Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 35
Filtrar
Más filtros

Base de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 17(15): 1825-1836, 2024 Aug 12.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39142758

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: In patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) provide similar results to drug-coated balloons (DCBs) but are inferior to drug-eluting stents (DES) at 1 year. However, the long-term efficacy of BVS in these patients remains unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of BVS in patients with ISR. METHODS: RIBS VI (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment; NCT02672878) and RIBS VI Scoring (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment With Scoring Balloon; NTC03069066) are prospective multicenter studies designed to evaluate the results of BVS in patients with ISR (N = 220). The inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical to those used in the RIBS IV (ISR of DES) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Drug-eluting Stents: Drug-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239940) and RIBS V (ISR of bare-metal stents) (Restenosis Intra-stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-eluting Stent; NCT01239953) randomized trials (including 249 ISR patients treated with DCBs and 249 ISR patients treated with DES). A prespecified comparison of the long-term results obtained with these treatment modalities (ie, DES, DCBs, and BVS) was performed. RESULTS: Clinical follow-up at 3 years was obtained in all (100%) 718 patients. The 3-year target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was 14.1% (vs 12.9% after DCBs [not significant], and 5.2% after DES [HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.47-5.36; P = 0.001]). In a landmark analysis (>1 year), the target lesion revascularization rate after BVS was higher than after DES (adjusted HR: 3.41; 95% CI: 1.15-10.08) and DCBs (adjusted HR: 3.33; 95% CI: 1.14-9.70). Very late vessel thrombosis was also more frequent with BVS (BVS: 1.8%, DCBs: 0.4%, DES: 0%; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ISR, late clinical results of DES are superior to those obtained with DCBs and BVS. Beyond the first year, DCBs are safer and more effective than BVS.


Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Reestenosis Coronaria , Diseño de Prótesis , Humanos , Factores de Tiempo , Masculino , Resultado del Tratamiento , Femenino , Estudios Prospectivos , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Persona de Mediana Edad , Anciano , Factores de Riesgo , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Stents , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto
2.
Cardiovasc Diagn Ther ; 13(5): 792-804, 2023 Oct 31.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37941845

RESUMEN

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered the therapy of choice in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI); however, a low persistent rate of revascularizations and stent thrombosis exist over the time. We have previously shown that a paclitaxel (PTX)-drug-coated balloon (DCB) after a bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation (DCB-combined strategy) yields superior angiographic and clinical results compared to BMS in the short term. However, the long-term safety and efficacy of this approach remain uncertain. Methods: An 8-year clinical follow-up was conducted on patients enrolled in the randomized PEBSI-1 trial (NCT01839890). The original trial included patients who suffered a STEMI, patients were randomly assigned to receive a DCB-combined strategy or BMS only and the primary endpoint was in-stent late luminal loss (LLL) at 9-month follow-up. After the completion of this study, death, myocardial re-infarction, ischemia-driven repeated revascularizations included target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis, were assessed by yearly contact by a clinical visit, telephone or by electronic records. These outcomes were adhered to ARC-2 criteria. Results: The rate of incomplete follow-up was very low, with only 3 out of 111 patients (2.7%) in the DCB-combined strategy group and 1 out of 112 patients (0.9%) in the BMS group. At 8 years there were a lower rate of TVR [3.7% vs. 14.3%; hazard ratio (HR): 0.243; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.081-0.727; P=0.006], and a trend towards lower TLR (2.8% vs. 8.9%; HR: 0.300; 95% CI: 0.083-1.090; P=0.052) in the DCB-combined strategy group. No statistical difference between the DCB-combined strategy and BMS groups were found for all causes of death, deaths from cardiovascular disease, reinfarctions or stent thrombosis. Notably in the DCB-combined strategy group, no episode of stent thrombosis occurred after the first year. Similarly, there were no cardiovascular deaths, TVR and TLR in the DCB-combined strategy group after 5 years. In contrast, during the period from year 5 to 8, the BMS group experienced an additional cardiovascular death, as well as one case of TVR, one case of TLR, and one case of stent thrombosis. Conclusions: In STEMI patients, the DCB-combined strategy maintains its safety and clinical efficacy over time. Our rates of TVR, TLR, and very late stent thrombosis (VLST) at very long-term are the lowest ever found in a STEMI trial. Further studies are warranted to assess the potential superiority of this novel strategy as compared with new-generation DES to prevent very late events in these patients. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; identifier: NCT01839890.

