Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Disease With and Without Diabetes: Findings From a Pooled Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes may be associated with differential outcomes in patients undergoing left main coronary revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes in patients with left main disease with and without diabetes randomized to PCI versus CABG. METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from 4 trials (SYNTAX [Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery], PRECOMBAT [Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease], NOBLE [Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularisation Study], and EXCEL [Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization]) that randomized patients with left main disease to PCI or CABG. Patients were considered suitable for either approach. Patients were categorized by diabetes status. Kaplan-Meier event rates, Cox model hazard ratios, and interactions were assessed. RESULTS: Among 4393 patients, 1104 (25.1%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes experienced higher rates of 5-year death (158/1104 [Kaplan-Meier rate, 14.7%] versus 297/3289 [9.3%]; P<0.001), spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI; 67/1104 [6.7%] versus 114/3289 [3.7%]; P<0.001), and repeat revascularization (189/1104 [18.5%] versus 410/3289 [13.2%]; P<0.001). Rates of all-cause mortality did not differ after PCI versus CABG in those with (84/563 [15.3%] versus 74/541 [14.1%]; hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82-1.52]) or without (155/1634 [9.7%] versus 142/1655 [8.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86-1.36; PintHR=0.87) diabetes. Rates of stroke within 1 year were lower with PCI versus CABG in the entire population, with no heterogeneity based on diabetes status (PintHR=0.51). The 5-year rates of spontaneous MI and repeat coronary revascularization were higher after PCI regardless of diabetes status (spontaneous MI: 45/563 [8.9%] versus 22/541 [4.4%] in diabetes and 82/1634 [5.3%] versus 32/1655 [2.1%] in no diabetes, PintHR=0.47; repeat revascularization: 127/563 [24.5%] versus 62/541 [12.4%] in diabetes and 254/1634 [16.3%] versus 156/1655 [10.1%] in no diabetes, PintHR=0.18). For spontaneous MI and repeat revascularization, there were greater absolute risk differences beyond 1 year in patients with diabetes (4.9% and 9.9%) compared with those without (2.1% and 4.3%; PintARD=0.047 and 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with left main disease considered equally suitable for PCI or CABG and with largely low to intermediate SYNTAX scores, diabetes was associated with higher rates of death and cardiovascular events through 5 years. Compared with CABG, PCI resulted in no difference in the risk of death and a lower risk of early stroke regardless of diabetes status, and a higher risk of spontaneous MI and repeat coronary revascularization, with larger late absolute excess risks in patients with diabetes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01205776, NCT0146651, NCT00422968, and NCT00114972.

Preventive percutaneous coronary intervention versus optimal medical therapy alone for the treatment of vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaques (PREVENT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndrome and sudden cardiac death are often caused by rupture and thrombosis of lipid-rich atherosclerotic coronary plaques (known as vulnerable plaques), many of which are non-flow-limiting. The safety and effectiveness of focal preventive therapy with percutaneous coronary intervention of vulnerable plaques in reducing adverse cardiac events are unknown. We aimed to assess whether preventive percutaneous coronary intervention of non-flow-limiting vulnerable plaques improves clinical outcomes compared with optimal medical therapy alone. METHODS: PREVENT was a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial done at 15 research hospitals in four countries (South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and New Zealand). Patients aged 18 years or older with non-flow-limiting (fractional flow reserve >0·80) vulnerable coronary plaques identified by intracoronary imaging were randomly assigned (1:1) to either percutaneous coronary intervention plus optimal medical therapy or optimal medical therapy alone, in block sizes of 4 or 6, stratified by diabetes status and the performance of percutaneous coronary intervention in a non-study target vessel. Follow-up continued annually in all enrolled patients until the last enrolled patient reached 2 years after randomisation. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischaemia-driven target-vessel revascularisation, or hospitalisation for unstable or progressive angina, assessed in the intention-to-treat population at 2 years. Time-to-first-event estimates were calculated with the Kaplan-Meier method and were compared with the log-rank test. This report is the principal analysis from the trial and includes all long-term analysed data. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02316886, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Sept 23, 2015, and Sept 29, 2021, 5627 patients were screened for eligibility, 1606 of whom were enrolled and randomly assigned to percutaneous coronary intervention (n=803) or optimal medical therapy alone (n=803). 1177 (73%) patients were men and 429 (27%) were women. 2-year follow-up for the primary outcome assessment was completed in 1556 (97%) patients (percutaneous coronary intervention group n=780; optimal medical therapy group n=776). At 2 years, the primary outcome occurred in three (0·4%) patients in the percutaneous coronary intervention group and in 27 (3·4%) patients in the medical therapy group (absolute difference -3·0 percentage points [95% CI -4·4 to -1·8]; p=0·0003). The effect of preventive percutaneous coronary intervention was directionally consistent for each component of the primary composite outcome. Serious clinical or adverse events did not differ between the percutaneous coronary intervention group and the medical therapy group: at 2 years, four (0·5%) versus ten (1·3%) patients died (absolute difference -0·8 percentage points [95% CI -1·7 to 0·2]) and nine (1·1%) versus 13 (1·7%) patients had myocardial infarction (absolute difference -0·5 percentage points [-1·7 to 0·6]). INTERPRETATION: In patients with non-flow-limiting vulnerable coronary plaques, preventive percutaneous coronary intervention reduced major adverse cardiac events arising from high-risk vulnerable plaques, compared with optimal medical therapy alone. Given that PREVENT is the first large trial to show the potential effect of the focal treatment for vulnerable plaques, these findings support consideration to expand indications for percutaneous coronary intervention to include non-flow-limiting, high-risk vulnerable plaques. FUNDING: The CardioVascular Research Foundation, Abbott, Yuhan Corp, CAH-Cordis, Philips, and Infraredx, a Nipro company.

