained from echocardiographic methodology demonstrated a significant increase in patients with SIHD at baseline. This observation may represent a plausible mechanism for the benefit of PCI in SIHD. Hence, VAC may be a feasible parameter in the assessment of patients with SIHD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

American College of Cardiology (ACC), American Heart Association (AHA) and Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) recently released the Clinical Practice Guidelines for myocardial revascularization [1]. The guidelines were the felt need of the fraternity and this single all-encompassing document, relegating the previous six guidelines on the subject to archives, is indeed welcome. However, the downgrading of coronary artery bypass surgery for stable multivessel coronary artery disease and its bracketing with percutaneous coronary interventions has caused a lot of anguish in the surgical fraternity. This document presents the official viewpoint of the Indian Association of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgeons on the matter. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Detection of ≥50% diameter stenosis left main coronary artery disease (LMD) has prognostic and therapeutic implications. Noninvasive stress imaging or an exercise tolerance test (ETT) are the most common methods to detect obstructive coronary artery disease, though stress test markers of LMD remain ill-defined.Objectives: The authors sought to identify markers of LMD as detected on coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA), using clinical and stress testing parameters.Methods: This was a post hoc analysis of ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches), including randomized and nonrandomized participants who had locally determined moderate or severe ischemia on nonimaging ETT, stress nuclear myocardial perfusion imaging, or stress echocardiography followed by CTA to exclude LMD. Stress tests were read by core laboratories. Prior coronary artery bypass grafting was an exclusion. In a stepped multivariate model, the authors identified predictors of LMD, first without and then with stress testing parameters.Results: Among 5,146 participants (mean age 63 years, 74% male), 414 (8%) had LMD. Predictors of LMD were older age (P < 0.001), male sex (P < 0.01), absence of prior myocardial infarction (P < 0.009), transient ischemic dilation of the left ventricle on stress echocardiography (P = 0.05), magnitude of ST-segment depression on ETT (P = 0.004), and peak metabolic equivalents achieved on ETT (P = 0.001). The models were weakly predictive of LMD (C-index 0.643 and 0.684).Conclusions: In patients with moderate or severe ischemia, clinical and stress testing parameters were weakly predictive of LMD on CTA. For most patients with moderate or severe ischemia, anatomical imaging is needed to rule out LMD. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Older patients are underrepresented in landmark randomized trials for stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). Therefore, we sought to evaluate the benefits of revascularization in patients ≥80 years old with SIHD. Methods: Retrospective study of patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography (ICA) for SIHD between 2009 and 2019. Patients were grouped according to treatment: revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI] or coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG]) versus initial medical therapy alone. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW)‐adjusted Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were performed. Outcomes evaluated were all‐cause mortality, non‐fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization. Results: A total of 1015 patients (median age 83.0, interquartile range [IQR] 81.3–85.2 years; 29% female) underwent ICA for SIHD. Of these, 557 (55%) were treated with revascularization and 458 (45%) with initial medical therapy alone. Baseline characteristics were well balanced after IPTW adjustment. At median follow‐up of 3.5 years (IQR 1.7–5.9 years), there were no differences in all‐cause mortality and non‐fatal MI between treatment groups; but there was an increased need for repeat revascularization (IPTW adjusted hazard ratio 2.22, 95% confidence interval 1.53–3.22) with revascularization. Separately comparing PCI or CABG alone versus medical therapy yielded similar results; as well as in subgroup analysis (except for patients ≥90 years old and those without prior CABG). Conclusion: There were no differences in all‐cause mortality and non‐fatal MI with invasive revascularization (either PCI or CABG) versus medical therapy alone in patients ≥80 years old with SIHD. Large randomized trials focusing on older patients are warranted to guide clinical practice in this growing population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ticagrelor presents less thrombotic risk compared to clopidogrel in acute coronary syndromes. However, its role in dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)-naive patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) undergoing elective percutaneous intervention (PCI) remains unclear, including uncertainty in the method of conversion to clopidogrel for adequate coverage without increased bleeding risk. Objective: Determine the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor loading and transitioning to clopidogrel in patients with SIHD undergoing elective PCI. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort review of patients with SIHD who underwent elective PCI. The Switch Rx patients were treated with ticagrelor immediately before PCI, converted to clopidogrel 300 mg the day after, and discharged with clopidogrel 75 mg daily. Standard Rx patients, who received a clopidogrel load and received clopidogrel 75 mg daily after the procedure, were analyzed as a matched comparator cohort. The safety outcomes were any bleeding event at 24 hours and 30 days. The efficacy outcomes included major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 24 hours and 30 days. Results: Five Switch Rx patients (n = 54) experienced bleeding academic research consortium type I bleeding within 24 hours, with no subsequent bleeding observed out to 30 days. When comparing the Switch Rx patients (n = 39) to their matched Standard Rx cohort (n = 39), no MACEs occurred within 30 days and there were no significant differences in safety and efficacy outcomes. Conclusion: In DAPT-naive patients undergoing elective PCI for SIHD, a strategy of in-lab ticagrelor transitioning to clopidogrel with a 300-mg load was not associated with increased bleeding or other adverse events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose of the Review: In the decades following the advent of percutaneous coronary intervention, the optimal treatment strategy for managing stable ischemic heart disease has remained a topic of debate. The purpose of this review is to discuss current literature that provides insight into preferred treatment strategies for managing stable coronary artery disease. Recent Findings: The COURAGE trial (2007) compared patients with stable coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention plus optimal medical therapy versus optimal medical therapy alone and found no difference in death from any cause and non-fatal myocardial infarction at 4.6 years. The more recent ISCHEMIA trial (2020) compared an initial invasive revascularization strategy with optimal medical therapy to optimal medical therapy alone and similarly found no difference in death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest at 5 years. Summary: When applied to a broad population with stable coronary artery disease, evidence suggests there is no benefit to an initial invasive revascularization strategy relative to optimal medical therapy alone. Further investigation is warranted to determine whether there are subgroups of individuals that may benefit from earlier revascularization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) found that there was no statistical difference in cardiovascular events with an initial invasive strategy as compared with an initial conservative strategy of guideline-directed medical therapy for patients with moderate to severe ischemia on noninvasive testing. In this study, we describe the reasons that potentially eligible patients who were screened for participation in the ISCHEMIA trial did not advance to enrollment, the step prior to randomization. Of those who preliminarily met clinical inclusion criteria on screening logs submitted during the enrollment period, over half did not participate due to physician or patient refusal, a potentially modifiable barrier. This analysis highlights the importance of physician equipoise when advising patients about participation in randomized controlled trials.

Background: Approximately 30% to 50% of patients who are referred for diagnostic coronary angiography are found to have no obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Ischemia and nonobstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) is increasingly recognized and encompasses coronary microvascular dysfunction, vasospastic angina, symptomatic myocardial bridging, and other vasomotor disorders. However, the prevalence of these disorders and whether underlying atherosclerotic plaque burden and morphology affect the long-term outcomes of each physiologic phenotype is unknown., Methods: The DISCOVER INOCA registry is ongoing at 8 centers in the United States and plans to enroll 500 patients with ischemic heart disease referred for angiography undergoing coronary function testing (CFT). All participants will complete patient-reported outcome measures and undergo protocol-guided angiography, acetylcholine provocation, coronary thermodilution, and intravascular imaging. Follow-up assessments occur at 30 days, 6 months, 1 year, and annually for 5 years. The primary short-term end point is the prevalence of INOCA phenotypes based on physiology and the degree of atherosclerosis based on intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography (intravascular imaging). The primary long-term end point is the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for cardiovascular causes, or coronary revascularization at a follow-up of 5 years. At the time of this publication, 100 participants have been enrolled., Conclusions: DISCOVER INOCA is the first prospective study of INOCA patients to integrate anatomic and physiologic measures of disease and correlate them with long-term outcomes. DISCOVER INOCA will report on the prevalence of INOCA phenotypes, the safety of comprehensive invasive CFT, and the impact of testing on diagnoses and medical therapy. Symptoms and cardiovascular adverse events at long-term follow-up will be determined in patients with no obstructive CAD undergoing angiography., (© 2024 The Author(s).)

Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a P2Y 12 inhibitor is recommended for at least 6 and 12 months following percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents among patients with stable ischemic heart disease and acute coronary syndrome, respectively. Additional exposure to antiplatelet therapy reduces ischemic events but also increases bleeding risk. Conversely, shorter durations of DAPT are preferred among those at high bleeding risk. Hence, decisions surrounding duration of DAPT after revascularization should include clinical judgment, assessment of the risk of bleeding and ischemic events, and time after revascularization., Competing Interests: Disclosure U. Baber: Honoraria/Consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boston Scientific, and Abbott. This research did not receive any funding from agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Hypertension and dyslipidemia are 2 highly prevalent and modifiable risk factors in patients with stable ischemic heart disease. Multiple lines of evidence demonstrate that lowering blood pressure and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol improves clinical outcomes in patients with ischemic heart disease. Accordingly, clinical guidelines recommend intensive treatment targets for these high-risk patients. This article summarizes the pathophysiology, supporting evidence, and treatment recommendations for management of hypertension and dyslipidemia among patients with manifest ischemic heart disease and points to future research and unmet clinical needs., Competing Interests: Disclosure T. Abrahams has no disclosures. S.J. Nicholls has received research support from AstraZeneca, United Kingdom, Amgen, United States, Anthera, CSL Behring, United States, Cerenis, Eli Lilly, Esperion, United States, Resverlogix, Novartis, Switzerland, InfraRedx, United States, and Sanofi-Regeneron; and is a consultant for Amgen, Akcea, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, CSL Behring, Eli Lilly, Esperion, Kowa, Merck, Takeda, Pfizer, Sanofi-Regeneron, Novo Nordisk, CSL Sequiris, and Vaxxinity. A.J. Nelson has received research support from Amgen, Eli Lilly, Novartis and Boehringer Ingelheim; and is a consultant for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Merck, Sanofi, Novo Nordisk, CSL Sequiris, and Vaxxinity., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There are unique advantages and disadvantages to functional versus anatomic testing in the work-up of patients who present with symptoms suggestive of obstructive coronary artery disease. Evaluation of these individuals starts with an assessment of pre-test probability, which guides subsequent testing decisions. The choice between anatomic and functional testing depends on this pre-test probability. In general, anatomic testing has particular utility among younger individuals and women; while functional testing can be helpful to rule-in ischemia and guide revascularization decisions. Ultimately, selection of the most appropriate test should be individualized to the patient and clinical scenario., Competing Interests: Disclosure M D. Kelsey reports consultation/advisory panels for Bayer, Heartflow. The remaining authors report nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Stress cardiovascular magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) is a cost-effective, noninvasive test that accurately assesses myocardial ischemia, myocardial viability, and cardiac function without the need for ionizing radiation. There is a large body of literature, including randomized controlled trials, validating its diagnostic performance, risk stratification capabilities, and ability to guide appropriate use of coronary intervention. Specifically, stress CMR has shown higher diagnostic sensitivity than single-photon emission computed tomography imaging in detecting angiographically significant coronary artery disease. Stress CMR is particularly valuable for the evaluation of patients with moderate to high pretest probability of having stable ischemic heart disease and for patients known to have challenging imaging characteristics, including women, individuals with prior revascularization, and those with left ventricular dysfunction. This paper reviews the basics principles of stress CMR, the data supporting its clinical use, the added-value of myocardial blood flow quantification, and the assessment of myocardial function and viability routinely obtained during a stress CMR study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ivabradine is a unique agent that is distinct from beta-blockers and calcium channel blockers as it reduces heart rate without affecting myocardial contractility or vascular tone. Ivabradine is a use-dependent inhibitor targeting the sinoatrial node. It is approved for use in the United States as an adjunct therapy for heart rate reduction in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In this scenario, ivabradine has demonstrated improved clinical outcomes due to reduction in heart failure readmissions. However, there has been conflicting evidence from prospective studies and randomized controlled trials for its use in stable ischemic heart disease regarding efficacy in symptom reduction and mortality benefit. Ivabradine may also play a role in the treatment of patients with inappropriate sinus tachycardia, who often cannot tolerate beta-blockers and/or calcium channel blockers. In this review, we highlight the evidence for the nuances of using ivabradine in heart failure, stable ischemic heart disease, and inappropriate sinus tachycardia to raise awareness for its vital role in the treatment of select populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. Coronary