Chronobiological variation in takotsubo syndrome: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Takotsubo syndrome (TTS) might exhibit particular chronobiological patterns in its onset, characterized by variations according to time of the day, day of the week, and month of the year. The aim of this study was to fully explore the temporal patterns (circadian, weekly and seasonal) in the onset of TTS. A systematic review and meta-analysis of literature were conducted for studies (2006-2024) reporting the temporal patterns (circadian, weekly and/or seasonal) in the onset of TTS. Among the 4257 studies retrieved, 20 (including 64,567 subjects) fulfilled all eligibility criteria. Data were aggregated used random effects model as pooled risk ratio and the attributable risk (AR). The proportion analysis (including 8 studies; n=853) showed a decreasing pattern of the pooled rates of TTS shifting from the morning to the night (pooled TTS rates: 34.0%; 32.1%; 21.7%; 12.7% in the morning, afternoon, evening and night, respectively). The same pattern was observed stratifying by type of preceding stressful factor or event, considering physical stressors (pooled rates in the morning and night: 37.6% and 9.8%, respectively), and also in case no event could be identified. The pooled rates of TTS onset peaked on Monday and Tuesday (17.3% and 18.4% respectively), then declined during the week, reaching the lowest rates on Friday and Saturday (10.6% and 10.8%, respectively), with no sex differences. TTS onset reached the highest values on summer, and the lowest in winter (27.9% versus 21.7% in summer and winter, respectively). The TTS morning peak based analyses (∼33% of all the registered events) account for a RR of 1.46 (95% CI: 1.38-1.54), the week-based for a RR of 1.26 (1.16-1.35), the season-based for a RR of 1.04 (1.04-1.05). TTS onset exhibits specific chronobiological patterns, characterized by a peak during the morning hours, and on Monday and Tuesday. Differing from other cardiovascular emergencies TTS was more frequent during summer. Further studies are needed to fully understand the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms in order to tailor relative management and preventive strategies.

Effect of timed dosing of usual antihypertensives according to patient chronotype on cardiovascular outcomes: the Chronotype sub-study cohort of the Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) study.

Background: Timing drug administration to endogenous circadian rhythms may enhance treatment efficacy. In the Chronotype sub-study of the Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) clinical trial we examined whether timing of usual antihypertensive medications according to patient chronotype (a behavioural marker of personal circadian rhythm) may influence clinical cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: This was a cohort sub-study of TIME, a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint, UK clinical trial of morning versus evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medications and cardiovascular outcomes. On August 3rd, 2020, all active TIME participants were invited to complete a validated chronotype questionnaire. Chronotype was quantitatively assessed as the mid sleep time on free days corrected for sleep debt on workdays (MSFsc). We analysed associations between chronotype and antihypertensive dosing time and explored their combined effect on cardiovascular outcomes (a composite endpoint of hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or non-fatal stroke, and single components) using proportional hazard time-to-event models adjusted for baseline covariates. These were used to specifically test for interactions between dosing time and chronotype. Findings: Between August 3, 2020, and March 31, 2021, 5358 TIME participants completed the online questionnaire. 2778 were previously randomised to morning dosing and 2580 to evening dosing of their usual antihypertensives. Chronotype was symmetrically distributed around a median MSFsc of 3:07 am. The composite endpoint increased for later MSFsc (later chronotype) dosed in the morning but not in those dosed in the evening (hazard ratios 1.46 [95% CI 1.14-1.86] and 0.96 [95% CI 0.70-1.30] per hour of MSFsc, respectively; interaction p = 0.036). Later chronotype was associated with increased risk of hospitalisation for non-fatal MI in the morning dosing group, and reduced risk in the evening dosing group (hazard ratios 1.62 [95% CI 1.18-2.22] and 0.66 [95% CI 0.44-1.00] per hour of MSFsc, respectively; interaction p < 0.001). No interaction between chronotype and antihypertensive dosing time was observed for stroke events. Interpretation: Alignment of dosing time of usual antihypertensives with personal chronotype could lower the incidence of non-fatal MI compared to a 'misaligned' dosing time regimen. Future studies are warranted to establish whether synchronizing administration time of antihypertensive therapy with individual chronotype reduces risk of MI. Funding: The TIME study was funded by the British Heart Foundation (CS/14/1/30659) with support from the British and Irish Hypertension Society.

