Ten-year Durability, Hemodynamic Performance, and Clinical Outcomes after Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation Using a Self-expanding Device.

INTRODUCTION: The expansion of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) to low-risk and younger patients has increased the relevance of the long-term durability of transcatheter heart valves (THV). The present study aims to assess the 10-year durability, hemodynamic performance, and clinical outcomes after TAVI using the CoreValve system. METHODS: An analysis from a prospective registry with predefined clinical and echocardiographic follow-up included 302 patients who underwent TAVI with the CoreValve system between 2007 and 2015. Bioprosthetic valve failure (BVF) was defined as any bioprosthetic valve dysfunction-related death, re-intervention, or severe hemodynamic valve deterioration. RESULTS: At the time of TAVI, the mean age was 80.41 ± 7.01 years, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) score was 6.13 ± 5.23%. At latest follow-up (median [IQR]: 5 [2-7] years), cumulative all-cause mortality rates at 3, 5, 7, and 10 years was 23.7%, 40%, 65.8%, and 89.8%, respectively. Mean aortic valve area and transvalvular gradient post-TAVI and at 5, 7, and 10 years were 1.94, 1.87, 1.69, and 1.98 cm2 (p = 0.236) and 8.3, 9.0, 8.2, and 10.1 mmHg (p = 0.796), respectively. Overall, 11 patients had BVF, of whom six had structural valve deterioration (SVD). The 10-year actual and actuarial freedom from BVF was 96.1% and 78.8%, and from SVD was 97.9% and 80.9%, respectively. Three patients developed significant non-SVD due to severe paravalvular leakage, and two patients were diagnosed with infective endocarditis. CONCLUSION: Using an early-generation self-expanding bioprosthesis, we documented durable hemodynamic performance and low rates of BVF and SVD up to 10 years after TAVI.

Incidence and pattern of urgent revascularization in acute coronary syndromes treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel.

BACKGROUND: The ISAR-REACT 5 trial compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in patients with ACS managed invasively. The present study sought to investigate the impact of ticagrelor and prasugrel on the incidence and pattern of urgent revascularization in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: This post-hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included all ACS patients who underwent PCI. The primary endpoint for this analysis was the incidence of urgent revascularization at 12-month follow-up. Secondary outcome was the pattern of urgent revascularization procedures (namely, urgent target vessel/non-target vessel revascularization - TVR/NTVR). Among 3,377 ACS patients who underwent PCI, 1,676 were assigned to ticagrelor and 1,701 to prasugrel before PCI. After 12 months, the incidence of urgent revascularization was higher among patients assigned to ticagrelor as compared to prasugrel (6.8% vs. 5.2%; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00-1.75; p = 0.051), mostly attributable to significantly more urgent NTVR in the ticagrelor group (3.8% vs. 2.4%; HR = 1.62 [1.09-2.41]; p = 0.017). The risk of urgent TVR did not differ between treatment groups (3.3% vs. 3.0%; HR = 1.13 [0.77-1.65]; p = 0.546). CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients treated with PCI, the cumulative rate of urgent revascularizations after 12 months is higher with ticagrelor compared to prasugrel, due to a significant increase in urgent revascularizations involving remote coronary vessels.

Lower revascularization rates after high-speed rotational atherectomy compared to modified balloons in calcified coronary lesions: 5-year outcomes of the randomized PREPARE-CALC trial.

BACKGROUND: In the PREPARE-CALC trial, severely calcified lesion preparation with rotational atherectomy (RA) before biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation demonstrated higher procedural success and comparable rates of acute lumen gain and late lumen loss compared to modified balloons (MB) (scoring/cutting). We aimed to analyze the 5-year outcomes of both lesion preparation strategies. METHODS: PREPARE-CALC randomly assigned 200 patients 1:1 to MB or RA, followed by SES implantation. The principal endpoint of the current analysis was target vessel failure (TVF) at 5 years. RESULTS: At 5 years, MB had comparable rates of TVF to RA (19% vs. 21%, HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.60-2.16, p = 0.687). Subgroup analysis showed a lesion length treatment interaction, favoring MB for short lesions and RA for long ones (p for interaction = 0.042). Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was significantly less common with RA (12 vs. 3%, HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.08-0.98, p = 0.048). In a multivariate analysis, RA was independently protective against TLR (adj. HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.04-0.78, p = 0.022), while ostial lesions were associated with higher TLR independent of treatment strategy (adj. HR 11.3, 95% CI 2.98-42.6, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: In patients with severely calcified coronary lesions, using MB or RA for lesion preparation followed by biodegradable polymer SES implantation was associated with comparable rates of TVF at 5 years. However, a significant reduction of TLR was observed after RA. PREPARE-CALC is the first randomized trial showing potential clinical advantages of RA over MB during long-term follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov . Unique identifier: NCT02502851.

