P2Y12 Inhibitors Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing Complex vs Non-Complex Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Monotherapy with P2Y12 inhibitors (P2Y12i) is emerging as alternative strategy to dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, early withdrawal of aspirin as part of P2Y12i monotherapy regimens may pose concerns in high-risk patients, such as those undergoing complex PCI. Our aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of P2Y12i monotherapy after a short course of DAPT (1-3-month) compared with standard DAPT (≥12-month) according to PCI complexity. METHODS: We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials using random effects models to combine hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Within-trial interactions were pooled to estimate heterogeneity between complex and noncomplex PCI strata. The study protocol was registered in the PROSPERO (CRD42021291027). RESULTS: We identified 5 trials including 31,627 patients, of whom 8,328 (26.3%) underwent complex PCI. P2Y12i monotherapy compared with standard DAPT was associated with a similar risk of all-cause death, stent thrombosis, and stroke, with no evidence for interaction between complex and noncomplex PCI. We found heterogeneity in the treatment effect of P2Y12i monotherapy vs standard DAPT with respect to myocardial infarction (P-interaction = 0.027). Compared with standard DAPT, P2Y12i monotherapy decreased the risk of myocardial infarction in complex PCI (HR 0.77, 95%CI 0.60-0.99, P = .042), but not in noncomplex PCI patients (HR 1.09, 95%CI 0.90-1.30, P = .382). The risk of major bleeding was significantly reduced by P2Y12i monotherapy with a consistent treatment effect (P-interaction = 0.699) in both complex and noncomplex PCI strata. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing complex PCI may derive more benefit and less harm from P2Y12i monotherapy after early aspirin withdrawal compared with standard DAPT.

Rationale and design of the PARTHENOPE trial: A two-by-two factorial comparison of polymer-free vs biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents and personalized vs standard duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in all-comers undergoing PCI.

BACKGROUND: Over the past few decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has undergone significant advancements as a result of the combination of device-based and drug-based therapies. These iterations have led to the development of polymer-free drug-eluting stents. However, there is a scarcity of data regarding their clinical performance. Furthermore, while various risk scores have been proposed to determine the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), none of them have undergone prospective validation within the context of randomized trials. DESIGN: The PARTHENOPE trial is a phase IV, prospective, randomized, multicenter, investigator-initiated, assessor-blind study being conducted at 14 centers in Italy (NCT04135989). It includes 2,107 all-comers patients with minimal exclusion criteria, randomly assigned in a 2-by-2 design to receive either the Cre8 amphilimus-eluting stent or the SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stent, along with either a personalized or standard duration of DAPT. Personalized DAPT duration is determined by the DAPT score, which accounts for both bleeding and ischemic risks. Patients with a DAPT score <2 (indicating higher bleeding than ischemic risk) receive DAPT for 3 or 6 months for chronic or acute coronary syndrome, respectively, while patients with a DAPT score ≥2 (indicating higher ischemic than bleeding risk) receive DAPT for 24 months. Patients in the standard DAPT group receive DAPT for 12 months. The trial aims to establish the noninferiority between stents with respect to a device-oriented composite end point of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization at 12 months after PCI. Additionally, the trial aims to demonstrate the superiority of personalized DAPT compared to a standard approach with respect to a net clinical composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, stroke, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or type 2 to 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 24-months after PCI. SUMMARY: The PARTHENOPE trial is the largest randomized trial investigating the efficacy and safety of a polymer-free DES with a reservoir technology for drug-release and the first trial evaluating a personalized duration of DAPT based on the DAPT score. The study results will provide novel insights into the optimizing the use of drug-eluting stents and DAPT in patients undergoing PCI.

