Management of patients treated with oral anticoagulant therapy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation: the PERSEO Registry.

In patients on oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent (PCI), international guidelines endorse the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) rather than vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) rather than triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT). Aim of this study was to evaluate contemporary real-world data on antithrombotic regimens and outcome in patients on OAC undergoing PCI with stent. Consecutive patients on OAC undergoing PCI were enrolled in the multicentre, prospective, observational PERSEO registry (NCT03392948). Primary end-point was net adverse clinical events (NACE) with VKA vs DOAC, whereas a secondary pre-specified end-point was NACE with DAT vs TAT both at 1-year follow-up. From February 2018 to February 2022, 1234 consecutive patients were included. The main indication for OAC was atrial fibrillation (86%) and the mean CHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4±2 and 3.6±1, respectively. Of the 1228 patients discharged alive, 222 (18%) were on VKA and 1006 (82%) on DOAC (p<0.01). DAT was employed in 197 patients whereas TAT in 1028. At follow-up, NACE rate was significantly higher with VKA compared to DOAC (23% vs 16%, p=0.013) and confirmed after propensity score adjustment. TAT and DAT did not differ as regards NACE rate (17% vs 19%, p=0.864) even though, compared to TAT, DAT was associated with less major bleedings (2% vs 5%, p= 0.014), confirmed after propensity score adjustment. In conclusion, in patients on OAC undergoing PCI, DOAC, compared to VKA, was associated with a significantly lower occurrence of NACE and DAT reduced bleedings compared to TAT.

Pathophysiology and Treatment of the No-Reflow Phenomenon in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Focus on Low-Dose Fibrinolysis during Primary Percutaneous Intervention.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the current class I therapeutic approach to treat acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). While primary PCI can restore adequate flow in the infarcted artery in the majority of cases, some patients experience the 'no-reflow' phenomenon, i.e., an abnormal myocardial reperfusion occurring even after the occluded coronary artery has been opened. No-reflow occurs when microvascular obstruction arises from embolization of thrombus or components of the atheromatous plaques. These embolic materials travel downstream within the infarct-related artery at time of primary PCI, leading to compromised blood flow. Currently, no expert consensus documents exist to outline an optimal strategy to prevent or treat no-reflow. Interventional cardiologists frequently employ intracoronary adenosine, calcium channel blockers, nicorandil, nitroprusside or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. However, evidence suggests that these interventions consistently enhance myocardial blood flow in only a specific subset of patients experiencing no-reflow. A recent and innovative therapeutic approach gaining attention is low-dose fibrinolysis during primary PCI, which offers the potential to augment coronary flow post-myocardial revascularization.

Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Interventions for Structural Heart Disease.

Contemporary evidence supports device-based transcatheter interventions for the management of patients with structural heart disease. These procedures, which include aortic valve implantation, mitral or tricuspid valve repair/implantation, left atrial appendage occlusion, and patent foramen ovale closure, profoundly differ with respect to clinical indications and procedural aspects. Yet, patients undergoing transcatheter cardiac interventions require antithrombotic therapy before, during, or after the procedure to prevent thromboembolic events. However, these therapies are associated with an increased risk of bleeding complications. To date, challenges and controversies exist regarding balancing the risk of thrombotic and bleeding complications in these patients such that the optimal antithrombotic regimens to adopt in each specific procedure is still unclear. In this review, we summarize current evidence on antithrombotic therapies for device-based transcatheter interventions targeting structural heart disease and emphasize the importance of a tailored approach in these patients.

TakoTsubo Syndrome: A Well-Known Disease but Not Everything Is Clear Yet.

TakoTsubo Syndrome (TTS) is a stress-induced cardiac disease characterized by temporary and segmental left ventricle dysfunction, typically involving the apex. Post-menopause women are more frequently affected. ECG and clinical features at presentation may be similar to those observed in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). However underlying pathomechanisms are completely different and, for what concerns TTS, extremely debated and not yet completely understood. Some hypotheses have been proposed during years, mostly regarding catecholamine-induced cardiotoxicity and microvascular dysfunction, usually following a trigger event which may be either "emotional" (primary TTS) or "physical" (secondary TTS). Additional modulators like neuroendocrine disorders (particularly hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis dysfunction and estrogen drop in menopause) may play a crucial role in TTS onset. Despite being originally considered more benign than ACS, several studies have enlightened that TTS and STEMI are burdened by the same in-hospital mortality and complications. However, TTS and ACS complications somehow differ for what concerns incidence, the underlying mechanisms, and both long- and short-term outcomes. Full recovery in TTS requires weeks to months and cases of recurrences have been described, but no single clinical feature seems to predict subsequent episodes so far. By now, apart from inhibitors of the Renin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAASi), no drug has proved to be effective either in the acute or chronic phase in reducing mortality, improving outcome, or preventing recurrences.

