RESUMO
Background@#Coronary artery disease patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) often exhibit reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). However, the impact of LV dysfunction status in conjunction with platelet reactivity on clinical outcomes has not been previously investigated. @*Methods@#From the multicenter PTRG-DES (Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term prognosis in DES-treated patients) consortium, the patients were classified as preserved-EF (PEF: LVEF ≥ 50%) and reduced-EF (REF: LVEF< 5 0%) group by echocardiography. Platelet reactivity was measured using VerifyNow P2Y 12 assay and high platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as PRU ≥ 252. The major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) were a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and stroke at 5 years after PCI. Major bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding types 3–5. @*Results@#A total of 13,160 patients from PTRG-DES, 9,319 (79.6%) patients with the results of both PRU and LVEF were analyzed. The incidence of MACCE and major bleeding was higher in REF group as compared with PEF group (MACCEs: hazard ratio [HR] 2.17, P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85–2.55; major bleeding: HR 1.78, P < 0.001, 95% CI 1.39–2.78).The highest rate of MACCEs was found in patients with REF and HPR, and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (HR 3.14 in REF(+)/HPR(+) vs. PEF(+)/HPR(-) group,P <0.01, 95% CI 2.51–3.91). The frequency of major bleeding was not associated with the HPR in either group. @*Conclusion@#LV dysfunction was associated with an increased incidence of MACCEs and major bleeding in patients who underwent PCI. The HPR status further exhibited significant increase of MACCEs in patients with LV dysfunction in a large, real-world registry.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04734028
RESUMO
Background@#The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using secondgeneration drug-eluting stents (DESs). @*Methods@#Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). @*Results@#Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). @*Conclusion@#The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES.
RESUMO
Objectives@#Limited information is available concerning the epidemiology of stroke and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the Republic of Korea. This study aimed to develop a national surveillance system to monitor the incidence of stroke and AMI using national claims data. @*Methods@#We developed and validated identification algorithms for stroke and AMI using claims data. This validation involved a 2-stage stratified sampling method with a review of medical records for sampled cases. The weighted positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated based on the sampling structure and the correspondingsampling rates. Incident cases and the incidence rates of stroke and AMI in the Republic ofKorea were estimated by applying the algorithms and weighted PPV and NPV to the 2018National Health Insurance Service claims data. @*Results@#In total, 2,200 cases (1,086 stroke cases and 1,114 AMI cases) were sampled from the 2018 claims database. The sensitivity and specificity of the algorithms were 94.3% and 88.6% for stroke and 97.9% and 90.1% for AMI, respectively. The estimated number of cases, including recurrent events, was 150,837 for stroke and 40,529 for AMI in 2018. The age- and sex-standardized incidence rate for stroke and AMI was 180.2 and 46.1 cases per 100,000 person-years, respectively, in 2018. @*Conclusion@#This study demonstrates the feasibility of developing a national surveillance system based on claims data and identification algorithms for stroke and AMI to monitor their incidence rates.
RESUMO
Purpose@#The incidence and prognostic implications of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are controversial, especially for Korean patients. Furthermore, the pattern of antithrombotic therapy for these patients is unknown. The present study sought to identify the impact of AF on Korean patients undergoing TAVI and demonstrate the status of antithrombotic therapy for these patients. @*Materials and Methods@#A total of 660 patients who underwent TAVI for severe AS were recruited from the nationwide K-TAVI registry in Korea. The enrolled patients were stratified into sinus rhythm (SR) and AF groups. The primary endpoint was all-cause death at 1-year. @*Results@#AF was recorded in 135 patients [pre-existing AF 108 (16.4%) and new-onset AF 27 (4.1%)]. The rate of all-cause death at 1 year was significantly higher in patients with AF than in those with SR [16.2% vs. 6.4%, adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 2.207, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.182–4.120, p=0.013], regardless of the onset timing of AF. The rate of new pacemaker insertion at 1 year was also significantly higher in patients with AF than in those with SR (14.0% vs. 5.5%, adjusted HR: 3.137, 95%CI: 1.621–6.071, p=0.001).Among AF patients, substantial number of patients received the combination of multiple antithrombotic agents (77.8%), and the most common combination was that of aspirin and clopidogrel (38.1%). @*Conclusion@#AF was an independent predictor of 1-year mortality and new pacemaker insertion in Korean patients undergoing TAVI.
