Small-volume tubes to reduce anemia and transfusion (STRATUS): a pilot study.

PURPOSE: Blood sampling for diagnostic testing causes blood loss. Small-volume tubes have the same cost, dimensions, and blood-draw techniques as standard-volume tubes, and are compatible with laboratory equipment; however, they are not commonly used. We sought to assess the feasibility of a stepped-wedge cluster trial to determine whether small-volume tubes reduce transfusion compared with standard-volume tubes in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: We conducted a prospective mixed-methods pilot study (before-after design) in one ICU with a six-week control period (standard-volume tubes) and a six-week intervention period (small-volume tubes). All patients admitted to the ICU were included. Feasibility was assessed as successful switch to small-volume tubes; adherence to tube size; sufficient volume for testing; user acceptance; barriers and facilitators to implementation; and 95% transfusion collection. We explored end-user acceptability using focus groups. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-five patients were included in the standard-volume and 204 in the small-volume periods. Transition to small-volume tubes was successful. Random audits showed 100% compliance. The proportion of samples with inadequate volume for testing was the same for both groups (both, 0.2%). Based on ten focus groups, small-volume tubes were acceptable with no barriers identified. Transfusion data collection was 100%. Median [interquartile range] estimated blood loss due to laboratory testing per patient per day in ICU was 11 [8-17] mL with standard-volume and 6 [4-8] mL with small-volume tubes. CONCLUSION: Small-volume tubes can be implemented with acceptability to end-users and without barriers. They did not result in an increased frequency of inadequate samples. These results inform a trial to determine whether small-volume tubes reduce transfusion. STUDY REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03284944); registered 15 September 2017.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les prélèvements sanguins pour les tests diagnostiques provoquent des pertes de sang. Les tubes de prélèvement de petit volume entraînent le même coût, ont les mêmes dimensions et nécessitent les mêmes techniques de prélèvement sanguin que les tubes de volume standard, en plus d'être compatibles avec l'équipement de laboratoire; cependant, ils ne sont pas couramment utilisés. Nous avons cherché à évaluer la faisabilité d'un essai clinique à intervention échelonnée visant à déterminer si les tubes de petit volume réduisaient la transfusion par rapport aux tubes de volume standard chez les patient·es de l'unité de soins intensifs (USI). MéTHODE: Nous avons mené une étude pilote prospective à méthodes mixtes (conception avant-après) dans une unité de soins intensifs, avec une période de contrôle de six semaines (tubes de volume standard) et une période d'intervention de six semaines (tubes de petit volume). Tou·tes les patient·es admis·es à l'USI ont été inclus·es. La faisabilité a été évaluée comme étant la transition réussie vers des tubes de petit volume; le respect de la taille du tube; un volume suffisant pour les tests sanguins; l'acceptation de l'utilisateur·trice; les obstacles et les facilitateurs à la mise en œuvre; et une collecte de données de transfusion de 95 %. Nous avons exploré l'acceptabilité par l'utilisateur·trice final·e à l'aide de groupes de discussion. RéSULTATS: Cent soixante-cinq patient·es ont été inclus·es dans le groupe volume standard et 204 dans les groupes pour la période de petit volume. La transition vers des tubes de petit volume a été couronnée de succès. Les audits aléatoires ont montré une observance de 100 %. La proportion d'échantillons dont le volume était insuffisant pour l'analyse était la même dans les deux groupes (0,2 % dans les deux cas). D'après dix groupes de discussion, les tubes de faible volume étaient acceptables et aucun obstacle n'a été identifié. La collecte de données transfusionnelles était de 100 %. Les pertes de sang médianes estimées [écart interquartile] dues aux tests de laboratoire par patient·e et par jour à l'USI étaient de 11 [8 à 17] mL avec un volume standard et de 6 [4 à 8] mL avec des tubes de petit volume. CONCLUSION: Les tubes de petit volume peuvent être mis en œuvre en étant acceptés par les utilisateur·trices et sans obstacles. Ils n'ont pas entraîné une augmentation de la fréquence des échantillons inadéquats. Ces résultats procurent des informations pour une étude visant à déterminer si les tubes de petit volume réduisent la transfusion. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03284944); enregistré le 15 septembre 2017.

Complete Revascularization with Multivessel PCI for Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion reduces the risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. Whether PCI of nonculprit lesions further reduces the risk of such events is unclear. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease who had undergone successful culprit-lesion PCI to a strategy of either complete revascularization with PCI of angiographically significant nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization. Randomization was stratified according to the intended timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI (either during or after the index hospitalization). The first coprimary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction; the second coprimary outcome was the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 3 years, the first coprimary outcome had occurred in 158 of the 2016 patients (7.8%) in the complete-revascularization group as compared with 213 of the 2025 patients (10.5%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60 to 0.91; P = 0.004). The second coprimary outcome had occurred in 179 patients (8.9%) in the complete-revascularization group as compared with 339 patients (16.7%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.61; P<0.001). For both coprimary outcomes, the benefit of complete revascularization was consistently observed regardless of the intended timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI (P = 0.62 and P = 0.27 for interaction for the first and second coprimary outcomes, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, complete revascularization was superior to culprit-lesion-only PCI in reducing the risk of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction, as well as the risk of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven revascularization. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; COMPLETE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01740479.).

