Post-stenting fractional flow reserve vs coronary angiography for optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention (TARGET-FFR).

AIMS: A fractional flow reserve (FFR) value ≥0.90 after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a reduced risk of adverse cardiovascular events. TARGET-FFR is an investigator-initiated, single-centre, randomized controlled trial to determine the feasibility and efficacy of a post-PCI FFR-guided optimization strategy vs. standard coronary angiography in achieving final post-PCI FFR values ≥0.90. METHODS AND RESULTS: After angiographically guided PCI, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive a physiology-guided incremental optimization strategy (PIOS) or a blinded coronary physiology assessment (control group). The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with a final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90. Final FFR ≤0.80 was a prioritized secondary outcome. A total of 260 patients were randomized (131 to PIOS, 129 to control) and 68.1% of patients had an initial post-PCI FFR <0.90. In the PIOS group, 30.5% underwent further intervention (stent post-dilation and/or additional stenting). There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint of the proportion of patients with final post-PCI FFR ≥0.90 between groups (PIOS minus control 10%, 95% confidence interval -1.84 to 21.91, P = 0.099). The proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80 was significantly reduced when compared with the angiography-guided control group (-11.2%, 95% confidence interval -21.87 to -0.35], P = 0.045). CONCLUSION: Over two-thirds of patients had a physiologically suboptimal result after angiography-guided PCI. An FFR-guided optimization strategy did not significantly increase the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≥0.90, but did reduce the proportion of patients with a final FFR ≤0.80.

Acute coronary syndrome management in older adults: guidelines, temporal changes and challenges.

Advancing age is a risk factor for the development of coronary artery disease and is an important indicator of outcome after acute coronary syndrome. As the number of older adults increases, the burden of cardiovascular disease is set to grow particularly as older adults remain disadvantaged in the delivery of acute cardiac care. This article reviews the temporal changes in the provision of guideline recommended therapies for the management of acute coronary syndrome, discusses reasons for age-dependent inequalities in care and the challenges facing clinicians.

Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Stent Optimisation in Focal and Diffuse Coronary Artery Disease.

Assessing coronary physiology after stent implantation facilitates the optimisation of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Coronary artery disease (CAD) patterns can be characterised by the pullback pressure gradient (PPG) index. The impact of focal vs. diffuse disease on physiology-guided incremental optimisation strategy (PIOS) is unknown. This is a sub-study of the TARGET-FFR randomized clinical trial (NCT03259815). The study protocol directed that optimisation be attempted for patients in the PIOS arm when post-PCI FFR was <0.90. Overall, 114 patients (n = 61 PIOS and 53 controls) with both pre-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR) pullbacks and post-PCI FFR were included. A PPG ≥ 0.74 defined focal CAD. The PPG correlated significantly with post-PCI FFR (r = 0.43; 95% CI 0.26 to 0.57; p-value < 0.001) and normalised delta FFR (r = 0.49; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.62; p-value < 0.001). PIOS was more frequently applied to vessels with diffuse CAD (6% focal vs. 42% diffuse; p-value = 0.006). In patients randomized to PIOS, those with focal disease achieved higher post-PCI FFR than patients with diffuse CAD (0.93 ± 0.05 vs. 0.83 ± 0.07, p < 0.001). There was a significant interaction between CAD patterns and the randomisation arm for post-PCI FFR (p-value for interaction = 0.004). Physiology-guided stent optimisation was applied more frequently to vessels with diffuse disease; however, patients with focal CAD at baseline achieved higher post-PCI FFR.

Angina After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Patient and Procedural Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Twenty percent to 40% of patients are affected by angina after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which is associated with anxiety, depression, impaired physical function, and reduced quality of life. Understanding patient and procedural factors associated with post-PCI angina may inform alternative approaches to treatment. METHODS: Two hundred thirty patients undergoing PCI completed the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7) and European quality of life-5 dimension-5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at baseline and 3 months post-PCI. Patients received blinded intracoronary physiology assessments before and after stenting. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare clinical and procedural characteristics among patients with and without post-PCI angina (defined by follow-up SAQ-angina frequency score <100). RESULTS: Eighty-eight of 230 patients (38.3%) reported angina 3 months post-PCI and had a higher incidence of active smoking, atrial fibrillation, and history of previous myocardial infarction or PCI. Compared with patients with no angina at follow-up, they had lower baseline SAQ summary scores (69.48±24.12 versus 50.20±22.59, P<0.001) and EQ-5D-5L health index scores (0.84±0.15 versus 0.69±0.22, P<0.001). Pre-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR) was lower among patients who had no post-PCI angina (0.56±0.15 versus 0.62±0.13, P=0.003). Percentage change in FFR after PCI had a moderate correlation with angina frequency score at follow-up (r=0.36, P<0.0001). Patients with post-PCI angina had less improvement in FFR (43.1±33.5% versus 67.0±50.7%, P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in post-PCI FFR, coronary flow reserve, or corrected index of microcirculatory resistance. Patients with post-PCI angina had lower SAQ-summary scores (64.01±22 versus 95.16±8.72, P≤0.001) and EQ-5D-5L index scores (0.69±0.26 versus 0.91±0.17, P≤0.001) at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Larger improvements in FFR following PCI were associated with less angina and better quality of life at follow-up. In patients with stable symptoms, intracoronary physiology assessment can inform expectations of angina relief and quality of life improvement after stenting and thereby help to determine the appropriateness of PCI. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03259815.