Allopurinol and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease: the ALL-HEART RCT and economic evaluation.

Background: Allopurinol is a xanthine oxidase inhibitor that lowers serum uric acid and is used to prevent acute gout flares in patients with gout. Observational and small interventional studies have suggested beneficial cardiovascular effects of allopurinol. Objective: To determine whether allopurinol improves major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease. Design: Prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint multicentre clinical trial. Setting: Four hundred and twenty-four UK primary care practices. Participants: Aged 60 years and over with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Interventions: Participants were randomised (1 : 1) using a central web-based randomisation system to receive allopurinol up to 600 mg daily that was added to usual care or to continue usual care. Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or cardiovascular death. Secondary outcomes were non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, hospitalisation for heart failure, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome, coronary revascularisation, hospitalisation for acute coronary syndrome or coronary revascularisation, all cardiovascular hospitalisations, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. The hazard ratio (allopurinol vs. usual care) in a Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for superiority in a modified intention-to-treat analysis. Results: From 7 February 2014 to 2 October 2017, 5937 participants were enrolled and randomised to the allopurinol arm (n = 2979) or the usual care arm (n = 2958). A total of 5721 randomised participants (2853 allopurinol; 2868 usual care) were included in the modified intention-to-treat analysis population (mean age 72.0 years; 75.5% male). There was no difference between the allopurinol and usual care arms in the primary endpoint, 314 (11.0%) participants in the allopurinol arm (2.47 events per 100 patient-years) and 325 (11.3%) in the usual care arm (2.37 events per 100 patient-years), hazard ratio 1.04 (95% confidence interval 0.89 to 1.21); p = 0.65. Two hundred and eighty-eight (10.1%) participants in the allopurinol arm and 303 (10.6%) participants in the usual care arm died, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.87 to 1.20); p = 0.77. The pre-specified health economic analysis plan was to perform a 'within trial' cost-utility analysis if there was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint, so NHS costs and quality-adjusted life-years were estimated over a 5-year period. The difference in costs between treatment arms was +£115 higher for allopurinol (95% confidence interval £17 to £210) with no difference in quality-adjusted life-years (95% confidence interval -0.061 to +0.060). We conclude that there is no evidence that allopurinol used in line with the study protocol is cost-effective. Limitations: The results may not be generalisable to younger populations, other ethnic groups or patients with more acute ischaemic heart disease. One thousand six hundred and thirty-seven participants (57.4%) in the allopurinol arm withdrew from randomised treatment, but an on-treatment analysis gave similar results to the main analysis. Conclusions: The ALL-HEART study showed that treatment with allopurinol 600 mg daily did not improve cardiovascular outcomes compared to usual care in patients with ischaemic heart disease. We conclude that allopurinol should not be recommended for the secondary prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with ischaemic heart disease but no gout. Future work: The effects of allopurinol on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease and co-existing hyperuricaemia or clinical gout could be explored in future studies. Trial registration: This trial is registered as EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2013-003559-39) and ISRCTN (ISRCTN 32017426). Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 11/36/41) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 18. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

The purpose of the ALL-HEART study was to determine whether giving allopurinol to people with ischaemic heart disease (also commonly known as coronary heart disease) would reduce their risk of having a heart attack, stroke or of dying from cardiovascular disease. Allopurinol is a medication usually given to patients with gout to prevent acute gout flares. It is not currently used to treat ischaemic heart disease. We randomly allocated people aged over 60 years with ischaemic heart disease to take up to 600 mg of allopurinol daily (in addition to their usual care) or to continue with their usual care. We then monitored participants for several years and recorded any major health events such as heart attacks, strokes and deaths. We obtained most of the follow-up data from centrally held electronic hospital admissions and death records, making the study easier for participants and more cost-efficient. We asked participants in both groups to complete questionnaires to assess their quality of life during the study. We also collected data to determine whether there was any economic benefit to the NHS of using allopurinol in patients with ischaemic heart disease. There was no difference in the risk of heart attacks, strokes or death from cardiovascular disease between the participants given allopurinol and those in the group continuing their usual care. We also found no difference in the risks of other cardiovascular events, deaths from any cause or quality-of-life measurements between the allopurinol and usual care groups. The results of the ALL-HEART study suggest that we should not recommend that allopurinol be given to people with ischaemic heart disease to prevent further cardiovascular events or deaths.