Full Study Report of Andexanet Alfa for Bleeding Associated with Factor Xa Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa is a modified recombinant inactive form of human factor Xa developed for reversal of factor Xa inhibitors. METHODS: We evaluated 352 patients who had acute major bleeding within 18 hours after administration of a factor Xa inhibitor. The patients received a bolus of andexanet, followed by a 2-hour infusion. The coprimary outcomes were the percent change in anti-factor Xa activity after andexanet treatment and the percentage of patients with excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 hours after the end of the infusion, with hemostatic efficacy adjudicated on the basis of prespecified criteria. Efficacy was assessed in the subgroup of patients with confirmed major bleeding and baseline anti-factor Xa activity of at least 75 ng per milliliter (or ≥0.25 IU per milliliter for those receiving enoxaparin). RESULTS: Patients had a mean age of 77 years, and most had substantial cardiovascular disease. Bleeding was predominantly intracranial (in 227 patients [64%]) or gastrointestinal (in 90 patients [26%]). In patients who had received apixaban, the median anti-factor Xa activity decreased from 149.7 ng per milliliter at baseline to 11.1 ng per milliliter after the andexanet bolus (92% reduction; 95% confidence interval [CI], 91 to 93); in patients who had received rivaroxaban, the median value decreased from 211.8 ng per milliliter to 14.2 ng per milliliter (92% reduction; 95% CI, 88 to 94). Excellent or good hemostasis occurred in 204 of 249 patients (82%) who could be evaluated. Within 30 days, death occurred in 49 patients (14%) and a thrombotic event in 34 (10%). Reduction in anti-factor Xa activity was not predictive of hemostatic efficacy overall but was modestly predictive in patients with intracranial hemorrhage. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute major bleeding associated with the use of a factor Xa inhibitor, treatment with andexanet markedly reduced anti-factor Xa activity, and 82% of patients had excellent or good hemostatic efficacy at 12 hours, as adjudicated according to prespecified criteria. (Funded by Portola Pharmaceuticals; ANNEXA-4 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02329327.).

Andexanet Alfa for Acute Major Bleeding Associated with Factor Xa Inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Andexanet alfa (andexanet) is a recombinant modified human factor Xa decoy protein that has been shown to reverse the inhibition of factor Xa in healthy volunteers. METHODS: In this multicenter, prospective, open-label, single-group study, we evaluated 67 patients who had acute major bleeding within 18 hours after the administration of a factor Xa inhibitor. The patients all received a bolus of andexanet followed by a 2-hour infusion of the drug. Patients were evaluated for changes in measures of anti-factor Xa activity and were assessed for clinical hemostatic efficacy during a 12-hour period. All the patients were subsequently followed for 30 days. The efficacy population of 47 patients had a baseline value for anti-factor Xa activity of at least 75 ng per milliliter (or ≥0.5 IU per milliliter for those receiving enoxaparin) and had confirmed bleeding severity at adjudication. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 77 years; most of the patients had substantial cardiovascular disease. Bleeding was predominantly gastrointestinal or intracranial. The mean (±SD) time from emergency department presentation to the administration of the andexanet bolus was 4.8±1.8 hours. After the bolus administration, the median anti-factor Xa activity decreased by 89% (95% confidence interval [CI], 58 to 94) from baseline among patients receiving rivaroxaban and by 93% (95% CI, 87 to 94) among patients receiving apixaban. These levels remained similar during the 2-hour infusion. Four hours after the end of the infusion, there was a relative decrease from baseline of 39% in the measure of anti-factor Xa activity among patients receiving rivaroxaban and of 30% among those receiving apixaban. Twelve hours after the andexanet infusion, clinical hemostasis was adjudicated as excellent or good in 37 of 47 patients in the efficacy analysis (79%; 95% CI, 64 to 89). Thrombotic events occurred in 12 of 67 patients (18%) during the 30-day follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of a descriptive preliminary analysis, an initial bolus and subsequent 2-hour infusion of andexanet substantially reduced anti-factor Xa activity in patients with acute major bleeding associated with factor Xa inhibitors, with effective hemostasis occurring in 79%. (Funded by Portola Pharmaceuticals; ANNEXA-4 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02329327 .).