Multicenter comparison of transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 versus Evolut PRO transcatheter heart valves.

BACKGROUND: New-generation self-expanding transcatheter aortic heart valves (THV) were designed to overcome technical constraints of their preceding generations. We sought to compare the efficacy and safety of the self-expanding ACURATE neo2 (Neo2) versus Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. METHODS: Seven hundred nine patients undergoing transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with either Neo2 (n = 496) or PRO (n = 213) were included. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to account for differences in baseline characteristics. In-hospital and 30-day clinical outcomes were evaluated according to Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups after PSM (Neo2: n = 155, Evolut Pro: n = 155). Technical success rates were high in both groups (Neo2: 94.8% vs PRO: 97.4%; p = 0.239). Need for permanent pacemaker implantation was less frequent with Neo2 compared with PRO (7.5% vs 20.6%; p = 0.002), whereas major vascular complications were more frequent with Neo2 (Neo2: 11.6% vs PRO: 4.5%; p = 0.022). Intended valve performance at discharge was high in both groups without relevant differences among groups (Neo2: 97.4% vs. 95.3%; p = 0.328). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term outcomes after TAVI using latest-generation self-expanding THV were excellent, with overall low rates of adverse events. However, Neo2 was associated with lower pacemaker rates and reduced the prevalence of moderate-severe paravalvular leakage. Transprosthetic gradients after TAVI were higher with Neo2 compared with PRO.

Impact of Access Site on Periprocedural Bleeding and Cerebral and Coronary Events in High-Bleeding-Risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Findings from the RIVA-PCI Trial.

INTRODUCTION: The preference for using transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) in patients requiring percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is based on evidence suggesting that TRA is associated with less bleeding and fewer vascular complications, shorter hospital stays, improved quality of life, and a potential beneficial effect on mortality. We have limited study data comparing the two access routes in a patient population with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing PCI, who have a particular increased risk of bleeding, while AF itself is associated with an increased risk of thromboembolism. METHODS: Using data from the RIVA-PCI registry, which includes patients with AF undergoing PCI, we analyzed a high-bleeding-risk (HBR) cohort. These patients were predominantly on oral anticoagulants (OAC) for AF, and the PCI was performed via radial or femoral access. Endpoints examined were in-hospital bleeding (BARC 2-5), cerebral events (TIA, hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke) and coronary events (stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction). RESULTS: Out of 1636 patients, 854 (52.2%) underwent TFA, while 782 (47.8%) underwent the procedure via TRA, including nine patients with brachial artery puncture. The mean age was 75.5 years. Groups were similar in terms of age, sex distribution, AF type, cardiovascular history, risk factors, and comorbidities, except for a higher incidence of previous bypass surgeries, heart failure, hyperlipidemia, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) with a glomerular filtration rate (GFR) < 60 ml/min in the TFA group. No clinically relevant differences in antithrombotic therapy and combinations were present at the time of PCI. However, upon discharge, transradial PCI patients had a higher rate of triple therapy, while dual therapy was preferred after transfemoral procedures. Radial access was more frequently chosen for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and unstable angina pectoris (UAP) cases (NSTEMI 26.6% vs. 17.0%, p < 0.0001; UAP 21.5% vs. 14.5%, p < 0.001), while femoral access was more common for elective PCI (60.3% vs. 44.1%, p < 0.0001). No differences were observed for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Both groups had similar rates of cerebral events (TFA 0.2% vs. TRA 0.3%, p = 0.93), but the TFA group had a higher incidence of bleeding (BARC 2-5) (4.2% vs. 1.5%, p < 0.01), mainly driven by BARC 3 bleeding (1.5% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.05). No significant differences were found for stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction (TFA 0.2% vs. TRA 0.3%, p = 0.93; TFA 0.4% vs. TRA 0.1%, p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: In HBR patients with AF undergoing PCI for acute or chronic coronary syndrome, the use of TRA might be associated with a decrease in in-hospital bleeding, while not increasing the risk of embolic or ischemic events compared to femoral access. Further studies are required to confirm these preliminary findings.

