Apixaban vs. standard of care after transcatheter aortic valve implantation: the ATLANTIS trial.

AIMS: The respective roles of oral anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remain debated. ATLANTIS is an international, randomized, open-label, superiority trial comparing apixaban to the standard of care. METHODS AND RESULTS: After successful TAVI, 1500 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive apixaban 5 mg (2.5 mg if impaired renal function or concomitant antiplatelet therapy) (n = 749) twice daily, or standard of care (n = 751). Randomization was stratified by the need for chronic anticoagulation therapy. Standard-of-care patients received a vitamin K antagonist (VKA) (Stratum 1) or antiplatelet therapy (Stratum 2) if there was an indication for anticoagulation or not, respectively. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, systemic embolism, intracardiac or bioprosthesis thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, and life-threatening, disabling, or major bleeding over 1-year follow-up. The primary safety endpoint was major, disabling, or life-threatening bleeding. The primary outcome occurred in 138 (18.4%) and 151 (20.1%) patients receiving apixaban or standard of care, respectively [hazard ratio (HR) 0.92; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.16] and there was no evidence of interaction between treatment and stratum (Pinteraction = 0.57). The primary safety endpoint was similar in both groups (HR 1.02; 95% CI 0.72-1.44). In Stratum 1 (n = 451), an exploratory analysis showed no difference for all endpoints between apixaban and VKA. In Stratum 2 (n = 1049), the primary outcome and primary safety endpoint did not differ, but obstructive valve thrombosis was reduced with apixaban vs. antiplatelet therapy (HR 0.19; 95% CI 0.08-0.46), while a signal of higher non-cardiovascular mortality was observed with apixaban. CONCLUSION: After TAVI, apixaban was not superior to the standard of care, irrespective of an indication for oral anticoagulation.

One-Year Outcomes after PCI Strategies in Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel coronary artery disease, the risk of a composite of death from any cause or severe renal failure leading to renal-replacement therapy at 30 days was found to be lower with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion only than with immediate multivessel PCI. We evaluated clinical outcomes at 1 year. METHODS: We randomly assigned 706 patients to either culprit-lesion-only PCI or immediate multivessel PCI. The results for the primary end point of death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days have been reported previously. Prespecified secondary end points at 1 year included death from any cause, recurrent myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, rehospitalization for congestive heart failure, the composite of death or recurrent infarction, and the composite of death, recurrent infarction, or rehospitalization for heart failure. RESULTS: As reported previously, at 30 days, the primary end point had occurred in 45.9% of the patients in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group and in 55.4% in the multivessel PCI group (P=0.01). At 1 year, death had occurred in 172 of 344 patients (50.0%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group and in 194 of 341 patients (56.9%) in the multivessel PCI group (relative risk, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76 to 1.01). The rate of recurrent infarction was 1.7% with culprit-lesion-only PCI and 2.1% with multivessel PCI (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.29 to 2.50), and the rate of a composite of death or recurrent infarction was 50.9% and 58.4%, respectively (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00). Repeat revascularization occurred more frequently with culprit-lesion-only PCI than with multivessel PCI (in 32.3% of the patients vs. 9.4%; relative risk, 3.44; 95% CI, 2.39 to 4.95), as did rehospitalization for heart failure (5.2% vs. 1.2%; relative risk, 4.46; 95% CI, 1.53 to 13.04). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, the risk of death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days was lower with culprit-lesion-only PCI than with immediate multivessel PCI, and mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups at 1 year of follow-up. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; CULPRIT-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927549 .).

