Angina After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Patient and Procedural Predictors.

BACKGROUND: Twenty percent to 40% of patients are affected by angina after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which is associated with anxiety, depression, impaired physical function, and reduced quality of life. Understanding patient and procedural factors associated with post-PCI angina may inform alternative approaches to treatment. METHODS: Two hundred thirty patients undergoing PCI completed the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ-7) and European quality of life-5 dimension-5 level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaires at baseline and 3 months post-PCI. Patients received blinded intracoronary physiology assessments before and after stenting. A post hoc analysis was performed to compare clinical and procedural characteristics among patients with and without post-PCI angina (defined by follow-up SAQ-angina frequency score <100). RESULTS: Eighty-eight of 230 patients (38.3%) reported angina 3 months post-PCI and had a higher incidence of active smoking, atrial fibrillation, and history of previous myocardial infarction or PCI. Compared with patients with no angina at follow-up, they had lower baseline SAQ summary scores (69.48±24.12 versus 50.20±22.59, P<0.001) and EQ-5D-5L health index scores (0.84±0.15 versus 0.69±0.22, P<0.001). Pre-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR) was lower among patients who had no post-PCI angina (0.56±0.15 versus 0.62±0.13, P=0.003). Percentage change in FFR after PCI had a moderate correlation with angina frequency score at follow-up (r=0.36, P<0.0001). Patients with post-PCI angina had less improvement in FFR (43.1±33.5% versus 67.0±50.7%, P<0.001). There were no between-group differences in post-PCI FFR, coronary flow reserve, or corrected index of microcirculatory resistance. Patients with post-PCI angina had lower SAQ-summary scores (64.01±22 versus 95.16±8.72, P≤0.001) and EQ-5D-5L index scores (0.69±0.26 versus 0.91±0.17, P≤0.001) at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Larger improvements in FFR following PCI were associated with less angina and better quality of life at follow-up. In patients with stable symptoms, intracoronary physiology assessment can inform expectations of angina relief and quality of life improvement after stenting and thereby help to determine the appropriateness of PCI. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT03259815.

Protocol for an economic evaluation of the randomised controlled trial of culprit lesion only PCI versus immediate multivessel PCI in acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: CULPRIT-SHOCK trial.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion for patients with acute myocardial infarctions is an accepted practice. A majority of patients present with multivessel disease with additional relevant stenoses apart from the culprit lesion. In haemodynamically stable patients, there is increasing evidence from randomised trials to support the practice of immediate complete revascularisation. However, in the presence of cardiogenic shock, the optimal management strategy for additional non-culprit lesions is unknown. A multicentre randomised controlled trial, CULPRIT-SHOCK, is examining whether culprit vessel only PCI with potentially subsequent staged revascularisation is more effective than immediate multivessel PCI. This paper describes the intended economic evaluation of the trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The economic evaluation will be conducted using a pre-trial decision model and within-trial analysis. The modelling-based analysis will provide expected costs and health outcomes, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over the lifetime for the cohort of patients included in the trial. The within-trial analysis will provide estimates of cost per life saved at 30 days and in 1 year, and estimates of health-related quality of life. Bootstrapping and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves will be used to address any uncertainty around these estimates. Different types of regression models within a generalised estimating equation framework will be used to examine how the total cost and quality-adjusted life years are explained by patients' characteristics, revascularisation strategy, country and centre. The cost-effectiveness analysis will be from the perspective of each country's national health services, where costs will be expressed in euros adjusted for purchasing power parity. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval for the study was granted by the local Ethics Committee at each recruiting centre. The economic evaluation analyses will be published in peer-reviewed journals of the concerned literature and communicated through the profiles of the authors at www.twitter.com and www.researchgate.net. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01927549; Pre-results.