Medical Marijuana, Recreational Cannabis, and Cardiovascular Health: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Cannabis, or marijuana, has potential therapeutic and medicinal properties related to multiple compounds, particularly Δ-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and cannabidiol. Over the past 25 years, attitudes toward cannabis have evolved rapidly, with expanding legalization of medical and recreational use at the state level in the United States and recreational use nationally in Canada and Uruguay. As a result, the consumption of cannabis products is increasing considerably, particularly among youth. Our understanding of the safety and efficacy of cannabis has been limited by decades of worldwide illegality and continues to be limited in the United States by the ongoing classification of cannabis as a Schedule 1 controlled substance. These shifts in cannabis use require clinicians to understand conflicting laws, health implications, and therapeutic possibilities. Cannabis may have therapeutic benefits, but few are cardiovascular in nature. Conversely, many of the concerning health implications of cannabis include cardiovascular diseases, although they may be mediated by mechanisms of delivery. This statement critically reviews the use of medicinal and recreational cannabis from a clinical but also a policy and public health perspective by evaluating its safety and efficacy profile, particularly in relationship to cardiovascular health.

The American Heart Association 2030 Impact Goal: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association.

Each decade, the American Heart Association (AHA) develops an Impact Goal to guide its overall strategic direction and investments in its research, quality improvement, advocacy, and public health programs. Guided by the AHA's new Mission Statement, to be a relentless force for a world of longer, healthier lives, the 2030 Impact Goal is anchored in an understanding that to achieve cardiovascular health for all, the AHA must include a broader vision of health and well-being and emphasize health equity. In the next decade, by 2030, the AHA will strive to equitably increase healthy life expectancy beyond current projections, with global and local collaborators, from 66 years of age to at least 68 years of age across the United States and from 64 years of age to at least 67 years of age worldwide. The AHA commits to developing additional targets for equity and well-being to accompany this overarching Impact Goal. To attain the 2030 Impact Goal, we recommend a thoughtful evaluation of interventions available to the public, patients, providers, healthcare delivery systems, communities, policy makers, and legislators. This presidential advisory summarizes the task force's main considerations in determining the 2030 Impact Goal and the metrics to monitor progress. It describes the aspiration that these goals will be achieved by working with a diverse community of volunteers, patients, scientists, healthcare professionals, and partner organizations needed to ensure success.

Non-eligibility for reperfusion therapy in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Contemporary insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR).

BACKGROUND: Reperfusion therapy is lifesaving in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Contemporary data describing the characteristics and outcomes of patients presenting with STEMI not receiving reperfusion therapy are lacking. METHODS: Using the ACTION Registry-GWTG database, we examined 219,726 STEMI patients (January 2007-December 2013) at 721 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-capable hospitals in United States. Clinical characteristics and in-hospital outcomes were stratified by those who underwent reperfusion (n = 188,200; 86%), those who did not undergo reperfusion with a reason for ineligibility (n = 27,179; 12%), and those without reperfusion but had no reason for ineligibility (n = 4,347; 2%). RESULTS: Compared with STEMI patients receiving reperfusion therapy, the nonreperfusion groups were older, were more often female, and had higher rates of hypertension, diabetes, prior myocardial infarction, prior stroke, atrial fibrillation, and left bundle-branch block and heart failure on presentation. The major reason for reperfusion noneligibility was coronary anatomy not suitable for PCI (33%). Presence of 3-vessel coronary disease was more common in the nonreperfusion groups (with or without a documented reason) compared with reperfusion group (38% and 36% vs 26%, P < .001, respectively). In-hospital mortality was higher in patients not receiving reperfusion therapy with or without a documented reason compared with the reperfusion group (adjusted odds ratio [95% CI] 1.88 [1.78-1.99] and 1.37 [1.21-1.57], respectively). CONCLUSION: Most patients with STEMI not receiving reperfusion therapy had a documented reason. Coronary anatomy not suitable for PCI was the major contributor to ineligibility. In-hospital mortality was higher in patients not receiving reperfusion therapy.

