Sirolimus-coated balloon in all-comer population of coronary artery disease patients: the EASTBOURNE DIABETES prospective registry.

BACKGROUND: The outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients are still suboptimal, and it is unclear if diabetic patients might derive a benefit from the use of drug-coated balloons. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of diabetes mellitus on the outcomes of patients undergoing PCI with sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) MagicTouch (Concept Medical, India). METHODS: We conducted a subgroup analysis of the prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated EASTBOURNE registry, evaluating the performance of MagicTouch SCB in patients with and without diabetes. The study primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12-month follow-up. Secondary clinical endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE), death, myocardial infarction (MI), and BARC 2-5 bleedings. RESULTS: Among 2,083 enrolled patients, a total of 864 suffered from diabetes (41.5%). Patients with diabetes had a numerically higher occurrence of TLR (6.5% vs. 4.7% HR 1.38, 95%CI 0.91-2.08), all-cause death (3.8% vs. 2.6%, HR 1.81, 95%CI 0.95-3.46), and MACE (12.2% vs. 8.9%; HR 1.26 95%CI 0.92-1.74). The incidence of spontaneous MI was significantly higher among diabetic patients (3.4% vs. 1.5%, HR 2.15 95%CI 1.09-4.25); bleeding events did not significantly differ. The overall incidence of TLR was higher among in-stent restenosis (ISR) as compared to de-novo coronary lesions, irrespectively from diabetes status. CONCLUSIONS: In the EASTBOURNE DIABETES registry, diabetic patients treated with the MagicTouch SCB did not have a significant increase in TLR when compared to non-diabetic patients; moreover, diabetic status did not affect the study device performance in terms of TLR, in both de-novo lesions and ISR.

Long term clinical outcome of sirolimus drug coated balloons in large coronary vessels.

BACKGROUND: Studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of drug coating balloons (DCB) for the treatment of lesions in large coronary vessel are limited. AIMS: Our study aimed to evaluate the performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary arteries. METHODS: We analyzed all the procedures included in the EASTBOURNE Registry (NCT03085823) enrolling patients with a clinical indication to percutaneous coronary intervention performed by a sirolimus DCB according to investigator judgment. In the present analysis, a cut-off of 2.75 mm was used to define large coronary arteries. Primary endpoint of the study was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 24 months whereas secondary endpoint included procedural success, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death and total mortality. RESULTS: Among the 2123 patients and 2440 lesions enrolled in the EASTBOURNE study between 2016 and 2020, 757 patients/810 lesions fulfilled the criteria for the present analysis. Mean reference vessel diameter was 3.2 ± 0.3 mm with mean lesion length of 22 ± 7 mm. Procedural success was high (96%) and at 2-year follow up the device showed a good efficacy with a TLR rate of 9%. There were 34 deaths (4.5%), 30 MIs (4%) and 8 BARC type 3-5 bleedings (1.1%). In-stent restenosis (629 lesions) and de novo lesions (181) were associated with 11% and 4% rates of TLR at 2 years, respectively (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical performance of a sirolimus DCB in large coronary artery vessels shows promising signals at 2-year follow up, both in de novo and in-stent restenosis lesions.

Management of patients treated with oral anticoagulant therapy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation: the PERSEO Registry.

In patients on oral anticoagulant (OAC) therapy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent (PCI), international guidelines endorse the use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) rather than vitamin K antagonists (VKA) and dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) rather than triple antithrombotic therapy (TAT). Aim of this study was to evaluate contemporary real-world data on antithrombotic regimens and outcome in patients on OAC undergoing PCI with stent. Consecutive patients on OAC undergoing PCI were enrolled in the multicentre, prospective, observational PERSEO registry (NCT03392948). Primary end-point was net adverse clinical events (NACE) with VKA vs DOAC, whereas a secondary pre-specified end-point was NACE with DAT vs TAT both at 1-year follow-up. From February 2018 to February 2022, 1234 consecutive patients were included. The main indication for OAC was atrial fibrillation (86%) and the mean CHA2DS2VASc and HAS-BLED scores were 4±2 and 3.6±1, respectively. Of the 1228 patients discharged alive, 222 (18%) were on VKA and 1006 (82%) on DOAC (p<0.01). DAT was employed in 197 patients whereas TAT in 1028. At follow-up, NACE rate was significantly higher with VKA compared to DOAC (23% vs 16%, p=0.013) and confirmed after propensity score adjustment. TAT and DAT did not differ as regards NACE rate (17% vs 19%, p=0.864) even though, compared to TAT, DAT was associated with less major bleedings (2% vs 5%, p= 0.014), confirmed after propensity score adjustment. In conclusion, in patients on OAC undergoing PCI, DOAC, compared to VKA, was associated with a significantly lower occurrence of NACE and DAT reduced bleedings compared to TAT.

