Assessment of Coronary Stenoses for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Evidence regarding the comparative efficacy of the different methods to determine the significance of coronary stenoses in the catheterization laboratory is lacking. We aimed to compare all available methods guiding the decision to perform percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL until October 5, 2023. We included trials that randomized patients with greater than 30% stenoses who underwent potential PCI and reported major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We included 15 trials with 16,333 participants with a mean weighted follow-up of 34 months. The trials contained a median of 49.3% (interquartile range: 32.6%, 100%) acute coronary syndrome participants. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with coronary angiography (CA) (risk ratio [RR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.82, high certainty), fractional flow reserve (FFR) (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.92, moderate certainty), and instantaneous wave:free ratio (iFR) (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.82, moderate certainty), and ranked first for MACE (88.1% probability of being the best). FFR (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.06, moderate certainty) and iFR (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.28, moderate certainty) likely did not decrease the risk of MACE compared with CA. Intravascular imaging may not be associated with a significant decrease in MACE compared with CA (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.17, low certainty) when used to guide the decision to perform PCI. In conclusion, a decision to perform PCI based on QFR was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with CA, FFR, and iFR in a mixed stable coronary disease and acute coronary syndrome population. These hypothesis-generating findings should be validated in large, randomized, head-to-head trials.

SYNERGY-Everolimus-Eluting Stent With a Bioabsorbable Polymer in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: CLEAR SYNERGY OASIS-9 Registry.

Our objective was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of the SYNERGY stent (Boston Scientific Corporation, Marlborough, Massachusetts) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The only drug-eluting stent approved for treatment of STEMI by the Food and Drug Administration is the Taxus stent (Boston Scientific) which is no longer commercially available, so further data are needed. The CLEAR (Colchicine and spironolactone in patients with myocardial infarction) SYNERGY stent registry was embedded into a larger randomized trial of patients with STEMI (n = 7,000), comparing colchicine versus placebo and spironolactone versus placebo. The primary outcome for the SYNERGY stent registry is major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as defined by cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or unplanned ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization within 12 months. We estimated a MACE rate of 6.3% at 12 months after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI based on the Thrombectomy vs percutaneous coronary intervention alone in STEMI (TOTAL) trial. Success was defined as upper bound of confidence interval (CI) to be less than the performance goal of 9.45%. Overall, 733 patients were enrolled from 8 countries with a mean age 60 years, 19.4% diabetes mellitus, 41.3% anterior MI, and median door-to-balloon time of 72 minutes. The MACE rate was 4.8% (95% CI 3.2 to 6.3%) at 12 months which met the success criteria against performance goal of 9.45%. The rates of cardiovascular death, recurrent MI, or target vessel revascularization were 2.7%, 1.9%, 1.0%, respectively. The rates of acute definite stent thrombosis were 0.3%, subacute 0.4%, late 0.4%, and cumulative stent thrombosis of 1.1% at 12 months. In conclusion, the SYNERGY stent in STEMI performed well and was successful compared with the performance goal based on previous trials.

Ultrasound guidance for transfemoral access in coronary procedures: an individual participant-level data metaanalysis from the femoral ultrasound trialist collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials of ultrasound (US)-guided transfemoral access (TFA) for coronary procedures have shown mixed results. AIMS: We aimed to compare US-guided versus non-US-guided TFA from randomised data in an individual participant-level data (IPD) meta-analysis. METHODS: We completed a systematic review and an IPD meta-analysis of all randomised controlled trials comparing US-guided versus non-US-guided TFA for coronary procedures. We performed a one-stage mixed-model meta-analysis using the intention-to-treat population from included trials. The primary outcome was a composite of major vascular complications or major bleeding within 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 2,441 participants (1,208 US-guided, 1,233 non-US-guided) from 4 randomised clinical trials were included. The mean age was 65.5 years, 27.0% were female, and 34.5% underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention. The incidence of major vascular complications or major bleeding (34/1,208 [2.8%] vs 55/1,233 [4.5%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.94; p=0.026) was lower in the US-guided TFA group. In the prespecified subgroup of participants who received a vascular closure device, those randomised to US-guided TFA experienced a reduction in the primary outcome (2.1% vs 5.6%; OR 0.36, 95% CI: 0.19-0.69), while no benefit for US guidance was observed in the subgroup without vascular closure devices (4.1% vs 3.3%; OR 1.21, 95% CI: 0.65-2.26; interaction p=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: In participants undergoing coronary procedures by TFA, US guidance decreased the composite outcome of major vascular complications or bleeding and may be especially helpful when using vascular closure devices.

