Impact of Insulin-Treated Compared to Non-Insulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus on Outcome of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Drug-Coated Balloons versus Drug-Eluting Stents in De Novo Coronary Artery Disease: The Randomized BASKET-SMALL 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the outcome of PCI of de novo stenosis with drug-coated balloons (DCB) versus drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) versus non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (NITDM). METHODS: Patients were randomized in the BASKET-SMALL 2 trial to DCB or DES and followed over 3 years for MACE (cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization [TVR]). Outcome in the diabetic subgroup (n = 252) was analyzed with respect to ITDM or NITDM. RESULTS: In NITDM patients (n = 157), rates of MACE (16.7% vs. 21.9%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29-1.58, p = 0.37), death, non-fatal MI, and TVR (8.4% vs. 14.5%, HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09-1.03, p = 0.057) were similar between DCB and DES. In ITDM patients (n = 95), rates of MACE (DCB 23.4% vs. DES 22.7%, HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.46-2.74, p = 0.81), death, non-fatal MI, and TVR (10.1% vs. 15.7%, HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.18-2.27, p = 0.49) were similar between DCB and DES. TVR was significantly lower with DCB versus DES in all diabetic patients (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.95, p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: DCB compared to DES for treatment of de novo coronary lesions in diabetic patients was associated with similar rates of MACE and numerically lower need for TVR both for ITDM and NITDM patients.

Safety and Efficacy of Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndromes: A Prespecified Analysis of BASKET-SMALL 2.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are an established treatment strategy for coronary artery disease. Randomized data on the application of DCBs in patients with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are limited. We evaluated the impact of clinical presentation (ACS versus chronic coronary syndrome) on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing DCB or drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment in a prespecified analysis of the BASKET-SMALL 2 trial (Basel Kosten Effektivitäts Trial-Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Small Vessel Interventions). METHODS: BASKET-SMALL 2 randomized 758 patients with small vessel coronary artery disease to DCB or DES treatment and followed them for 3 years regarding major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization). RESULTS: Among 758 patients, 214 patients (28.2%) presented with an ACS (15 patients [7%], ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction; 109 patients [50.9%], non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction; 90 patients [42.1%], unstable angina pectoris). At 1-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of the primary end point by randomized treatment in patients with ACS (hazard ratio, 0.50 [95% CI, 0.19-1.26] for DCB versus DES) or chronic coronary syndrome (hazard ratio, 1.29 [95% CI, 0.67-2.47] for DCB versus DES). There was no significant interaction between clinical presentation and treatment effect (P for interaction, 0.088). For cardiac death (P for interaction, 0.049) and nonfatal myocardial infarction (P for interaction, 0.010), a significant interaction between clinical presentation and treatment was seen at 1 year with lower rates of these secondary end points in patients with ACS treated by DCB. At 3 years, there were similar major adverse cardiac event rates throughout groups without significant interaction between clinical presentation and treatment (P for interaction, 0.301). All-cause mortality was higher in ACS compared with chronic coronary syndrome; however, there was no difference between DCB and DES irrespective of clinical presentation. CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup analysis of the BASKET-SMALL 2 trial, there was no interaction between indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (acute versus chronic coronary syndrome) and treatment effect of DCB versus DES in patients with small vessel coronary artery disease. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01574534.

