Treatment with SGLT2 Inhibitors in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and Extensive Coronary Artery Disease: Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Sodium-glucose type 2 cotransporter inhibitors (SGLT2-I) have shown solid benefits in reducing cardiovascular mortality and admissions for heart failure in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cardiovascular disease. However, no specific studies exist in patients with high-risk coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, observational study including patients with T2DM and a new diagnosis of extensive CAD (defined as left main disease or three main coronary vessel disease). Patients were recruited from 2015 until 2020, with a follow-up of at least 12 months. The primary outcome was to compare all-cause mortality in patients treated with or without SGLT2-I at discharge and adjusted by inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) propensity score. RESULTS: A total of 420 patients were included: 104 (24.7%) were treated with SGLT2-I and 316 (75.3%) were not (non-SGLT2-I group). The presentation was acute coronary syndrome in 44.3%. The mean age was 71.2 ± 10.5 years. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 51.5 ± 12.5%, and the mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was 73.9 ± 22 ml/min. After a mean follow-up of 3 ± 1.6 years, all-cause mortality was 16.4%, and cardiovascular mortality was 9.5%. After IPTW, the risk of all-cause death was lower in the SGLT2-I group with a hazard ratio of 0.32 (95% confidence interval 0.12-0.81), p = 0.016. With regard to secondary outcomes, patients in the SGLT2-I group were associated with less renal function deterioration but an increase in unplanned revascularizations. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM and extensive CAD, treatment with SGLT2-I after discharge was associated with a reduced risk of all-cause death.

Incidence, Causes, and Impact of In-Hospital Infections After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

In-hospital infections (IHI) are one of the most common and serious problems after invasive procedures. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an increasingly used alternative to surgery in patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence, origin, risk factors, and clinical outcomes of IHI after TAVI. A total of 303 consecutive patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent transfemoral TAVI were included and followed during a median time of 21 months. We examined the occurrence, types, origin, and timing of infections during hospital stay as well as short- and long-term clinical outcomes according to the occurrence of IHI. A total of 51 patients (17%; 62 infectious episodes) experienced IHI after TAVI. Respiratory and urinary tract infections were the most frequent type of infections (44% and 34%, respectively), followed by surgical site infection (8%) and bloodstream infection (5%). Positive cultures were obtained in 74% of the samples, of which 65% were gram-negative bacilli. Modifiable factors such as bleeding (p = 0.005) and length of coronary care unit stay (p <0.001) were independently associated with an increased infection risk. Patients with IHI had a longer hospital stay (14 vs 6 days, p <0.001), an increased mortality (hazard ratio 2.48, 95% CI 1.45 to 4.23) and readmission rate (hazard ratio 2.0, 95% CI 1.27 to 3.14) during the follow-up. In conclusion, IHI is a frequent complication after TAVI with a significant impact on short- and long-term clinical outcomes. The most important risk factors associated with the development of this complication were modifiable periprocedural aspects. These results underline the importance to implement specific preventive strategies to reduce in-hospital-acquired infections after TAVI.

Incidence, Management, and Immediate- and Long-Term Outcomes After Iatrogenic Aortic Dissection During Diagnostic or Interventional Coronary Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Aortic dissection type A is a disease with high mortality. Iatrogenic aortic dissection after interventional procedures is infrequent, and prognostic data are scarce. Our objective was to analyze its incidence, patient profile, and long-term prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2014, we retrospectively analyzed 74 patients with dissection of the ascending aorta. Clinical and procedural data were reviewed, and later, we performed a prospective clinical follow-up by telephone or in the office. The incidence of aortic dissection was 0.06%. Our patients, predominantly male (67.6%), had a mean age of 66.9±10.8 years. With multiple cardiovascular risk factors, the main reason for cardiac catheterization was an acute coronary syndrome (n=54). The complication was detected acutely in all, trying to engage the right coronary artery in 47 and the left main artery in 30 and after other maneuvers in 2, mostly complex therapeutic procedures (78.4%). A coronary artery was involved in 45 patients (60.8%). Thirty-five patients underwent an angioplasty and stent implantation; 3 had cardiac surgery; and 36 were managed conservatively. Two patients died of cardiogenic shock after the dissection. After a median follow-up of 51.2 months (range, 16.4-104.8 months), none of the remaining patients developed complications as a result of the dissection, progression, ischemia, pain, or dissection recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Iatrogenic catheter dissection of the aorta is a rare complication that carries an excellent short- and long-term prognosis with the adoption of a conservative approach. When a coronary artery is involved as an entry point, it usually can be safely sealed with a stent with good long-term outcomes.