Clinical and procedural outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for de novo lesions involving the ostial left circumflex coronary artery.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous treatment for ostial left circumflex artery (LCx) lesions is known to be associated with suboptimal results. AIMS: The present study aims to assess the procedural and long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for de novo ostial LCx lesions overall and according to the coronary revascularization strategy. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing PCI with second generation drug eluting stents or drug coated balloons for de novo ostial LCx lesions in three high-volume Italian centers between 2012 and 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was target-vessel revascularization (TVR) at 2 years. Secondary endpoints included major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), target lesion revascularization, myocardial infarction, stroke, all-cause death, and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients were included in the analysis with a median follow-up of 901 (IQR: 450-1728) days. 79.5% of the patients were male, 33.6% were diabetic, 49.7% had a previous PCI, and 23.1% a prior surgical revascularization. Very ostial LCx stenting was performed in 34.1%, crossover from left main to LCx in 17.3%, and a two-stent strategy in 48.6% of cases, respectively. In the overall population, the incidence of TVR at 2 years was 19.0% while MACCE rate was 25.7%. No major differences in clinical outcomes were found according to the stenting strategy. Use of intracoronary imaging was associated with fewer MACCE (HR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.25-1.13, p = 0.01), while the diameter of the stent implanted in the ostial LCx was associated with less TVR (HR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.25-0.75, p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Percutaneous revascularization of the ostial LCx is associated with a high rate of TVR, regardless of the stenting strategy. Intracoronary imaging and proper stent sizing may reduce the failure rates.

Long-term prognostic impact of subclinical myocardial dysfunction in patients recovered from COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular sequelae may occur in patients recovered from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Recent studies have detected a considerable incidence of subclinical myocardial dysfunction-assessed with speckle-tracking echocardiography-and of long-COVID symptoms in these patients. This study aimed to define the long-term prognostic role of subclinical myocardial dysfunction and long-COVID condition in patients recovered from COVID-19 pneumonia. METHODS: We prospectively followed up 110 patients hospitalized at our institution due to COVID-19 pneumonia in April 2020 and then recovered from SARS-CoV-2 infection. A 7-month clinical and echocardiographic evaluation was performed, followed by a 21-month clinical follow-up. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure hospitalization, and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A subclinical myocardial dysfunction-defined as an impairment of left ventricular global longitudinal strain (≥-18%)-was identified at a 7-month follow-up in 37 patients (34%), was associated with an increased risk of long-term MACE with a good discriminative power (area under the curve: .73) and resulted in a strong independent predictor of extended MACE in multivariate regression analyses. Long-COVID condition was not associated with a worse long-term prognosis, instead. CONCLUSIONS: In patients recovered from COVID-19 pneumonia, a subclinical myocardial dysfunction is present in one-third of the whole population at 7-month follow-up and is associated with a higher risk of MACE at long-term follow-up. Speckle-tracking echocardiography is a promising tool to optimize the risk-stratification in patients recovered from COVID-19 pneumonia, while the definition of a long-COVID condition has no prognostic relevance.

Left atrial appendage closure with the II generation Ultraseal device: An international registry. The LIGATE study.

OBJECTIVES: To assess feasibility and safety of second-generation left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) Ultraseal device in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). BACKGROUND: LAAC with first-generation Ultraseal device (Cardia, Eagan, Minnesota) has been shown to be a feasible therapeutic option in patients with NVAF. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the novel second-generation Ultraseal device. METHODS: All patients with NVAF undergoing second-generation Ultraseal device implantation between February 2018 and September 2020 were included in a multicenter international registry. Periprocedural and post-discharge events were collected through 6-month follow-up. Co-primary efficacy endpoints were device success and technical success while primary safety endpoint was in-hospital major adverse event (MAE) occurrence. RESULTS: A total of 52 patients were included: mean age 75 ± 8, 30.8% women, mean HAS-BLED 3 ± 1. The device was successfully implanted in all patients. Technical success was achieved in 50 patients (96.1%). In-hospital MAEs occurred in three patients (5.8%). The incidence of 6-month all-cause death and major bleeding was 11.6% and 2.1%, respectively. No strokes, transient ischemic attacks, systemic embolisms, or device embolization were reported after discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation Ultraseal device implantation was associated with high success rates and a low incidence of peri-procedural complications. Larger studies with longer follow-up are warranted to further evaluate the safety and the efficacy of this device, especially at long-term follow-up.