Impact of Diabetes on Outcome With Drug-Coated Balloons Versus Drug-Eluting Stents: The BASKET-SMALL 2 Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus on 3-year clinical outcome in patients undergoing drug-coated balloon (DCB) or drug-eluting stent (DES) treatment for de novo lesions. BACKGROUND: For treatment of de novo coronary small vessel disease, DCBs are noninferior to DES. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial, including 758 patients with de novo lesions in coronary vessels <3 mm who were randomized 1:1 to DCB or DES and followed over 3 years for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], and target vessel revascularization [TVR]), outcome was analyzed regarding the presence or absence of diabetes mellitus. RESULTS: In nondiabetic patients (n = 506), rates of MACE (DCB 13.0% vs DES 11.5%; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-2.09; P = 0.43), cardiac death (2.8% vs 2.9%; HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.32-2.92; P = 0.96), nonfatal MI (5.1% vs 4.8%; HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.44-2.28; P = 0.99), and TVR (8.8% vs 6.1%; HR: 1.64; 95% CI: 0.83-3.25; P = 0.16) were similar. In diabetic patients (n = 252), rates of MACE (19.3% vs 22.2%; HR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.45-1.48; P = 0.51), cardiac death (8.8% vs 5.9%; HR: 2.01; 95% CI: 0.76-5.31; P = 0.16), and nonfatal MI (7.1% vs 9.8%; HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.21-1.49; P = 0.24) were similar in DCB and DES. TVR was significantly lower with DCBs vs DES (9.1% vs 15.0%; HR: 0.40; 95% CI: 0.17-0.94; P = 0.036; P = 0.011 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: The rates of MACE are similar in DCBs and DES in de novo coronary lesions of diabetic and nondiabetic patients. In diabetic patients, need for TVR was significantly lower with DCB versus DES. (Basel Stent Kosten Effektivitäts Trial Drug Eluting Balloons vs Drug Eluting Stents in Small Vessel Interventions [BASKET-SMALL2]; NCT01574534).

Long-term efficacy and safety of drug-coated balloons versus drug-eluting stents for small coronary artery disease (BASKET-SMALL 2): 3-year follow-up of a randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: In the treatment of de-novo coronary small vessel disease, drug-coated balloons (DCBs) are non-inferior to drug-eluting stents (DESs) regarding clinical outcome up to 12 months, but data beyond 1 year is sparse. We aimed to test the long-term efficacy and safety of DCBs regarding clinical endpoints in an all-comer population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In this prespecified long-term follow-up of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients from 14 clinical sites in Germany, Switzerland, and Austria with de-novo lesions in coronary vessels <3 mm and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly assigned 1:1 to DCB or second-generation DES and followed over 3 years for major adverse cardiac events (ie, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularisation [TVR]), all-cause death, probable or definite stent thrombosis, and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding type 3-5). Analyses were performed on the full analysis set according to the modified intention-to-treat principle. Dual antiplatelet therapy was recommended for 1 month after DCB and 6 months after DES with stable symptoms, but 12 months with acute coronary syndromes. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01574534 and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between April 10, 2012, and Feb 1, 2017, of 883 patients assessed, 758 (86%) patients were randomly assigned to the DCB group (n=382) or the DES group (n=376). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of major adverse cardiac events was 15% in both the DCB and DES groups (hazard ratio [HR] 0·99, 95% CI 0·68-1·45; p=0·95). The two groups were also very similar concerning the single components of adverse cardiac events: cardiac death (Kaplan-Meier estimate 5% vs 4%, HR 1·29, 95% CI 0·63-2·66; p=0·49), non-fatal myocardial infarction (both Kaplan-Meier estimate 6%, HR 0·82, 95% CI 0·45-1·51; p=0·52), and TVR (both Kaplan-Meier estimate 9%, HR 0·95, 95% CI 0·58-1·56; p=0·83). Rates of all-cause death were very similar in DCB versus DES patients (both Kaplan-Meier estimate 8%, HR 1·05, 95% CI 0·62-1·77; p=0·87). Rates of probable or definite stent thrombosis (Kaplan-Meier estimate 1% vs 2%; HR 0·33, 95% CI 0·07-1·64; p=0·18) and major bleeding (Kaplan-Meier estimate 2% vs 4%, HR 0·43, 95% CI 0·17-1·13; p=0·088) were numerically lower in DCB versus DES, however without reaching significance. INTERPRETATION: There is maintained efficacy and safety of DCB versus DES in the treatment of de-novo coronary small vessel disease up to 3 years. FUNDING: Swiss National Science Foundation, Basel Cardiovascular Research Foundation, and B Braun Medical.