Rescue percutaneous intervention for acute complications of coronary artery surgery.

Although percutaneous interventions in the context of perioperative coronary artery surgery ischaemic complications are not unusual, this type of secondary revascularisation is rarely addressed in the literature. Information on aspects such as complications and clinical outcome is limited, in spite of this being a high-risk population. To shed light on the subject, the present article presents a systematic review of the literature on this topic, along with the analysis of the institutional experience at a centre with high surgical and percutaneous revascularisation case volume.

Long-term clinical benefit of sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with in-stent restenosis results of the RIBS-II (Restenosis Intra-stent: Balloon angioplasty vs. elective sirolimus-eluting Stenting) study.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to assess the long-term effectiveness and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with ISR remains a challenge. The long-term outcome of patients with ISR treated with SES remains unknown. METHODS: The RIBS-II (Restenosis Intra-stent: Balloon angioplasty vs. elective sirolimus-eluting Stenting) study was a randomized trial conducted in 150 patients with ISR (76 SES, 74 balloon angioplasty [BA]). The long-term (>1 year) clinical outcome and pre-specified subgroup analyses were pre-defined secondary study end points. RESULTS: At 1 year, the event-free survival (death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization [TVR]) was better in the SES group (88% vs. 69%, p < 0.005). Additional long-term (>3 years) clinical follow-up was obtained in 97% of patients (median 3.3 years). After the first year, 3 patients died (1 SES, 2 BA), 5 suffered myocardial infarction (4 SES, 1 BA), and 7 required TVR (4 SES, 3 BA). At last follow-up, definitive/probable/possible stent thrombosis was similar in both groups (2/2/1 SES vs. 1/0/3 BA, p = NS). At 4 years, the event-free survival was 76% in the SES arm and 65% in the BA arm (p = 0.019). On multivariate analysis, SES implantation was an independent predictor of event-free survival. Subgroup analyses were consistent with the main outcome measure. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR, SES implantation remains effective and safe at very long-term clinical follow-up.

Clinical variables related with in-stent restenosis late regression after bare metal coronary stenting.

UNLABELLED: In-stent restenosis (ISR) has an incidence between 20% and 30% using bare metal stents. ISR late regression phenomenon (ISRLR) has been previously described, but clinical variables related with this phenomenon remain unclear. The aim of the study was to identify the variables related with ISRLR. METHODS: We identified from our data base 30 patients between November 1995 and September 2002 that fulfilled the following criteria: 1) Documented ISR at follow-up angiography (CA-1); 2) treated medically; and 3) Referred for a second follow-up angiography (CA-2). at least 3 months after CA-1. ISRLR was defined as a > 0.2 mm increase in MLD between CA-1 and CA-2, calculated as the 2-fold of our inter-observer variability. ISR late progression was defined as a > 0.2 mm decrease in minimum lumen diameter (MLD) between CA-1 and CA-2. RESULTS: At the time of CA-2 only 2 patients (6.7%) had symptoms related with the previously stented vessel. We found a mean MLD of 1.03+/-0.34 mm and 1.54+/-0.48 mm at CA-1 and CA-2 respectively (AMLD = 0.51 +/-0.34 mm; p < 0.001). Twenty four patients (80.0%) had ISRLR. Two variables were related to the presence or absence ISRLR: Current smoking at the time of coronary stenting (70.8% vs 20.0% respectively, p = 0.026) and acute coronary syndrome as clinical indication for coronary stenting (and 83.5% vs 40.0% respectively, p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: ISRLR is a frequent phenomenon in patients with ISR treated medically, probably contributing to the benign long-term clinical outcome that has been previously described in patients with asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic ISR. Current smoking at the time of coronary stenting and acute coronary syndrome as clinical indication for coronary stenting are associated with this phenomenon.