In-hospital Outcomes of Rotational Atherectomy in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From the Multicentre ROTA-STEMI Network.

BACKGROUND: Although the use of rotational atherectomy (RA) is off-label in the setting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), it can be the only option in severely calcified culprit lesions to achieve procedural success. We sought to investigate the safety and feasibility of RA during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of patients who underwent RA during PPCI from 12 European centres. The main outcomes were procedural success (defined as successful stent implantation with final thrombolysis in myocardial infarction [TIMI] flow 3 and residual stenosis < 30%) and in-hospital mortality. A comparison of patients presenting with and without shock was performed. RESULTS: In 104 patients with RA during STEMI, the mean age was 72.8 ± 9.1 years, and 35% presented with cardiogenic shock. Bailout RA was performed in 76.9% of cases. Mean burr size was 1.42 ± 0.21 mm. Procedural success was achieved in 86.5% of cases, with no difference between shocked and nonshocked patients (94.4% vs 82.4%; P = 0.13). In-hospital stent thrombosis occurred in 0.96%, perforation in 1.9% and burr entrapment in 2.9% of cases. In spite of equally high procedural success, in-hospital mortality was higher in shocked (50%) compared with nonshocked patients (1.5%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting with STEMI requiring RA, represent a high-risk population, frequently presenting with cardiogenic shock. In this analysis of selected patients, RA was performed as a bailout strategy in the majority, and, as such, RA seems to be feasible with a high procedural success rate. In the absence of cardiogenic shock, RA-facilitated PCI seems to be associated with low in-hospital mortality.

Predictors of long-term adverse outcomes after successful chronic total occlusion intervention: physiology or morphology?

BACKGROUND: Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) and target-vessel SYNTAX score (tvSS) are novel indices used to assess lesion physiology and morphology in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Their prognostic implication after successful recanalization of coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the prognostic value of QFR measured immediately after successful CTO-recanalization in predicting vessel-oriented adverse events, and to compare it with the pre-procedural morphological tvSS. METHODS: QFR was measured offline after successful CTO-PCIs in a single center. We grouped the patients according to a cut-off value of post-PCI QFR (0.91). The primary outcome was target-vessel failure (TVF) at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 470 CTO lesions performed during the study period, 324 were eligible for QFR analysis (258 with QFR ≥ 0.91 and 66 with QFR < 0.91). The mean age of the study population was 68.3 ± 10.7 years. The low QFR group had a lower left ventricular ejection fraction (45.8 ± 13.9% vs. 49.8 ± 12.4%, p = 0.025) and a higher rate of atrial fibrillation (19.7% vs. 11.2%, p = 0.020). The mean tvSS was 12.8 ± 4.8, and it showed no significant difference in both groups (13.6 ± 5.1 vs. 12.6 ± 4.6, p = 0.122). Patients with low post-CTO QFR had a trend to develop more TVF at 2 years (21.2% vs. 12.4%, HR 1.74; 95% CI 0.93-3.25, p = 0.086). Low post-CTO QFR failed to predict 2-year TVF (aHR 1.67; 95% CI 0.85-3.29, p = 0.136), while pre-procedural tvSS was an independent predictor for 2-year TVF (aHR 1.06; 95% CI 1.01-1.13, p = 0.030). CONCLUSION: We found a limited prognostic value of immediate physiological assessment using QFR after successful CTO intervention. Pre-procedure morphological characteristics of CTO lesions using tvSS can play a role in predicting long-term adverse events.

