Prognostic Value of Coronary CT Angiography-derived Fractional Flow Reserve on 3-year Outcomes in Patients with Stable Angina.

Background The prognostic value of coronary CT angiography (CTA)-derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) beyond 1-year outcomes and in patients with high levels of coronary artery calcium (CAC) is uncertain. Purpose To assess the prognostic value of coronary CTA-derived FFR test results on 3-year clinical outcomes in patients with coronary stenosis and among a subgroup of patients with high levels of CAC. Materials and Methods This study represents a 3-year follow-up of patients with new-onset stable angina pectoris who were consecutively enrolled in the Assessing Diagnostic Value of Noninvasive CT-FFR in Coronary Care, known as ADVANCE (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02499679) registry, between December 2015 and October 2017 at three Danish sites. A high CAC was defined as an Agatston score of at least 400. A lesion-specific coronary CTA-derived FFR value of 2 cm with distal-to-stenosis value at or below 0.80 represented an abnormal test result. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause death and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction. Event rates were estimated using the one-sample binomial model, and relative risk was compared between participants stratified by results of coronary CTA-derived FFR. Results This study included 900 participants: 523 participants with normal results (mean age, 64 years ± 9.6 [SD]; 318 male participants) and 377 with abnormal results from coronary CTA-derived FFR (mean age, 65 years ± 9.6; 264 male participants). The primary end point occurred in 11 of 523 (2.1%) and 25 of 377 (6.6%) participants with normal and abnormal coronary CTA-derived FFR results, respectively (relative risk, 3.1; 95% CI: 1.6, 6.3; P < .001). In participants with high CAC, the primary end point occurred in four of 182 (2.2%) and 19 of 212 (9.0%) participants with normal and abnormal coronary CTA-derived FFR results, respectively (relative risk, 4.1; 95% CI: 1.4, 11.8; P = .001). Conclusion In individuals with stable angina, a normal coronary CTA-derived FFR test result identified participants with a low 3-year risk of all-cause death or nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction, both in the overall cohort and in participants with high CAC scores. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02499679 Published under a CC BY 4.0 license. Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Sinitsyn in this issue.

Virulence Factors Associated with Enterococcus Faecalis Infective Endocarditis: A Mini Review.

INTRODUCTION: The enterococci are accountable for up to 20% of all cases of infective endocarditis, with Enterococcus faecalis being the primary causative isolate. Infective endocarditis is a life-threatening infection of the endocardium that results in the formation of vegetations. Based on a literature review, this paper provides an overview of the virulence factors associated with E. faecalis infective endocarditis. Furthermore, it reports the effects of active or passive immunization against some of these involved factors. INDIVIDUAL VIRULENCE FACTORS: Nine virulence factors have in particular been associated with E. faecalis infective endocarditis. Absence of these factors entailed attenuation of strains in both mixed- and mono-bacterial infection endocarditis models as well as in in vitro and ex vivo assays when compared to their virulence factor expressing parental strains. PATHOGENESIS: The virulence factors promote a broad spectrum of events that together allow for disease development and progression. The infection is initiated through bacterial binding to ligands present at the site of infection after which the colonization can be accelerated through inter-bacterial attachment and modulation of the host immune response. The formation and growth of the vegetation provide protection and promote growth. Controlled degeneration of the vegetation appears to increase the likelihood of embolization and dissemination, without exposing protected bacteria. PROPHYLACTIC IMMUNIZATION: In most cases, active and passive immunization against associated virulence factors provided partial protection. FUTURE PROSPECTS: There is a need for further evaluation of the known virulence factors. Immunization against two or more virulence factors might be an effective prophylactic tool.