Drug-Coated Balloon in Acute Coronary Syndromes: Ready for the Prime Time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are a major global health concern. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) has been endorsed as safe and effective in the management of culprit and non-culprit lesions of ACS. However, permanent metallic implants may have drawbacks, including the need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and the risk of long-term stent-related complications. An alternative approach using drug-coated balloons (DCBs) is gaining growing interest, having the potential of delivering therapy directly to vulnerable plaques, avoiding the need for permanent metallic implants, and potentially allowing for better long-term medical treatment. Despite limited evidence, DCB is being explored in several patients' subgroups. This review aims to discuss the existing evidence regarding DCB in ACS management. RECENT FINDINGS: DCB appears to be a promising strategy in the management of ACS, showing comparable angiographic and clinical results as compared to new-generation DES in relatively small clinical trials or large prospective registries. The advantage of avoiding permanent implants is particularly appealing in this setting, where DCB has the potential of delivering anti-atherogenic local therapy directly to vulnerable plaques still amenable to atherogenic regression. This review seeks to underline the theoretical background of DCB use and reports the available evidence in its support in the specific setting of ACS. In the context of ACS, the use of DCB is highly attractive, offering a dedicated anti-atherogenic local therapy, capable of addressing a broad range of vulnerable plaques and patients.

Clinical Outcome of FFR-Guided Revascularization Strategy of Coronary Lesions: The HALE-BOPP Study.

Background: Recently, questions around the efficacy and effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) have arisen in various clinical settings. Methods: The Clinical Outcome of FFR-guided Revascularization Strategy of Coronary Lesions (HALE-BOPP) study is an investigator-initiated, multicentre, international prospective study enrolling patients who underwent FFR measurement on at least one vessel. In accordance with the decision-making workflow and treatment, the vessels were classified in three subgroups: (i) angio-revascularized, (ii) FFR-revascularized, (iii) FFR-deferred. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of target vessel failure (TVF, cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization). The analysis was carried out at vessel- and patient-level. Results: 1305 patients with 2422 diseased vessels fulfilled the criteria for the present analysis. Wire-related pitfalls and transient adenosine-related side effects occurred in 0.8% (95% CI: 0.4%-1.4%) and 3.3% (95% CI: 2.5%-4.3%) of cases, respectively. In FFR-deferred vessels, the overall incidence rate of TVF was 0.024 (95% CI: 0.019-0.031) lesion/year. After a median follow-up of 3.6 years, the occurrence of TVF was 6%, 7% and 11.7% in FFR-deferred, FFR-revascularized and angio-revascularized vessels, respectively. Compared to angio-revascularized vessels, FFR-guided vessels (both FFR-revascularized and FFR-deferred vessels) showed a lower TVF incidence rate lesion/year (0.029, 95% CI: 0.024-0.034 vs. 0.049, 95% CI: 0.040-0.061 respectively, p = 0.0001). The result was consistent after correction for confounding factors and across subgroups of clinical interest. The patient-level analysis confirmed the lower occurrence of TVF in negative-FFR vs. positive-FFR subgroups. Conclusions: In a large prospective observational study, an FFR-based strategy for the deferral of coronary lesions is a reliable and safe tool, associated with good outcomes. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03079739.