Adverse drug reactions with oral anticoagulants: data from sicilian spontaneous reporting system database.

OBJECTIVE: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) were developed to avoid the limitations of vitamin K antagonists (VKAs). DOACs are associated with a greater incidence of gastrointestinal bleeding and a smaller number of intracranial haemorrhages than VKAs. Therefore, it is important to deepen our knowledge of their safety profiles. The aim of this study was thus to analyse adverse drug reaction (ADR) reports on DOACs and VKAs using the Sicilian Spontaneous Reporting System (SRS) database. METHODS: All ADR reports with DOACs and VKAs as suspected drugs that were entered into the Sicilian SRS database during the period 2001-2019 were selected. In detail, all reports with the following single active substances were included: dabigatran etexilate, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban; acenocoumarol and warfarin were included as a comparator group. Descriptive statistical methodology was used to evaluate characteristics of the reported cases with a case-by-case assessment. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Out of 521 reports related to anticoagulants, 444 (85.2%) and 77 (14.8%) involved DOACs and VKAs, respectively. DOAC-related reports were mainly of gastrointestinal disorders. In contrast, VKAs were mostly associated with blood and lymphatic system disorders, injury, investigations and vascular disorders. Many more cases of ADRs in the form of gastrointestinal disorders concerned dabigatran etexilate (n = 179, 73.7%) than the other DOACs, while ADRs in the form of blood disorders were mainly associated with acenocoumarol (n = 27, 57.4%). The most commonly reported Preferred Terms for DOACs were dyspepsia (n = 89, 17.1%), upper abdominal pain (n = 41, 9.2%) and pruritus (n = 26, 5.8%), whereas for VKAs, they were anaemia (n = 21, 27.3%) and hypocoagulable state (n = 18, 3.5%). Potentially interacting concomitant medications particularly included antithrombotic agents (n = 19, 4.3%) for DOACs and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) (n = 37, 48.1%) and antithrombotic agents (n = 13, 16.9%) for VKAs. CONCLUSION: The ADRs most commonly associated with DOACs, especially dabigatran, were gastrointestinal disorders, particularly gastrointestinal bleeding. Our study also highlights the potential role of drug-drug interactions in the ADRs. The cases of gastrointestinal bleeding highlight the need for careful prescribing of DOACs and use of potentially interacting concomitant drugs.

Assessment of residual thrombus burden in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin infusion: The MATRIX (minimizing adverse hemorrhagic events by transradial access site and angioX) OCT study.

BACKGROUND: Residual stent strut thrombosis after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), negatively affects myocardial perfusion, may increase stent thrombosis risk, and it is associated with neointima hyperplasia at follow-up. OBJECTIVES: To study the effectiveness of any bivalirudin infusion versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) infusion in reducing residual stent strut thrombosis in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: Multi-vessel STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI and requiring staged intervention were selected among those randomly allocated to two different bivalirudin infusion regimens in the MATRIX (Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by TRansradial Access Site and angioX) Treatment-Duration study. Those receiving heparin only were enrolled into a registry arm. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) of the infarct-related artery was performed at the end of primary PCI and 3-5 days thereafter during a staged intervention. The primary endpoint was the change in minimum flow area (ΔMinFA) defined as (stent area + incomplete stent apposition [ISA] area) - (intraluminal defect + tissue prolapsed area) between the index and staged PCI. RESULTS: 123 patients in bivalirudin arm and 28 patients in the UFH arm were included. Mean stent area, percentage of malapposed struts, and mean percent thrombotic area were comparable after index or staged PCI. The ΔMinFA in the bivalirudin group was 0.25 versus 0.05 mm2 in the UFH group, which resulted in a between-group significant difference of 0.36 [95% CI: (0.05, 0.71); p = .02]. This was mostly related to a decrease in tissue protrusion in the bivalirudin group (p = .03). There was a trend towards more patients in the bivalirudin group who achieved a 5% difference in the percentage of OCT frames with the area >5% (p = .057). CONCLUSIONS: The administration of bivalirudin after primary PCI significantly reduces residual stent strut thrombosis when compared to UFH. This observation should be considered hypothesis-generating since the heparin-treated patients were not randomly allocated.

