Rationale and design of the FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation (FRENCHIE) study.

BACKGROUND: Despite major advances in prevention and treatment, cardiovascular diseases - particularly acute myocardial infarction - remain a leading cause of death worldwide and in France. Collecting contemporary data about the characteristics, management and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction in France is important. AIMS: The main objectives are to describe baseline characteristics, contemporary management, in-hospital and long-term outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction hospitalized in tertiary care centres in France; secondary objectives are to investigate determinants of prognosis (including periodontal disease and sleep-disordered breathing), to identify gaps between evidence-based recommendations and management and to assess medical care costs for the index hospitalization and during the follow-up period. METHODS: FRENCHIE (FRENch CoHort of myocardial Infarction Evaluation) is an ongoing prospective multicentre observational study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04050956) enrolling more than 19,000 patients hospitalized for acute myocardial infarction with onset of symptoms within 48hours in 35 participating centres in France since March 2019. Main exclusion criteria are age<18 years, lack of health coverage and procedure-related myocardial infarction (types 4a and 5). Detailed information was collected prospectively, starting at admission, including demographic data, risk factors, medical history and treatments, initial management, with prehospital care pathways and medication doses, and outcomes until hospital discharge. The follow-up period (up to 20 years for each patient) is ensured by linking with the French national health database (Système national des données de santé), and includes information on death, hospital admissions, major clinical events, healthcare consumption (including drug reimbursement) and total healthcare costs. FRENCHIE is also used as a platform for cohort-nested studies - currently three randomized trials and two observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide large contemporary cohort with very long-term follow-up will improve knowledge about acute myocardial infarction management and outcomes in France, and provide a useful platform for nested studies and trials.

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.

Whole blood transcriptome signature predicts severe forms of COVID-19: Results from the COVIDeF cohort study.

COVID-19 is associated with heterogeneous outcome. Early identification of a severe progression of the disease is essential to properly manage the patients and improve their outcome. Biomarkers reflecting an increased inflammatory response, as well as individual features including advanced age, male gender, and pre-existing comorbidities, are risk factors of severe COVID-19. Yet, these features show limited accuracy for outcome prediction. The aim was to evaluate the prognostic value of whole blood transcriptome at an early stage of the disease. Blood transcriptome of patients with mild pneumonia was profiled. Patients with subsequent severe COVID-19 were compared to those with favourable outcome, and a molecular predictor based on gene expression was built. Unsupervised classification discriminated patients who would later develop a COVID-19-related severe pneumonia. The corresponding gene expression signature reflected the immune response to the viral infection dominated by a prominent type I interferon, with IFI27 among the most over-expressed genes. A 48-genes transcriptome signature predicting the risk of severe COVID-19 was built on a training cohort, then validated on an external independent cohort, showing an accuracy of 81% for predicting severe outcome. These results identify an early transcriptome signature of severe COVID-19 pneumonia, with a possible relevance to improve COVID-19 patient management.

Association of Use and Dose of Lipid-Lowering Therapy Post Acute Myocardial Infarction With 5-Year Survival in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Older people are underrepresented in randomized trials. The association between lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) and its intensity after acute myocardial infarction and long-term mortality in this population deserves to be assessed. METHODS: The FAST-MI (French Registry of Acute ST-Elevation or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) program consists of nationwide French surveys including all patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction ≤48 hours from onset over a 1- to 2-month period in 2005, 2010, and 2015, with long-term follow-up. Numerous data were collected and a centralized 10-year follow-up was organized. The present analysis focused on the association between prescription of LLT (atorvastatin ≥40 mg or equivalent, or any combination of statin and ezetimibe) and 5-year mortality in patients aged ≥80 years discharged alive. Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching were used to adjust for baseline differences. RESULTS: Among the 2258 patients aged ≥80 years (mean age, 85±4 years; 51% women; 39% ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction; 58% with percutaneous coronary intervention), 415 were discharged without LLT (18%), 866 with conventional doses (38%), and 977 with high-dose LLT (43%). Five-year survival was 36%, 47.5%, and 58%, respectively. Compared with patients without LLT, high-dose LLT was significantly associated with lower 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.66-0.92]), whereas conventional-intensity LLT was not (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.80-1.09]). In propensity score-matched cohorts (n=278 receiving high-intensity LLT and n=278 receiving no statins), 5-year survival was 52% with high-intensity LLT at discharge and 42% without statins (hazard ratio, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.62-0.98]). CONCLUSIONS: In these observational cohorts, high-intensity LLT at discharge after acute myocardial infarction was associated with reduced all-cause mortality at 5 years in an older adult population. These results suggest that high-intensity LLT should not be denied to patients on the basis of old age. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT00673036, NCT01237418, and NCT02566200.