The fate of coronary dissections left after sirolimus-coated balloon angioplasty: A prespecified subanalysis of the EASTBOURNE study.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to understand the clinical outcomes of dissections left untreated after sirolimus drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty. BACKGROUND: DCB may be a valuable alternative to stents for the treatment of native coronary lesions, but the risk of having a dissection after DCB-angioplasty is not negligible. While type A and B dissections can be safely treated conservatively, some debate exists regarding type C dissections. We previously showed the safety of dissections left untreated after second-generation paclitaxel-DCB. However, the fate of dissections after sirolimus-DCB angioplasty has not been investigated so far. METHODS: EASTBOURNE is a prospective, multicenter, international, investigator-driven study aiming to explore the safety and efficacy of a novel sirolimus-DCB. This study enrolled a consecutive, all-comer population of coronary artery disease patients and is the largest prospective study on DCB so far. Primary endpoints of the study, target-lesion revascularization (TLR), and other clinical endpoints at 12 months, have been presented elsewhere. This is a prespecified subgroup analysis of the patients left with not-flow limiting dissection after DCB angioplasty, with complete 12 months follow-up and comparison between patients left with a dissection versus patients with DCB used for de novo lesions. RESULTS: Between September 2016 and November 2020, a total of 2123 patients were enrolled at 38 study centers. Seventy-three patients were left with nonflow limiting dissections (43 type A, 27 type B, 3 type C) and underwent complete 1-year clinical follow-up. In the nondissection group, 1110 patients had de-novo coronary artery disease while 900 had in-stent restenosis. Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups, while the dissection group was associated with longer lesions (23.8 vs. 18.4 mm, p < 0.001) and more frequent use of predilation (100 vs. 91.4%, p = 0.016). At 12-month follow-up, no significant differences among the groups were found, with a total of 1.25% TLR in the dissection cohort versus 5.6% in the de-novo cohort (p = 0.13), and an overall rate of major adverse cardiovascular events of 4.4% versus 10.1% (p = 0.18). Total death (1.5 vs. 2.6, p = 0.87), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (0% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.35), and bleedings did not differ significantly among the groups as well. CONCLUSIONS: In this subgroup analysis of the EASTBOURNE study of consecutive patients treated with new-generation sirolimus DCB, dissections left untreated after angioplasty did not lead to an increase in adverse events.

The evolution and revolution of drug coated balloons in coronary angioplasty: An up-to-date review of literature data.

European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines gave class I A indication for use of DCB in in-stent restenosis. However, no indication exists for the usage of DCB in de novo lesions. Although the current generation DES offer excellent results, as we embark more complex lesions such as calcified lesion and chronic total occlusion, restenosis and stent thrombosis are higher and tend to increase within the years. There is increasing desire to leave nothing behind to abolish the risk of restenosis and stent thrombosis and hence the absorbable scaffolds were introduced, but with disappointing results. In addition, they take several years to be absorbed. Drug coated balloons offer an alternative to stents with no permanent implant of metal or polymer. They are already in use in in Europe and Asia and they have been approved for the first time in the United States for clinical trials specifically for restenotic lesions. There is emerging data in de novo lesions which have shown that DCB are noninferior and in some studies maybe even superior to current generation DES especially in small vessels. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on this expanding technology focussing on the evidence in both re-stenotic and de novo lesions.

How to perform a successful drug-coated balloon angioplasty? Tips and tricks.

Drug-coated balloons (DCB) offer an excellent alternative to stents as the antiproliferative drugs are delivered via balloons and hence there is no permanent implant of metal or polymer. This rationale applies perfectly in in-stent restenosis (ISR) as we want to avoid another layer of metal in a previously failed stent. However, their use has also been extended to de novo lesions especially in patients and lesion subsets where stents are not ideal. There is an increased desire toward expanding this further and studies are now being done which are testing DCB in large-caliber vessels. As the use of DCB is escalating, we felt the importance of writing this article whereby we aim to provide important tips and tricks when using DCB especially for the operators who are in the early phase or have the desire of embarking this technology. From our experience, the DCB-angioplasty substantially differs on several aspects from DES-angioplasty. We have provided several case bases examples including algorithm when using DCB in ISR and de novo lesions.

Impact of diabetes on long-term outcomes of bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention. An analysis from the BIFURCAT registry.

