Comparison between Imaging and Physiology in Guiding Coronary Revascularization: A Meta-Analysis.

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a widely used revascularization strategy for coronary artery disease. The choice between imaging-guided and physiology-guided PCI has been a subject of debate. This meta-analysis aims to systematically compare outcomes between imaging and physiology-guided PCI and management of intermediate coronary lesions (ICLs). Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across major databases for studies published up to December 2023 following PRISMA guidelines. Seven eligible studies comparing imaging-guided and physiology-guided PCI were selected for the final analysis. Relevant outcome measures included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel revascularization (TVR), target vessel failure (TVF), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Subgroup analysis was performed for ICLs. Results: A total of 5701 patients were included in the meta-analysis. After a mean follow-up of 2.1 years, imaging-guided PCI was associated with lower rates of TVR compared to physiology-guided PCI (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.95, p = 0.02); concerning MACE, TVF, and TLR, no differences were found. When the analysis was restricted to studies considering ICLs management, there were no differences between the two techniques. Meta regression analysis did not show any impact of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) presentation on MACE and TVR. Conclusions: The findings suggest that imaging-guided PCI may reduce the need for future revascularization of the target vessel compared to the functional-guided approach, and this result was not influenced by ACS presentation. These results may have important implications for clinical practice, guiding interventional cardiologists in selecting the most appropriate guidance strategy.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in Low Surgical Risk Patients: An Updated Metanalysis of Extended Follow-Up Randomized Controlled Trials.

The long-term safety and effectiveness of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in low surgical risk has not been evaluated in a pooled analysis. An electronic database search was conducted for randomized controlled trials with a maximal 5 years clinical and echocardiographic follow-up including low surgical risk patients who underwent TAVR or SAVR. We calculated odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using a random-effects model. Subgroups analysis was performed for permanent pacemaker implantation and paravalvular leaks. Three randomized controlled trials were included with a total of 2,611 low surgical risk patients (Society of Thoracic Surgeons score <4%). Compared with SAVR, the TAVR group had similar rates of all-cause mortality (OR 0.94,95% CI 0.65 to 1.37, p = 0.75) and disabling stroke (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.36, p = 0.48). No significant differences were registered in the TAVR group in terms of major cardiovascular events (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.38, p = 0.83), myocardial infarction (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.40, p = 0.31), valve thrombosis (OR 3.11, 95% CI 0.29 to 33.47, p = 0.35), endocarditis (OR 0.71,95% CI 0.35 to 1.48, p = 0.36), aortic valve reintervention (OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.66, p = 0.80), and rehospitalization (OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.02, p = 0.07) compared with SAVR. However, TAVR patients had a higher risk of paravalvular leaks (OR 8.21, 95% CI 4.18 to 16.14, p <0.00001), but lower rates of new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR 0.27,95% CI 0.17 to 0.30, p <0.0001). The rates of permanent pacemaker implantation were comparable from 1 year up to a maximum of 5 years (OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.97, p = 0.18). Lastly, TAVR had a greater effective orifice area (0.10 cm2/m2, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.15, p = 0.0001), but similar transvalvular mean gradients (0.60, 95% CI 3.94 to 2.73, p = 0.72). In conclusion, TAVR patients had similar long-term outcomes compared with SAVR, except for an elevated risk of paravalvular leaks in the TAVR group and increased rates of atrial fibrillation in the SAVR cohort.

A Meta-Analysis of Short-Term Outcomes of TAVR versus SAVR in Bicuspid Aortic Valve Stenosis and TAVR Results in Different Bicuspid Valve Anatomies.

BACKGROUND: To provide a comprehensive analysis of the current literature comparing the outcomes of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) and transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis (BAS), with particular attention to BAV morphology in patients undergoing TAVR. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, all relevant articles with no design restrictions from PubMed, CCTR (Cochrane Controlled Trials Register), and Google Scholar were screened for inclusion. Studies were included if they reported clinical endpoints for SAVR and TAVR or, in BAS treated with TAVR, for type 1 and non-type 1 morphology. Odds ratio and Cohen's D were considered as effect size measurements for qualitative and quantitative variables, respectively. RESULTS: A total of eight studies comparing short-term outcomes between SAVR and TAVR and nine studies with outcomes data between type 1 and non-type 1 BAS treated with TAVR were considered for the final analysis. No statistically significant difference was found for what concerns the rates of death, stroke, and acute kidney injury between SAVR and TAVR. In comparison to patients undergoing SAVR, the incidence of PPI (permanent pacemaker implantation) was greater in the TAVR group (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.15-0.79, p = 0.01), and the frequency of bleeding events was found to be higher among patients undergoing SAVR (OR 4.3, 95% CI 2.9-6.4, p < 0.001). The probabilities of 30-day mortality, stroke, and any bleeding were not significantly affected by bicuspid valve morphology in TAVR patients. PPI or development of new conduction anomalies was found to be more frequent in type 1 anatomies (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.30-0.70, p <0.001). Mildly lower post-procedural transprothesic gradients were found in patients with type 1 morphology. CONCLUSIONS: In BAS patients, TAVR has comparable short-term outcomes rates with SAVR, but higher PPI rates and lower incidence of bleeding events. In patients undergoing TAVR, type 1 BAS is associated with lower postoperative transvalvular gradients but higher PPI rates and conduction abnormalities.

