Safety and benefit of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors in out of hospital cardiac arrest patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients requiring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at higher risk of both stent thrombosis and bleeding. The use of aggressive antiplatelet therapy could lead to a higher risk of bleeding in these patients. Indeed, data on glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPi) use in this specific indication is scarce. AIM: We sought to evaluate the benefit and safety of GPi use in OHCA patients requiring PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between January 2007 and December 2017, we retrospectively included all consecutive patients treated with PCI for an OHCA from cardiac cause. Clinical, procedural data and in-hospital outcomes were collected. Three hundred and eighty-five patients were included. GPi were administrated in 41.3% of cases (159 patients). Patients who received GPi were younger, had less prior PCI, more often a TIMI 0 or 1 flow before PCI and thromboaspiration use. There were no differences regarding in-hospital definite stent thrombosis among the two groups (11.9% in the GPi group vs 7.1% in the non-GPi group, p = 0.10) or in-hospital mortality (48.6% vs 49.3%, p = 0.68). The incidence of any bleeding (33.3% vs. 19.6%; p = 0.002), and major bleeding (BARC 3-5) (21.9% vs. 16.8%; p = 0.007) was significantly higher in patients receiving GPi. Indeed, using multivariate analysis, GPi use was predictor of major bleeding (OR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.06-3.08; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In patients treated with PCI for OHCA from cardiac cause, GPi use was associated with an increased risk of major bleeding events, without difference on in-hospital stent thrombosis or death.

The balance of thrombosis and hemorrhage in STEMI patients with or without associated cardiac arrest: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Data is scarce on hemorrhagic and thrombotic complications in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) associated with out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). METHODS: This is a monocentric, retrospective study conducted from January 2012 to December 2017 in a tertiary university hospital, which serves as a cardiac arrest center for a large urban area. Over the study period, all consecutive patients who were treated with stent implantation for STEMI with or without OHCA were included. Baseline characteristics, treatments, hemorrhagic and thrombotic events were compared between STEMI patients with and without OHCA. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed in order to identify predictors of 30-day mortality, occurrence of major bleeding (MB), and early stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: A total of 549 patients treated for STEMI without OHCA and 146 patients for STEMI with OHCA were included. The incidence of definite ST and MB after coronary angioplasty was significantly higher in patients with OHCA (2.6% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.004 and 3.3% vs. 19.2%, p < 0.001, respectively). Independent predictors of MB in OHCA patients were anticoagulation therapy (HR = 3.11, 95%CI [1.22-7.98], p = 0.02) and the use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (HR = 4.16, 95%CI [1.61-10.79], p = 0.003). Independent predictors of mortality in OHCA patients were age (HR = 1.05, 95%CI [1.02-1.09], p = 0.004) and ST (HR = 5.62, 95%CI [1.61-19.65], p = 0.007, with a protective effect of new anti-P2Y12 treatments (HR = 0.20, 95%CI [0.08-0.46], p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients treated for STEMI associated with OHCA are at higher-risk of ST and MB than those who did not experience cardiac arrest. In this subset of patients, prospective studies are needed to better evaluate the balance of thrombosis and hemorrhage.

Assessment of Long-Term Structural Deterioration of Transcatheter Aortic Bioprosthetic Valves Using the New European Definition.

BACKGROUND: The durability of transcatheter aortic bioprosthetic valves is a crucial issue, but data are scarce, especially beyond 5 years of follow-up. We aimed to assess long-term (7 years) structural valve deterioration (SVD) and bioprosthetic valve failure of transcatheter aortic bioprosthetic valves. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consecutive patients with at least 5-year follow-up available undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation from April 2002 to December 2011 in 5 French centers were included. Incidence of SVD and bioprosthetic valve failure were defined according to newly standardized criteria of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions/European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery and reported as cumulative incidence function to account for the competing risk of death. One thousand four hundred three consecutive patients were included with a mean age of 82.6±7.5 years and with a mean logistic EuroSCORE (European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation) of 21.3±7.5%. A balloon-expandable valve was used in 83.7% of cases. Survival rates were 83.5% (95% CI, 81.4%-85.5%) and 18.6% (95% CI, 15.3%-21.8%) at 1 and 7 years, respectively. Median duration of follow-up was 3.9 years. Bioprosthetic valve failure occurred in 19 patients with a 7-year cumulative incidence of 1.9% (95% CI, 1.4%-2.4%). SVD occurred in 49 patients (moderate, n=32; severe, n=17) with a 7-year cumulative incidence of moderate and severe SVD of 7.0% (95% CI, 5.6%-8.4%) and 4.2% (95% CI, 2.9%-5.5%), respectively. Five patients had aortic valve reintervention (1.0%; 95% CI, 0.4%-1.6%) including 1 case of surgical aortic valve replacement and 4 redo-transcatheter aortic valve implantation. The incidences of SVD and bioprosthetic valve failure were not significantly different between balloon and self-expandable prostheses. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term assessment of transcatheter aortic bioprosthetic valves durability is limited by the poor survival of our population beyond 5 years. Further studies are warranted, particularly in younger and lower-risk patients.

[TAVI: History and perspectives]. / TAVI : histoire et perspectives.

Nearly 20 years have passed from the concept to clinical development of percutaneous aortic valve replacement, starting from an idea considered "stupid" of Professor Alain Cribier in Rouen. After a first phase of compassionate implantation, large randomized trials PARTNER and COREVALVE US have allowed TAVI to impose itself in the European and American recommendations in patients inoperable or considered with high surgical risk. Next European recommendations on the management of valvular heart diseases expected in 2017 should take into account the positive results observed in intermediate risk patients in the PARTNER 2 and SURTAVI studies, recently adopted in the US recommendations. Randomized trials in "all coming" patients are already on their way, and the future of TAVI is to be the reference treatment for a vast majority of patients with aortic stenosis.