Study protocol for the epigenetic characterization of angor pectoris according to the affected coronary compartment: Global and comprehensive assessment of the relationship between invasive coronary physiology and microRNAs.

BACKGROUND: MicroRNAs (miRNAs) are noncoding RNAs involved in post-transcriptional genetic regulation with a proposed role in intercellular communication. miRNAs are considered promising biomarkers in ischemic heart disease. Invasive physiological evaluation allows a precise assessment of each affected coronary compartment. Although some studies have associated the expression of circulating miRNAs with invasive physiological indexes, their global relationship with coronary compartments has not been assessed. Here, we will evaluate circulating miRNAs profiles according to the coronary pattern of the vascular compartment affectation. STUDY AND DESIGN: This is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, descriptive study to be conducted at three centres in Spain (NCT05374694). The study will include one hundred consecutive patients older than 18 years with chest pain of presumed coronary cause undergoing invasive physiological evaluation, including fractional flow reserve (FFR) and index of microvascular resistance (IMR). Patients will be initially classified into four groups, according to FFR and IMR: macrovascular and microvascular affectation (FFR≤0.80 / IMR≥25), isolated macrovascular affectation (FFR≤0.80 / IMR<25), isolated microvascular affectation (FFR>0.80 / IMR ≥25) and normal coronary indexes (FFR>0.80 / IMR<25). Patients with isolated microvascular affectation or normal indexes will also undergo the acetylcholine test and may be reclassified as a fifth group in the presence of spasm. A panel of miRNAs previously associated with molecular mechanisms linked to chronic coronary syndrome will be analysed using RT-qPCR. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study will identify miRNA profiles associated with patterns of coronary affectation and will contribute to a better understanding of the mechanistic pathways of coronary pathology.

Novel Antithrombotic Agents in Ischemic Cardiovascular Disease: Progress in the Search for the Optimal Treatment.

Ischemic cardiovascular diseases have a high incidence and high mortality worldwide. Therapeutic advances in the last decades have reduced cardiovascular mortality, with antithrombotic therapy being the cornerstone of medical treatment. Yet, currently used antithrombotic agents carry an inherent risk of bleeding associated with adverse cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. Advances in understanding the pathophysiology of thrombus formation have led to the discovery of new targets and the development of new anticoagulants and antiplatelet agents aimed at preventing thrombus stabilization and growth while preserving hemostasis. In the following review, we will comment on the key limitation of the currently used antithrombotic regimes in ischemic heart disease and ischemic stroke and provide an in-depth and state-of-the-art overview of the emerging anticoagulant and antiplatelet agents in the pipeline with the potential to improve clinical outcomes.

Ajustando a RFR por Preditores de Discordância, "A RFR Ajustada": Uma Metodologia Alternativa para Melhorar a Capacidade Diagnóstica dos Índices Coronarianos / Adjusting RFR by Predictors of Disagreement, "The Adjusted RFR": An Alternative Methodology to Improve the Diagnostic Capacity of Coronary Indices

Resumo Fundamento Os limiares de corte para a "relação do ciclo completo de repouso" (RFR) oscilam em diferentes séries, sugerindo que as características da população podem influenciá-los. Da mesma forma, foram documentados preditores de discordância entre a RFR e a reserva de fluxo fracionado (FFR). O Estudo RECOPA, mostrou que a capacidade diagnóstica está reduzida na "zona cinzenta" da RFR, tornando necessária a realização de FFR para descartar ou confirmar isquemia. Objetivos Determinar os preditores de discordância, integrar as informações que eles fornecem em um índice clínico-fisiológico: a "RFR Ajustada", e comparar sua concordância com o FFR. Métodos Usando dados do Estudo RECOPA, os preditores de discordância em relação à FFR foram determinados na "zona cinzenta" da RFR (0,86 a 0,92) para construir um índice ("RFR Ajustada") que pesaria a RFR juntamente com os preditores de discordância e avaliar sua concordância com a FFR. Resultados Foram avaliadas 156 lesões em 141 pacientes. Os preditores de discordância foram: doença renal crônica, cardiopatia isquêmica prévia, lesões não envolvendo a artéria descendente anterior esquerda e síndrome coronariana aguda. Embora limitada, a "RFR Ajustada" melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em comparação com a RFR na "zona cinzenta" (AUC-RFR = 0,651 versus AUC-"RFR Ajustada" = 0,749), mostrando também uma melhora em todos os índices diagnósticos quando foram estabelecidos limiares de corte otimizados (sensibilidade: 59% a 68%; especificidade: 62% a 75%; acurácia diagnóstica: 60% a 71%; razão de verossimilhança positiva: 1,51 a 2,34; razão de verossimilhança negativa: 0,64 a 0,37). Conclusões Ajustar a RFR integrando as informações fornecidas pelos preditores de discordância para obter a "RFR Ajustada" melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em nossa população. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar se os índices clínico-fisiológicos melhoram a capacidade diagnóstica da RFR ou de outros índices coronarianos.