Long-Term Results After Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stent Implantation in Saphenous Vein Grafts: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background Efficacy data on drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts are controversial. We aimed to compare DES with BMS among patients undergoing saphenous vein grafts intervention regarding long-term outcome. Methods and Results In this multinational trial, patients were randomized to paclitaxel-eluting or BMS. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events and its individual components at 5-year follow-up. One hundred seventy-three patients were included in the trial (89 DES versus 84 BMS). One-year major adverse cardiac event rates were lower in DES compared with BMS (2.2% versus 16.0%, hazard ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64, P=0.01), which was mainly driven by a reduction of subsequent myocardial infarctions and need for target-vessel revascularization. Five-year major adverse cardiac event rates remained lower in the DES compared with the BMS arm (35.5% versus 56.1%, hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.68, P<0.001). A landmark-analysis from 1 to 5 years revealed a persistent benefit of DES over BMS (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.74, P=0.007) in terms of target-vessel revascularization. More patients in the BMS group underwent multiple target-vessel revascularization procedures throughout the study period compared with the DES group (DES 1.1% [n=1] versus BMS 9.5% [n=8], P=0.013). Enrollment was stopped before the target sample size of 240 patients was reached. Conclusions In this randomized controlled trial with prospective long-term follow-up of up to 5 years, DES showed a better efficacy than BMS with sustained benefits over time. DES may be the preferred strategy in this patient population. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00595647.

Prognostic Significance of Longitudinal Clinical Congestion Pattern in Chronic Heart Failure: Insights From TIME-CHF Trial.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between longitudinal clinical congestion pattern and heart failure outcome is uncertain. This study was designed to assess the prevalence of congestion over time and to investigate its impact on outcome in chronic heart failure. METHODS: A total of 588 patients with chronic heart failure older than 60 years of age with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class ≥II from the TIME-CHF study were included. The endpoints for this study were survival and hospitalization-free heart failure survival. Orthopnea, NYHA ≥III, paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea, hepatomegaly, peripheral pitting edema, jugular venous distension, and rales were repeatedly investigated and related to outcomes. These congestion-related signs and symptoms were used to design a 7-item Clinical Congestion Index. RESULTS: Sixty-one percent of patients had a Clinical Congestion Index ≥3 at baseline, which decreased to 18% at month 18. During the median [interquartile range] follow-up of 27.2 [14.3-39.8] months, 17%, 27%, and 47% of patients with baseline Clinical Congestion Index of 0, 1-2, and ≥3 at inclusion, respectively, died (P <.001). Clinical Congestion Index was identified as an independent predictor of mortality at all visits (P <.05) except month 6 and reduced hospitalization-free heart failure survival (P <.05). Successful decongestion was related to better outcome as compared to persistent congestion or partial decongestion (log-rank P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The extent of congestion as assessed by means of clinical signs and symptoms decreased over time with intensified treatment, but it remained present or relapsed in a substantial number of patients with heart failure and was associated with poor outcome. This highlights the importance of appropriate decongestion in chronic heart failure.

Competing risks of major bleeding and thrombotic events with prasugrel-based dual antiplatelet therapy after stent implantation - An observational analysis from BASKET-PROVE II.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) prevents thrombotic events after coronary stent implantation but may induce bleedings, specifically in elderly patients. However, a competitive risk analysis is lacking. OBJECTIVES: To assess the determinants of major bleeding and the balance between the competing risks of major bleeding and thrombotic events during prasugrel-based DAPT after stent implantation. METHODS: Overall, 2,291 patients randomized to drug-eluting or bare metal stents and treated with prasugrel 10mg/day for 1 year were followed over 2 years for major bleeding (BARC 3/5) and thrombotic events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definitive/probable stent thrombosis). Prasugrel dose was reduced to 5mg in patients >75 years and/or <60kg. Predictors of major bleeding and competing risks of major bleeding and thrombotic events were assessed. RESULTS: Two-year rates of major bleeding and thrombotic events were 2.9% and 9.0%, respectively. The only independent predictor of major bleeding was age (hazard ratio per year increase 1.05 [1.02,1.07], p<0.001). The relationship between major bleeding and age was non-linear, with lowest hazard ratios at 57 years and an exponential increase only above 65 years. In contrast, the relationship between thrombotic events and age was linear and continuously increasing with older age. While the competing risk of thrombotic events was higher than that of major bleeding in younger patients, the two risks were similar in older patients. After discontinuation of prasugrel, bleeding events leveled off in all patients, while thrombotic events continued to increase. CONCLUSIONS: In prasugrel-based DAPT, age is the strongest risk factor for major bleeding, increasing exponentially >65 years. In younger patients, thrombotic events represent a higher risk than bleeding, while thrombotic and bleeding risks were similar in older patients. Important clinical implications relate to prasugrel dose in the elderly, duration of DAPT and the competing risk balance necessitating individualized treatment decisions.

