Prognostic impact of precipitated cardiac decompensation in symptomatic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and severe secondary mitral regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to assess the distribution of primary (with no trigger) and secondary (with a decompensation trigger) heart failure events in a severe heart failure population and their association with 2-year all-cause mortality in the Mitra.Fr study. METHODS: We included 304 patients with symptomatic heart failure, and severe mitral regurgitation and guideline directed medical therapy randomized to medical therapy alone or medical therapy with percutaneous mitral valve repair. According to the follow-up, we defined 3 categories of events: follow-up without any heart failure event, at least 1 decompensation starting with a primary heart failure decompensation or starting with a precipitated secondary heart failure event. The primary outcome was 2-years all-cause mortality. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients (59 %) had at least 1 heart failure decompensation within 24-months of follow-up. 129 heart failure decompensations (72%) were a first primary heart failure and 50 (28%) were a first secondary decompensation. Finally, 30 patients had both types of decompensations but these were not taken into account for the comparison of primary and secondary decompensations. Primary decompensations were 3-times more frequent than secondary decompensations, but the mean number of heart failure decompensations was similar in the "Primary heart failure group" compared to the "Secondary heart failure group": (1.94 ± 1.39 vs 1.80 ± 1.07 respectively; P = .480). Compared to patients without heart failure decompensation, patients with "Only primary decompensation" or with "Only secondary decompensation" had a significantly increased risk of death (HR = 4.87, 95% CI [2.86, 8.32] and 2.68 95%CI [1.64, 4.37] respectively). All-cause mortality, was not significantly different between these 2 type of decompensations (HR = 1.82, 95% CI [0.93, 3.58]; P = .082), but each additional heart failure recurrence was associated with a significant increase in mortality risk (HR = 1.27, 95% CI [1.08; 1.50]; P = .005). CONCLUSIONS: In heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and severe secondary mitral regurgitation patients, primary heart failure decompensations were 3-times more frequent compared to precipitated decompensations with a nonsignificant trend in increased risk of all-cause mortality. Our results fail to support the differentiation between primary and secondary decompensations as they seem to portend the same outcome impact.

A Multimodal Cardioprotection Strategy During Cardiac Surgery: The ProCCard Study.

OBJECTIVE: The ProCCard study tested whether combining several cardioprotective interventions would reduce the myocardial and other biological and clinical damage in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Multicenter tertiary care hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: 210 patients scheduled to undergo aortic valve surgery. INTERVENTIONS: A control group (standard of care) was compared to a treated group combining five perioperative cardioprotective techniques: anesthesia with sevoflurane, remote ischemic preconditioning, close intraoperative blood glucose control, moderate respiratory acidosis (pH 7.30) just before aortic unclamping (concept of the "pH paradox"), and gentle reperfusion just after aortic unclamping. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome was the postoperative 72-h area under the curve (AUC) for high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I (hsTnI). Secondary endpoints were biological markers and clinical events occurring during the 30 postoperative days and the prespecified subgroup analyses. The linear relationship between the 72-h AUC for hsTnI and aortic clamping time, significant in both groups (p < 0.0001), was not modified by the treatment (p = 0.57). The rate of adverse events at 30 days was identical. A non-significant reduction of the 72-h AUC for hsTnI (-24%, p = 0.15) was observed when sevoflurane was administered during cardiopulmonary bypass (46% of patients in the treated group). The incidence of postoperative renal failure was not reduced (p = 0.104). CONCLUSION: This multimodal cardioprotection has not demonstrated any biological or clinical benefit during cardiac surgery. The cardio- and reno-protective effects of sevoflurane and remote ischemic preconditioning therefore remain to be demonstrated in this context.

