Temporal Trend of the Incidence and Characteristics of Renal Infarction: Korean Nationwide Population Study.

BACKGROUND: Large-scale studies about epidemiologic characteristics of renal infarction (RI) are few. In this study, we aimed to analyze the incidence and prevalence of RI with comorbidities in the South Korean population. METHODS: We investigated the medical history of the entire South Korean adult population between 2013 and 2019 using the National Health Insurance Service database (n = 51,849,591 in 2019). Diagnosis of RI comorbidities were confirmed with International Classification of Disease, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification codes. Epidemiologic characteristics, distribution of comorbidities according to etiologic mechanisms, and trend of antithrombotic agents were estimated. RESULTS: During the 7-years, 10,496 patients were newly diagnosed with RI. The incidence rate increased from 2.68 to 3.06 per 100,000 person-years during the study period. The incidence rate of RI increased with age peaking in the 70s with 1.41 times male predominance. The most common comorbidity was hypertension, followed by dyslipidemia and diabetes mellitus. Regarding etiologic risk factor distribution, high embolic risk group, renovascular disease group, and hypercoagulable state group accounted for 16.6%, 29.1%, and 13.7% on average, respectively. For the antithrombotic treatment of RI, the prescription of antiplatelet agent gradually decreased from 17.0% to 13.0% while that of anticoagulation agent was maintained around 35%. The proportion of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants remarkably increased from only 1.4% to 17.6%. CONCLUSION: Considering the progressively increasing incidence of RI and high prevalence of coexisting risk factors, constant efforts to raise awareness of the disease are necessary. The current epidemiologic investigation of RI would be the stepping-stone to establishing future studies about clinical outcomes and optimal treatment strategies.

Aspirin versus clopidogrel for chronic maintenance monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (HOST-EXAM): an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal antiplatelet monotherapy during the chronic maintenance period in patients who undergo coronary stenting is unknown. We aimed to compare head to head the efficacy and safety of aspirin and clopidogrel monotherapy in this population. METHODS: We did an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, multicentre trial at 37 study sites in South Korea. We enrolled patients aged at least 20 years who maintained dual antiplatelet therapy without clinical events for 6-18 months after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES). We excluded patients with any ischaemic and major bleeding complications. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a monotherapy agent of clopidogrel 75 mg once daily or aspirin 100 mg once daily for 24 months. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type 3 or greater, in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02044250. FINDINGS: Between March 26, 2014, and May 29, 2018, we enrolled 5530 patients. 5438 (98·3%) patients were randomly assigned to either the clopidogrel group (2710 [49·8%]) or to the aspirin group (2728 [50·2%]). Ascertainment of the primary endpoint was completed in 5338 (98·2%) patients. During 24-month follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 152 (5·7%) patients in the clopidogrel group and 207 (7·7%) in the aspirin group (hazard ratio 0·73 [95% CI 0·59-0·90]; p=0·0035). INTERPRETATION: Clopidogrel monotherapy, compared with aspirin monotherapy during the chronic maintenance period after percutaneous coronary intervention with DES significantly reduced the risk of the composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome, and BARC bleeding type 3 or greater. In patients requiring indefinite antiplatelet monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention, clopidogrel monotherapy was superior to aspirin monotherapy in preventing future adverse clinical events. FUNDING: ChongKunDang, SamJin, HanMi, DaeWoong, and the South Korea Ministry of Health and Welfare.

Incidence of atrial fibrillation in patients with renal infarction: A retrospective cohort analysis of the Korean national health insurance registry.