Clinical characteristics and in hospital outcomes of heart transplant recipients with allograft vasculopathy undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Insights from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy is a major cause of morbidity and mortality following heart transplantation. Large multicenter studies evaluating the clinical characteristics and inhospital outcomes of heart transplant recipients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and inhospital outcomes of heart transplant recipients undergoing PCI compared to general population. METHODS: We analyzed 1,897,328 patients from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry who underwent PCI of at least 1 native vessel between July 2009 and December 2013 from 1,477 centers, of which 542 patients (0.03%) were heart transplant recipients. Clinical characteristics were evaluated and, after 1:4 propensity matching, inhospital outcomes were compared between 538 heart transplant patients and 2,128 non-transplant patients. RESULTS: Transplant recipients undergoing PCI had a higher prevalence of diabetes, dyslipidemia and peripheral vascular disease; lower prevalence of angina, acute coronary syndrome, abnormal noninvasive functional study, and type C coronary lesions compared to the non-transplant PCI population. After propensity matching, all-cause inhospital mortality was similar between transplant and non-transplant groups (1.3% vs 1.0%; OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.54-2.67). CONCLUSION: This is the largest series to date outlining the characteristics of heart transplant recipients undergoing PCI. Similar inhospital outcomes were noted in heart transplant recipients compared to the general population. Further studies evaluating long-term outcomes are warranted.

Endovascular repair of traumatic aortic injury: a novel arena in interventional cardiology.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the feasibility of endovascular repair of traumatic aortic injuries performed by interventional cardiologists in collaboration with cardiothoracic surgeons. BACKGROUND: Traumatic aortic injury (TAI) represents a significant cause of mortality in trauma patients. Endovascular techniques have recently come into play for the management of TAI and are usually performed by a multidisciplinary team consisting of a thoracic or vascular surgeon and/or interventional radiology. With extensive expertise in catheter-based interventions, interventional cardiologists may have a pivotal role in this important procedure. METHODS: From January 2009 to July 2011, we reviewed the TAI endovascular repair outcomes performed by a team of interventional cardiologists in collaboration with cardiothoracic surgery at our institution. The charts of these patients were reviewed to collect desired data, which included preoperative, procedural, and follow-up details. RESULTS: Twenty patients were identified in our series. Most of these patients developed TAI from motor vehicle accidents. Technical success for endovascular repair of TAI was achieved in all patients. Two patients developed endoleak, of which one patient required subsequent open repair. Two patients expired in the hospital from coexistent injuries. CONCLUSIONS: Our series of endovascular repair for TAI performed by interventional cardiologists with the collaboration of cardiothoracic surgeons showed excellent outcomes. Our experience may give further insight in the collaborative role of interventional cardiology and cardiothoracic surgery for endovascular repair of TAI.

ED administration of thienopyridines in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results from the NCDR.

OBJECTIVE: American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines recommend that patients with definite unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) receive dual antiplatelet therapy on presentation to the hospital when undergoing early invasive management or "as soon as possible" after admission when being managed conservatively. The guidelines do not specify whether these medications should be administered in the emergency department (ED). Our aim was to determine whether ED administration of a thienopyridine was associated with clinical outcomes among patients with NSTEMI. METHODS: We examined thienopyridine use in 39454 patients with NSTEMI who received a thienopyridine within 24 hours of presentation in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry's Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network-Get With The Guidelines Registry from January 2007 to June 2010. Patients who were not seen initially in the ED, were transferred in, or were missing time data were excluded. We analyzed the association between ED administration of thienopyridines and outcomes and patient demographics. RESULTS: Of the cohort receiving a thienopyridine within 24 hours, 9534 (24.2%) received it in the ED. Emergency department administration of a thienopyridine was not associated with in-hospital major bleeding (multivariable adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.09) or in-hospital mortality (adjusted 1.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.20). Independent predictors most strongly associated with ED thienopyridine administration were elevated troponin, ED length of stay, prior percutaneous coronary intervention, and initial electrocardiogram showing ischemic changes. CONCLUSIONS: There was no association between ED thienopyridine administration and in-hospital major bleeding or mortality. Emergency department length of stay, electrocardiographic changes, and elevated troponin were associated with ED thienopyridine administration.

