Timing of multivessel revascularization in stable patients with STEMI: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (MV-PCI) is recommended in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) without cardiogenic shock. The present network meta-analysis investigated the optimal timing of MV-PCI in this context. METHODS: We pooled the aggregated data from randomized trials investigating stable STEMI patients with multivessel cad treated with a strategy of either MV-PCI or culprit vessel-only PCI. The primary outcome was all-cause death. The main secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization. This study is registered at PROSPERO (CRD42023457794). RESULTS: Among 11 trials, a total of 10 507 patients were randomly assigned to MV-PCI (same sitting, n = 1683; staged during the index hospitalization, n = 3460; staged during a subsequent hospitalization within 45 days, n = 3275) or to culprit vessel-only PCI (n = 2089). The median follow-up was 18.6 months. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, MV-PCI staged during the index hospitalization significantly reduced all-cause death (risk ratio, 0.73; 95%CI, 0.56-0.92; P = .008) and ranked as possibly the best treatment option for this outcome compared with all other strategies. In comparison with culprit vessel-only PCI, a MV-PCI reduced cardiovascular mortality without differences dependent on the timing of revascularization. MV-PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, significantly reduced myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, with no significant difference between each other. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD without cardiogenic shock, multivessel PCI within the index hospitalization, either in a single procedure or staged, represents the safest and most efficacious approach. The different timings of multivessel PCI did not result in any significant differences in all-cause death.

Invasive Assessment of Right Ventricular to Pulmonary Artery Coupling Improves 1-year Mortality Prediction After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement and Anticipates the Persistence of Extra-Aortic Valve Cardiac Damage.

Background: The interplay between the right ventricle and the pulmonary artery, known as right ventricular to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling, is crucial for assessing right ventricular systolic function against the afterload from the pulmonary circulation. Pulmonary artery pressure levels are ideally measured by right heart catheterization. Yet, echocardiography represents the most utilized method for evaluating pulmonary artery pressure levels, albeit with limitations in accuracy. This study therefore aims to evaluate the prognostic significance of right ventricular to pulmonary artery (RV-PA) coupling expressed as tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) related to systolic pulmonary artery pressure (sPAP) levels measured by right heart catheterization (TAPSE/sPAPinvasive) or estimated by transthoracic echocardiography (TAPSE/sPAPechocardiography) in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Methods: Using data from a bicentric registry, this study compares TAPSE/sPAPinvasive vs. TAPSE/sPAPechocardiography in predicting 1-year all-cause mortality after TAVR. Results: Among 333 patients with complete echocardiography and right heart catheterization data obtained before TAVR, their mean age was 79.8 ± 6.74 years, 39.6% were female, and general 1-year survival was 89.8%. sPAPinvasive and sPAPechocardiography showed only moderate correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient R: 0.53, p value: <0.0001). TAPSE/sPAPinvasive was superior to TAPSE/sPAPechocardiography in predicting 1-year all-cause mortality after TAVR (area under the curve: 0.662 vs. 0.569, p value: 0.025). Patients with reduced TAPSE/sPAPinvasive levels (< 0.365 mm/mmHg) evidenced significantly lower 1-year survival rates than patients with preserved TAPSE/sPAPinvasive levels (81.8 vs. 93.6%, p value: 0.001; hazard ratio for 1-year mortality: 3.09 [95% confidence interval: 1.55-6.17]). Echocardiographic follow-up data revealed that patients with reduced RV-PA coupling suffer from persistent right ventricular dysfunction (TAPSE: 16.6 ± 4.05 mm vs. 21.6 ± 4.81 mm in patients with preserved RV-PA coupling) and severe tricuspid regurgitation (diagnosed in 19.7 vs. 6.58% in patients with preserved RV-PA coupling). Conclusions: RV-PA coupling expressed as TAPSE/sPAPinvasive can refine stratification of severe aortic stenosis patients into low-risk and high-risk cohorts for mortality after TAVR. Moreover, it can help to anticipate persistent extra-aortic valve cardiac damage, which will demand further treatment.

Incidence and pattern of urgent revascularization in acute coronary syndromes treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel.