BACKGROUND: Regarding the pathophysiology of renal infarction (RI), cardioembolic causes could have large proportion. However, there are notable variations in prevalence of atrial fibrillation (AF) among patients with RI across different studies, ranging from 17 to 65%. The primary objective of this study is to analyze the incidence of AF in patients with RI. METHODS: This nationwide retrospective cohort study enrolled 5200 patients with RI from the Korean National Institute of Health Services database spanning the years 2013 to 2019. The study accessed the AF incidence rate within 12 months in patients without a prior history of AF. Events occurring within 3 months of RI diagnosis were excluded to mitigate cases diagnosed during the initial screening or those with AF diagnoses that were potentially overlooked in the past. RESULTS: AF occurred in 19.1% of patients with RI over the entire period (median: 2.5 years, interquartile range 1.04-4.25 years). The majority of AF cases (16.1%) occured within the first year, resulting in an overall incidence rate of 7.0 per 100 person-years. Patients with newly developed AF were, on average, older than those who did not develop AF (64.1 vs. 57.3 years, P < 0.001). The independent predictors of AF were identified as age, male sex, higher body mass index, current smoking, ischemic heart disease, and heart failure. CONCLUSIONS: Physicians should consider the implementation of active rhythm monitoring for patients with RI to identify potential occurrence of subclinical AF, even if not initially diagnosed during the initial screening after RI diagnosis.

Impact of Age on Antiplatelet Monotherapy in the Chronic Maintenance Period After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Post Hoc Analysis From the HOST-EXAM Extended Study.

BACKGROUNDS: The HOST-EXAM Extended study reported the benefit of clopidogrel monotherapy over aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This age-specific subgroup analysis of the study aimed to assess the impact of age on antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI. METHODS: We analysed data from the per-protocol population (4717 patients) with a median follow-up of 5.8 years. The old age group comprised 2033 patients (43.1%), defined as those 65 years of age or older. The primary end point was the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission due to acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) bleeding type 3 or greater. The secondary end points were thrombotic composite outcomes and any bleeding. RESULTS: Age correlated with an elevated risk of adverse events, particularly from age 65. Clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with a reduction of the primary end point in both the old age group (19.4% vs 23.1%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.802, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.664-0.968; P = 0.022) and the young age group (7.8% vs 11.7%, HR 0.646, 95% CI 0.506-0.825; P < 0.001), without significant interaction (interaction P = 0.167). These findings were consistent for the secondary composite thrombotic end point and any bleeding events (interaction P value of secondary thrombotic end point: 0.786; interaction P value of any bleeding end point: 0.565). Consistent results were observed in analyses with a 75-year age cutoff and in subgroup analyses by 10-year age intervals. CONCLUSIONS: In patients requiring antiplatelet monotherapy after PCI, occurrence of both ischemic and bleeding events dramatically increased from age 65. The beneficial impact of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of age. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02044250.

Clinical efficacy of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor in de novo heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: We aimed to analyze the efficacy of angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) by the disease course of heart failure (HF). METHODS: We evaluated 227 patients with HF in a multi-center retrospective cohort that included those with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤ 40% undergoing ARNI treatment. The patients were divided into patients with newly diagnosed HF with ARNI treatment initiated within 6 months of diagnosis (de novo HF group) and those who were diagnosed or admitted for HF exacerbation for more than 6 months prior to initiation of ARNI treatment (prior HF group). The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death and worsening HF, including hospitalization or an emergency visit for HF aggravation within 12 months. RESULTS: No significant differences in baseline characteristics were reported between the de novo and prior HF groups. The prior HF group was significantly associated with a higher primary outcome (23.9 vs. 9.4%) than the de novo HF group (adjusted hazard ratio 2.52, 95% confidence interval 1.06-5.96, p = 0.036), although on a higher initial dose. The de novo HF group showed better LVEF improvement after 1 year (12.0% vs 7.4%, p = 0.010). Further, the discontinuation rate of diuretics after 1 year was numerically higher in the de novo group than the prior HF group (34.4 vs 18.5%, p = 0.064). CONCLUSION: The de novo HF group had a lower risk of the primary composite outcome than the prior HF group in patients with reduced ejection fraction who were treated with ARNI.

Hemo-metabolic impairment in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Data from the INTERSTELLAR registry.