Routine Functional Testing or Standard Care in High-Risk Patients after PCI.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data from randomized trials to guide a specific follow-up surveillance approach after myocardial revascularization. Whether a follow-up strategy that includes routine functional testing improves clinical outcomes among high-risk patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is uncertain. METHODS: We randomly assigned 1706 patients with high-risk anatomical or clinical characteristics who had undergone PCI to a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing (nuclear stress testing, exercise electrocardiography, or stress echocardiography) at 1 year after PCI or to standard care alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina at 2 years. Key secondary outcomes included invasive coronary angiography and repeat revascularization. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 64.7 years, 21.0% had left main disease, 43.5% had bifurcation disease, 69.8% had multivessel disease, 70.1% had diffuse long lesions, 38.7% had diabetes, and 96.4% had been treated with drug-eluting stents. At 2 years, a primary-outcome event had occurred in 46 of 849 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 5.5%) in the functional-testing group and in 51 of 857 (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 6.0%) in the standard-care group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61 to 1.35; P = 0.62). There were no between-group differences with respect to the components of the primary outcome. At 2 years, 12.3% of the patients in the functional-testing group and 9.3% in the standard-care group had undergone invasive coronary angiography (difference, 2.99 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.01 to 5.99), and 8.1% and 5.8% of patients, respectively, had undergone repeat revascularization (difference, 2.23 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.22 to 4.68). CONCLUSIONS: Among high-risk patients who had undergone PCI, a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing, as compared with standard care alone, did not improve clinical outcomes at 2 years. (Funded by the CardioVascular Research Foundation and Daewoong Pharmaceutical; POST-PCI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03217877.).

Routine stress testing in diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: the POST-PCI trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal follow-up surveillance strategy for high-risk diabetic patients with had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unknown. METHODS: The POST-PCI (Pragmatic Trial Comparing Symptom-Oriented versus Routine Stress Testing in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) study was a randomized trial comparing a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing at 1 year vs. standard care alone after high-risk PCI. Randomization was stratified according to diabetes status. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 1706 randomized patients, participants with diabetes (n = 660, 38.7%) had more frequent comorbidities and a higher prevalence of complex anatomical or procedural characteristics than those without diabetes (n = 1046, 61.3%). Patients with diabetes had a 52% greater risk of primary composite events [hazard ratio (HR) 1.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.27; P = .039]. The 2-year incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar between strategies of routine functional testing or standard care alone in diabetic patients (7.1% vs. 7.5%; HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.53-1.66; P = .82) and non-diabetic patients (4.6% vs. 5.1%; HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.51-1.55; P = .68) (interaction term for diabetes: P = .91). The incidences of invasive coronary angiography and repeat revascularization after 1 year were higher in the routine functional-testing group than the standard-care group irrespective of diabetes status. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being at higher risk for adverse clinical events, patients with diabetes who had undergone high-risk PCI did not derive incremental benefit from routine surveillance stress testing compared with standard care alone during follow-up.

Optical Coherence Tomography-Guided or Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The OCTIVUS Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) showed superior clinical outcomes compared with angiography-guided PCI. However, the comparative effectiveness of OCT-guided and IVUS-guided PCI regarding clinical outcomes is unknown. METHODS: In this prospective, multicenter, open-label, pragmatic trial, we randomly assigned 2008 patients with significant coronary artery lesions undergoing PCI in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either an OCT-guided or IVUS-guided PCI. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at 1 year, which was powered for noninferiority of the OCT group compared with the IVUS group. Safety outcomes were also assessed. RESULTS: At 1 year, primary end point events occurred in 25 of 1005 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 2.5%) in the OCT group and in 31 of 1003 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 3.1%) in the IVUS group (absolute difference, -0.6 percentage points; upper boundary of one-sided 97.5% CI, 0.97 percentage points; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy was similar (14 patients [1.4%] in the OCT group versus 15 patients [1.5%] in the IVUS group; P=0.85). The incidence of major procedural complications was lower in the OCT group than in the IVUS group (22 [2.2%] versus 37 [3.7%]; P=0.047), although imaging procedure-related complications were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with significant coronary artery lesions, OCT-guided PCI was noninferior to IVUS-guided PCI with respect to the incidence of a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. The selected study population and lower-than-expected event rates should be considered in interpreting the trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique number: NCT03394079.