Allopurinol versus usual care in UK patients with ischaemic heart disease (ALL-HEART): a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial.

BACKGROUND: Allopurinol is a urate-lowering therapy used to treat patients with gout. Previous studies have shown that allopurinol has positive effects on several cardiovascular parameters. The ALL-HEART study aimed to determine whether allopurinol therapy improves major cardiovascular outcomes in patients with ischaemic heart disease. METHODS: ALL-HEART was a multicentre, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint trial done in 18 regional centres in England and Scotland, with patients recruited from 424 primary care practices. Eligible patients were aged 60 years or older, with ischaemic heart disease but no history of gout. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1), using a central web-based randomisation system accessed via a web-based application or an interactive voice response system, to receive oral allopurinol up-titrated to a dose of 600 mg daily (300 mg daily in participants with moderate renal impairment at baseline) or to continue usual care. The primary outcome was the composite cardiovascular endpoint of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death. The hazard ratio (allopurinol vs usual care) in a Cox proportional hazards model was assessed for superiority in a modified intention-to-treat analysis (excluding randomly assigned patients later found to have met one of the exclusion criteria). The safety analysis population included all patients in the modified intention-to-treat usual care group and those who took at least one dose of randomised medication in the allopurinol group. This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT 2013-003559-39, and ISRCTN, ISRCTN32017426. FINDINGS: Between Feb 7, 2014, and Oct 2, 2017, 5937 participants were enrolled and then randomly assigned to receive allopurinol or usual care. After exclusion of 216 patients after randomisation, 5721 participants (mean age 72·0 years [SD 6·8], 4321 [75·5%] males, and 5676 [99·2%] white) were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, with 2853 in the allopurinol group and 2868 in the usual care group. Mean follow-up time in the study was 4·8 years (1·5). There was no evidence of a difference between the randomised treatment groups in the rates of the primary endpoint. 314 (11·0%) participants in the allopurinol group (2·47 events per 100 patient-years) and 325 (11·3%) in the usual care group (2·37 events per 100 patient-years) had a primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·89-1·21], p=0·65). 288 (10·1%) participants in the allopurinol group and 303 (10·6%) participants in the usual care group died from any cause (HR 1·02 [95% CI 0·87-1·20], p=0·77). INTERPRETATION: In this large, randomised clinical trial in patients aged 60 years or older with ischaemic heart disease but no history of gout, there was no difference in the primary outcome of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or cardiovascular death between participants randomised to allopurinol therapy and those randomised to usual care. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Cardiovascular outcomes in adults with hypertension with evening versus morning dosing of usual antihypertensives in the UK (TIME study): a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that evening dosing with antihypertensive therapy might have better outcomes than morning dosing. The Treatment in Morning versus Evening (TIME) study aimed to investigate whether evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication improves major cardiovascular outcomes compared with morning dosing in patients with hypertension. METHODS: The TIME study is a prospective, pragmatic, decentralised, parallel-group study in the UK, that recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with hypertension and taking at least one antihypertensive medication. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1), without restriction, stratification, or minimisation, to take all of their usual antihypertensive medications in either the morning (0600-1000 h) or in the evening (2000-0000 h). Participants were followed up for the composite primary endpoint of vascular death or hospitalisation for non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke. Endpoints were identified by participant report or record linkage to National Health Service datasets and were adjudicated by a committee masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was assessed as the time to first occurrence of an event in the intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants randomly assigned to a treatment group). Safety was assessed in all participants who submitted at least one follow-up questionnaire. The study is registered with EudraCT (2011-001968-21) and ISRCTN (18157641), and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between Dec 17, 2011, and June 5, 2018, 24 610 individuals were screened and 21 104 were randomly assigned to evening (n=10 503) or morning (n=10 601) dosing groups. Mean age at study entry was 65·1 years (SD 9·3); 12 136 (57·5%) participants were men; 8968 (42·5%) were women; 19 101 (90·5%) were White; 98 (0·5%) were Black, African, Caribbean, or Black British (ethnicity was not reported by 1637 [7·8%] participants); and 2725 (13·0%) had a previous cardiovascular disease. By the end of study follow-up (March 31, 2021), median follow-up was 5·2 years (IQR 4·9-5·7), and 529 (5·0%) of 10 503 participants assigned to evening treatment and 318 (3·0%) of 10 601 assigned to morning treatment had withdrawn from all follow-up. A primary endpoint event occurred in 362 (3·4%) participants assigned to evening treatment (0·69 events [95% CI 0·62-0·76] per 100 patient-years) and 390 (3·7%) assigned to morning treatment (0·72 events [95% CI 0·65-0·79] per 100 patient-years; unadjusted hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·83-1·10]; p=0·53). No safety concerns were identified. INTERPRETATION: Evening dosing of usual antihypertensive medication was not different from morning dosing in terms of major cardiovascular outcomes. Patients can be advised that they can take their regular antihypertensive medications at a convenient time that minimises any undesirable effects. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation.