RESUMO
Background and Objectives@#De-escalation of dual-antiplatelet therapy through dose reduction of prasugrel improved net adverse clinical events (NACEs) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS), mainly through the reduction of bleeding without an increase in ischemic outcomes. Whether the benefits of de-escalation are sustained in highly thrombotic conditions such as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is unknown. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of de-escalation therapy in patients with STEMI or non-STsegment elevation ACS (NSTE-ACS). @*Methods@#This is a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS trial. ACS patients were randomized to prasugrel de-escalation (5 mg daily) or conventional dose (10 mg daily) at 1-month post-percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary endpoint was a NACE, defined as a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, clinically driven revascularization, stroke, and bleeding events of grade ≥2 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria at 1 year. @*Results@#Among 2,338 patients included in the randomization, 326 patients were diagnosed with STEMI. In patients with NSTE-ACS, the risk of the primary endpoint was significantly reduced with de-escalation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.48– 0.89; p=0.006 for de-escalation vs. conventional), mainly driven by a reduced bleeding. However, in those with STEMI, there was no difference in the occurrence of the primary outcome (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.48–2.26; p=0.915; p for interaction=0.271). @*Conclusions@#Prasugrel dose de-escalation reduced the rate of NACE and bleeding, without increasing the rate of ischemic events in NSTE-ACS patients but not in STEMI patients.
RESUMO
Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the leading causes of morbidity and death globally. In particular, a heart failure remains a major problem that contributes to global mortality. Considerable advancements have been made in conventional pharmacological therapies and coronary intervention surgery for cardiac disorder treatment. However, more than 15% of patients continuously progress to end-stage heart failure and eventually require heart transplantation. Over the past year, numerous numbers of protocols to generate cardiomyocytes (CMCs) from human pluripotent stem cells (hPSCs) have been developed and applied in clinical settings. Number of studies have described the therapeutic effects of hPSCs in animal models and revealed the underlying repair mechanisms of cardiac regeneration. In addition, biomedical engineering technologies have improved the therapeutic potential of hPSC-derived CMCs in vivo. Recently substantial progress has been made in driving the direct differentiation of somatic cells into mature CMCs, wherein an intermediate cellular reprogramming stage can be bypassed.This review provides information on the role of hPSCs in cardiac regeneration and discusses the practical applications of hPSC-derived CMCs; furthermore, it outlines the relevance of directly reprogrammed CMCs in regenerative medicine.
RESUMO
Background/Aims@#While switching strategies of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (RIs) have sometimes been used in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients, the current status of in-hospital P2Y12RI switching remains unknown. @*Methods@#Overall, 8,476 AMI patients who underwent successful revascularization from Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institute of Health (KAMIR-NIH) were divided according to in-hospital P2Y12RI strategies, and net adverse cardiovascular events (NACEs), defined as a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding during hospitalization were compared. @*Results@#Patients with in-hospital P2Y12RI switching accounted for 16.5%, of which 867 patients were switched from clopidogrel to potent P2Y12RI (C-P) and 532 patients from potent P2Y12RI to clopidogrel (P-C). There were no differences in NACEs among the unchanged clopidogrel, the unchanged potent P2Y12RIs, and the P2Y12RI switching groups. However, compared to the unchanged clopidogrel group, the C-P group had a higher incidence of non-fatal MI, and the P-C group had a higher incidence of TIMI major bleeding. In clinical events of in-hospital P2Y12RI switching, 90.9% of non-fatal MI occurred during pre-switching clopidogrel administration, 60.7% of TIMI major bleeding was related to pre-switching P2Y12RIs, and 71.4% of TIMI major bleeding was related to potent P2Y12RIs. Only 21.6% of the P2Y12RI switching group switched to P2Y12RIs after a loading dose (LD); however, there were no differences in clinical events between patients with and without LD. @*Conclusions@#In-hospital P2Y12RI switching occurred occasionally, but had relatively similar clinical outcomes compared to unchanged P2Y12RIs in Korean AMI patients. Non-fatal MI and bleeding appeared to be mainly related to pre-switching P2Y12RIs.