BACKGROUND: It is still unclear the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) in complex coronary lesions treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) which themselves are at increased incidence of adverse events. METHODS: BIFURCAT registry encompassed patients treated with PCI for coronary bifurcation lesion from the COBIS III and the RAIN registry. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major cardiovascular adverse event (MACE), a composite and mutual exclusive of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI) or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). A total of 5537 patients were included in the analysis and 1834 (33%) suffered from DM. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 21 months, diabetic patients had a higher incidence of MACE (17% vs. 9%, p < 0.001), all-cause mortality (9% vs. 4%, p < 0.001), TLR (5% vs. 3%, p = 0.001), MI (4% vs. 2%, p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis (ST) (2% vs. 1%, p = 0.007). After multivariate analysis, diabetes remained significantly associated with MACE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37; confidence interval [CI]: 1.13-1.65; p = 0.001), all-cause death (HR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.24-2.19, p = 0.001), TLR (HR: 1.45; CI: 1.03-2.04; p = 0.031) and ST (HR: 1.73, CI: 1.04-2.88; p = 0.036), but not with MI (HR: 1.34; CI: 0.93-1.92; p = 0.11). Among diabetics, chronic kidney disease (HR: 2.99; CI: 2.21-4.04), baseline left ventricular ejection fraction (HR: 0.98; CI: 0.97-0.99), femoral access (HR: 1.62; CI: 1.23-2.15), left main coronary artery (HR: 1.44; CI: 1.06-1.94), main branch diameter (HR: 0.79; CI: 0.66-0.94) and final kissing balloon (HR: 0.70; CI: 0.52-0.93) were independent predictors of MACE at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DM treated with PCI for coronary bifurcations have a worse prognosis due to higher incidence of MACE, all-cause mortality, TLR and ST compared to the non-diabetics.

Drug-coated balloon for the management of coronary chronic total occlusions.

There is a higher rate of successful recanalization of patients with coronary chronic total occlusions, nevertheless, the rate of patients referred for revascularization remains low. In addition, there is a greater need to improve long-term outcomes of chronic total occlusions after percutaneous coronary intervention, and although the implantation of new-generation drug-eluting stents has been optimized with coronary imaging guidance, the rate of stenting failure remains a major issue and long-term vessel patency could be improved. We reviewed clinical data regarding the benefit of treating chronic total occlusions and the use of drug-coated balloons as an alternative therapeutic modality in this setting. Although clinical data is limited, the initial evidence and the daily clinical practice point towards a synergistic hybrid treatment strategy based on the combination of drug-coated balloons plus drug-eluting stents, reducing the total stent length and maintaining the scaffolding properties of stents where it is mandatory. Additionally, drug-coated balloons allow natural enlargement of the open vessel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), which is a major limitation of stents in chronic total occlusion (CTO).

DCBs as an adjuvant tool to DES for very complex coronary lesions.

Drug eluting stents (DES) have revolutionised interventional cardiology and currently represent the standard for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). However, due to several limitations, new strategies are required, especially in very complex lesions. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) offer an attractive therapeutic alternative, and have already obtained a Class I recommendation for the treatment of in stent restenosis (ISR) with Level A of evidence. Moreover, the role of DCB has been tested in several other settings, such as de novo large vessel disease, multivessel disease or very complex lesions, with promising results regarding safety and effectiveness. In this context, a hybrid strategy consisting in the use of a DES and DCB with the aim of reducing the amount of metal implanted and minimising the risk of ISR and stent thrombosis could become the solution for very complex lesions. Several important studies already demonstrated very good angiographic results in terms of late lumen loss and restenosis for this approach in bifurcation lesions. Moreover, for long diffuse coronary disease similar rates of MACE, TVR, and TLR at 2-year follow-up in comparison to a DES-alone strategy were found. What is more, the use of this strategy in high-bleeding risk patients could safely permit the practitioners to reduce the DAPT duration, as data is suggesting. As our daily practice already strongly incorporated this strategy and with more data expected from important trials, it is our strong believe that the hybrid approach can become a standard treatment choice in the near future.

Intravascular imaging for left main stem assessment: An update on the most recent clinical data.