Low- or standard-dose edoxaban versus antiplatelet therapy for leaflet thrombus and cerebral thromboembolism after TAVR: A prespecified analysis of randomized ADAPT-TAVR trial.

BACKGROUND: The risks of leaflet thrombosis and the associated cerebral thromboembolism are unknown according to different anticoagulation dosing after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The aim was to evaluate the incidence of leaflet thrombosis and cerebral thromboembolism between low-dose (30 mg) or standard-dose (60 mg) edoxaban and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after TAVR. METHODS: In this prespecified subgroup analysis of the ADAPT-TAVR trial, the primary endpoint was the incidence of leaflet thrombosis on 4-dimensional computed tomography at 6-months. Key secondary endpoints were new cerebral lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging and neurological and neurocognitive dysfunction. RESULTS: Of 229 patients enrolled in this study, 118 patients were DAPT group and 111 were edoxaban group (43 [39.1%] 60 mg vs 68 [61.3%] 30 mg). There was a significantly lower incidence of leaflet thrombosis in the standard-dose edoxaban group than in the DAPT group (2.4% vs 18.3%; odds ratio [OR] 0.11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-0.55; P = .03). However, no significant difference was observed between low-dose edoxaban and DAPT (15.0% vs 18.3%; OR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.32-1.81; P = .58). Irrespective of different antithrombotic regiments, the percentages of patients with new cerebral lesions on brain MRI and worsening neurological or neurocognitive function were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: In patients without an indication for anticoagulation after TAVR, the incidence of leaflet thrombosis was significantly lower with standard-dose edoxaban but not with low-dose edoxaban, as compared with DAPT. However, this differential effect of edoxaban on leaflet thrombosis was not associated with a reduction of new cerebral thromboembolism and neurological dysfunction.

Comparison of High- and Low-Dose Rivaroxaban Regimens in Elderly East Asian Patients With Atrial Fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: In the Rivaroxaban Once-daily oral direct factor Xa inhibition Compared with vitamin K antagonism for prevention of stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) trial, rivaroxaban 20 mg was the on-label dose, and the dose-reduction criterion for rivaroxaban was a creatinine clearance of < 50 mL/min. Some Asian countries are using reduced doses label according to the J-ROCKET AF trial. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a high-dose rivaroxaban regimen (HDRR, 20/15 mg) and low-dose rivaroxaban regimen (LDRR, 15/10 mg) among elderly East Asian patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) in real-world practice. METHODS: This study was a multicenter, prospective, non-interventional observational study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in AF patients > 65 years of age with or without renal impairment. RESULTS: A total of 1,093 patients (mean age, 72.8 ± 5.8 years; 686 [62.9%] men) were included in the analysis, with 493 patients allocated to the HDRR group and 598 patients allocated to the LDRR group. A total of 765 patients received 15 mg of rivaroxaban (203 in the HDRR group and 562 in the LDRR group). There were no significant differences in the incidence rates of major bleeding (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidential interval [CI], 0.21-1.93), stroke (adjusted HR, 3.21; 95% CI, 0.54-19.03), and composite outcomes (adjusted HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.47-2.69) between the HDRR and LDRR groups. CONCLUSION: This study revealed the safety and effectiveness of either dose regimen of rivaroxaban in an Asian population for stroke prevention of AF. Considerable numbers of patients are receiving LDRR therapy in real-world practice in Asia. Both regimens were safe and effective for these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04096547.

Everolimus-Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Extended Follow-Up Outcomes of Multicenter Randomized Controlled BEST Trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term comparative outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with everolimus-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are limited in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled trial was conducted in 27 international heart centers and was designed to randomly assign 1776 patients with angiographic multivessel coronary artery disease to receive PCI with everolimus-eluting stents or CABG. After inclusion of 880 patients (438 in the PCI group and 442 in the CABG group) between July 2008 and September 2013, the study was terminated early because of slow enrollment. The primary end point was the composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 11.8 years (interquartile range, 10.6-12.5 years; maximum, 13.7 years), the primary end point occurred in 151 patients (34.5%) in the PCI group and 134 patients (30.3%) in the CABG group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.18 [95% CI, 0.88-1.56]; P=0.26). No significant differences were seen in the occurrence of a safety composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke between groups (28.8% and 27.1%; HR, 1.07 [95% CI, 0.75-1.53]; P=0.70), as well as the occurrence of death from any cause (20.5% and 19.9%; HR, 1.04 [95% CI, 0.65-1.67]; P=0.86). However, spontaneous myocardial infarction (7.1% and 3.8%; HR, 1.86 [95% CI, 1.06-3.27]; P=0.031) and any repeat revascularization (22.6% and 12.7%; HR, 1.92 [95% CI, 1.58-2.32]; P<0.001) were more frequent after PCI than after CABG. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease, there were no significant differences between PCI and CABG in the incidence of major adverse cardiac events, the safety composite end point, and all-cause mortality during the extended follow-up. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifiers: NCT05125367 and NCT00997828.