Timing of Complete Revascularization with Multivessel PCI for Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with multivessel coronary artery disease, the time at which complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions should be performed remains unknown. METHODS: We performed an international, open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial at 37 sites in Europe. Patients in a hemodynamically stable condition who had STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to undergo immediate multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI; immediate group) or PCI of the culprit lesion followed by staged multivessel PCI of nonculprit lesions within 19 to 45 days after the index procedure (staged group). The primary end point was a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, or hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year after randomization. The percentages of patients with a primary or secondary end-point event are provided as Kaplan-Meier estimates at 6 months and at 1 year. RESULTS: We assigned 418 patients to undergo immediate multivessel PCI and 422 to undergo staged multivessel PCI. A primary end-point event occurred in 35 patients (8.5%) in the immediate group as compared with 68 patients (16.3%) in the staged group (risk ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.38 to 0.72; P<0.001 for noninferiority and P<0.001 for superiority). Nonfatal myocardial infarction and unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization occurred in 8 patients (2.0%) and 17 patients (4.1%), respectively, in the immediate group and in 22 patients (5.3%) and 39 patients (9.3%), respectively, in the staged group. The risk of death from any cause, the risk of stroke, and the risk of hospitalization for heart failure appeared to be similar in the two groups. A total of 104 patients in the immediate group and 145 patients in the staged group had a serious adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients in hemodynamically stable condition with STEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, immediate multivessel PCI was noninferior to staged multivessel PCI with respect to the risk of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, or hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year. (Supported by Boston Scientific; MULTISTARS AMI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03135275.).

Short Versus Long-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI in Contemporary Practice: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients at high bleeding risk (HBR patients) represent an important subset of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). It remains unclear whether a shortened duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) confers benefits compared with prolonged duration of DAPT in this patient population. The aim of this study was to investigate and compare bleeding and ischemic outcomes among HBR patients receiving short- versus long-term DAPT after PCI. METHODS: A meta-analysis of studies comparing short-term (1-3 months) and long-term (6-12 months) DAPT after PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stents in HBR patients was performed. RESULTS: Six studies [1 randomized controlled trial (RCT), 2 RCT subanalyses, and 3 prospective propensity-matched studies] involving 15,908 patients were included in the meta-analysis. During a follow-up of 12 months, short-term DAPT was associated with a reduction in major bleeding events [odds ratio (OR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.95; p = 0.03, I2 = 71] and comparable definite/probable stent thrombosis, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemic stroke, compared with long-DAPT. Single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) with aspirin was comparable to SAPT with P2Y12 inhibitor, with no treatment-by-subgroup interaction for major bleeding events (p-interaction = 0.27). In studies including patients presenting with MI, a trend of more frequent MI was noted in the short-DAPT arm (OR 1.25, 95% CI 0.98-1.59; p = 0.07; I2 = 0). In a sensitivity analysis comparing 3- and 12-month DAPT, the 3-month DAPT strategy was associated with a higher risk of ischemic stroke (OR 2.37, 95% CI 1.15-4.87; p = 0.02, I2 = 0%). CONCLUSION: Short-term DAPT after PCI in HBR patients was associated a reduction in major bleeding events and similar ischemic outcomes. However, a higher risk of ischemic stroke and MI at 1 year of follow-up was seen in some subsets.

Patients with higher-atherothrombotic risk vs. lower-atherothrombotic risk undergoing coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with atherothrombotic risk are at high hazard of ischemic events. Preventive medicine plays a major role in modifying their outcomes. Whether the choice of a BP-SES or DP-EES can contribute to the occurrence of events remains unclear. We sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with higher atherothrombotic risk (H-ATR) versus lower atherothrombotic risk (L-ATR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). METHODS: Patients (n = 2361) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into H-ATR vs. L-ATR. L-ATR patients had ≤ 1 and H-ATR ≥ 2 of the following criteria: presentation in ACS, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI/CABG, or previous stroke. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and stent thrombosis (ST) at three years. RESULTS: H-ATR patients (n = 1023) were more morbid than L-ATR patients (n = 1338). TLF rate was significantly higher in H-ATR patients as compared with L-ATR (11.6% vs. 7.0%; HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.20, p < 0.0001). With BP-SES TLF rates were numerically lower as compared with DP-EES in H-ATR (10.5% vs. 13.5%; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14, p = 0.20) and significantly lower in L-ATR (5.6% vs. 9.8%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: In the era of newer-generation DES, patients with H-ATR still are at hazard for ischemic events. Patients with BP-SES had lower TLF rates as compared with DP-EES, most consistent in L-ATR whereas in H-ATR patients most probably secondary preventive strategies are of higher value. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrial.gov. NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946. https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 .