Design and rationale of the COMPLETE trial: A randomized, comparative effectiveness study of complete versus culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention to treat multivessel coronary artery disease in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

A significant proportion of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). Following successful culprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI, the question of whether to routinely revascularize non-culprit lesions or manage them conservatively with optimal medical therapy (OMT) alone is a common dilemma facing clinicians. METHODS: COMPLETE is a prospective, randomized, international, multicenter, parallel group, open-label trial with blinded evaluation of outcomes. Following successful PCI (contemporary drug eluting stents recommended) of the culprit lesion for STEMI, a total of 4041 patients from 140 centers in 31 countries were randomized to receive either complete revascularization, consisting of staged PCI of all suitable non-culprit lesions plus optimal medical therapy (OMT), or to culprit lesion-only PCI, consisting of OMT alone. OMT comprises evidence-based therapy for STEMI, including and dual antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, HTN and lipid management. All coronary angiograms in the trial are being evaluated in a central angiographic core lab to assess quality and completeness of revascularization. The co-primary outcomes are (1): the composite of CV death or new non-fatal MI and (2 the composite of CV death, new non-fatal MI or ischemia-driven revascularization at a median follow-up of 3 years. CONCLUSIONS: The COMPLETE trial is an international multicenter randomized trial that will help determine whether complete revascularization involving staged PCI of non-culprit lesions improves outcomes in patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD. (clinicaltrials.govNCT01740479).

Clinical impact of direct stenting and interaction with thrombus aspiration in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration.

Aims: Preliminary studies suggest that direct stenting (DS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) may reduce microvascular obstruction and improve clinical outcome. Thrombus aspiration may facilitate DS. We assessed the impact of DS on clinical outcome and myocardial reperfusion and its interaction with thrombus aspiration among ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing PCI. Methods and results: Patient-level data from the three largest randomized trials on routine manual thrombus aspiration vs. PCI only were merged. A 1:1 propensity matched population was created to compare DS and conventional stenting. Synergy between DS and thrombus aspiration was assessed with interaction P-values in the final models. In the unmatched population (n = 17 329), 32% underwent DS and 68% underwent conventional stenting. Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration as compared with PCI only (41% vs. 22%; P < 0.001). Patients undergoing DS required less contrast (162 mL vs. 172 mL; P < 0.001) and had shorter fluoroscopy time (11.1 min vs. 13.3 min; P < 0.001). After propensity matching (n = 10 944), no significant differences were seen between DS and conventional stenting with respect to 30-day cardiovascular death [1.7% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.41; P = 0.60; Pinteraction = 0.96) and 30-day stroke or transient ischaemic attack (0.6% vs. 0.4%; odds ratio 1.02; 95% CI 0.14-7.54; P = 0.99; Pinteraction = 0.81). One-year results were similar. No significant differences were seen in electrocardiographic and angiographic myocardial reperfusion measures. Conclusion: Direct stenting rates were higher in patients randomized to thrombus aspiration. Clinical outcomes and myocardial reperfusion measures did not differ significantly between DS and conventional stenting and there was no interaction with thrombus aspiration.

Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: An Individual Patient Meta-Analysis: Thrombectomy Trialists Collaboration.

BACKGROUND: Thrombus aspiration during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been widely used; however, recent trials have questioned its value and safety. In this meta-analysis, we, the trial investigators, aimed to pool the individual patient data from these trials to determine the benefits and risks of thrombus aspiration during PCI in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS: Included were large (n≥1000), randomized, controlled trials comparing manual thrombectomy and PCI alone in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Individual patient data were provided by the leadership of each trial. The prespecified primary efficacy outcome was cardiovascular mortality within 30 days, and the primary safety outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack within 30 days. RESULTS: The 3 eligible randomized trials (TAPAS [Thrombus Aspiration During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Acute Myocardial Infarction], TASTE [Thrombus Aspiration in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction in Scandinavia], and TOTAL [Trial of Routine Aspiration Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI]) enrolled 19 047 patients, of whom 18 306 underwent PCI and were included in the primary analysis. Cardiovascular death at 30 days occurred in 221 of 9155 patients (2.4%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 262 of 9151 (2.9%) randomized to PCI alone (hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.01; P=0.06). Stroke or transient ischemic attack occurred in 66 (0.8%) randomized to thrombus aspiration and 46 (0.5%) randomized to PCI alone (odds ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.98-2.10; P=0.06). There were no significant differences in recurrent myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, heart failure, or target vessel revascularization. In the subgroup with high thrombus burden (TIMI [Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction] thrombus grade ≥3), thrombus aspiration was associated with fewer cardiovascular deaths (170 [2.5%] versus 205 [3.1%]; hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.98; P=0.03) and with more strokes or transient ischemic attacks (55 [0.9%] versus 34 [0.5%]; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-2.42, P=0.04). However, the interaction P values were 0.32 and 0.34, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction did not improve clinical outcomes. In the high thrombus burden group, the trends toward reduced cardiovascular death and increased stroke or transient ischemic attack provide a rationale for future trials of improved thrombus aspiration technologies in this high-risk subgroup. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URLs: http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/. Unique identifiers: NCT02552407 and CRD42015025936.