RESUMO
Purpose@#Platelet function test (PFT) results and genotype hold unique prognostic implications in East Asian patients. The aim of the PTRG-DES (Platelet function and genoType-Related long-term proGnosis in Drug-Eluting Stent-treated Patients with coronary artery disease) consortium is to assess the clinical impact thereof on long-term clinical outcomes in Korean patients with coronary artery disease during dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) including clopidogrel. @*Materials and Methods@#Searching publications on the PubMed, we reviewed clopidogrel treatment studies with PFT and/or genotype data for potential inclusion in this study. Lead investigators were invited to share PFT/genotype results, patient characteristics, and clinical outcomes to evaluate relationships among them. @*Results@#Nine registries from 32 academic centers participated in the PTRG-DES consortium, contributing individual patient data from 13160 patients who underwent DES implantation between July 2003 and August 2018. The PTRG-PFT cohort was composed of 11714 patients with available VerifyNow assay results. Platelet reactivity levels reached 218±79 P2Y12 reaction units (PRU), and high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity based on a consensus-recommended cutoff (PRU >208) was observed in 55.9%. The PTRGGenotype cohort consisted of 8163 patients with candidate genotypes related with clopidogrel responsiveness. Of those with cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 genotype, frequencies of carrying one and two loss-of-function allele (s) (*2 or *3) were 47.9% (intermediate metabolizers) and 14.2% (poor metabolizers), respectively. @*Conclusion@#The PTRG-DES consortium highlights unique values for on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity and CYP2C19 phenotype that may be important to developing optimal antiplatelet regimens in East Asian patients.
RESUMO
Objective@#Recent studies have raised concerns about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the cardiovascular outcomes of sulfonylureas (SUs) versus DPP4 inhibitors in combination with metformin. @*Methods@#After searching for trials using combination therapy of metformin with an SU or DPP4 inhibitor in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, 1 prospective observational study and 15 randomized controlled studies were selected. @*Results@#Regarding the primary analysis endpoint, no significant differences were found in the risk of all-cause mortality between SUs and DPP4 inhibitors as add-on therapies to metformin (random-effect relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98–1.33;I2 =0%; p=0.097). Cardiovascular death was also similar between SUs and DPP4 inhibitors in the 5 studies that reported outcomes (random-effect RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83–1.27; I2 =0%; p=0.817). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events, coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, and heart failure. However, the SU group showed a higher risk of ischemic stroke, more hypoglycemic events, and more weight gain than the DPP4 inhibitor group (ischemic stroke, random-effect RR, 2.78; 95% CI, 1.06–7.30; I2 =51.9%; p=0.039; hypoglycemia, random-effect RR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.53–9.39; I2 =98.2; p=0.004; weight gain, weighted mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.07–2.29; I2 =94.7; p<0.001). @*Conclusion@#As add-on therapies to metformin, SUs and DPP4 inhibitors showed no significant differences in all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. However, some of the favorable results of DPP4 inhibitors suggest good safety and feasibility of the drugs.
RESUMO
Background and Objectives@#The outcome benefits of β-blockers in chronic coronary artery disease (CAD) have not been fully assessed. We evaluated the prognostic impact of β-blockers on patients with chronic CAD after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). @*Methods@#A total of 3,075 patients with chronic CAD were included from the Grand DrugEluting Stent registry. We analyzed β-blocker prescriptions, including doses and types, in each patient at 3-month intervals from discharge. After propensity score matching, 1,170 pairs of patients (β-blockers vs. no β-blockers) were derived. Primary outcome was defined as a composite endpoint of all-cause death and myocardial infarction (MI). We further analyzed the outcome benefits of different doses (low-, medium-, and high-dose) and types (conventional or vasodilating) of β-blockers. @*Results@#During a median (interquartile range) follow-up of 3.1 (3.0–3.1) years, 134 (5.7%) patients experienced primary outcome. Overall, β-blockers demonstrated no significant benefit in primary outcome (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63–1.24), all-cause death (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.60–1.25), and MI (HR, 1.25; 95% CI, 0.49–3.15). In subgroup analysis, β-blockers were associated with a lower risk of all-cause death in patients with previous MI and/ or revascularization (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.14–0.99) (p for interaction=0.045). No significant associations were found for the clinical outcomes with different doses and types of β-blockers. @*Conclusions@#Overall, β-blocker therapy was not associated with better clinical outcomes in patients with chronic CAD undergoing PCI. Limited mortality benefit of β-blockers may exist for patients with previous MI and/or revascularization.