Use of emergency medical service transport among patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Activation of emergency medical services (EMS) is critical for the early triage and treatment of patients experiencing ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, yet data regarding EMS use and its association with subsequent clinical care are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed an observational analysis of 37 634 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients treated at 372 US hospitals participating in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With the Guidelines between January 2007 and September 2009, and examined independent patient factors associated with EMS transportation versus patient self-transportation. We found that EMS transport was used in only 60% of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Older patients, those living farther from the hospital, and those with hemodynamic compromise were more likely to use EMS transport. In contrast, race, income, and education level did not appear to be associated with the mode of transport. Compared with self-transported patients, EMS-transported patients had significantly shorter delays in both symptom-onset-to-arrival time (median, 89 versus 120 minutes; P<0.0001) and door-to-reperfusion time (median door-to-balloon time, 63 versus 76 minutes; P<0.0001; median door-to-needle time, 23 versus 29 minutes; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Emergency medical services transportation to the hospital is underused among contemporary ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients. Nevertheless, use of EMS transportation is associated with substantial reductions in ischemic time and treatment delays. Community education efforts are needed to improve the use of emergency transport as part of system-wide strategies to improve ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction reperfusion care.

Characteristics and in-hospital outcomes of patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction found to have significant coronary artery disease on coronary angiography and managed medically: stratification according to renal function.

BACKGROUND: The characteristics, therapies, and outcomes of patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, found to have significant coronary artery disease on coronary angiography, and managed without revascularization ("nonrevascularized patients") have not been evaluated previously in a large-scale registry. METHODS: We examined data on 13,872 non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction nonrevascularized patients who were captured by the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network registry. Patients were divided according to baseline renal function in 4 groups: no chronic kidney disease (CKD) and CKD stages 3, 4, and 5. RESULTS: The in-hospital mortality of nonrevascularized patients was 3.7%, whereas their in-hospital major bleeding rate was 10.8%. Overall, 44.2% (n = 6,132) of nonrevascularized patients had CKD. Compared with patients with normal renal function, nonrevascularized patients with CKD had significantly more history of myocardial infarction, heart failure, more 3-vessel coronary artery disease, and received fewer antithrombotic therapies. In addition, they had significantly higher rates of in-hospital mortality and major bleeding; CKD stage 4 was associated with the highest risk of adverse events. The multivariable-adjusted odds ratios of in-hospital mortality for CKD stages 3, 4, and 5 relative to no CKD were 1.5, 2.5, and 2.2, respectively (global P < .0001), and the analogous adjusted odds ratios of major bleeding were 1.5, 2.5, and 1.8 (global P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Nonrevascularized patients have a high in-hospital mortality. Nonrevascularized patients with CKD have more comorbidities than patients without CKD and less frequently receive guideline-recommended therapies. Chronic kidney disease is strongly associated with in-hospital mortality and bleeding.

Limitations of using cardiac catheterization rates to assess the quality of care for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: An early invasive management strategy is recommended for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) who do not have a contraindication to cardiac catheterization (CCC). However, the frequency of CCC reporting has not been delineated, and the relationship of CCC reporting to hospital-level guidelines adherence for NSTEMI has not been investigated. METHODS: We used the American College of Cardiology National Cardiovascular Data Registry Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network Registry-Get With The Guidelines database to evaluate variations in hospital-level reporting of CCC for 111,320 patients with NSTEMI admitted to 370 hospitals with revascularization capabilities in the United States from 2007 to 2010 and how these variations were associated with guideline adherence and in-hospital mortality. Hospitals were grouped into tertiles based on rates of reported CCCs. Treatment patterns and in-hospital mortality rates were evaluated across hospital tertiles separately for patients with and without a reported CCC. RESULTS: A total of 18,290 (16.4%) of 111,320 patients with NSTEMI had a reported CCC, but hospital-level CCC reporting varied considerably (low tertile 0%-8.2%, intermediate tertile >8.2%-18.8%, and high tertile >18.8%-75.6%). Patients with a reported CCC had more comorbidities and high-risk features compared with patients without a CCC. The use of most guideline-recommended medications and in-hospital mortality rates were similar across hospital tertiles-both for patients with and without a reported CCC. CONCLUSIONS: The reporting of CCC among patients with NSTEMI varies widely across US hospitals and does not appear to be related to guidelines adherence or in-hospital mortality rates. These findings suggest that it will be a challenge to standardize the reporting of CCC and thus use invasive management to assess the quality of NSTEMI care.

