Stopping Aspirin Within 1 Month After Stenting for Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome: The T-PASS Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Stopping aspirin within 1 month after implantation of a drug-eluting stent for ticagrelor monotherapy has not been exclusively evaluated for patients with acute coronary syndrome. The aim of this study was to investigate whether ticagrelor monotherapy after <1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is noninferior to 12 months of ticagrelor-based DAPT for adverse cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial, 2850 patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation at 24 centers in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either ticagrelor monotherapy (90 mg twice daily) after <1 month of DAPT (n=1426) or 12 months of ticagrelor-based DAPT (n=1424) between April 24, 2019, and May 31, 2022. The primary end point was the net clinical benefit as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding at 1 year after the index procedure in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary end points were the individual components of the primary end point. RESULTS: Among 2850 patients who were randomized (mean age, 61 years; 40% ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction), 2823 (99.0%) completed the trial. Aspirin was discontinued at a median of 16 days (interquartile range, 12-25 days) in the group receiving ticagrelor monotherapy after <1 month of DAPT. The primary end point occurred in 40 patients (2.8%) in the group receiving ticagrelor monotherapy after <1-month DAPT, and in 73 patients (5.2%) in the ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT group (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.37-0.80]; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.002 for superiority). This finding was consistent in the per-protocol population as a sensitivity analysis. The occurrence of major bleeding was significantly lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy after <1-month DAPT group compared with the 12-month DAPT group (1.2% versus 3.4%; hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.20-0.61]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that stopping aspirin within 1 month for ticagrelor monotherapy is both noninferior and superior to 12-month DAPT for the 1-year composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding, primarily because of a significant reduction in major bleeding, among patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving drug-eluting stent implantation. Low event rates, which may suggest enrollment of relatively non-high-risk patients, should be considered in interpreting the trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03797651.

Optical coherence tomography-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with complex lesions (OCCUPI): an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial in South Korea.

BACKGROUND: Despite the detailed imaging information provided by optical coherence tomography (OCT) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), clinical benefits of this imaging technique in this setting remain uncertain. The aim of the OCCUPI trial was to compare the clinical benefits of OCT-guided versus angiography-guided PCI for complex lesions, assessed as the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. METHODS: This investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial conducted at 20 hospitals in South Korea enrolled patients aged 19-85 years for whom PCI with drug-eluting stents was clinically indicated. After diagnostic angiography, clinical and angiographic findings were assessed to identify patients who met the criterion of having one or more complex lesions. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive PCI with OCT guidance (OCT-guidance group) or angiography guidance without OCT (angiography-guidance group). Web-response permuted-block randomisation (mixed blocks of four or six) was used at each participating site to allocate patients. The allocation sequence was computer-generated by an external programmer who was not involved in the rest of the trial. Outcome assessors were masked to group assignment. Patients, follow-up health-care providers, and data analysers were not masked. PCI was done according to conventional standard methods with everolimus-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or ischaemia-driven target-vessel revascularisation), 1 year after PCI. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The margin used to establish superiority was 1·0 as a hazard ratio. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03625908) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Jan 9, 2019, and Sept 22, 2022, 1604 patients requiring PCI with drug-eluting stents for complex lesions were randomly assigned to receive either OCT-guided PCI (n=803) or angiography-guided PCI (n=801). 1290 (80%) of 1604 patients were male and 314 (20%) were female. The median age of patients at randomisation was 64 years (IQR 57-70). 1588 (99%) patients completed 1-year follow-up. The primary endpoint occurred in 37 (5%) of 803 patients in the OCT-guided PCI group and 59 (7%) of 801 patients in the angiography-guided PCI group (absolute difference -2·8% [95% CI -5·1 to -0·4]; hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·41 to 0·93]; p=0·023). Rates of stroke, bleeding events, and contrast-induced nephropathy were not significantly different across the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Among patients who required drug-eluting stent implantation for complex lesions, OCT guidance resulted in a lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year compared with angiography guidance. These findings indicate the existence of a therapeutic benefit of OCT as an intravascular imaging technique for PCI guidance in patients with complex coronary lesions. FUNDING: Abbott Vascular and Cardiovascular Research Center. TRANSLATION: For the Korean translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-coated balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal artery disease: a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have demonstrated favourable outcomes following endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal artery (FPA) disease. However, uncertainty remains whether the use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can improve the outcomes of DCBs. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, randomized trial, conducted at seven centres in South Korea, compared the outcomes of IVUS-guided vs. angiography-guided angioplasty for treating FPA disease with DCBs. Patients were assigned to receive IVUS-guided (n = 119) or angiography-guided (n = 118) angioplasty using DCBs. The primary endpoint was 12-month primary patency. RESULTS: Between May 2016 and August 2022, 237 patients were enrolled and 204 (86.0%) completed the trial (median follow-up; 363 days). The IVUS guidance group showed significantly higher primary patency [83.8% vs. 70.1%; cumulative difference 19.6% (95% confidence interval 6.8 to 32.3); P = .01] and increased freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization [92.4% vs. 83.0%; difference 11.6% (95% confidence interval 3.1 to 20.1); P = .02], sustained clinical improvement (89.1% vs. 76.3%, P = .01), and haemodynamic improvement (82.4% vs. 66.9%, P = .01) at 12 months compared with the angiography guidance group. The IVUS group utilized larger balloon diameters and pressures for pre-dilation, more frequent post-dilation, and higher pressures for post-dilation, resulting in a greater post-procedural minimum lumen diameter (3.90 ± 0.59 vs. 3.71 ± 0.73 mm, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular ultrasound guidance significantly improved the outcomes of DCBs for FPA disease in terms of primary patency, freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and sustained clinical and haemodynamic improvement at 12 months. These benefits may be attributed to IVUS-guided optimization of the lesion before and after DCB treatment.