3.
EuroIntervention ; 19(7): 571-579, 2023 Sep 18.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37482940

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) improves clinical symptoms and quality of life. The longer-term safety of PCI compared to optimal medical therapy (OMT) remains uncertain. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the long-term safety of PCI for CTO in a randomised trial as compared to OMT. METHODS: A total of 396 patients with a symptomatic CTO were enrolled into a randomised, multicentre clinical trial comparing PCI and OMT. Half of the patients had a single CTO; the others had multivessel disease. Non-CTO lesions were treated prior to randomisation (2:1 ratio). During follow-up, crossover from OMT to PCI occurred in 7.3% (1 year) and 17.5% (3 years) of patients. RESULTS: At 3 years, the incidence of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction was not significantly different between the groups (OMT 3.7% vs PCI 6.2%; p=0.29). By per-protocol analysis, the difference remained non-significant (OMT 5.7% vs PCI 4.7%; p=0.67). Overall, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were more frequent with OMT (OMT 21.2% vs PCI 11.2%), largely because of ischaemia-driven revascularisation. The rates of stroke or hospitalisation for bleeding were not different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: At 3 years there was no difference in the rate of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction between PCI or OMT among patients with a remaining single coronary CTO. The MACE rate was higher in the OMT group due largely to ischaemia-driven revascularisation. CTO PCI appears to be a safe option for patients with a single remaining significant coronary CTO. CinicalTrials.gov: NCT01760083.


Asunto(s)
Oclusión Coronaria , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Oclusión Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Oclusión Coronaria/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Calidad de Vida , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Enfermedad Crónica , Factores de Riesgo
4.
Int J Cardiol ; 367: 90-98, 2022 11 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36030132

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Sex and prior cardiovascular disease (CVD) are known independent prognostic factors following an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We aimed to examine whether the association between sex and 30-day mortality differ according to the presence of previous CVD in STEMI patients. METHODS: Prospective, observational, multicentre registry of consecutive patients managed in 17 STEMI networks in Spain (83 centres), between April and June 2019. Unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models assessed the association of 30-day mortality with sex and prior CVD status, as well as their interaction. RESULTS: Among 4366 patients (mean age 63.7 ± 13.0 years; 78% male), there were 337 (8.1%) deaths within the first 30 days. There was an association between crude 30-day mortality and sex (women 10.4% vs. men 7.4%, p = 0.003), and prior CVD (CVD 13.7% vs non-CVD 6.8%, p < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounding, neither sex nor prior CVD were apparently associated with mortality. Nevertheless, we found a significant sex-CVD interaction (p-interaction = 0.006), since women were at lower risk than men in the subset of patients with prior CVD (OR = 0.30, 95%CI = 0.12-0.80) but not in those without CVD (OR = 1.17, 95%CI = 0.79-1.74). CONCLUSIONS: Women as well as patients with prior CVD have an increased crude risk of 30-day mortality. However, sex-related differences in short term mortality are modulated by the interaction with CVD in STEMI patients. Compared to men, women had a similar prognosis in the subset of patients without CVD, whereas they were associated with a lower risk of mortality among those with prior CVD after adjusting for other prognostic factors.


Asunto(s)
Enfermedades Cardiovasculares , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST , Anciano , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/diagnóstico , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/diagnóstico , Factores Sexuales
5.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) ; 75(8): 669-680, 2022 Aug.
Artículo en Inglés, Español | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35067471

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) networks should guarantee STEMI care with good clinical results and within the recommended time parameters. There is no contemporary information on the performance of these networks in Spain. The objective of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics of patients, times to reperfusion, characteristics of the intervention performed, and 30-day mortality. METHODS: Prospective, observational, multicenter registry of consecutive patients treated in 17 STEMI networks in Spain (83 centers with the Infarction Code), between April 1 and June 30, 2019. RESULTS: A total of 5401 patients were attended (mean age, 64±13 years; 76.9% male), of which 4366 (80.8%) had confirmed STEMI. Of these, 87.5% were treated with primary angioplasty, 4.4% with fibrinolysis, and 8.1% did not receive reperfusion. In patients treated with primary angioplasty, the time between symptom onset and reperfusion was 193 [135-315] minutes and the time between first medical contact and reperfusion was 107 [80-146] minutes. Overall 30-day mortality due to STEMI was 7.9%, while mortality in patients treated with primary angioplasty was 6.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients with STEMI were treated with primary angioplasty. In more than half of the patients, the time from first medical contact to reperfusion was <120 minutes. Mortality at 30 days was relatively low.