Multimodal cardioprotective strategy in cardiac surgery (the ProCCard trial): Study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial damage in patients undergoing cardiac surgery increases both morbidity and mortality. Different protective strategies dealing with either preconditioning or postconditioning or assessing a single aspect of cardioprotection have shown conflicting results. We tested the hypothesis that a multimodal approach would improve cardioprotection and limit myocardial damage following cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. METHODS: This study is a pragmatic multicenter (six French institutions), prospective, randomized, single-blinded, controlled trial. The randomization is stratified by centers. In the study, 210 patients scheduled for aortic valve surgery with or without coronary artery bypass grafting will be assigned to a control or a treatment group (105 patients in each group). In the control group, patients receive total intravenous anesthesia with propofol and liberal intraoperative blood glucose management (initiation of insulin infusion when blood glucose, measured every 60 min, is greater than 180 mg/dl), as a standard of care. The treatment group receives a bundle of care combining five techniques of cardioprotection: (1) remote ischemic preconditioning applied before aortic cross-clamping; (2) maintenance of anesthesia with sevoflurane; (3) tight intraoperative blood glucose management (initiation of insulin infusion when blood glucose, measured every 30 min, is greater than 140 mg/dl); (4) moderate respiratory acidosis (pH 7.30) at the end of cardiopulmonary bypass; and (5) a gentle reperfusion protocol following aortic unclamping. The primary outcome is myocardial damage measured by postoperative 72-h area under the curve of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I. DISCUSSION: The ProCCard study will be the first multicenter randomized controlled trial aiming to assess the role of a bundle of care combining several cardioprotective strategies to reduce myocardial damage in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03230136 . Registered on July 26, 2017. Last updated on April 17, 2019.

Percutaneous repair or medical treatment for secondary mitral regurgitation: outcomes at 2 years.

AIMS: The MITRA-FR trial showed that among symptomatic patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, percutaneous repair did not reduce the risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months compared with guideline-directed medical treatment alone. We report the 24-month outcome from this trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: At 37 centres, we randomly assigned 304 symptomatic heart failure patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation (effective regurgitant orifice area >20 mm2 or regurgitant volume >30 mL), and left ventricular ejection fraction between 15% and 40% to undergo percutaneous valve repair plus medical treatment (intervention group, n = 152) or medical treatment alone (control group, n = 152). The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months. At 24 months, all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 63.8% of patients (97/152) in the intervention group and 67.1% (102/152) in the control group [hazard ratio (HR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.34]. All-cause mortality occurred in 34.9% of patients (53/152) in the intervention group and 34.2% (52/152) in the control group (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.70-1.50). Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 55.9% of patients (85/152) in the intervention group and 61.8% (94/152) in the control group (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72-1.30). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, percutaneous repair added to medical treatment did not significantly reduce the risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure at 2 years compared with medical treatment alone.

Percutaneous Repair or Medical Treatment for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation.

BACKGROUND: In patients who have chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, severe secondary mitral-valve regurgitation is associated with a poor prognosis. Whether percutaneous mitral-valve repair improves clinical outcomes in this patient population is unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients who had severe secondary mitral regurgitation (defined as an effective regurgitant orifice area of >20 mm2 or a regurgitant volume of >30 ml per beat), a left ventricular ejection fraction between 15 and 40%, and symptomatic heart failure, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy (intervention group; 152 patients) or to receive medical therapy alone (control group; 152 patients). The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, the rate of the primary outcome was 54.6% (83 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 51.3% (78 of 152 patients) in the control group (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.84; P=0.53). The rate of death from any cause was 24.3% (37 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 22.4% (34 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.77). The rate of unplanned hospitalization for heart failure was 48.7% (74 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 47.4% (72 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.56). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, the rate of death or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year did not differ significantly between patients who underwent percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Research National Program and Abbott Vascular; MITRA-FR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01920698 .).