Radial versus femoral access and bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin in invasively managed patients with acute coronary syndrome (MATRIX): final 1-year results of a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by Transradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of Angiox (MATRIX) programme was designed to assess the comparative safety and effectiveness of radial versus femoral access and of bivalirudin versus unfractionated heparin with optional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with the whole spectrum of acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management. Here we describe the prespecified final 1-year outcomes of the entire programme. METHODS: MATRIX was a programme of three nested, randomised, multicentre, open-label, superiority trials in patients with acute coronary syndrome in 78 hospitals in Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, and Sweden. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were simultaneously randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and to bivalirudin, with or without post-percutaneous coronary intervention infusion or unfractionated heparin (one-step inclusion). Patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome were randomly assigned (1:1) before coronary angiography to radial or femoral access and, only if deemed eligible to percutaneous coronary intervention after angiography (two-step inclusion), entered the antithrombin type and treatment duration programmes. Randomisation sequences were computer generated, blocked, and stratified by intended new or current use of P2Y12 inhibitor (clopidogrel vs ticagrelor or prasugrel), and acute coronary syndrome type (ST-elevation myocardial infarction, troponin-positive, or troponin-negative non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome). Bivalirudin was given as a bolus of 0·75 mg/kg, followed immediately by an infusion of 1·75 mg/kg per h until completion of percutaneous coronary intervention. Heparin was given at 70-100 units per kg in patients not receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and at 50-70 units per kg in patients receiving glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Clinical follow-up was done at 30 days and 1 year. Co-primary outcomes for MATRIX access and MATRIX antithrombin type were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke up to 30 days; and net adverse clinical events, defined as the composite of non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major bleeding, or major adverse cardiovascular events up to 30 days. The primary outcome for MATRIX treatment duration was the composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events up to 30 days. Analyses were done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627. FINDINGS: Between Oct 11, 2011, and Nov 7, 2014, we randomly assigned 8404 patients to receive radial (4197 patients) or femoral (4207 patients) access. Of these 8404 patients, 7213 were included in the MATRIX antithrombin type study and were randomly assigned to bivalirudin (3610 patients) or heparin (3603 patients). Patients assigned to bivalirudin were included in the MATRIX treatment duration study, and were randomly assigned to post-procedure infusion (1799 patients) or no post-procedure infusion (1811 patients). At 1 year, major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ between patients assigned to radial access compared with those assigned to femoral access (14·2% vs 15·7%; rate ratio 0·89, 95% CI 0·80-1·00; p=0·0526), but net adverse clinical events were fewer with radial than with femoral access (15·2% vs 17·2%; 0·87, 0·78-0·97; p=0·0128). Compared with heparin, bivalirudin was not associated with fewer major adverse cardiovascular (15·8% vs 16·8%; 0·94, 0·83-1·05; p=0·28) or net adverse clinical events (17·0% vs 18·4%; 0·91, 0·81-1·02; p=0·10). The composite of urgent target vessel revascularisation, stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events did not differ with or without post-procedure bivalirudin infusion (17·4% vs 17·4%; 0·99, 0·84-1·16; p=0·90). INTERPRETATION: In patients with acute coronary syndrome, radial access was associated with lower rates of net adverse clinical events compared with femoral access, but not major adverse cardiovascular events at 1 year. Bivalirudin with or without post-procedure infusion was not associated with lower rates of major adverse cardiovascular events or net adverse clinical events. Radial access should become the default approach in acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing invasive management. FUNDING: Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology, The Medicines Company, Terumo, amd Canada Research Chairs Programme.

ECG analysis in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management: rationale and design of the electrocardiography sub-study of the MATRIX trial.

BACKGROUND: The twelve­lead electrocardiogram (ECG) has become an essential tool for the diagnosis, risk stratification, and management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, several areas of residual controversies or gaps in evidence exist. Among them, P-wave abnormalities identifying atrial ischemia/infarction are largely neglected in clinical practice, and their diagnostic and prognostic implications remain elusive; the value of ECG to identify the culprit lesion has been investigated, but validated criteria indicating the presence of coronary occlusion in patients without ST-elevation are lacking; finally, which criteria among the multiple proposed, better define pathological Q-waves or success of revascularisation deserve further investigations. METHODS: The Minimizing Adverse hemorrhagic events via TRansradial access site and systemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX) trial was designed to test the impact of bleeding avoidance strategies on ischemic and bleeding outcomes across the whole spectrum of patients with ACS receiving invasive management. The ECG-MATRIX is a pre-specified sub-study of the MATRIX programme which aims at analyzing the clinical value of ECG metrics in 4516 ACS patients (with and without ST-segment elevation in 2212 and 2304 cases, respectively) with matched pre and post-treatment ECGs. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a unique opportunity to further investigate the role of ECGs in the diagnosis and risk stratification of ACS patients with or without ST-segment deviation, as well as to assess whether the radial approach and bivalirudin may affect post-treatment ECG metrics and patterns in a large contemporary ACS population.

Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome and endothelial function: potential impact of different treatment strategies-meta-analysis of prospective studies.

PURPOSE: Previous studies have shown an association between obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) and cardiovascular events. Whether this association is mediated by an impairment of endothelial function, which is itself a driver of elevated cardiovascular risk, has yet to be clarified, as it is the eventual protective role of several OSAS treatments. The aim of our meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of various OSAS treatments on endothelial function calculated by means of flow-mediated dilatation (FMD). METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis of prospective studies including patients affected by mild to severe OSAS treated with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), surgery, oral appliance and medical treatments. FMD was measured before and after treatment RESULTS: After pooling results from different treatment strategies, OSAS treatment showed a positive impact on endothelial function (Mean Difference [MD] = 2.58; 95% CI 1.95-3.20; p < 0.00001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study supports the hypothesis that several modalities of treatment for OSAS positively impact endothelial function. Whether this effect also associates with an improvement of clinical outcomes remains to be ascertained.

Bivalirudin or Unfractionated Heparin in Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: We randomly assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event). The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events. RESULTS: The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (10.3% and 10.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.09; P=0.44), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (11.2% and 12.4%, respectively; relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.03; P=0.12). Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (11.0% and 11.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P=0.34). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin. The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion. (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01433627.).

Radial vs femoral access for the prevention of acute kidney injury (AKI) after coronary angiography or intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the impact of radial vs femoral access on the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) after coronary angiography or intervention. BACKGROUND: There is a growing recognition of the importance of access site selection as an adjudicative measure to mitigate the risk of renal impairment for patients with coronary artery disease undergoing angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of the literature and meta-analyzed available evidence comparing the rates of AKI with radial vs femoral access in patients undergoing coronary angiography or intervention. Studies reporting the incidence of AKI as a primary or secondary outcome were pooled in fixed- and random-effects meta-analyses and meta-regression techniques were used to account for across-study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Across data pooled from nine studies (n = 32 181), radial access was significantly associated with a reduction in the incidence of AKI (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.66, P < 0.0001 with fixed-effects model, OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.67, P < 0.0001 with random-effects model) as compared to femoral. In the meta-regression model, the effect size of radial access effect was related to the number of centers in which studies were conducted. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the femoral approach, radial access was associated with a lower incidence of AKI after coronary angiography or intervention, although this benefit was less pronounced in multicenter than in single-center studies.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes with or without ST-segment elevation.

Aims: To assess whether radial compared with femoral access is associated with consistent outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). Methods and results: In the Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by TRansradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX (MATRIX) programme patients were randomized to radial or femoral access, stratified by STEMI (2001 radial, 2009 femoral) and NSTE-ACS (2196 radial, 2198 femoral). The 30-day co-primary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events (NACE), defined as MACE or major bleeding In the overall study population, radial access reduced the NACE but not MACE endpoint at the prespecified 0.025 alpha. MACE occurred in 121 (6.1%) STEMI patients with radial access vs. 126 (6.3%) patients with femoral access [rate ratio (RR) = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.75-1.24; P = 0.76] and in 248 (11.3%) NSTE-ACS patients with radial access vs. 303 (13.9%) with femoral access (RR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.67-0.96; P = 0.016) (Pint = 0.25). NACE occurred in 142 (7.2%) STEMI patients with radial access and in 165 (8.3%) patients with femoral access (RR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.68-1.08; P = 0.18) and in 268 (12.2%) NSTE-ACS patients with radial access compared with 321 (14.7%) with femoral access (RR = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.69-0.97; P = 0.023) (Pint = 0.76). All-cause mortality and access site-actionable bleeding favoured radial access irrespective of ACS type (Pint = 0.11 and Pint = 0.36, respectively). Conclusion: Radial as compared with femoral access provided consistent benefit across the whole spectrum of patients with ACS, without evidence that type of presenting syndrome affected the results of the random access allocation.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether radial compared with femoral access improves outcomes in unselected patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management. METHODS: We did a randomised, multicentre, superiority trial comparing transradial against transfemoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were about to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to radial or femoral access with a web-based system. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, blocked, and stratified by use of ticagrelor or prasugrel, type of acute coronary syndrome (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, troponin positive or negative, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome), and anticipated use of immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events, defined as major adverse cardiovascular events or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The analysis was by intention to treat. The two-sided α was prespecified at 0·025. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627. FINDINGS: We randomly assigned 8404 patients with acute coronary syndrome, with or without ST-segment elevation, to radial (4197) or femoral (4207) access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. 369 (8·8%) patients with radial access had major adverse cardiovascular events, compared with 429 (10·3%) patients with femoral access (rate ratio [RR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·74-0·99; p=0·0307), non-significant at α of 0·025. 410 (9·8%) patients with radial access had net adverse clinical events compared with 486 (11·7%) patients with femoral access (0·83, 95% CI 0·73-0·96; p=0·0092). The difference was driven by BARC major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1·6% vs 2·3%, RR 0·67, 95% CI 0·49-0·92; p=0·013) and all-cause mortality (1·6% vs 2·2%, RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·53-0·99; p=0·045). INTERPRETATION: In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality. FUNDING: The Medicines Company and Terumo.