Long-Term Consequences of COVID-19 in Predominantly Immunonaive Patients: A Canadian Prospective Population-Based Study.

Background: Lingering symptoms are frequently reported after acute SARS-CoV-2 infection, a condition known as post-COVID-19 condition (PCC). The duration and severity of PCC in immunologically naïve persons remain unclear. Furthermore, the long-term consequences of these chronic symptoms on work and mental health are poorly documented. Objective: To determine the outcome, the risk factors, and the impact on work and mental health associated with post-COVID-19 symptoms. Methods: This prospective population-based study assessed acute COVID-19 symptoms and their evolution for up to nine months following infection. Individuals aged 18 years and older with COVID-19 in three Canadian regions between 1 November 2020 and 31 May 2021 were recruited. Participants completed a questionnaire that was either administered by trained student investigators over the phone or self-administered online. Results: A total of 1349 participants with a mean age of 46.6 ± 16.0 years completed the questionnaire. Participants were mostly unvaccinated at the time of their COVID-19 episode (86.9%). Six hundred and twenty-two participants (48.0%) exhibited one symptom or more, at least three months post-COVID-19. Among participants with PCC, 23.0% to 37.8% experienced fatigue at the time of survey. Moreover, 6.1% expressed psychological distress. Risk factors for PCC and fatigue included female sex (OR = 1.996), higher number of symptoms (OR = 1.292), higher severity of episode (OR = 3.831), and having a mental health condition prior to the COVID-19 episode (OR = 5.155). Conclusions: In this multicenter cohort study, almost half (47%) of the participants reported persistent symptoms >3 months after acute infection. Baseline risk factors for PCC include female sex, number and severity of symptoms during acute infection, and a previous diagnosis of mental health disorder. Having PCC negatively impacted health-related quality of life and these patients were more likely to exhibit psychological distress, as well as fatigue.

No-reflow after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: an angiographic core laboratory analysis of the TOTAL Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal strategy to prevent no-reflow in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown. AIMS: We aimed to examine the effect of thrombectomy on the outcome of no-reflow in key subgroups and the adverse clinical outcomes associated with no-reflow. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the TOTAL Trial, a randomised trial of 10,732 patients comparing thrombectomy versus PCI alone. This analysis utilised the angiographic data of 1,800 randomly selected patients. RESULTS: No-reflow was diagnosed in 196 of 1,800 eligible patients (10.9%). No-reflow occurred in 95/891 (10.7%) patients randomised to thrombectomy compared with 101/909 (11.1%) in the PCI-alone arm (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.28; p-value=0.76). In the subgroup of patients who underwent direct stenting, those randomised to thrombectomy compared with PCI alone experienced less no-reflow (19/371 [5.1%] vs 21/216 [9.7%], OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96). In patients who did not undergo direct stenting, there was no difference between the groups (64/504 [12.7%] vs 75/686 [10.9%)], OR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.82-1.69; interaction p-value=0.02). No-reflow patients had a significantly increased risk of experiencing the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA Class IV heart failure) at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio 1.70, 95% CI: 1.13-2.56; p-value=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI treated by PCI, thrombectomy did not reduce no-reflow in all patients but may be synergistic with direct stenting. No-reflow is associated with increased adverse clinical outcomes.

Ultrasound-guided femoral access in patients with vascular closure devices: a prespecified analysis of the randomised UNIVERSAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Whether ultrasound (US)-guided femoral access compared to femoral access without US guidance decreases access site complications in patients receiving a vascular closure device (VCD) is unclear. AIMS: We aimed to compare the safety of VCD in patients undergoing US-guided versus non-US-guided femoral arterial access for coronary procedures. METHODS: We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the UNIVERSAL trial, a multicentre randomised controlled trial of 1:1 US-guided femoral access versus non-US-guided femoral access, stratified for planned VCD use, for coronary procedures on a background of fluoroscopic landmarking. The primary endpoint was a composite of major Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3 or 5 bleeding and vascular complications at 30 days. RESULTS: Of 621 patients, 328 (52.8%) received a VCD (86% ANGIO-SEAL, 14% ProGlide). In patients who received a VCD, those randomised to US-guided femoral access compared to non-US-guided femoral access experienced a reduction in major bleeding or vascular complications (20/170 [11.8%] vs 37/158 [23.4%], odds ratio [OR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23-0.82). In patients who did not receive a VCD, there was no difference between the US- and non-US-guided femoral access groups, respectively (20/141 [14.2%] vs 13/152 [8.6%], OR 1.76, 95% CI: 0.80-4.03; interaction p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving a VCD after coronary procedures, US-guided femoral access was associated with fewer bleeding and vascular complications compared to femoral access without US guidance. US guidance for femoral access may be particularly beneficial when VCD are used.