RESUMO
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a fatal manifestation of ischemic heart disease and remains a major public health concern worldwide despite advances in its diagnosis and management. The characteristics of patients with AMI, as well as its disease patterns,have gradually changed over time in Korea, and the outcomes of revascularization have improved dramatically. Several characteristics associated with the revascularization of Korean patients differ from those of patients in other countries. The sophisticated state of AMI revascularization in Korea has led to the need for a Korean expert consensus. The Task Force on Expert Consensus Document of the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction has comprehensively reviewed the outcomes of large clinical trials and current practical guidelines, as well as studies on Korean patients with AMI. Based on these comprehensive reviews, the members of the task force summarize the major guidelines and recent publications, and propose an expert consensus for revascularization in patients with AMI.
RESUMO
Objective@#Recent studies have raised concern about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors. We performed a systematic review through meta-analysis to compare cardiovascular outcomes of sulfonylurea (SU) versus DPP4 inhibitors when used in combination with metformin. @*Methods@#After searching for trials using combination therapy of metformin with DPP4 inhibitor or SU in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, one prospective observation study and 15 randomized controlled studies were selected. @*Results@#Regarding the primary analysis endpoint, there were no significant differences in the risk of all-cause mortality between SU and DPP4 inhibitors as an add-on therapy to metformin (random-effect relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98–1.33;p=0.811; I2 =0%). Cardiovascular death was also similar between the two drug classes in the five studies which reported outcomes (random-effect RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83–1.27; p=0.517; I2 =0%). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events (MACE), coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and heart failure. However, there were less hypoglycemic events and weight gain in the DPP4 inhibitor group as compared with the SU group (random-effect RR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.53–9.39; p<0.001; I2 =98.2 and weighted mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.07–2.29; p<0.001; I2 =94.7, respectively). @*Conclusion@#As add-on therapy to metformin, there were no significant differences in allcause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between DPP4 inhibitors and SUs.
RESUMO
Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a fatal manifestation of ischemic heart disease and remains a major public health concern worldwide despite advances in its diagnosis and management. The characteristics of patients with AMI, as well as its disease patterns,have gradually changed over time in Korea, and the outcomes of revascularization have improved dramatically. Several characteristics associated with the revascularization of Korean patients differ from those of patients in other countries. The sophisticated state of AMI revascularization in Korea has led to the need for a Korean expert consensus. The Task Force on Expert Consensus Document of the Korean Society of Myocardial Infarction has comprehensively reviewed the outcomes of large clinical trials and current practical guidelines, as well as studies on Korean patients with AMI. Based on these comprehensive reviews, the members of the task force summarize the major guidelines and recent publications, and propose an expert consensus for revascularization in patients with AMI.
RESUMO
Objective@#Recent studies have raised concern about the cardiovascular safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors. We performed a systematic review through meta-analysis to compare cardiovascular outcomes of sulfonylurea (SU) versus DPP4 inhibitors when used in combination with metformin. @*Methods@#After searching for trials using combination therapy of metformin with DPP4 inhibitor or SU in PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase, one prospective observation study and 15 randomized controlled studies were selected. @*Results@#Regarding the primary analysis endpoint, there were no significant differences in the risk of all-cause mortality between SU and DPP4 inhibitors as an add-on therapy to metformin (random-effect relative risk [RR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98–1.33;p=0.811; I2 =0%). Cardiovascular death was also similar between the two drug classes in the five studies which reported outcomes (random-effect RR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.83–1.27; p=0.517; I2 =0%). Furthermore, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac events (MACE), coronary heart disease, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke and heart failure. However, there were less hypoglycemic events and weight gain in the DPP4 inhibitor group as compared with the SU group (random-effect RR, 3.79; 95% CI, 1.53–9.39; p<0.001; I2 =98.2 and weighted mean difference, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.07–2.29; p<0.001; I2 =94.7, respectively). @*Conclusion@#As add-on therapy to metformin, there were no significant differences in allcause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between DPP4 inhibitors and SUs.