Edoxaban Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for Leaflet Thrombosis and Cerebral Thromboembolism After TAVR: The ADAPT-TAVR Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether the direct oral anticoagulant edoxaban can reduce leaflet thrombosis and the accompanying cerebral thromboembolic risk after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. In addition, the causal relationship of subclinical leaflet thrombosis with cerebral thromboembolism and neurological or neurocognitive dysfunction remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, open-label randomized trial comparing edoxaban with dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin plus clopidogrel) in patients who had undergone successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement and did not have an indication for anticoagulation. The primary end point was an incidence of leaflet thrombosis on 4-dimensional computed tomography at 6 months. Key secondary end points were the number and volume of new cerebral lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging and the serial changes of neurological and neurocognitive function between 6 months and immediately after transcatheter aortic valve replacement. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients were included in the final intention-to-treat population. There was a trend toward a lower incidence of leaflet thrombosis in the edoxaban group compared with the dual antiplatelet therapy group (9.8% versus 18.4%; absolute difference, -8.5% [95% CI, -17.8% to 0.8%]; P=0.076). The percentage of patients with new cerebral lesions on brain magnetic resonance imaging (edoxaban versus dual antiplatelet therapy, 25.0% versus 20.2%; difference, 4.8%; 95% CI, -6.4% to 16.0%) and median total new lesion number and volume were not different between the 2 groups. In addition, the percentages of patients with worsening of neurological and neurocognitive function were not different between the groups. The incidence of any or major bleeding events was not different between the 2 groups. We found no significant association between the presence or extent of leaflet thrombosis with new cerebral lesions and a change of neurological or neurocognitive function. CONCLUSIONS: In patients without an indication for long-term anticoagulation after successful transcatheter aortic valve replacement, the incidence of leaflet thrombosis was numerically lower with edoxaban than with dual antiplatelet therapy, but this was not statistically significant. The effects on new cerebral thromboembolism and neurological or neurocognitive function were also not different between the 2 groups. Because the study was underpowered, the results should be considered hypothesis generating, highlighting the need for further research. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov. Unique identifier: NCT03284827.

Preventive PCI or medical therapy alone for vulnerable atherosclerotic coronary plaque: Rationale and design of the randomized, controlled PREVENT trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary syndromes are commonly caused by the rupture of vulnerable plaque, which often appear angiographically not severe. Although pharmacologic management is considered standard therapy for stabilizing plaque vulnerability, the potential role of preventive local treatment for vulnerable plaque has not yet been determined. The PREVENT trial was designed to compare preventive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus optimal medical therapy (OMT) with OMT alone in patients with functionally nonsignificant high-risk vulnerable plaques. METHODS: The PREVENT trial is a multinational, multicenter, prospective, open-label, active-treatment-controlled randomized trial. Eligible patients have at least 1 angiographically significant stenosis (diameter stenosis >50% by visual estimation) without functional significance (fractional flow reserve [FFR] >0.80). Target lesions are assessed by intracoronary imaging and must meet at least 2 imaging criteria for vulnerable plaque; (1) minimal lumen area <4.0 mm2; (2) plaque burden >70%; (3) maximal lipid core burden index in a 4 mm segment >315 by near infrared spectroscopy; and (4) thin cap fibroatheroma as determined by virtual histology or optical coherence tomography. Enrolled patients are randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either preventive PCI with either bioabsorbable vascular scaffolds or metallic everolimus-eluting stents plus OMT or OMT alone. The primary endpoint is target-vessel failure, defined as the composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischemic-driven target-vessel revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable or progressive angina, at 2 years after randomization. RESULTS: Enrollment of a total of 1,608 patients has been completed. Follow-up of the last enrolled patient will be completed in September 2023 and primary results are expected to be available in early 2024. CONCLUSIONS: The PREVENT trial is the first large-scale, randomized trial to evaluate the effect of preventive PCI on non-flow-limiting vulnerable plaques containing multiple high-risk features that is appropriately powered for clinical outcomes. PREVENT will provide compelling evidence as to whether preventive PCI of vulnerable plaques plus OMT improves patient outcomes compared with OMT alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov. Unique identifier: NCT02316886. KEY POINTS: The PREVENT trial is the first, large-scale randomized clinical trial to evaluate the effect of preventive PCI on non-flow-limiting vulnerable plaque with high-risk features. It will provide compelling evidence to determine whether PCI of focal vulnerable plaques on top of OMT improves patient outcomes.