Race and Ethnicity With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Outcomes Within a Universal Health Care System: Insights From the CARTaGENE Study.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether racial and ethnic disparities for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) persist within universal health care systems. We aimed to explore long-term ASCVD outcomes within a single-payer health care system with extensive drug coverage in Québec, Canada. METHODS: CARTaGENE (CaG) is a population-based prospective cohort study of individuals aged 40 to 69 years. We included only participants without previous ASCVD. The primary composite endpoint was time to the first ASCVD event (cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke-transient ischemic attack, or peripheral arterial vascular event). RESULTS: The study cohort included 18,880 participants followed for a median of 6.6 years (2009 to 2016). The mean age was 52 years, and 52.4% were female. After further adjustment for socioeconomic and cardiovascular factors, the increase in ASCVD risk for South Asians (SAs) was attenuated (hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75, 2.67), whereas Black participants' risk was lower (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.29, 0.95) compared with White participants. After similar adjustments, there were no significant differences in ASCVD outcomes among the Middle Eastern, Hispanic, East-Southeast Asian, Indigenous, and mixed race-ethnicities participants and the White participants. CONCLUSIONS: After adjustment for CV risk factors, the risk of ASCVD was attenuated in the SA CaG participants. Intensive risk-factor modification may mitigate the ASCVD risk of the SAs. Within a universal health care context and comprehensive drug coverage, the ASCVD risk was lower among Black compared with White CaG participants. Future studies are needed to confirm whether universal and liberal access to health care and medications can reduce the rates of ASCVD among the Black population.

Design and Rationale of Routine UltrasouNd GuIdance for Vascular AccEss foR Cardiac Procedures: A Randomized TriaL (UNIVERSAL).

Background: A significant limitation of femoral artery access for cardiac interventions is the increased risk of vascular complications and bleeding compared to radial access. Ultrasound (US)-guided femoral access may reduce major vascular complications and bleeding. We aim to determine whether routinely using US guidance for femoral arterial access for coronary angiography or intervention will reduce Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 2, 3, or 5 bleeding or major vascular complications. Methods: The Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures: A Randomized Trial (UNIVERSAL) is a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomized trial with blinded outcomes assessment. Patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without intervention via a femoral approach with fluoroscopic guidance will be randomized 1:1 to US-guided femoral access, compared to no US. The primary outcome is the composite of major bleeding based on the BARC 2, 3, or 5 criteria or major vascular complications within 30 days. The trial is designed to have 80% power and a 2-sided alpha level of 5% to detect a 50% relative risk reduction for the primary outcome based on a control event rate of 14%. Results: We completed enrollment on April 29, 2022, with 621 randomized patients. The patients had a mean age of 71 years (25.4% female), with a high rate of comorbidities, as follows: 45% had a prior percutaneous coronary intervention; 57% had previous coronary artery bypass surgery; and 18% had peripheral vascular disease. Conclusions: The UNIVERSAL trial will be one of the largest randomized trials of US-guided femoral access and has the potential to change guidelines and increase US uptake for coronary procedures worldwide.