Impact of chronic total occlusion and revascularization strategy in patients with infarct-related cardiogenic shock: A subanalysis of the culprit-shock trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of coronary artery chronic total occlusion (CTO) and its management with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the setting of myocardial infarction (MI) related cardiogenic shock (CS) remains unclear. METHODS: This is a pre-specified analysis from the culprit-lesion-only PCI vs multivessel PCI in CS (CULPRIT-SHOCK) trial which randomized patients presenting with MI and multivessel disease complicated by CS to a culprit-lesion-only or immediate multivessel PCI strategy. CTO was defined by central core-laboratory evaluation. The independent associations between the presence of CTO and adverse outcomes at 30 days and 1 year were assessed using multivariate logistics models. RESULTS: A noninfarct related CTO was present in 157 of 667 (23.5%) analyzed patients. Patients presenting with CTO had more frequent diabetes mellitus or prior PCI but less frequently presented with ST segment elevation MI as index event. The presence of CTO was associated with higher rate of death at 30 days (adjusted Odds ratio 1.63; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.60). Rate of death at 1 year was also increased but did not reach statistical significance (adjusted Odds ratio 1.62; 95%CI 0.99-2.66). Compare to immediate multivessel PCI, a strategy of culprit-lesion-only PCI was associated with lower rates of death or renal replacement therapy at 30 days in patients with and without CTO (Odds ratio 0.79 95%CI 0.42-1.49 and Odds ratio 0.67 95%CI 0.48-0.96, respectively), without significant interaction (P = .68). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MI-related CS and multivessel disease, the presence of CTO is associated with adverse outcomes while a strategy of culprit-lesion-only PCI seems beneficial regardless of the presence of CTO.

PCI Strategies in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock.

BACKGROUND: In patients who have acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock, early revascularization of the culprit artery by means of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves outcomes. However, the majority of patients with cardiogenic shock have multivessel disease, and whether PCI should be performed immediately for stenoses in nonculprit arteries is controversial. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned 706 patients who had multivessel disease, acute myocardial infarction, and cardiogenic shock to one of two initial revascularization strategies: either PCI of the culprit lesion only, with the option of staged revascularization of nonculprit lesions, or immediate multivessel PCI. The primary end point was a composite of death or severe renal failure leading to renal-replacement therapy within 30 days after randomization. Safety end points included bleeding and stroke. RESULTS: At 30 days, the composite primary end point of death or renal-replacement therapy had occurred in 158 of the 344 patients (45.9%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group and in 189 of the 341 patients (55.4%) in the multivessel PCI group (relative risk, 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.96; P=0.01). The relative risk of death in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group as compared with the multivessel PCI group was 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72 to 0.98; P=0.03), and the relative risk of renal-replacement therapy was 0.71 (95% CI, 0.49 to 1.03; P=0.07). The time to hemodynamic stabilization, the risk of catecholamine therapy and the duration of such therapy, the levels of troponin T and creatine kinase, and the rates of bleeding and stroke did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who had multivessel coronary artery disease and acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock, the 30-day risk of a composite of death or severe renal failure leading to renal-replacement therapy was lower among those who initially underwent PCI of the culprit lesion only than among those who underwent immediate multivessel PCI. (Funded by the European Union 7th Framework Program and others; CULPRIT-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927549 .).

Radial versus femoral artery access for percutaneous coronary artery intervention in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease complicated by cardiogenic shock: Subanalysis from the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial.

BACKGROUND: The use and impact of transradial artery access (TRA) compared to transfemoral artery access (TFA) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (MI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remain unclear. METHODS: This is a post hoc analysis of the CULPRIT-SHOCK trial where patients presenting with MI and multivessel disease complicated by CS were randomized to a strategy of culprit-lesion-only or immediate multivessel PCI. Arterial access was left at operator's discretion. Adjudicated outcomes of interest were the composite of death or renal replacement therapy (RRT) at 30 days and 1 year. Multivariate logistic models were used to assess the association between the arterial access and outcomes. RESULTS: Among the 673 analyzed patients, TRA and TFA were successfully performed in 118 (17.5%) and 555 (82.5%) patients, respectively. Compared to TFA, TRA was associated with a lower 30-day rate of death or RRT (37.3% vs 53.2%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34-0.96), a lower 30-day rate of death (34.7% vs 49.7%; aOR: 0.56; 95% CI 0.33-0.96), and a lower 30-day rate of RRT (5.9% vs 15.9%; aOR: 0.40; 95% CI 0.16-0.97). No significant differences were observed regarding the 30-day risks of type 3 or 5 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding and stroke. The observed reduction of death or RRT and death with TRA was no longer significant at 1 year (44.9% vs 57.8%; aOR: 0.85; 95% CI 0.50-1.45 and 42.4% vs 55.5%, aOR: 0.78; 95% CI 0.46-1.32, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI for acute MI complicated by CS, TRA may be associated with improved early outcomes, although the reason for this finding needs further research.