Randomized Trial of Benznidazole for Chronic Chagas' Cardiomyopathy.

BACKGROUND: The role of trypanocidal therapy in patients with established Chagas' cardiomyopathy is unproven. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multicenter, randomized study involving 2854 patients with Chagas' cardiomyopathy who received benznidazole or placebo for up to 80 days and were followed for a mean of 5.4 years. The primary outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first event of any of the components of the composite outcome of death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, sustained ventricular tachycardia, insertion of a pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, cardiac transplantation, new heart failure, stroke, or other thromboembolic event. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 394 patients (27.5%) in the benznidazole group and in 414 (29.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.07; P=0.31). At baseline, a polymerase-chain-reaction (PCR) assay was performed on blood samples obtained from 1896 patients; 60.5% had positive results for Trypanosoma cruzi on PCR. The rates of conversion to negative PCR results (PCR conversion) were 66.2% in the benznidazole group and 33.5% in the placebo group at the end of treatment, 55.4% and 35.3%, respectively, at 2 years, and 46.7% and 33.1%, respectively, at 5 years or more (P<0.001 for all comparisons). The effect of treatment on PCR conversion varied according to geographic region: in Brazil, the odds ratio for PCR conversion was 3.03 (95% CI, 2.12 to 4.34) at 2 years and 1.87 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.63) at 5 or more years; in Colombia and El Salvador, the odds ratio was 1.33 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.98) at 2 years and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.45) at 5 or more years; and in Argentina and Bolivia, the odds ratio was 2.63 (95% CI, 1.89 to 3.66) at 2 years and 2.79 (95% CI, 1.99 to 3.92) at 5 or more years (P<0.001 for interaction). However, the rates of PCR conversion did not correspond to effects on clinical outcome (P=0.16 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS: Trypanocidal therapy with benznidazole in patients with established Chagas' cardiomyopathy significantly reduced serum parasite detection but did not significantly reduce cardiac clinical deterioration through 5 years of follow-up. (Funded by the Population Health Research Institute and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00123916; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN13967269.).

Randomized trial of primary PCI with or without routine manual thrombectomy.

BACKGROUND: During primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), manual thrombectomy may reduce distal embolization and thus improve microvascular perfusion. Small trials have suggested that thrombectomy improves surrogate and clinical outcomes, but a larger trial has reported conflicting results. METHODS: We randomly assigned 10,732 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI to a strategy of routine upfront manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure within 180 days. The key safety outcome was stroke within 30 days. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 347 of 5033 patients (6.9%) in the thrombectomy group versus 351 of 5030 patients (7.0%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio in the thrombectomy group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.15; P=0.86). The rates of cardiovascular death (3.1% with thrombectomy vs. 3.5% with PCI alone; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12; P=0.34) and the primary outcome plus stent thrombosis or target-vessel revascularization (9.9% vs. 9.8%; hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P=0.95) were also similar. Stroke within 30 days occurred in 33 patients (0.7%) in the thrombectomy group versus 16 patients (0.3%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.75; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with STEMI who were undergoing primary PCI, routine manual thrombectomy, as compared with PCI alone, did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA class IV heart failure within 180 days but was associated with an increased rate of stroke within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; TOTAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149044.).

Outcomes after thrombus aspiration for ST elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year follow-up of the prospective randomised TOTAL trial.

BACKGROUND: Two large trials have reported contradictory results at 1 year after thrombus aspiration in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). In a 1-year follow-up of the largest randomised trial of thrombus aspiration, we aimed to clarify the longer-term benefits, to help guide clinical practice. METHODS: The trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI versus PCI ALone in Patients with STEMI (TOTAL) was a prospective, randomised, investigator-initiated trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) alone in 10,732 patients with STEMI. Eligible adult patients (aged ≥18 years) from 87 hospitals in 20 countries were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1) within 12 h of symptom onset to receive routine manual thrombectomy with PCI or PCI alone. Permuted block randomisation (with variable block size) was done by a 24 h computerised central system, and was stratified by centre. Participants and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The trial did not show a difference at 180 days in the primary outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure. However, the results showed improvements in the surrogate outcomes of ST segment resolution and distal embolisation, but whether or not this finding would translate into a longer term benefit remained unclear. In this longer-term follow-up of the TOTAL study, we report the results on the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure) and secondary outcomes at 1 year. Analyses of the primary outcome were by modified intention to treat and only included patients who underwent index PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01149044. FINDINGS: Between Aug 5, 2010, and July 25, 2014, 10,732 eligible patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to thrombectomy followed by PCI (n=5372) or to PCI alone (n=5360). After exclusions of patients who did not undergo PCI in each group (337 in the PCI and thrombectomy group and 331 in the PCI alone group), the final study population comprised 10,064 patients (5035 thrombectomy and 5029 PCI alone). The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 395 (8%) of 5035 patients in the thrombectomy group compared with 394 (8%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (hazard ratio [HR] 1·00 [95% CI 0·87-1·15], p=0·99). Cardiovascular death within 1 year occurred in 179 (4%) of the thrombectomy group and in 192 (4%) of 5029 in the PCI alone group (HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·76-1·14], p=0·48). The key safety outcome, stroke within 1 year, occurred in 60 patients (1·2%) in the thrombectomy group compared with 36 (0·7%) in the PCI alone group (HR 1·66 [95% CI 1·10-2·51], p=0·015). INTERPRETATION: Routine thrombus aspiration during PCI for STEMI did not reduce longer-term clinical outcomes and might be associated with an increase in stroke. As a result, thrombus aspiration can no longer be recommended as a routine strategy in STEMI. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Network and Centre for Trials Internationally, and Medtronic Inc.