Comparative study of costs and resource utilization of rotational atherectomy versus intravascular lithotripsy for percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) is a novel alternative to rotational atherectomy (RA) for the modification of heavily calcified coronary stenoses prior to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compare the real-world resource utilization and associated costs of PCI with adjunctive RA and IVL. METHODS: We compared the resource utilization, in-lab consumable costs and procedural data of 120 patients who underwent PCI with IVL from the Disrupt-CAD II study (NCT03328949) to 60 patients who underwent PCI with RA at the Golden Jubilee National Hospital, Glasgow, UK. The RA patients were consecutive and selected on the basis of being deemed suitable for IVL by an independent interventional cardiologist experienced in the use of both techniques. RESULTS: PCI with IVL was associated with significantly lower costs than PCI with RA (mean difference £ 398 [95% CI: £ 181-615]; P<0.001). Considering between-group differences, the IVL group used 4.02 fewer balloons (P<0.001), 3.03 fewer guidewires (P<0.001), 0.52 fewer guide catheters (P=0.001), 0.22 fewer guide extensions (P=0.004) and 1.03 fewer drug eluting stents (DES) (P<0.001) per case than the RA group. The IVL group had shorter procedural duration (mean difference 13.3 min [95% CI: 3.6-23.0]; P=0.008) but longer fluoroscopy times (mean difference 4.4 min [95% CI: 1.7-7.1]; P=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this indirect comparison, we found that the higher initial device costs of IVL may be offset by a lower overall resource utilization. Further research is required to confirm this, and future randomized trials should include a formal health economic analysis.

Incidence of acute bronchospasm during systemic adenosine administration for coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND: Adenosine is frequently used during coronary angiography to induce hyperaemia and allow operators to perform quantitative measurements of lesion severity. Acute bronchospasm is a recognised side effect relating to the activation of 'off target' A2B receptors. The true incidence of severe bronchospasm relating to adenosine administration is not known. METHODS: Using an electronic patient database, we analysed 100,253 consecutive coronary angiograms over almost 19 years. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) was measured under systemic adenosine in 9,440 cases. RESULTS: Adenosine-related bronchospasm was reported in only five cases (0.05%). One case resulted in a life-threatening respiratory arrest. CONCLUSIONS: This study reveals the incidence of acute bronchospasm during FFR testing to be extremely low. Although rare, these reactions can be severe and are not simply limited to patients with brittle airways disease. Physicians should be aware of the utility of bolus intravenous aminophylline providing targeted therapy to reverse and treat adenosine-related bronchospasm.

Post-operative myocardial infarction following aortic root surgery with coronary reimplantation: a case series treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Coronary ostial stenosis is an uncommon but potentially lethal complication following aortic root replacement with or without aortic valve replacement (including Bentall and David procedures). This manifests clinically as acute myocardial ischaemia in the early or late post-operative period. Traditionally, this might be managed with redo open-heart surgery. CASE SUMMARY: This case series describes two presentations where urgent percutaneous coronary intervention was used to manage myocardial infarction complicating aortic root surgery with coronary reimplantation. DISCUSSION: This series highlights the risk of acute myocardial infarction after cardiac surgery involving coronary reimplantation. Emergency percutaneous coronary intervention is feasible and illustrates the importance of shared post-operative care involving the cardiac surgeons and the cardiology team.