Drug-coated balloons for small coronary artery disease (BASKET-SMALL 2): an open-label randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are a novel therapeutic strategy for small native coronary artery disease. However, their safety and efficacy is poorly defined in comparison with drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: BASKET-SMALL 2 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised non-inferiority trial. 758 patients with de-novo lesions (<3 mm in diameter) in coronary vessels and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive angioplasty with DCB versus implantation of a second-generation DES after successful predilatation via an interactive internet-based response system. Dual antiplatelet therapy was given according to current guidelines. The primary objective was to show non-inferiority of DCB versus DES regarding major adverse cardiac events (MACE; ie, cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularisation) after 12 months. The non-inferiority margin was an absolute difference of 4% in MACE. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01574534. FINDINGS: Between April 10, 2012, and February 1, 2017, 382 patients were randomly assigned to the DCB group and 376 to DES group. Non-inferiority of DCB versus DES was shown because the 95% CI of the absolute difference in MACE in the per-protocol population was below the predefined margin (-3·83 to 3·93%, p=0·0217). After 12 months, the proportions of MACE were similar in both groups of the full-analysis population (MACE was 7·5% for the DCB group vs 7·3% for the DES group; hazard ratio [HR] 0·97 [95% CI 0·58-1·64], p=0·9180). There were five (1·3%) cardiac-related deaths in the DES group and 12 (3·1%) in the DCB group (full analysis population). Probable or definite stent thrombosis (three [0·8%] in the DCB group vs four [1·1%] in the DES group; HR 0·73 [0·16-3·26]) and major bleeding (four [1·1%] in the DCB group vs nine [2·4%] in the DES group; HR 0·45 [0·14-1·46]) were the most common adverse events. INTERPRETATION: In small native coronary artery disease, DCB was non-inferior to DES regarding MACE up to 12 months, with similar event rates for both treatment groups. FUNDING: Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung, Basel Cardiovascular Research Foundation, and B Braun Medical AG.

[Heart failure with "mid-range" ejection fraction: a new clinical entity?] / Herzinsuffizienz mit «mid-range¼ Auswurffraktion: Eine neue klinische Entität?

Heart failure with "mid-range" ejection fraction: a new clinical entity? Abstract. The new entity of heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction (HFmrEF) is defined as clinical syndrome characterized by typical symptoms and signs of heart failure (HF), an EF of 40 - 49 %, elevated natriuretic peptides and documentation of structural heart disease. Prevalence has been estimated at 10 - 20 % of all patients with HF. Compared to the populations with reduced (HFrEF) and preserved (HFpEF) EF, patients with HFmrEF show in general intermediate clinical characteristics. However, coronary disease as aetiology of HF is similar in HFmrEF and HFrEF and significantly more prevalent than in HFpEF. Outcome is poor as in the other HF categories. Frequently, HFmrEF seems to be a transitory stage from or to HFrEF and HFpEF respectively. Preliminary data suggest a potential benefit of evidence-based drug treatment for HFrEF also in HFmrEF.

Novel concept to guide systolic heart failure medication by repeated biomarker testing-results from TIME-CHF in context of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine.