Introduction: Par rapport à l'abord radial, la limitation importante de l'abord artériel fémoral lors des interventions au cœur pose un risque accru de complications vasculaires et de saignements. L'abord fémoral guidé par ultrasons (US) peut contribuer à réduire les complications vasculaires majeures et les saignements. Nous avons pour objectif de déterminer si l'utilisation systématique du guidage par US pour l'abord artériel fémoral lors des angiographies ou des interventions coronariennes contribuera à réduire les saignements de type 2, 3 ou 5 selon le B leeding A cademic R esearch C onsortium (BARC) ou les complications vasculaires majeures. Méthodes: L' U ltrasou n d Gu i dance for V ascular Acc e ss fo r Cardiac Procedure s : A Randomized Tria l (UNIVERSAL) est un essai multicentrique, prospectif, ouvert, à répartition aléatoire, réalisé par une évaluation à l'insu des résultats. Les patients subissant une angiographie coronarienne avec ou sans intervention par voie fémorale sous guidage fluoroscopique seront répartis de façon aléatoire 1:1 à l'abord fémoral guidé par US ou sans US. Le principal critère d'évaluation est le critère composite de saignements majeurs de type 2, 3 ou 5 selon les critères du BARC ou de complications vasculaires majeures dans les 30 jours. L'essai est conçu de façon à avoir une puissance de 80 % et un seuil alpha bilatéral de 5 % pour déterminer la réduction du risque relatif de 50 % du critère d'évaluation principal selon un taux d'événements dans le groupe témoin de 14 %. Résultats: Le 29 avril 2022, nous avons terminé le recrutement de 621 patients choisis aléatoirement. Les patients avaient un âge moyen de 71 ans (25,4 % de femmes) et un taux élevé de comorbidités : 45 % avaient déjà subi une intervention coronarienne percutanée, 57 % avaient déjà subi un pontage aorto-coronarien et 18 % avaient une maladie vasculaire périphérique. Conclusions: L'essai UNIVERSAL qui sera l'un des plus vastes essais à répartition aléatoire sur l'abord fémoral guidé par US a le potentiel de faire changer les lignes directrices et de faire augmenter le recours aux US lors des interventions coronariennes dans le monde entier.

Routine Ultrasonography Guidance for Femoral Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures: The UNIVERSAL Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A significant limitation of femoral artery access for cardiac interventions is the increased risk of vascular complications and bleeding compared with radial access. Strategies to make femoral access safer are needed. Objective: To determine whether routinely using ultrasonography guidance for femoral arterial access for coronary angiography/intervention reduces bleeding or vascular complications. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Routine Ultrasound Guidance for Vascular Access for Cardiac Procedures (UNIVERSAL) randomized clinical trial is a multicenter, prospective, open-label trial of ultrasonography-guided femoral access vs no ultrasonography for coronary angiography or intervention with planned femoral access. Patients were randomized from June 26, 2018, to April 26, 2022. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were not eligible. Interventions: Ultrasonography guidance vs no ultrasonography guidance for femoral arterial access on a background of fluoroscopic landmarking. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary composite outcome is the composite of major bleeding based on the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 criteria or major vascular complications within 30 days. Results: A total of 621 patients were randomized at 2 centers in Canada (mean [SD] age, 71 [10.24] years; 158 [25.4%] female). The primary outcome occurred in 40 of 311 patients (12.9%) in the ultrasonography group vs 50 of 310 patients (16.1%) without ultrasonography (odds ratio, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.49-1.20]; P = .25). The rates of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding were 10.0% (31 of 311) vs 10.7% (33 of 310) (odds ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.55-1.56]; P = .78). The rates of major vascular complications were 6.4% (20 of 311) vs 9.4% (29 of 310) (odds ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.37-1.20]; P = .18). Ultrasonography improved first-pass success (277 of 311 [86.6%] vs 222 of 310 [70.0%]; odds ratio, 2.76 [95% CI, 1.85-4.12]; P < .001) and reduced the number of arterial puncture attempts (mean [SD], 1.2 [0.5] vs 1.4 [0.8]; mean difference, -0.26 [95% CI, -0.37 to -0.16]; P < .001) and venipuncture (10 of 311 [3.1%] vs 37 of 310 [11.7%]; odds ratio, 0.24 [95% CI, 0.12-0.50]; P < .001) with similar times to access (mean [SD], 114 [185] vs 129 [206] seconds; mean difference, -15.1 [95% CI, -45.9 to 15.8]; P = .34). All prerandomization prespecified subgroups were consistent with the overall finding. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, use of ultrasonography for femoral access did not reduce bleeding or vascular complications. However, ultrasonography did reduce the risk of venipuncture and number of attempts. Larger trials may be required to demonstrate additional potential benefits of ultrasonography-guided access. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03537118.