In-hospital and 1-year outcomes with drug-eluting versus bare metal stents in saphenous vein graft intervention: a report from the EVENT registry.

OBJECTIVES: To compare outcomes of patients receiving drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of saphenous vein bypass grafts (SVG). BACKGROUND: Long-term benefits of DES versus BMS are well established for native vessel PCI. Benefit in patients undergoing SVG intervention is less certain. We used data from a multicenter registry (evaluation of drug eluting stents and ischemic events, EVENT) to compare outcomes among patients treated with DES versus BMS 1-year following SVG interventions. METHODS: Between July 2004 and December 2007, 684 patients in EVENT underwent SVG PCI (515 DES only, 169 BMS only). The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization between hospital discharge and 1-year follow-up. Propensity score stratification was used to adjust for differences between groups. RESULTS: Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of patients treated with DES and BMS were similar. The DES group had fewer men and a higher prevalence of prior PCI. Patients receiving DES had less angiographic thrombus, less frequent use of embolic protection devices, greater total stent length, and smaller maximum stent diameters. Unadjusted outcomes between discharge and 1-year follow-up did not differ between the groups. After risk adjustment, the primary outcome was less frequent among patients treated with DES (adjusted HR = 0.48, 95% CI = 0.27-0.84, P < 0.01) with similar relative benefits across the individual endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing SVG PCI in a "real world" registry analyzed using propensity score stratification, treatment with DES compared with BMS was associated with reduced MACE at 1 year following PCI.

Pharmacodynamic effects of cangrelor and clopidogrel: the platelet function substudy from the cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal management of platelet inhibition (CHAMPION) trials.

Cangrelor is an intravenous antagonist of the P2Y(12) receptor characterized by rapid, potent, predictable, and reversible platelet inhibition. However, cangrelor was not superior to clopidogrel in reducing the incidence of ischemic events in the cangrelor versus standard therapy to achieve optimal management of platelet inhibition (CHAMPION) trials. A prospectively designed platelet function substudy was performed in a selected cohort of patients to provide insight into the pharmacodynamic effects of cangrelor, particularly in regard to whether cangrelor therapy may interfere with the inhibitory effects of clopidogrel. This pre-defined substudy was conducted in a subset of patients from the CHAMPION-PCI trial (n = 230) comparing cangrelor with 600 mg of clopidogrel administered before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and from the CHAMPION-PLATFORM trial (n = 4) comparing cangrelor at the time of PCI and 600 mg clopidogrel given after the PCI. Pharmacodynamic measures included P2Y12 reaction units (PRU) assessed by VerifyNow P2Y12 testing (primary endpoint marker), platelet aggregation by light transmittance aggregometry following 5 and 20 µmol/L adenosine diphosphate stimuli, and markers of platelet activation determined by flow cytometry. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients who achieved <20 % change in PRU between baseline and >10 h after PCI. The main trial was stopped early limiting enrollment in the platelet substudy. A total of 167 patients had valid pharmacodynamic assessments for the primary endpoint. The percent of individuals achieving <20 % change in PRU between baseline and >10 h after PCI was higher with cangrelor + clopidogrel (32/84, 38.1 %) compared with placebo + clopidogrel (21/83, 25.3 %), but this was not statistically significant (difference:12.79 %, 95 % CI: -1.18 %, 26.77 %;p = 0.076). All pharmacodynamic markers as well as the prevalence of patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity were significantly lower in patients treated with cangrelor. A rapid platelet inhibitory effect was achieved during cangrelor infusion and a rapid offset of action after treatment discontinuation. This CHAMPION platelet function substudy represents the largest pharmacodynamic experience with cangrelor, demonstrating its potent P2Y(12) receptor inhibitory effects, and rapid onset/offset of action. Although there was no significant pharmacodynamic interaction when transitioning to clopidogrel therapy, further studies are warranted given that enrollment in this study was limited due to premature interruption of the main trial.