Limb Outcomes With Ticagrelor Plus Aspirin in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus and Atherosclerosis.

BACKGROUND: Ticagrelor reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and increased bleeding in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coronary artery disease. Limb events including revascularization, acute limb ischemia (ALI), and amputation are major morbidities in patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the effect of ticagrelor on limb events. METHODS: Patients were randomized to ticagrelor or placebo on top of aspirin and followed for a median of 3 years. MACE (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), limb events (ALI, amputation, revascularization), and bleeding were adjudicated by an independent and blinded clinical events committee. The presence of peripheral artery disease (PAD) was reported at baseline. RESULTS: Of 19,220 patients randomized, 1,687 (8.8%) had PAD at baseline. In patients receiving placebo, PAD was associated with higher MACE (10.7% vs 7.3%; HR: 1.48; P < 0.001) and limb (9.5% vs 0.8%; HR: 10.67; P < 0.001) risk. Ticagrelor reduced limb events (1.6% vs 1.3%; HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.61-0.96; P = 0.022) with significant reductions for revascularization (HR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.62-0.99; P = 0.044) and ALI (HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.70; P = 0.009). The benefit was consistent with or without PAD (HR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.58-1.11; and HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.55-1.05, respectively; Pinteraction = 0.81). There was no effect modification of ticagrelor vs placebo based on PAD for MACE (Pinteraction = 0.40) or TIMI major bleeding (Pinteraction = 0.3239). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with T2DM and atherosclerosis are at high risk of limb events. Ticagrelor decreased this risk, but increased bleeding. Future trials evaluating the combination of ticagrelor and aspirin would further elucidate the benefit/risk of such therapy in patients with PAD, including those without coronary artery disease. (A Study Comparing Cardiovascular Effects of Ticagrelor Versus Placebo in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [THEMIS]: NCT01991795).

Restrictive vs Liberal Blood Transfusions for Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Anaemia by Heart Failure Status: An RCT Subgroup Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Red blood cell transfusion can cause fluid overload. We evaluated the interaction between heart failure (HF) at baseline and transfusion strategy on outcomes in acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We used data from the randomized REALITY trial (https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/study/NCT02648113), comparing restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategies in patients with AMI and anaemia. HF was defined as history of HF or Killip class > 1 at randomization. Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE: composite of all-cause death, non-recurrent AMI, stroke, or emergency revascularization prompted by ischaemia) at 30 days. RESULTS: Among 658 randomized patients, 311 (47.3%) had HF. HF patients had higher rates of MACE at 30 days and 1 year, and higher rates of non-fatal new-onset HF. There was no interaction between HF and effect of randomized assignment on the primary outcome or non-fatal new-onset HF. A liberal transfusion strategy was associated with increased all-cause death at 30 days and at 1 year in HF patients (Pinteraction = 0.009 and P = 0.049, respectively). The main numerical difference in cause of death between restrictive and liberal strategies was death by HF at 30 days (4 vs 11). CONCLUSIONS: HF is frequent in AMI patients with anaemia and is associated with higher risk of MACE (including all-cause death) and non-fatal new-onset HF. While there was no interaction of HF with effect of transfusion strategy on MACE, a liberal transfusion strategy was associated with higher all-cause death that appears driven by a higher risk of early death due to HF.

Data Monitoring Committees and clinical trials: From scientific justification to organisation.