BACKGROUND: Not only hemo-dynamic (HD) factors but also hemo-metabolic (HM) risk factors reflecting multi-organ injuries are considered as important prognostic factors in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, studies regarding HM risk factors in STEMI patients are currently limited. METHOD: Under analysis were 1,524 patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the INTERSTELLAR registry. Patients were divided into HM (≥ 2 risk factors) and non-HM impairment groups. The primary outcome was in-hospital all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Of 1,524 patients, 214 (14.0%) and 1,310 (86.0%) patients were in the HM and non-HM impairment groups, respectively. Patients with HM impairment had a higher incidence of in-hospital mortality than those without (24.3% vs. 2.7%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for confounders, HM impairment was independently associated with in-hospital mortality (inverse probability of treatment weighting [IPTW]-adjusted odds ratio: 1.81, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-3.14). In the third door-to-balloon (DTB) time tertile (≥ 82 min), HM impairment was strongly associated with in-hospital mortality. In the first DTB time tertile ( < 62 min), indicating relatively rapid revascularization, HM impairment was consistently associated with increased in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hemo-metabolic impairment is significantly associated with increased risk of in-hospital and 1-year mortality in patients with STEMI. It remains a significant prognostic factor, regardless of DTB time.

Moderate-Intensity Statin With Ezetimibe Combination Therapy vs High-Intensity Statin Monotherapy in Patients at Very High Risk of Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Post Hoc Analysis From the RACING Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: High-intensity statin is strongly recommended in patients at very high risk (VHR) of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). However, concerns about statin-associated adverse effects result in underuse of this strategy in practice. Objective: To evaluate the outcomes of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination in VHR and non-VHR patients with ASCVD. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a post hoc analysis of the Randomized Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Lipid Lowering With Statin Monotherapy vs Statin/Ezetimibe Combination for High-Risk Cardiovascular Disease (RACING) open-label, multicenter, randomized clinical trial. The study was conducted from February 2017 to December 2018 at 26 centers in Korea. Study participants included patients with documented ASCVD. Data were analyzed from April to June 2022. Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe (rosuvastatin, 10 mg, with ezetimibe, 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin, 20 mg). Patients at VHR for ASCVD were defined according to the 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the 3-year outcome of cardiovascular death, coronary or peripheral revascularization, hospitalization of cardiovascular events, or nonfatal stroke. Results: A total of 3780 patients (mean [SD] age, 64 [10] years; 2826 male [75%]) in the RACING trial, 1511 (40.0%) were categorized as VHR, which was associated with a greater occurrence of the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15-1.75). There was no significant difference in the primary end point between those who received combination therapy and high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with VHR disease (11.2% vs 11.7%; HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.30) and non-VHR disease (7.7% vs 8.7%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.66-1.18). The median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was significantly lower in the combination therapy group than in the high-intensity statin group (VHR, 1 year: 57 [47-71] mg/dL vs 65 [53-78] mg/dL; non-VHR, 1 year: 58 mg/dL vs 68 mg/dL; P < .001). Furthermore, in both the VHR and non-VHR groups, combination therapy was associated with a significantly greater mean change in LDL-C level (VHR, 1 year: -19.1 mg/dL vs -10.1 mg/dL; 2 years: -22.3 mg/dL vs -13.0 mg/dL; 3 years: -18.8 mg/dL vs -9.7 mg/dL; non-VHR, 1 year: -23.7 mg/dL vs -12.5 mg/dL; 2 years: -25.2 mg/dL vs -15.1 mg/dL; 3 years: -23.5 mg/dL vs -12.6 mg/dL; all P < .001) and proportion of patients with LDL-C level less than 70 mg/dL (VHR, 1 year: 73% vs 58%; non-VHR, 1 year: 72% vs 53%; P < .001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the lipid-lowering drug due to intolerance occurred less frequently in the combination therapy group (VHR, 4.6% vs 7.7%; P = .02; non-VHR, 5.0% vs 8.7%; P = .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Results suggest that the outcomes of ezetimibe combination observed in the RACING trial were consistent among patients at VHR of ASCVD. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03044665.