Radial Versus Femoral Access in Invasively Managed Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Studies in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing invasive management showed conflicting conclusions regarding the effect of access site on outcomes. PURPOSE: To summarize evidence from recent, high-quality trials that compared clinical outcomes occurring with radial versus femoral access in invasively managed adults with ACS. DATA SOURCES: English-language publications in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases between January 1990 and August 2015. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized trials of radial versus femoral access in invasively managed patients with ACS. DATA EXTRACTION: Two investigators independently extracted the study data and rated the risk of bias. DATA SYNTHESIS: Of 17 identified randomized trials, 4 were high-quality multicenter trials that involved a total of 17 133 patients. Pooled data from the 4 trials showed that radial access reduced death (relative risk [RR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.90]; P = 0.003), major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.86 [CI, 0.75 to 0.98]; P = 0.025), and major bleeding (RR, 0.57 [CI, 0.37 to 0.88]; P = 0.011). Radial procedures lasted slightly longer (standardized mean difference, 0.11 minutes) and had higher risk for access-site crossover (6.3% vs. 1.7%) than did femoral procedures. LIMITATION: Heterogeneity in outcomes definitions and potential treatment modifiers across studies, including operator experience in radial procedures and concurrent anticoagulant regimens. CONCLUSION: Compared with femoral access, radial access reduces mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, and major bleeding in patients with ACS undergoing invasive management. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: None. (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42015022031).

Impact of clinical presentation on ischaemic and bleeding outcomes in patients receiving 6- or 24-month duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after stent implantation: a pre-specified analysis from the PRODIGY (Prolonging Dual-Antiplatelet Treatment After Grading Stent-Induced Intimal Hyperplasia) trial.

AIMS: We investigated if acute coronary syndrome (ACS) rather than stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) presentation is an outcome modifier with respect to the duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients undergoing coronary stenting. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the Prolonging Dual-Antiplatelet Treatment After Grading Stent-Induced Intimal Hyperplasia (PRODIGY) trial, a total of 1465 (74.3%) patients presented ACS whereas 505 (25.7%) had SCAD and were randomized to 6- or 24-month DAPT. At 24 months, the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or cerebrovascular accident (CVA) did not differ between the long- and short-term DAPT arms in both ACS (11.1 vs. 11.7%; P = 0.67) and SCAD (7.5 vs. 4.8%; P = 0.21) patients, respectively. Long-term DAPT was associated with a 75% increase of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC)-class 2, 3, or 5 bleeding in ACS [7.1 vs. 4.1%; hazard ratio (HR) 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-2.74, P = 0.015; number needed to treat for harm (NNTH): 33.3] and a five-fold increase in SCAD (8.2 vs. 1.6%; HR 5.37, 95% CI 1.84-15.74, P = 0.002; NNTH: 15.1) patients, with a borderline quantitative interaction (PINT = 0.056). As a result, net adverse cardiovascular events (death, MI, CVA, BARC class 2, 3, or 5 bleeding) were more than doubled in SCAD patients receiving 24-month DAPT, whereas they did not differ in ACS patients (PINT = 0.024). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that clinical presentation may be a treatment modifier with respect to DAPT duration after stenting consistent with the hypothesis that SCAD-but not ACS-patients are exposed to a significant increase in bleeding and net adverse clinical events when treated with 24-month compared with 6-month therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00611286. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00611286?term=prodigy&rank=2.