Compromiso de vasos secundarios durante la implantación directa de stent coronario: Incidencia y factores relacionados / Side branch occlusion during direct stent implantation: Incidence and related factors

Objetivo: El objetivo fue evaluar el grado de compromiso de las ramas que son enjauladas durante la implantación directa de stent. Pacientes y métodos: Se estudiaron 56 pacientes en los que se implantó al menos un stent coronario (58 stents) sin dilatación previa con balón y en los que se enjauló alguna rama secundaria. Se evaluó la tasa de pérdida de la rama, el efecto de la implantación del stent sobre el flujo de esta rama y los factores relacionados con estos hechos. Resultados: El vaso principal fue la descendente anterior en el 63%, la circunfleja en el 21%, la coronaria derecha en el 14% y el tronco principal de la coronaria izquierda en un caso. Se obtuvo éxito angiográfico sobre el vaso principal en todos los casos. Antes del procedimiento, el flujo a nivel de la rama secundaria era TIMI grado 3, 2 y 0 en 55 (95%), 2 (3%) y un caso (2%), respectivamente. Tras la implantación del stent, el flujo era TIMI grado 3, 2, 1 y 0 en 50 (86%), 1 (2%), 2 (3%) y 5 (9%) casos, respectivamente (p = 0.204). La incidencia de pérdida de la rama fue 12% (7/58); en un caso, se intentó con éxito recanalizar y dilatar ésta a través de los struts del stent, por lo que la tasa de pérdida de rama final fue 10% (6/ 58). Las ramas que se ocluyeron tenían un mayor grado de estenosis en el origen antes de la implantación del stent (30.2 ± 31.3% vs 16.8 ± 11.1%, p = 0.028). En los pacientes que se reevaluaron angiográficamente, a los 6.2 ±1.9 meses, el 50% de las ramas que se habían ocluido se encontraban permeables, y el 88% de las que no se comprometieron seguían permeables. Conclusiones: La tasa de oclusión de las ramas con la implantación directa de stent fue 12% en nuestra serie, cifra similar a la que ocurre con la implantación de stent tras dilatación con balón. Por tanto, la existencia de ramas localizadas en el segmento en el que va a implantarse el stent no tiene por qué condicionar la decisión o no de realizar una dilatación previa con balón.

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the compromise of side branches when jailed by a coronary stent implanted without balloon predilation. Patients and methods: 56 patients in which at least a coronary stent was implanted without balloon predilation and covering a side brach (58 stents, 1.04 ± 0.19 per patient) were studied. The effect of direct coronary stent implantation over side branch flow, as well as the characteristics associated were studied. Results: The main vessel was left anterior descending in 63%, left circumflex in 21%, right coronary in 14%, and left main in one case. An angiographic successful result in the main vessel was obtained in all cases. Coronary flow was TIMI 3, 2, 1, and 0 in 95%, 3%, 0%, and 2% before the procedure, in comparison with 86%, 2%, 3%, and 9% after stent implantation (p = 0.204). The incidence of side branch occlusion was 12% (7/58). In one case, the side branch was dilated across the stent struts, and thus the rate of side branch loss at the end of the procedure was 10% (6/58). In cases of side branch occlusion, there was a more severe stenosis at its origin before stent implantation (30.2 ± 31.3% vs 16.8± 11.1%, p = 0.028). Fifty percent of side branches occluded after direct coronary stent implantation and angiographically reevaluated at follow-up became patent, and 88% of side branches not affected after stent implantation remained patent at 6.2 ± 1.9 months. Conclusion: The rate of side branch occlusion after direct stent implantation in our series was 12%, that is not different from that reported for conventional stent implantation. Thus, the decision of using direct or conventional coronary stenting should not be conditioned by the presence of side branches arising from the target lesion.