A pharmacodynamic comparison of prasugrel vs. high-dose clopidogrel in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: results of the Optimizing anti-Platelet Therapy In diabetes MellitUS (OPTIMUS)-3 Trial.

AIMS: Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have increased platelet reactivity and reduced platelet response to clopidogrel compared with patients without DM. Prasugrel, a more potent antiplatelet agent, is associated with greater reductions in ischaemic events compared with clopidogrel, particularly in patients with DM. The aim of this study was to perform serial pharmacodynamic assessments of prasugrel with high-dose clopidogrel in patients with DM. METHODS AND RESULTS: Optimizing anti-Platelet Therapy In diabetes MellitUS (OPTIMUS)-3 was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover study in patients with type 2 DM and coronary artery disease (CAD). Patients (n= 35) were randomly assigned to either prasugrel 60 mg loading dose (LD)/10 mg maintenance dose (MD) or clopidogrel 600 mg LD/150 mg MD over two 1-week treatment periods separated by a 2-week washout period. Platelet function was assessed by VerifyNow® P2Y12 assay, light transmission aggregometry, and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation at 0, 1, 4, and 24 h and 7 days. Greater platelet inhibition by VerifyNow® P2Y12 was achieved by prasugrel compared with clopidogrel at 4 h post-LD (least squares mean, 89.3 vs. 27.7%, P< 0.0001; primary endpoint). The difference in platelet inhibition between prasugrel and clopidogrel was significant from 1 h through 7 days (P < 0.0001). Similar results were obtained using all other platelet function measures. Prasugrel resulted in fewer poor responders at all time points irrespective of definition used. CONCLUSION: In patients with type 2 DM and CAD, standard-dose prasugrel is associated with greater platelet inhibition and better response profiles during both the loading and maintenance periods when compared with double-dose clopidogrel.

Use of evidence-based therapies in short-term outcomes of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction in patients with chronic kidney disease: a report from the National Cardiovascular Data Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network registry.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a risk factor for myocardial infarction (MI) and death. Our goal was to characterize the association between CKD severity and short-term outcomes and the use of in-hospital evidence-based therapies among patients with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) and non-ST-segment elevation MI (NSTEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study sample was drawn from the Acute Coronary Treatment and Intervention Outcomes Network registry, a nationwide sample of STEMI (n=19 029) and NSTEMI (n=30 462) patients. Estimated glomerular filtration rate was calculated with the Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation in relation to use of immediate (first 24 hours) therapies and early (first 48 hours) cardiac catheterization as well as in-hospital major bleeding events and death. Overall, 30.5% and 42.9% of patients with STEMI and NSTEMI, respectively, had CKD. Regardless of MI type, patients with progressively more severe CKD had higher rates of death. For STEMI, the odds ratio for stage 3a, 3b, 4, and 5 CKD compared with patients with no CKD was 2.49, 3.72, 4.82, and 7.97, respectively (P(trend)<0.0001). For NSTEMI, the analogous odds ratios were 1.81, 2.41, 3.50, and 4.09 (P for trend <0.0001). In addition, patients with progressively more severe CKD were less likely to receive immediate evidence-based therapies including aspirin, beta-blockers, or clopidogrel, were less likely to undergo any reperfusion (STEMI) or revascularization (NSTEMI), and had higher rates of bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Reports over the past decade have highlighted the importance of CKD among patients with MI. Data from this contemporary cohort suggest that patients with CKD still receive fewer evidence-based therapies and have substantially higher mortality rates.