Impact of new-onset arrhythmia on cardiac reverse remodeling following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: computed tomography-derived left ventricular and atrial strains.

OBJECTIVE: Patients who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) are at risk for new-onset arrhythmia (NOA) that may require permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation, resulting in decreased cardiac function. We aimed to investigate the factors that are associated with NOA after TAVR and to compare pre- and post-TAVR cardiac functions between patients with and without NOA using CT-derived strain analyses. METHODS: We included consecutive patients who underwent pre- and post-TAVR cardiac CT scans six months after TAVR. New-onset left bundle branch block, atrioventricular block, and atrial fibrillation/flutter lasting over 30 days after the procedure and/or the need for PPM diagnosed within 1 year after TAVR were regarded as NOA. Implant depth and left heart function and strains were analyzed using multi-phase CT images and compared between patients with and without NOA. RESULTS: Of 211 patients (41.7% men; median 81 years), 52 (24.6%) presented with NOA after TAVR, and 24 (11.4%) implanted PPM. Implant depth was significantly deeper in the NOA group than in the non-NOA group (- 6.7 ± 2.4 vs. - 5.6 ± 2.6 mm; p = 0.009). Left ventricular global longitudinal strain (LV GLS) and left atrial (LA) reservoir strain were significantly improved only in the non-NOA group (LV GLS, - 15.5 ± 4.0 to - 17.3 ± 2.9%; p < 0.001; LA reservoir strain, 22.3 ± 8.9 to 26.5 ± 7.6%; p < 0.001). The mean percent change of the LV GLS and LA reservoir strains was evident in the non-NOA group (p = 0.019 and p = 0.035, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A quarter of patients presented with NOA after TAVR. Deep implant depth on post-TAVR CT scans was associated with NOA. Patients with NOA after TAVR had impaired LV reserve remodeling assessed by CT-derived strains. CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT: New-onset arrhythmia (NOA) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) impairs cardiac reverse remodeling. CT-derived strain analysis reveals that patients with NOA do not show improvement in left heart function and strains, highlighting the importance of managing NOA for optimal outcomes. KEY POINTS: • New-onset arrhythmia following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a concern that interferes with cardiac reverse remodeling. • Comparison of pre-and post-TAVR CT-derived left heart strain provides insight into the impaired cardiac reverse remodeling in patients with new-onset arrhythmia following TAVR. • The expected reverse remodeling was not observed in patients with new-onset arrhythmia following TAVR, given that CT-derived left heart function and strains did not improve.

New insertable cardiac monitors show high diagnostic yield and good safety profile in real-world clinical practice: results from the international prospective observational SMART Registry.

AIMS: Insertable cardiac monitors (ICMs) are indicated for long-term monitoring of unexplained syncope or palpitations, and for detection of bradycardia, ventricular tachycardia, and/or atrial fibrillation (AF). The aim of our study was to evaluate the safety and clinical value associated with a new generation ICM (Confirm Rx™, Abbott, Illinois, USA), featuring a new remote monitoring system based on smartphone patient applications. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SMART Registry is an international prospective observational study. The main endpoints were ICM safety (incidence of serious adverse device and procedure-related events (SADEs) at 1 month), ICM clinical value (incidence of device-detected true arrhythmias and of clinical diagnoses and interventions), and patient-reported experience measurements (PREMs). A total of 1400 subjects were enrolled. ICM indications included syncope (49.1%), AF (18.8%), unexplained palpitations (13.6%), risk of ventricular arrhythmia (6.6%), and cryptogenic stroke (6.0%). Freedom from SADEs at 1 month was 99.4% (95% Confidence Interval: 98.8-99.7%). In the 6-month monitoring period, the ICM detected true cardiac arrhythmias in 45.7% of patients and led to clinical interventions in a relevant proportion of patients; in particular, a pacemaker implant was performed after bradycardia detection in 8.9% of subjects who received an ICM for syncope and oral anticoagulation therapy was indicated after AF detection in 15.7% of subjects with cryptogenic stroke. PREMs showed that 78.2% of subjects were satisfied with the remote monitoring patient app. CONCLUSION: The evaluated ICM is associated with an excellent safety profile and high diagnostic yield. Patients reported positive experiences associated with the use of their smartphone for the device remote monitoring.

Long-term outcome of thoracoscopic ablation and radiofrequency catheter ablation for persistent atrial fibrillation as a de novo procedure.