The effect of diabetes on surgical versus percutaneous left main revascularization outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal method of coronary revascularization for diabetes mellitus (DM) patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) is controversial in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era. METHODS: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing DES-based percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for LMCAD in DM patients and tested for effect measure modification (EMM) by diabetes for adverse events. We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing CABG to DES-based PCI including DM patients with LMCAD published up to March 1, 2021. We completed separate random-effects meta-analyses for four RCTs (4356 patients, mean follow-up of 4.9 years) and six observational studies (9360 patients, mean follow-up of 5.2 years). RESULTS: In RCTs among DM patients, DES-based PCI, compared to CABG, was associated with a 30% increased relative risk (RR) (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.09-1.56, I2 = 0%), while among non-DM patients, there was a 25% increased relative risk (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07-1.44, I2 = 0%) for the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and unplanned revascularization (MACCE). There was no evidence of EMM (p-value for interaction = 0.70). The mean weighted SYNTAX score was 25.7. In observational studies, there was no difference between DES-based PCI and CABG for all-cause mortality in patients with DM (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.91-1.40, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: CABG was superior to PCI for LMCAD in RCTs in DM patients for MACCE. Heart teams may consider DM as one of the many components in the clinical decision-making process, but may not want to consider DM as a primary deciding factor between DES-based PCI and CABG for LMCAD with low to intermediate anatomical complexity in the other coronary arteries. STUDY REGISTRATION: CRD42021246931 (PROSPERO).

The feasibility, reliability, and incremental value of two-dimensional speckle-tracking for the detection of significant coronary stenosis after treadmill stress echocardiography.

BACKGROUND: Two-dimensional speckle-tracking echocardiography (STE) may help detect coronary artery disease (CAD) when combined with dobutamine stress echocardiography. However, few studies have explored STE with exercise stress echocardiography (ESE). We aimed to evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and incremental value of STE combined with treadmill ESE compared to treadmill ESE alone to detect CAD. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of all consecutive patients with abnormal ESE in 2018-2020 who subsequently underwent coronary angiography within a six-month interval. We 1:1 propensity score-matched these patients to those with a normal ESE. Two blinded operators generated a 17-segment bull's-eye map of longitudinal strain (LS). We utilized the mean differences between stress and baseline LS values in segments 13-17, segment 17, and segments 15-16 to create receiver operator curves for the overall examination, the left anterior descending artery (LAD), and the non-LAD territories, respectively. RESULTS: We excluded 61 STEs from 201 (30.3%) eligible ESEs; 47 (23.4%) because of suboptimal image quality and 14 (7.0%) because of excessive heart rate variability precluding the calculation of a bull's-eye map. After matching, a total of 102 patients were included (51 patients in each group). In the group with abnormal ESE patients (mean age 66.4 years, 39.2% female), 64.7% had significant CAD (> 70% stenosis) at coronary angiogram. In the group with normal ESE patients (mean age 65.1 years, 35.3% female), 3.9% were diagnosed with a new significant coronary stenosis within one year. The intra-class correlation for global LS was 0.87 at rest and 0.92 at stress, and 0.84 at rest, and 0.89 at stress for the apical segments. The diagnostic accuracy of combining ESE and STE was superior to visual assessment alone for the overall examination (area under the curve (AUC) = 0.89 vs. 0.84, p = 0.025), the non-LAD territory (AUC = 0.83 vs. 0.70, p = 0.006), but not the LAD territory (AUC = 0.79 vs. 0.73, p = 0.11). CONCLUSIONS: Two-dimensional speckle-tracking combined with treadmill ESE is relatively feasible, reliable, and may provide incremental diagnostic value for the detection and localization of significant CAD.

Racial Disparities in Acute Coronary Syndrome Management Within a Universal Healthcare Context: Insights From the AMI-OPTIMA Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although prior studies have demonstrated racial disparities regarding acute coronary syndrome (ACS) care within private or mixed healthcare systems, few researchers have explored such disparities within universal healthcare systems. We aimed to evaluate the quality and outcomes of in-hospital ACS management for White patients vs patients of colour, within a universal healthcare context. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Acute Myocardial Infarction - Knowledge Translation to Optimize Adherence to Evidence-Based Therapy study, a cluster-randomized trial evaluating a knowledge-translation intervention at 24 hospitals in Quebec, Canada (years: 2009 and 2012). The primary endpoint was coronary catheterization. The secondary endpoints included in-hospital mortality, percutaneous and surgical coronary revascularization, major bleeding, total stroke, and discharge prescription of evidence-based medical therapy. RESULTS: Of 3444 included patients, 2738 were White, and 706 were people of colour. The mean age was 68.2 years (33.3% women) among White patients and 69.5 years (36.0% women) among patients of colour. Patients of colour were less likely to undergo in-hospital coronary catheterization than were White patients (74.5% vs 80.3%, P = 0.001). This difference was attenuated after adjusting for patient-level characteristics (odds ratio 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.09), and it was eliminated after adjusting for hospital-level characteristics (odds ratio 1.04; 95% confidence interval 0.73-1.49). CONCLUSIONS: Racial disparity in coronary catheterization for ACS persists within a universal healthcare context. Patients' comorbidities and hospital-level factors may be partially responsible for this inequality. Future research on cardiovascular healthcare in patients with diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds in universal healthcare systems is needed to remediate racial inequality in ACS management.