Drug eluting versus bare metal stents in cardiac allograft vasculopathy: a systematic review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac allograft vasculopathy (CAV) is a distinct pathological condition characterized by diffuse and progressive arteriopathy and it is an important determinant of long-term graft survival. Definitive CAV treatment is retransplantation but palliation with stenting might temporarily alleviate it. The benefit of drug eluting stents (DES) over bare metal stents (BMS) in the treatment of such lesions is debatable. We therefore sought to do a literature search to review the available evidence comparing DES to BMS. METHODS: We conducted Pub Med, EMBASE, Cochrane database review, Web of Science search of studies comparing DES with BMS in CAV. Available studies were retrospective in nature with either direct comparison groups (n = 5) or historical controls (n = 1). The main outcomes analyzed were in stent restenosis (ISR) during follow-up and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 312 patients from six studies were included in the review (1995-2007). Most commonly used DES were sirolimus eluting stent. DES appeared to reduce the long-term risk of ISR compared with BMS. Three of the five studies showed a statistically significant reduction in ISR at 12 months while the one study assessing ISR at 6 months showed no significant difference. Clinical endpoints such as death and major adverse cardiac events were not statistically different. CONCLUSION: DES appear to reduce the incidence of ISR in CAV as compared with BMS. Prospective randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the clinical benefit of DES beyond a reduction in ISR.

Endovascular treatment of mesenteric ischemia.

OBJECTIVES: Our goal was to describe a single-center's experience in managing acute and chronic mesenteric ischemia with endovascular therapies. BACKGROUND: Open surgical revascularization has been considered the historical gold standard treatment for mesenteric ischemia though it poses considerable morbidity and mortality risk. An aging population with increased comorbidities makes endovascular treatment a more attractive treatment option. METHODS: Consecutive subjects receiving percutaneous mesenteric interventions for acute and chronic mesenteric ischemia from 2004 to 2010 were identified retrospectively. Information on comorbidities, symptoms, screening tests, procedural outcomes, and follow up was obtained. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received percutaneous mesenteric interventions during this period. The mean age of the population was 65.0 years with roughly equal proportions of males (48.4%) and females (51.6%). Traditional cardiovascular risk factors were highly prevalent (hypertension 45.2%, diabetes 25.8%, dyslipidemia 38.7%, nicotine use 45.2%). Procedural success was 93.5%; no periprocedural complications were reported. During a mean follow up of 13 months, 16.1% required repeat revascularization and 22.6% died. Endovascular treatment of acute mesenteric ischemia was successful (n = 8) and no patient required open surgical revascularization acutely or during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Endovascular treatment of mesenteric ischemia is a safe and effective therapy with acceptable long-term results. Our experience with acute mesenteric ischemia suggests that percutaneous treatment may be an effective alternative to surgical revascularization in appropriately selected patients.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies in acute coronary syndromes.

The combination of aspirin and clopidogrel is the mainstay antiplatelet therapy for acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, the dosing of aspirin, the dosing of clopidogrel, the timing of clopidogrel initiation as well as the duration of clopidogrel therapy remain controversial matters. Clopidogrel resistance is an emerging concept with potential clinical implications. In the era of clopidogrel and bivalirudin, the role of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonists is being challenged, yet they are still indicated in a select high-risk population. Concerning anticoagulant use in ACS, newer agents, bivalirudin and fondaparinux, have improved outcomes in comparison to heparin in patients managed with an invasive or conservative strategy, respectively. Combining multiple antiplatelet agents and an anticoagulant is the standard of care for ACS.

