Central Core Laboratory versus Site Interpretation of Coronary CT Angiography: Agreement and Association with Cardiovascular Events in the PROMISE Trial.

Purpose To assess concordance and relative prognostic utility between central core laboratory and local site interpretation for significant coronary artery disease (CAD) and cardiovascular events. Materials and Methods In the Prospective Multicenter Imaging Study for Evaluation of Chest Pain (PROMISE) trial, readers at 193 North American sites interpreted coronary computed tomographic (CT) angiography as part of the clinical evaluation of stable chest pain. Readers at a central core laboratory also interpreted CT angiography blinded to clinical data, site interpretation, and outcomes. Significant CAD was defined as stenosis greater than or equal to 50%; cardiovascular events were defined as a composite of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. Results In 4347 patients (51.8% women; mean age ± standard deviation, 60.4 years ± 8.2), core laboratory and site interpretations were discordant in 16% (683 of 4347), most commonly because of a finding of significant CAD by site but not by core laboratory interpretation (80%, 544 of 683). Overall, core laboratory interpretation resulted in 41% fewer patients being reported as having significant CAD (14%, 595 of 4347 vs 23%, 1000 of 4347; P < .001). Over a median follow-up period of 25 months, 1.3% (57 of 4347) sustained myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death. The C statistic for future myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death was 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54, 0.68) for the core laboratory and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.56, 0.70) for the sites. Conclusion Compared with interpretation by readers at 193 North American sites, standardized core laboratory interpretation classified 41% fewer patients as having significant CAD. © RSNA, 2017 Online supplemental material is available for this article. Clinical trial registration no. NCT01174550.

Procedural effectiveness of a novel 1.20 mm diameter angioplasty catheter: clinical and angiographic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical and angiographic outcomes using a 1.20 mm diameter angioplasty catheter as part of a predilation strategy for coronary lesion treatment. BACKGROUND: Development of an angioplasty catheter with low crossing profile and small balloon diameter represents an opportunity to facilitate percutaneous revascularization of complex coronary disease. METHODS: Clinical and angiographic outcomes were evaluated following a predilation treatment strategy using a low profile, 1.20 mm angioplasty catheter. The primary end-point of procedural success was defined as successful device delivery, performance and lesion treatment without occurrence of perforation, flow-limiting dissection, reduction in baseline TIMI grade, or clinically significant arrhythmias, and with final achievement of TIMI 3 flow. In-hospital major adverse events were also determined. RESULTS: Among 71 patients (83 lesions), angiographic characteristics included: de novo lesion, 75.9%; saphenous vein graft 9.6%; lesion length (mean ± standard deviation), 12.27 ± 5.96 mm; reference vessel diameter, 2.61 ± 0.57 mm; lesion classification B2/C, 59.0%; baseline TIMI 0/1 flow, 4.8%. Procedural success was achieved for 98.5% (66/67) of patients. Catheter delivery to the target lesion was achieved in all patients, and the rate of device success with luminal improvement after predilation was 96.2% (75/78). No acute procedural complications were observed, and in-hospital target lesion failure occurred in 6 patients (8.5%) related to peri-procedural non-Q wave myocardial infarction. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary lesion predilation with a low profile, 1.20 mm angioplasty catheter is associated with favorable procedural safety and efficacy and may represent an effective treatment for complex coronary anatomy.

Patients and Their Physician's Perspectives About Oral Anticoagulation in Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Not Receiving an Anticoagulant.

Importance: The underuse of oral anticoagulation in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (AF) is a major issue that is not well understood. Objective: To understand the lack of anticoagulation by assessing the perceptions of patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation and their physician's about the risk of stroke and the benefits and risks of anticoagulation. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included patients with nonvalvular AF and a CHA2DS2-VASc score of 2 or more (calculated as congestive heart failure, hypertension, age 75 years and older, diabetes, stroke or transient ischemic attack, vascular disease, age 65 to 74 years, and sex category) who were not receiving anticoagulation and were enrolled from 19 sites within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) Practice Innovation and Clinical Excellence Registry (PINNACLE Registry) between January 18, 2017, and May 7, 2018. Data were collected from January 18, 2017, to September 30, 2019, and analyzed from April 2022 to March 2023. Exposure: Each patient enrolled in the study completed a survey, and their treating physician then conducted a clinical review of their care. Main Outcomes and Measures: Assessment of willingness for anticoagulation treatment and its appropriateness after central review by a panel of 4 cardiologists. Use of anticoagulation at 1 year follow-up was compared vs similar patients at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry. Results: Of the 817 patients enrolled, the median (IQR) age was 76.0 (69.0-83.0) years, 369 (45.2%) were women, and the median (IQR) CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.0 (3.0-6.0). The top 5 reasons physicians cited for no anticoagulation were low AF burden or successful rhythm control (278 [34.0%]), patient refusal (272 [33.3%]), perceived low risk of stroke (206 [25.2%]), fall risk (175 [21.4%]), and high bleeding risk (167 [20.4%]). After rereview, 221 physicians (27.1%) would reconsider prescribing oral anticoagulation as compared with 311 patients (38.1%), including 67 (24.6%) whose physician cited patient refusal. Of 647 patients (79.2%) adjudicated as appropriate or may be appropriate for anticoagulation, physicians would reconsider anticoagulation for only 177 patients (21.2%), while 527 patients (64.5%) would either agree to starting anticoagulation (311 [38.1%]) or were neutral (216 [27.3%]) to starting anticoagulation. Upon follow-up, 119 patients (14.6%) in the BOAT-AF study were prescribed anticoagulation, as compared with 55 879 of 387 975 similar patients (14.4%) at other centers in the PINNACLE Registry. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that patients with AF who are not receiving anticoagulation are more willing to consider anticoagulation than their physicians. These data emphasize the need to revisit any prior decision against anticoagulation in a shared decision-making manner.