Ticagrelor monotherapy for acute coronary syndrome: an individual patient data meta-analysis of TICO and T-PASS trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a potent P2Y12 inhibitor is recommended for 12 months after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. Monotherapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor after short-term DAPT is an attractive option to better balance the risks of ischaemia and bleeding. Therefore, this study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT, especially in patients with ACS. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 11 November 2023, and for the primary analysis, individual patient data were pooled from the relevant randomized clinical trials comparing ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term (≤3 months) DAPT with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT, exclusively in ACS patients undergoing DES implantation. The co-primary endpoints were ischaemic endpoint (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and bleeding endpoint [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding] at 1 year. RESULTS: Individual patient data from two randomized clinical trials including 5906 ACS patients were analysed. At 1 year, the primary ischaemic endpoint did not differ between the ticagrelor monotherapy and ticagrelor-based DAPT groups [1.9% vs. 2.5%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-1.13; P = .194]. The incidence of the primary bleeding endpoint was lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy group (2.4% vs. 4.5%; adjusted HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.40-0.72; P < .001). The results were consistent in a secondary aggregate data meta-analysis including the ACS subgroup of additional randomized clinical trials which enrolled patients with ACS as well as chronic coronary syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients undergoing DES implantation, ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT was associated with less major bleeding without a concomitant increase in ischaemic events compared with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023476470).

Effect of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus in patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease: a post-hoc analysis from the LODESTAR randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin on new-onset diabetes mellitus (NODM) among patients treated with high-intensity statin therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD) remains to be clarified. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of NODM in patients with CAD treated with rosuvastatin compared to atorvastatin in the randomized LODESTAR trial. METHODS: In the LODESTAR trial, patients with CAD were randomly assigned to receive either rosuvastatin or atorvastatin using a 2-by-2 factorial randomization. In this post-hoc analysis, the 3-year incidence of NODM was compared between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin treatment in the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy as the principal population of interest. RESULTS: Among 2932 patients without diabetes mellitus at baseline, 2377 were included in the as-treated population analysis. In the as-treated population with high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between the rosuvastatin and atorvastatin groups (11.4% [106/948] versus 8.8% [73/856], hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.98 to 1.77, P = 0.071). When the risk of NODM with rosuvastatin versus atorvastatin was assessed according to the achieved low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, the risk of NODM began to increase at a LDL-C level below 70 mg/dL. The incidence of NODM was significantly greater in the rosuvastatin group than it was in the atorvastatin group when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL (13.9% versus 8.0%; HR = 1.79, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.73, P = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Among CAD patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy, the incidence of NODM was not significantly different between rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. However, a drug effect of the statin type on NODM was observed when the achieved LDL-C level was < 70 mg/dL. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT02579499.