AIMS: Limited data are available regarding the efficacy of thoracoscopic ablation as the first procedure for persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). We sought to compare the long-term efficacy of thoracoscopic ablation vs. radiofrequency (RF) catheter ablation as the first procedure for persistent AF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between February 2011 and December 2020, 575 patients who underwent ablation for persistent AF were studied. Among them, thoracoscopic ablation was performed in 281 patients, RF catheter ablation in 228, and hybrid ablation in 66. Rhythm, clinical, and safety outcomes during 7-year follow-up were compared. The patients who underwent thoracoscopic ablation were older, had a higher prevalence of stroke, and had a larger left atrial volume than those who underwent RF catheter ablation. In the propensity score-matched population (n = 306), incidences of atrial tachyarrhythmia recurrence were 51.4% in the thoracoscopic ablation group and 62.5% in the RF catheter ablation group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.869, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.618-1.223, P = 0.420]. Stroke and total procedural adverse events were not significantly different between thoracoscopic and RF catheter ablation (2.7 vs. 2.5%, P = 0.603, and 7.1 vs. 4.8%, P = 0.374, respectively). The hybrid ablation group showed similar rhythm outcomes compared with both the thoracoscopic and the RF catheter ablation groups. At the redo procedure, pulmonary vein gaps were more frequently observed in the RF catheter ablation group (32.6%) than in the thoracoscopic ablation group (7.9%) and in the hybrid ablation group (8.8%) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: As a first procedure in persistent AF, thoracoscopic ablation and RF catheter ablation showed comparable efficacy, clinical, and safety outcomes during long-term follow-up.

Association of right bundle branch block or intraventricular conduction delay with recurrence of atrial fibrillation after catheter ablation.

BACKGROUND: The association between bundle branch block (BBB) and recurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) after catheter ablation is unclear. The aim of this study was to determine whether AF combined with BBB is associated with AF recurrence after catheter ablation. METHODS: A total of 477 consecutive AF patients who underwent catheter ablation were included. The AF patients were divided into three groups according to BBB: AF without BBB (n = 427), AF with right bundle branch block (AF with RBBB) (n = 16), and AF with intraventricular conduction delay (AF with IVCD) (n = 34). RESULTS: Of the 477 AF patients (mean age 57 years, 81% men, median CHA2 DS2 -VASc score of 1), 16 (3.4%) patients had RBBB, and 34 (7.1%) patients had IVCD. During a mean follow-up of 15.2 ± 6.7 months, 119 patients (24.9%) had recurrence of AF. Of these, 111 (26%) patients were in the AF without BBB group, with 2 (12.5%) and 6 (17.6%) patients in the RBBB and IVCD groups, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the rate of recurrent AF was not significantly different among the three groups (p = .39). Multivariable analysis showed that persistent AF (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.15-2.50, p = .007), chronic kidney disease (HR 2.94, 95% CI 1.20-7.17, p = .01), and left atrial diameter (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.009-1.082, p = .01) were significantly associated with AF recurrence. CONCLUSION: AF with BBB was not significantly associated with the recurrence of AF after catheter ablation in middle-aged patients with low-risk cardiovascular profile.

Positional obstructive sleep apnea in patients with atrial fibrillation.

PURPOSE: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common, potentially modifiable condition implicated in the pathogenesis of atrial fibrillation (AF). The presence and severity of OSA is largely sleep position-dependent, yet there is high variability in positional dependence among patients with OSA. We investigated the prevalence of positional OSA (POSA) and examined associated factors in patients with AF. METHODS: We recruited an equal number of patients with and without AF who underwent diagnostic polysomnography. Patients included had ≥ 120 min of total sleep time with 30 min of sleep in both supine and lateral positions. POSA was defined as an overall apnea hypopnea index (AHI) ≥ 5/h, supine AHI (sAHI) ≥ 5/h, and sAHI greater than twice the non-supine AHI. POSA prevalence was compared in patients with and without AF adjusting for age, sex, OSA severity, and heart failure. RESULTS: A total of patients (male: 56%, mean age 62 years) were included. POSA prevalence was similar between the two groups (46% vs. 39%; p = 0.33). Obesity and severe OSA (AHI ≥ 30/h) were associated with low likelihood of POSA (OR [CI] of 0.17 [0.09-0.32] and 0.28 [0.12-0.62]). In patients with AF, male sex was associated with a higher likelihood of POSA (OR [CI] of 3.16 [1.06-10.4]). CONCLUSION: POSA is common, affecting more than half of patients with AF, but the prevalence was similar in those without AF. Obesity and more severe OSA are associated with lower odds of POSA. Positional therapy should be considered in patients with mild OSA and POSA.