Left main (LM) stem has different structural and anatomical characteristics compared to all of the other segments of the coronary tree, thus its management through percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a challenge and is associated with worse clinical outcome and higher need for revascularization as compared to other lesion settings. Intravascular imaging, by means of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT), is an important tool for LM PCI guidance, aiming at improving the immediate performance and the long term outcome of this procedure. Following current guidelines and recent scientific findings, IVUS becomes important to firstly assess, and finally evaluate the result of LM stenting, according to the experience and preferences of the operator. The role of OCT still remains to be defined, but recent data is shedding light also on this imaging technique. The aim of this review is to highlight the latest scientific advancements regarding intravascular imaging in LM coronary artery disease.

Sirolimus-coated balloon versus everolimus-eluting stent in de novo coronary artery disease: Rationale and design of the TRANSFORM II randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is a widely adopted strategy for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease. DES implantation conveys an inherent risk for short- and long-term complications, including in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. Drug-coated balloons are emerging as an alternative approach to fulfill the "leaving nothing behind" principle and avoid long-term DES-related complications. DESIGN: TRANSFORM II is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized clinical trial, testing a sirolimus-coated balloon (SCB) versus the standard of care for native coronary vessels with a 2-3 mm diameter, in terms of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF; primary endpoint) and net adverse cardiovascular events (coprimary endpoint). Patients undergoing PCI will be randomized to be treated with either SCB or new-generation everolimus-eluting stent and will be followed up clinically for up to 60 months. Assuming a TLF rate of 8% at 12 months with DES, a sample size of 1325 patients was chosen to ensure an 80% power to detect a 1.5% lower incidence in the SCB group with a type I error rate of 0.05. The TRANSFORM II trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (identification number NCT04893291). Several substudies, including an optical coherence tomography assessment at 9 months (intracoronary imaging substudy), will investigate the study device in different clinical and lesion settings. CONCLUSIONS: The randomized TRANSFORM II trial will determine whether a novel SCB is noninferior to a current everolimus-eluting stent when adopted for the treatment of de novo lesions in coronary vessels with a diameter between 2 and 3 mm.

Long-term outcomes following intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) for calcified coronary lesions: A Real-World Multicenter European Study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the long-term clinical outcomes following intravascular lithotripsy (IVL) in calcified coronary lesions from a real-world population. BACKGROUND: IVL is a relatively new but promising modality for treating coronary calcified lesions, but there is a dearth of long-term outcome data from real-world patients. METHODS: This was a multicenter, observational study in which we enrolled all patients treated with IVL from November 2018 to February 2021 from eight centers in Europe and the United Kingdom. Procedural success, complications, and clinical outcomes (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TVMI], target lesion revascularization [TLR], and MACE [major adverse cardiac events, the composite of cardiac death, TVMI, and TLR]) were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 273 patients with a mean age of 72 ± 9.1 years were treated with IVL. Major comorbidities included diabetes mellitus (n = 110, 40%) and chronic kidney disease (n = 45, 16%). Acute coronary syndrome accounted for 48% (n = 132) of patients, while 52% (n = 141) had stable angina. De novo lesions and in-stent restenosis accounted for 79% and 21% of cases, respectively. Intravascular imaging was used in 33% (n = 90) of patients. An upfront IVL strategy was adopted in 34% (n = 92), while the rest were bailout procedures. Adjuvant rotational atherectomy ("RotaTripsy") was required in 11% (n = 31) of cases. The procedural success was 99%. During a median follow-up of 687 days (interquartile range: 549-787), cardiac death occurred in 5% (n = 14), TVMI in 3% (n = 8), TLR in 6% (n = 16), and MACE rate was 11% (n = 30). CONCLUSION: This is the largest multicenter registry with a long-term follow-up showing the remarkably high procedural success of IVL use in calcified coronary lesions with low rates of hard endpoints and MACE.

Optical coherence tomography, intravascular ultrasound or angiography guidance for distal left main coronary stenting. The ROCK cohort II study.