The Prognostic Value of Derivatives-Reactive Oxygen Metabolites (d-ROMs) for Cardiovascular Disease Events and Mortality: A Review.

Oxidative stress participates in the development and exacerbation of cardiovascular diseases (CVD). The ability to promptly quantify an imbalance in an individual reductive-oxidative (RedOx) state could improve cardiovascular risk assessment and management. Derivatives-reactive oxygen metabolites (d-ROMs) are an emerging biomarker of oxidative stress quantifiable in minutes through standard biochemical analysers or by a bedside point-of-care test. The current review evaluates available data on the prognostic value of d-ROMs for CVD events and mortality in individuals with known and unknown CVD. Outcome studies involving small and large cohorts were analysed and hazard ratio, risk ratio, odds ratio, and mean differences were used as measures of effect. High d-ROM plasma levels were found to be an independent predictor of CVD events and mortality. Risk begins increasing at d-ROM levels higher than 340 UCARR and rises considerably above 400 UCARR. Conversely, low d-ROM plasma levels are a good negative predictor for CVD events in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure. Moreover, combining d-ROMs with other relevant biomarkers routinely used in clinical practice might support a more precise cardiovascular risk assessment. We conclude that d-ROMs represent an emerging oxidative-stress-related biomarker with the potential for better risk stratification both in primary and secondary cardiovascular prevention.

Tricuspid annular disjunction can be isolated and even arrhythmogenic. A cardiac magnetic resonance study.

Mitral annular disjunction is related to increased arrhythmogenic risk; in a certain percentage of cases, mitral annular disjunction is associated with tricuspid annular disjunction. While the prognostic implications of mitral annular disjunction have been well established, there is still little data to define this aspect regarding the tricuspid annular disjunction. We present a case of a patient admitted for life-threatening ventricular arrhythmias that occurred during endurance sporting activity, who was found to have isolated tricuspid annular disjunction, not associated with mitral annular disjunction. Based on several factors, including the morphology and axis of QRS of the ventricular arrhythmic activity, and its behavior, including the response to antiarrhythmic treatment, and in keeping with the finding of edema and late gadolinium enhancement at the basal segment of the right ventricle free wall on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging, a direct relation between tricuspid annular disjunction and ventricular arrhythmias was highly conceivable. Control after three months showed almost complete remission of the previously described and persistence of LGE at the level of the basal segment of the free wall of the right ventricle, so giving strength to the hypothesis of an event related to increased acute RV free wall stress, secondary to high-intensity physical activity, established on a framework of chronic wall stress, as represented by LGE, similarly to what happens for mitral valve prolapse. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first case of a legitimately conceivable direct relation between tricuspid annular disjunction and ventricular arrhythmias.

Adverse events and overall health and well-being after COVID-19 vaccination: interim results from the VAC4COVID cohort safety study.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the incidence of adverse events (AEs), reactogenicity symptoms, menstrual changes and overall self-rated improvement in health and well-being after COVID-19 vaccination. DESIGN: VAC4COVID is an ongoing prospective, active observational, post-authorisation cohort safety study (PASS) of UK-approved vaccines for COVID-19 disease. SETTING: The study is conducted through a secure website (www.vac4covid.com) by MEMO Research, University of Dundee, UK. PARTICIPANTS: 16 265 adult (18 years or older) UK residents with a valid email address and internet access. INTERVENTIONS: Any UK-authorised COVID-19 vaccination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcomes reported in this interim analysis include AEs, reactogenicity-type AEs (headache, fatigue, muscle or joint pain, fever, nausea, dizziness or local vaccine reaction), menstrual changes and reported improvement in overall health and well-being. RESULTS: 11 475 consented participants (mean age 54.8 years) provided follow-up data between 2 February and 5 October 2021 (mean follow-up duration 184 days), by which date 89.2% of participants had received two vaccine doses. 89.8% of 5222 participants who completed a follow-up questionnaire in the 7 days after any COVID-19 vaccination reported no AEs. The risk of experiencing any event (not necessarily vaccine-related) requiring hospitalisation was less than 0.2%. 43.7% of post-vaccination follow-up records reported improvement in health and well-being. Reactogenicity-type reactions were more common in the week after the first dose of ChAdOx1 than BNT162b2 (7.8% vs 1.6%), but this relationship was reversed after the second dose (1.3% vs 3.1%). 0.3% of women reported menstrual symptoms after vaccination; no differences between vaccine type or dose order were detected. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides reassuring data on low rates of AEs after COVID-19 vaccination. Differences in reactogenicity-type AE profiles between ChAdOx1 and BNT162b2 and between first and second doses of these vaccines were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN95881792; Pre-results.