Periprocedural myocardial infarction and injury in elective coronary stenting.

Aims: To assess the incidence, risk factors and prognosis of periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) and myocardial injury in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods and results: We included all consecutive patients who underwent elective PCI with a negative troponin level at admission from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2015. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of periprocedural MI (Type 4a MI), stent thrombosis (Type 4b MI), and myocardial injury according to the Third universal definition of MI. Multivariable analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of periprocedural MI and myocardial injury and its relation to 30-day and 1-year clinical outcome. Of the 1390 elective PCI patients, the primary endpoint occurred in 28.7% of patients, including 7.0% of Type 4a MI, 0.14% of Type 4b MI, and 21.6% of myocardial injury. Independent risk factors for the occurrence of the primary endpoint were left main PCI, total stent length >30 mm, multiple stenting, chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min) and age >75 years. At 30 days, patients with periprocedural MI and myocardial injury had a higher rate of cardiovascular events [5.5% vs. 1.2%, adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) = 3.8, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.9-6.9; P < 0.001] mainly driven by ischaemic events (3.2% vs. 0.6%, HR 5.9, 95% CI 2.9-20; P < 0.0001). At 1-year, the risk of ischemic events remained higher in the periprocedural MI and myocardial injury group (adjHR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.6; P = 0.004). Conclusions: Periprocedural MI and injury are frequent complications of elective PCI associated with an increased rate of cardiovascular events at 30 days and 1 year.

Effects of intrauterine substance and postnatal violence exposure on aggression in children.

During the cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and early 1990s, many expressed fears that children with intrauterine cocaine exposure (IUCE) would grow up to be unusually violent. The present study examines the relationship of caregiver reports of school-age children's aggressive behavior with IUCE and postnatal exposure to violence. Respondents were 140 low-income, primarily African American children, ages 8-11, and each child's current primary caregiver from a longitudinal study evaluating potential long term sequelae of IUCE. Multiple regression analyses were used to investigate the independent and interactive effects of level of IUCE (None (n = 69), Lighter (n = 47), Heavier (n = 24)) and exposure to violence (Violence Exposure Scale for Children-Revised) on aggressive behavior (Child Behavior Checklist), while also controlling for other intrauterine substance exposures and additional contextual factors. Children's self-reported exposure to violence was significantly positively associated with caregivers' reports of aggressive behavior (ß = 2.17, P = .05), as was concurrent caregiver's psychiatric distress (ß = .15, P = .003). However, neither IUCE nor its interaction with exposure to violence showed a significant association with aggressive behavior. Findings suggest the importance of postnatal social environment rather than IUCE in predicting aggressive behavior in childhood.

High on-treatment platelet reactivity as a risk factor for secondary prevention after coronary stent revascularization: A landmark analysis of the ARCTIC study.

BACKGROUND: Individualizing antiplatelet therapy after platelet function testing did not improve outcome after coronary stenting in the Assessment by a Double Randomization of a Conventional Antiplatelet Strategy Versus a Monitoring-Guided Strategy for Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation and of Treatment Interruption Versus Continuation One Year After Stenting (ARCTIC) study. Whether results are different during the phase of secondary prevention starting after hospital discharge, when periprocedural events have been excluded, is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In ARCTIC, 2440 patients were randomized before coronary stenting to a strategy of platelet function monitoring (VerifyNow P2Y12/aspirin point-of-care assay) with drug adjustment in suboptimal responders to antiplatelet therapy or to a conventional strategy without monitoring and without drug or dose changes. We performed a landmark analysis starting at the time of hospital discharge evaluating the primary end point of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization through 1 year. After discharge, the primary end point occurred in 8.6% of patients in the monitoring arm and 7.9% in the conventional arm (hazard ratio, 1.105; 95% confidence interval, 0.835-1.461; P=0.48). Stent thrombosis or urgent revascularization occurred in 4.4% and 4.5% in the monitoring and conventional arms, respectively (P=0.99). There was no difference for any of the other ischemic end points. Major bleeding event rates were 1.8% in the monitoring arm and 2.8% in the conventional arm (P=0.11), whereas major or minor bleeding event rates were 2.3% and 3.4%, respectively (P=0.10). CONCLUSIONS: Detection of platelet hyper-reactivity by platelet function testing in patients undergoing coronary stenting with further therapeutic adjustment does not reduce ischemic recurrences after intervention. On-treatment platelet hyperreactivity cannot be considered as a risk factor requiring intervention for secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary revascularization. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00827411.

