Can the optimal type of stent be predicted based on clinical risk factors? A subgroup analysis of the randomized BASKET-PROVE trial.

BACKGROUND: The randomized BASKET-PROVE study showed no significant differences between sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), everolimus-eluting stents (EES), and bare-metal stents (BMS) with respect to the primary end point, rates of death from cardiac causes, or myocardial infarction (MI) at 2 years of follow-up, in patients requiring stenting of a large coronary artery. Clinical risk factors may affect clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions. We present a retrospective analysis of the BASKET-PROVE data addressing the question as to whether the optimal type of stent can be predicted based on a cumulative clinical risk score. METHODS: A total of 2,314 patients (mean age 66 years) who underwent coronary angioplasty and implantation of ≥1 stents that were ≥3.0 mm in diameter were randomly assigned to receive SES, EES, or BMS. A cumulative clinical risk score was derived using a Cox model that included age, gender, cardiovascular risk factors (hypercholesterolemia, hypertension, family history of cardiovascular disease, diabetes, smoking), presence of ≥2 comorbidities (stroke, peripheral artery disease, chronic kidney disease, chronic rheumatic disease), a history of MI or coronary revascularization, and clinical presentation (stable angina, unstable angina, ST-segment elevation MI). RESULTS: An aggregate drug-eluting stent (DES) group (n = 1,549) comprising 775 patients receiving SES and 774 patients receiving EES was compared to 765 patients receiving BMS. Rates of death from cardiac causes or nonfatal MI at 2 years of follow-up were significantly increased in patients who were in the high tertile of risk stratification for the clinical risk score compared to those who were in the aggregate low-mid tertiles. In patients with a high clinical risk score, rates of death from cardiac causes or nonfatal MI were lower in patients receiving DES (2.4 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 1.6-3.6) compared with BMS (5.5 per 100 person-years, 95% CI 3.7-8.2, hazard ratio 0.45, 95% CI 0.26-0.80, P = .007). However, they were not significantly different between receivers of DES and BMS in patients in the low-mid risk tertiles. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory analysis suggests that, in patients who require stenting of a large coronary artery, use of a clinical risk score may identify those patients for whom DES use may confer a clinical advantage over BMS, beyond lower restenosis rates.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in large coronary arteries.

BACKGROUND: Recent data have suggested that patients with coronary disease in large arteries are at increased risk for late cardiac events after percutaneous intervention with first-generation drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents. We sought to confirm this observation and to assess whether this increase in risk was also seen with second-generation drug-eluting stents. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2314 patients needing stents that were 3.0 mm or more in diameter to receive sirolimus-eluting, everolimus-eluting, or bare-metal stents. The primary end point was the composite of death from cardiac causes or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 2 years. Late events (occurring during months 7 to 24) and target-vessel revascularization were the main secondary end points. RESULTS: The rates of the primary end point were 2.6% among patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents, 3.2% among those receiving everolimus-eluting stents, and 4.8% among those receiving bare-metal stents, with no significant differences between patients receiving either drug-eluting stent and those receiving bare-metal stents. There were also no significant between-group differences in the rate of late events or in the rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. Rates of target-vessel revascularization for reasons unrelated to myocardial infarction were 3.7% among patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents, 3.1% among those receiving everolimus-eluting stents, and 8.9% among those receiving bare-metal stents. The rate of target-vessel revascularization was significantly reduced among patients receiving either drug-eluting stent, as compared with a bare-metal stent, with no significant difference between the two types of drug-eluting stents. CONCLUSIONS: In patients requiring stenting of large coronary arteries, no significant differences were found among sirolimus-eluting, everolimus-eluting, and bare-metal stents with respect to the rate of death or myocardial infarction. With the two drug-eluting stents, similar reductions in rates of target-vessel revascularization were seen. (Funded by the Basel Cardiovascular Research Foundation and the Swiss National Foundation for Research; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN72444640.).

Long-term follow-up of coronary venous bypass graft lesions treated with a new generation drug-eluting stent with bioabsorbable polymer.