Initial impacts of global risk mitigation measures taken during the combatting of the COVID-19 pandemic.

This paper presents an analysis of risk mitigation measures taken by countries around the world facing the current COVID-19 outbreak. In light of the current pandemic the authors collated and clustered (using harmonised terminology) the risk mitigation measures taken around the globe in the combat to contain, and since March 11, 2020, to limit the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus known to cause the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This overview gathers lessons learnt, providing an update on the current knowledge for authorities, sectors and first responders on the effectiveness of said measures, and may allow enhanced prevention, preparedness and response for future outbreaks. Various measures such as mobility restrictions, physical distancing, hygienic measures, socio-economic restrictions, communication and international support mechanisms have been clustered and are reviewed in terms of the nature of the actions taken and their qualitative early-perceived impact. At the time of writing, it is still too premature to express the quantitative effectiveness of each risk mitigation cluster, but it seems that the best mitigation results are reported when applying a combination of voluntary and enforceable measures.

Sighting acute myocardial infarction through platelet gene expression.

Acute myocardial infarction is primarily due to coronary atherosclerotic plaque rupture and subsequent thrombus formation. Platelets play a key role in the genesis and progression of both atherosclerosis and thrombosis. Since platelets are anuclear cells that inherit their mRNA from megakaryocyte precursors and maintain it unchanged during their life span, gene expression profiling at the time of an acute myocardial infarction provides information concerning the platelet gene expression preceding the coronary event. In ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), a gene-by-gene analysis of the platelet gene expression identified five differentially expressed genes: FKBP5, S100P, SAMSN1, CLEC4E and S100A12. The logistic regression model used to combine the gene expression in a STEMI vs healthy donors score showed an AUC of 0.95. The same five differentially expressed genes were externally validated using platelet gene expression data from patients with coronary atherosclerosis but without thrombosis. Platelet gene expression profile highlights five genes able to identify STEMI patients and to discriminate them in the background of atherosclerosis. Consequently, early signals of an imminent acute myocardial infarction are likely to be found by platelet gene expression profiling before the infarction occurs.

The effect of indapamide vs. bendroflumethiazide for primary hypertension: a systematic review.

The aims of the current review were to compare the efficacy of monotherapy with bendroflumethiazide vs. indapamide on mortality, cardiovascular outcomes, blood pressure, need for intensification of treatment and treatment withdrawal. Two authors independently screened the results of a literature search, assessed the risk of bias and extracted relevant data. Randomized clinical trials of hypertensive patients of at least a 1-year duration were included. When there was disagreement, a third reviewer was consulted. Risk ratio (RR) and mean differences were used as measures of effect. Two trials comparing bendroflumethiazide against placebo, one comparing indapamide with placebo and three of short duration directly comparing indapamide and Bendroflumethiazide, were included. No statistically significant difference was found between indapamide and bendroflumethiazide for all deaths [RR 0.82; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57, 1.18], cardiovascular deaths (RR 0.82; 95% CI 0.55, 1.20), noncardiovascular deaths (0.81; 95% CI 0.54, 1.22), coronary events (RR 0.73; 95% CI 0.30, 1.79) or all cardiovascular events (RR 0.89; 95% CI 0.67, 1.18). Indapamide performed worse for stroke (RR 2.21; 95% CI 1.19, 4.11), even though a reduction in RR compared with placebo was observed in both groups. There was no statistically or clinically significant difference between indapamide and bendroflumethiazide in blood pressure reduction (mean absolute difference <1 mmHg). The present review highlights a lack of studies to answer the review question but also a lack of evidence of superiority of one drug over the other. Therefore, there is a clear need for new studies directly comparing the effect of these drugs on the outcomes of interest.