BACKGROUND: The ISAR-REACT 5 trial compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS managed invasively. The present study sought to investigate the impact of ticagrelor and prasugrel on the incidence and pattern of urgent revascularization in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: This post-hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included all ACS patients who underwent PCI. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the incidence of urgent revascularization at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcome was the pattern of urgent revascularization procedures (namely, urgent target vessel/non-target vessel revascularization - TVR/NTVR). Among 3,377 ACS patients who underwent PCI, 1,676 were assigned to ticagrelor and 1,701 to prasugrel before PCI. After 12 months, the incidence of urgent revascularization was higher among patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to prasugrel (6.8% vs. 5.2%; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.75; p = 0.051), mostly attributable to significantly more urgent NTVR in the ticagrelor group (3.8% vs. 2.4%; HR = 1.62 [1.09-2.41]; p = 0.017). The risk of urgent TVR did not differ between treatment groups (3.3% vs. 3.0%; HR = 1.13 [0.77-1.65]; p = 0.546). CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients treated with PCI, the cumulative rate of urgent revascularizations after 12 months is higher with ticagrelor compared to prasugrel, due to a significant increase in urgent revascularizations involving remote coronary vessels.

Transcatheter or Surgical Treatment of Aortic-Valve Stenosis.

BACKGROUND: Among low-risk patients with severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis who are eligible for both transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) and surgical aortic-valve replacement (SAVR), data are lacking on the appropriate treatment strategy in routine clinical practice. METHODS: In this randomized noninferiority trial conducted at 38 sites in Germany, we assigned patients with severe aortic stenosis who were at low or intermediate surgical risk to undergo either TAVI or SAVR. Percutaneous- and surgical-valve prostheses were selected according to operator discretion. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause or fatal or nonfatal stroke at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 1414 patients underwent randomization (701 to the TAVI group and 713 to the SAVR group). The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 74±4 years; 57% were men, and the median Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score was 1.8% (low surgical risk). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the primary outcome at 1 year was 5.4% in the TAVI group and 10.0% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio for death or stroke, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.79; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The incidence of death from any cause was 2.6% in the TAVI group and 6.2% in the SAVR group (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.73); the incidence of stroke was 2.9% and 4.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.06). Procedural complications occurred in 1.5% and 1.0% of patients in the TAVI and SAVR groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe aortic stenosis at low or intermediate surgical risk, TAVI was noninferior to SAVR with respect to death from any cause or stroke at 1 year. (Funded by the German Center for Cardiovascular Research and the German Heart Foundation; DEDICATE-DZHK6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03112980.).

Comparison of two self-expanding transcatheter heart valves for degenerated surgical bioprostheses: the AVENGER multicentre registry.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of comparative data on transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) in degenerated surgical prostheses (valve-in-valve [ViV]). AIMS: We sought to compare outcomes of using two self-expanding transcatheter heart valve (THV) systems for ViV. METHODS: In this retrospective multicentre registry, we included consecutive patients undergoing transfemoral ViV using either the ACURATE neo/neo2 (ACURATE group) or the Evolut R/PRO/PRO+ (EVOLUT group). The primary outcome measure was technical success according to Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-3. Secondary outcomes were 30-day all-cause mortality, device success (VARC-3), coronary obstruction (CO) requiring intervention, rates of severe prosthesis-patient mismatch (PPM), and aortic regurgitation (AR) ≥moderate. Comparisons were made after 1:1 propensity score matching. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 835 patients from 20 centres (ACURATE n=251; EVOLUT n=584). In the matched cohort (n=468), technical success (ACURATE 92.7% vs EVOLUT 88.9%; p=0.20) and device success (69.7% vs 73.9%; p=0.36) as well as 30-day mortality (2.8% vs 1.6%; p=0.392) were similar between the two groups. The mean gradients and rates of severe PPM, AR ≥moderate, or CO did not differ between the groups. Technical and device success were higher for the ACURATE platform among patients with a true inner diameter (ID) >19 mm, whereas a true ID ≤19 mm was associated with higher device success - but not technical success - among Evolut recipients. CONCLUSIONS: ViV TAVI using either ACURATE or Evolut THVs showed similar procedural outcomes. However, a true ID >19 mm was associated with higher device success among ACURATE recipients, whereas in patients with a true ID ≤19 mm, device success was higher when using Evolut.