Cardioverter defibrillator implantation without induction of ventricular fibrillation: a single-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial (SIMPLE).

BACKGROUND: Defibrillation testing by induction and termination of ventricular fibrillation is widely done at the time of implantation of implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ICD implantation without defibrillation testing versus the standard of ICD implantation with defibrillation testing. METHODS: In this single-blind, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial (Shockless IMPLant Evaluation [SIMPLE]), we recruited patients aged older than 18 years receiving their first ICD for standard indications at 85 hospitals in 18 countries worldwide. Exclusion criteria included pregnancy, awaiting transplantation, particpation in another randomised trial, unavailability for follow-up, or if it was expected that the ICD would have to be implanted on the right-hand side of the chest. Patients undergoing initial implantation of a Boston Scientific ICD were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated sequence to have either defibrillation testing (testing group) or not (no-testing group). We used random block sizes to conceal treatment allocation from the patients, and randomisation was stratified by clinical centre. Our primary efficacy analysis tested the intention-to-treat population for non-inferiority of no-testing versus testing by use of a composite outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock (ie, a shock that did not terminate a spontaneous episode of ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation). The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·5 calculated from a proportional hazards model with no-testing versus testing as the only covariate; if the upper bound of the 95% CI was less than 1·5, we concluded that ICD insertion without testing was non-inferior to ICD with testing. We examined safety with two, 30 day, adverse event outcome clusters. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00800384. FINDINGS: Between Jan 13, 2009, and April 4, 2011, of 2500 eligible patients, 1253 were randomly assigned to defibrillation testing and 1247 to no-testing, and followed up for a mean of 3·1 years (SD 1·0). The primary outcome of arrhythmic death or failed appropriate shock occurred in fewer patients (90 [7% per year]) in the no-testing group than patients who did receive it (104 [8% per year]; HR 0·86, 95% CI 0·65-1·14; pnon-inferiority <0·0001). The first safety composite outcome occurred in 69 (5·6%) of 1236 patients with no-testing and in 81 (6·5%) of 1242 patients with defibrillation testing, p=0·33. The second, pre-specified safety composite outcome, which included only events most likely to be directly caused by testing, occurred in 3·2% of patients with no-testing and in 4·5% with defibrillation testing, p=0·08. Heart failure needing intravenous treatment with inotropes or diuretics was the most common adverse event (in 20 [2%] of 1236 patients in the no-testing group vs 28 [2%] of 1242 patients in the testing group, p=0·25). INTERPRETATION: Routine defibrillation testing at the time of ICD implantation is generally well tolerated, but does not improve shock efficacy or reduce arrhythmic death. FUNDING: Boston Scientific and the Heart and Stroke Foundation (Ontario Provincial office).

Culprit lesion thrombus burden after manual thrombectomy or percutaneous coronary intervention-alone in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the optical coherence tomography sub-study of the TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy versus PCI ALone) trial.

AIMS: Manual thrombectomy has been proposed as a strategy to reduce thrombus burden during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, the effectiveness of manual thrombectomy in reducing thrombus burden is uncertain. In this substudy of the TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy versus PCI ALone) trial, we compared the thrombus burden at the culprit lesion using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients treated with thrombectomy vs. PCI-alone. METHODS AND RESULTS: The TOTAL trial (N = 10 732) was an international, multicentre, randomized trial of thrombectomy (using the Export catheter, Medtronic Cardiovascular, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) in STEMI patients treated with primary PCI. The OCT substudy prospectively enrolled 214 patients from 13 sites in 5 countries. Optical coherence tomography was performed immediately after thrombectomy or PCI-alone and then repeated after stent deployment. Thrombus quantification was performed by an independent core laboratory blinded to treatment assignment. The primary outcome of pre-stent thrombus burden as a percentage of segment analysed was 2.36% (95% CI: 1.73-3.22) in the thrombectomy group and 2.88% (95% CI: 2.12-3.90) in the PCI-alone group (P = 0.373). Absolute pre-stent thrombus volume was not different (2.99 vs. 3.74 mm(3), P = 0.329). Other secondary outcomes of pre-stent quadrants of thrombus, post-stent atherothrombotic burden, and post-stent atherothrombotic volume were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: Manual thrombectomy did not reduce pre-stent thrombus burden at the culprit lesion compared with PCI-alone. Both strategies were associated with low thrombus burden at the lesion site after the initial intervention to restore flow.