Pharmacogenomic Approach to Selecting Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes: The PHARMCLO Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although clopidogrel is still frequently used in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), its efficacy is hampered by interpatient response variability caused by genetic polymorphisms associated with clopidogrel's metabolism. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to evaluate whether selecting antiplatelet therapy (clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor) on the basis of a patient's genetic and clinical characteristics leads to better clinical outcomes compared with the standard of care, which bases the selection on clinical characteristics alone. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for ACS were randomly assigned to standard of care or the pharmacogenomic arm, which included the genotyping of ABCB1, CYP2C19*2, and CYP2C19*17 using an ST Q3 system that provides data within 70 min at each patient's bedside. The patients were followed up for 12 ± 1 month for the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death and the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and major bleeding defined according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 criteria. RESULTS: After enrolling 888 patients, the study was prematurely stopped. Clopidogrel was used more frequently in the standard-of-care arm (50.7% vs. 43.3%), ticagrelor in the pharmacogenomic arm (42.6% vs. 32.7%; p = 0.02), and prasugrel was equally used in both arms. The primary endpoint occurred in 71 patients (15.9%) in the pharmacogenomic arm and in 114 (25.9%) in the standard-of-care arm (hazard ratio: 0.58; 95% confidence interval: 0.43 to 0.78; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A personalized approach to selecting antiplatelet therapy for patients with ACS may reduce ischemic and bleeding events. (Pharmacogenetics of Clopidogrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes [PHARMCLO]; NCT03347435).

Scar Detection by Pulse-Cancellation Echocardiography: Validation by CMR in Patients With Recent STEMI.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess an echocardiographic approach (scar imaging echocardiography with ultrasound multipulse scheme [eSCAR]), based on existing multipulse ultrasound scheme, as a marker of myocardial scar in humans, compared with cardiac magnetic resonance assessing late gadolinium enhancement (CMR-LGE). BACKGROUND: The detection of myocardial scar impacts patient prognosis and management in coronary artery disease and other types of cardiac disease. The clinical experience with echocardiography suggests that the reflected ultrasound signal is often significantly enhanced in infarcted myocardial segments. METHODS: Twenty patients with a recent ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (cases) and 15 patients with absent CMR-LGE (negative controls) were imaged with both the eSCAR pulse-cancellation echocardiography and CMR-LGE to assess their potential association. RESULTS: Scar was detectable at CMR-LGE in 19 of 20 STEMI patients (91%), whereas all (100%) demonstrated eSCAR at echocardiography. In the 19 STEMI patients in whom CMR-LGE was detected, regional matching between eSCAR and CMR-LGE was total, although the segmental extent of detected scar was not always superimposable, particularly in the most apical segments, a region in which eSCAR demonstrated undersensitivity for the true extent of scar. CONCLUSIONS: A 2-dimensional multipulse echocardiography allows detection of myocardial scar, reliably matching the presence and site of CMR-LGE at 30 days after STEMI, or its absence in negative controls.

Rapid and portable, lab-on-chip, point-of-care genotyping for evaluating clopidogrel metabolism.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a platelet P2Y12 receptor inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, ticagrelor) is a cornerstone of antithrombotic treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Clopidogrel has been the standard of care for nearly a decade; however, its clinical efficacy is influenced by a considerable inter-patient variability in response, clearly associated to cytochrome P (CYP) enzyme genetic variations. We used a novel point-of-care lab-on-chip instrument to genotype ACS patients in order to identify carriers of the ATB-binding cassette ABCB1 3435, CYP2C19*2 and CYPC2C19*17 alleles and adjust the pharmacological approach accordingly. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between October 2012 and January 2013, 160 ACS patients were enrolled at the Cardiology Unit of the Ospedale Niguarda Cà Granda and genotyped at the patients' point-of-care using the newly developed Q3 portable real-time PCR instrument, which remarkably scored the CYP2C19*2, CYP2C19*17, and ABCB1 3435 alleles in a time of 70 min from DNA extraction to final genotype calls; concordance with the other gold-standard genotyping techniques was 100%. CONCLUSIONS: The Q3 instrument proved to be as reliable as the current conventional techniques. As genotyping in the ACS setting cannot be delegated to centralised clinical laboratories for reasons of time, genotyping at the patients' bedside provides an opportunity to conduct large-scale randomised trials in order to assess whether adding genotype data to clinical variables improves clinical outcomes.