Clinical trials often last several months or even several years. As the trial progresses, it can be tempting to find out whether the data obtained already answers the question posed at the start of the trial in order to stop inclusions or monitoring earlier. However, knowing and taking into account interim results can sometimes compromise the integrity of the results, which is counterproductive. To minimise this risk and ensure that the treatments are assessed reliably, safety and/or efficacy criteria are monitored during the study by a Data Monitoring Committee. After receiving the results confidentially, the Data Monitoring Committee assesses the benefit/risk ratio of the study treatment and recommends that the trial be continued, modified or terminated. Data Monitoring Committee members issuing these recommendations have an important responsibility: a hasty decision to end the trial may lead to inconclusive results unable to answer the initial question and, inversely, delaying the decision to end the trial may expose the subjects to potentially ineffective or even harmful interventions. The Data Monitoring Committee's task is therefore particularly complex. With this in mind, the round table discussion at the Giens workshops was a chance to review the scientific justification for creating Data Monitoring Committees and to recall the need for their members to receive comprehensive training on the complexities of multiple analyses, confidentiality requirements applying to the results and the need for them to be aware that recommendations to end a trial must be based on data that is robust enough to assess the benefit/risk ratio of the treatment studied.

Intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in 18 emergency departments in the Paris metropolitan area, France (DEPIST-COVID): A cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial.

BACKGROUND: Asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic infections account for a substantial portion of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) transmissions. The value of intensified screening strategies, especially in emergency departments (EDs), in reaching asymptomatic and paucisymptomatic patients and helping to improve detection and reduce transmission has not been documented. The objective of this study was to evaluate in EDs whether an intensified SARS-CoV-2 screening strategy combining nurse-driven screening for asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients with routine practice (intervention) could contribute to higher detection of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to routine practice alone, including screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients (control). METHODS AND FINDINGS: We conducted a cluster-randomized, two-period, crossover trial from February 2021 to May 2021 in 18 EDs in the Paris metropolitan area, France. All adults visiting the EDs were eligible. At the start of the first period, 18 EDs were randomized to the intervention or control strategy by balanced block randomization with stratification, with the alternative condition being applied in the second period. During the control period, routine screening for SARS-CoV-2 included screening for symptomatic or hospitalized patients. During the intervention period, in addition to routine screening practice, a questionnaire about risk exposure and symptoms and a SARS-CoV-2 screening test were offered by nurses to all remaining asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients. The primary outcome was the proportion of newly diagnosed SARS-CoV-2-positive patients among all adults visiting the 18 EDs. Primary analysis was by intention-to-treat. The primary outcome was analyzed using a generalized linear mixed model (Poisson distribution) with the center and center by period as random effects and the strategy (intervention versus control) and period (modeled as a weekly categorical variable) as fixed effects with additional adjustment for community incidence. During the intervention and control periods, 69,248 patients and 69,104 patients, respectively, were included for a total of 138,352 patients. Patients had a median age of 45.0 years [31.0, 63.0], and women represented 45.7% of the patients. During the intervention period, 6,332 asymptomatic/paucisymptomatic patients completed the questionnaire; 4,283 were screened for SARS-CoV-2 by nurses, leading to 224 new SARS-CoV-2 diagnoses. A total of 1,859 patients versus 2,084 patients were newly diagnosed during the intervention and control periods, respectively (adjusted analysis: 26.7/1,000 versus 26.2/1,000, adjusted relative risk: 1.02 (95% confidence interval (CI) [0.94, 1.11]; p = 0.634)). The main limitation of this study is that it was conducted in a rapidly evolving epidemiological context. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed that intensified screening for SARS-CoV-2 in EDs was unlikely to identify a higher proportion of newly diagnosed patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial registration number: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04756609.

Comparing the long-term outcomes in chronic coronary syndrome patients with prior ST-segment and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the TIGRIS registry.