BACKGROUND: To date, no published data are available regarding long-term follow-up of new generation DES implanted in coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) lesions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term clinical outcome of patients receiving the new generation Biolimus A9-coated drug-eluting stent (DES) with biodegradable polymer in saphenous vein grafts (SVG). METHODS: Three thousand sixty-seven patients were included in the NOBORI 2 registry: 71 patients with a total of 117 lesions received at least 1 biolimus A9 DES in SVG lesions and 2,959 patients received percutaneous coronary intervention in other lesions. Clinical follow-up was performed at 1, 6, and 12 months, and annually up to 3 years. RESULTS: Compared to the non-CABG group, patients with CABG lesions were older (P < 0.001), had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = 0.004), and presented more often with acute coronary syndrome (P = 0.02). At 3-year follow-up, cardiac death occurred in 9.7% versus 2.1% (P < 0.001), myocardial infarction (MI) in 8.3% versus 3.0% (P = 0.02), target lesion failure in 13.9% versus 6.4% (P = 0.03), and major adverse cardiac event in 18.1% versus 8.6% (P = 0.01). No differences were observed in TV-MI and TLR, nor stent thrombosis (ST) which was generally low in both groups (1.4% vs 0.8%, P = NS). CONCLUSION: Albeit 3-year outcomes were less favorable in the CABG group, the higher cardiac mortality was apparently not driven by ST, target vessel MI, or TLR, but is likely due to advanced disease and age as well as comorbidity. The low TLR rate as well as the absence of late and very late ST suggest that BES are safe and effective for the treatment of CABG lesions.

Stent thrombosis after coronary stent implantation: a protective effect of high-dose statin therapy?

OBJECTIVES: To assess independent predictors of stent thrombosis (ST) in an all-comer trial. METHODS: This is an observational case-control study based on a retrospective analysis of the Basel Stent Kosten Effektivitäts Trial (BASKET) (n = 826). Patients with ST were compared to controls with regard to baseline parameters. Multivariate models were performed to identify independent predictors of ST. RESULTS: At 36 months, there were 53 (6.4%) patients with ST, 17 (32%) of whom had early ST and 36 (68%) of whom had late/very late ST. Patients with ST were at a higher cardiovascular risk but received lower doses of statins than the controls (n = 212). Stents in ST patients were longer, had more overlap and were not as well expanded, with significantly more remaining stenoses than the stents in the controls. Multivariable analysis revealed interventions in saphenous vein grafts, malapposed stents, an overlap >3 mm, complex coronary anatomy and treatment with low-dose/no statins as risk factors for ST, while interventions in saphenous vein grafts, underexpanded or malapposed stents, a history of myocardial infarction and treatment with low-dose/no statins were risk factors for late ST. CONCLUSIONS: The use of statins might have a protective effect against ST. This observation is new, hypothesis-generating and should be evaluated in an adequately powered randomized trial.

Impact of a nationwide public campaign on delays and outcome in Swiss patients with acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: To improve the outcome in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), public campaigns have been launched aimed at shortening presentation delays and allowing more efficient treatment. Their impact is uncertain. METHODS: Pre-hospital delays and outcome in patients with ACS included in the Swiss National AMIS Plus registry were assessed prospectively before and after a nationwide multimedia campaign ('HELP') by the Swiss Heart Foundation in 2007. The campaign aimed at better awareness of symptoms, increasing knowledge in laymen of resuscitation and more rapid access to medical services. The primary study endpoint was the time between onset of symptoms and hospital admission. Secondary endpoints were successful out-of-hospital resuscitation, symptoms upon admission, and outcome. RESULTS: Between January 2005 and December 2008, 8906 ACS patients (61% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), 39% non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction/unstable angina pectoris (NSTEMI/UAP), mean age 65 ± 13 years, 75% males) admitted within 24 hours after onset of symptoms were enrolled. The median pre-hospital delay was reduced from 197 minutes during the pre-intervention period to 180 minutes during the post-intervention period (reduction 10% (95% confidence interval (CI) 6-14%); P < 0.001), in STEMI (reduction 10% (95% CI 5-14%); P < 0.001) and NSTEMI patients (reduction 11% (95% CI 4-17%); P = 0.001), due to pronounced effects in males (reduction 12% (95% CI 7-16%); P < 0.001) and in patients ≤75 years (reduction 12% (95% CI 8-16%); P < 0.001). Out-of-hospital resuscitation increased (odds ratio (OR) 1.26 (95% CI 1.06-1.54); P = 0.02). Overall outcome remained unchanged, however, the rate of re-infarction showed a decrease (OR 0.58 (95% CI 0.36-0.91); P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: After a nationwide educational campaign, shorter pre-hospital delays were observed, and more patients were able to be treated promptly. These results may be useful in planning future health strategies to improve management and outcome of patients with ACS, especially in female and elderly patients.