A Ten-Year Follow-Up Study of the Association Between Uric Acid and Adverse Cardiovascular Events in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease.

The association between uric acid (UA) and long-term mortality in patients with coronary artery disease is poorly investigated. We assessed the association between UA and 10-year mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in 3,998 patients who underwent PCI. Patients were categorized in groups according to UA tertiles: tertile 1 (UA <5.80 mg/100 ml, n = 1,347), tertile 2 (UA 5.80 to 7.04 mg/100 ml, n = 1,340), and tertile 3 (UA >7.94 mg/100 ml, n = 1,311). The primary outcome was 10-year all-cause mortality. All-cause deaths occurred in 1,200 patients: 320 deaths (26.5%) in patients with UA in the first tertile, 325 deaths (26.9%) in patients with UA in the second tertile, and 555 deaths (46.0%) in patients with UA in the third tertile (adjusted hazard ratio 1.22, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 1.27, p <0.001) for 1 mg/100 ml increment in UA level. Cardiac deaths occurred in 748 patients: 194 deaths (16.5%) in patients with UA in the first tertile, 202 deaths (17.0%) in patients with UA in the second tertile, and 352 deaths (29.7%) in patients with UA in the third tertile (adjusted hazard ratio 1.24 [1.17 to 1.32], p <0.001) for 1 mg/100 ml increment in the UA level. The 10-year rates of target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization, or nontarget vessel revascularization did not differ significantly according to the UA level. In conclusion, in patients with coronary artery disease treated with PCI, increased UA level was associated with higher 10-year mortality. Increased UA level was not associated with the progression of atherosclerosis in nontreated coronary vessels or progression of intimal hyperplasia in stented lesions requiring intervention.

Aspirin loading and coronary no-reflow after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: The association of aspirin loading with the risk of coronary no-reflow (CNR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) has not been investigated. We assessed the association of aspirin loading before PCI with CNR in patients with AMI. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 3100 patients with AMI undergoing PCI. Of them, 2812 patients received aspirin loading (a single oral [or chewed] or intravenous dose of 150-300 mg) and 288 patients did not receive aspirin loading before PCI. The primary endpoint was CNR, defined as Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction blood flow grade of <3 after the PCI. RESULTS: CNR occurred in 130 patients: 127 patients in the group with aspirin loading and 3 patients in the group without aspirin loading before PCI (4.5% vs. 1.0%; odds ratio [OR] = 4.50, 95% confidence interval, [1.42-14.21], p = 0.005). After adjustment, the association between aspirin loading and CNR was significant (adjusted OR = 4.49 [1.56-12.92]; p < 0.001). There was no aspirin loading-by-P2Y12 inhibitor (ticagrelor or prasugrel) interaction (pint = 0.465) or aspirin loading-by-chronic aspirin therapy on admission (pint = 0.977) interaction with respect to the occurrence of CNR after PCI. Chronic low-dose aspirin therapy on admission was not independently associated with higher risk of CNR after PCI (adjusted OR = 1.06 [0.65-1.72]; p = 0.824). CONCLUSION: In patients with AMI undergoing PCI, aspirin loading before the PCI procedure at the guideline-recommended doses was associated with higher odds of developing CNR. However, due to the limited number of events, the findings should be considered as hypothesis generating.

[Update on the treatment of aortic valve stenosis in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients]. / Update zur Behandlung der Aortenklappenstenose bei symptomatischen und asymptomatischen Patienten.

Aortic valve stenosis is one of the most frequent valvular heart diseases requiring treatment in industrialized countries. The symptom onset is associated with a significantly increased mortality, so that there is a clear indication for treatment in patients with severe, symptomatic aortic valve stenosis; however, data on the optimal treatment of patients with asymptomatic aortic valve stenosis are scarce. Smaller studies in the field of cardiac surgery suggest that early surgical valve replacement is superior to a conservative approach. For this reason, the results of additional adequately powered randomized trials are awaited with great interest. In this year numerous long-term results from randomized comparisons of the two available treatment options (surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement) were published, which will further guide the heart team to find the best treatment approach for each individual.