OBJECTIVES: Compared with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients, non-STEMI (NSTEMI) patients have more comorbidities and extensive coronary artery disease. Contemporary comparative data on the long-term prognosis of stable post-myocardial infarction subtypes are needed. DESIGN: Long-Term rIsk, clinical manaGement and healthcare Resource utilisation of stable coronary artery dISease (TIGRIS) was a multinational, observational and longitudinal cohort study. SETTING: Patients were enrolled from 350 centres, with >95% coming from cardiology practices across 24 countries, from 19 June 2013 to 31 March 2017. PARTICIPANTS: This study enrolled 8277 stable patients 1-3 years after myocardial infarction with ≥1 additional risk factor. OUTCOME MEASURES: Over a 2 year follow-up, cardiovascular events and deaths and self-reported health using the EuroQol 5-dimension questionnaire score were recorded. Relative risk of clinical events and health resource utilisation in STEMI and NSTEMI patients were compared using multivariable Poisson regression models, adjusting for prognostically relevant patient factors. RESULTS: Of 7752 patients with known myocardial infarction type, 46% had NSTEMI; NSTEMI patients were older with more comorbidities than STEMI patients. NSTEMI patients had significantly poorer self-reported health and lower prevalence of dual antiplatelet therapy at hospital discharge and at enrolment 1-3 years later. NSTEMI patients had a higher incidence of combined myocardial infarction, stroke and cardiovascular death (5.6% vs 3.9%, p<0.001) and higher all-cause mortality (4.2% vs 2.6%, p<0.001) compared with STEMI patients. Risks were attenuated after adjusting for other patient characteristics. Health resource utilisation was higher in NSTEMI patients, although STEMI patients had more cardiologist visits. CONCLUSIONS: Post-NSTEMI chronic coronary syndrome patients had a less favourable risk factor profile, poorer self-reported health and more adverse cardiovascular events during long-term follow-up than individuals post STEMI. Efforts are needed to recognise the risks of stable patients after NSTEMI and optimise secondary prevention and care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01866904.

Restrictive or Liberal Transfusion Strategy in Myocardial Infarction and Anemia.

BACKGROUND: A strategy of administering a transfusion only when the hemoglobin level falls below 7 or 8 g per deciliter has been widely adopted. However, patients with acute myocardial infarction may benefit from a higher hemoglobin level. METHODS: In this phase 3, interventional trial, we randomly assigned patients with myocardial infarction and a hemoglobin level of less than 10 g per deciliter to a restrictive transfusion strategy (hemoglobin cutoff for transfusion, 7 or 8 g per deciliter) or a liberal transfusion strategy (hemoglobin cutoff, <10 g per deciliter). The primary outcome was a composite of myocardial infarction or death at 30 days. RESULTS: A total of 3504 patients were included in the primary analysis. The mean (±SD) number of red-cell units that were transfused was 0.7±1.6 in the restrictive-strategy group and 2.5±2.3 in the liberal-strategy group. The mean hemoglobin level was 1.3 to 1.6 g per deciliter lower in the restrictive-strategy group than in the liberal-strategy group on days 1 to 3 after randomization. A primary-outcome event occurred in 295 of 1749 patients (16.9%) in the restrictive-strategy group and in 255 of 1755 patients (14.5%) in the liberal-strategy group (risk ratio modeled with multiple imputation for incomplete follow-up, 1.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.99 to 1.34; P = 0.07). Death occurred in 9.9% of the patients with the restrictive strategy and in 8.3% of the patients with the liberal strategy (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.47); myocardial infarction occurred in 8.5% and 7.2% of the patients, respectively (risk ratio, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.49). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute myocardial infarction and anemia, a liberal transfusion strategy did not significantly reduce the risk of recurrent myocardial infarction or death at 30 days. However, potential harms of a restrictive transfusion strategy cannot be excluded. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; MINT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02981407.).