Biochemical Efficacy of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors by Cardiovascular Risk Profile and Volume Status in a Real-World Diabetic Population.

ABSTRACT: Despite large-scale randomized clinical trials (RCTs) highlighting a consistent prognostic benefit of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) both in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk and in those with heart failure, there is relative paucity of data on their biochemical effects in a real-world setting. We performed a retrospective analysis on consecutive diabetic patients who were prescribed a SGLT2i in a tertiary referral center and completed at least 1 year of treatment. Changes in glycated hemoglobin, weight, and hematocrit were compared across 2 cardiovascular risk categories, defined through the inclusion criteria of 3 large RCTs. Of the 459 patients screened, 312 completed 1 year of treatment (68.0%), 92 interrupted the treatment prematurely (20.0%), and 55 were lost to follow-up (12.0%). The most common cause of drug discontinuation was genital or urinary tract infections (9.4%). At 1 year, reduction in glycated hemoglobin concentration (-0.7 ± 1.5%, P < 0.001) and body weight (2.4 ± 4.6 kg, P < 0.001) was comparable between patients at high versus low cardiovascular risk, while hematocrit increase (2.3 ± 3.3%, P < 0.001) was more marked in patients with high cardiovascular risk and low baseline hematocrit. In a real-world population of diabetic patients, SGLT2is were well-tolerated at 1 year and led to improved glycemic control and weight loss. Hematocrit increase was more consistent in patients with high cardiovascular risk and signs of fluid overload, indicating euvolemic restoration as a potential cardioprotective mechanism mediated by these compounds.

Left Ventricular Thrombus Management After Acute Myocardial Infarction in Clinical Practice: Results from LEVITATION Survey and Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: Left ventricular thrombus (LVT) after ST-elevation myocardial infarction still presents diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. The LEVITATION survey was designed to take a picture of LVT management in current clinical practice. METHODS: The survey covered diagnostic, therapeutic, and prophylactic issues and was completed by 104 European cardiac centers. Most of them (59%) were university or tertiary centers. RESULTS: The survey showed anterior apical a-/dyskinesia, large MI, spontaneous echo-contrast, late presentation with delayed PCI, and TIMI flow 0-1 as the most important perceived risk factors for LVT formation. Serial ultrasound imaging is the most used tool to diagnose LVT (88% of the centers), with contrast-enhanced ultrasound and cardiac MR performed in case of poor apex visualization or spontaneous echo-contrast. One third (34%) of the centers uses prophylactic anticoagulation to prevent LVT formation. In the presence of LVT, low molecular weight heparin is the most used in-hospital therapy. At discharge, vitamin K antagonist and direct oral anticoagulants are used in 67 and 32% of the cases, respectively. Triple antithrombotic therapy with aspirin plus clopidogrel and VKA is the most used strategy at discharge (55%), whereas a single antiplatelet therapy is preferred only in the case of moderate-to-high risk of bleeding. To assess LVT total regression, half of the centers use contrast-enhanced ultrasound and/or cardiac-MR. The duration of anticoagulation is usually 3-6 months (55%), with long-term prolongation in case of LVT persistence or recurrence. CONCLUSION: The survey has depicted for the first time the current real-world management of this neglected topic and has highlighted several grey zones that are still present and not supported by evidence.