BACKGROUND: It is uncertain whether repeated measurements of a multi-target biomarker panel may help to personalize medical heart failure (HF) therapy to improve outcome in chronic HF. METHODS: This analysis included 499 patients from the Trial of Intensified versus standard Medical therapy in Elderly patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF), aged ≥ 60 years, LVEF ≤ 45%, and NYHA ≥ II, who had repeated clinical visits within 19 months follow-up. The interaction between repeated measurements of biomarkers and treatment effects of loop diuretics, spironolactone, ß-blockers, and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitors on risk of HF hospitalization or death was investigated in a hypothesis-generating analysis. Generalized estimating equation (GEE) models were used to account for the correlation between recurrences of events in a patient. RESULTS: One hundred patients (20%) had just one event (HF hospitalization or death) and 87 (17.4%) had at least two events. Loop diuretic up-titration had a beneficial effect for patients with high interleukin-6 (IL6) or high high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) (interaction, P = 0.013 and P = 0.001), whereas the opposite was the case with low hsCRP (interaction, P = 0.013). Higher dosage of loop diuretics was associated with poor outcome in patients with high blood urea nitrogen (BUN) or prealbumin (interaction, P = 0.006 and P = 0.001), but not in those with low levels of these biomarkers. Spironolactone up-titration was associated with lower risk of HF hospitalization or death in patients with high cystatin C (CysC) (interaction, P = 0.021). ß-Blockers up-titration might have a beneficial effect in patients with low soluble fms-like tyrosine kinase-1 (sFlt) (interaction, P = 0.021). No treatment biomarker interactions were found for RAS inhibition. CONCLUSION: The data of this post hoc analysis suggest that decision-making using repeated biomarker measurements may be very promising in bringing treatment of heart failure to a new level in the context of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine. Clearly, prospective testing is needed before this novel concept can be adopted. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org, identifier: ISRCTN43596477.

Is the clinical presentation of chronic heart failure different in elderly versus younger patients and those with preserved versus reduced ejection fraction?

BACKGROUND: Whether the clinical presentation and in particular prevalence of symptoms and signs of heart failure (HF) is different in elderly versus younger patients and in those with reduced (HFrEF) versus preserved (HFpEF) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is a matter of ongoing debate. AIMS: To compare detailed clinical characteristics of these important subgroups and to develop a prediction rule for the differentiation of HFpEF and HFrEF based on clinical parameters. METHODS: The analysis was based on the Trial of Intensified versus standard Medical therapy in Elderly patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF) comprising 622 patients ≥60 years with HF including the whole LVEF spectrum. RESULTS: In the groups ≥75 years and with HFpEF typical symptoms and clinical signs of HF were more prevalent as compared to those <75 years or with HFrEF, respectively. The burden of comorbidities was higher in the older age group. HFrEF could not be differentiated from HFpEF by symptom history and clinical examination alone. However, a combination of age, presence of pulmonary rales, systolic blood pressure, cause of heart failure, osteoporosis, current smoking, NT-proBNP, haemoglobin, QRS width and heart rhythm allowed to identify HFrEF versus HFpEF with a sensitivity of 81% and specificity of 90% (c-statistics 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: More symptoms and signs of HF were present both in the older age group and in patients with HFpEF. HFpEF versus HFrEF could be differentiated by a set of simple clinical, laboratory and ECG parameters but not by symptom history and physical examination alone.

Drug-coated balloons for de novo lesions in small coronary arteries: rationale and design of BASKET-SMALL 2.

The treatment of coronary small vessel disease (SVD) remains an unresolved issue. Drug-eluting stents (DES) have limited efficacy due to increased rates of instent-restenosis, mainly caused by late lumen loss. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) are a promising technique because native vessels remain structurally unchanged. Basel Stent Kosten-Effektivitäts Trial: Drug-Coated Balloons vs. Drug-Eluting Stents in Small Vessel Interventions (BASKET-SMALL 2) is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, noninferiority trial of DCB vs DES in native SVD for clinical endpoints. Seven hundred fifty-eight patients with de novo lesions in vessels <3 mm in diameter and an indication for percutaneous coronary intervention such as stable angina pectoris, silent ischemia, or acute coronary syndromes are randomized 1:1 to angioplasty with DCB vs implantation of a DES after successful initial balloon angioplasty. The primary endpoint is the combination of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization up to 1 year. Secondary endpoints include stent thrombosis, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding, and long-term outcome up to 3 years. Based on clinical endpoints after 1 year, we plan to assess the noninferiority of DCB compared to DES in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for SVD. Results will be available in the second half of 2018. This study will compare DCB and DES regarding long-term safety and efficacy for the treatment of SVD in a large all-comer population.

Heart failure with mid-range ejection fraction: a distinct clinical entity? Insights from the Trial of Intensified versus standard Medical therapy in Elderly patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF).