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A post-hoc analysis of the RACING trial.

AIM: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this post-hoc subgroup analysis of the RACING trial, patients were analysed based on the presence of MetS. MetS was defined as meeting at least three of the five following criteria: (a) elevated waist circumference; (b) elevated triglycerides; (c) reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; (d) elevated blood pressure; and (e) elevated fasting glucose. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. RESULTS: Of the 3780 patients enrolled in the RACING trial, 1703 (45.1%) had MetS at baseline. The primary outcome rate was 10.1% and 10.3% in patients with MetS receiving ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.72-1.32; p = .868). Lower rates of intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction (3.9% vs. 8.0%; p < .001) and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (57 vs. 65 mg/dl; p < .001) were observed with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy. Furthermore, the rate of new-onset diabetes was 18.5% and 19.1% in each group (p = .822). There were no significant interactions between MetS and therapy regarding study outcomes in the total population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MetS and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy had comparable cardiovascular benefits with those of high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meanwhile, ezetimibe combination therapy was associated with lower drug intolerance and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but there was no apparent between-group difference in new-onset diabetes.

Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Repair Within and Outside the Instructions for Use in Korean Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been used worldwide to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Outcomes after EVAR within and outside the instruction for use (IFU) remain controversial. We analyzed long-term outcomes of EVAR within-the-IFU compared with that outside-the-IFU and baseline clinical/anatomical characteristics that influence outcomes of EVAR. METHODS: The study included 546 patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA from 1997 to 2021 at 2 Korean medical centers. The primary endpoint was graft-related adverse events (GRAEs), including type 1 or 3 endoleak, reintervention (included open conversion), aneurysm sac enlargement, aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), rupture, stent-graft migration, and stent thrombotic occlusion. RESULTS: The patients who underwent EVAR outside the IFU were 287 (52.6%). A neck angle of >60° was most common outside the IFU criteria (n=146, 50.9%). This study revealed that patients outside the IFU had a higher rate of GRAEs compared with patients within the IFU (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.879; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.045-2.386). A neck angle of >60° was a significant risk factor for GRAEs (adjusted HR: 2.229; 95% CI: 1.418-3.503), type 1 or 3 endoleak (adjusted HR: 2.640; 95% CI: 1.343-5.189), and reintervention (adjusted HR: 1.891; 95% CI: 1.055-3.388). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed EVAR with outside the IFU was associated with increased GRAEs, mainly attributed to endoleak and ARM, compared with EVAR with within the IFU. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak, and reintervention. CLINICAL IMPACT: Our study revealed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with outside-the-instruction for use (IFU) was associated with increased graft-related adverse events (GRAEs) compared with EVAR with within-the-IFU. In the low-risk population, the incidence of GRAEs and Aneurysm related mortality were higher in the outside-the-IFU group rather than within-the-IFU group. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak and reintervention.