Sex-specific Inequalities in the Treatment of Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions: A Sub-analysis of the PREPARE-CALC Trial.

Background: Coronary vessels in women may have anatomical and histological particularities. The aim of this study was to investigate sex-specific characteristics and outcomes of patients with calcified coronary arteries in the Prepare-CALC (Comparison of Strategies to Prepare Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions) trial. Methods: The Prepare-CALC trial randomised patients with severe coronary calcification to coronary lesion preparation either using modified balloons (MB; cutting or scoring) or rotational atherectomy (RA). Results: Of 200 randomised patients, 24% were women. Strategy success in general was similar between women (93.8%) and men (88.2%; p=0.27). For men, strategy success was significantly more common with an RA-based strategy than an MB-based strategy (98.7% in the RA group versus 77.3% in the MB group, p<0.001), whereas for women there was no evidence of a significant difference in strategy success between RA and MB (95.7% in the RA group versus 92% in the MB group, p>0.99, p for interaction between sex and treatment strategy=0.03). Overall, significant complications such as death, MI, stent thrombosis, bypass operation and perforations were rare and did not differ significantly by gender or treatment strategy. Plaque rupture and disrupted calcified nodules were more common in women. Conclusion: In a well-defined patient population with severely calcified coronary arteries, lesion preparation with an RA-strategy was superior to an MB-strategy in men. For women, both RA and MB strategies appear to have a similar success rate, although definitive conclusions are limited due to the small number of women in the trial.

The effect of a Prasugrel- vs. a Ticagrelor-based strategy on total ischaemic and bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

AIMS: The effect of a prasugrel vs. a ticagrelor based strategy on total (including both first and recurrent) ischaemic and bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) has not been evaluated. The aim of this analysis was to investigate the treatment effect of a prasugrel vs. a ticagrelor based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing an invasive management strategy when both first and recurrent non-fatal ischaemic and bleeding events are taken into account. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a post-hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 randomized control trial, including all 4018 patients in the trial. The main clinical endpoints of interest included ischaemic events [myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke] and bleeding events [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 to 5 bleeding]. An additional endpoint of interest was definite/probable stent thrombosis. The effect of the prasugrel vs. ticagrelor based strategies on these endpoints was evaluated on both time-to-first event and total events analyses. Patients in the prasugrel group had a lower risk of MI in comparison to the ticagrelor group on both time-to-first event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.61; 95% confidence interval 0.44-0.85] and total events [HR = 0.62 (0.45-0.86)] analysis. The risk of BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding was comparable between the prasugrel and ticagrelor groups on both time-to-first event [HR = 0.96 (0.75-1.25)] and total events [HR = 0.99 (0.76-1.31)] analysis. CONCLUSION: A prasugrel based strategy was associated with a reduction in total MI events in comparison to a ticagrelor based strategy in patients with ACS undergoing invasive assessment. Total BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding events were comparable between the two groups. Given the importance of this topic, future studies to confirm these findings would be welcome. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01944800.

Association between Platelet Count and Treatment Effect of Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: The relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel based dual antiplatelet therapy strategies according to the platelet count (PC) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) have not been defined. METHODS: This is a posthoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial, in which patients presenting with ACS were randomized to treatment with ticagrelor versus prasugrel. Patients were divided into quartiles according to PC. The primary endpoint was incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and the safety endpoint was incidence of BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) type 3 to 5 bleeding at 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 3,943 patients with known PC (997 patients in quartile 1 (Q1), 1,003 in quartile 2 (Q2) [205 ± 10.3 × 109/L], 961 patients in quartile 3 (Q3) [241 ± 11.7 × 109/L], and 982 patients in quartile 4 (Q4) [317 ± 68.6 × 109/L]). There was no significant interaction between treatment arm (ticagrelor vs. prasugrel) and PC group with respect to primary endpoint (Q1: 8.8 vs. 6.3%, hazard ratio [HR] =1.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89-2.23; p = 0.148; Q2: 9.9 vs. 5.8%, HR = 1.68, 95% CI: 1.06-2.66; p = 0.027; Q3: 7.8 vs. 5.5%, HR = 1.43, 95% CI: 0.87-2.37; p = 0.159; Q4: 10.1 vs. 10.1%, HR = 1.05, 95% CI: 0.71-1.57; p = 0.799; p for interaction [p int] = 0.482) and with respect to bleeding endpoint (Q1: 5.8 vs. 4.2%, HR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.76-2.63; p = 0.279; Q2: 6.4 vs. 3.7%, HR = 1.62, 95% CI: 0.85-2.06; p = 0.140; Q3: 4.4 vs. 3.0%, HR = 1.53, 95% CI: 0.73-3.18; p = 0.258; Q4: 5.6 vs. 8.5%, HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.40-1.14; p = 0.138, p int = 0.102). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, incidences of ischemic and bleeding events at 12 months are comparable across quartiles of platelet count.