Randomized comparison of everolimus-eluting stent versus sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for de novo coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes mellitus (ESSENCE-DIABETES): results from the ESSENCE-DIABETES trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents significantly improved angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with bare metal stents in diabetic patients. However, a comparison of everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetic patients has not been evaluated. Therefore we compared effectiveness of everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized study compared everolimus-eluting stent (n=149) and sirolimus-eluting stent (n=151) implantation in diabetic patients. The primary end point was noninferiority of angiographic in-segment late loss at 8 months. Clinical events were also monitored for at least 12 months. Everolimus-eluting stents were noninferior to sirolimus-eluting stents for 8-month in-segment late loss (0.23 ± 0.27 versus 0.37 ± 0.52 mm; difference, -0.13 mm; 95% confidence interval, -0.25 to -0.02; upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval, -0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority), with reductions in in-stent restenosis (0% versus 4.7%; P=0.029) and in-segment restenosis (0.9% versus 6.5%; P=0.035). However, in-stent late loss (0.11 ± 0.26 versus 0.20 ± 0.49 mm; P=0.114) was not statistically different between the 2 groups. At 12 months, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (0.7% versus 2.6%; P=0.317), death (1.3% versus 3.3%; P=0.448), and myocardial infarction (0% versus 1.3%; P=0.498) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. Major adverse cardiac events, including death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (2.0% versus 5.3%; P=0.218), were also not statistically different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Everolimus-eluting stents were noninferior to sirolimus-eluting stents in reducing in-segment late loss and reduced angiographic restenosis at 8 months in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease.

Sirolimus-eluting stent versus paclitaxel-eluting stent for patients with long coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes remain relatively unfavorable for stent-based coronary intervention of lesions with long diseased segments. This study compared sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for long coronary lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: The present randomized, multicenter, prospective study compared the use of long (> or =32 mm) SES with PES in 500 patients with long (> or =25 mm) native coronary lesions. The primary end point of the trial was the rate of binary in-segment restenosis according to follow-up angiography at 6 months. The SES and PES groups had similar baseline characteristics. Lesion length was 33.9+/-11.6 mm in the SES group and 34.5+/-12.6 mm in the PES group (P=0.527). The in-segment binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the PES group (3.3% versus 14.6%; relative risk 0.23; P<0.001). In-stent late loss of lumen diameter was 0.09+/-0.37 mm in the SES group and 0.45+/-0.55 mm in the PES group (P<0.001). In patients with restenoses, a pattern of focal restenosis was more common in the SES group than in the PES group (100% versus 53.3%, P=0.031). Consequently, SES patients had a lower rate of target-lesion revascularization at 9 months (2.4% versus 7.2%, P=0.012). The incidence of death (0.8% in SES versus 0% in PES, P=0.499) or myocardial infarction (8.8% in SES versus 10.8% in PES, P=0.452) at 9 months of follow-up was not statistically different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with long native coronary artery disease, SES implantation was associated with a reduced incidence of angiographic restenosis and a reduced need for target-lesion revascularization compared with PES implantation.

Comparison of triple versus dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation (from the DECLARE-Long trial).

To evaluate the impact of cilostazol on neointimal hyperplasia after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for long coronary lesions, we performed a randomized multicenter prospective study comparing triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol; triple group, n = 250) and dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel; standard group, n = 250) for 6 months in patients with long lesions (> or =25 mm) requiring a long DES (> or =32 mm). The primary end point was in-stent late loss at 6-month angiography. The 2 groups had similar baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. In-stent late loss (0.22 +/- 0.48 mm vs 0.32 +/- 0.51 mm, p = 0.031) and in-segment late loss (0.34 +/- 0.49 mm vs 0.51 +/- 0.49 mm, p = 0.001) at 6-month follow-up angiography were significantly lower in the triple group versus the standard group. There was a trend toward lower rates of in-segment restenosis in the triple group versus the standard group (6.7% vs 11.2%, p = 0.104). Target lesion revascularization (TLR; 2.8% vs 6.8%, p = 0.036) and major adverse cardiac events (2.8% vs 7.6%, p = 0.016), including death, myocardial infarction, and TLR at 9 months were significantly lower in the triple group than in the standard group. At 9 months, the 2 groups had similar rates of stent thrombosis (0.4% vs 0.4%, p = 0.999), death (0% vs 0.8%, p = 0.499), and myocardial infarction (0.4% vs 0.4%, p = 0.999). In conclusion, cilostazol significantly reduced late loss at 6 months after DES implantation and the occurrence of TLR and major adverse cardiac events in patients with long coronary lesions.

