6- Versus 24-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients Nonresistant to Aspirin: Final Results of the ITALIC Trial (Is There a Life for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel).

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is noninferior to 24-month DAPT in aspirin-sensitive patients. BACKGROUND: The ITALIC (Is There a Life for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel) trial showed that rates of bleeding and thrombotic events at 1 year were much the same with 6 versus 12 months of DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stents. In this report, 2-year follow-up is presented. METHODS: In a multicenter randomized study, patients with confirmed nonresistance to aspirin undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation were allocated to 6 or 24 months of DAPT. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding at 12 months post-percutaneous coronary intervention. The secondary endpoints comprised the same composite endpoint at 24 months and each individual component. RESULTS: Overall, 2,031 patients from 70 centers were screened; 926 were randomized to 6-month and 924 to 24-month DAPT. Noninferiority was demonstrated for 6- versus 12-month DAPT, with an absolute risk difference of 0.11% (95% confidence interval: -1.04% to 1.26%; p = 0.0002). At 2 years, the composite endpoint was unchanged, at 3.5% for 6 months and 3.7% for 24 months (p = 0.79), and rates of myocardial infarction (1.3% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.51), stroke (0.6% vs. 0.8%; p = 0.77), and target vessel revascularization (1.0% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.09) were likewise similar. There was a trend toward higher mortality with longer DAPT (2.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.11). Four patients (0.4%) in the 24-month group and none in the 6-month group had major bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Two-year outcomes in the ITALIC trial confirmed the 1-year results and showed that patients receiving 6-month DAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention with second-generation drug-eluting stent have similar outcomes to those receiving 24-month DAPT.

Primary angioplasty: Effect of deferred stenting on stent size.

BACKGROUND: Primary angioplasty with immediate stenting (IS) is the gold standard for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Deferred stenting (DS) has been proposed to limit periprocedural complications, and may influence stent size because of thrombus and spasm alleviation. AIM: We sought to study the effect of DS on stent size. METHODS: Over the study period, 258 patients underwent primary angioplasty for STEMI (DS, n=84; IS, n=174). An informative coronary angiogram run - i.e. allowing for proper lesion analysis - was selected and anonymized by an independent operator. Two experienced operators randomly analysed these runs, and proposed stent dimensions after having measured vessel diameter and lesion length by quantitative coronary analysis. The primary objective was the variation in stent size between the two coronary angiograms. RESULTS: The median delay between the two coronary angiograms was 2 days. Overall, the stent length was shorter (-1.64mm; P=0.030) and its diameter was larger (+0.13mm; P<0.001) during the second coronary angiogram, especially in the right coronary arteries. CONCLUSIONS: DS led to the implantation of a larger and shorter stent; this is probably because DS allows for more accurate assessment of the residual lesion after relief of spasm and thrombus, and may have clinical consequences in terms of stent thrombosis and restenosis.

Comparison of Immediate With Delayed Stenting Using the Minimalist Immediate Mechanical Intervention Approach in Acute ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The MIMI Study.

BACKGROUND: Delayed stent implantation after restoration of normal epicardial flow by a minimalist immediate mechanical intervention aims to decrease the rate of distal embolization and impaired myocardial reperfusion after percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to confirm whether a delayed stenting (DS) approach (24-48 hours) improves myocardial reperfusion, versus immediate stenting, in patients with acute ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the prospective, randomized, open-label minimalist immediate mechanical intervention (MIMI) trial, patients (n=140) with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction ≤12 hours were randomized to immediate stenting (n=73) or DS (n=67) after Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 3 flow restoration by thrombus aspiration. Patients in the DS group underwent a second coronary arteriography for stent implantation a median of 36 hours (interquartile range 29-46) after randomization. The primary end point was microvascular obstruction (% left ventricular mass) on cardiac magnetic resonance imaging performed 5 days (interquartile range 4-6) after the first procedure. There was a nonsignificant trend toward lower microvascular obstruction in the immediate stenting group compared with DS group (1.88% versus 3.96%; P=0.051), which became significant after adjustment for the area at risk (P=0.049). Median infarct weight, left ventricular ejection fraction, and infarct size did not differ between groups. No difference in 6-month outcomes was apparent for the rate of major cardiovascular and cerebral events. CONCLUSIONS: The present findings do not support a strategy of DS versus immediate stenting in patients with ST-segment-elevation infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention and even suggested a deleterious effect of DS on microvascular obstruction size. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01360242.

