Optical coherence tomography, intravascular ultrasound or angiography guidance for distal left main coronary stenting. The ROCK cohort II study.

OBJECTIVES: to test the safety and efficacy of intravascular imaging and specifically optical coherence tomography (OCT) as a diagnostic tool for left main angioplasty and analyze the mid-term outcome accordingly. BACKGROUND: Clinical data and international guidelines recommend the use of intravascular imaging ultrasound (IVUS) to guide left main (LM) angioplasty. Despite early experience using OCT in this setting is encouraging, the evidence supporting its use is still limited. METHODS: ROCK II is a multicenter, investigator-driven, retrospective European study to compare the performance of IVUS and OCT versus angiography in patients undergoing distal-LM stenting. The primary study endpoint was target-lesion failure (TLF) including cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularization. We designed this study hypothesizing the superiority of intravascular imaging over angiographic guidance alone, and the non-inferiority of OCT versus IVUS. RESULTS: A total of 730 patients, 377 with intravascular-imaging guidance (162 OCT, 215 IVUS) and 353 with angiographic guidance, were analyzed. The one-year rate of TLF was 21.2% with angiography and 12.7% with intravascular-imaging (p = 0.039), with no difference between OCT and IVUS (p = 0.26). Intravascular-imaging was predictor of freedom from TLF (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23-0.93: p = 0.03). Propensity-score matching identified three groups of 100 patients each with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The one-year rate of TLF was 16% in the angiographic, 7% in the OCT and 6% in the IVUS group, respectively (p = 0.03 for IVUS or OCT vs. angiography). No between-group significant differences in the rate of individual components of TLF were found. CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular imaging was superior to angiography for distal LM stenting, with no difference between OCT and IVUS.

Does left atrial appendage closure improve the success of pulmonary vein isolation? Results of a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The combination of left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) potentially represents a comprehensive treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), controlling symptoms while at the same time reducing the risk of stroke and the need for chronic anticoagulation. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to assess the impact of LAA closure added to PVI in patients with high-risk AF. METHODS: Patients with a history of symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF refractory to ≥ 2 antiarrhythmic drugs, CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2, and HAS-BLED score ≥ 3 were randomized to PVI-only (n = 44) or PVI with LAA closure (n = 45). RESULTS: Six patients in PVI + LAA closure group crossed over to PVI-only group due to failure of LAA closure device implantation. On-treatment comparisons at the 24 month follow-up revealed that 33 (66%) of the 50 PVI group and 23 (59%) of the 39 PVI with LAA closure group were AF-free on no antiarrhythmic drugs (p = 0.34). The PVI + LAA closure treatment was significantly associated with a higher AF burden during the blanking period: 9.7 ± 10.8 vs 4.2 ± 4.1% (p = 0.004). At the end follow-up, there were no serious complications and no strokes or thromboembolic events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of LAA closure device implantation with PVI was safe but was not observed to influence the success of PVI in patients with symptomatic refractory AF. Early AF after ablation, however, is increased by LAA closure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01695824.