Abstract Background Cutoff thresholds for the "resting full-cycle ratio" (RFR) oscillate in different series, suggesting that population characteristics may influence them. Likewise, predictors of discordance between the RFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been documented. The RECOPA Study showed that diagnostic capacity is reduced in the RFR "grey zone", requiring the performance of FFR to rule out or confirm ischemia. Objectives To determine predictors of discordance, integrate the information they provide in a clinical-physiological index, the "Adjusted RFR", and compare its agreement with the FFR. Methods Using data from the RECOPA Study, predictors of discordance with respect to FFR were determined in the RFR "grey zone" (0.86 to 0.92) to construct an index ("Adjusted RFR") that would weigh RFR together with predictors of discordance and evaluate its agreement with FFR. Results A total of 156 lesions were evaluated in 141 patients. Predictors of discordance were: chronic kidney disease, previous ischemic heart disease, lesions not involving the anterior descending artery, and acute coronary syndrome. Though limited, the "Adjusted RFR" improved the diagnostic capacity compared to the RFR in the "grey zone" (AUC-RFR = 0.651 versus AUC-"Adjusted RFR" = 0.749), also showing an improvement in all diagnostic indices when optimal cutoff thresholds were established (sensitivity: 59% to 68%; specificity: 62% to 75%; diagnostic accuracy: 60% to 71%; positive likelihood ratio: 1.51 to 2.34; negative likelihood ratio: 0.64 to 0.37). Conclusions Adjusting the RFR by integrating the information provided by predictors of discordance to obtain the "Adjusted RFR" improved the diagnostic capacity in our population. Further studies are required to evaluate whether clinical-physiological indices improve the diagnostic capacity of RFR or other coronary indices.

Adjusting RFR by Predictors of Disagreement, "The Adjusted RFR": An Alternative Methodology to Improve the Diagnostic Capacity of Coronary Indices. / Ajustando a RFR por Preditores de Discordância, "A RFR Ajustada": Uma Metodologia Alternativa para Melhorar a Capacidade Diagnóstica dos Índices Coronarianos.

BACKGROUND: Cutoff thresholds for the "resting full-cycle ratio" (RFR) oscillate in different series, suggesting that population characteristics may influence them. Likewise, predictors of discordance between the RFR and fractional flow reserve (FFR) have been documented. The RECOPA Study showed that diagnostic capacity is reduced in the RFR "grey zone", requiring the performance of FFR to rule out or confirm ischemia. OBJECTIVES: To determine predictors of discordance, integrate the information they provide in a clinical-physiological index, the "Adjusted RFR", and compare its agreement with the FFR. METHODS: Using data from the RECOPA Study, predictors of discordance with respect to FFR were determined in the RFR "grey zone" (0.86 to 0.92) to construct an index ("Adjusted RFR") that would weigh RFR together with predictors of discordance and evaluate its agreement with FFR. RESULTS: A total of 156 lesions were evaluated in 141 patients. Predictors of discordance were: chronic kidney disease, previous ischemic heart disease, lesions not involving the anterior descending artery, and acute coronary syndrome. Though limited, the "Adjusted RFR" improved the diagnostic capacity compared to the RFR in the "grey zone" (AUC-RFR = 0.651 versus AUC-"Adjusted RFR" = 0.749), also showing an improvement in all diagnostic indices when optimal cutoff thresholds were established (sensitivity: 59% to 68%; specificity: 62% to 75%; diagnostic accuracy: 60% to 71%; positive likelihood ratio: 1.51 to 2.34; negative likelihood ratio: 0.64 to 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Adjusting the RFR by integrating the information provided by predictors of discordance to obtain the "Adjusted RFR" improved the diagnostic capacity in our population. Further studies are required to evaluate whether clinical-physiological indices improve the diagnostic capacity of RFR or other coronary indices.

