Outcomes Related to Antiplatelet Therapy in a High-Risk ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Population: A Retrospective Real-World Analysis of an Italian ECMO Center.

AIM: To evaluate outcomes related to antiplatelet therapy in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) admitted to the San Gerardo Hospital in Monza, an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) reference center in the Monza-Brianza area. METHODS: This retrospective study enrolled patients with STEMI hospitalized between 2013 and 2017. RESULTS: This study included 653 patients (mean age: 67.5 years, 71% male). Across the study period, ticagrelor use showed consistent increases, from 22% of patients during 2013 to 85% in 2017. Cardiac arrest prehospitalization occurred in 100 patients (15.3%), either at home (n = 85, 13.0%) or during transfer (n = 15, 2.3%); 46 patients underwent ECMO for refractory cardiac arrest. Rates of 90-day survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-4.4, P = .004) and ST resolution (odds ratio [OR]: 2.5, 95% CI: 1.6-4.1, P = .000) were higher with ticagrelor than with other antiplatelet agents. When analyzed by each agent, patients on ticagrelor had longer survival (HR: 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2-0.8, P = .008) than patients on clopidogrel and more frequent ST resolution than those on clopidogrel or prasugrel (OR: 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2-0.7, P = .002 and OR: 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2-0.7, P = .006). There was no difference in mortality between ticagrelor and prasugrel. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in the treatment of high-risk patients with STEMI over time are in line with changes in treatment guidelines. In these patients, ticagrelor is associated with significantly improved 90-day mortality compared with clopidogrel.

The paradox of clopidogrel use in patients with acute coronary syndromes and diabetes: insight from the Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome Registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and acute coronary syndromes have a greater level of platelet aggregation and a poor response to oral antiplatelet drugs. Clopidogrel is still widely used in clinical practice, despite the current evidence favoring ticagrelor and prasugrel. AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the determinants of clopidogrel use in the population of the multicenter prospective 'Acute Coronary Syndrome and Diabetes Registry' carried out during a 9-week period between March and May 2015 at 29 Hospitals. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 559 consecutive acute coronary syndrome patients [mean age: 68.7±11.3 years, 50% ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)], with 'known DM' (56%) or 'hyperglycemia' at admission, were included in the registry; 460 (85%) patients received a myocardial revascularization. RESULTS: At hospital discharge, dual antiplatelet therapy was prescribed to 88% of the patients (clopidogrel ticagrelor and prasugrel to 39, 38, and 23%, respectively). Differences in P2Y12 inhibitor administration were recorded on the basis of history of diabetes, age, and clinical presentation (unstable angina/non-STEMI vs. non-STEMI). On univariate analysis, age older than 75 years or more, known DM, peripheral artery disease, previous myocardial infarction, previous revascularization, complete revascularization, previous cerebrovascular event, creatinine clearance, unstable angina/non-STEMI at presentation, Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events Score, EuroSCORE, CRUSADE Bleeding Score, and oral anticoagulant therapy were significantly associated with clopidogrel choice at discharge. On multivariate analysis, only oral anticoagulant therapy and the CRUSADE Bleeding Score remained independent predictors of clopidogrel prescription. CONCLUSION: In the present registry of a high-risk population, clopidogrel was the most used P2Y12 inhibitor at hospital discharge, confirming the 'paradox' to treat sicker patients with the less effective drug. Diabetic status, a marker of higher thrombotic risk, did not influence this choice; however, bleeding risk was taken into account.

APpropriAteness of percutaneous Coronary interventions in patients with ischaemic HEart disease in Italy: the APACHE pilot study.