Recurrent Revascularization at 10 Years After Percutaneous Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with recurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains particularly challenging, with data and guideline recommendations for repeat percutaneous coronary intervention being scant. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the long-term incidence of recurrent revascularization events after percutaneous treatment of drug-eluting stent (DES) ISR. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, 402 patients (500 lesions) assigned to plain balloon (PB), drug-coated balloon (DCB), or DES treatment in the randomized ISAR-DESIRE 3 (Efficacy Study of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon, -Stent vs. Plain Angioplasty for Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis) trial were followed up over a median of 10.3 years. The primary endpoint was total repeat target lesion revascularization (R-TLR) including all, first and recurrent, events. RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, first R-TLR was required in 204 lesions, 82 in the PB group, 70 in the DCB group, and 52 in the DES group. The total number of R-TLRs was 373: 162 in the PB group, 124 in the DCB group, and 87 in the DES group. During the first year of follow-up, the risk for total R-TLR was reduced by DCB (HR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.24-0.54) and DES (HR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.14-0.38) treatment compared with PB treatment. After 1 year, the risk for total R-TLR was nonsignificantly reduced by DCB treatment (HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.51-1.16) and significantly reduced by DES treatment (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.39-0.95) compared with PB treatment. Risk in the DCB and DES groups was similar during (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.89-2.69) and after (HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.82-1.92) 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: The total number of R-TLRs over 10 years after treatment of patients with DES ISR was high. DCBs and particularly DES were able to reduce the need for both first and recurrent revascularization compared with PB treatment.

Incidence of systemic inflammatory response syndrome and patient outcome following transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair.

OBJECTIVES: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) is a common finding after cardiovascular interventions. Data on the incidence of SIRS and its impact on outcome in patients undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge mitral valve repair (MV-TEER) for mitral regurgitation (MR) is lacking. METHODS: From January 2013 to December 2020, 373 patients with moderate or severe MR undergoing MV-TEER were included. SIRS was defined as at least two of the following criteria within 48 h after the procedure: leucocyte count > 12.0 or < 4.0 × 109/l, respiratory rate > 20 breaths per minute or PaCO2 ≤ 4.3 kPa/32 mmHg, heart rate > 90 bpm and temperature > 38.0 °C or < 36.0 °C. The primary endpoint was 3-years all-cause mortality. RESULTS: SIRS was observed in 49.6% (185/373) of patients. Patients who developed SIRS presented more frequently with NYHA III/IV at baseline [SIRS: 82.4% (149/185) vs. no SIRS: 79.0% (147/188); p = 0.029]. Patients who developed SIRS spent more days on ICU (p < 0.001) and overall length of stay was longer (p < 0.001). Relevant residual MR, defined as MR ≥ III in-hospital, was present more often in patients who developed SIRS [SIRS: 11.3% (20/177) vs. no SIRS: 3.93% (7/178), p = 0.036]. At 3 years, all-cause mortality in the entire population was 33.5% (125/373) with an increased all-cause mortality in patients with SIRS compared to patients without SIRS (HR 1.49, [CI 95% 1.04, 2.13]; p = 0.0264). In the multivariate analysis development of SIRS (HR 1.479 [CI 95% 1.016, 2.154]; p = 0.041) was identified as predictor for 3-years all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: SIRS is a common finding after MV-TEER occurring in approximately half of patients. SIRS after MV-TEER was associated with a longer in-hospital stay. In addition, we observed an increased 3-years all-cause mortality in patients with SIRS.

Multicenter comparison of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 versus Evolut PRO transcatheter heart valves.

BACKGROUND: New-generation self-expanding transcatheter aortic heart valves (THV) were designed to overcome technical constraints of their preceding generations. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (Neo2) versus Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. METHODS: Seven hundred nine patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with either Neo2 (n = 496) or PRO (n = 213) were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were evaluated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups after PSM (Neo2: n = 155, Evolut Pro: n = 155). Technical success rates were high in both groups (Neo2: 94.8% vs PRO: 97.4%; p = 0.239). Need for permanent pacemaker implantation was less frequent with Neo2 compared with PRO (7.5% vs 20.6%; p = 0.002), whereas major vascular complications were more frequent with Neo2 (Neo2: 11.6% vs PRO: 4.5%; p = 0.022). Intended valve performance at discharge was high in both groups without relevant differences among groups (Neo2: 97.4% vs. 95.3%; p = 0.328). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term outcomes after TAVI using latest-generation self-expanding THV were excellent, with overall low rates of adverse events. However, Neo2 was associated with lower pacemaker rates and reduced the prevalence of moderate-severe paravalvular leakage. Transprosthetic gradients after TAVI were higher with Neo2 compared with PRO.

