Ten-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention of in-stent restenosis in saphenous vein grafts.

BACKGROUND: Only few data is available for long-term outcomes of patients being treated for in-stent restenosis (ISR) in saphenous vein grafts (SVG). AIMS: Thus, the aim of this observational, retrospective study was to close this lack of evidence. METHODS: Between January 2007 and February 2021 a total of 163 patients with 186 ISR lesions located in SVG were treated at two large-volume centers in Munich, Germany. Endpoints of interest were all-cause mortality, target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI). Furthermore, recurrent ISR were assessed. Outcomes are presented as Kaplan-Meier event rates. RESULTS: Mean age was 72.6 ± 8.6 years, 90.8% were male, 36.8% were diabetics and 42.3% presented an acute coronary syndrome. ISR were treated with DES in 64.0% and with balloon angioplasty (BA) in 36.0%. After 10 years, the rates for all-cause mortality, TVMI and TLR were 58.2%, 15.4%, and 22.6%, respectively. No statistically relevant differences were found between the types of treatment (DES or BA) regarding all-cause mortality (55.7% vs. 63.2%, p = 0.181), TVMI (13.8% vs. 18.6%, p = 0.215) and TLR (21.8% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.764). Median time between first and recurrent ISR was 270.8 days. Recurrent ISR were treated with DES in a comparable proportion as during first ISR (p = 0.075). Independent predictor of TLR is patient age (p = 0.034). The median follow-up duration was 5.1 years (75% CI 2.8; 8.5). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical event rates after intervention of ISR located in SVG are high without statistically relevant differences regarding the type of treatment. However, further studies are needed.

Machine learning identifies pathophysiologically and prognostically informative phenotypes among patients with mitral regurgitation undergoing transcatheter edge-to-edge repair.

AIMS: Patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) present with considerable heterogeneity in cardiac damage depending on underlying aetiology, disease progression, and comorbidities. This study aims to capture their cardiopulmonary complexity by employing a machine-learning (ML)-based phenotyping approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were obtained from 1426 patients undergoing mitral valve transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (MV TEER) for MR. The ML model was developed using 609 patients (derivation cohort) and validated on 817 patients from two external institutions. Phenotyping was based on echocardiographic data, and ML-derived phenotypes were correlated with 5-year outcomes. Unsupervised agglomerative clustering revealed four phenotypes among the derivation cohort: Cluster 1 showed preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF; 56.5 ± 7.79%) and regular left ventricular end-systolic diameter (LVESD; 35.2 ± 7.52 mm); 5-year survival in Cluster 1, hereinafter serving as a reference, was 60.9%. Cluster 2 presented with preserved LVEF (55.7 ± 7.82%) but showed the largest mitral valve effective regurgitant orifice area (0.623 ± 0.360 cm2) and highest systolic pulmonary artery pressures (68.4 ± 16.2 mmHg); 5-year survival ranged at 43.7% (P-value: 0.032). Cluster 3 was characterized by impaired LVEF (31.0 ± 10.4%) and enlarged LVESD (53.2 ± 10.9 mm); 5-year survival was reduced to 38.3% (P-value: <0.001). The poorest 5-year survival (23.8%; P-value: <0.001) was observed in Cluster 4 with biatrial dilatation (left atrial volume: 312 ± 113 mL; right atrial area: 46.0 ± 8.83 cm2) although LVEF was only slightly reduced (51.5 ± 11.0%). Importantly, the prognostic significance of ML-derived phenotypes was externally confirmed. CONCLUSION: ML-enabled phenotyping captures the complexity of extra-mitral valve cardiac damage, which does not necessarily occur in a sequential fashion. This novel phenotyping approach can refine risk stratification in patients undergoing MV TEER in the future.

Iliofemoral artery predilation prior to transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation in patients with aortic valve stenosis and advanced peripheral artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the feasibility and safety of percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) of the iliofemoral arteries (IFA) before transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (Tf-TAVI) in patients with advanced peripheral artery disease (PAD). BACKGROUND: Although Tf-TAVI represents the access of choice, alternative vascular access routes are preferred for patients displaying advanced PAD. PTA of the IFA represents a less invasive option, broadening the spectrum of patients eligible for Tf-TAVI. METHODS: All patients requiring PTA of the IFA before Tf-TAVI, between 2012 and 2021, were included. Primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of successful transcatheter heart valve (THV) delivery and implantation. Primary safety endpoint was the rate of PTA and access-site-related vascular complications, procedural- and in-hospital complications. RESULTS: Among 2726 Tf-TAVI procedures, 59 patients required IFA predilation. Successful THV delivery and implantation was achieved in 57 (96.6%) patients, respectively. Sheath placement was achieved in 59 (100%) patients with only one minor dissection and no major vascular complications following iliofemoral PTA. Regarding access site complications, two (3.4%) vessel perforations and one (1.7%) vessel rupture were observed, with eight (13.5%) patients requiring unplanned endovascular interventions. There was one intraprocedural death due to THV-induced vessel laceration, while in-hospital all-cause mortality was 8.5% in the present high-risk patient cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Predilation of IFA is safe and effective in patients with advanced PAD. Careful preprocedural planning is paramount in improving procedural safety and efficacy. This strategy has the potential to broaden the spectrum of patients eligible for Tf-TAVI.

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and High Bleeding Risk.

BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy and safety of more potent P2Y12 inhibitors in patients with acute coronary syndrome and high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains unclear. We aimed to study the treatment effect of ticagrelor and prasugrel in percutaneous coronary intervention patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and HBR. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment 5) included patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel, in whom HBR was defined as per Academic Research Consortium criteria. The primary (efficacy) end point was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The secondary (safety) end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed 12 months after randomization. RESULTS: Out of the 3239 patients included in this analysis, 486 fulfilled the criteria for Academic Research Consortium-HBR definition (HBR group; ticagrelor, n=230 and prasugrel, n=256), while 2753 did not (non-HBR group; ticagrelor, n=1375 and prasugrel, n=1378). Compared with the non-HBR group, the HBR group had a higher risk for the primary (hazard ratio [HR]=3.57 [95% CI, 2.79-4.57]; P<0.001) and secondary end point (HR=2.94 [2.17-3.99]; P<0.001). In the HBR group, the primary (HR=1.09 [0.73-1.62]) and secondary (HR=1.18 [0.67-2.08]) end points were not significantly different between patients assigned to ticagrelor and prasugrel. In the non-HBR group, the primary end point (HR=1.62 [1.19-2.20]) occurred more frequently in patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to patients assigned to prasugrel, without difference in safety (HR=1.08 [0.74-1.58]). There was no significant treatment allocation-by-HBR status interaction with respect to the primary (P for interaction=0.12) or secondary (P for interaction=0.80) end points. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, HBR status increased both ischemic and bleeding risk without significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of either ticagrelor or prasugrel. These results warrant confirmation in larger cohorts. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.