Balancing the benefits and risks of antiplatelet agents in patients with non-ST-segment elevated acute coronary syndromes and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Selecting appropriate antiplatelet therapy requires close attention to the delicate balance between reducing risk of ischemic events while minimizing bleeding risk. The broad range of available agents, while permitting tailoring of pharmacotherapy to individual patients, also complicates selection of optimal regimens. Platelet physiology provides an underpinning for the rationale behind pharmacotherapeutic strategies for patients with non-ST-segment elevated acute coronary syndromes (NSTE ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The same mechanisms of action that confer anti-ischemic benefit with antiplatelet agents may also be associated with increased risk. In the context of ACS and PCI, antiplatelet agents are used in complex strategies and combinations with other pharmacotherapies targeted at alleviating ischemic symptoms and reducing ischemic risk. Accounting for individual patient risk factors, timing of treatment, and dosage of antiplatelet medications minimizes risk while optimizing outcomes. This review examines results from clinical trials of thienopyridines (clopidogrel, ticlopidine, and the newer prasugrel), the new P2Y(12) antagonists ticagrelor and cangrelor, glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors (abciximab, eptifibatide, tirofiban), and the direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin. Recommendations include clopidogrel for use upstream if discontinued 5 days before coronary angiographic bypass graft. Bivalirudin remains a reasonable treatment choice in patients at low to moderate risk; and glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors confer anti-ischemic benefit with little incremental bleeding risk when individual patient factors are taken into account for their dosing. Increased awareness of the factors contributing to risks and benefits associated with the available antiplatelet agents will help guide physicians in choosing optimal regimens for all patients.

Fluoroscopy vs. traditional guided femoral arterial access and the use of closure devices: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the effectiveness of accessing the common femoral artery (CFA) using fluoroscopic guidance (FG) versus traditional anatomic landmark guidance (TALG) during cardiac catheterization and to determine the effect of the two modalities on the appropriateness for use of vascular closure devices (VCDs). BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown a consistent relationship between the head of the femur and the CFA, yet there is no prospective data validating the superiority of fluoroscopy-assisted CFA access. METHODS: A total of 972 patients were randomized to either FG or TALG access. The primary endpoint of the study was the angiographic suitability of the puncture site for VCD use. Secondary endpoints included arteriotomy location, time and number of attempts needed to obtain access, and the incidence of vascular complications. RESULTS: Of these, 474 patients were randomized into the FG arm and 498 patients into the TALG arm. A total of 79.5% of patients in the fluoroscopy arm and 80.7% in the traditional arm (P = 0.7) were deemed angiographically suitable for VCD based on the arteriotomy. The fluoroscopy group had significantly less arteriotomies below the inferior border of the head of the femur (P = 0.03). Total time for sheath insertion (105.7 +/- 130.7 vs. 106.5 +/- 152.6 sec) and number of arterial punctures (1.1 +/- 0.4 vs. 1.1 +/- 0.5) did not differ among the FG and TALG, respectively. The rates of vascular complications were not different. CONCLUSION: The angiographic suitability for VCD was not different between FG and TALG groups. Fluoroscopy decreased the number of low arteriotomies. The time to sheath insertion, number of arterial punctures needed to obtain access, and the incidence of complications were also similar.

Antiplatelet and anticoagulant agents: key differences in mechanisms of action, clinical application, and therapeutic benefit in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndromes.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Platelet activation and aggregation are important pathophysiologic elements of both non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes and the ischemic complications of percutaneous coronary intervention, making antiplatelet agents necessary components of the pharmacotherapeutic treatment paradigm for these patients. This review evaluates and interprets the role of oral antiplatelet agents, glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors, and bivalirudin in the context of current clinical evidence and practice. RECENT FINDINGS: The current standard of care for patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes--aspirin, clopidogrel, and glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors for the majority of patients--is being challenged by recent clinical trials (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment, Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 2, Randomized Evaluation of Percutaneous coronary intervention Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events-2, Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage StrategY), raising important questions regarding the value of glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitors as accompaniments of high-dose clopidogrel pretreatment and increased use of the anticoagulant bivalirudin. SUMMARY: Current data indicate that antiplatelet regimens consisting of aspirin, clopidogrel, and a glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitor provide substantial benefit among patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. Optimized antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapy--including aspirin, clopidogrel, a glycoprotein IIb-IIIa inhibitor, and an anticoagulant--may reduce the incidence of subclinical and clinical events.