Ticagrelor or prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome with off-hour versus on-hour presentation: a subgroup analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presenting during off- and on-hours. BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to time of hospital presentation remain unknown. METHODS: This post hoc analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 trial included 1565 patients with ACS presenting off-hours and 2453 patients presenting on-hours, randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; the safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3-5 bleeding, both at 12 months. RESULTS: The primary endpoint occurred in 80 patients (10.4%) in the ticagrelor group and 57 patients (7.3%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting off-hours (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-2.03; P = 0.033), and 104 patients (8.5%) in the ticagrelor group and 80 patients (6.7%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting on-hours (HR = 1.29 [0.97-1.73]; P = 0.085), without significant treatment arm-by-presentation time interaction (Pint = 0.62). BARC type 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 35 patients (5.1%) in the ticagrelor group and 37 patients (5.3%) in the prasugrel group (P = 0.84) in patients presenting off-hours, and 60 patients (5.9%) in the ticagrelor group and 43 patients (4.6%) in the prasugrel group in patients presenting on-hours (P = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ACS planned to undergo an invasive treatment strategy, time of presentation (off-hours vs. on-hours) does not interact significantly with the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor vs. prasugrel. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01944800.

Rotational atherectomy of calcified coronary lesions: current practice and insights from two randomized trials.

With growing experience, technical improvements and use of newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES), recent data showed satisfactory acute and long-term results after rotational atherectomy (RA) in calcified coronary lesions. The randomized ROTAXUS and PREPARE-CALC trials compared RA to balloon-based strategies in two different time periods in the DES era. In this manuscript, we assessed the technical evolution in RA practice from a pooled analysis of the RA groups of both trials and established a link to further recent literature. Furthermore, we sought to summarize and analyze the available experience with RA in different patient and lesion subsets, and propose recommendations to improve RA practice. We also illustrated the combination of RA with other methods of lesion preparation. Finally, based on the available evidence, we propose a simple and practical approach to treat severely calcified lesions.

The Target Vessel SYNTAX Score: A Novel Pre-Procedural Predictor for Contrast-Induced Acute Kidney Injury After Rotational Atherectomy.

BACKGROUND: Rotational atherectomy (RA) is a complex procedure often associated with high contrast load. Known risk scores do not predict contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI) before RA. We aim to investigate pre-procedural predictors of CI-AKI after RA, and the role of the target vessel SYNTAX score (tvSS). METHODS: Among 295 patients who underwent RA between 01.2010 and 02.2019 at a single center, 49 developed CI-AKI. Those who were on chronic hemodialysis or with no available 48-h' kidney function tests were excluded. Predictors of CI-AKI were assessed in the whole cohort and those with no basal renal impairment. RESULTS: The rate of CI-AKI was 16.6 %. The tvSS was 18 [14-23] vs. 12 [9-18] in patients with vs. without CI-AKI (p < 0.001). The tvSS cut-off value of 15 provided 75 % sensitivity and 60 % specificity for predicting CI-AKI. Consequently, a tvSS ≥15 emerged as an independent pre-procedural predictor for CI-AKI (adjusted OR: 4.94, 95 % CI: 2.38-10.20, p < 0.001), along with left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤35 % (p = 0.016) and glomerular filtration rate (GFR) <45 ml/min (p = 0.004). TvSS was the only independent pre-procedural predictor for CI-AKI in patients with GFR ≥60 ml/min (p < 0.001). The contrast volume/GFR ratio and peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI) were independent procedural predictors for CI-AKI in the whole cohort and in patients with basal GFR ≥60 ml/min. CONCLUSION: CI-AKI after RA is frequent. The tvSS is an efficient pre-procedural predictor for CI-AKI after RA, along with LVEF ≤35 % and GFR <45 ml/min. Contrast volume/GFR ratio and peri-procedural MI emerged as procedural predictors for CI-AKI.