Asunto(s)
Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/diagnóstico , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/terapia , España/epidemiología
6.
Cardiovasc Diabetol ; 20(1): 69, 2021 03 23.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33757510

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 pandemic, elective invasive cardiac procedures (ICP) have been frequently cancelled or postponed. Consequences may be more evident in patients with diabetes. OBJECTIVES: The objective was to identify the peculiarities of patients with DM among those in whom ICP were cancelled or postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as to identify subgroups in which the influence of DM has higher impact on the clinical outcome. METHODS: We included 2,158 patients in whom an elective ICP was cancelled or postponed during COVID-19 pandemic in 37 hospitals in Spain. Among them, 700 (32.4%) were diabetics. Patients with and without diabetes were compared. RESULTS: Patients with diabetes were older and had a higher prevalence of other cardiovascular risk factors, previous cardiovascular history and co-morbidities. Diabetics had a higher mortality (3.0% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (1.9% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.001). Differences were especially important in patients with valvular heart disease (mortality 6.9% vs 1.7% [p < 0.001] and cardiovascular mortality 4.9% vs 0.9% [p = 0.002] in patients with and without diabetes, respectively). In the multivariable analysis, diabetes remained as an independent risk factor both for overall and cardiovascular mortality. No significant interaction was found with other clinical variables. CONCLUSION: Among patients in whom an elective invasive cardiac procedure is cancelled or postponed during COVID-19 pandemic, mortality and cardiovascular mortality is higher in patients with diabetes, irrespectively on other clinical conditions. These procedures should not be cancelled in patients with diabetes.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Angiografía Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Cardiopatías/diagnóstico por imagen , Cardiopatías/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Tiempo de Tratamiento , Listas de Espera , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Comorbilidad , Bases de Datos Factuales , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/mortalidad , Femenino , Cardiopatías/mortalidad , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , España/epidemiología , Factores de Tiempo , Listas de Espera/mortalidad
7.
Coron Artery Dis ; 32(2): 96-104, 2021 Mar 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32558692

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Currently drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons are recommended in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) after scoring balloon (SCB) predilation in these patients is unknown. METHODS: RIBS VI (NCT02672878) and RIBS VI 'Scoring' (NCT03069066) are prospective multicentre studies assessing the value of BVS in patients with ISR. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both studies. Results of conventional BVS implantation (112 patients) were compared with those obtained with systematic SCB therapy before BVS (108 patients). Angiographic follow-up was scheduled for all patients. RESULTS: On late angiography (93% of eligible patients) the in-segment minimal lumen diameter (primary end-point) (1.88 ± 0.5 vs. 1.90 ± 0.4 mm, P = 0.81), % diameter stenosis (28 ± 17 vs. 29 ± 15%), late lumen loss (0.23 ± 0.4 vs. 0.22 ± 0.4 mm) and binary restenosis rate (8.5 vs. 9.3%) were similar in the conventional BVS and SCB + BVS groups, respectively. At 1-year follow-up (100% of patients) target lesion revascularization (TLR) requirement (9.8 vs. 11.1%) was similar with the two strategies. Freedom from cardiac death, myocardial infarction and TLR was 88% and 87%, respectively. Results remained unchanged after adjusting for potential baseline confounders and were consistent in 10 prespecified subgroups. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that results of conventional BVS implantation in patients with ISR are not improved by systematic predilation with SCB. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT02672878 (RIBS VI) and NCT03069066 (RIBS VI 'Scoring').


Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Anciano , Angiografía Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , España , Stents , Andamios del Tejido
8.
Catheter Cardiovasc Interv ; 97(5): 927-937, 2021 04 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33336506