AIMS: While the conditions of heart failure (HF) with reduced (HFrEF, LVEF < 40%) and preserved (HFpEF, LVEF ≥ 50%) left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) are well characterized, it is unknown whether patients with HF and mid-range LVEF (HFmrEF, LVEF 40-49%) have to be regarded as a separate clinical entity. The aim of this study was to characterize these three populations and to compare outcome and response to therapy. METHODS AND RESULTS: The analysis was based on the Trial of Intensified versus standard Medical therapy in Elderly patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF) comprising a population with established HF including the whole spectrum of LVEF. Of the 622 patients, 108 (17%) were classified as having HFmrEF. This group was in general found to be 'intermediate' regarding clinical characteristics with a comparable and high burden of comorbidities and equally impaired quality of life but was more likely to have coronary artery disease as compared with the HFpEF group. During a median follow-up of 794 days, mortality was 39.7% without significant differences between groups. N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-guided as compared with standard therapy resulted in improved survival free of HF hospitalizations in HFrEF and HFmrEF, but not in HFpEF. CONCLUSION: Although the 'intermediate' clinical profile of HFmrEF between HFrEF and HFpEF would support the conclusion that HFmrEF is a distinct clinical entity, we hypothesize that HFmrEF has to be categorized as HFrEF because of the high prevalence of coronary artery disease and the similar benefit of NT-proBNP-guided therapy in HFrEF and HFmrEF, in contrast to HFpEF.

N-Terminal Pro-B-Type Natriuretic Peptide-Guided Therapy in Chronic Heart Failure Reduces Repeated Hospitalizations-Results From TIME-CHF.

BACKGROUND: Although heart failure (HF) patients are known to experience repeated hospitalizations, most studies evaluated only time to first event. N-Terminal B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP)-guided therapy has not convincingly been shown to improve HF-specific outcomes, and effects on recurrent all-cause hospitalization are uncertain. Therefore, we investigated the effect of NT-proBNP-guided therapy on recurrent events in HF with the use of a time-between-events approach in a hypothesis-generating analysis. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Trial of Intensified Versus Standard Medical Therapy in Elderly Patients With Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-CHF) randomized 499 HF patients, aged ≥60 years, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤45%, New York Heart Association functional class ≥I,I to NT-proBNP-guided versus symptom-guided therapy for 18 months, with further follow-up for 5.5 years. The effect of NT-proBNP-guided therapy on recurrent HF-related and all-cause hospitalizations and/or all-cause death was explored. One hundred four patients (49 NT-proBNP-guided, 55 symptom-guided) experienced 1 and 275 patients (133 NT-proBNP-guided, 142 symptom-guided) experienced ≥2 all-cause hospitalization events. Regarding HF hospitalization, 132 patients (57 NT-proBNP-guided, 75 symptom-guided) experienced 1 and 122 patients (57 NT-proBNP-guided, 65 symptom-guided) experienced ≥2 events. NT-proBNP-guided therapy was significant in preventing 2nd all-cause hospitalizations (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83; P = .01), in contrast to nonsignificant results in preventing 1st all-cause hospitalization events (HR 0.91; P = .35). This was not the case regarding HF hospitalization events (HR 0.85 [P = .14] vs HR 0.73 [P = .01]) The beneficial effect of NT-proBNP-guided therapy was seen only in patients aged <75 years, and not in those aged ≥75 years (interaction terms with P = .01 and P = .03 for all-cause hospitalization and HF hospitalization events, respectively). CONCLUSION: NT-proBNP-guided therapy reduces the risk of recurrent events in patients <75 years of age. This included all-cause hospitalization by mainly reducing later events, adding knowledge to the neutral effect on this end point when shown using time-to-first-event analysis only. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org, identifier: ISRCTN43596477.