Totally Thoracoscopic Ablation in Patients With Recurrent Atrial Fibrillation After Catheter Ablation.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of totally thoracoscopic ablation (TTA) in patients with recurrent atrial fibrillation (AF) after radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA). METHODS: From February 2012 to May 2020, 460 patients who underwent TTA were classified into two groups: CA (presence of RFCA history, n = 74) and nCA groups (absence of RFCA history, n = 386). Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analyses were used to adjust for confounders. The primary endpoint was freedom from the composite of AF, typical atrial flutter, atypical atrial flutter and any atrial tachyarrhythmia, lasting more than 30 seconds during the follow-up. All patients were followed up at 3, 6, and 12 months via electrocardiogram and 24-hour Holter monitoring. RESULTS: Bilateral pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) was conducted in all patients and the conduction block tests were confirmed. In the CA group, difficult PVI occasionally occurred due to structural changes, such as pericardial adhesion and fibrosis of the pulmonary venous structure, caused by a previous catheter ablation. Early complications such as stroke and pacemaker insertion were not different between the two groups. The normal sinus rhythm was maintained in 70.1% (317/460) patients after a median follow-up period of 38.1 months. The IPTW-weighted Kaplan-Meier curves revealed that freedom from AF events at 5 years was 68.4% (95% confidence interval, 62.8-74.5) in the nCA group and 31.2% (95% confidence interval, 16.9-57.5) in the CA group (P < 0.001). In IPTW-weighted Cox regression, preoperative left atrial diameter, persistent or long-standing AF, the presence of congestive heart failure and catheter ablation history were associated with AF events. CONCLUSION: Patients in the CA group showed a higher recurrence rate of AF than those in the nCA group, while TTA was safely performed in both the groups.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting in left main coronary artery disease: an individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The optimal revascularisation strategy for patients with left main coronary artery disease is uncertain. We therefore aimed to evaluate long-term outcomes for patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: In this individual patient data meta-analysis, we searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane database using the search terms "left main", "percutaneous coronary intervention" or "stent", and "coronary artery bypass graft*" to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English between database inception and Aug 31, 2021, comparing PCI with drug-eluting stents with CABG in patients with left main coronary artery disease that had at least 5 years of patient follow-up for all-cause mortality. Two authors (MSS and BAB) identified studies meeting the criteria. The primary endpoint was 5-year all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were cardiovascular death, spontaneous myocardial infarction, procedural myocardial infarction, stroke, and repeat revascularisation. We used a one-stage approach; event rates were calculated by use of the Kaplan-Meier method and treatment group comparisons were made by use of a Cox frailty model, with trial as a random effect. In Bayesian analyses, the probabilities of absolute risk differences in the primary endpoint between PCI and CABG being more than 0·0%, and at least 1·0%, 2·5%, or 5·0%, were calculated. FINDINGS: Our literature search yielded 1599 results, of which four RCTs-SYNTAX, PRECOMBAT, NOBLE, and EXCEL-meeting our inclusion criteria were included in our meta-analysis. 4394 patients, with a median SYNTAX score of 25·0 (IQR 18·0-31·0), were randomly assigned to PCI (n=2197) or CABG (n=2197). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of 5-year all-cause death was 11·2% (95% CI 9·9-12·6) with PCI and 10·2% (9·0-11·6) with CABG (hazard ratio 1·10, 95% CI 0·91-1·32; p=0·33), resulting in a non-statistically significant absolute risk difference of 0·9% (95% CI -0·9 to 2·8). In Bayesian analyses, there was an 85·7% probability that death at 5 years was greater with PCI than with CABG; this difference was more likely than not less than 1·0% (<0·2% per year). The numerical difference in mortality was comprised more of non-cardiovascular than cardiovascular death. Spontaneous myocardial infarction (6·2%, 95% CI 5·2-7·3 vs 2·6%, 2·0-3·4; hazard ratio [HR] 2·35, 95% CI 1·71-3·23; p<0·0001) and repeat revascularisation (18·3%, 16·7-20·0 vs 10·7%, 9·4-12·1; HR 1·78, 1·51-2·10; p<0·0001) were more common with PCI than with CABG. Differences in procedural myocardial infarction between strategies depended on the definition used. Overall, there was no difference in the risk of stroke between PCI (2·7%, 2·0-3·5) and CABG (3·1%, 2·4-3·9; HR 0·84, 0·59-1·21; p=0·36), but the risk was lower with PCI in the first year after randomisation (HR 0·37, 0·19-0·69). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with left main coronary artery disease and, largely, low or intermediate coronary anatomical complexity, there was no statistically significant difference in 5-year all-cause death between PCI and CABG, although a Bayesian approach suggested a difference probably exists (more likely than not <0·2% per year) favouring CABG. There were trade-offs in terms of the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and revascularisation. A heart team approach to communicate expected outcome differences might be useful to assist patients in reaching a treatment decision. FUNDING: No external funding.