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 pandemic in Spain, elective procedures were canceled or postponed, mainly due to health care systems overwhelming. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the consequences of interrupting invasive procedures in patients with chronic cardiac diseases due to the COVID-19 outbreak in Spain. METHODS: The study population is comprised of 2,158 patients that were pending on elective cardiac invasive procedures in 37 hospitals in Spain on the 14th of March 2020, when a state of alarm and subsequent lockdown was declared in Spain due to the COVID-19 pandemic. These patients were followed-up until April 31th. RESULTS: Out of the 2,158 patients, 36 (1.7%) died. Mortality was significantly higher in patients pending on structural procedures (4.5% vs. 0.8%, respectively; p < .001), in those >80 year-old (5.1% vs. 0.7%, p < .001), and in presence of diabetes (2.7% vs. 0.9%, p = .001), hypertension (2.0% vs. 0.6%, p = .014), hypercholesterolemia (2.0% vs. 0.9%, p = .026) [Correction added on December 23, 2020, after first online publication: as per Dr. Moreno's request changes in p-values were made after original publication in Abstract.], chronic renal failure (6.0% vs. 1.2%, p < .001), NYHA > II (3.8% vs. 1.2%, p = .001), and CCS > II (4.2% vs. 1.4%, p = .013), whereas was it was significantly lower in smokers (0.5% vs. 1.9%, p = .013). Multivariable analysis identified age > 80, diabetes, renal failure and CCS > II as independent predictors for mortality. CONCLUSION: Mortality at 45 days during COVID-19 outbreak in patients with chronic cardiovascular diseases included in a waiting list due to cancellation of invasive elective procedures was 1.7%. Some clinical characteristics may be of help in patient selection for being promptly treated when similar situations happen in the future.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos/estadística & datos numéricos , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/cirugía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Listas de Espera , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedades Cardiovasculares/epidemiología , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , España/epidemiología
9.
EuroIntervention ; 16(17): 1426-1433, 2021 04 20.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33164893

RESUMEN

AIMS: The aim of this study was to assess clinical and prognosis differences in patients with COVID-19 and STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a nationwide registry of consecutive patients managed within 42 specific STEMI care networks, we compared patient and procedure characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in two different cohorts, according to whether or not they had COVID-19. Among 1,010 consecutive STEMI patients, 91 were identified as having COVID-19 (9.0%). With the exception of smoking status (more frequent in non-COVID-19 patients) and previous coronary artery disease (more frequent in COVID-19 patients), clinical characteristics were similar between the groups, but COVID-19 patients had more heart failure on arrival (31.9% vs 18.4%, p=0.002). Mechanical thrombectomy (44% vs 33.5%, p=0.046) and GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor administration (20.9% vs 11.2%, p=0.007) were more frequent in COVID-19 patients, who had an increased in-hospital mortality (23.1% vs 5.7%, p<0.0001), that remained consistent after adjustment for age, sex, Killip class and ischaemic time (OR 4.85, 95% CI: 2.04-11.51; p<0.001). COVID-19 patients had an increase of stent thrombosis (3.3% vs 0.8%, p=0.020) and cardiogenic shock development after PCI (9.9% vs 3.8%, p=0.007). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed a significant increase in in-hospital mortality, stent thrombosis and cardiogenic shock development after PCI in patients with STEMI and COVID-19 in comparison with contemporaneous non-COVID-19 STEMI patients.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitales , Humanos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , SARS-CoV-2 , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/epidemiología , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento
10.
Rev Esp Cardiol ; 73(12): 994-1002, 2020 Dec.
Artículo en Español | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33071427

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P < .001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P < .001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P = .017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.

11.
Rev Esp Cardiol (Engl Ed) ; 73(12): 994-1002, 2020 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés, Español | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32917566

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The COVID-19 outbreak has had an unclear impact on the treatment and outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of this study was to assess changes in STEMI management during the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: Using a multicenter, nationwide, retrospective, observational registry of consecutive patients who were managed in 75 specific STEMI care centers in Spain, we compared patient and procedural characteristics and in-hospital outcomes in 2 different cohorts with 30-day follow-up according to whether the patients had been treated before or after COVID-19. RESULTS: Suspected STEMI patients treated in STEMI networks decreased by 27.6% and patients with confirmed STEMI fell from 1305 to 1009 (22.7%). There were no differences in reperfusion strategy (> 94% treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention in both cohorts). Patients treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention during the COVID-19 outbreak had a longer ischemic time (233 [150-375] vs 200 [140-332] minutes, P<.001) but showed no differences in the time from first medical contact to reperfusion. In-hospital mortality was higher during COVID-19 (7.5% vs 5.1%; unadjusted OR, 1.50; 95%CI, 1.07-2.11; P <.001); this association remained after adjustment for confounders (risk-adjusted OR, 1.88; 95%CI, 1.12-3.14; P=.017). In the 2020 cohort, there was a 6.3% incidence of confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection during hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: The number of STEMI patients treated during the current COVID-19 outbreak fell vs the previous year and there was an increase in the median time from symptom onset to reperfusion and a significant 2-fold increase in the rate of in-hospital mortality. No changes in reperfusion strategy were detected, with primary percutaneous coronary intervention performed for the vast majority of patients. The co-existence of STEMI and SARS-CoV-2 infection was relatively infrequent.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Manejo de la Enfermedad , Pandemias , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Sistema de Registros , SARS-CoV-2 , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/cirugía , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/epidemiología , España/epidemiología
15.
Pulse (Basel) ; 6(3-4): 137-143, 2019 Apr.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31049313