Stroke in the TOTAL trial: a randomized trial of routine thrombectomy vs. percutaneous coronary intervention alone in ST elevation myocardial infarction.

AIMS: TOTAL (N = 10 732), a randomized trial of routine manual thrombectomy vs. percutaneous coronary intervention alone in ST elevation myocardial infarction, showed no difference in the primary efficacy outcome but a significant increase in stroke. We sought to understand these findings. METHODS AND RESULTS: A detailed analysis of stroke timing, stroke severity, and stroke subtype was performed. Strokes were adjudicated by neurologists blinded to treatment assignment. Stroke within 30 days, the primary safety outcome, was increased [33 (0.7%) vs. 16 (0.3%), hazard ratio (HR) 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13-3.75]. The difference in stroke was apparent within 48 h [15 (0.3%) vs. 5 (0.1%), HR 3.00; 95% CI 1.09-8.25]. There was an increase in strokes within 180 days with minor or no disability (Rankin 0-2) [18 (0.4%) vs. 13 (0.3%) HR 1.38; 95% CI 0.68-2.82] and in strokes with major disability or fatal (Rankin 3-6) [35 (0.7%) vs. 13 (0.3%), HR 2.69; 95% CI 1.42-5.08]. Most of the absolute difference was due to an increase in ischaemic strokes within 180 days [37 (0.7%) vs. 21 (0.4%), HR 1.71; 95% CI 1.03-3.00], but there was also an increase in haemorrhagic strokes [10 (0.2%) vs. 2 (0.04%), HR 4.98; 95% CI 1.09-22.7]. Patients that had a stroke had a mortality of 30.8% within 180 days vs. 3.4% without a stroke (P < 0.001). A meta-analysis of randomized trials (N = 21 173) showed an increase in risk of stroke (odds ratio 1.59; 95% CI 1.11-2.27) but a trend towards reduction in mortality odds ratio (odds ratio 0.87; 95% CI 0.76-1.00). CONCLUSION: Thrombectomy was associated with a significant increase in stroke. Based on these findings, future trials must carefully collect stroke to determine safety in addition to efficacy.

Design and rationale of the TOTAL trial: a randomized trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus PCI ALone in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI.

BACKGROUND: A major limitation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for the treatment of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is impaired microvascular perfusion due to embolization and obstruction of microcirculation with thrombus. Manual thrombectomy has the potential to reduce distal embolization and improve microvascular perfusion. Clinical trials have shown mixed results regarding thrombectomy. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of routine upfront manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI compared with percutaneous coronary intervention alone in patients with STEMI. DESIGN: This is a multicenter, prospective, open, international, randomized trial with blinded assessment of outcomes. Patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI are randomized to upfront routine manual aspiration thrombectomy with the Export catheter (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, CA) or to percutaneous coronary intervention alone. The primary outcome is the composite of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or new or worsening New York Heart Association class IV heart failure up to 180 days. The trial uses an event-driven design and will recruit 10,700 patients. SUMMARY: The TOTAL trial will determine the effect of routine manual aspiration thrombectomy during PPCI on clinically important outcomes.

Low-dose vs standard-dose unfractionated heparin for percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes treated with fondaparinux: the FUTURA/OASIS-8 randomized trial.

CONTEXT: The optimal unfractionated heparin regimen for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes treated with fondaparinux is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To compare the safety of 2 unfractionated heparin regimens during PCI in high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes initially treated with fondaparinux. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind randomized parallel-group trial in 179 hospitals in 18 countries involving 2026 patients undergoing PCI within 72 hours, nested within a cohort of 3235 high-risk patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes initially treated with fondaparinux enrolled from February 2009 to March 2010. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received intravenously either low-dose unfractionated heparin, 50 U/kg, regardless of use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (GpIIb-IIIa) inhibitors or standard-dose unfractionated heparin, 85 U/kg (60 U/kg with GpIIb-IIIa inhibitors), adjusted by blinded activated clotting time (ACT). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Composite of major bleeding, minor bleeding, or major vascular access-site complications up to 48 hours after PCI. Key secondary outcomes include composite of major bleeding at 48 hours with death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization within day 30. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 4.7% of those in the low-dose group vs 5.8% in the standard-dose group (odds ratio [OR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.19; P = .27). The rates of major bleeding were not different but the rates of minor bleeding were lower with 0.7% in the low-dose group vs 1.7% in the standard-dose group (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.16-0.97; P = .04). For the key secondary outcome, the rates for low-dose group were 5.8% vs 3.9% in the standard-dose group (OR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.00-2.28; P = .05) and for death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization it was 4.5% for the low-dose group vs 2.9% for the standard-dose group (OR, 1.58; 95% CI, 0.98-2.53; P = .06). Catheter thrombus rates were very low (0.5% in the low-dose group and 0.1% in the standard-dose group, P = .15). CONCLUSION: Low-dose compared with standard-dose unfractionated heparin did not reduce major peri-PCI bleeding and vascular access-site complications. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790907.