Procedural Effectiveness With a Focused Force Scoring Angioplasty Catheter: Procedural and Clinical Outcomes From the Scoreflex NC Trial.

BACKGROUND: The Scoreflex NC scoring angioplasty catheter is designed with a short rapid-exchange tip distal to a non-compliant, high-pressure balloon and an integral wire outside of the balloon, such that the guidewire and the integral wire act as scoring elements during balloon inflation. The external scoring elements enable a focal stress pattern facilitating expansion of resistant lesions at lower pressures using a focused force angioplasty effect. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled in a prospective, single-arm study conducted at 12 centers in the United States. The primary endpoint was device procedural success, defined as the composite of successful device delivery to the target lesion with balloon inflation and deflation; absence of vessel perforation, flow-limiting dissection or reduction in TIMI flow from baseline; and achievement of final TIMI 3 flow. RESULTS: Among 200 patients (234 lesions), lesion complexities included: bifurcation disease (37.6%), moderate/severe calcification (36.6%), and total occlusions (5.0%). Successful delivery to the target lesion, inflation and removal of the balloon catheter was achieved in 95.5% of patients (191/200). Procedural success was achieved in 93.5% (187/200) of patients, and final TIMI 3 flow was observed in 99.0% of cases (198/200). No unanticipated device-related events occurred. In-hospital major adverse events were reported in 4.5% of patients (9/200), related to periprocedural myocardial infarction (8/200, 4.0%) and target lesion revascularization (1/200, 0.5%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing elective PCI and with varied lesion complexity, these results support the safety and effectiveness of a dilation strategy using the Scoreflex NC scoring catheter.

Impact of Race and Ethnicity on the Clinical and Angiographic Characteristics, Social Determinants of Health, and 1-Year Outcomes After Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent Procedures in Women.

Background The impact of race/ethnicity on coronary stent outcomes in women is unknown. We compared baseline characteristics, social determinants of health, and 1-year outcomes in female African Americans (AA) and Hispanic/Latinas (HL) versus white women after coronary everolimus-eluting stent implantation in all-comer patients. Methods and Results We pooled 1863 women from the PLATINUM Diversity (n=1057 women) and PROMUS ELEMENT PLUS (n=806 women) postapproval studies, with some overlap in study sites. Social determinants of health data were only available for PLATINUM Diversity. The primary end point was 1-year major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization). Outcomes were risk adjusted using multivariate Cox regression. The study sample comprised 1417 white (76.1%, reference group), 296 AA (15.9%), and 107 HL (5.7%) women. AA were older, and both AA and HL had more diabetes mellitus and hypertension than white women. AA had larger reference vessel diameters but less lesion calcification, whereas HL had less lesion tortuosity but more calcification. Compared with white women, there was a trend toward higher unadjusted 1-year major adverse cardiac events in AA (12.0% versus 8.0%; P=0.06) but similar rates in HL (11.0% versus 8.0%; P=0.32), and after risk adjustment, there were no differences (AA women: hazard ratio, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.00-2.17; HL women: hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.71-2.44). AA had a 3-fold higher adjusted risk of 1-year myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 3.45; 95% CI, 1.72-7.14; P=0.01) and increased risk of target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.10-2.94; P=0.02). Independent predictors of major adverse cardiac events included renal disease, prior myocardial infarction, silent ischemia, history of stroke, and multivessel disease. Conclusions Race and ethnicity confer heterogeneity in women undergoing everolimus-eluting stent implantation. Despite more comorbidities and less favorable social determinants of health, AA and HL women have similar 1-year major adverse cardiac events to white women, although AA women seem to have a higher risk of 1-year myocardial infarction. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02240810.