Dual-antiplatelet treatment beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation (ARCTIC-Interruption): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimum duration of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) after coronary stenting remains uncertain, with an unknown efficacy to safety ratio of extended treatment leading to discrepancies between international guidelines and clinical practice. We assessed whether DAPT continuation beyond 1 year after coronary stenting is beneficial. METHODS: This analysis was a planned extension of the previously published ARCTIC-Monitoring trial, in which we randomly allocated 2440 patients to a strategy of platelet function testing with antiplatelet treatment adjustment or a conventional strategy after coronary stenting with drug-eluting stent (DES). We recruited patients (aged 18 years or older) scheduled for planned DES implantation at 38 centres in France. After 1 year of follow-up, patients without contraindication to interruption of DAPT were eligible for a second randomisation to this second phase of the study (ARCTIC-Interruption). Using a computer-generated randomisation sequence (1:1; stratified by centre), we allocated patients to a strategy of interruption of DAPT where the thienopyridine was interrupted and single aspirin antiplatelet treatment was maintained (interruption group) or a strategy of DAPT continuation for 6-18 months (continuation group). The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularisation, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00827411. FINDINGS: Between Jan 4, 2011, and March 3, 2012, 1259 eligible patients were randomly allocated to treatment in ARCTIC-Interruption: 624 to the interruption group and 635 to the continuation group. After a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 15-18), the primary endpoint occurred in 27 (4%) patients in the interruption group and 24 (4%) patients in the continuation group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·17 [95% CI 0·68-2·03]; p=0·58). STEEPLE major bleeding events occurred more often in the continuation group (seven [1%] patients) compared with the interruption group (one [<0·5%] patient; HR 0·15 [0·02-1·20]; p=0·073). Major or minor bleedings were also more common in the continuation group compared with the interruption group (12 [2%] patients vs three [1%] patients; HR 0·26 [0·07-0·91]; p=0·04). INTERPRETATION: Our finding suggests no apparent benefit but instead harm with extension of DAPT beyond 1 year after stenting with DES when no event has occurred within the first year after stenting. No conclusion can be drawn for high-risk patients who could not be randomised. The consistency between findings from all trials of such interruption suggests the need for a reappraisal of guidelines for DAPT after coronary stenting towards shorter duration of treatment. FUNDING: Allies in Cardiovascular Trials Initiatives and Organized Networks (ACTION Study Group), Fondation de France, Sanofi-Aventis, Cordis, Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Fondation SGAM.

Bedside monitoring to adjust antiplatelet therapy for coronary stenting.

BACKGROUND: Patients' responses to oral antiplatelet therapy are subject to variation. Bedside monitoring offers the opportunity to improve outcomes after coronary stenting by individualizing therapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2440 patients scheduled for coronary stenting at 38 centers to a strategy of platelet-function monitoring, with drug adjustment in patients who had a poor response to antiplatelet therapy, or to a conventional strategy without monitoring and drug adjustment. The primary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization 1 year after stent implantation. For patients in the monitoring group, the VerifyNow P2Y12 and aspirin point-of-care assays were used in the catheterization laboratory before stent implantation and in the outpatient clinic 2 to 4 weeks later. RESULTS: In the monitoring group, high platelet reactivity in patients taking clopidogrel (34.5% of patients) or aspirin (7.6%) led to the administration of an additional bolus of clopidogrel, prasugrel, or aspirin along with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during the procedure. The primary end point occurred in 34.6% of the patients in the monitoring group, as compared with 31.1% of those in the conventional-treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98 to 1.29; P=0.10). The main secondary end point, stent thrombosis or any urgent revascularization, occurred in 4.9% of the patients in the monitoring group and 4.6% of those in the conventional-treatment group (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.52; P=0.77). The rate of major bleeding events did not differ significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed no significant improvements in clinical outcomes with platelet-function monitoring and treatment adjustment for coronary stenting, as compared with standard antiplatelet therapy without monitoring. (Funded by Allies in Cardiovascular Trials Initiatives and Organized Networks and others; ARCTIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00827411.).