Use of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for covid-19 with or without underlying immunodeficiency: open label, randomised clinical trial.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of covid-19 convalescent plasma to treat patients admitted to hospital for moderate covid-19 disease with or without underlying immunodeficiency (CORIPLASM trial). Design: Open label, randomised clinical trial. Setting: CORIMUNO-19 cohort (publicly supported platform of open label, randomised controlled trials of immune modulatory drugs in patients admitted to hospital with moderate or severe covid-19 disease) based on 19 university and general hospitals across France, from 16 April 2020 to 21 April 2021. Participants: 120 adults (n=60 in the covid-19 convalescent plasma group, n=60 in the usual care group) admitted to hospital with a positive SARS-CoV2 test result, duration of symptoms <9 days, and World Health Organization score of 4 or 5. 49 patients (n=22, n=27) had underlying immunosuppression. Interventions: Open label randomisation to usual care or four units (200-220 mL/unit, 2 units/day over two consecutive days) of covid-19 convalescent plasma with a seroneutralisation titre >40. Main outcome measures: Primary outcomes were proportion of patients with a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 on the 10 point scale on day 4 (higher values indicate a worse outcome), and survival without assisted ventilation or additional immunomodulatory treatment by day 14. Secondary outcomes were changes in WHO Clinical Progression Scale scores, overall survival, time to discharge, and time to end of dependence on oxygen supply. Predefined subgroups analyses included immunosuppression status, duration of symptoms before randomisation, and use of steroids. Results: 120 patients were recruited and assigned to covid-19 convalescent plasma (n=60) or usual care (n=60), including 22 (covid-19 convalescent plasma) and 27 (usual care) patients who were immunocompromised. 13 (22%) patients who received convalescent plasma had a WHO Clinical Progression Scale score of ≥6 at day 4 versus eight (13%) patients who received usual care (adjusted odds ratio 1.88, 95% credible interval 0.71 to 5.24). By day 14, 19 (31.6%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 20 (33.3%) patients in the usual care group needed ventilation, additional immunomodulatory treatment, or had died. For cumulative incidence of death, three (5%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and eight (13%) in the usual care group died by day 14 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.10 to 1.53), and seven (12%) patients in the convalescent plasma group and 12 (20%) in the usual care group by day 28 (adjusted hazard ratio 0.51, 0.20 to 1.32). In a subgroup analysis performed in patients who were immunocompromised, transfusion of covid-19 convalescent plasma was associated with mortality (hazard ratio 0.39, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 1.10). Conclusions: In this study, covid-19 convalescent plasma did not improve early outcomes in patients with moderate covid-19 disease. The efficacy of convalescent plasma in patients who are immunocompromised should be investigated further. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04345991.

Effect of Noninvasive Airway Management of Comatose Patients With Acute Poisoning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tracheal intubation is recommended for coma patients and those with severe brain injury, but its use in patients with decreased levels of consciousness from acute poisoning is uncertain. Objective: To determine the effect of intubation withholding vs routine practice on clinical outcomes of comatose patients with acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a multicenter, randomized trial conducted in 20 emergency departments and 1 intensive care unit (ICU) that included comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning and a Glasgow Coma Scale score less than 9 in France between May 16, 2021, and April 12, 2023, and followed up until May 12, 2023. Intervention: Patients were randomized to undergo conservative airway strategy of intubation withholding vs routine practice. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a hierarchical composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Key secondary outcomes included adverse events resulting from intubation as well as pneumonia within 48 hours. Results: Among the 225 included patients (mean age, 33 years; 38% female), 116 were in the intervention group and 109 in the control group, with respective proportions of intubations of 16% and 58%. No patients died during the in-hospital stay. There was a significant clinical benefit for the primary end point in the intervention group, with a win ratio of 1.85 (95% CI, 1.33 to 2.58). In the intervention group, there was a lower proportion with any adverse event (6% vs 14.7%; absolute risk difference, 8.6% [95% CI, -16.6% to -0.7%]) compared with the control group, and pneumonia occurred in 8 (6.9%) and 16 (14.7%) patients, respectively (absolute risk difference, -7.8% [95% CI, -15.9% to 0.3%]). Conclusions and Relevance: Among comatose patients with suspected acute poisoning, a conservative strategy of withholding intubation was associated with a greater clinical benefit for the composite end point of in-hospital death, length of ICU stay, and length of hospital stay. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04653597.

Cost-effectiveness of modified diagnostic strategy to safely rule-out pulmonary embolism in the emergency department: a non-inferiority cluster crossover randomized trial (MODIGLIA-NI).