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Ticagrelor Therapy With or Without Aspirin After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis of the TICO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: We sought to explore the sex differences in clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor monotherapy after ticagrelor-based 3-month versus 12-month dual-antiplatelet therapy. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the TICO trial (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome; n=3056)-a randomized controlled trial for patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with drug-eluting stent. The primary outcome was a net adverse clinical event (composite of major bleeding, death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or target-vessel revascularization) 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. RESULTS: There were 27.3% (n=628) women in the TICO trial; they were older with lower body mass index and higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease than men. Compared with men, women had higher risk of net adverse clinical events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89 [95% CI, 1.34-2.67]), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.07-2.68]), and major bleeding (HR, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.25-3.35]). Among the groups stratified by sex and dual-antiplatelet therapy strategy, the incidences of primary and secondary outcomes were significantly different and the highest in women with ticagrelor-based 12-month dual-antiplatelet therapy (P<0.001). There was no significant heterogeneity in the impact of treatment strategy on the risks of primary and secondary outcomes between both sexes. Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in women (HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.26-0.85]; P=0.02) and comparable in men (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.52-1.14]; P=0.19) without significant interaction (P for interaction, 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: After percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome, women demonstrated worse clinical outcomes than men. Ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual-antiplatelet therapy was associated with significantly lower risk of net adverse clinical events in women without sex interaction.

Development of Clinically Validated Artificial Intelligence Model for Detecting ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Although the importance of primary percutaneous coronary intervention has been emphasized for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the appropriateness of the cardiac catheterization laboratory activation remains suboptimal. This study aimed to develop a precise artificial intelligence (AI) model for the diagnosis of STEMI and accurate cardiac catheterization laboratory activation. METHODS: We used electrocardiography (ECG) waveform data from a prospective percutaneous coronary intervention registry in Korea in this study. Two independent board-certified cardiologists established a criterion standard (STEMI or Not STEMI) for each ECG based on corresponding coronary angiography data. We developed a deep ensemble model by combining 5 convolutional neural networks. In addition, we performed clinical validation based on a symptom-based ECG data set, comparisons with clinical physicians, and external validation. RESULTS: We used 18,697 ECGs for the model development data set, and 1,745 (9.3%) were STEMI. The AI model achieved an accuracy of 92.1%, sensitivity of 95.4%, and specificity of 91.8 %. The performances of the AI model were well balanced and outstanding in the clinical validation, comparison with clinical physicians, and the external validation. CONCLUSION: The deep ensemble AI model showed a well-balanced and outstanding performance. As visualized with gradient-weighted class activation mapping, the AI model has a reasonable explainability. Further studies with prospective validation regarding clinical benefit in a real-world setting should be warranted.

Treat-to-target or high-intensity statin treatment in older adults with coronary artery disease: a post hoc analysis of the LODESTAR trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal statin treatment strategy that is balanced for both efficacy and safety has not been clearly determined in older adults with coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: In the post hoc analysis of the LODESTAR (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-targeting statin therapy versus intensity-based statin therapy in patients with coronary artery disease) trial, the impact between a treat-to-target strategy versus a high-intensity statin therapy strategy was compared in older adults (aged 75 years or older). The goal of treat-to-target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was 50-70 mg/dl. The primary endpoint comprised the three-year composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke or coronary revascularisation. RESULTS: Among 4,400 patients with CAD enrolled in the LODESTAR trial, 822 (18.7%) were aged 75 years or older. Poor clinical outcomes and risk factors for atherosclerosis were more frequently observed in older adults than in younger population (<75 years old). Among these older adults with CAD, the prescription rate of high-intensity statin was significantly lower in the treat-to-target strategy group throughout the study period (P < 0.001). The mean LDL-C level for three years was 65 ± 16 mg/dl in the treat-to-target strategy group and 64 ± 18 mg/dl in the high-intensity statin group (P = 0.34). The incidence of primary endpoint occurrence was 10.9% in the treat-to-target strategy group and 12.0% in the high-intensity statin group (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.38, P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity statin therapy is theoretically more necessary in older adults because of worse clinical outcomes and greater number of risk factors for atherosclerosis. However, the primary endpoint occurrence with a treat-to-target strategy with an LDL-C goal of 50-70 mg/dl was comparable to that of high-intensity statin therapy and reduced utilisation of a high-intensity statin. Taking efficacy as well as safety into account, adopting a tailored approach may be considered for this high-risk population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02579499.

Balloon-expandable cobalt chromium stent versus self-expandable nitinol stent for the Atherosclerotic Iliac Arterial Disease (SENS-ILIAC Trial) Trial: a randomized controlled trial.