Application of albumin-adjusted ischemia modified albumin index as an early screening marker for acute coronary syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Existing cardiac markers are not sensitive for reversible myocardial ischemia. Ischemia modified albumin (IMA) has recently been shown to be an early and sensitive marker of myocardial ischemia. We established a newly standardized, albumin-adjusted IMA index that was more sensitive and accurate than the conventional IMA value. METHODS: We enrolled 413 consecutive patients with symptoms suggestive of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). All patients were classified to either the ACS group (n=129) or 4 other groups (n=284). The ideal cutoff value of IMA was calculated by the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. The albumin-adjusted IMA index was calculated from the results of correlation assay between serum albumin concentration and IMA value and re-applied. RESULTS: The sensitivity and specificity of IMA for ACS were 93.0% and 35.6%, respectively, at 85.0 U/ml. IMA had a negative linear relationship with serum albumin and albumin-adjusted IMA index was calculated by using the following equation [IMA index=serum albumin conc. (g/dl) x 23+IMA (U/ml)-100]. The sensitivity and specificity were 98.4% and 34.5%, respectively, at IMA index of 83.4. CONCLUSIONS: The use of the calculated albumin-adjusted IMA index is recommended to increase the sensitivity of the ACS diagnosis although IMA is a sensitive marker for the identification of ACS.

Multi-link Vision and MiniVision stent registry in Asian patients with coronary artery disease: a prospective, multi-center study.

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have showed that the fine mesh stents are associated with a significant reduction in both clinical and angiographic re-stenosis of the coronary arteries. To maintain a very satisfactory radio-opacity using the stents, Guidant of the USA has designed a new type of bare metal stents (BMS)-Multi-link (ML) Vision/ML MiniVision stents. The clinical outcomes of Asian patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) after implanting the Multi-link Vision or MiniVision stent were investigated in this study. METHODS: An observational, prospective, multi-center, non-randomized post marketing registry was conducted to demonstrate the efficacy of the BMS-ML Vision/ML MiniVision stents. The primary end point of the registry was clinical target lesion revascularization (TLR) at a 6-month follow-up. The major secondary end points included the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and serious adverse events (SAE) in hospital and at 6 months; and the rate of clinical TLR as a function of the type of angina. A total of 429 Asian people with 449 lesions from 14 centers were selected for this study. The average reference diameter of the lesions was (3.0 +/- 0.5) mm, and the mean length was (15.7 +/- 5.0) mm. RESULTS: The successful rate of the procedure was 99.3%. Twenty-five percent of the lesions were treated by direct stenting without pre-dilation. Eighty-six percent of the lesions were implanted with ML Vision stent. After the 6-month follow-up, the rate of clinical TLR was 1.4%. The MACE, SAE and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were 6.8%, 3.5% and 1.4% respectively. CONCLUSION: The current registry showed the excellent 6-month clinical outcomes of ML Vision/ML MiniVision stents in Asian patients with CAD.

A case of sheathless transradial coronary intervention for complex coronary lesions with a standard guiding catheter.

One of the major limitations of transradial coronary intervention is the inability to use large guiding system, which leads to the development of dedicated sheathless guide catheter system. However, these devices are not available in the Republic of Korea. We present a case in which conventional guiding catheter was used for sheathless transradial coronary intervention in the treatment of complex coronary anatomy.

Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting stent versus Sirolimus-Eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes mellitus from the ESSENCE-DIABETES II trial.

Angiographic and clinical outcomes remain relatively unfavorable for diabetic patients even after the use of drug-eluting stent. This prospective, multicenter, randomized study compared the relative efficacy and safety of resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. The primary end point was noninferiority of angiographic in-segment late loss at 9 months. Clinical events were also monitored for at least 12 months. Patient recruitment was prematurely stopped after enrollment of 256 patients (127 in R-ZES group and 129 in SES) because of discontinuing production of SES. The R-ZES was noninferior to the SES for 9-month in-segment late loss (0.34 ± 0.30 vs 0.39 ± 0.43 mm; difference -0.048; 95% confidence interval -0.157 to 0.061; upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval 0.044; p <0.001 for noninferiority). In addition, in-stent late loss (0.22 ± 0.29 vs 0.21 ± 0.40 mm, p = 0.849) and the rates of in-segment (1.2% vs 6.7%, p = 0.119) and in-stent (1.2% vs 3.3%, p = 0.621) binary restenoses were similar between the 2 groups. At 12 months, there were no statistical differences between the 2 groups in the incidence of any clinical outcomes (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization, and composite outcomes). In conclusion, despite having reduced power because of early study termination, our study suggests that the R-ZES has noninferior angiographic outcomes at 9 months to the SES in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease.

The correlation of carotid artery stiffness with heart function in hypertensive patients.

BACKGROUND: The strength of each heart beat and the stiffness of large arteries contribute to blood pressure (BP). When the large arteries are stiff and their resistance greater, the afterload increases and this may change the function of the heart. However, the relation between common carotid artery stiffness and heart function in hypertensive patients has not been clarified. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty hypertensive patients underwent transthoracic and carotid echocardiography. Measurements of local arterial stiffness were taken at the right common carotid artery level and stiffness parameter (ß), pressure-strain elasticity modulus and intima-media thickness were calculated. Brachial cuff BP was measured just before starting the carotid study. The patients with any cardiovascular disease, diabetes mellitus, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or carotid stenosis were excluded. RESULTS: Carotid artery stiffness parameter (ß) was correlated with age and left ventricular mass index (p < 0.005). Even though ß was not correlated with LV systolic function, it was inversely correlated with diastolic function as measured by early mitral annular velocity. When the artery was stiffer, early mitral annular velocity (e') decreased (p < 0.001) and the index of left atrial (LA) pressure (early diastolic mitral inflow E velocity/e') increased (p = 0.001). In logistic regression, diastolic dysfunction was affected by age (beta -0.385, p = 0.001), LA volume index (beta 0.175, p = 0.013) and ß (beta -0.273, p = 0.019). CONCLUSION: In hypertensive patients, changes in carotid artery stiffness can affect the diastolic function, independent of age and LA volume index. Therefore, measurements and control of carotid stiffness can play an important role in the prevention of diastolic heart failure.

Antegrade ballooning with retrograde approach for the treatment of long restenotic total occlusion.

A retrograde approach through collateral channels is thought to improve the success rate of percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO). Among CTO lesions, the in-stent chronic total reocclusion (ISR-CTO) is a subset with an unsatisfactory outcome despite repeated procedures. Various strategies and techniques are required to improve the success rate of this novel approach. We describe a case in which a long ISR-CTO was successfully recanalized by a drug-eluting balloon after antegrade ballooning of the proximal part of the lesion with retrograde wire crossing, and discuss the availability of this approach for the treatment of long ISR-CTO.

Recanalization of an accidentally crushed coronary stent by intravascular ultrasonography catheter entrapment.

Intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) imaging is a user-friendly technique widely used during coronary interventions. An 80-year-old man was admitted with chest pain, and successful percutaneous coronary intervention was performed with stent implantation. One week later, the patient complained of further chest pain. Urgent coronary angiography showed total occlusion of the middle left anterior descending artery and the aspiration of thrombi was high. IVUS imaging showed inadequate stent strut apposition and distal dissection. We attempted another stent implantation but the IVUS catheter was stuck on the 0.014 inch wire. Therefore, we tried to pass the wire across the lateral side. After the wire was successfully passaged, the sprinter balloon was passed through the crushed stent to expand it. After 4 days later, the patient was discharged with no symptoms or electrocardiographic change.