BACKGROUND: The aim of this trial-based economic evaluation was to assess the incremental costs and cost-effectiveness of the modified diagnostic strategy combining the YEARS rule and age-adjusted D-dimer threshold compared with the control (which used the age-adjusted D-dimer threshold only) for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism (PE) in the Emergency Department (ED). METHODS: Economic evaluation from a healthcare system perspective alongside a non-inferiority, crossover, and cluster-randomized trial conducted in 16 EDs in France and two in Spain with three months of follow-up. The primary endpoint was the additional cost of a patient without failure of the diagnostic strategy, defined as venous thromboembolism (VTE) diagnosis at 3months after exclusion of PE during the initial ED visit. Mean differences in 3-month failure and costs were estimated using separate generalized linear-regression mixed models, adjusted for strategy type, period, and the interaction between strategy and period as fixed effects and the hospital as a random effect. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was obtained by dividing the incremental costs by the incremental frequency of VTE. RESULTS: Of the 1,414 included patients, 1,217 (86%) were analyzed in the per-protocol analysis (648 in the intervention group and 623 in the control group). At three months, there were no statistically significant differences in total costs (€-46; 95% CI: €-93 to €0.2), and the failure rate was non inferior in the intervention group (-0.64%, one-sided 97.5% CI: -∞ to 0.21%, non-inferiority margin 1.5%) between groups. The point estimate of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) indicating that each undetected VTE averted in the intervention group is associated with cost savings of €7,142 in comparison with the control group. There was a 93% probability that the intervention was dominant. Similar results were found in the as randomized population. CONCLUSIONS: Given the observed cost decrease of borderline significance, and according to the 95% confidence ellipses, the intervention strategy has a potential to lead to cost savings as a result of a reduction in the use of chest imaging and of the number of undetected VTE averted. Policy-makers should investigate how these monetary benefits can be distributed across stakeholders. CLINICALTRIALS: Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04032769; July 25, 2019.

Overnight Stay in the Emergency Department and Mortality in Older Patients.

Importance: Patients in the emergency department (ED) who are waiting for hospital admission on a wheeled cot may be subject to harm. However, mortality and morbidity among older patients who spend the night in the ED while waiting for a bed in a medical ward are unknown. Objective: To assess whether older adults who spend a night in the ED waiting for admission to a hospital ward are at increased risk of in-hospital mortality. Design, Settings, and Participants: This was a prospective cohort study of older patients (≥75 years) who visited the ED and were admitted to the hospital on December 12 to 14, 2022, at 97 EDs across France. Two groups were defined and compared: those who stayed in the ED from midnight until 8:00 am (ED group) and those who were admitted to a ward before midnight (ward group). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was in-hospital mortality, truncated at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included in-hospital adverse events (ie, falls, infection, bleeding, myocardial infarction, stroke, thrombosis, bedsores, and dysnatremia) and hospital length of stay. A generalized linear-regression mixed model was used to compare end points between groups. Results: The total sample comprised 1598 patients (median [IQR] age, 86 [80-90] years; 880 [55%] female and 718 [45%] male), with 707 (44%) in the ED group and 891 (56%) in the ward group. Patients who spent the night in the ED had a higher in-hospital mortality rate of 15.7% vs 11.1% (adjusted risk ratio [aRR], 1.39; 95% CI, 1.07-1.81). They also had a higher risk of adverse events compared with the ward group (aRR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.04-1.49) and increased median length of stay (9 vs 8 days; rate ratio, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.11-1.31). In a prespecified subgroup analysis of patients who required assistance with the activities of daily living, spending the night in the ED was associated with a higher in-hospital mortality rate (aRR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.25-2.61). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this prospective cohort study indicate that for older patients, waiting overnight in the ED for admission to a ward was associated with increased in-hospital mortality and morbidity, particularly in patients with limited autonomy. Older adults should be prioritized for admission to a ward.

Rationale and design of the direct oral anticoagulants for prevention of left ventricular thrombus after anterior acute myocardial infarction (APERITIF) trial.

BACKGROUND: Anterior acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with an increased risk of left ventricular (LV) thrombus formation. We hypothesized that adding low-dose oral rivaroxaban to the usual antiplatelet regimen would reduce the risk of LV thrombus in patients with large AMI. STUDY DESIGN: APERITIF is an investigator-initiated, multicenter randomized open-label, blinded end-point (PROBE) trial, nested in the ongoing "FRENCHIE" registry, a French multicenter prospective observational study, in which all consecutive patients admitted within 48 hours of symptom onset in a cardiac Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for AMI are included (NCT04050956). Among them, patients with anterior ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (STEMI) or very high-risk non- ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients with involvement of the left anterior descending artery are randomized into 2 groups: Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) alone or DAPT plus rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily for 4 weeks, started as soon as possible after completion of the initial percutaneous coronary intervention/angiography procedure. The primary endpoint is the presence of LV thrombus at 1 month, as detected by contrast enhanced CMR (CE-CMR). Secondary endpoints include LV thrombus dimension (greatest diameter), the rate of major bleedings and major cardiovascular events at 1 month. Based on estimated event rates, a sample size of 560 patients is needed to show superiority of DAPT plus rivaroxaban therapy versus DAPT alone, with 80% power. CONCLUSION: The APERITIF trial will determine whether, in patients with large AMIs, the use of rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily in addition to DAPT reduces LV thrombus formation, compared with DAPT alone. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT05077683.