OBJECTIVES: to test the safety and efficacy of intravascular imaging and specifically optical coherence tomography (OCT) as a diagnostic tool for left main angioplasty and analyze the mid-term outcome accordingly. BACKGROUND: Clinical data and international guidelines recommend the use of intravascular imaging ultrasound (IVUS) to guide left main (LM) angioplasty. Despite early experience using OCT in this setting is encouraging, the evidence supporting its use is still limited. METHODS: ROCK II is a multicenter, investigator-driven, retrospective European study to compare the performance of IVUS and OCT versus angiography in patients undergoing distal-LM stenting. The primary study endpoint was target-lesion failure (TLF) including cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularization. We designed this study hypothesizing the superiority of intravascular imaging over angiographic guidance alone, and the non-inferiority of OCT versus IVUS. RESULTS: A total of 730 patients, 377 with intravascular-imaging guidance (162 OCT, 215 IVUS) and 353 with angiographic guidance, were analyzed. The one-year rate of TLF was 21.2% with angiography and 12.7% with intravascular-imaging (p = 0.039), with no difference between OCT and IVUS (p = 0.26). Intravascular-imaging was predictor of freedom from TLF (HR 0.46; 95% CI 0.23-0.93: p = 0.03). Propensity-score matching identified three groups of 100 patients each with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The one-year rate of TLF was 16% in the angiographic, 7% in the OCT and 6% in the IVUS group, respectively (p = 0.03 for IVUS or OCT vs. angiography). No between-group significant differences in the rate of individual components of TLF were found. CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular imaging was superior to angiography for distal LM stenting, with no difference between OCT and IVUS.

Chronic Oral Anticoagulation Therapy and Prognosis of Patients Admitted to Hospital for COVID-19: Insights from the HOPE COVID-19 Registry.

Background: Most evidence regarding anticoagulation and COVID-19 refers to the hospitalization setting, but the role of oral anticoagulation (OAC) before hospital admission has not been well explored. We compared clinical outcomes and short-term prognosis between patients with and without prior OAC therapy who were hospitalized for COVID-19. Methods: Analysis of the whole cohort of the HOPE COVID-19 Registry which included patients discharged (deceased or alive) after hospital admission for COVID-19 in 9 countries. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. Study outcomes were compared after adjusting variables using propensity score matching (PSM) analyses. Results: 7698 patients were suitable for the present analysis (675 (8.8%) on OAC at admission: 427 (5.6%) on VKAs and 248 (3.2%) on DOACs). After PSM, 1276 patients were analyzed (638 with OAC; 638 without OAC), without significant differences regarding the risk of thromboembolic events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.59-2.08). The risk of clinically relevant bleeding (OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.92-4.83), as well as the risk of mortality (HR 1.22, 95% CI 1.01-1.47; log-rank p value = 0.041), was significantly increased in previous OAC users. Amongst patients on prior OAC only, there were no differences in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding, thromboembolic events, or mortality when comparing previous VKA or DOAC users, after PSM. Conclusion: Hospitalized COVID-19 patients on prior OAC therapy had a higher risk of mortality and worse clinical outcomes compared to patients without prior OAC therapy, even after adjusting for comorbidities using a PSM. There were no differences in clinical outcomes in patients previously taking VKAs or DOACs. This trial is registered with NCT04334291/EUPAS34399.

Anticoagulation Therapy in Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From a Multicenter International Prospective Registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019 [HOPE-COVID19]).

OBJECTIVES: No standard therapy, including anticoagulation regimens, is currently recommended for coronavirus disease 2019. Aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of anticoagulation in coronavirus disease 2019 hospitalized patients and its impact on survival. DESIGN: Multicenter international prospective registry (Health Outcome Predictive Evaluation for Corona Virus Disease 2019). SETTING: Hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019. PATIENTS: Five thousand eight hundred thirty-eight consecutive coronavirus disease 2019 patients. INTERVENTIONS: Anticoagulation therapy, including prophylactic and therapeutic regimens, was obtained for each patient. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred eighty patients (94%) did not receive any anticoagulation before hospitalization. Two-thousand six-hundred one patients (44%) during hospitalization received anticoagulation therapy and it was not associated with better survival rate (81% vs 81%; p = 0.94) but with higher risk of bleeding (2.7% vs 1.8%; p = 0.03). Among patients admitted with respiratory failure (49%, n = 2,859, including 391 and 583 patients requiring invasive and noninvasive ventilation, respectively), anticoagulation started during hospitalization was associated with lower mortality rates (32% vs 42%; p < 0.01) and nonsignificant higher risk of bleeding (3.4% vs 2.7%; p = 0.3). Anticoagulation therapy was associated with lower mortality rates in patients treated with invasive ventilation (53% vs 64%; p = 0.05) without increased rates of bleeding (9% vs 8%; p = 0.88) but not in those with noninvasive ventilation (35% vs 38%; p = 0.40). At multivariate Cox' analysis mortality relative risk with anticoagulation was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in patients admitted with respiratory failure, 0.50 (95% CI, 0.49-0.67) in those requiring invasive ventilation, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.51-1.01) in noninvasive ventilation. CONCLUSIONS: Anticoagulation therapy in general population with coronavirus disease 2019 was not associated with better survival rates but with higher bleeding risk. Better results were observed in patients admitted with respiratory failure and requiring invasive ventilation.