heart disease is the main cause of mortality among diseases of the circulatory system, and the use of myocardial revascularisation contributes to the improvement of the disease course. However, along with the use of high-tech diagnostic and treatment methods, cardio-rehabilitation is an integral part of the process with the search of the new methods for its improvement. The aim of the study. To characterize the basic principles of curation of patients with acute coronary syndrome in the Carpathian region and to evaluate the effectiveness of cardio-rehabilitation of these patients after myocardial revascularization. Materials and methods. The peculiarities of the course and treatment of acute coronary syndrome in the period from 2014 to 2018 in the Ivano-Frankivsk region were analyzed. There were 210 patients examined with coronary artery disease with different forms and used methods of treatment, patients with stable ischemic heart disease, who were performed percutaneous coronary intervetion; they were divided into groups depending on the methods of restorative treatment and rehabilitation. In order to improve the quality of rehabilitation of patients the suggestive therapy with musical accompaniment was used. The rehabilitation was performed using the author’s program “Psychological rehabilitation of patients with ischemic heart disease and myocardial infarction by optimization of the internal (inner) state”, which included 5 interactive lessons with the use of the elements of the training. Lessons were performed by a cardiologist and psychologist and they were constructed taking into account the components of the inner picture of health. The clinical-anamnestic data, instrumental, psychometric methods were studied at the beginning of treatment, after 1 month and after 6 months of restorative treatment. Results. Every year the number of percutaneous coronary interventions in the Precarpathian region increases. The study of the course of stable ischemic heart disease revealed that the lowest rates of depression were in men under 45 years and over 75 years old, the highest in men aged 45-59 years. The use of the program contributed to a significant reduction of the signs of anxiety during 6 months of treatment. Planed stenting with further rehabilitation and rehabilitation under the program contributes to the positive dynamics of hemodynamics with a decrease in left ventricle volume (end systolic volume from 127.50 ± 6.12 to 109.50 ± 76.00 cm3; end diastolic volume from 65.30 ± 3.20 to 54.40 ± 3.00 cm3 (p < 0.05); the improvement in quality of life also depended on the treatment used, on a scale ″Attitude to illness″ in traditional treatment – 60.0 ± 5.0 %, in the group of the suggestive 80.0 ± 4.0 and 93.0 ± 5.0 %, respectively (p < 0.05) were found to reduce depression and anxiety in patients with stable coronary heart disease. Thus, the average anxiety score decreased by 29.7 % from 8.36 ± 0.61 at the beginning of treatment to 5.88 ± 0.47 points after 6 months of curation. Conclusions. Analyzing the peculiarities of the course and treatment of patients with acute coronary syndrome in the period 2014-2018 in the Carpathian region, it is found that the introduction of modern methods of restoration of coronary blood flow with the use of urgent on the planned stenting can significantly affect the occurrence of cases. There is an increase in the number of percutaneous coronary interventions performed in patients with acute coronary syndrome, and no regularities are noted among the planned interventions. The effectiveness of curation of patients with acute coronary syndrome is mediated by a number of clinical and psychological characteristics, namely the type of blood supply, the chosen method of restoration of the coronary flow, its urgent performance, changes in intracardiac hemodynamics and psycho-emotional state of the patient. Timely restoration of coronary perfusion and effective rehabilitation measures in patients with coronary heart disease provide correction of the clinical course of the disease, reducing the signs of depression and improving the quality of life of patients. Evaluating the effectiveness of cardiorehabilitation, a combination of traditional treatment of suggestive curation and training in the program of “Psychological rehabilitation of patients with coronary heart disease and myocardial infarction by optimizing the internal state” is inserted as appropriate.

ABSTRACT The management of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) is still today one of the greatest challenges of cardiology. The complexity of the angioplasty procedure of a CTO added to its controversial clinical benefits has generated certain skepticism in the community of cardiologists when developing coronary deocclusion programs at the catheterization laboratory. However, the evidence from observational studies indicates that if the intervention is successful it can significantly increase the patient’s quality of life, improve the left ventricular function, reduce the need for a subsequent CABG, and possibly improve survival. Several factors must be taken into consideration in the selection of patients elective for an intervention, including the extent of ischemia surrounding the occlusion, the myocardial viability, the coronary location of the CTO, and the chances of being successful with the procedure. This review provides a general description of the anatomy and histopathology of the CTOs, the evidence surrounding the clinical benefit of these procedures, the use of useful scoring systems to assess more objectively the probability of success, and a summary of the latest techniques available today to perform this procedure.