Prior Myocardial Infarction and Treatment Effect of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes - A Post-hoc Analysis of the ISAR-REACT 5 Trial.

Background The efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with acute coronary syndrome and prior myocardial infarction (MI) remain unstudied. We aimed to assess the treatment effect of ticagrelor versus prasugrel according to prior MI status in patients with ACS. Methods and Results Patients with acute coronary syndrome planned for an invasive strategy and randomized to ticagrelor or prasugrel in the ISAR-REACT (Intracoronary Stenting and Antithrombotic Regimen: Rapid Early Action for Coronary Treatment) 5 trial were included. The primary end point was the composite of 1-year all-cause death, MI, or stroke; the secondary safety end point was the composite of 1-year Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 to 5 bleeding. The study included 4015 patients (prior MI=631 patients; no prior MI=3384 patients). As compared with patients without prior MI, the primary end point occurred more frequently in patients with prior MI (12.6% versus 7.2%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.78 [95% CI, 1.38-2.29]); the secondary safety end point appears to differ little between patients with and without prior MI (5.8% versus 5.7%, respectively; HR, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.71-1.45]). With regard to the primary end point, ticagrelor versus prasugrel was associated with an HR of 1.62 (95% CI, 1.03-2.55) in patients with prior MI and an HR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.99-1.65) in patients without prior MI (Pint=0.37). With regard to the secondary safety end point, ticagrelor versus prasugrel was associated with an HR of 1.28 (95% CI, 0.56-2.91) in patients with prior MI and an HR of 1.13 (95% CI, 0.82-1.55) in patients without prior MI (Pint=0.79). Conclusions Patients with acute coronary syndrome and prior MI are at higher risk for recurrent ischemic but not bleeding events. Prasugrel is superior to ticagrelor in reducing the risk of ischemic events without a tradeoff in bleeding regardless of prior MI status. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01944800.

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.

Combined rotational atherectomy and cutting balloon angioplasty prior to drug-eluting stent implantation in severely calcified coronary lesions: The PREPARE-CALC-COMBO study.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of lesion preparation using rotational atherectomy (RA) with consecutive cutting balloon angioplasty (Rota-Cut). BACKGROUND: Whether the Rota-Cut combination improves stent performance in severely calcified coronary lesions is unknown. METHODS: PREPARE-CALC-COMBO is a single-arm prospective trial in which 110 patients were treated with a Rota-Cut strategy before implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents and compared with patients treated with modified balloon (MB, scoring or cutting) or RA from a historical cohort (the randomized PREPARE-CALC trial). The study had two primary endpoints: in-stent acute lumen gain (ALG) by quantitative angiographic analysis and stent expansion (SE) on optical coherence tomography. RESULTS: In-stent ALG was significantly higher with Rota-Cut compared to RA or MB alone (1.92 ± 0.45 mm vs. 1.74 ± 0.45 mm with MB vs. 1.70 ± 0.42 mm with RA; p = 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). SE was comparable between groups (75.1 ± 13.8% vs. 73.5 ± 13.3 with MB vs. 73.1 ± 12.2 with RA; p = 0.19 and p = 0.39, respectively). The Rota-Cut combination resulted in higher minimal stent area (MSA) (7.1 ± 2.2mm2 vs. 6.1 ± 1.7mm2  with MB vs. 6.2 ± 1.9mm2 with RA; p = 0.003 and p = 0.004, respectively). In-hospital death occurred in one patient. Target vessel failure at 9 months was low and comparable between groups (8.2% vs. 8% with MB vs. 6% with RA; p = 1 and p = 0.79, respectively). CONCLUSION: Rota-Cut combination resulted in higher ALG and larger MSA compared with historical control of RA or MB alone, but was not associated with higher SE. Despite extensive lesion preparation, this strategy is safe, feasible, and associated with favorable clinical outcome at 9 months.