Ticagrelor monotherapy in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: TWILIGHT-CKD.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: In this prespecified subanalysis of the TWILIGHT trial, we evaluated the treatment effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin according to renal function. The trial enrolled patients undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation who fulfilled at least one clinical and one angiographic high-risk criterion. Chronic kidney disease, defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, was a clinical study entry criterion. Following a 3-month period of ticagrelor plus aspirin, event-free patients were randomly assigned to aspirin or placebo on top of ticagrelor for an additional 12 months. Of the 6835 patients randomized and with available eGFR at baseline, 1111 (16.3%) had CKD. Ticagrelor plus placebo reduced the primary endpoint of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin in both patients with [4.6% vs. 9.0%; hazard ratio (HR) 0.50, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.80] and without (4.0% vs. 6.7%; HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47-0.75; Pinteraction = 0.508) CKD, but the absolute risk reduction was greater in the former group. Rates of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were not significantly different between the two randomized groups irrespective of the presence (7.9% vs. 5.7%; HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.88-2.22) or absence of (3.2% vs. 3.6%; HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68-1.20; Pinteraction = 0.111) CKD. CONCLUSION: Among CKD patients undergoing PCI, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced the risk of bleeding without a significant increase in ischaemic events as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.

Monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor or aspirin for secondary prevention in patients with established atherosclerosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy is recommended among patients with established atherosclerosis. We compared monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor versus aspirin for secondary prevention. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, all randomised trials comparing P2Y12 inhibitor with aspirin monotherapy for secondary prevention in patients with cerebrovascular, coronary, or peripheral artery disease were evaluated for inclusion. On Dec 18, 2019, we searched PubMed, Embase, BioMedCentral, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Additionally, we reviewed references from identified articles and searched abstracts from 2017 to 2019 presented at relevant scientific meetings. Data about year of publication, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample size, baseline patients' features including the baseline condition determining study inclusion (ie, cerebrovascular, coronary, or peripheral artery disease), P2Y12 inhibitor type and dosage, aspirin dosage, endpoint definitions, effect estimates, follow-up duration, and percentage of patients lost to follow-up were collected. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were used as metric of choice for treatment effects with random-effects models. Co-primary endpoints were myocardial infarction and stroke. Key secondary endpoints were all-cause death and vascular death. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I2 index. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018115037). FINDINGS: A total of nine randomised trials were identified and included in this study, and 42 108 patients randomly allocated to a P2Y12 inhibitor (n=21 043) or aspirin (n=21 065) were included in our analyses. Patients who received a P2Y12 inhibitor had a borderline reduction for the risk of myocardial infarction compared with those who received aspirin (OR 0·81 [95% CI 0·66-0·99]; I2=10·9%). Risks of stroke (OR 0·93 [0·82-1·06]; I2=34·5%), all-cause death (OR 0·98 [0·89-1·08]; I2=0%), and vascular death (OR 0·97 [0·86-1·09]; I2=0%) did not differ between patients who received a P2Y12 inhibitor and those who received aspirin. Similarly, the risk of major bleeding (OR 0·90 [0·74-1·10]; I2=3·9%) did not differ between patients who received a P2Y12 inhibitor and those who received aspirin. The number needed to treat to prevent one myocardial infarction with P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy was 244 patients. Findings were consistent regardless of the type of P2Y12 inhibitor used. INTERPRETATION: Compared with aspirin monotherapy, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy is associated with a risk reduction for myocardial infarction and a comparable risk of stroke in the setting of secondary prevention. The benefit of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy is of debatable clinical relevance, in view of the high number needed to treat to prevent a myocardial infarction and the absence of any effect on all-cause and vascular mortality. FUNDING: Italian Ministry of Education.

Etiology, epidemiology, pathophysiology and management of tricuspid regurgitation: an overview.