Nonculprit Lesion Plaque Morphology in Patients With ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From the COMPLETE Trial Optical Coherence Tomography Substudys.

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization with routine percutaneous coronary intervention of nonculprit lesions after primary percutaneous coronary intervention improves outcomes in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Whether this benefit is associated with nonculprit lesion vulnerability is unknown. METHODS: In a prospective substudy of the COMPLETEs trial (Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multi-Vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI), we performed optical coherence tomography of at least 2 coronary arteries before nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention in 93 patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; and the ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction culprit vessel if there was unstented segment amenable to imaging. Nonculprit lesions were categorized as obstructive (≥70% stenosis by visual angiographic assessment) or nonobstructive, and as thin-cap fibroatheroma (TCFA) or non-TCFA by optical coherence tomography criteria. TCFA was defined as a lesion with mean fibrous cap thickness <65 µm overlying a lipid arc >90°. RESULTS: On a patient level, at least one obstructive TCFA was observed in 44/93 (47%) of patients. On a lesion level, there were 58 TCFAs among 150 obstructive nonculprit lesions compared with 74 TCFAs among 275 nonculprit lesions (adjusted TCFA prevalence: 35.4% versus 23.2%, P=0.022). Compared with obstructive non-TCFAs, obstructive TCFAs had similar lesion length (23.1 versus 20.8 mm, P=0.16) but higher lipid quadrants (55.2 versus 19.2, P<0.001), greater mean lipid arc (203.8° versus 84.5°, P<0.001), and more macrophages (97.1% versus 54.4%, P<0.001) and cholesterol crystals (85.8% versus 44.3%, P<0.001). For nonobstructive lesions, TCFA lesions had similar lesion length (16.7 versus 14.6 mm, P=0.11), but more lipid quadrants (36.4 versus 13.5, P<0.001), and greater mean lipid arc (191.8° versus 84.2°, P<0.001) compared with non-TCFA. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who underwent optical coherence tomography imaging in the COMPLETE trial, nearly 50% had at least one obstructive nonculprit lesion containing complex vulnerable plaque. Obstructive lesions more commonly harbored vulnerable plaque morphology than nonobstructive lesions. This may help explain the benefit of routine percutaneous coronary intervention of obstructive nonculprit lesions in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01740479s.

Outcomes Among Clopidogrel, Prasugrel, and Ticagrelor in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Who Underwent Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention From the TOTAL Trial.

BACKGROUND: Robust comparisons between oral P2Y12 inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients who undergo primary percutaneous coronary intervention are lacking. We sought to evaluate outcomes on the basis of P2Y12 inhibitor therapy in patients from the Thrombectomy With PCI Versus PCI Alone in Patients With STEMI Undergoing Primary PCI (TOTAL) trial. METHODS: We grouped 9932 patients according to P2Y12 inhibitor at hospital discharge: clopidogrel (n = 6500; 65.5%), prasugrel (n = 1244; 12.5%), or ticagrelor (n = 2188; 22.0%). The primary composite end point of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association class IV heart failure was examined at 1 year. Secondary efficacy and safety end points were also assessed. Cox proportional hazard ratios were determined and adjusted for confounders via propensity scoring. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics differing between the 3 groups were mainly age 75 years or older, diabetes, and previous stroke. After adjustment, ticagrelor use was associated with a lower rate of the primary composite outcome compared with clopidogrel (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.91; P < 0.02) and prasugrel (aHR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.89; P = 0.02). Prasugrel use was not associated with a lower rate of the primary outcome compared with clopidogrel (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.86-1.39; P > 0.99). Neither prasugrel nor ticagrelor were associated with increased risk of stroke compared with clopidogrel. Compared with clopidogrel, ticagrelor was associated with significantly lower rates of major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: In this observational analysis of STEMI patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor was associated with improved outcomes compared with clopidogrel and prasugrel. An appropriately powered randomized trial is needed to confirm these findings.

Defibrillation testing and clinical outcomes after implantable cardioverter-defibrillator implantation in patients in atrial fibrillation at the time of implant: An analysis from the SIMPLE trial.