ELLIPSE Study: a Phase 1 study evaluating the tolerance of bevacizumab nasal spray in the treatment of epistaxis in hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is a dominantly inherited genetic vascular disorder in which epistaxis is the most frequent manifestation, responsible for high morbidity. Management of this symptom has no standard, and local treatments are often aggressive. Their efficacy is variable and has not been proven. Anti-angiogenic drugs, such as bevacizumab, are a new treatment strategy. Its systemic administration in patients with HHT improves liver damage-related symptoms and epistaxis. To limit the systemic adverse effects of bevacizumab and to ease administration, a local administration seems suitable. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the tolerance of increasing doses of bevacizumab administered as a nasal spray in patients with HHT-related epistaxis. Secondary objectives were to study the bioavailability and efficacy of bevacizumab against epistaxis when given as a nasal spray. METHODOLOGY: Phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, monocentric study performed sequentially (dose escalation) on 5 groups of 8 patients. Each group was made up of 6 verum and 2 placebos. Five increasing doses of bevacizumab nasal spray (25 mg/mL) were evaluated: 12.5, 25, 50, 75 and 100 mg. RESULTS: A total of 40 patients were included between October 2011 and October 2012. Bevacizumab nasal spray was well tolerated in all patients and the drug was not detected in their serum. No dose limiting toxicity was observed. No efficacy was observed at any dose in this study. CONCLUSION: Based on these results, bevacizumab nasal spray is a safe treatment of epistaxis in HHT. However, a randomized Phase 2 study is needed to determine its efficacy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier #NCT01507480.

Visibility of retractions: a cross-sectional one-year study.

BACKGROUND: Retraction in Medline medical literature experienced a tenfold increase between 1999 and 2009, however retraction remains a rare event since it represents 0.02% of publications. Retractions used to be handled following informal practices until they were formalized in 2009 by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The objective of our study was to describe the compliance to these guidelines. METHODS: All retractions published in 2008 were identified using the Medline publication type "retraction of publication". The notices of retraction and the original articles were retrieved. For each retraction, we identified the reason for retraction, the country of affiliation of the first author, the time to retraction, the impact factor of the journal and the mention of retraction on the original article. RESULTS: Overall, 244 retractions were considered for analysis. Formal retraction notices could not be retrieved for 9. Of the 235 retractions available (96%), the reason was not detailed for 21 articles (9%). The most cited reasons were mistakes (28%), plagiarism (20%), fraud (14%) and overlap (11%). The original paper or its location was found for 233 retractions (95%). Of these, 22% were available with no mention of the retraction. CONCLUSION: A standard retraction form could be helpful, with a check list of major reason, leaving the editor free to provide the reader with any further information. Original articles should remain available with a clear mention of the retraction.

[Retractions due to errors and frauds]. / Rétractations pour erreur et pour fraude.

Scientific papers disseminate information but they cannot reflect the reality as they sometimes contain errors or fraud. Retractions and errata are the means allowing to correct the literature. The annual retraction rate increased 10 times between 1999 and 2009. Meanwhile, retractions are rare events, concerning 0.02% of the publications. To limit the errors and frauds, we should focus on quality instead of quantity of the literature; we should implement systems able to detect misconduct, and measures of prevention.

Ex vivo study of bevacizumab transport through porcine nasal mucosa.

INTRODUCTION: Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is a genetic disorder associated with abnormal angiogenesis and disabling epistaxis, for which bevacizumab is reported to be a new therapeutic option. In the present study, bevacizumab transport in porcine nasal mucosa was investigated to determine antibody bioavailability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Transmucosal absorption of bevacizumab was examined by using nasal mucosa specimens mounted onto static vertical diffusion cells then treated with bevacizumab solution (25 mg mL(-1), 500 µg) for 2.5h. Bevacizumab concentrations were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Mucosal integrity was examined by histological examination of treated mucosa. RESULTS: Transmucosal transport of bevacizumab followed a Fickian diffusion process (permeability coefficient: [0.63 ± 22]× 10(-6) cm s(-1); and steady-state flux: 56.4 ± 19.6 µg cm(-2)h(-1)). Total recovery of bevacizumab throughout the 2.5h experiment was 83% of the initial dose distributed (i) at the mucosal surface (263 ± 73 µg; ∼53%) and (ii) into (95 ± 14 µg; ∼19%) and through (56 ± 26 µg; ∼11%) the mucosa. There was no evidence of any noticeable histological effects, confirming the harmlessness of nasal bevacizumab delivery. CONCLUSION: In the present study, absorption of bevacizumab into nasal mucosa was demonstrated, providing new fundamentals that are mandatory for further clinical trials in HHT patients.