First-generation paclitaxel- vs. second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents in small coronary arteries: the BASKET-SMALL Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Event rates after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are higher in small than large coronary vessels but may vary between different drug-eluting stent (DES) types. AIM: To assess the efficacy of two different DES in small vessel disease. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients with small vessel PCI were randomised 1 : 1 to a first-generation paclitaxel- vs. a second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation after 2 years. RESULTS: Overall, 191 patients were enrolled: 100 with a paclitaxel- and 91 with a zotarolimus-eluting stent. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. After 2 years, rates of the primary endpoint were numerically higher for zotarolimus- than paclitaxel-eluting stents (9.9% vs. 5.0%, hazard ratio 2.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-6.2, p = 0.19), which was mainly driven by higher rates of target vessel revascularisation (6.6% vs. 2.0%, hazard ratio 3.39, 95% CI: 0.68-16.78, p = 0.14). Based on this, a total of 1,019 patients would be necessary to demonstrate at least non-inferiority between the DES used. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, paclitaxel-eluting stents had a favourable efficacy profile in small vessel disease, although the numbers were too small to draw final conclusions. Based on the prohibitively high sample size for a randomized controlled trial between DES, other treatment options should be considered.

Interaction of Galectin-3 Concentrations with the Treatment Effects of ß-Blockers and RAS Blockade in Patients with Systolic Heart Failure: A Derivation-Validation Study from TIME-CHF and GISSI-HF.

BACKGROUND: Galectin-3 predicts prognosis in heart failure (HF) and may help to select HF patients in need of intensified therapy. METHODS: This retrospective post hoc analysis included 219 patients from the Trial of Intensified versus Standard Medical Therapy in Elderly Patients with Congestive Heart Failure (TIME-HF) and 631 patients from Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nell'Insufficienza Cardiaca (GISSI-HF) with HF who had reduced ejection fraction and available galectin-3 plasma concentrations. The interaction between galectin-3, ß-blockers, renin-angiotensin system (RAS) blockade, and spironolactone on outcome was evaluated in TIME-CHF and validated in GISSI-HF. End points were all-cause mortality and the composite of mortality with HF hospitalization or any hospitalization. RESULTS: High galectin-3 concentrations were associated with adverse outcome in both cohorts and remained significantly associated with death after multivariate adjustment [hazard ratio 2.42 (95% CI 1.17-5.01), P = 0.02, in TIME-CHF; 1.47 (1.02-2.10), P = 0.04, in GISSI-HF). In TIME-CHF, patients with low galectin-3 plasma concentrations had a better prognosis when ß-blockers were up-titrated, whereas patients with high galectin-3 plasma concentrations did not (interaction P < 0.05 for mortality and death with or without hospitalization). Opposite trends were seen for RAS blockade but were not statistically significant. Patients with high galectin-3 plasma concentrations had neutral prognosis when receiving spironolactone, whereas patients with low galectin-3 plasma concentrations had worse prognosis when receiving spironolactone (interaction P < 0.10 for death with or without hospitalization). In the GISSI-HF validation cohort, these interactions were confirmed for ß-blockers (P < 0.05 for all end points) and consistent for RAS blockade (P < 0.10 for death with or without hospitalization), but inconsistent for spironolactone. CONCLUSIONS: Galectin-3 is a mediocre prognostic marker, and galectin-3 concentrations interact with the treatment effect of ß-blockers and possibly RAS blockade in patients with systolic HF.

[Update arterial hypertension 2015]. / Update Arterielle Hypertonie 2015.

Hypertension, defined as office blood pressure of ≥140 mmHg systolic and/or ≥90 mmHg diastolic, is prevalent and one of the most important risk factors for disease and premature death. Diagnostic evaluation includes risk stratification regarding other cardiovascular risk factors, cardiovascular disease and asymptomatic organ damage. Currently, treatment is generally recommended with blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg with the goal of reducing values below these limits also in high risk patients. Exceptions concern patients with advanced age or diabetes. Treatment involves lifestyle changes, anthypertensive drugs and in the future probably interventional techniques. This mini-review summarizes selected and practically relevant diagnostic and therapeutic aspects from recent international guidelines.

L'hypertension artérielle, définie comme une pression mesurée au cabinet ≥140 mmHg pour la systolique et/ou ≥90 mmHg pour la diastolique, a une prévalence élevée et représente un des facteurs de risque majeurs de morbidité et de mortalité. L'évaluation diagnostique inclue une stratification en prenant en compte les autres facteurs de risque cardiovasculaire et la présence éventuelle d'une atteinte asymptomatique d'un organe cible. Un traitement est généralement recommandé lorsque la pression artérielle est ≥140/90 mmHg avec pour but de l'abaisser en-dessous de ce seuil, ceci également chez les malades à haut risque cardiovasculaire. Les malades âgés et les malades diabétiques représentent à cet égard une exception. Le traitement comporte des changements de l'hygiène de vie, des médicaments antihypertenseurs et probablement, dans le futur, des techniques interventionnelles. Cette mini-revue résume les aspects importants à considérer sur le plan diagnostique et thérapeutique de l'hypertension, ceci en se basant sur les recommandations internationales récentes.