Impact of transfusion strategy on platelet aggregation and biomarkers in myocardial infarction patients with anemia.

BACKGROUND: Higher rates of thrombotic events have been reported in myocardial infarction (MI) patients requiring blood transfusion. The impact of blood transfusion strategy on thrombosis and inflammation is still unknown. OBJECTIVE: To compare the impact of a liberal vs. a restrictive transfusion strategy on P2Y12 platelet reactivity and biomarkers in the multicentric randomized REALITY trial. METHODS: Patients randomized to a liberal (hemoglobin ≤10 g/dL) or a restrictive (hemoglobin ≤8 g/dL) transfusion strategy had VASP-PRI platelet reactivity measured centrally in a blinded fashion and platelet reactivity unit (PRU) measured locally using encrypted VerifyNow; at baseline and after randomization. Biomarkers of thrombosis (P-selectin, PAI-1, vWF) and inflammation (TNF-α) were also measured. The primary endpoint was the change in the VASP-PRI (difference from baseline and post randomization) between the randomized groups. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients randomized were included in this study (n = 50 in each group). Transfused patients received on average 2.4 ± 1.6 units of blood. We found no differences in change of the VASP PRI (difference 1.2% 95% CI (-10.3-12.7%)) or by the PRU (difference 13.0 95% CI (-21.8-47.8)) before and after randomization in both randomized groups. Similar results were found in transfused patients (n = 71) regardless of the randomized group, VASP PRI (difference 1.7%; 95% CI (-9.5-1.7%)) or PRU (difference 27.0; 95% CI (-45.0-0.0)). We did not find an impact of transfusion strategy or transfusion itself in the levels of P-selectin, PAI-1, vWF, and TNF-α. CONCLUSION: In this study, we found no impact of a liberal vs. a restrictive transfusion strategy on platelet reactivity and biomarkers in MI patients with anemia. A conclusion that should be tempered due to missing patients with exploitable biological data that has affected our power to show a difference.

Long-term outcomes among stable post-acute myocardial infarction patients living in rural versus urban areas: insights from the prospective, observational TIGRIS registry.

BACKGROUND: Insights on the differences in clinical outcomes, quality of life (QoL) and health resource utilisation (HRU) with different levels of care available to post-acute myocardial infarction (AMI) populations in rural and urban settings are limited. METHODS: The long-Term rIsk, clinical manaGement, and healthcare Resource utilisation of stable coronary artery dISease (TIGRIS), a prospective, observational registry, enrolled 8452 patients aged ≥50 years 1-3 years post-AMI from June 2013 to November 2014 from 24 countries in Asia Pacific/Australia, Europe, North America and South America. Differences in QoL (measured using the EuroQol Research Foundation instrument) and HRU between patients in rural and urban settings were evaluated in this post hoc analysis. The incidence of clinical endpoints (cardiovascular (CV) death, AMI, unstable angina with urgent revascularisation and stroke; bleeding; and all-cause mortality) was analysed. Data were collected at baseline and every 6 months for 24 months. RESULTS: There were fewer hospitalisations and visits to general practitioners (GPs) and cardiologists in the rural versus urban populations (adjusted event rate ratio (ERR)=0.90 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.00, p=0.04); ERR=0.84 (95% CI, 0.78 to 0.92, p<0.001); ERR=0.86 (95% CI, 0.81 to 0.92, p<0.001), respectively). No statistically significant differences were observed between rural and urban populations in all-cause death, AMI, unstable angina with urgent revascularisation, CV death, stroke, major bleeding events and health-related QoL. The adjusted incidence rate ratio was 0.92 (95% CI, 0.74 to 1.15) for the composite of CV death, AMI and stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Living in rural areas was associated with fewer GP/cardiologist visits and hospitalisations; no significant differences in clinical outcomes and QoL were observed. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01866904.