Iliac artery angioplasty with stenting is an effective alternative treatment modality for aortoiliac occlusive diseases. Few randomized controlled trials have compared the efficacy and safety between self-expandable stent (SES) and balloon-expandable stent (BES) in atherosclerotic iliac artery disease. In this randomized, multicenter study, patients with common or external iliac artery occlusive disease were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either BES or SES. The primary end point was the 1-year clinical patency, defined as freedom from any surgical or percutaneous intervention due to restenosis of the target lesion after the index procedure. The secondary end point was a composite event from major adverse clinical events at 1 year. A total of 201 patients were enrolled from 17 major cardiovascular intervention centers in South Korea. The mean age of the enrolled patients was 66.8 ± 8.5 years and 86.2% of the participants were male. The frequency of critical limb ischemia was 15.4%, and the most common target lesion was in the common iliac artery (75.1%). As the primary end point, the 1-year clinical patency as primary end point was 99% in the BES group and 99% in the SES group (p > 0.99). The rate of repeat revascularization at 1 year was 7.8% in the BES group and 7.0% in the SES group (p = 0.985; confidence interval, 1.011 [0.341-2.995]). In our randomized study, the treatment of iliac artery occlusive disease with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable stent was comparable in 12-month clinical outcomes without differences in the procedural success or geographic miss rate regardless of the deployment method in the distal aortoiliac occlusive lesion (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01834495).

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe vs. high-intensity statin in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the RACING trial.

AIMS: This study evaluated the effect of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a pre-specified, stratified subgroup analysis of the DM cohort in the RACING trial. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. Among total patients, 1398 (37.0%) had DM at baseline. The incidence of the primary outcome was 10.0% and 11.3% among patients with DM randomized to ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.22; P = 0.460). Intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug was observed in 5.2% and 8.7% of patients in each group, respectively (P = 0.014). LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 81.0%, 83.1%, and 79.9% of patients in the ezetimibe combination therapy group, and 64.1%, 70.2%, and 66.8% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all P < 0.001). In the total population, no significant interactions were found between DM status and therapy regarding primary outcome, intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction, and the proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: Ezetimibe combination therapy effects observed in the RACING trial population are preserved among patients with DM. This study supports moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy as a suitable alternative to high-intensity statins if the latter cannot be tolerated, or further reduction in LDL cholesterol is required among patients with DM and ASCVD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier:NCT03044665.

Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug combinations rather than increasing doses of one drug can achieve greater efficacy and lower risks. Thus, as an alternative to high-intensity statin monotherapy, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy can lower LDL cholesterol concentrations effectively while reducing adverse effects. However, evidence from randomised trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes is needed. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) at 26 clinical centres in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy (rosuvastatin 10 mg with ezetimibe 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin 20 mg). The primary endpoint was the 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke, in the intention-to-treat population with a non-inferiority margin of 2·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03044665 and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Feb 14, 2017, and Dec 18, 2018, 3780 patients were enrolled: 1894 patients to the combination therapy group and 1886 to the high-intensity statin monotherapy group. The primary endpoint occurred in 172 patients (9·1%) in the combination therapy group and 186 patients (9·9%) in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (absolute difference -0·78%; 90% CI -2·39 to 0·83). LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 73%, 75%, and 72% of patients in the combination therapy group, and 55%, 60%, and 58% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all p<0·0001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug by intolerance was observed in 88 patients (4·8%) and 150 patients (8·2%), respectively (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with ASCVD, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy was non-inferior to high-intensity statin monotherapy for the 3-year composite outcomes with a higher proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL and lower intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction. FUNDING: Hanmi Pharmaceutical.