Impact of worsening renal function related to medication in heart failure.

AIMS: Renal failure is a major challenge in treating heart failure (HF) patients. HF medication may deteriorate renal function, but the impact thereof on outcome is unknown. We investigated the effects of HF medication on worsening renal function (WRF) and the relationship to outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: This post-hoc analysis of TIME-CHF (NT-proBNP-guided vs. symptom-guided management in chronic HF) included patients with LVEF ≤45% and ≥1 follow-up visit (n = 462). WRF III was defined as a rise in serum creatinine ≥0.5 mg/dL (i.e. 44.2 µmol/L) at any time during the first 6 months. Four classes of medication were considered: loop diuretics, beta-blockers, renin-angiotensin system (RAS)-blockers, and spironolactone. Functional principal component analysis of daily doses was used to comprehend medication over time. All-cause mortality after 18 months was the primary outcome. Interactions between WRF, medication, and outcome were tested. Patients with WRF III received on average higher loop diuretic doses (P = 0.0002) and more spironolactone (P = 0.02), whereas beta-blockers (P = 0.69) did not differ and lower doses of RAS-blockers were given (P = 0.09). There were significant interactions between WRF III, medicationn and outcome. Thus, WRF III was associated with poor prognosis if high loop diuretic doses were given (P = 0.001), but not with low doses (P = 0.29). The opposite was found for spironolactone (poor prognosis in the case of WRF III with no spironolactone, P <0.0001; but not with spironolactone, P = 0.31). Beta-blockers were protective in all patients (P <0.001), but most in those with WRF III (P <0.05 for interaction). RAS-blockade was associated with improved outcome (P = 0.006), irrespective of WRF III. CONCLUSION: Based on this analysis, it may be hypothesized that high doses of loop diuretics might have detrimental effects, particularly in combination with significant WRF, whereas spironolactone and beta-blockers might be protective in patients with WRF.

Long-term efficacy and safety of biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stents: main results of the Basel Stent Kosten-Effektivitäts Trial-PROspective Validation Examination II (BASKET-PROVE II), a randomized, controlled noninferiority 2-year outcome trial.

BACKGROUND: Biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) were developed to be as effective as second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and as safe >1 year as bare-metal stents (BMS). Thus, very late stent thrombosis (VLST) attributable to durable polymers should no longer appear. METHODS AND RESULTS: To address these early and late aspects, 2291 patients presenting with acute or stable coronary disease needing stents ≥3.0 mm in diameter between April 2010 and May 2012 were randomly assigned to biolimus-A9-eluting BP-DES, second-generation everolimus-eluting DP-DES, or thin-strut silicon-carbide-coated BMS in 8 European centers. All patients were treated with aspirin and risk-adjusted doses of prasugrel. The primary end point was combined cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization within 2 years. The combined secondary safety end point was a composite of VLST, myocardial infarction, and cardiac death. The cumulative incidence of the primary end point was 7.6% with BP-DES, 6.8% with DP-DES, and 12.7% with BMS. By intention-to-treat BP-DES were noninferior (predefined margin, 3.80%) compared with DP-DES (absolute risk difference, 0.78%; -1.93% to 3.50%; P for noninferiority 0.042; per protocol P=0.09) and superior to BMS (absolute risk difference, -5.16; -8.32 to -2.01; P=0.0011). The 3 stent groups did not differ in the combined safety end point, with no decrease in events >1 year, particularly VLST with BP-DES. CONCLUSIONS: In large vessel stenting, BP-DES appeared barely noninferior compared with DP-DES and more effective than thin-strut BMS, but without evidence for better safety nor lower VLST rates >1 year. Findings challenge the concept that durable polymers are key in VLST formation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01166685.