BACKGROUND: The Shockless IMPLant Evaluation (SIMPLE) trial showed that defibrillation testing (DT) at the time of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implant did not improve shock efficacy or reduce mortality. There are no data regarding the risk of complications, including stroke, among patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) who undergo DT. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this prospectively planned substudy of SIMPLE was to evaluate the effect of DT vs no DT on clinical outcomes among patients with AF. METHODS: We compared efficacy (failed appropriate shock/arrhythmic death) and safety between patients who had AF on their immediate preprocedural ECG to the rest of the study patients. Then among patients with AF we compared these outcomes between patients randomized to DT vs no DT. RESULTS: Of the 2500 patients enrolled in SIMPLE, 251 (10%) were in AF immediately before ICD implant. AF patients had an increased risk of failed appropriate shock/arrhythmic death (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.64; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-2.39; P = .009) and higher all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 1.58; 95% CI 1.2-2.08; P = .001). Among AF patients, perioperative complications and stroke did not significantly differ between DT vs no-DT groups (9.2% vs 5.4%; P = .2; and 1.7% vs 1.5%; P >.999, respectively). Failed appropriate shock or arrhythmic death occurred in 35 of 251 AF patients (14%), and the no-DT group proved not inferior to the DT group (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.30-1.15; Pnoninferiority = .006). CONCLUSION: ICD recipients with AF are at increased risk for adverse outcomes; however, DT does not improve arrhythmic survival or shock efficacy. There is no evidence that DT increased the occurrence of perioperative stroke.

Timing of Staged Nonculprit Artery Revascularization in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: COMPLETE Trial.

BACKGROUND: The COMPLETE (Complete vs Culprit-only Revascularization to Treat Multi-vessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI) trial demonstrated that staged nonculprit lesion percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduced major cardiovascular (CV) events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of nonculprit-lesion PCI timing on major CV outcomes and also the time course of the benefit of complete revascularization. METHODS: Following culprit-lesion PCI, 4,041 patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD were randomized to staged nonculprit-lesion PCI or culprit-lesion only PCI. Randomization was stratified according to investigator-planned timing of nonculprit-lesion PCI: during or after the index hospitalization. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of CV death or myocardial infarction (MI). In pre-specified analyses, hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated for each time stratum. Landmark analyses of the entire population were performed within 45 days and after 45 days. RESULTS: For nonculprit-lesion PCI planned during the index hospitalization (actual time: median 1 day), CV death or MI was reduced with complete revascularization compared with culprit-lesion only PCI (HR: 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 1.00). For nonculprit lesion PCI planned to occur after hospital discharge (actual time: median 23 days), CV death or MI was also reduced with complete revascularization (HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.49 to 0.97; interaction p = 0.62). Landmark analyses demonstrated an HR of 0.86 (95% CI: 0.59 to 1.24) during the first 45 days and 0.69 (95% CI: 0.54 to 0.89) from 45 days to the end of follow-up for intended nonculprit lesion PCI versus culprit lesion only PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Among STEMI patients with multivessel disease, the benefit of complete revascularization over culprit-lesion only PCI was consistent irrespective of the investigator-determined timing of nonculprit-lesion intervention. The benefit of complete revascularization on hard clinical outcomes emerged mainly over the long term.

Thrombus Aspiration in Patients With High Thrombus Burden in the TOTAL Trial.

BACKGROUND: Routine thrombus aspiration in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) does not improve clinical outcomes. However, there is remaining uncertainty about the potential benefit in those patients with high thrombus burden, where there is a biological rationale for greater benefit. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefit of thrombus aspiration among STEMI patients with high thrombus burden. METHODS: TOTAL (ThrOmbecTomy with PCI vs. PCI ALone in patients with STEMI) was a randomized trial of routine manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone in patients with STEMI (n = 10,732). High thrombus burden (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction thrombus grade ≥3) was a pre-specified subgroup. RESULTS: The primary outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death, MI, cardiogenic shock, or heart failure was not different at 1 year with thrombus aspiration in patients with high thrombus burden (8.1% vs. 8.3% thrombus aspiration; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84 to 1.13) or low thrombus burden (6.0% vs. 5.0% thrombus aspiration; HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 0.73 to 2.05; interaction p = 0.41). However, among patients with high thrombus burden, stroke at 30 days was more frequent with thrombus aspiration (31 [0.7%] thrombus aspiration vs. 16 [0.4%] PCI alone, HR: 1.90; 95% CI: 1.04 to 3.48). In the high thrombus burden group, thrombus aspiration did not significantly improve CV mortality at 30 days (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.61 to 1.01; p = 0.06) and at 1 year (HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.09; p = 0.25). Irrespective of treatment assignment, high thrombus burden was an independent predictor of death (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.05 to 3.01). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with high thrombus burden, routine thrombus aspiration did not improve outcomes at 1 year and was associated with an increased rate of stroke. High thrombus burden is still an important predictor of outcome in STEMI. (A Trial of routine aspiration ThrOmbecTomy with PCI vs. PCI ALone in patients with STEMI [TOTAL]; NCT01149044).