Very long-term outcomes after acute myocardial infarction in young men and women: Insights from the FAST-MI program.

AIMS: Conflicting data exists about long-term outcomes in young women and men experiencing acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: The FAST-MI program consists of three nationwide French surveys carried out 5years apart from 2005 to 2015, including consecutive patients with AMI over a 1-month period with up to 10-year follow-up. The present analysis focused on adults≤50 yo according to their gender. RESULTS: Women accounted for 17.5% (335) of the 1912 patients under 50 yo and had a similar age as men (43.9±5.1 vs. 43.9±5.5years, P=0.92). They received less percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) than men (85.9% vs. 91.3%, P=0.005), even in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (83.6% vs. 93.5%, P<0.001). Recommended secondary prevention medications were less frequently prescribed at discharge in women (40.6% vs. 52.8%, P<0.001), a trend that persisted in 2015 (59.1% vs. 72.8% in 2015, P<0.001). Still, ten-year survival was similar in men (90.5%) and women (92.3%) (crude HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.55-1.35], P=0.52, adjusted HR: 0.63 [95% CI: 0.38-1.07], P=0.09); similar results were found for ten-year survival among hospital survivors (91.2% in men vs. 93.7% in women, adjusted HR: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.45-1.66], P=0.66). Of the 1684 patients alive at hospital discharge with morbidity follow-up≥6months available, death, AMI or stroke at 8years occurred in 12.9% men and 11.2% in women (adjusted HR: 0.90 [95% CI: 0.60-1.33], P=0.59). CONCLUSIONS: Young women with AMI undergo less cardiac interventions and are less often prescribed secondary prevention treatment than men, even when significant coronary artery disease is present, but keep a similar long-term prognosis after AMI. Optimal management of these young patients, regardless of gender, is necessary to ensure best outcomes after this major cardiovascular event.

Association between combination antibiotic therapy as opposed as monotherapy and outcomes of ICU patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa ventilator-associated pneumonia: an ancillary study of the iDIAPASON trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment duration and the nature of regimen of antibiotics (monotherapy or combination therapy) for Pseudomonas aeruginosa ventilator­associated pneumonia (PA-VAP) remain debated. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether a combination antibiotic therapy is superior to a monotherapy in patients with PA-VAP in terms of reduction in recurrence and death, based on the 186 patients included in the iDIAPASON trial, a multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing 8 versus 15 days of antibiotic therapy for PA-VAP. METHODS: Patients with PA-VAP randomized in the iDIAPASON trial (short-duration-8 days vs. long-duration-15 days) and who received appropriate antibiotic therapy were eligible in the present study. The main objective is to compare mortality at day 90 according to the antibiotic therapy received by the patient: monotherapy versus combination therapy. The primary outcome was the mortality rate at day 90. The primary outcome was compared between groups using a Chi-square test. Time from appropriate antibiotic therapy to death in ICU or to censure at day 90 was represented using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and compared between groups using a Log-rank test. RESULTS: A total of 169 patients were included in the analysis. The median duration of appropriate antibiotic therapy was 14 days. At day 90, among 37 patients (21.9%) who died, 17 received monotherapy and 20 received a combination therapy (P = 0.180). Monotherapy and combination antibiotic therapy were similar for the recurrence rate of VAP, the number of extra pulmonary infections, or the acquisition of multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria during the ICU stay. Patients in combination therapy were exposed to mechanical ventilation for 28 ± 12 days, as compared with 23 ± 11 days for those receiving monotherapy (P = 0.0243). Results remain similar after adjustment for randomization arm of iDIAPASON trial and SOFA score at ICU admission. CONCLUSIONS: Except longer durations of antibiotic therapy and mechanical ventilation, potentially related to increased difficulty in achieving clinical cure, the patients in the combination therapy group had similar outcomes to those in the monotherapy group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02634411 , Registered 15 December 2015.