Genetic and platelet function testing of antiplatelet therapy for percutaneous coronary intervention: the ARCTIC-GENE study.

BACKGROUND: The ARCTIC study randomized 2440 patients scheduled for stent implantation to a strategy of platelet function monitoring with drug adjustment in patients who had a poor response to antiplatelet therapy or to a conventional strategy without monitoring and drug adjustment. No significant improvement in clinical outcomes with platelet function monitoring was observed. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to assess the relationships between CYP2C19 genotypes, clopidogrel pharmacodynamic response, and clinical outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the ARCTIC-GENE study, 1394 patients were genotyped for loss- and gain-of-function CYP2C19 alleles. Randomization of treatment strategy was well balanced. Slow metabolizers identified as carriers of at least one loss-of-function allele CYP2C19*2 (n = 459) were more likely poor responders at randomization (41.6 vs. 31.6%, p = 0.0112) and 14 days later (23.8 vs. 10.4%, p < 0.0001) and more frequently on prasugrel (11.5 vs. 8.1%, p = 0.039) as compared with rapid metabolizers (n = 935). Intensification of antiplatelet treatment did not differ between slow and rapid metabolizers according to the study algorithm based on platelet function only. The primary study outcome defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization 1 year after stent implantation did not differ between slow and rapid metabolizers (HR 0.988, 95% CI [0.812;1.202], p = 0.90). Likewise, the primary safety outcome did not differ between rapid and slow metabolizer phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: The genetic clopidogrel profile was a good marker of platelet function response on clopidogrel but was not related to clinical outcome suggesting that the genetic added little to the pharmacodynamic information used in the study to adjust antiplatelet therapy. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00827411.

Prasugrel but not high dose clopidogrel overcomes the lansoprazole neutralizing effect of P2Y12 inhibition: Results of the randomized DOSAPI study.

AIMS: The potential negative metabolic interaction between proton pump inhibitors and clopidogrel is an unsolved issue. We hypothesized that doubling the clopidogrel maintenance dose (150 mg) would be less effective than switching to prasugrel 10 mg maintenance dose (MD) to overcome this negative interaction. METHOD AND RESULTS: In a randomized study with a factorial design, 82 stable coronary artery disease patients treated with 75 mg clopidogrel MD and aspirin were assigned to receive in a double blind fashion lansoprazole (30 mg/day) or placebo and to receive in an open fashion 150 mg clopidogrel MD or 10 mg prasugrel MD. The primary endpoint was the relative change in residual platelet reactivity over the 14-day study period [(RPA14day-RPAbaseline)/RPAbaseline]. The effect of doubling the clopidogrel MD on relative change in RPA was neutralized by lansoprazole (-53.6±48.4% versus +0.8±53.7% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = 0.02) whereas 10 mg of prasugrel MD dramatically reduced RPA irrespective of lansoprazole co-administration (-81.8 %±24.8% vs. -72.9%±32.9% without and with lansoprazole, respectively, p = NS). Lansoprazole exposure was the only parameter with a significant interaction with RPA among subgroups. CONCLUSION: The higher platelet inhibitory effect obtained by doubling the clopidogrel MD was totally neutralized by the co-administration of lansoprazole. This drug interaction was not observed with prasugrel 10 mg.

Phenotyping coronary plaque by computed tomography in premature coronary artery disease.