Systemic inflammatory response syndrome in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Data on systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are scarce and limited to small cohorts. We aimed to investigate its incidence and mid-term impact in a large cohort of TAVI patients. METHODS: From January 2018 to December 2020, 717 patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing TAVI were included. SIRS was defined as fulfilling at least two of the following criteria within 48 h from the procedure: leucocyte count >12.0 or <4.0 × 109/l, respiratory rate > 20 breaths per minute or PaCO2 ≤ 4.3 kPa/32 mmHg, heart rate > 90 beats per minute and temperature > 38.0 °C or <36.0 °C. Clinical endpoints were 1-year rehospitalization for chronic heart failure (CHF) and 2-years all-cause mortality. Event rates during follow-up were calculated as Kaplan-Meier estimates. RESULTS: SIRS developed in 56.3 % (404/717) of patients after TAVI. SIRS occurred more frequently in patients with post-dilatation (SIRS 34.7 % (140/404) vs. no SIRS 23.3 % (73/313); p < 0.001) and major vascular complications (SIRS 16.1 % (65/404) vs. no SIRS 8.6 % (27/313); p = 0.004). Further, ICU days were more in patients who developed SIRS (SIRS 1.56 ± 1.50 days vs. no SIRS 1.22 ± 1.02 days; p = 0.001). At 2-years, all-cause mortality in the entire population was 23.9 %. However, there was no difference in CHF at 1-year (5.9 % vs. 4.1 %; log-rank = 0.347) nor in all-cause mortality at 2-years (22.0 % vs. 26.2 %; log-rank = 0.690) between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: SIRS is a common finding after TAVI, which may prolong hospital stay but is without effect on mortality during 2-years follow-up.

Coronary no-reflow and adverse events in patients with acute myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention with current drug-eluting stents and third-generation P2Y12 inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: The frequency and prognostic value of coronary no-reflow (CNR) was investigated in studies that have used an outdated reperfusion therapy in terms of stent technology and antithrombotic drugs. We assessed the association of CNR with adverse outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) and newer antithrombotic drugs, ticagrelor or prasugrel. METHODS: This study included 3100 patients with AMI who underwent PCI with current DES and third-generation P2Y12 inhibitors. CNR was defined as Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) blood flow grade ≤ 2 at the end of PCI. The primary end point was 1-year incidence of net adverse clinical and cerebral events-a composite end point of death of any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke or major bleeding. RESULTS: CNR was diagnosed in 130 patients (4.2%). The primary end point occurred in 28 patients in the CNR group and 354 patients in the reflow group (cumulative incidence 23.2% and 12.8%; adjusted hazard ratio = 1.53, 95% confidence interval 1.01-2.33; P = 0.049). The 1-year incidences of death or myocardial infarction (14.6% vs. 7.6%; P = 0.003), myocardial infarction (8.8% vs. 3.9%; P = 0.007) and major bleeding (10.9% vs. 5.6%; P = 0.008) were significantly higher in patients with CNR than patients with reflow. The risk of adverse events in patients with CNR was highest within the first 30 days after PCI. CONCLUSION: In patients with AMI undergoing PCI with current DES and third generation P2Y12 receptor inhibitors, CNR was associated with a higher risk of adverse outcomes at 1 year.