Significant decrease in in-hospital mortality and major adverse cardiac events in Swiss STEMI patients between 2000 and December 2007.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the in-hospital outcome of STEMI (ST elevation myocardial infarction) patients admitted to Swiss hospitals between 2000 and December 2007, and to identify the predictors of in-hospital mortality and major cardiac events. METHODS: Data from the Swiss national registry AMIS Plus (Acute Myocardial Infarction and Unstable Angina in Switzerland) were used. All patients admitted between January 2000 and December 2007 with STEMI or a new LBBB (left bundle branch block) were included in the registry. RESULT: We studied 12 026 STEMI patients admitted to 68 hospitals. The mean age was 64 +/- 13 years and 73% of the patients were male. Incidence of in-hospital death was 7.6% in 2000 and 6% in 2007. Reinfarction fell from 3.7% in 2000 to 0.9% in 2007. Thrombolysis decreased from 40.2% in 2000 to 2% in 2007. Clinical predictors of mortality were: age >65 years, Killips class III or IV, diabetes, Q wave myocardial infarction (at presentation). Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) had lower mortality and reinfarction rates (3.9% versus 11.2% and 1.1% versus 3.1% respectively, p <0.001) over time, although their numbers increased from 43% in 2000 to 85% in 2007. Patients admitted to hospitals with PCI facilities had lower mortality than patients hospitalised in hospitals without it, but the demographic characteristics differ widely between the two groups. Both in-hospital mortality and reinfarction decreased significantly over the time, parallel to an increased number of PCI. PCI was also the strongest predictor of survival. CONCLUSION: In-hospital mortality and reinfarction rate have decreased significantly in Swiss STEMI patients in the last seven years, parallel to a significant increase in the number of percutaneous coronary interventions in addition to medical therapy. Outcome is not related to the site of admission but to PCI access.

Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for large coronary vessel stenting? The BASKET-PROVE (PROspective Validation Examination) trial: study protocol and design.

BACKGROUND: Based on a subgroup analysis of 18-month BAsel Stent Kosten Effektivitäts Trial (BASKET) outcome data, we hypothesized that very late (> 12 months) stent thrombosis occurs predominantly after drug-eluting stent implantation in large native coronary vessel stenting. METHODS: To prove or refute this hypothesis, we set up an 11-center 4-country prospective trial of 2260 consecutive patients treated with > or = 3.0-mm stents only, randomized to receive Cypher (Johnson & Johnson, Miami Lakes, FL), Vision (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Laboratories, IL), or Xience stents (Abbott Vascular). Only patients with left main or bypass graft disease, in-stent restenosis or stent thrombosis, in need of nonheart surgery, at increased bleeding risk, without compliance/consent are excluded. All patients are treated with dual antiplatelet therapy for 12 months. The primary end point will be cardiac death/nonfatal myocardial infarction after 24 months with further follow-up up to 5 years. RESULTS: By June 12, 229 patients (10% of the planned total) were included with a baseline risk similar to that of the same subgroup of BASKET (n = 588). CONCLUSIONS: This study will answer several important questions of contemporary stent use in patients with large native vessel stenting. The 2-year death/myocardial infarction-as well as target vessel revascularization-and bleeding rates in these patients with a first- versus second-generation drug-eluting stent should demonstrate the benefit or harm of these stents compared to cobalt-chromium bare-metal stents in this relevant, low-risk group of everyday patients. In addition, a comparison with similar BASKET patients will allow to estimate the impact of 12- versus 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy on these outcomes.