Significant tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is a common finding, affecting about one in twenty-five subjects among the elderly and presenting more frequently in women than in men. This review summarizes data concerning etiology, epidemiology, pathophysiology and management strategies of TR. The tricuspid valve (TV) has a broad anatomical variability. Classically, TR has been distinguished as primary and secondary or functional TR (FTR), with the latter being the most prevalent. FTR is a multifactorial disorder, resulting from maladaptive right ventricular remodeling secondary to pulmonary hypertension or from atrial fibrillation leading to dilation of the right atrium, tricuspid annulus and base of the right ventricle, with pathological TV coaptation. Thus two main types of FTR can be identified: pulmonary hypertension-FTR and idiopathic-FTR, depending on which factor, ventricular or atrial respectively, is the primum movens of the disease. Appreciable evidence suggests that significant TR leads to worsening prognosis regardless of the underlying etiology and should be addressed as a separate therapeutic target. The treatment of TR in patients undergoing left-sided cardiac surgery is well established. Isolated surgical repair of TR is instead rarely performed because patients are often deemed inoperable due to prohibitive risk. Besides, perioperative mortality remains higher than for any other valve. Several transcatheter TV replacement and repair systems, the latter mostly borrowed from percutaneous treatment systems of mitral regurgitation or from TV repair surgical techniques, have shown efficacy and safety when used on the TV. These could provide an effective treatment option for patients not eligible for surgery.

Drug-Coated balloons vs drug-eluting stents for the treatment of small coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence about the effects of drug-coated balloons (DCB) compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with native small vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and main international conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing DCB versus DES in patients with native small vessel CAD. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was target vessel revascularization (TVR). Secondary clinical endpoints were: myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis or target vessel thrombosis. Secondary angiographic outcomes were: in-segment restenosis, in-segment percentage-diameter stenosis, in-segment late lumen loss, in-segment net luminal gain, and in-segment minimal lumen diameter. RESULTS: Five trials enrolling 1,459 patients were included. Mean clinical follow-up was 10.2 months. The use of DCB, compared with DES, was associated with similar risk of TVR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1.68; p = .92), TLR (OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 0.57 to 5.28; p = .33), all-cause death (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.14 to 7.48; p = .98), with a trend toward a lower risk of MI (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.03; p = .06), and with significant lower risk of vessel thrombosis (OR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.94; p = .04). DCB use was associated with similar risk of angiographic restenosis (OR: 1.12; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.84; p = .64), comparable late luminal loss (standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.18; 95% CI: -0.39 to 0.03; p = .09), while leading to significant higher percentage diameter stenosis (SMD: 0.27; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.41; p < .01) and smaller minimal luminal diameter (SMD: -0.52; 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.18; p = .003). CONCLUSION: Compared with DES, the use of DCB for the treatment of native small vessel CAD is associated with similar TVR and restenosis and reduces the risk of vessel thrombosis, although DES implantation yields slightly better angiographic surrogate endpoints.

Radial versus femoral access for coronary interventions: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVE: It is still debated if benefits associated with radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) are due to the access site selection itself, operator expertise or other underlying mechanisms. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, and meeting abstracts for randomized trials comparing radial versus femoral access site for coronary angiography and PCI. Primary safety endpoint was major bleeding. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were stroke and myocardial infarction (MI). This study is registered with PROSPERO. RESULTS: We identified 31 trials (30,096 patients, PCI performed in 21,225 patients). Radial compared to femoral access was associated with a significant risk reduction in major bleeding (OR 0.53, 95%CI 0.42-0.66, I2  = 3.3%). Findings were consistent regardless of clinical characteristics or whether coronary angiography was performed with or without PCI. The benefit of radial access was significantly increased in studies published before 2010 and in patients with chronic coronary syndrome. Risk for stroke (OR 1.11, 95%CI 0.76-1.64, I2  = 0%) and MI (OR 0.90, 95%CI 0.79-1.04, I2  = 0%) were comparable between the groups. Risk for mortality and vascular complications were significantly lower with radial than femoral access. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing coronary angiography and PCI, radial access is associated with a significant risk reduction in bleeding, vascular complications, and mortality compared to femoral access. The risk of stroke or MI were comparable in patients with radial or femoral access.