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We assessed the feasibility of renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) treatment in patients with resistant hypertension using the Iberis® RDN system. This study was a prospective, multicenter, single-arm feasibility registry. METHODS: We collected data from patients who underwent RDN treatment using the Iberis system. From November 2014 to February 2016, 16 patients from 6 centers in Europe were enrolled in this registry. RESULTS: Consistent reductions in the 24-h systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure were obtained. At any follow-up point, more than 70% of the patients were responders. The change in the 24-h SBP at 1 month was strongly correlated with that at 12 months. CONCLUSION: The Iberis system is safe and effective in patients for the treatment of resistant hypertension. Furthermore, our results suggest that we can estimate the effect of RDN in the long term at the 1-month follow-up point using the 24-h SBP.

16.
Cardiovasc Revasc Med ; 20(12): 1140-1145, 2019 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30833209

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The Magmaris bioresorbable magnesium scaffold was successfully tested in in-vitro and in clinical premarket studies. Subsequently the Magmaris postmarket program aimed to review intraprocedural data of at least 2000 patients to assess user preferences, guideline adherence and intraprocedural performance in clinical routine. METHODS: This international multicentre survey encompasses data from 356 hospitals across 45 countries. As part of the certification for Magmaris implantation, each hospital had to complete consecutive post-market evaluation forms of their first 10 commercial Magmaris patients. RESULTS: From June 2016 to May 2018, data on 2018 implantations were collected. Main reasons for selecting Magmaris was patients' life expectancy (67%, n = 1359) and low or not calcified lesions, (67%, n = 1357). Magmaris was successfully deployed in 99% of cases (n = 1995), predilatation was performed in 95% (n = 1922) and post-dilatation in 87% (n = 1756). Physicians rated the overall performance and the pushability as good or very good in 96% of cases (n = 1799). Guide wire friction, trackability, and conformability were rated as good or very good in 94% of cases, and crossability in 93%. The majority of patients were scheduled to receive dual antiplatelet therapy for up to 12 months. CONCLUSION: Generally, implantation guidelines were adhered to and theoretical advantages of the metal scaffold observed in in-vitro tests have translated into practice with good intraprocedural performance outcomes, confirming the controlled roll-out of this novel technology into clinical practice. SUMMARY FOR ANNOTATED TABLE OF CONTENT: The Magmaris 2000 program includes the first commercial cases at each hospital. Overall, data on 2018 implantations were collected. The high rate of pre- and post-dilatation as well as other parameters confirm that generally the implantation guidelines are adhered to and the good intraprocedural performance (rated as good or very good in 96%) confirm the theoretical advantages of a metallic scaffold in practice.


Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles/normas , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/instrumentación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/normas , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos/normas , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Adhesión a Directriz/normas , Magnesio , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/normas , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Angioplastia Coronaria con Balón/efectos adversos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Esperanza de Vida , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificación , Vigilancia de Productos Comercializados , Diseño de Prótesis/normas , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
18.
Eur Heart J ; 39(26): 2484-2493, 2018 07 07.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29722796

RESUMEN

Aims: The clinical value of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic coronary total occlusions (CTOs) is not established by randomized trials. This study should compare the benefit of PCI vs. optimal medical therapy (OMT) on the health status in patients with at least one CTO. Method and results: Three hundred and ninety-six patients were enrolled in a prospective randomized, multicentre, open-label, and controlled clinical trial to compare the treatment by PCI with OMT with a 2:1 randomization ratio. The primary endpoint was the change in health status assessed by the Seattle angina questionnaire (SAQ) between baseline and 12 months follow-up. Fifty-two percent of patients have multi-vessel disease in whom all significant non-occlusive lesions were treated before randomization. An intention-to-treat analysis was performed including 13.4% failed procedures in the PCI group and 7.3% cross-overs in the OMT group. At 12 months, a greater improvement of SAQ subscales was observed with PCI as compared with OMT for angina frequency [5.23, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.75; 8.71; P = 0.003], and quality of life (6.62, 95% CI 1.78-11.46; P = 0.007), reaching the prespecified significance level of 0.01 for the primary endpoint. Physical limitation (P = 0.02) was also improved in the PCI group. Complete freedom from angina was more frequent with PCI 71.6% than OMT 57.8% (P = 0.008). There was no periprocedural death or myocardial infarction. At 12 months, major adverse cardiac events were comparable between the two groups. Conclusion: Percutaneous coronary intervention leads to a significant improvement of the health status in patients with stable angina and a CTO as compared with OMT alone. Trial registration: NCT01760083.