AIMS: Premature coronary artery disease (CAD) is an aggressive disease with multiple recurrences mostly related to new coronary lesions. This study aimed to compare coronary plaque characteristics of individuals with premature CAD with those of incidental plaques found in matched individuals free of overt cardiovascular disease, using coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA). METHODS AND RESULTS: Of 1552 consecutive individuals who underwent CCTA, 106 individuals with history of acute or stable obstructive CAD ≤45 years were matched by age, sex, smoking status, cardiovascular heredity, and dyslipidaemia with 106 controls. CCTA were analysed for Coronary Artery Disease Reporting and Data System score, plaque composition, and high-risk plaque (HRP) features, including spotty calcification, positive remodelling, low attenuation, and napkin-ring sign. The characteristics of 348 premature CAD plaques were compared with those of 167 incidental coronary plaques of matched controls. The prevalence of non-calcified plaques was higher among individuals with premature CAD (65.1 vs. 30.2%, P < 0.001), as well as spotty calcification (42.5 vs. 17.9%, P < 0.001), positive remodelling (41.5 vs. 9.4%, P < 0.001), low attenuation (24.5 vs. 3.8%, P < 0.001), and napkin-ring sign (1.9 vs. 0.0%). They exhibited an average of 2.2 (2.7) HRP, while the control group displayed 0.4 (0.8) HRP (P < 0.001). Within a median follow-up of 24 (16, 34) months, individuals with premature CAD and ischaemic recurrence (n = 24) had more HRP [4.3 (3.9)] than those without ischaemic recurrence [1.5 (1.9)], mostly non-calcified with low attenuation and positive remodelling. CONCLUSION: Coronary atherosclerosis in individuals with premature CAD is characterized by a high and predominant burden of non-calcified plaque and unusual high prevalence of HRP, contributing to disease progression with multiple recurrences. A comprehensive qualitative CCTA assessment of plaque characteristics may further risk stratify our patients, beyond cardiovascular risk factors.

Ticagrelor vs Clopidogrel in Clopidogrel-Naive Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Whether ticagrelor may reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis after elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy is unclear. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare ticagrelor vs clopidogrel in patients with and without chronic clopidogrel therapy before undergoing elective PCI. METHODS: In this prespecified analysis of the ALPHEUS (Assessment of Loading With the P2Y12 Inhibitor Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel to Halt Ischemic Events in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Stenting) trial, patients were defined as clopidogrel(+) and clopidogrel(-) according to the presence and absence of clopidogrel treatment for ≥7 days before PCI, respectively. The primary endpoint was the composite of PCI-related myocardial infarction and major injury as defined by the third and fourth universal definition 48 hours after PCI. RESULTS: A total of 1,882 patients were included, 805 (42.7%) of whom were clopidogrel(+). These patients were older, had more comorbidities, and had more frequent features of complex PCI. The primary endpoint was less frequently present in clopidogrel(-) compared to clopidogrel(+) patients (32.8% vs 40.0%; OR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.60-0.88), but no significant differences were reported for the risk of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or transient ischemic attack at 48 hours or 30 days. Ticagrelor did not reduce periprocedural myocardial necrosis or the risk of adverse outcomes, and there was no significant interaction regarding the presence of chronic clopidogrel treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Clopidogrel-naive patients presented less periprocedural complications compared to clopidogrel(+) patients, a difference related to a lower risk profile and less complex PCI. The absence of clopidogrel at baseline did not affect the absence of a difference between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in terms of PCI-related complications supporting the use of clopidogrel as the standard of care in elective PCI in patients with or without chronic clopidogrel treatment.