Deferred vs immediate stenting in ST elevation myocardial infarction: Potential interest in selected patients.

BACKGROUND: Slow flow, no reflow and distal embolization often occur during primary angioplasty in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), compromising optimal myocardial reperfusion. AIMS: This study aimed at assessing the impact of deferred stenting (DS) on periprocedural events as compared to immediate stenting (IS). The second objective was to gather the reasons advocated by the physicians for deferring stenting. METHODS: All consecutive patients referred for primary angioplasty were included between September 2010 and November 2011. Physicians were free to choose the strategy between DS and IS but had to justify their choice. DS patients underwent a coronary angiogram control in a delay > 24h. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were included. Forty patients underwent DS and 58 IS. DS strategy involved thrombus management by thromboaspiration (33 patients 82.5%) and by the use of AntiGpIIbIIIa (23 patients 62.2%). This strategy could be achieved with a low complication rate. In particular, one patient had a reocclusion leading to a rapid reintervention and one had a distal embolization. In comparison, 11 periprocedural events occurred in the IS subgroup. In addition, among DS patients, 7 were treated medically because of a non-significant stenosis. The major criteria considered by the operator to prefer DS in the presence of a TIMI 3 flow concerned thrombotic load. CONCLUSION: This mono-centric experience confirmed the feasibility and the safety of DS. On top of reducing periprocedural events, it may allow for other treatment options in selected STEMI patients, e.g. surgery or medical treatment. The reasons leading physicians to choose DS were large thrombus burden on top of resolution of chest pain and normalization of the ECG. These criteria could help selecting situations in which DS may be of particular value as compared to IS.

6- versus 24-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents in patients nonresistant to aspirin: the randomized, multicenter ITALIC trial.

BACKGROUND: The currently recommended duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in drug-eluting stent (DES) recipients is 12 months to reduce the risk of late stent thrombosis, particularly in those with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). OBJECTIVES: This study hypothesized that antiplatelet treatment with DAPT for 6 months may be noninferior to 24-month DAPT in aspirin-sensitive patients. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized study assigned patients undergoing implantation of everolimus-eluting stents with confirmed nonresistance to aspirin to receive 6- or 24-month DAPT. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, stroke, and major bleeding at 12 months post-stenting. RESULTS: A total of 2,031 patients were enrolled in 70 European and Middle Eastern centers. The trial was prematurely terminated due to recruitment problems, leaving 941 patients randomized to 24-month DAPT and 953 to 6-month DAPT. The 2 treatment groups had similar baseline and procedural characteristics. There was no significant difference in the primary endpoint (24-month: 1.5% vs. 6-month: 1.6%; p = 0.85). Noninferiority was demonstrated for 6- versus 24-month DAPT, with an absolute risk difference of 0.11% (95% confidence interval: -1.04% to 1.26%; p for noninferiority = 0.0002). There were no significant differences in stent thrombosis or bleeding complications. In the 792 (44%) high-risk patients with ACS, primary and secondary endpoints did not significantly differ (hazard ratio: 1.7 [95% confidence interval: 0.519 to 6.057; p = 0.361]). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of bleeding and thrombotic events were not significantly different according to 6- versus 24-month DAPT after PCI with new-generation DES in good aspirin responders. (Is There A LIfe for DES After Discontinuation of Clopidogrel [ITALICplus]; NCT01476020).

Outcome impact of coronary revascularization strategy reclassification with fractional flow reserve at time of diagnostic angiography: insights from a large French multicenter fractional flow reserve registry.