Multiparametric carotid and cardiac ultrasound compared with clinical risk scores for the prediction of angiographic coronary artery disease: a multicenter prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular risk prediction is deemed fundamental and the assessment of organ damage is emerging as a potentially 'downstream' picture of individual risk. Our aim was to assess the feasibility and value of prediction of coronaropathy [coronary artery disease (CAD)] of integrated cardiovascular ultrasound examination. METHODS: This multicenter study involved eight cardiology centers that enrolled 457 consecutive patients. Blood pressures, carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT), carotid pulse wave velocity (cPWV), semiquantitative score of cardiac calcifications, global myocardial longitudinal strain (GLS), and rest Doppler flow velocity on the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery were measured. After coronary angiography, patients were divided in CAD, n = 273, at least one coronary stenosis higher than 50%, and no CAD, n = 184. RESULTS: CAD were older (65.9 ±â€Š10.7 versus 63.1 ±â€Š11.2 years, mean ±â€Šstandard deviation, P = 0.01), and had higher blood pressure (137.0 ±â€Š18.8/77.5 ±â€Š11.1 versus 130.2 ±â€Š17.4/75.1 ±â€Š9.7 mmHg, P < 0.02), cIMT (791.4 ±â€Š165.5 versus 712.0 ±â€Š141.5 mcm, P < 0.0001), cPWV (median: 9 versus 8.1 m/s, P < 0.01), score of calcium (median, 2 versus 1, P < 0.0001), LAD velocity (median, 38 versus 36, P < 0.07), and lower GLS (-17.6 ±â€Š4.3 versus -19.3 ±â€Š5.1, P < 0.05) than no CAD. Score of calcium was feasible in the totality of patients, cIMT in 97%, cPWV in 86%, GLS in 88%, and LAD in 84%. A combination of at least three variables was measurable in 80% of the patients. All ultrasound parameters significantly predicted CAD. However, in a stepwise logistic regression, the only combined predictors of obstructive CAD were score of calcium, cIMT, and LAD velocity. CONCLUSION: In Echo-Lab, Rome, Italy, the integrated cardiovascular ultrasound study is feasible in a high percentage of patients. The combination of three parameters, that is, score of calcium, cIMT, and LAD velocity, has incremental predictive value for obstructive CAD.

Cardiac calcium score on 2D echo: correlations with cardiac and coronary calcium at multi-detector computed tomography.

BACKGROUND: To test the hypothesis that a semi-quantitative echocardiographic calcium score (eCS) significantly correlates with cardiac calcium measured by coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and, secondarily, severe coronary artery calcifications and stenosis. METHODS: This is a retrospective, observational study, conducted in a tertiary centre. eCS was compared with CCTA scores of non-coronary cardiac calcium (nCACS), coronary cardiac calcium (CACS) and number of diseased coronary vessels, in 141 subjects without known coronary artery disease (CAD), who underwent both echocardiography and CCTA for clinical reasons. RESULTS: Age, prevalence of hypertension and all measures of calcium (eCS, nCACS and CACS) differed significantly between the no-CAD and CAD subgroups. eCS was positively correlated with nCACS (Spearman rho = 0.64, p < 0.0001), CACS (rho = 0.46, p < 0.01) and weakly with the number of diseased coronary vessels (rho = 0.28, p < 0.05). eCS and nCACS had similar area under the curve (AUC) for the prediction of severe CACS (≥400) (0.77, 95% CI 0.68-0.86 and 0.79, 95% CI 0.72-0.88) or obstructive CAD (0.63, 95% CI 0.54-0.72 and 0.63, 95% CI 0.55-0.73). CONCLUSIONS: eCS, a calcium score easily obtainable during standard echocardiography, is moderately to strongly correlated with nCACS by CCTA. The full eCS score correlates with nCACS better than its single components. It correlates with CACS and predicts severe coronary calcification (CACS > 400), a known predictor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The eCS also predicts obstructive CAD, incrementally to age and clinical variables, although for this purpose CACS remains the most accurate score.