Comparison of different percutaneous revascularisation timing strategies in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: The optimal timing to perform percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients remains unknown. AIMS: We sought to compare different PCI timing strategies in TAVI patients. METHODS: The REVASC-TAVI registry is an international registry including patients undergoing TAVI with significant, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) at preprocedural workup. In this analysis, patients scheduled to undergo PCI before, after or concomitantly with TAVI were included. The main endpoints were all-cause death and a composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI) or rehospitalisation for congestive heart failure (CHF) at 2 years. Outcomes were adjusted using the inverse probability treatment weighting (IPTW) method. RESULTS: A total of 1,603 patients were included. PCI was performed before, after or concomitantly with TAVI in 65.6% (n=1,052), 9.8% (n=157) or 24.6% (n=394), respectively. At 2 years, all-cause death was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (6.8% vs 20.1% vs 20.6%; p<0.001). Likewise, the composite endpoint was significantly lower in patients undergoing PCI after TAVI as compared with PCI before or concomitantly with TAVI (17.4% vs 30.4% vs 30.0%; p=0.003). Results were confirmed at landmark analyses considering events from 0 to 30 days and from 31 to 720 days. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and stable coronary artery disease scheduled for TAVI, performance of PCI after TAVI seems to be associated with improved 2-year clinical outcomes compared with other revascularisation timing strategies. These results need to be confirmed in randomised clinical trials.

Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients With Stable Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The best management of stable coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is still unclear due to the marked inconsistency of the available evidence. METHODS: The REVASC-TAVI registry (Management of Myocardial Revascularization in Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With Coronary Artery Disease) collected data from 30 centers worldwide on patients undergoing TAVI who had significant, stable CAD at preprocedural work-up. For the purposes of this analysis, patients with either complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were compared in a propensity score matched analysis, to take into account of baseline confounders. The primary and co-primary outcomes were all-cause death and the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure, respectively, at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 2407 patients enrolled, 675 pairs of patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization were matched. The primary (21.6% versus 18.2%, hazard ratio' 0.88 [95% CI, 0.66-1.18]; P=0.38) and co-primary composite (29.0% versus 27.1%, hazard ratio' 0.97 [95% CI, 0.76-1.24]; P=0.83) outcome did not differ between patients achieving complete or incomplete myocardial revascularization, respectively. These results were consistent across different prespecified subgroups of patients (< or >75 years of age, Society of Thoracic Surgeons score > or <4%, angina at baseline, diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction > or <40%, New York Heart Association class I/II or III/IV, renal failure, proximal CAD, multivessel CAD, and left main/proximal anterior descending artery CAD; all P values for interaction >0.10). CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis of the REVASC-TAVI registry showed that, among TAVI patients with significant stable CAD found during the TAVI work-up, completeness of myocardial revascularization achieved either staged or concomitantly with TAVI was similar to a strategy of incomplete revascularization in reducing the risk of all cause death, as well as the risk of death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and rehospitalization for heart failure at 2 years, regardless of the clinical and anatomical situations.

Prognostic value of systemic inflammatory response syndrome after transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

AIMS: Systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) could affect mortality after transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) up to 12 months of follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of SIRS after TAVI and its impact on all-cause mortality up to 24 months follow-up. METHODS: We retrospectively enrolled 132 patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI. SIRS development during the first 72 h after the intervention was evaluated. Other postoperative complications were defined according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC2). All patients underwent follow-up at 30 days and 24 months. Endpoints were 30-days and 24-months mortality. RESULTS: Post-TAVI SIRS developed in 27 patients (20%). At 30-day follow-up, all-cause death occurred in 10 (8%) patients and SIRS occurred more frequently in patients with adverse short-term outcome (60 vs. 17%; P = 0.001). Twenty-four months all-cause death occurred in 25 (19%) patients. SIRS resulted as an independent predictor of long-term outcome [hazard ratio 3.7; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.5-9; P = 0.004], along with major vascular complications (hazard ratio 4; 95% CI 1.6-9.9; P = 0.003), relevant bleedings (hazard ratio 6.4; 95% CI 1.5-28; P = 0.013) and baseline pulmonary hypertension (hazard ratio 2.4; 95% CI 1.05-5.6; P = 0.039). CONCLUSION: Postoperative SIRS was more frequent in patients who died at 30 days follow-up. Moreover, SIRS resulted as a predictor of 24-month mortality along with vascular complications, relevant bleedings and baseline pulmonary hypertension.

Arrhythmic safety of hydroxychloroquine in COVID-19 patients from different clinical settings.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to describe ECG modifications and arrhythmic events in COVID-19 patients undergoing hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) therapy in different clinical settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: COVID-19 patients at seven institutions receiving HCQ therapy from whom a baseline and at least one ECG at 48+ h were available were enrolled in the study. QT/QTc prolongation, QT-associated and QT-independent arrhythmic events, arrhythmic mortality, and overall mortality during HCQ therapy were assessed. A total of 649 COVID-19 patients (61.9 ± 18.7 years, 46.1% males) were enrolled. HCQ therapy was administrated as a home therapy regimen in 126 (19.4%) patients, and as an in-hospital-treatment to 495 (76.3%) hospitalized and 28 (4.3%) intensive care unit (ICU) patients. At 36-72 and at 96+ h after the first HCQ dose, 358 and 404 ECGs were obtained, respectively. A significant QT/QTc interval prolongation was observed (P < 0.001), but the magnitude of the increase was modest [+13 (9-16) ms]. Baseline QT/QTc length and presence of fever (P = 0.001) at admission represented the most important determinants of QT/QTc prolongation. No arrhythmic-related deaths were reported. The overall major ventricular arrhythmia rate was low (1.1%), with all events found not to be related to QT or HCQ therapy at a centralized event evaluation. No differences in QT/QTc prolongation and QT-related arrhythmias were observed across different clinical settings, with non-QT-related arrhythmias being more common in the intensive care setting. CONCLUSION: HCQ administration is safe for a short-term treatment for patients with COVID-19 infection regardless of the clinical setting of delivery, causing only modest QTc prolongation and no directly attributable arrhythmic deaths.