BACKGROUND: There is no large report of the impact of fractional flow reserve (FFR) on the reclassification of the coronary revascularization strategy on individual patients referred for diagnostic angiography. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Registre Français de la FFR (R3F) investigated 1075 consecutive patients undergoing diagnostic angiography including an FFR investigation at 20 French centers. Investigators were asked to define prospectively their revascularization strategy a priori based on angiography before performing the FFR. The final revascularization strategy, reclassification of the strategy by FFR, and 1-year clinical follow-up were prospectively recorded. The strategy a priori based on angiography was medical therapy in 55% and revascularization in 45% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 38%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 7%). Patients were treated according to FFR in 1028/1075 (95.7%). The applied strategy after FFR was medical therapy in 58% and revascularization in 42% (percutaneous coronary intervention, 32%; coronary artery bypass surgery, 10%). The final strategy applied differed from the strategy a priori in 43% of cases: in 33% of a priori medical patients, in 56% of patients undergoing a priori percutaneous coronary intervention, and in 51% of patients undergoing a priori coronary artery bypass surgery. In reclassified patients treated based on FFR and in disagreement with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=464), the 1-year outcome (major cardiac event, 11.2%) was as good as in patients in whom final applied strategy concurred with the angiography-based a priori decision (n=611; major cardiac event, 11.9%; log-rank, P=0.78). At 1 year, >93% patients were asymptomatic without difference between reclassified and nonreclassified patients (Generalized Linear Mixed Model, P=0.75). Reclassification safety was preserved in high-risk patients. CONCLUSION: This study shows that performing FFR during diagnostic angiography is associated with reclassification of the revascularization decision in about half of the patients. It further demonstrates that it is safe to pursue a revascularization strategy divergent from that suggested by angiography but guided by FFR.

An uncommon presentation of acute type A aortic dissection: left main coronary artery obstruction.

Acute aortic dissection presents with a wide range of manifestations. Sometimes an acute coronary syndrome is diagnosed instead of aortic dissection leading to inappropriate treatment. We describe a case of acute aortic dissection with the uncommon involvement of the left main coronary artery. A 64-year-old man was referred to our hospital for primary coronary intervention because ECG demonstrated ST elevation in the aVR lead with diffuse ST-segment depression. Coronary angiography was performed to treat the culprit lesion but the left main coronary artery could not be catheterized. Aortography and transesophageal echocardiography confirmed Stanford type A aortic dissection. The patient died of cardiac arrest in spite of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. This case also illustrates how Stanford type A aortic dissection can present with left main coronary artery obstruction.

Quantification of ventricular resynchronization reserve by radionuclide phase analysis in heart failure patients: a prospective long-term study.

BACKGROUND: Phase analysis, developed to assess dyssynchrony from ECG-gated radionuclide ventriculography, has shown promising results. We hypothesized that quantifying the cardiac resynchronization reserve, that is, the extent of response to cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT), by radionuclide imaging could potentially identify patients who are best suited for CRT. METHODS AND RESULTS: Seventy-four patients ages 64.8±10.1 years were prospectively studied from July 2004 to July 2006, of whom 62.2% and 37.8%, respectively, were in New York Heart Association class 3 and 4. Mean QRS width was 173±25 ms. ECG-gated radionuclide ventriculography to quantify interventricular and intraventricular dyssynchrony was performed at baseline with and without CRT and at the 3-month follow-up visit. Amino-terminal-pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) levels were also determined at baseline and at 3 months. During a mean follow-up of 10.1±7.6 months, there were 37 (50%) clinical events that defined the nonresponder group, including cardiac death or readmission for worsening heart failure. In multivariate Cox model analysis, higher NT-pro-BNP blood levels were associated with a significant increase in the risk for event (hazard ratio=1.085 for a 100 pg/L increase in NT-pro-BNP; 95% confidence interval, 1.014 to 1.161). Each 10° elevation in intraventricular dyssynchrony was associated with a decrease in the risk of events (hazard ratio=0.456, 95% confidence interval, 0.304 to 0.683). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis demonstrated that an interventricular dyssynchrony cutoff value of 25.5° for intraventricular synchrony yielded 91.4% sensitivity and 84.4% specificity for predicting a good response to CRT. CONCLUSIONS: The quantification of interventricular dyssynchrony with radionuclide phase analysis suggests that early postimplantation interventricular dyssynchrony may provide identification of CRT responders.