FUNDAMENTO: Os limiares de corte para a "relação do ciclo completo de repouso" (RFR) oscilam em diferentes séries, sugerindo que as características da população podem influenciá-los. Da mesma forma, foram documentados preditores de discordância entre a RFR e a reserva de fluxo fracionado (FFR). O Estudo RECOPA, mostrou que a capacidade diagnóstica está reduzida na "zona cinzenta" da RFR, tornando necessária a realização de FFR para descartar ou confirmar isquemia. OBJETIVOS: Determinar os preditores de discordância, integrar as informações que eles fornecem em um índice clínico-fisiológico: a "RFR Ajustada", e comparar sua concordância com o FFR. MÉTODOS: Usando dados do Estudo RECOPA, os preditores de discordância em relação à FFR foram determinados na "zona cinzenta" da RFR (0,86 a 0,92) para construir um índice ("RFR Ajustada") que pesaria a RFR juntamente com os preditores de discordância e avaliar sua concordância com a FFR. RESULTADOS: Foram avaliadas 156 lesões em 141 pacientes. Os preditores de discordância foram: doença renal crônica, cardiopatia isquêmica prévia, lesões não envolvendo a artéria descendente anterior esquerda e síndrome coronariana aguda. Embora limitada, a "RFR Ajustada" melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em comparação com a RFR na "zona cinzenta" (AUC-RFR = 0,651 versus AUC-"RFR Ajustada" = 0,749), mostrando também uma melhora em todos os índices diagnósticos quando foram estabelecidos limiares de corte otimizados (sensibilidade: 59% a 68%; especificidade: 62% a 75%; acurácia diagnóstica: 60% a 71%; razão de verossimilhança positiva: 1,51 a 2,34; razão de verossimilhança negativa: 0,64 a 0,37). CONCLUSÕES: Ajustar a RFR integrando as informações fornecidas pelos preditores de discordância para obter a "RFR Ajustada" melhorou a capacidade diagnóstica em nossa população. Mais estudos são necessários para avaliar se os índices clínico-fisiológicos melhoram a capacidade diagnóstica da RFR ou de outros índices coronarianos.

Comparison between the Right and Left Distal Radial Access for Patients Undergoing Coronary Procedures: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.

Introduction: Distal radial access for coronary procedures decreases hemostasis time, prevents radial occlusion, and improves patient comfort compared to conventional transradial access. Initially described for left distal radial access (lDRA), the right distal radial access (rDRA) is feasible. However, there are no comparative studies to date. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of the access site on vascular access and procedural performance. Methods: From August 2020 to October 2021, coronary procedures performed through distal radial access were prospectively recorded. After propensity score matching, the rDRA and lDRA were compared. The primary endpoint was the proportion of approach success. The secondary endpoints included access time, coronary procedural success, radial spasm, exposition to ionizing radiation, patient comfort, and vascular access-related complications. Results: From a total of 385 procedures in 382 patients, after a propensity score matching, 182 procedures were compared between the rDRA and lDRA. There were no differences in the baseline characteristics between the groups. Compared to the lDRA, the rDRA presented similar approach success (96.7% vs. 96.7%, p=1.0), less access time (39 (25-60) sec vs. 50 (29-90) sec, p=0.018), comparable coronary procedural success after sheath placement (100% vs. 100%, p=1.000), and not statistically significant radial spasm (2.19% vs. 6.59%, p=0.148). No differences in dose-area product (32 (20-56.2) Gy.m2 vs. 32.3 (19.4-46.3) Gy.m2; p=0.472) and fluoroscopy time (4.4 (2.5-9.1) min vs. 4.3 (2.4-7.5) min, p=0.251) were detected between the groups. No vascular access-related complications were observed in any group. Conclusions: The rDRA, compared to the lDRA, had the same proportion of approach success and procedural performance, with a slight reduction in access time for patients undergoing coronary procedures.