Impact of guideline-directed medical therapy on 5-year mortality in patients with newly diagnosed peripheral artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend that patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) should be treated with antithrombotic agents, renin-angiotensin-system blockers, and statins. However, the clinical impact of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) on long-term mortality in patients with newly diagnosed PAD remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of GDMT and evaluate 5-year mortality according to GDMT after PAD diagnosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study, using nationwide health insurance claims data in Korea, included patients newly diagnosed with PAD between 2006 and 2015. GDMT was defined as the use of all drugs, including antithrombotic agents, renin-angiotensin-system blockers, and statins, within 3 months of PAD diagnosis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We investigated 19,561 newly diagnosed patients with PAD without proven cardiovascular disease. Among the study population, 4378 patients (22.4%) were categorized in the GDMT and 15,183 (77.6%) in the non-GDMT groups. During the 5-year follow-up, GDMT showed a lower incidence of all-cause mortality than that of non-GDMT (2.8% vs 4.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.329; 95% confidence interval, 0.257-0.421; P < .001). Even in the propensity-matched population, GDMT showed a lower mortality rate than non-GDMT (hazard ratio, 0.283; 95% confidence interval, 0.217-0.370; P < .001). As the number of guideline-recommended drugs increased, the mortality rate decreased proportionately. CONCLUSIONS: After PAD diagnosis, GDMT was associated with a lower incidence of mortality regardless of proven cardiovascular disease. This retrospective analysis showed an insufficient prevalence of GDMT among patients with PAD in real-world practice.

Treat-to-Target or High-Intensity Statin in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In patients with coronary artery disease, some guidelines recommend initial statin treatment with high-intensity statins to achieve at least a 50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). An alternative approach is to begin with moderate-intensity statins and titrate to a specific LDL-C goal. These alternatives have not been compared head-to-head in a clinical trial involving patients with known coronary artery disease. Objective: To assess whether a treat-to-target strategy is noninferior to a strategy of high-intensity statins for long-term clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, multicenter, noninferiority trial in patients with a coronary disease diagnosis treated at 12 centers in South Korea (enrollment: September 9, 2016, through November 27, 2019; final follow-up: October 26, 2022). Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the LDL-C target strategy, with an LDL-C level between 50 and 70 mg/dL as the target, or high-intensity statin treatment, which consisted of rosuvastatin, 20 mg, or atorvastatin, 40 mg. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was a 3-year composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization with a noninferiority margin of 3.0 percentage points. Results: Among 4400 patients, 4341 patients (98.7%) completed the trial (mean [SD] age, 65.1 [9.9] years; 1228 females [27.9%]). In the treat-to-target group (n = 2200), which had 6449 person-years of follow-up, moderate-intensity and high-intensity dosing were used in 43% and 54%, respectively. The mean (SD) LDL-C level for 3 years was 69.1 (17.8) mg/dL in the treat-to-target group and 68.4 (20.1) mg/dL in the high-intensity statin group (n = 2200) (P = .21, compared with the treat-to-target group). The primary end point occurred in 177 patients (8.1%) in the treat-to-target group and 190 patients (8.7%) in the high-intensity statin group (absolute difference, -0.6 percentage points [upper boundary of the 1-sided 97.5% CI, 1.1 percentage points]; P < .001 for noninferiority). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with coronary artery disease, a treat-to-target LDL-C strategy of 50 to 70 mg/dL as the goal was noninferior to a high-intensity statin therapy for the 3-year composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization. These findings provide additional evidence supporting the suitability of a treat-to-target strategy that may allow a tailored approach with consideration for individual variability in drug response to statin therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02579499.

Long-term outcomes after paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty of femoropopliteal arteries in Asian patients of the IN.PACT Global Study.