Comparison of in-hospital mortality for acute myocardial infarction in Switzerland with admission during routine duty hours versus admission during out of hours (insight into the AMIS plus registry).

To improve long-term survival, prompt revascularization of the infarct-related artery should be done in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI); therefore, a large proportion of these patients would be hospitalized during out of hours. The clinical effects of out-of-hours AMI management were already questioned, with conflicting results. The purpose of this investigation was to compare the in-hospital outcome of patients admitted for AMI during out of hours and working hours. All patients with AMI included in the AMIS Plus Registry from January 1, 1997, to March 30, 2006, were analyzed. The working-hours group included patients admitted from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays, and the out-of-hours group included patients admitted from 7 p.m. to 7 a.m. on weekdays or weekends. Major cardiac events were defined as cardiovascular death, reinfarction, and stroke. The study primary end points were in-hospital death and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates. A total of 12,480 patients met the inclusion criteria, with 52% admitted during normal working hours, and 48%, during out of hours. Patients admitted during weekdays included more women (28.1% vs 26%; p = 0.009), older patients (65.5 +/- 13 vs 64.1 +/- 13 years; p = 0.0011), less current smokers (40.1% vs 43.5%; p <0.001), and less patients with a history of ischemic heart disease (31.5% vs 34.5%; p = 0.001). A significantly higher proportion of patients admitted during out of hours had Killip's class III and IV. No differences in terms of in-hospital survival rates between the 2 groups (91.5% vs 91.2%; p = 0.633) or MACE-free survival rates (both 88.5%; p = 1.000) were noted. In conclusion, the outcome of patients with AMI admitted out of hours was the same compared with those with a weekday admission. Of predictors for in-hospital outcome, timing of admission had no significant influence on mortality and/or MACE incidence.

Intravenous low-molecular-weight heparins compared with unfractionated heparin in percutaneous coronary intervention: quantitative review of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Despite its limitations, unfractionated heparin (UFH) is the recommended anticoagulant during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Few randomized trials have compared low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) and UFH, and most lacked the power to detect a difference between the 2 anticoagulants in terms of safety or efficacy. Our objective was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing the efficacy and safety of LMWH vs UFH as anticoagulants in the setting of PCI. METHODS: We used MEDLINE, randomized trials presented at major cardiology conferences, and journal article bibliographies from January 1998 and September 2006. Two reviewers independently identified randomized studies comparing the intravenous administration of LMWH vs UFH among patients undergoing PCI. Data on sample size, baseline characteristics, and outcomes of interest were independently extracted and analyzed. RESULTS: Thirteen trials including 7318 patients met the inclusion criteria. A total of 4201 patients (57.4%) received LMWH, and 3117 patients (42.6%) received UFH. Intravenous LMWH use was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of major bleeding compared with UFH (odds ratio [OR], 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.82; P = .002). A trend toward a reduction in minor bleeding was also observed among LMWH-treated patients (OR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.47-1.20; P = .24). Similar efficacy was observed between LMWH and UFH regarding the double end point of death or myocardial infarction (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.79-1.24; P = .93). There were no significant differences in death, myocardial infarction, and urgent revascularization between patients receiving LMWH and those receiving UFH. CONCLUSION: The use of intravenous LMWH during PCI is associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding events compared with UFH, without compromising outcomes on hard ischemic end points.

[The Old-Age Heart]. / Das Herz im Alter.

The Old-Age Heart Abstract. Knowledge of cardiovascular changes in old age and their therapeutic options is important. Old age can lead to hypertrophy of the left ventricle, diastolic dysfunction, heart valve changes and pulmonary hypertension. Patients often develop arterial hypertension. Valvular changes are common in people over 100 years of age (aortic stenosis and mitral insufficiency). The risk of coronary heart disease is 35 % for men and 24 % for women. In old age, sinus node dysfunction and atrial fibrillation are common. 25 % of all strokes are cardiac embolisms in atrial fibrillation. Cardiac interventions in the elderly are increasingly frequent and include coronary catheter revascularization or valve interventions (percutaneous aortic valve replacement or MitraClip). Optimal therapy in old age includes not only cardiovascular interventions also include drugs and a lifestyle modification and mainly serves to improve the quality of life.