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter comparison study of triple antiplatelet therapy with dual antiplatelet therapy to reduce restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation in long coronary lesions: results from the DECLARE-LONG II (Drug-Eluting Stenting Followed by Cilostazol Treatment Reduces Late Restenosis in Patients with Long Coronary Lesions) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to determine whether cilostazol reduces intimal hyperplasia in patients undergoing long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation (stent length: ≥ 30 mm) for native long coronary lesions (length: ≥ 25 mm). BACKGROUND: Restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation remains a significant clinical problem in long coronary lesions. METHODS: Patients (n = 499) were assigned randomly to triple (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol, triple group: n = 250) or dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel and placebo, dual group: n = 249) for 8 months after long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation. The primary end point was in-stent late loss at the 8-month angiography according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. The in-stent (0.56 ± 0.55 mm vs. 0.68 ± 0.59 mm, p = 0.045) and in-segment (0.32 ± 0.54 mm vs. 0.47 ± 0.54 mm, p = 0.006) late loss were significantly lower in the triple versus dual group, as were 8-month in-stent restenosis (10.8% vs. 19.1%, p = 0.016), in-segment restenosis (12.2% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.028), and 12-month ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization (5.2% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.042) rates. At 12 months, major adverse cardiac events including death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization tended to be lower in the triple group than the dual group (7.2% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.07). Percent intimal hyperplasia volume by volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis was reduced from 27.1 ± 13.2% for the dual group to 22.1 ± 9.9% for the triple group (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving triple antiplatelet therapy after long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation had decreased extent of late luminal loss, percent intimal hyperplasia volume, and angiographic restenosis, resulting in a reduced risk of 12-month target lesion revascularization compared with patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. (Triple Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after ABT578-Eluting Stent; NCT00589927).

Preventive strategies of renal insufficiency in patients with diabetes undergoing intervention or arteriography (the PREVENT Trial).

Few studies have compared the ability of sodium bicarbonate plus N-acetylcysteine (NAC) and sodium chloride plus NAC to prevent contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) in diabetic patients with impaired renal function undergoing coronary or endovascular angiography or intervention. Diabetic patients (n = 382) with renal disease (serum creatinine ≥1.1 mg/dl and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) were randomly assigned to receive prophylactic sodium chloride (saline group, n = 189) or sodium bicarbonate (bicarbonate group, n = 193) before elective coronary or endovascular angiography or intervention. All patients received oral NAC 1,200 mg 2 times/day for 2 days. The primary end point was CIN, defined as an increase in serum creatinine >25% or an absolute increase in serum creatinine ≥0.5 mg/dl within 48 hours after contrast exposure. There were no significant between-group differences in baseline characteristics. The primary end point was met in 10 patients (5.3%) in the saline group and 17 (9.0%) in the bicarbonate group (p = 0.17), with 2 (1.1%) and 4 (2.1%), respectively, requiring hemodialysis (p = 0.69). Rates of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke did not differ significantly at 1 month and 6 months after contrast exposure. In conclusion, hydration with sodium bicarbonate is not superior to hydration with sodium chloride in preventing CIN in patients with diabetic nephropathy undergoing coronary or endovascular angiography or intervention.

A randomized comparison of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in patients with diabetes mellitus: 4-year clinical outcomes of DES-DIABETES (drug-eluting stent in patients with DIABETES mellitus) trial.

OBJECTIVES: We compared 4-year efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND: Four-year comparison of SES with PES in diabetic patients has not been evaluated in a randomized manner. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized study compared SES (n = 200) and PES (n = 200) implantation in diabetic patients. We evaluated 4-year major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 2 years, TLR (3.5% vs. 11.0%, log-rank, p < 0.01) and MACE (3.5% vs. 12.5%, log-rank, p < 0.01) were significantly lower in SES versus PES group with no difference of death or MI. At 4 years there were no differences in death (3.0% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.45) or MI (1.5% vs. 1.0%, p = 0.99) between SES and PES group. The TLR (7.5% vs. 12.0%, log-rank, p = 0.10) and MACE (11.0% vs. 16.0%, log-rank, p = 0.10) were statistically not different between SES and PES group. At multivariate Cox regression, post-procedural minimal lumen diameter (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.24 to 0.81, p < 0.01), hypercholesterolemia (HR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.29 to 3.79, p < 0.01), and use of intravascular ultrasound (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.26 to 0.99, p = 0.049) were independent predictors of 4-year MACE. CONCLUSIONS: Superiority of SES over PES during 2 years was attenuated between 2 years and 4 years in diabetic patients. Use of intravascular ultrasound and larger post-procedural minimal lumen diameter were independent predictors of the improved long-term clinical outcomes.