The efficacy of single-lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator with atrial sensing dipole to detect atrial fibrillation and to reduce inappropriate therapy according to atrial sensing ON or OFF: Rationale and design of the SMART-CONTROL study, a prospective multicenter randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Few studies have compared the efficacy of single-lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) with atrial sensing dipole (VDD-ICD) and conventional single-chamber ICD from the aspect of atrial fibrillation (AF) detection or inappropriate ICD therapy reduction. In the SMART-CONTROL trial (NCT03932604), we primarily aim to investigate whether the atrial sensing capability of VDD-ICD is useful in AF detection and inappropriate therapy reduction by randomly activating or deactivating the atrial sensing function. METHODS AND DESIGN: This study was designed as a prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized trial to enroll 640 patients with no history of clinical AF or rhythm control for AF within 1 year who were undergoing the implantation of VDD-ICD system. Patients are assigned randomly to atrial sensing "ON" or "OFF" group, with crossover allowed during follow-up. The coprimary outcomes are the incidence of AF detection and inappropriate ICD therapy over a 2-year follow-up period. The secondary outcomes include non-AF atrial tachyarrhythmia, ventricular tachyarrhythmia with or without ICD therapy, thromboembolic events, bleeding, heart failure hospitalization, mortality, a composite of adverse cardiovascular events, and long-term atrial sensing stability or variability. CONCLUSION: We expect that this trial can evaluate the efficacy of a single-lead ICD system on various clinical outcomes including AF detection and inappropriate therapy reduction, and ultimately provide guidance to selection of ICD system.

Risk of infective endocarditis associated with invasive dental procedures in patients with cardiac rhythm devices.

AIMS: The incidence of infective endocarditis related to cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs) has gradually increased. The risk associated with dental procedures in patients with CIED implantation and the need for prevention of infective endocarditis remain unclear. The present study investigated the incidence and risk of infective endocarditis associated with invasive dental procedures in patients with CIEDs. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed a nationwide population-based cohort of patients with CIEDs who underwent dental procedures. We performed a self-controlled case series analysis and evaluated the incidence rate ratio of infective endocarditis 3 months after dental procedures. Of a total of 62 019 patients who underwent CIED implantation, 32 536 patients underwent at least one dental procedure during follow-up, and the mean number of dental procedures was 3.4 per patient. They were 152 infections with an incidence of 445 per 100 000 person-years in the dental procedure period and 500 events at an incidence of 255 per 100 000 person-years in the non-dental procedure period. The CIED-related infective endocarditis in the dental procedure period occurred significantly more frequently than during non-dental procedure periods (odds ratio, 1.75; 95% confidence interval, 1.48-2.05; P < 0.001). The mean time interval from dental procedure to infective endocarditis was 59.6 ± 47.3 days. CONCLUSION: Invasive dental procedures are associated with an increased risk of infective endocarditis in those who underwent CIED implantation. Appropriate preventive therapy might be needed in these patients.

Prognostic value of comprehensive intracoronary physiology assessment early after heart transplantation.

AIMS: We evaluated the long-term prognostic value of invasively assessing coronary physiology after heart transplantation in a large multicentre registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: Comprehensive intracoronary physiology assessment measuring fractional flow reserve (FFR), the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR), and coronary flow reserve (CFR) was performed in 254 patients at baseline (a median of 7.2 weeks) and in 240 patients at 1 year after transplantation (199 patients had both baseline and 1-year measurement). Patients were classified into those with normal physiology, reduced FFR (FFR ≤ 0.80), and microvascular dysfunction (either IMR ≥ 25 or CFR ≤ 2.0 with FFR > 0.80). The primary outcome was the composite of death or re-transplantation at 10 years. At baseline, 5.5% had reduced FFR; 36.6% had microvascular dysfunction. Baseline reduced FFR [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 2.33, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88-6.15; P = 0.088] and microvascular dysfunction (aHR 0.88, 95% CI 0.44-1.79; P = 0.73) were not predictors of death and re-transplantation at 10 years. At 1 year, 5.0% had reduced FFR; 23.8% had microvascular dysfunction. One-year reduced FFR (aHR 2.98, 95% CI 1.13-7.87; P = 0.028) and microvascular dysfunction (aHR 2.33, 95% CI 1.19-4.59; P = 0.015) were associated with significantly increased risk of death or re-transplantation at 10 years. Invasive measures of coronary physiology improved the prognostic performance of clinical variables (χ2 improvement: 7.41, P = 0.006). However, intravascular ultrasound-derived changes in maximal intimal thickness were not predictive of outcomes. CONCLUSION: Abnormal coronary physiology 1 year after heart transplantation was common and was a significant predictor of death or re-transplantation at 10 years.