Asunto(s)
Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/uso terapéutico , Angina de Pecho/terapia , Inhibidores de la Enzima Convertidora de Angiotensina/uso terapéutico , Oclusión Coronaria/terapia , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/uso terapéutico , Nitratos/uso terapéutico , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Angina de Pecho/etiología , Enfermedad Crónica , Oclusión Coronaria/complicaciones , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Calidad de Vida
19.
JACC Cardiovasc Interv ; 10(18): 1841-1851, 2017 09 25.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28866036

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the value of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). BACKGROUND: Currently both drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-eluting balloons (DEB) are recommended in patients with ISR. However, the value of BVS in this setting remains unclear. METHODS: RIBS VI (Restenosis Intra-stent: drug-eluting Balloon vs everolimus-eluting Stent) was a prospective multicenter study (19 Spanish sites) that included 141 patients treated with BVS for either bare-metal stent (BMS) ISR or DES-ISR. Late angiography was scheduled at 6 to 9 months. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were similar to those used in the RIBS IV (patients with DES-ISR) and RIBS V (patients with BMS-ISR) trials, where DEB (n = 249) was compared with everolimus (EES)-DES (n = 249). Results of BVS in RIBS VI were compared with those obtained with DEB and EES in the RIBS IV and V trials. RESULTS: On late angiography (n = 134; 95% of eligible) the in-segment minimal lumen diameter (primary endpoint) was 1.87 ± 0.5 mm, late lumen loss was 0.23 ± 0.4 mm, and restenosis rate was 11%. At 1-year follow-up (100% of patients) no patient died, 4 (2.8%) experienced a myocardial infarction, and 16 (11.3%) required target lesion revascularization. One patient (0.7%) who discontinued antiplatelet therapy experienced definitive BVS thrombosis. Freedom from cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization was 86%. The minimal lumen diameter at follow-up after BVS was similar to that obtained with DEB (1.88 ± 0.6 mm; p = NS) but smaller than that achieved after EES (2.16 ± 0.7 mm; p < 0.001). Likewise, target lesion revascularization rates after BVS were similar to those seen with DEB (10.4%) but higher than with EES (3.2%; p < 0.001). Results remained unchanged after adjusting for potential confounders in baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests the safety and efficacy of BVS in patients with ISR. In this challenging anatomic scenario BVS obtained late angiographic and clinical results similar to DEB but inferior to EES. (Restenosis Intrastent: Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds Treatment [RIBS VI]; NCT02672878).


Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Reestenosis Coronaria/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Stents , Anciano , Angiografía Coronaria , Reestenosis Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Reestenosis Coronaria/etiología , Quimioterapia Combinada , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Metales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificación , Estudios Prospectivos , Diseño de Prótesis , Factores de Riesgo , España , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
20.
EuroIntervention ; 13(Z): Z64-Z69, 2017 May 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28504234

RESUMEN

Since 1990 The Spanish Society of Cardiology Working Group on Cardiac Catheterization and Interventional Cardiology has presented a yearly report on the data collected in the National Registry, with online support since 2010. The Steering Committee has analysed all data provided voluntarily by institutions, which consisted of a total of anywhere between 105 and 113 hospitals. Medical care was provided to a population of 46.8 million inhabitants in 2015. During this period, diagnostic procedures increased progressively from 2010, reaching a maximum of 145,836 in 2015, 86% (125,484) corresponding to coronary angiograms. This means a ratio of 3,127 diagnostic studies per million inhabitants and 2,746 coronary angiograms per million inhabitants. Total percutaneous coronary interventions have increased to 67,671 procedures, with a ratio of 1,466 per million inhabitants where 18,418 were carried out during the acute phase of myocardial infarction (21.7%). Radial access has been successfully implemented in up to 73.8% of diagnostic procedures and 76.1% of percutaneous interventions. Concerning structural interventions such as septal defects, valve interventions and closure of left atrial appendage, these have had a marked evolution over time, with a total of 1,586 TAVI and 334 LAA closure procedures performed in 2015.


Asunto(s)
Cateterismo Cardíaco/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos , Cardiopatías/cirugía , Angiografía Coronaria/métodos , Cardiopatías/diagnóstico , Humanos , Sistema de Registros/estadística & datos numéricos , España
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA