Clinical evaluation of rosuvastatin in heart transplant patients with hypercholesterolemia and therapeutic failure of other statin regimens: short-term and long-term efficacy and safety results.

We conducted an observational study of 30 heart transplant recipients with serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c) >100 mg/dl despite previous statin therapy, who were treated with rosuvastatin 10 mg daily (5 mg in case of renal dysfunction). Serum lipids, creatine phosphokinase (CPK), bilirubin, and hepatic enzymes were prospectively measured 2, 4, and 12 weeks after the initiation of the drug. Clinical outcomes of patients who continued on long-term rosuvastatin therapy beyond this 12-week period were reviewed in February 2015. Over the 12-week period following rosuvastatin initiation, serum levels of total cholesterol (TC) and LDL-c and the ratio TC/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-c) decreased steadily (P < 0.001). Average absolute reductions of these three parameters were -48.7 mg/dl, -46.6 mg/dl, and -0.9, respectively. Seventeen (57%) achieved a serum LDL-c < 100 mg/dl. No significant changes from baseline were observed in serum levels of triglycerides, HDL-c, hepatic enzymes, bilirubin, or CPK. Twenty-seven (90%) patients continued on long-term therapy with rosuvastatin over a median period of 3.6 years, with no further significant variation in lipid profile. The drug was suspended due to liver toxicity in 1 (3.3%) patient and due to muscle toxicity in 2 (6.7%) patients. All adverse reactions resolved rapidly after rosuvastatin withdrawal. Our study supports rosuvastatin as a reasonable alternative for heart transplant recipients with hypercholesterolemia and therapeutic failure of other statin regimens.

Intermittent inotropic support with levosimendan in advanced heart failure as destination therapy: The LEVO-D registry.

AIM: Patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) who are not candidates to advanced therapies have poor prognosis. Some trials have shown that intermittent levosimendan can reduce HF hospitalizations in AHF in the short term. In this real-life registry, we describe the patterns of use, safety and factors related to the response to intermittent levosimendan infusions in AHF patients not candidates to advanced therapies. METHODS AND RESULTS: Multicentre retrospective study of patients diagnosed with advanced heart failure, not HT or LVAD candidates. Patients needed to be on the optimal medical therapy according to their treating physician. Patients with de novo heart failure or who underwent any procedure that could improve prognosis were not included in the registry. Four hundred three patients were included; 77.9% needed at least one admission the year before levosimendan was first administered because of heart failure. Death rate at 1 year was 26.8% and median survival was 24.7 [95% CI: 20.4-26.9] months, and 43.7% of patients fulfilled the criteria for being considered a responder lo levosimendan (no death, heart failure admission or unplanned HF visit at 1 year after first levosimendan administration). Compared with the year before there was a significant reduction in HF admissions (38.7% vs. 77.9%; P < 0.0001), unplanned HF visits (22.7% vs. 43.7%; P < 0.0001) or the combined event including deaths (56.3% vs. 81.4%; P < 0.0001) during the year after. We created a score that helps predicting the responder status at 1 year after levosimendan, resulting in a score summatory of five variables: TEER (+2), treatment with beta-blockers (+1.5), Haemoglobin >12 g/dL (+1.5), amiodarone use (-1.5) HF visit 1 year before levosimendan (-1.5) and heart rate >70 b.p.m. (-2). Patients with a score less than -1 had a very low probability of response (21.5% free of death or HF event at 1 year) meanwhile those with a score over 1.5 had the better chance of response (68.4% free of death or HF event at 1 year). LEVO-D score performed well in the ROC analysis. CONCLUSION: In this large real-life series of AHF patients treated with levosimendan as destination therapy, we show a significant decrease of heart failure events during the year after the first administration. The simple LEVO-D Score could be of help when deciding about futile therapy in this population.

Prevention and treatment of coronary artery vasculopathy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is still one of the major causes of death following heart transplantation. Here, we review the recent advances in its prevention and treatment. RECENT FINDINGS: Preventive measures comprise control of classical risk factors, prophylaxis against cytomegalovirus, avoidance of graft endothelial damage during heart transplantation, and prevention of acute rejection. These measures can be effective if begun early. The treatment options for established CAV are limited, percutaneous revascularization and coronary artery bypass graft only being viable for a minority of patients because of the diffuse nature of CAV. Retransplantation is the only definitive therapy for CAV and may be considered for suitable patients with advanced CAV and allograft dysfunction. One of the most promising developments in the recent years is the use of mTOR inhibitors, which can now be regarded as effective in preventing CAV in de novo patients; their role in the treatment of established CAV is still uncertain despite some encouraging recent findings. SUMMARY: The implementation of measures and lifestyles that help prevent CAV should be a priority of postheart transplantation management. Research should urgently evaluate mTOR inhibitors for the treatment of established CAV.

Economic evaluation of complete revascularization versus stress echocardiography-guided revascularization in the STEACS with multivessel disease.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Economic studies may help decision making in the management of multivessel disease in the setting of myocardial infarction. We sought to perform an economic evaluation of CROSS-AMI (Complete Revascularization or Stress Echocardiography in Patients With Multivessel Disease and ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction) randomized clinical trial. METHODS: We performed a cost minimization analysis for the strategies (complete angiographic revascularization [ComR] and selective stress echocardiography-guided revascularization [SelR]) compared in the CROSS-AMI clinical trial (N=306), attributable the initial hospitalization and readmissions during the first year of follow-up, using current rates for health services provided by our health system. RESULTS: The index hospitalization costs were higher in the ComR group than in SelR arm (19 657.9±6236.8 € vs 14 038.7±4958.5 €; P <.001). There were no differences in the costs of the first year of follow-up rehospitalizations between both groups for (ComR 2423.5±4568.0 vs SelR 2653.9±5709.1; P=.697). Total cost was 22 081.3±7505.6 for the ComR arm and 16 692.6±7669.9 for the SelR group (P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the CROSS-AMI trial, the initial extra economic costs of the ComR versus SelR were not offset by significant savings during follow-up. SelR seems to be more efficient than ComR in patients with ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease treated by emergent angioplasty. Study registred at ClinicalTrial.gov (Identifier: NCT01179126).

Heart transplantation.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper briefly and subjectively reviews a number of the modest or tentative, but noteworthy, advances in heart transplantation that have been made during the past 18 months or so. RECENT FINDINGS: The advances reviewed concern the selection of recipients, the management of the heart transplantation waiting list, the management of donors, post-heart transplant monitoring of immunological status, the early diagnosis of rejection, the role of mammalian target of rapamycine inhibitors and induction agents, and the definition and grading of cardiac allograft vasculopathy. SUMMARY: The findings reviewed indicate progress in the clarification of issues that were in most cases already being investigated. Further studies will in general be needed before corresponding measures are adopted in clinical practice.

Pulmonary Arteriovenous Malformation and Embolic Myocardial Infarction in a Patient With Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia.

This report describes a case of embolic myocardial infarction secondary to a pulmonary arteriovenous malformation. Pulmonary arteriovenous malformations are rare and mostly congenital and are inherited as an autosomal dominant disorder known as hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia. Myocardial infarction is an uncommon complication in patients with untreated pulmonary arteriovenous malformations. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

Comparison of predicted and observed mortality in patients with heart failure treated at a specialized unit.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To analyze survival in heart failure (HF) patients treated at a specialized unit. METHODS: Prospective cohort-based study of HF patients treated at a specialized unit from 2011 to 2017. Observed 1- and 3-year mortality rates were compared with those predicted by the Meta-Analysis Global Group in Chronic Heart Failure (MAGGIC) risk score. RESULTS: We studied 1280 patients, whose median MAGGIC risk score was 19 [interquartile range, 13-24]. Prescription rates of beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, and sacubitril-valsartan were 93%, 67%, 22%, 73%, and 16%, respectively. The MAGGIC risk score showed good discrimination for mortality at 1 year (c-statistic=0.71) and 3 years (c-statistic=0.76). Observed mortality was significantly lower than predicted mortality, both at 1 year (6.2% vs 10.9%; observed/predicted ratio=0.57; P<.001) and at 3 years (16.7% vs 27.7%; observed/predicted ratio=0.60; P<.001). This discrepancy was found in several subgroups, except in patients aged> 70 years (29.9% vs 34.7%; observed/predicted ratio=0.86; P=.126) and in patients with ejection fraction> 40% (19.6% vs 20.7%; observed/predicted ratio=0.95; P=.640). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in HF patients treated at a specialized clinic was significantly lower than that predicted by the MAGGIC risk score.

Late thrombosis of paclitaxel-eluting stents: long-term incidence, clinical consequences, and risk factors in a cohort of 604 patients.

BACKGROUND: Late thrombosis is the major safety concern of drug-eluting stents, but its incidence in common clinical practice remains controversial to date, especially beyond the first year after stent implantation. We sought to investigate the incidence, clinical consequences, and risk factors of late thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. METHODS: Consecutive patients (N = 604) who received > or = 1 paclitaxel-eluting stent(s) (PES) between June 2003 and February 2005 at our institution were enrolled. Clinical characteristics and major outcomes were reviewed to detect cases and predictors of late and very late definite PES thrombosis (LDT) of PES, as currently defined by the Academic Research Council. RESULTS: During long-term follow-up (median 34.3 months, IQR 8.6), 17 cases of LDT were noted (cumulative incidence 2.8%, 95% CI 1.7%-4.5%). Most of LDT were very late thromboses (14 cases, 82%). Late and very late definite PES thrombosis appeared at a steady rate (incidence density 1.1% patient-years). Late and very late definite PES thrombosis was related to a high risk of all-cause death (HR 3.2, 95% CI 1.3-7.9) and cardiac death (HR 6.0, 95% CI 2.3-15.6). Withdrawal of antiplatelet therapy, left ventricular ejection fraction, and average stent diameter per patient were independent predictors of LDT in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Late and very late definite PES thrombosis may be more frequent in a real setting than anticipated by initial experimental and observational studies but is keeping with more recent scientific evidence. It seems to occur at a constant rate during long-term follow-up and is associated with a high risk of overall and cardiac death.

Prognostic Value of the Nutritional Risk Index in Heart Transplant Recipients.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: To study the prognostic impact of preoperative nutritional status, as assessed through the nutritional risk index (NRI), on postoperative outcomes after heart transplantation (HT). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center study of 574 patients who underwent HT from 1991 to 2014. Preoperative NRI was calculated as 1.519 × serum albumin (g/L) + 41.7 × (body weight [kg] / ideal body weight [kg]). The association between preoperative NRI and postoperative outcomes was analyzed by means of multivariable logistic regression and multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: Mean NRI before HT was 100.9 ± 9.9. According to this parameter, the prevalence of severe nutritional risk (NRI < 83.5), moderate nutritional risk (83.5 ≤ NRI < 97.5), and mild nutritional risk (97.5 ≤ NRI < 100) was 5%, 22%, and 10%, respectively. One year post-transplant mortality rates in these 4 categories were 18.2%, 25.3%, 7.9% and 10.2% (P < .001), respectively. The NRI was independently associated with a lower risk of postoperative infection (adjusted OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.95-1.00; P = .027) and prolonged postoperative ventilator support (adjusted OR, 0.96; 95%CI, 0.94-0.98; P = .001). Patients at moderate or severe nutritional risk had significantly higher 1-year post-HT mortality (adjusted HR, 1.55; 95%CI, 1.22-1.97; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Malnourished patients have a higher risk of postoperative complications and mortality after HT. Preoperative NRI determination may help to identify HT candidates who might benefit from nutritional intervention.