OBJECTIVES: To first explore in Italy appropriateness of indication, adherence to guideline recommendations and mode of selection for coronary revascularisation. DESIGN: Retrospective, pilot study. SETTING: 22 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-performing hospitals (20 patients per site), 13 (59%) with on-site cardiac surgery. PARTICIPANTS: 440 patients who received PCI for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome were independently selected in a 4:1 ratio with half diabetics. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients who received appropriate PCI using validated appropriate use scores (ie, AUS≥7). Also, in patients with stable CAD, we examined adherence to the following European Society of Cardiology recommendations: (A) per cent of patients with complex coronary anatomy treated after heart team discussion; (B) per cent of fractional flow reserve-guided PCI for borderline stenoses in patients without documented ischaemia; (C) per cent of patients receiving guideline-directed medical therapy at the time of PCI as well as use of provocative test of ischaemia according to pretest probability (PTP) of CAD. RESULTS: Of the 401 mappable PCIs (91%), 38.7% (95% CI 33.9 to 43.6) were classified as appropriate, 47.6% (95% CI 42.7 to 52.6) as uncertain and 13.7% (95% CI 10.5% to 17.5%) as inappropriate. Median PTP in patients with stable CAD without known coronary anatomy was 69% (78% intermediate PTP, 22% high PTP). Ischaemia testing use was similar (p=0.71) in patients with intermediate (n=140, 63%) and with high PTP (n=40, 66%). In patients with stable CAD (n=352) guideline adherence to the three recommendations explored was: (A) 11%; (B) 25%; (C) 23%. AUS was higher in patients evaluated by the heart team as compared with patients who were not (7 (6.8) vs 5 (4.7); p=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Use of heart team approaches and adherence to guideline recommendations on coronary revascularisation in a real-world setting is limited. This pilot study documents the feasibility of measuring appropriateness and guideline adherence in clinical practice and identifies substantial opportunities for quality improvement. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02748603.

G-CSF treatment for STEMI: final 3-year follow-up of the randomised placebo-controlled STEM-AMI trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) treatment induces a sustained benefit on adverse remodelling in patients with large anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and left ventricular (LV) dysfunction after successful reperfusion. METHODS: The STEM-AMI Trial was a prospective, placebo-controlled, multicentre study. Sixty consecutive patients with a first anterior STEMI, who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention 2-12 h after symptom onset, with LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤45% measured by echocardiography within 12 h after successful revascularisation (TIMI flow score ≥2), were randomised 1:1 to G-CSF (5 µg/Kg body weight b.i.d.) or placebo. Clinical events and Major Adverse Cardiac and Cerebrovascular Event (MACCE) were monitored, and LVEF, LV end-diastolic (LVEDV) and end-systolic (LVESV) volumes, and infarct size were evaluated by MRI at the final 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients completed the study, of whom 35 with MRI. No significant differences were found in mortality and MACCE between G-CSF and placebo-treated groups. The 3-year infarct size was not different between groups, whereas LVEDV was significantly lower in G-CSF (n=20) than in placebo (n=15) patients (170.1±8.1 vs 197.2±8.9 mL, respectively; p=0.033 at analysis of covariance). A significant inverse correlation was detected in G-CSF patients between the number of circulating CD34 cells at 30 days after reperfusion and the 3-year absolute and indexed LVEDV (ρ=-0.71, 95% CI -0.90 to -0.30, and ρ=-0.62, -0.86 to -0.14, respectively), or their change over time (r=-0.59, -0.85 to -0.11, and r=-0.55, -0.83 to -0.06, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: G-CSF therapy may be beneficial in attenuating ventricular remodelling subsequent to a large anterior STEMI in the long term. No differences have been detected in clinical outcome.

Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor attenuates left ventricular remodelling after acute anterior STEMI: results of the single-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled multicentre STem cEll Mobilization in Acute Myocardial Infarction (STEM-AMI) Trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the effect of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on left ventricular (LV) function and volumes in patients with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and depressed LV ejection fraction (EF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty consecutive patients with anterior STEMI, undergoing primary angioplasty percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with symptom-to-reperfusion time of 2-12 h and EF ≤45% after PCI, were randomized to G-CSF 5 µg/kg b.i.d. subcutaneously (n = 24) or placebo (n = 25) for 5 days, starting <12 h after PCI. The primary endpoint was an increase from baseline to 6 months of 5% in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), as measured by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Co-primary endpoint was a ≥20 mL difference in end-diastolic volume (EDV). Infarct size and perfusion were evaluated with late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) and gated (99m)Technetium Sestamibi single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Left ventricular EDV and end-systolic volume (ESV) increased from baseline to 6 months in the placebo group (81.7 ± 24.4 to 94.4 ± 26.0 mL/m(2), P < 0.00005 and 45.2 ± 20.0 to 53.2 ± 23.8 mL/m(2), P = 0.016) but were unchanged in the G-CSF group (82.2 ± 20.3 to 85.7 ± 23.7 mL/m(2), P = 0.40 and 46.0 ± 18.2 to 48.4 ± 20.8 mL/m(2), P = 0.338). There were no significant differences in EF or perfusion between groups. A significant reduction in transmural LGE segments was seen at 6 months in the G-CSF vs. placebo groups (4.38 ± 2.9 to 3.3 ± 2.6, P = 0.04 and 4.2 ± 2.6 to 3.6 ± 2.7, P = 0.301, respectively). Significantly more placebo patients had a change in left ventricular end-diastolic volume abovethe median (9.3 mL/m(2)) when reperfusion time exceeded 180 min (median time-to-reperfusion) (P = 0.0123). Severe adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSION: Early G-CSF administration attenuates ventricular remodelling in patients with anterior STEMI and EF ≤45% after successful PCI.

Diagnostic evaluation of people with hypertension in low income country: cohort study of "essential" method of risk stratification.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the predictive power of a risk stratification method for people with hypertension based on "essential" procedures (that is, available in economically less developed areas of the world), comparing it in the same population with the results given by the method suggested by the 1999 World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension (WHO-ISH) guidelines. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study of outcomes according to cardiovascular risk profile at baseline. SETTING: Primary care in a poor rural area of the Ecuadorian forest. PARTICIPANTS: 504 people with hypertension prospectively monitored for a mean of 6.7 (SD 2.3) years. INTERVENTIONS: Essential data included blood pressure, medical history, smoking, age, sex, and diagnosis of diabetes; the WHO-ISH methods additionally included measurement of fasting blood glucose, total cholesterol, and creatinine, urinalysis, and electrocardiography. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cardiovascular events and total deaths. RESULTS: With both methods there was a highly significant association between the level of predicted risk and the incidence of cardiovascular events and of total deaths: up to three quarters of all cardiovascular events and two thirds of all deaths were reported among people classified as at high or very high risk with either method. The predictive discrimination of the essential method is comparable with the WHO-ISH with C statistics (95% confidence interval) of 0.788 (0.721 to 0.855) and 0.744 (0.673 to 0.815), respectively, for cardiovascular events and 0.747 (0.678 to 0.816) and 0.705 (0.632 to 0.778) for total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The risk stratification of patients with hypertension with an essential package of variables (that is, available and practicable even in the economically less developed areas of the world) serves at least as well as the more comprehensive method proposed by WHO-ISH.

Overall cardiovascular risk still ignored in general practice care of hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension have emphasized the importance of total cardiovascular risk for setting the blood pressure (BP) goal to be achieved and the intensity with which it should be pursued. DESIGN: To assess the degree of BP control in hypertensives receiving long-term antihypertensive treatment according to the presence of major cardiovascular risk factors or diseases and the level of individual total cardiovascular risk, a large sample of general practitioners throughout Italy had to evaluate a random sample of their hypertensive patients. METHODS: A clinical history was collected for each patient and BP was measured three times using a reliable automatic instrument. To stratify the cardiovascular risk we used the criteria suggested by the 1999 WHO-ISH guidelines. RESULTS: Among the 1204 patients recruited (mean age 64.2 +/- 11.4 years, 663 females), only 399 patients (33.1%) had a BP lower than 140/90 mmHg. Except for male sex and previous myocardial infarction, the concomitant presence of major cardiovascular risk factors or diseases was never associated to a better control of hypertension. BP control was unrelated to individual overall cardiovascular risk: BP was < 140/90 mmHg respectively in 44.0, 37.7, 33.5 and 42.1% (P for trend = 0.54) of people aged less than 65 years with low, medium, high and very high risk and in 27.7, 25.9 and 27.1% (P for trend = 0.91) of people aged more than 65 years at medium, high and very high risk. CONCLUSIONS: BP control in Italian hypertensives is still unsatisfactory, even in patients at high and very high cardiovascular risk.