CONTEXTE: Bien que des études antérieures aient démontré l'existence de disparités raciales dans la prise en charge du syndrome coronarien aigu (SCA) au sein de systèmes de santé privés ou mixtes, peu de chercheurs ont étudié ces disparités au sein de systèmes universels de soins de santé. Nous avons cherché à évaluer la qualité et les résultats de la prise en charge du SCA à l'hôpital pour les patients blancs par rapport aux patients de couleur, dans un contexte de soins de santé universels. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Nous avons effectué une analyse a posteriori de l'étude AMI-OPTIMA, un essai sur échantillon en grappes aléatoire évaluant une intervention d'application des connaissances dans 24 hôpitaux du Québec, au Canada (années : 2009 et 2012). Le paramètre d'évaluation principal était le cathétérisme coronaire. Les paramètres d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient la mortalité à l'hôpital, la revascularisation coronaire percutanée et chirurgicale, l'hémorragie majeure, l'accident vasculaire cérébral et la prescription au congé d'un traitement médical fondé sur des données probantes. RÉSULTATS: Sur les 3444 patients étudiés, 2738 étaient blancs et 706 étaient des personnes de couleur. L'âge moyen était de 68,2 ans (33,3 % de femmes) chez les patients blancs, et de 69,5 ans (36,0 % de femmes) chez les patients de couleur. Les patients de couleur étaient moins susceptibles de subir un cathétérisme coronaire à l'hôpital que les patients blancs (74,5 % contre 80,3 %, p = 0,001). Cette différence a été atténuée après ajustement pour tenir compte des caractéristiques des patients (rapport de cotes : 0,89; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : 0,73-1,09), et éliminée après ajustement pour tenir compte des caractéristiques des hôpitaux (rapport de cotes : 1,04; IC à 95 % : 0,73-1,49). CONCLUSIONS: La disparité raciale en ce qui a trait au cathétérisme coronaire pour un SCA persiste dans un contexte de soins de santé universels. Les comorbidités des patients et des facteurs liés à l'hôpital peuvent être partiellement responsables de cette inégalité. De plus amples recherches sur les soins cardiovasculaires chez les patients de diverses origines raciales ou ethniques dans les systèmes universels de soins de santé sont nécessaires pour remédier aux inégalités raciales dans la prise en charge du SCA.

The effect of ASA, ticagrelor, and heparin in ST-segment myocardial infarction patients with prolonged transport times to primary percutaneous intervention.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of early upstream antithrombotic therapy administration (ATTA) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with prolonged transport times to primary percutaneous intervention (PPCI) on major clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether early upstream administration of aspirin, ticagrelor, and unfractionated heparin (UFH) confers additional benefits compared with in-hospital administration. METHODS: Between 2015 and 2018, we performed PPCI in 709 included consecutive STEMI patients. We compared 482 STEMI patients who received aspirin, ticagrelor, and UFH loading in a non-PCI capable spoke hospital before transfer (NPHT) versus 227 prehospital triage setting (PTS) STEMI patients who received in-ambulance aspirin, followed by ticagrelor and UFH in the hub catheterization laboratory. The primary outcome was the presence of a pre-PPCI TIMI flow 2-3 in the infarct related artery (IRA). The secondary outcomes included definite acute stent thrombosis and hemorrhagic complications. RESULTS: The median times from ticagrelor and heparin administration to angiography in the NPHT group and the PTS group were 80.5 min (Interquartile Range (IQR) 68.5-94) and 10 min (IQR 5-15) respectively (p < .0001). Using inverse probability of treatment weighting to minimize heterogeneity between groups, we showed significant differences for the primary outcome (44.6 versus 18.5%, p < .0001) and for definite acute stent thrombosis (0.6 versus 2.6%, p = .03), with no difference in the combined in-hospital BARC 2-5 bleeding events (1.9 versus 3.5%, p = .18) in the NPHT versus the PTS group, respectively. CONCLUSION: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, after adjusting for baseline covariates, early upstream ATTA with aspirin, ticagrelor, and UFH was associated with greater pre-PPCI TIMI flow and less definite acute stent thrombosis in STEMI patients, without increased bleeding risk.