Contribution of the Optical Coherence Tomography in Calcified Lesions.

Coronary artery calcification is a complex process found predominantly in the elderly population. Coronary angiography frequently lacks sensitivity to detect, evaluate and quantify these lesions. Yet calcified lesions are considered stable, it remains associated with a higher rate of peri procedural complications during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) including an increased risk of stent under expansion and struts mal apposition leading to poor clinical outcome. Intracoronary imaging (Intravascular Ultra Sound (IVUS) and Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT)) allows better calcified lesions identification, localization within the coronary artery wall (superficial or deep calcifications), quantification. This lesions characterization allows a better choice of dedicated plaque-preparation tools (modified balloons, rotational or orbital atherectomy, intravascular lithotripsy) that are crucial to achieve optimal PCI results. OCT could also assess the impact of these tools on the calcified plaque morphology (plaque fracture, burring effects…). An OCT-guided tailored PCI strategy for calcified lesions still requires validation by clinical studies which are currently underway.

[Endocoronary imaging contribution in iatrogenic dissection management]. / Apport de l'imagerie endocoronaire dans la prise en charge d'une dissection iatrogène.

Iatrogenic coronary dissections are rare but potentially serious. Their management is complex, particularly if the dissection occurs without an angioplasty guide in the arterial lumen. In this context, angiography alone is insufficient, and endocoronary imaging is essential (using optical coherence or IVUS) to guide angioplasty when necessary (guide in the true lumen, coverage of the tear). We report here the case of an iatrogenic dissection of the right coronary artery treated with OFDI guiding.

Safety and Efficacy of Mini-Invasive Left Atrial Appendage Closure: A Propensity-Score Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) for prevention of stroke is validated in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) contraindicated to oral anticoagulation. General anaesthesia (GA) is often used for procedural guidance by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE); however, its use may be challenging in some patients. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety and the midterm efficacy of a mini-invasive LAAC strategy using micro-TEE under procedural sedation. METHODS: Comparison by propensity score of 2 cohorts of consecutive patients who underwent LAAC: standard TEE-guided LAAC (3-dimensional [3D] TEE under GA) and mini-invasive LAAC strategy (micro-TEE under procedural sedation). The primary endpoint was a composite of embolic or bleeding events, significant per procedural complication, and cardiovascular deaths within 3 months after LAAC. RESULTS: In total, 432 patients were included (78.7 ± 8 years old, 32.4% of women, CHA2DS2VASC score: 4.9 ± 1.1); 127 patients underwent mini-invasive LAAC strategy and were compared with 305 patients standard TEE-guided LAAC. The mini-invasive strategy was achieved in 122 of 127 (96.1%) planned patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 11.2% of patients from the mini-invasive LAAC strategy group and in 10.3% of patients from the standard TEE group (absolute difference = 0.9% [-6.4; 4.5], hazard ratio = 1.11 [0.56; 2.19], P = 0.76). Procedural times, fluoroscopy duration, and hospital stays were shorter in the mini-invasive LAAC strategy group (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The mini-invasive LAAC strategy is safe and effective compared with the standard TEE-guided LAAC strategy. A mini-invasive LAAC strategy may also be an important tool to help physicians to treat more patients as LAAC indications evolve in the future.

Three-Year Outcomes With Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided or Angiography-Guided Multivessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with multivessel disease with successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, the FLOWER-MI trial (Flow Evaluation to Guide Revascularization in Multivessel ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) showed that a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided strategy was not superior to an angiography-guided strategy for treatment of noninfarct-related artery lesions regarding the 1-year risk of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization. The extension phase of the trial was planned using the same primary outcome to determine whether a difference in outcomes would be observed with a longer follow-up. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease with successful percutaneous coronary intervention of the infarct-related artery to receive complete revascularization guided by either FFR (n=586) or angiography (n=577). RESULTS: After 3 years, a primary outcome event occurred in 52 of 498 patients (9.40%) in the FFR-guided group and in 44 of 502 patients (8.17%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.79-1.77]; P=0.4). Death occurred in 22 patients (4.00%) in the FFR-guided group and in 23 (4.32%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.53-1.71]); nonfatal myocardial infarction in 23 (4.13%) and 14 (2.56%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.63 [95% CI, 0.84-3.16]); and unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization in 21 (3.83%) and 18 (3.36%; hazard ratio, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.61-2.16]), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although event rates in the trial were lower than expected, in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing complete revascularization, an FFR-guided strategy did not have a significant benefit over an angiography-guided strategy with respect to the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization up to 3 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02943954.

Safety and efficacy of NOAC vs. VKA in patients treated by PCI: a retrospective study of the FRANCE PCI registry.

Introduction: Dual antithrombotic therapy (DAT) combining oral anticoagulation (OAC), preferentially Non-vitamin K antagonist OAC (NOAC) and single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for a period of 6-12 months is recommended after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an indication for OAC. Objective: To compare outcomes between vitamin K antagonist (VKA) and NOAC-treated patients in the nation-wide France PCI registry. Methods: All consecutive patients from the France PCI registry treated by PCI and discharged with OAC between 2014 and 2020 were included and followed one-year. Major bleeding was defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) classification ≥3 and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke. A propensity-score analysis was used. Results: Of the 7,277 eligible participants, 2,432 (33.4%) were discharged on VKA and 4,845 (66.6%) on NOAC. After propensity-score adjustment, one-year major bleeding was less frequent in NOAC vs. VKA-treated participants [3.1% vs. 5.2%, -2.1% (-3.6% to -0.6%), p = 0.005 as well as the rate of MACE [9.2% vs. 11.9%, -2.7% (-5.0% to -0.4%), p = 0.02]. One-year mortality was also significantly decreased in NOAC vs. VKA-treated participants [7.4% vs. 9.9%, -2.6% (-4.7% to -0.5%), p = 0.02]. The area under ROC curves of the anticoagulant treatment propensity score was estimated at 0.93, suggesting potential indication bias. Conclusions: NOAC seems to have a better efficacy and safety profile than VKA. However, potential indication bias were found.