Modified balloons to prepare severely calcified coronary lesions before stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: The performance of modified balloons (namely cutting or scoring balloons) to prepare severely calcified lesions in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains controversial. We investigated the clinical and imaging outcomes of patients undergoing PCI assigned to modified balloon therapy to prepare severely calcified coronary lesions before stent implantation. METHODS: In this meta-analysis, we aggregated the study-level data from trials enrolling invasively treated patients who were randomly assigned to modified balloon or control therapy to prepare severely calcified lesions before stenting. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including death, myocardial infarction (MI), and repeat revascularization. The secondary outcomes included the individual components of the primary outcome, coronary perforation and final minimal stent area (MSA) as measured by intracoronary imaging. RESULTS: A total of 648 participants in six trials were allocated to modified balloon therapy (n = 335) or control therapy (semi-compliant, non-compliant, or super high-pressure balloon, n = 313). The median follow-up was 11 months. Overall, MACE occurred in 8.96% of patients assigned to a modified balloon and 12.78% of patients assigned to control therapy [risk ratio = 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35-1.39; P = 0.24]. There was a significant treatment effect-by-modified balloon type interaction for the outcome MACE in patients assigned to cutting balloon compared with control therapy [RR = 0.40 (0.28-0.56), P for interaction (Pint) < 0.001]. Patients treated with a modified balloon compared with control therapy showed neither a significant difference for the other clinical outcomes nor for final MSA [standardized mean difference = 0.67 (- 0.71, 2.06); P = 0.26]. CONCLUSIONS: In patients treated with PCI for severely calcific coronary artery disease a strategy of lesion preparation with a modified balloon before stenting does not improve clinical or imaging outcomes compared with control therapy. The different performance of cutting and scoring balloons warrants further investigation.

Implantation depth of balloon-expandable transcatheter heart valves and risks for permanent pacemaker implantation and midterm adverse events.

BACKGROUND: Permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) remains a relevant complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) and its impact on outcome remains controversial. AIMS: This study aimed to analyze the effects of implantation depth on PPI at 30 days and assess its impact on outcome with the balloon-expandable Sapien 3 (S3) prosthesis. METHODS: Between 2014 and 2018, 849 patients without previous pacemaker undergoing transfemoral TAVI with the S3 were included. Prosthesis implantation depth was measured and divided into Quintiles. An ordinal logistic regression was used to assess its association with PPI, while a multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of PPI. Survival analyses were performed with the Kaplan-Meier method and a multivariable Cox regression was performed to ascertain the impact of PPI on mortality. RESULTS: Overall, incidence of PPI at 30 days was 9.7%. Implantation depth decreased consistently from a median of 6.7 mm [5.55-8.00] in 2014 to 2.7 mm [2.30-3.50] in 2018 (p < 0.001). When considering Quintiles of implantation depth, incidence of PPI was significantly higher in upper Quintiles and risk for PPI was significantly lower for the 1. Quintile compared to the 5. Quintile (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: [0.16-0.73]; p = 0.003). In the adjusted multivariable logistic regression implantation depth persisted ad independent predictor of PPI at 30 days. Patients requiring PPI at 30 days displayed significantly higher mortality at 4 years compared to patients without PPI (49.5% vs. 40.0%; log-rank = 0.022). In a multivariate analysis, increased logistic EuroScore, diabetes mellitus, and history of atrial fibrillation, were independent predictors of all-cause mortality at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Higher prosthesis implantation relative to the virtual aortic annulus was significantly associated with reduced risk for PPI at 30 days. Patients with PPI at 30 days exhibited higher mortality during follow-up, however, only logistic EuroScore, diabetes mellitus, and history of atrial fibrillation were identified as independent predictors of mortality at 2 years.

Outcomes of endovascular treatment for popliteal artery disease.

Background: Finding the appropriate endovascular revascularization strategy for patients with peripheral artery disease and a popliteal artery lesion remains particulary challenging. Data regarding predictors for a beneficial outcome are scarce. Patients and methods: All endovascular procedures of popliteal artery lesions (n=227) performed in 197 patients between February 2009 and May 2018 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed. Hemodynamically relevant restenosis represented the primary endpoint. Results: The overall technical success rate was 98% and yielded 99% for stenoses (n=145) and 97% for occlusions (n=82). In a median follow-up of 10 months, the overall rate of restenosis was 23%. After 1 and 2 years, the primary patency rates were 76% and 55% and the secondary patency rate was 100%, respectively. The estimated probability of restenosis was significantly higher in stented lesions (stent vs. no stent; 36.0% vs. 19.1%; p=0.030). Multivariate analysis identified stent implantation (hazard ratio: 2.4; overall P=0.010) and diabetes (hazard ratio 2.0; P=0.023) as significant predictors for the development of restenosis. Conclusions: Endovascular therapy for popliteal artery disease was associated with high technical success rates and accompanied with a promising mid-term outcome, particularly in lesions treated with balloon angioplasty alone.