Italian Multicenter Registry of Bare Metal Stent Use in Modern Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Era (AMARCORD): A multicenter observational study.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the use of bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era, focusing on indications for use and clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND: Limited data on BMS usage in current clinical practice are available. METHODS: All patients who underwent PCI with at least one BMS implantation in 18 Italian centers from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017, were included in our registry. Rates of BMS use and reasons for BMS implantations were reported for the overall study period and for each year. Primary outcomes were mortality, bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-BARC and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-TIMI non-CABG definitions), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause and cardiac death, any myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or any stent thrombosis. RESULTS: Among 58,879 patients undergoing PCI in the study period, 2,117 (3.6%) patients (mean age 73 years, 69.7% males, 73.3% acute coronary syndrome) were treated with BMS implantation (2,353 treated lesions). The rate of BMS implantation progressively decreased from 10.1% (2013) to 0.3% (2017). Main reasons for BMS implantation were: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (23.1%), advanced age (24.4%), and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk (34.0%). At a mean follow-up of 2.2 ± 1.5 years, all-cause and cardiac mortality were 25.6 and 12.7%, respectively; MACE rate was 35.3%, any bleeding rate was 13.0% (BARC 3-5 bleeding 6.3%, TIMI non-CABG major bleeding 6.1%). CONCLUSION: In a large, contemporary, real-world, multicenter registry, BMS use progressively reduced over the last 5 years. Main reasons for BMS implantation were STEMI, advanced age, and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk. High rates of mortality and MACE were observed in this real-world high-risk population.

EAPCI Position Statement on Invasive Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic poses an unprecedented challenge to healthcare worldwide. The infection can be life threatening and require intensive care treatment. The transmission of the disease poses a risk to both patients and healthcare workers. The number of patients requiring hospital admission and intensive care may overwhelm health systems and negatively affect standard care for patients presenting with conditions needing emergency interventions. This position statements aims to assist cardiologists in the invasive management of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. To that end, we assembled a panel of interventional cardiologists and acute cardiac care specialists appointed by the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) and from the Acute Cardiovascular Care Association (ACVC) and included the experience from the first and worst affected areas in Europe. Modified diagnostic and treatment algorithms are proposed to adapt evidence-based protocols for this unprecedented challenge. Various clinical scenarios, as well as management algorithms for patients with a diagnosed or suspected COVID-19 infection, presenting with ST- and non-ST-segment elevation ACS are described. In addition, we address the need for re-organization of ACS networks, with redistribution of hub and spoke hospitals, as well as for in-hospital reorganization of emergency rooms and cardiac units, with examples coming from multiple European countries. Furthermore, we provide a guidance to reorganization of catheterization laboratories and, importantly, measures for protection of healthcare providers involved with invasive procedures.

Myocardial ischemia and coronary disease in heart failure.

Heart failure is a complex clinical syndrome and represents the final path of numerous heart diseases. Coronary artery disease is recognized as the primary risk factor for heart failure development, being the main etiological factor in more than 50% of heart failure patients in North America and Europe. Regardless of overt coronary artery disease, myocardial ischemia is a common finding in failing hearts, likely due to structural or functional coronary circulation alterations. Ischemia is a self-propagating process which irreversibly impairs the cardiac function and negatively impacts prognosis. Thus, a better and thorough understanding of myocardial ischemia pathophysiology in heart failure would likely lead to significantly improved outcomes in these patients. This review aims to describe the mechanisms of myocardial ischemia and coronary artery disease in heart failure, focusing on coronary circulation dysfunctions due to increased parietal stress or non-obstructive coronary disease, and discussing the association and management of coronary artery disease in patients with heart failure.

