Temporal Trends, Outcomes, and Predictors of Next-Day Discharge and Readmission Following Uncomplicated Evolut Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Next-day discharge (NDD) outcomes following uncomplicated self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve replacement have not been studied. Here, we compare readmission rates and clinical outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD transcatheter aortic valve replacement with Evolut. METHODS AND RESULTS: Society of Thoracic Surgeons/American College of Cardiology TVT (Transcatheter Valve Therapy) Registry patients (n=29 597) undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement with self-expanding supra-annular valves (Evolut R, PRO, and PRO+) from July 2019 to June 2021 were stratified by postprocedure length of stay: ≤1 day (NDD) versus >1 day (non-NDD). Propensity score matching was used to compare risk adjusted 30-day readmission rates and 1-year outcomes in NDD versus non-NDD, and multivariable regression to determine predictors of NDD and readmission. Between the first and last calendar quarter, the rate of NDD increased from 45.4% to 62.1% and median length of stay decreased from 2 days to 1. Propensity score matching produced relatively well-matched NDD and non-NDD cohorts (n=10 549 each). After matching, NDD was associated with lower 30-day readmission rates (6.3% versus 8.4%; P<0.001) and 1-year adverse outcomes (death, 7.0% versus 9.3%; life threatening/major bleeding, 1.6% versus 3.4%; new permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, 3.6 versus 11.0%; [all P<0.001]). Predictors of NDD included non-Hispanic ethnicity, preexisting permanent pacemaker implantation/implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and previous surgical aortic valve replacement. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing uncomplicated self-expanding Evolut transcatheter aortic valve replacement are discharged the next day. This study found that NDD can be predicted from baseline patient characteristics and was associated with favorable 30-day and 1-year outcomes, including low rates of permanent pacemaker implantation and readmission.

Myocardial Bridging: Diagnosis, Functional Assessment, and Management: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

Myocardial bridging (MB) is a congenital coronary anomaly in which a segment of the epicardial coronary artery traverses through the myocardium for a portion of its length. The muscle overlying the artery is termed a myocardial bridge, and the intramyocardial segment is referred to as a tunneled artery. MB can occur in any coronary artery, although is most commonly seen in the left anterior descending artery. Although traditionally considered benign in nature, increasing attention is being given to specific subsets of MB associated with ischemic symptomatology. The advent of contemporary functional and anatomic imaging modalities, both invasive and noninvasive, have dramatically improved our understanding of dynamic pathophysiology associated with MBs. This review provides a contemporary overview of epidemiology, pathobiology, diagnosis, functional assessment, and management of MBs.

Incidence, predictors, and outcomes of DAPT disruption due to non-compliance vs. bleeding after PCI: insights from the PARIS Registry.

BACKGROUND: The disruption of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) due to non-compliance or bleeding is known to significantly increase the risk of adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is currently unknown if there are differences in the predictors and clinical impact of disruption due to non-compliance compared with bleeding. METHODS: The patterns of non-adherence to antiplatelet regimens in stented patients (PARIS) registry was an international, multicenter prospective study of PCI patients discharged on DAPT (aspirin + a P2Y12 receptor). We analyzed the incidence, patient characteristics, predictors, and outcomes in patients with DAPT disruption due to non-compliance as compared to DAPT disruption due to bleeding in the PARIS registry. Predictors of non-recommended disruption and bleeding disruption were assessed using logistic regression. Risks associated with disruption on major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite of cardiac death, definite or probable stent thrombosis, spontaneous myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were analyzed using time-updated Cox regression over 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: Out of 5018 patients, the rate of non-compliant DAPT disruption was 1.6% at 30 days (n = 79), 6.5% at 12 months (n = 328), and 9.1% at 2 years from PCI (n = 457). The rate of bleeding DAPT disruption was 0.6% at 30 days (n = 32), 3.1% at 12 months (n = 156), and 4.6% at 2 years (n = 229). Multivariate predictors of non-compliant disruption included female gender, history of smoking, acute coronary syndrome, and US patients which were associated with greater risk; and dyslipidemia and discharge PPI which were associated with lower risk. Multivariate predictors of bleeding disruption included older age, prior MI, and discharge warfarin which were associated with greater risk; and US region and intervention to the LAD which were associated with lower risk. Non-compliant disruption was associated with a significantly greater risk for MACE (HR 1.73, 95% CI 1.17-2.54, p = 0.006) and spontaneous myocardial infarction (HR 2.93, 95% CI 1.85-4.65, p < 0.001). Bleeding disruption was associated with a significantly greater risk for all-cause death (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.22-3.08, p = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 10 patients disrupts DAPT due to non-compliance and 1 in 20 disrupts DAPT due to bleeding. Disruption due to non-compliance resulted in higher risk for ischemic events and disruption due to bleeding had higher subsequent mortality. These data warrant efforts to focus on patient education in those at high risk of non-compliance.

Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stents.

BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) are associated with an excess of thrombotic complications compared with metallic everolimus-eluting stents (EES). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the comparative effectiveness of the Food and Drug Administration-approved BVS versus metallic EES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at longest available follow-up. METHODS: The authors searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and web sources for randomized trials comparing BVS and EES. The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were target lesion failure and definite or probable stent thrombosis, respectively. RESULTS: Seven trials were included: in sum, 5,583 patients were randomized to receive either the study BVS (n = 3,261) or the EES (n = 2,322). Median time of follow-up was 2 years (range 2 to 3 years). Compared with metallic EES, risk of target lesion failure (9.6% vs. 7.2%; absolute risk difference: +2.4%; risk ratio: 1.32; 95% confidence interval: 1.10 to 1.59; number needed to harm: 41; p = 0.003; I2 = 0%) and stent thrombosis (2.4% vs. 0.7%; absolute risk difference: +1.7%; risk ratio: 3.15; 95% confidence interval: 1.87 to 5.30; number needed to harm: 60; p < 0.0001; I2 = 0%) were both significantly higher with BVS. There were no significant differences in all-cause or cardiovascular mortality between groups. The increased risk for ST associated with BVS was concordant across the early (<30 days), late (30 days to 1 year), and very late (>1 year) periods (pinteraction = 0.49). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with metallic EES, the BVS appears to be associated with both lower efficacy and higher thrombotic risk over time. (Bioresorbable vascular scaffold compare to everolimus stents in long term follow up; CRD42017059993).