OBJECTIVES: The long-term data on the use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) for femoropopliteal atherosclerotic lesions in the real-world setting are limited, even more so for racially and geographically distinct populations. The present analysis reports the 5-year safety and effectiveness outcomes of a DCB in the Asian subset of the prospective, real-world IN.PACT Global Study. METHODS: The IN.PACT Global Study was a prospective, multicenter, international, single-arm study designed to assess the long-term safety and effectiveness of the IN.PACT Admiral DCB in real-world participants with femoropopliteal artery disease. The present analysis included 114 Asian participants (138 lesions) treated in South Korea and Singapore. Assessments through 5 years included freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization, the safety endpoint (a composite of freedom from device- and procedure-related mortality through 30 days; and freedom from major target limb amputation and clinically driven target vessel revascularization within 60 months after the index procedure) and major adverse events. RESULTS: In this prespecified Asian subset, there was a high incidence of diabetes mellitus (54.4%), hypertension (78.1%), coronary artery disease (43.9%), and concomitant below-the-knee vascular disease of target leg (39.5%). Mean lesion length was 17.4 ± 12.4 cm; 26.8% were in-stent restenosis, and more than half of the lesions were totally occluded (51.4%) and calcified (54.3%). The 5-year Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization was 77.1% (95% confidence interval: 67.0%-84.5%). The safety composite endpoint was 76.0%; the cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 19.9%, and no major target limb amputations were reported through 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: This subset analysis of Asian participants from the IN.PACT Global Study demonstrated consistent results with the previously reported data of the IN.PACT Admiral DCB. The data confirm the durable clinical effectiveness and safety profile of the DCB through 5 years for femoropopliteal atherosclerotic disease in this real-world population.

Two-year outcomes between ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing newer-generation drug-eluting stent implantation.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the 2-year clinical outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who received newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: Overall, 18,875 acute myocardial infarction patients were divided into two groups: CKD (STEMI, n = 1707; NSTEMI, n = 1648) and non-CKD (STEMI, n = 8660; NSTEMI, n = 6860). The occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), any repeat coronary revascularization, and definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), was evaluated. RESULTS: After multivariable-adjusted analysis, in the CKD group, the MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.365, p = 0.004), all-cause death (aHR: 1.503, p = 0.004), noncardiac death (non-CD; aHR: 1.960, p = 0.004), and all-cause death or MI rates (aHR: 1.458, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group. In the non-CKD group, the non-CD rate (aHR: 1.78, p = 0.006) was also higher in the NSTEMI group. The CD, re-MI, any repeat revascularization, and ST rates were similar between groups. In the CKD group, from 6 months to 2 years after the index procedure, all-cause death, non-CD, and all-cause death or MI rates were significantly higher in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group. These results may be related to the higher non-CD rate in the NSTEMI group. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of contemporary newer-generation DES, NSTEMI showed a relatively higher non-CD rate than STEMI in both CKD and non-CKD groups.

Feasibility of Aortic Annular Measurements Using Noncontrast-Enhanced Cardiac Computed Tomography in Preprocedural Evaluation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Comparison With Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography.

OBJECTIVE: Noncontrast-enhanced (NCE) cross-sectional images other than contrast-enhanced (CE)-computed tomography (CT) may be necessary for annular sizing before transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), because of the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy. We aimed to investigate the feasibility of aortic annular measurements using NCE-CT in TAVR candidates by comparing them with CE-CT measurements. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 46 patients who underwent CT for the purpose of pre-TAVR evaluation (17 men; mean age, 82.3 ± 5.0 years). On CE and NCE examination, measurements of the average diameter and perimeter of aortic annulus were performed by 2 observers, and coronary ostial heights were measured. Differences in annular parameters and coronary ostial heights between NCE and CE examinations were assessed using Bland-Altman analysis and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: Aortic annulus measurement values were significantly larger in the NCE examinations compared with those in the CE examinations according to both readers (mean differences of 0.8 mm for the average diameter and 2.1 mm for the perimeter according to observer 1, and 1.1 mm for the average diameter and 3.4 mm for the perimeter according to observer 2; ICC, 0.771-0.923). The mean difference between coronary ostial height measurement on NCE and CE examination was 0.6 mm for left coronary ostium (ICC, 0.795) and 0.7 mm for right coronary ostium (ICC, 0.802). No case showed disagreement between NCE and CE examinations for hypothetical valve sizing. CONCLUSIONS: Noncontrast-enhanced cardiac CT examination may be feasible for aortic annular measurements before TAVR and provides comparable measurement values to CE examination.

Surgical Findings and Outcomes of Endotension Following Endovascular Aneurysm Repair.