Relative survival and excess mortality following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND:: High survival rates are commonly reported following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, with most contemporary studies reporting overall survival. AIMS:: The aim of this study was to describe survival following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction corrected for non-cardiovascular deaths by reporting relative survival and investigate clinically significant factors associated with poor long-term outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS:: Using the prospective UK Percutaneous Coronary Intervention registry, primary percutaneous coronary intervention cases ( n=88,188; 2005-2013) were matched to mortality data for the UK populace. Crude five-year relative survival was 87.1% for the patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and 94.7% for patients <55 years. Increasing age was associated with excess mortality up to four years following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (56-65 years: excess mortality rate ratio 1.61, 95% confidence interval 1.46-1.79; 66-75 years: 2.49, 2.26-2.75; >75 years: 4.69, 4.27-5.16). After four years, there was no excess mortality for ages 56-65 years (excess mortality rate ratio 1.27, 0.95-1.70), but persisting excess mortality for older groups (66-75 years: excess mortality rate ratio 1.72, 1.30-2.27; >75 years: 1.66, 1.15-2.41). Excess mortality was associated with cardiogenic shock (excess mortality rate ratio 6.10, 5.72-6.50), renal failure (2.52, 2.27-2.81), left main stem stenosis (1.67, 1.54-1.81), diabetes (1.58, 1.47-1.69), previous myocardial infarction (1.52, 1.40-1.65) and female sex (1.33, 1.26-1.41); whereas stent deployment (0.46, 0.42-0.50) especially drug eluting stents (0.27, 0.45-0.55), radial access (0.70, 0.63-0.71) and previous percutaneous coronary intervention (0.67, 0.60-0.75) were protective. CONCLUSIONS:: Following primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction, long-term cardiovascular survival is excellent. Failure to account for non-cardiovascular death may result in an underestimation of the efficacy of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Invasive management of acute coronary syndrome: Interaction with competing risks.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to characterise the interaction between ACS- and non-ACS-risk on the benefits of invasive management in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Consecutive patients admitted to a tertiary hospital's Cardiac Care Unit in the months of July-December, 2003-2011 with troponin elevation (>30 ng/L) were included. "ACS-specific-risk" was estimated using the GRACE score and "non-ACS-risk" was estimated using the Charlson-Comorbidity-Index (CCI). Inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting was used to adjust for baseline differences between patients who did or did not receive invasive management. A multivariable flexible parametric model was used to characterise the time-varying hazard. RESULTS: In total, 3057 patients were included with a median follow-up of 9.0 years. Based on CCI, 1783 patients were classified as 'low-non-ACS risk' (CCI ≤ 1; invasive management 81%; 12-month mortality 5%), 820 as 'medium-non-ACS risk' (CCI 2-3; invasive management 68%; 12-month mortality 13%), and 468 as 'high-non-ACS risk' (CCI ≥ 4; invasive management 47%; 12-month mortality 29%). After adjustment, invasive management was associated with a significant reduction in one-year overall-mortality in the 'low-risk' and 'medium-risk' groups (HR = 0.38, 95%CI:0.26-0.56; HR = 0.46, 95%CI:0.32-0.67); but not in the 'high-risk' group (HR = 1.02, 95%CI:0.67-1.56). The absolute benefit of invasive management was greatest with higher baseline ACS-risk, with a non-linear interaction between ACS- and non-ACS-risk. CONCLUSIONS: There is a complex interaction between ACS- and non-ACS-risk on the benefit of invasive management. These results highlight the need to develop robust methods to objectively quantify risk attributable to non-ACS comorbidities in order to make informed decisions regarding the use of invasive management in individuals with numerous comorbidities.

In an era of rapid STEMI reperfusion with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention is there a role for adjunct therapeutic hypothermia? A structured literature review.

Mild hypothermia has been shown to improve neurological outcome and reduce mortality following out of hospital cardiac arrest. In animal models the application of hypothermia with induced coronary occlusion has demonstrated a reduction in infarct size. Consequently, hypothermia has been proposed as a treatment, in addition to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PPCI) for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, there is incomplete understanding of the mechanism and magnitude of the protective effect of hypothermia on the myocardium, and limited outcome data. We undertook a structured literature review of therapeutic hypothermia as adjuvant to PPCI for acute STEMI. We examined the feasibility, safety, impact on infarct size and the resultant effect on major adverse cardiac events and mortality. There were 13 studies between 1946 and 2016. With the exception of one study, therapeutic hypothermia for STEMI was reported to be feasible and safe, and its only demonstrable benefit was a modest reduction in post-infarct heart failure events. Evidence to date, however, is from small clinical trials and in an era of low early mortality following PPCI for STEMI, demonstrating a mortality benefit will be challenging. Post-myocardial infarction left ventricular dysfunction is a more frequent, alternative clinical outcome and therefore any intervention that mitigates this warrants further investigation.