Abstract Introduction Long-term risk for recurrent cardiovascular events among myocardial infarction (MI) patients in the acute versus chronic stable phase is not well characterized. This study was conducted to evaluate risk factors associated with all-cause mortality and cardiovascular (CVD) morbidity and to determine the transition period from the acute to chronic stable phase of disease. Methods Administrative claims data from a managed care database (2007–2012) were linked to the Social Security Death Index. Kaplan–Meier curves were generated over a 3-year period. The association between risk factors and clinical endpoints was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Poisson models estimated the ‘transition time’ from acute to chronic phase of disease. Results On average, recurrent cardiovascular event rates were higher among acute MI patients in comparison to the chronic MI patients during the first 3 months of follow-up. Over the 3-year follow-up period, survival curves became parallel and for some outcomes (i.e., acute myocardial infarction and bleeding events), were not statistically significantly different between the two groups. In both the acute and chronic MI cohorts, diabetes, heart failure, and renal disease were consistently statistically significant and positively associated with greater risk of death and ischemic events. PAD was consistently associated with increased risk among the chronic cohort and composite endpoints among the acute patients. Conclusions Greater understanding of differences in the CVD risk profiles and the transition from acute to chronic stable phase may help identify high-risk patients and inform clinical risk stratification and long-term disease management in MI patients. Funding Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

The results of the most discussed randomized trials of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in comparison with drug therapy (COURAGE and FAME 2) and PCI imitation (ORBITA) in patients with stable coronary heart disease are analyzed. Information on the ongoing ISCHEMIA trial is presented. Different points of view are compared concerning the results of the most important PCI research projects. Factors that can distort the results and the possibilities of their elimination are discussed. The main provisions of the American (2017) and European (2018) Guidelines on myocardial revascularization with a focus on PCI in patients with stable coronary heart disease are described.Conflict of interest: the authors declare no conflict of interest.

A total of 137 male patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD), average age 62.3 ± 7.46 years, were divided into 3 groups depending on the initial measurements of blood pressure (BP) and heart rate (HR). Group 1 included patients with elevated blood pressure and/or heart rate (44.5% of patients); Group 2 included patients with normal blood pressure and/or heart rate (38.7%); Group 3 included patients with lowered blood pressure and/or heart rate (16.8%). Patients of Group 1 received beta-adrenergic blockers (BABs) or non-dihydropyridine calcium channel blockers (NDCCBs), in some cases ivabradine-containing BABs (Raenom®, Gedeon Richter) at doses required to achieve target blood pressure and heart rate. The patients of Group 2 received a limited range of drugs above listed due to their blood pressure and heart rate measurements, and the patients of Group 3 did not receive any due to the low levels of such measurements. Effectiveness of the therapy in patients of Group I was the highest. The use of trimetazidine MB (Predizin MB®, Gedeon Richter) has significantly improved the results of treatment in patients of Groups 2 and 3. Trimetazidine MB added to the therapy in patients of Group 1 improved the effectiveness of treatment. Prolongation of trimetazidine MB therapy contributed to improvement of its anti-ischemic effect. Thus, BABs, NDCCBs and ivabradine entered into the foreground, as an optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with elevated blood pressure and heart rate measurements. Trimetazidine MB, and ivabradine in some cases prevail in patients with normal and low blood pressure and/or heart rate. It should be stated that patients with various hemodynamic variants of SIHDa require a differentiated approach to the choice of OMT.

Background: Coronary angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (caFFR) measurements have shown good correlations and agreement with invasive wire-based fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurements. However, few studies have examined the diagnostic performance of caFFR measurements before and after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study sought to compare the diagnostic performance of caFFR measurements against wire-based FFR measurements in patients before and after PCI.Methods: Patients who underwent FFR-guided PCI were eligible for the acquisition of caFFR measurements. Offline caFFR measurements were performed by blinded hospital operators in a core laboratory. The primary endpoint was the vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE), defined as a composite of vessel-related cardiovascular death, vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization.Results: A total of 105 pre-PCI caFFR measurements and 65 post-PCI caFFR measurements were compared against available wire-based FFR measurements. A strong linear correlation was found between wire-based FFR and caFFR measurements (r = 0.77; p < 0.001) before PCI, and caFFR measurements also showed a high correlation (r = 0.82; p < 0.001) with wire-based FFR measurements after PCI. A total of 6 VOCEs were observed in 61 patients during follow-up. Post-PCI FFR values (≤0.82) in the target vessel was the strongest predictor of VOCE [hazard ratio (HR): 5.59; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.12–27.96; p = 0.036). Similarly, patients with low post-PCI caFFR values (≤0.83) showed an 8-fold higher risk of VOCE than those with high post-PCI caFFR values (>0.83; HR: 8.83; 95% CI: 1.46–53.44; p = 0.017).Conclusion: The study showed that the caFFR measurements were well-correlated and in agreement with invasive wire-based FFR measurements before and after PCI. Similar to wire-based FFR measurements, post-PCI caFFR measurements can be used to identify patients with a higher risk for adverse events associated with PCI.