BACKGROUND: Endotension is one of the detrimental complications after endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) and surgical management has been considered as standard of care. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the findings, and outcomes of such surgical intervention. The aim of this study was to investigate intraoperative findings and outcomes of surgical treatment for endotension after EVAR. METHODS: Between January 2005 and October 2018, of the 708 patients who underwent EVAR for aneurysm aortic aneurysm; 12 patients (mean age of 76.1; range 66-88) who underwent open repair for endotension were retrospectively analyzed. The anatomical characteristics of the aorta and surgical findings were reviewed. The rates of early and late procedural complications, and overall mortality were evaluated. RESULTS: The median interval between the EVAR and surgical conversion was 45.9 months (range 17.1-46.9). Three of the twelve patients underwent emergency surgery due to aneurysm rupture. The median aneurysm sac size, the proximal neck diameter, and the proximal neck length before EVAR were 64 mm, 23.5 mm, and 30.5 mm, respectively, that changed before open repair to 93.5 mm (P = 0.02), 25 mm (P = 0.011), and 23 mm (P = 0.003), respectively. In four of the twelve patients, radiographically undetected endoleak was identified during surgery to be Type Ia, Ib, II, and III, respectively. The rates of early and late procedural complications, and overall mortality were 8.3%, 8.3% and 8.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with endotension have a risk of delayed endoleak and aneurysm rupture; secondary intervention should be performed in such cases to prevent fatal complications. Surgical treatment appears to be a curative treatment for endotension with favorable outcomes. In addition, the possibility of an undetected endoleak should be considered as a potential cause of endotension.

Differential Prognostic Implications of Vasoactive Inotropic Score for Patients With Acute Myocardial Infarction Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock According to Use of Mechanical Circulatory Support.

OBJECTIVES: To identify whether the prognostic implications of Vasoactive Inotropic Score according to use of mechanical circulatory support differ in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. DESIGN: A multicenter retrospective and prospective observational cohort study. SETTING/PATIENT: The REtrospective and prospective observational Study to investigate Clinical oUtcomes and Efficacy registry includes 1,247 patients with cardiogenic shock from 12 centers in Korea. A total of 836 patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock were finally selected, and the study population was stratified by quartiles of Vasoactive Inotropic Score (< 10, 10-30, 30-90, and > 90) for the present study. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary endpoint was in-hospital mortality and secondary endpoint was follow-up mortality. Among the study population, 326 patients (39.0%) received medical treatment alone, 218 (26.1%) received intra-aortic balloon pump, and 292 (34.9%) received extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. In-hospital mortality occurred in 305 patients (36.5%) and was significantly higher in patients with higher Vasoactive Inotropic Score (15.6%, 20.8%, 40.2%, and 67.3%, for < 10, 10-30, 30-90, and > 90; p < 0.001). Vasoactive Inotropic Score showed better ability to predict in-hospital mortality in acute myocardial infarction patients with cardiogenic shock who received medical treatment alone (area under the curve: 0.797; 95% CI, 0.728-0.865) than in those who received intra-aortic balloon pump (area under the curve, 0.704; 95% CI, 0.625-0.783) or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (area under the curve, 0.644; 95% CI, 0.580-0.709). The best cutoff value of Vasoactive Inotropic Score for the prediction of in-hospital mortality also differed according to the use of mechanical circulatory support (16.5, 40.1, and 84.0 for medical treatment alone, intra-aortic balloon pump, and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, respectively). There was a significant interaction between Vasoactive Inotropic Score as a continuous value and the use of mechanical circulatory support including intra-aortic balloon pump (interaction-p = 0.006) and extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (interaction-p < 0.001) for all-cause mortality during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: High Vasoactive Inotropic Score was associated with significantly higher in-hospital and follow-up mortality in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock. The predictive value of Vasoactive Inotropic Score for mortality was significantly higher in acute myocardial infarction patients with cardiogenic shock treated by medical treatment alone than in those treated by mechanical circulatory support such as intra-aortic balloon pump or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.