Comparative care and outcomes for acute coronary syndromes in Central and Eastern European Transitional countries: A review of the literature.

AIMS: The purpose of this review was to compare quality of care and outcomes following acute coronary syndrome (ACS) in Central and Eastern European Transitional (CEET) countries. METHODS: This was a review of original ACS articles in CEET countries from PubMed, ISI Web of Science, Medline and Embase databases published in English from November 2003 to February 2014. RESULTS: Seventeen manuscripts fulfilled the search criteria. Of 19 CEET countries studied, there were no published ACS management or outcome data for four countries. In-hospital mortality for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) ranged from 6.3% in the Czech Republic to 15.3% in Latvia. In-hospital mortality for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) ranged from 3.0% in Poland to 20.7% in Romania. For STEMI, primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) ranged from 1.0% to over 92.0%, fibrinolytic therapy from 0.0% to 49.6%, and no reperfusion therapy from 7.0% to 63.0%. CONCLUSION: Many CEET countries do not have published ACS care and outcomes data. Of those that do, there is evidence for substantial geographical variation in early mortality. Wide variation in emergency reperfusion strategies for STEMI suggests that acute cardiac care is likely to be modifiable and if addressed could reduce mortality from ACS in CEET countries. The collection of ACS care and outcomes data across Europe must be prioritised.

Risk stratification for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction in the era of primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

Acute coronary syndromes presenting with ST elevation are usually treated with emergency reperfusion/revascularisation therapy. In contrast current evidence and national guidelines recommend risk stratification for non ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) with the decision on revascularisation dependent on perceived clinical risk. Risk stratification for STEMI has no recommendation. Statistical risk scoring techniques in NSTEMI have been demonstrated to improve outcomes however their uptake has been poor perhaps due to questions over their discrimination and concern for application to individuals who may not have been adequately represented in clinical trials. STEMI is perceived to carry sufficient risk to warrant emergency coronary intervention [by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI)] even if this results in a delay to reperfusion with immediate thrombolysis. Immediate thrombolysis may be as effective in patients presenting early, or at low risk, but physicians are poor at assessing clinical and procedural risks and currently are not required to consider this. Inadequate data on risk stratification in STEMI inhibits the option of immediate fibrinolysis, which may be cost-effective. Currently the mode of reperfusion for STEMI defaults to emergency angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention ignoring alternative strategies. This review article examines the current risk scores and evidence base for risk stratification for STEMI patients. The requirements for an ideal STEMI risk score are discussed.

Comparative outcomes after unprotected left main stem percutaneous coronary intervention: a national linked cohort study of 5,065 acute and elective cases from the BCIS Registry (British Cardiovascular Intervention Society).

OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to report outcomes from percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to an unprotected left main stem (UPLMS) stenosis according to presenting syndrome, including ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS), and chronic stable angina (CSA). BACKGROUND: There are no published whole-country data concerning patient outcomes following PCI to UPLMS. METHODS: This study is a prospective national cohort study using data from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society (BCIS) registry from January 1, 2005, through December 31, 2010. RESULTS: Of 5,065 patients having PCI to an UPLMS, 784 (15.5%) presented with STEMI, 2,381 (47.0%) with NSTEACS, and 1,900 (37.5%) with CSA. Crude 30-day and 1-year mortality rates were STEMI: 28.3% and 37.6%, NSTEACS: 8.9% and 19.5%, and CSA: 1.4% and 7.0%, respectively. Unadjusted in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular event rates were STEMI: 26.6%, NSTEACS: 6.6%, and CSA: 3.3%. Risk of 30-day mortality was much greater for STEMI and NSTEACS patients than CSA (STEMI adjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 29.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.37 to 44.80, NSTEACS aOR: 6.45, 95% CI: 4.27 to 9.76). More than 40% of patients presenting with STEMI had cardiogenic shock, in whom mortality was higher than in STEMI cases without shock (30 days: 52.0% vs. 11.7%, 1 year: 61.1% vs. 20.9%). Radial access, compared with the femoral approach, was associated with a lower risk of 30-day mortality (STEMI aOR: 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21 to 0.62; NSTEACS aOR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: More than one-half of the patients who received UPLMS PCI were acute where outcomes were much worse than elective cases. Cardiogenic shock is common in STEMI patients, of whom more than one-half die at 30 days. The radial approach was associated with reduced early mortality in acute cases.