Common cardiovascular risk factors and in-hospital mortality in 3,894 patients with COVID-19: survival analysis and machine learning-based findings from the multicentre Italian CORIST Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: There is poor knowledge on characteristics, comorbidities and laboratory measures associated with risk for adverse outcomes and in-hospital mortality in European Countries. We aimed at identifying baseline characteristics predisposing COVID-19 patients to in-hospital death. METHODS AND RESULTS: Retrospective observational study on 3894 patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection hospitalized from February 19th to May 23rd, 2020 and recruited in 30 clinical centres distributed throughout Italy. Machine learning (random forest)-based and Cox survival analysis. 61.7% of participants were men (median age 67 years), followed up for a median of 13 days. In-hospital mortality exhibited a geographical gradient, Northern Italian regions featuring more than twofold higher death rates as compared to Central/Southern areas (15.6% vs 6.4%, respectively). Machine learning analysis revealed that the most important features in death classification were impaired renal function, elevated C reactive protein and advanced age. These findings were confirmed by multivariable Cox survival analysis (hazard ratio (HR): 8.2; 95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6-14.7 for age ≥85 vs 18-44 y); HR = 4.7; 2.9-7.7 for estimated glomerular filtration rate levels <15 vs ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m2; HR = 2.3; 1.5-3.6 for C-reactive protein levels ≥10 vs ≤ 3 mg/L). No relation was found with obesity, tobacco use, cardiovascular disease and related-comorbidities. The associations between these variables and mortality were substantially homogenous across all sub-groups analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Impaired renal function, elevated C-reactive protein and advanced age were major predictors of in-hospital death in a large cohort of unselected patients with COVID-19, admitted to 30 different clinical centres all over Italy.

Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention: executive summary.

A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device-the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold-has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.

Clinical outcomes with reservoir-based polymer-free amphilimus-eluting stents in real-world patients according to diabetes mellitus and complexity: The INVESTIG8 registry.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remain at higher risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention despite the use of contemporary drug-eluting stents. The Cre8 amphilimus-eluting stent (AES) has shown promising results in DM patients. Whether this holds true irrespective of patient's clinical and angiographic complexity is unknown. METHODS: Five hundred and ninety five consecutive patients (738 lesions) undergoing AES implantation were included in the INVESTIG8 multicenter registry. Patients were stratified according to DM status and further stratified according to patients' complexity. The prespecified primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF)-defined as the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: DM patients were more often complex as compared to non-DM patients (70% vs. 61%, P = 0.015). At 18-month follow-up, there was a trend to a higher TLF rate in DM than in non-DM patients (6.9% vs. 3.5%, P = 0.063). This was largely driven by a markedly higher risk of TLF among complex DM patients as compared to simple DM patients (8.9% vs. 2.4%, P = 0.053). A multivariate analysis identified complexity (HR 6.11, 95% CI: 1.42-26.2) but not DM (HR 1.59; 95% CI 0.71-3.56) as an independent predictor of TLF. Of note, TLR rates were similar between DM and non-DM patients (3.3% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.228). CONCLUSIONS: In this real-world, multicenter registry the Cre8 AES showed favorable clinical outcomes in DM patients. Increased risk of TLF appears to be driven by patients' complexity rather than DM status. These findings will need to be confirmed in a large-scale randomized trial.

Left atrial appendage closure with the Ultraseal device: Initial experience and mid-term follow-up.

AIMS: Left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is considered an effective option in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and contraindications to long-term oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy. However, there are some concerns about safety of currently available devices. Our aim is to provide an initial assessment on feasibility and safety of the novel LAA closure Ultraseal device in patients with NVAF and contraindications to long-term OAC therapy. METHODS: Twenty-three consecutive patients with NVAF undergoing Ultraseal device implantation between July 2016 and February 2018 at two institutions were included. All patients performed transesophageal echocardiography and computed tomography angiography prior to LAA closure. RESULTS: Procedural success was achieved in all patients except two who experienced incorrect device deployment with incomplete LAA closure. Procedure duration halved from first to last procedure performed. The only periprocedural adverse events observed were a myocardial infarction and an in-hospital death due pneumonia. At mean follow-up (166 ± 80 days) all other patients were alive and free from major bleedings and ischaemic strokes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that the Ultraseal device is a feasible option for LAA occlusion. Notably, the learning curve in this registry was fast, paralleled by extremely low complication rates. These results should be considered hypothesis generating and larger studies are mandatory.