Near-infrared spectroscopy-intravascular ultrasound to improve assessment of coronary artery disease severity in patients referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (The IMPACTavi registry): Design and rationale.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) was established as a standard treatment for high-operative risk patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Although coronary artery disease (CAD) often coexists with AS, clinical and angiographic evaluations of stenosis severity are unreliable in this specific setting. To provide precise risk stratification of coronary lesions, combined near-infrared spectroscopy and intravascular ultrasound (NIRS-IVUS) was developed to integrate morphological and molecular information on plaque composition. However, there is a lack of evidence on the association between NIRS-IVUS derived findings such as maximum 4mm lipid core burden index (maxLCBI4mm) and clinical outcomes in AS patients undergoing TAVI. This registry aims to assess feasibility and safety of NIRS-IVUS imaging in the setting of routine pre-TAVI coronary angiography to improve assessment of CAD severity. METHODS: The registry is designed as a non-randomized, prospective, observational, multicenter cohort registry. Patients referred for TAVI with angiographic evidence of CAD receive NIRS-IVUS imaging and are followed up to 24 months. Enrolled patients are classified as NIRS-IVUS positive and NIRS-IVUS negative, respectively, based on their maxLCBI4mm to compare their clinical outcomes. The primary endpoint of the registry is major adverse cardiovascular events over a 24-month follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Identification of patients likely or unlikely to benefit from revascularization prior to TAVI represents an important unmet clinical need. This registry is designed to investigate whether NIRS-IVUS-derived atherosclerotic plaque characteristics can identify patients and lesions at risk for future adverse cardiovascular events after TAVI, in order to refine interventional decision-making in this challenging patient population.

Very long-term outlook of acute coronary syndromes after percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of polymer-free versus durable-polymer new-generation drug-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND: Detailed long-term follow-up data on patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in general, and those with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in particular, are limited. We aimed to appraise the long-term outlook of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with state-of-the-art coronary stents for STEMI, other types of ACS and stable coronary artery disease (CAD), and also explore the potential beneficial impact of new-generation polymer-free drug-eluting stents (DES) in this setting. METHODS: Baseline, procedural and very long-term outcome data on patients undergoing PCI and randomized to implantation of new-generation polymer-free vs. durable polymer DES were systematically collected, explicitly distinguishing subjects with admission diagnosis of STEMI, non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTEACS), and stable CAD. Outcomes of interest included death, myocardial infarction, revascularization (i.e. patient-oriented composite endpoints [POCE]), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and device-oriented composite endpoints (DOCE). RESULTS: A total of 3002 patients were included, 1770 (59.0%) with stable CAD, 921 (30.7%) with NSTEACS, and 311 (10.4%) with STEMI. At long-term follow-up (7.5±3.1 years), all clinical events were significantly more common in the NSTEACS group and, to a lesser extent, in the stable CAD group (e.g. POCE occurred in, respectively, 637 [44.7%] vs. 964 [37.9%] vs. 133 [31.5%], P<0.001). While these differences were largely attributable to adverse coexisting features in patients with NSTEACS (e.g. advanced age, insulin-dependent diabetes, and extent of CAD), the unfavorable outlook of patients presenting with NSTEACS persisted even after multivariable adjustment including several prognostically relevant factors (hazard ratio [HR] of NSTEACS vs. stable CAD 1.19 [95% confidence interval 1.03-1.38], P=0.016). Notably, even after encompassing all prognostically impactful features, no difference between polymer-free and permanent polymer drug-eluting stents appeared (HR=0.96 [0.84-1.10], P=0.560). CONCLUSIONS: Unstable coronary artery disease, especially when presenting without ST-elevation, represents an informative marker of adverse long-term prognosis in current state-of-the-art invasive cardiology practice. Even considering admission diagnosis, and despite of using no polymer, polymer-free DES showed similar results with regards to safety and efficacy when compared with DES with permanent polymer.