Acute kidney injury after percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale of the AKI-MATRIX (acute kidney injury-minimizing adverse hemorrhagic events by TRansradial access site and systemic implementation of angioX) sub-study.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is an important complication of both diagnostic cardiac catheterization and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A large body of evidence supports that AKI is related to volume of contrast used. Despite several measures are available to reduce the impact of contrast media on AKI, its incidence remains significant as other mechanisms of renal damage are involved. A new paradigm is established according to which bleeding prevention is at least as important as preventing recurrent ischemic events in the management of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing an invasive approach. Periprocedural bleeding, which is consistently reduced by radial approach, is emerging as a risk factor for the development of AKI. Therefore, the role of vascular access as a measure to prevent AKI needs to be systematically assessed in randomized studies. To date, no prospective comparison on renal outcomes has been carried out in randomized trials between radial and femoral approach. The Minimizing Adverse hemorrhagic events by TRansradial access site and systemic Implementation of AngioX (MATRIX) trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01433627) has been designed to test whether to minimize bleeding events by using radial access and bivalirudin, across the whole spectrum of patients with ACS undergoing PCI, will result in improved outcomes with respect to both ischemic and bleeding complications. The AKI-MATRIX sub-study will provide a unique opportunity to assess whether the advantages of radial approach may even contribute to the reduction of the risk of AKI in patients with ACS.

Do patients with heart failure and right bundle branch block need biventricular pacing? A case of significant QRS narrowing by right ventricular pacing alone.

We report the case of a 56-year-old male with ischemic cardiomyopathy, severe left ventricular dysfunction and right bundle branch block (RBBB) with a wide QRS duration (180ms) who received dual-chamber implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for primary prevention of sudden death. After having placed the right ventricular lead in the middle of the inter-ventricular septum, a significant narrowing of QRS duration was observed, thus obtaining "de facto" a cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). This type of cardiac pacing could be an alternative to conventional CRT with left ventricular pacing in patients with wide QRS due to RBBB. The long-term effects of this RV only pacing strategy with ICD in patients with heart failure yet remain to be determined.

Exploring the level of agreement among different drug-drug interaction checkers: a comparative study on direct oral anticoagulants.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) may be involved in drug-drug interactions (DDIs) potentially increasing the risk of adverse drug reactions. This study aimed to evaluate the level of agreement among interaction checkers (ICs) and DOACs' summary of product characteristics (SPCs), in listing DDIs and in attributing DDIs' severity. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The level of agreement among five ICs (i.e. INTERCheck WEB, Micromedex, Lexicomp, Epocrates, and drugs.com) in identifying potential DDIs and in attributing severity categories was evaluated using Gwet's AC1 on all five ICs and by comparing groups of four- and two-pair sets of ICs. RESULTS: A total of 486 potentially interacting drugs with dabigatran, 556 for apixaban, 444 for edoxaban, and 561 for rivaroxaban were reported. The level of agreement among the ICs in identifying potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.12-0.16). Similarly, it was low in 4 and 2 sets analyses. The level of agreement among the ICs in classifying the severity of potential DDIs was poor (range: 0.32-0.34), also in 4 and 2 sets analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity among different ICs and SPCs underscores the need to standardize DDI datasets and to conduct real-world studies to generate evidence regarding the frequency and clinical relevance of potential DOAC-related DDIs.

Late acquired coronary aneurysm and restenosis after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation: a case report.

Background: Although the technology of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) aroused the peak of interest a few years ago and currently remains available only as part of experimental research, patients who have had BVS implanted should be still carefully monitored to detect possible long-term complications. Case summary: We present the case of a 47-year-old man who had received BVS implantation for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Six years later, computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) demonstrated in-segment restenosis in between two newly formed coronary aneurysms at the site of the implanted BVS. The patient received successful optical coherence tomography-guided percutaneous intervention with a new metallic drug-eluting stent implantation. Discussion: Our case demonstrates that coronary aneurysms can be well characterized with CTCA and are often incidentally discovered as they cause no symptoms. The incidence of coronary aneurysm at the site of a previously implanted BVS is not defined, and little is known about the pathophysiology and evolution of these lesions. Therefore, the decision to proceed with conservative management or intervention must be tailored to the clinical conditions of the patient, the anatomy, the rapidity of growth, and the possible thrombotic burden.