RESUMO
Background@#Although ticagrelor is known to increase the bleeding risk compared to clopidogrel in East Asian patients, its clinical benefits in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without high bleeding risk (HBR) remains unknown. @*Methods@#A total of 7,348 patients who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institute of Health (KAMIR-NIH), between November 2011 and December 2015, were divided into two groups according to the Academic Research Consortium for HBR criteria (KAMIR-HBR, 2,469 patients; KAMIR-non HBR, 4,879 patients). We compared in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs, defined as a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or stroke), and the thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major bleeding between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the KAMIR-HBR and the KAMIR-non HBR groups, respectively. @*Results@#After propensity score matching, ticagrelor had a higher incidence of in-hospital TIMI major bleeding than clopidogrel in all patients (odds ratio [OR], 1.683; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.010–2.805; P = 0.046) and the KAMIR-HBR group (OR, 3.460; 95% CI, 1.374–8.714; P = 0.008). However, there was no significant difference in in-hospital TIMI major bleeding between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in the KAMIR-non HBR group (OR, 1.436; 95% CI, 0.722–2.855; P = 0.303). No differences were observed in the cumulative incidences of in-hospital and 6-month MACEs between ticagrelor and clopidogrel in both groups. @*Conclusions@#The bleeding risk of ticagrelor was attenuated in Korean patients with AMI without HBR. Appropriate patient selection could reduce in-hospital bleeding complications associated with ticagrelor in Korean patients with AMI who underwent successful PCI.
RESUMO
Background and Objectives@#This clinical trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of D+Storm™ drug-eluting stent (DES) and BioMatrix Flex™ DES. @*Methods@#This study was a multicenter, subject-single-blind, randomized, and confirmed comparative clinical trial. According to the inclusion criteria, those diagnosed with stable angina, unstable angina, silent ischemia, or non-ST-segment myocardial infarction were selected among patients with coronary artery stenosis as subjects. Among the subjects with 50% stenosis on coronary angiography, the experiment was performed on those who had a lesion with reference vessel 2.5–4.0 mm in diameter and ≤40 mm in length. The primary endpoint was an in-segment late loss and the secondary endpoints were in-stent late lumen loss, stent malapposition, the incidence of mortality, myocardial infarction, reoperation, and stent thrombosis at 36 weeks. @*Results@#57 patients in the D+Storm™ DES group and 55 patients in the BioMatrix Flex™ DES group were enrolled in the study. Fifty-seven patients in the D+Storm™ DES group and Fifty-five patients in the BioMatrix Flex™ DES group were enrolled in the study. An average of in-segment late lumen loss was 0.08±0.13 mm in the D+Storm™ DES group and 0.14±0.32mm in the BioMatrix Flex™ DES group with no significant difference between the 2 groups (p=0.879). In addition, there was no significant difference in adverse events between D+Storm™ DES and BioMatrix Flex™ DES. @*Conclusions@#This study demonstrated the clinical effectiveness and safety of D+Storm™ DES implantation in patients with coronary artery disease over a 36-week follow-up period.
RESUMO
Background/Aims@#We evaluated changes in the ascending aorta dimension post-transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in bicuspid aortic valve (BiAV) and tricuspid aortic valve (TAV) patients. @*Methods@#Patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR at Seoul National University Hospital were consecutively recruited. Patients with less than 12 months’ follow-up and/or with an ascending aorta size larger than 50 mm were excluded. The ascending aorta size was measured on a parasternal long axis view using transthoracic echocardiography. @*Results@#Among the 67 patients who were included (age: 76.5 ± 6.5 years; male: 52.2%; AV area: 0.67 ± 0.15 cm2), 19 (28.4%) had BiAV; 48 (71.6%) had TAV. The median (interquartile ranges) follow-up duration was 398 days (361 to 451). BiAV patients were younger (73.2 ± 7.2 vs. 77.8 ± 5.8, p = 0.008), and had lower incidences of chronic renal disease (5.3% vs. 35.4%, p = 0.014) and history of coronary intervention (15.8% vs. 50.0%, p = 0.013), than TAV patients. On pre-procedural echocardiography, the ascending aorta dimensions in BiAV patients were larger than those in TAV patients (40.5 ± 3.8 mm vs. 35.9 ± 4.2 mm, p < 0.005). The ascending aorta dimension changed minimally during follow-up; post-TAVR, the ascending aorta’s growth rate was –0.11 ± 1.9 and 0.26 ± 1.8 mm/yr in patients with BiAV and TAV, respectively (p = 0.50). Progression of the ascending aorta’s dimension postTAVR was not clinically significant in BiAV patients. @*Conclusions@#The concern about the progression of aortopathy in BiAV patients post-TAVR may not be a clinical issue. This should be confirmed in studies with a larger population and with a longer follow-up duration.