Should paclitaxel be considered an old generation DCB? The limus era.

Since their introduction Drug Coated Balloons (DCBs) have slowly gained their spot into everyday cath-lab practice, first for treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR), more recently for small vessels disease; today a growing body of evidence start supporting their use in more complex lesions, from bifurcations, to large vessels, to acute lesions. Although the new generation of DCBs showed a better performance and safety than the older one, the drug of choice has always been the Paclitaxel; last year some concerns were raised on the safety of Paclitaxel devices, in particular the balloons mining their use. Recently Sirolimus ventured in the DCBs world, making its appearance on cath-lab shelves and becoming a good alternative to Paclitaxel (DCB).

Transradial approach for carotid artery stenting: A position paper from the Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE).

Carotid artery stenting (CAS) is a valid and effective alternative to endoatherectomy when performed by experienced operators. The conventional approach used is the transfemoral one, but in the last 10 years a transradial (TR) approach, the standard access for cardiac catheterization, became widely adopted for peripheral vascular interventions, included the extracranial carotids. Preliminary experiences suggest this approach as safe and effective, especially in specific anatomical and clinical settings that have been shown to be associated with high risk of complications from the femoral route. Lacking international guidelines, this document, promoted by the Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology - Gruppo Italiano Studi Emodinamici (SICI-GISE), was drawn-up by a panel of interventional cardiologists with a documented experience on the subject, focusing on the indications, techniques and materials that should be used for this type of intervention and the most recent literature on the subject.

Drug-Coated balloons vs drug-eluting stents for the treatment of small coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

OBJECTIVES AND BACKGROUND: There is conflicting evidence about the effects of drug-coated balloons (DCB) compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with native small vessel coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases and main international conference proceedings were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing DCB versus DES in patients with native small vessel CAD. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was target vessel revascularization (TVR). Secondary clinical endpoints were: myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), all-cause death, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis or target vessel thrombosis. Secondary angiographic outcomes were: in-segment restenosis, in-segment percentage-diameter stenosis, in-segment late lumen loss, in-segment net luminal gain, and in-segment minimal lumen diameter. RESULTS: Five trials enrolling 1,459 patients were included. Mean clinical follow-up was 10.2 months. The use of DCB, compared with DES, was associated with similar risk of TVR (odds ratio [OR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 1.68; p = .92), TLR (OR: 1.74; 95% CI: 0.57 to 5.28; p = .33), all-cause death (OR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.14 to 7.48; p = .98), with a trend toward a lower risk of MI (OR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.23 to 1.03; p = .06), and with significant lower risk of vessel thrombosis (OR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.94; p = .04). DCB use was associated with similar risk of angiographic restenosis (OR: 1.12; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.84; p = .64), comparable late luminal loss (standardized mean difference (SMD): -0.18; 95% CI: -0.39 to 0.03; p = .09), while leading to significant higher percentage diameter stenosis (SMD: 0.27; 95% CI 0.12 to 0.41; p < .01) and smaller minimal luminal diameter (SMD: -0.52; 95% CI: -0.86 to -0.18; p = .003). CONCLUSION: Compared with DES, the use of DCB for the treatment of native small vessel CAD is associated with similar TVR and restenosis and reduces the risk of vessel thrombosis, although DES implantation yields slightly better angiographic surrogate endpoints.