High on-thienopyridine platelet reactivity in elderly coronary patients: the SENIOR-PLATELET study.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare on-thienopyridine platelet reactivity of elderly patients (≥75 years) vs. younger patients (<75 years). Elderly patients represent a growing and challenging segment of the coronary population for whom the effect of dual antiplatelet therapy on platelet inhibition has not been specifically addressed. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SENIOR-PLATELET study included 1331 coronary patients chronically (>14 days) treated with aspirin and a thienopyridine (clopidogrel 75 mg, n= 1027; clopidogrel 150 mg, n= 139; or prasugrel 10 mg, n= 165). Platelet response to clopidogrel and prasugrel was assessed by the VerifyNow assay and light transmission aggregrometry (LTA). Response to treatment, rate of high platelet reactivity (HPR), and inhibition (HPI) were compared in the two age categories. On-treatment platelet reactivity with clopidogrel 75 mg, 150 mg or prasugrel 10 mg was higher in elderly patients (n= 205) than in younger patients (n= 1126) whichever the test used. The difference in P2Y(12) reaction units (PRU) between the two populations was +45 in patients treated with clopidogrel 75 mg (P< 0.0001), +30 in patients treated with clopidogrel 150 mg (P= 0.17), and +20 with prasugrel 10 mg (P= 0.10). Differences in residual platelet aggregation were consistent when measured by LTA. Elderly patients treated with clopidogrel 75 mg were more likely to have HPR than younger patients (38.2 vs. 18.2%, OR: 2.58, 95% CI: 1.76-3.79; P< 0.0001) even after adjustment for potential confounders (adj OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.16-2.87; P= 0.009). CONCLUSION: Elderly patients present an impaired response to clopidogrel with a high rate of HPR. Clopidogrel 150 mg or prasugrel 10 mg blunt, but do not eliminate the difference in response observed between old and young patients.

Prevention and treatment of premature ischaemic heart disease with European Society of Cardiology Guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the changes in the European Society Cardiology/European Atherosclerotic Society (ESC/EAS) guidelines improved the identification for primary prevention therapy in young adults at risk of a premature myocardial infarction. METHODS: Patients admitted for a first ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the ePARIS registry (n=2757) between 2010 and 2018 were classified by age: <55, 55-65 and >65 years old. Using Systematic Coronary Risk Estimation 2, we evaluated whether patients would have been detected and treated with primary prevention statins before their first STEMI based on the 2021 EAS/ESC guidelines versus 2019 and 2016 guidelines. Eligibility for intensive proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9i) in secondary prevention was also assessed. RESULTS: Following 2021 ESC guidelines, 62.5% of individuals aged <55 years old would have been eligible for statins before their first STEMI, similarly to older age categories. In comparison, only 17% and 18% of young individuals would have been eligible for primary prevention statins prior to their first STEMI with 2016 and 2019 guidelines, compared with group 55-65 years (41% and 35%) and >65 years old (19% and 72%), p<0.01. After their first STEMI, 25% of patients <55 years would be eligible for PCSK9i, compared with 23.2% and 15% in patients aged 55-65 years and >65 years. CONCLUSIONS: The 2021 ESC guidelines allowed a much better detection of young individuals before their first STEMI than prior ESC guidelines. In secondary prevention, most of young individuals did not reach low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels recommended, but only one quarter would be eligible for PCSK9i.

Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement Using Transcatheter Aortic Valve or Dedicated Devices: Current Evidence and Future Prospects.

Transcatheter mitral valve replacement (TMVR) is a novel and evolving field dedicated to addressing the therapeutic challenges posed by patients at high surgical risk with mitral valve disease. TMVR can be categorized into two distinct fields based on the type of device and its specific indications: TMVR with transcatheter aortic valves (TAV) and TMVR with dedicated devices. Similar to aortic stenosis, TMVR with TAV requires a rigid support structure to secure the valve in place. As a result, it is indicated for patients with failing bioprothesis or surgical rings or mitral valve disease associated with severe mitral annular calcification (MAC), which furnishes the necessary foundation for valve anchoring. While TMVR with TAV has shown promising outcomes in valve-in-valve procedures, its effectiveness remains more contentious in valve-in-ring or valve-in-MAC procedures. Conversely, TMVR with dedicated devices seeks to address native mitral regurgitation, whether accompanied by MAC or not, providing an alternative to Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair (TEER) when TEER is not feasible or expected to yield unsatisfactory results. This emerging field is gradually surmounting technical challenges, including anchoring a valve in a non-calcified annulus and transitioning from the transapical route to the transeptal approach. Numerous devices are presently undergoing clinical trials. This review aims to furnish an overview of the supporting evidence for TMVR using TAV in each specific indication (valve-in-valve, valve-in-ring, valve-in-MAC). Subsequently, we will discuss the anticipated benefits of TMVR with dedicated devices over TEER, summarize the characteristics and clinical results of TMVR systems currently under investigation, and outline future prospects in this field.