RESUMO
Background/Aims@#Long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers is unknown. This study aimed to investigate the long-term benefit of vasodilating β-blockers over conventional β-blockers in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). @*Methods@#Using nationwide prospective multicenter Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry data, we analyzed 3-year clinical outcomes of 7,269 patients with AMI who received percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and β-blocker therapy. Patients were classified according to treatment strategy (vasodilating β-blockers vs. conventional β-blockers). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and hospitalization for heart failure (HF) at 3 years. Secondary outcomes were each component of the primary outcome. Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences of baseline characteristics. @*Results@#In 3,079 pairs (6,158 patients) of propensity score-matched patients, the primary outcome occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group compared with the conventional β-blockers group (7.6% vs. 9.8%, p = 0.003). Among the secondary outcomes, cardiac death occurred significantly less in the vasodilating β-blockers group than in the conventional group (3.5% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.015). The incidence rates of MI (2.4% vs. 3.0%, p = 0.160) or hospitalization for HF (2.6% vs. 3.2%, p = 0.192) were not significantly different between the two groups. @*Conclusions@#Vasodilating β-blocker therapy was associated with better clinical outcomes compared with conventional β-blocker therapy in AMI patients undergoing PCI during 3 years follow-up. Vasodilating β-blockers could be recommended preferentially for these patients.
RESUMO
The optimal dose of beta blockers after acute myocardial infarction (MI) remains uncertain. We evaluated the effectiveness of low-dose nebivolol, a beta1 blocker and a vasodilator, in patients with acute MI. A total of 625 patients with acute MI from 14 teaching hospitals in Korea were divided into 2 groups according to the dose of nebivolol (nebistol®, Elyson Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Seoul, Korea): low-dose group (1.25 mg daily, n=219) and usual- to high-dose group (≥2.5 mg daily, n=406). The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE, composite of death from any cause, non-fatal MI, stroke, repeat revascularization, rehospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure) at 12 months. After adjustment using inverse probability of treatment weighting, the rates of MACCE were not different between the low-dose and the usual- to high-dose groups (2.8% and 3.1%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.92, 95% confidence interval: 0.38 to 2.24, p=0.860). The low-dose nebivolol group showed higher rates of MI than the usual- to high-dose group (1.2% and 0%, p=0.008). The 2 groups had similar rates of death from any cause (1.1% and 0.3%, p=0.273), stroke (0.4% and 1.1%, p=0.384), repeat PCI (1.2% and 0.8%, p=0.428), rehospitalization for unstable angina (1.2% and 1.0%, p=0.743) and for heart failure (0.6% and 0.7%, p=0.832). In patients with acute MI, the rates of MACCE for low-dose and usual- to high-dose nebivolol were not significantly different at 12-month follow-up.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The impact of SYNergy between percutaneous coronary intervention with TAXus and cardiac surgery score (SS) and SS II in patients who receive percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES) has not been fully validated.METHODS: The SS, SS II were calculated in 1,248 patients with left main and/or 3-vessel disease treated with EES. Patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE; all-cause death, any myocardial infarction (MI), any revascularization) and target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel MI, target lesion revascularization) were analyzed.RESULTS: The mean SS was 21.1±9.6. Three-year POCE increased according to the SS group (15.2% vs. 19.9% vs. 27.4% for low (≤22), intermediate (≥23, ≤32), high (≥33) SS groups, p<0.001). By multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis, SS group was an independent predictor of 3-year POCE (hazard ratio, 1.324; 95% confidence interval, 1.095–1.601; p=0.004). The receiver operating characteristic curves revealed that the SS II was superior to the SS for 3-year POCE prediction (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.611 vs. 0.669 for SS vs. SS II, p=0.019), but not for 3-year TLF (AUC: 0.631 vs. 0.660 for SS vs. SS II, p=0.996). In subgroup analysis, SS II was superior to SS in patients with cardiovascular clinical risk factors, and in those presenting as stable angina.CONCLUSIONS: The usefulness of SS and SS II was still valid in patients with left main and/or 3-vessel disease. SS II was superior to SS for the prediction of patient-oriented outcomes, but not for lesion-oriented outcomes.TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00698607ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01605721