Purpose of Review: This article reviews the evidence on optimal medical therapy (OMT) versus coronary revascularization in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD) and advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). Recent Findings: A post hoc analysis of the COURAGE trial in patients with SIHD and CKD showed no difference in freedom from angina, death, and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) between OMT and percutaneous intervention plus OMT compared with patients without CKD. The ISCHEMIA-CKD trial of 777 patients with advanced CKD revealed no difference in cumulative incidence of death or nonfatal MI at 3 years between OMT and revascularization but the composite of death or new dialysis was higher in the invasive arm. Additionally, there were no significant or sustained benefits in related to angina-related health status in invasive versus conservative strategy. Summary: An initial revascularization strategy does not reduce mortality or MI or relieve angina symptoms in patients with SIHD and advanced CKD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial failed to show a reduction in hard clinical end points with an early invasive strategy in stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). However, the influence of left main disease and high‐risk coronary anatomy was left unaddressed. In a large angiographic disease‐based registry, we examined the modulating effect of revascularization on long‐term outcomes in anatomically high‐risk SIHD. Methods and Results 9016 patients with SIHD with high‐risk coronary anatomy (3 vessel disease with ≥70% stenosis in all 3 epicardial vessels or left main disease ≥50% stenosis [isolated or in combination with other disease]) were selected for study from April 1, 2002 to March 31, 2016. The primary composite of all‐cause death or myocardial infarction (MI) was compared between revascularization versus conservative management. A total of 5487 (61.0%) patients received revascularization with either coronary artery bypass graft surgery (n=3312) or percutaneous coronary intervention (n=2175), while 3529 (39.0%) patients were managed conservatively. Selection for coronary revascularization was associated with improved all‐cause death/MI as well as longer survival compared with selection for conservative management (Inverse Probability Weighted hazard ratio [IPW‐HR] 0.62; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.66; P

[Display omitted] [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Medical therapy, including antianginal treatment, is the cornerstone in the management of stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). However, it remains unclear whether combining antianginal agents provides benefits beyond monotherapy in terms of quality of life (QoL) and cardiovascular outcomes. We used data from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial, which compared cardiovascular and QoL outcomes in patients with SIHD and diabetes mellitus randomized to revascularization with intensive medical therapy or intensive medical therapy alone. We categorized patients into 3 groups: ≥2 versus 1 versus 0 antianginals. We compared patient characteristics, QoL metrics, and cardiovascular end points at baseline and at 5 years, creating a multivariable model to adjust for key clinical confounders. Of 2,368 patients, 348 patients (14.7%) were on 0 antianginals, 1,020 patients (43.1%) were on 1 antianginal, and 1,000 patients (42.2%) were on ≥2 antianginals at baseline. The most common antianginal class was β blockers. At baseline, patients on 0 antianginals had better QoL metrics (self-health score, Duke activity status index, and energy rating) than patients on ≥2 antianginals. However, at the 1-year follow-up, patients taking only 1 antianginal showed greater QoL improvement than those taking 0 antianginal, without any incremental benefit in QoL metrics seen in patients taking ≥2 antianginal agents, even after adjusting for multiple covariates such as age, heart failure, diabetes control, and myocardial jeopardy index. Lastly, at the 5-year follow-up, after adjustment, there were no differences in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, or myocardial infarction between patients taking different numbers of antianginals. Adults on a single antianginal for SIHD and diabetes mellitus had similar or better improvements in QoL than those on 2 or more antianginal agents at 1 year of follow-up. These findings merit further research to better understand the impact of medical therapy intensity on QoL in patients with SIHD and associated co-morbidities., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Jennifer Frampton reports current research support from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. Dr. Damluji receives research funding from the Pepper Scholars Program of the Johns Hopkins University Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center funded by the National Institute on Aging P30-AG021334 and receives mentored patient-oriented research career development award from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute K23-HL153771-01. Dr. Nanna reports present research support from the American College of Cardiology Foundation supported by the George F. and Ann Harris Bellows Foundation, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, the Yale Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center (P30AG021,342), and the National Institute on Aging/National Institutes of Health from R03AG074067 (GEMSSTAR award) and consulting from HeartFlow, Inc. The remaining authors have no competing interest to declare., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)