Myocardial revascularization failure among patients requiring cardiac catheterization and secondary revascularization in contemporary clinical practice: Results of the REVASEC multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and Secondary revascularization (SR) are contemporary interventional cardiology challenges. AIM: To investigate the characteristics, management, and prognosis of patients with myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and need for secondary revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice. METHODS: The REVASEC study is a prospective registry (NCT03349385), which recruited patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography at 19 centers. The primary endpoint is a patient-oriented composite (POCE) at 1 year, including death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 869 patients previously revascularized by percutaneous intervention (83%) or surgery (17%) were recruited. MRF was found in 83.7% (41.1% stent/graft failure, 32.1% progression of coronary disease, and 10.5% residual disease). SR was performed in 70.1%, preferably by percutaneous intervention (95%). The POCE rate at 1 year was 14% in the overall cohort, with 6.4% all-cause death. In the multivariate analysis, lower POCE rates were found in the groups without MRF (9.4%) and with disease progression (11%) compared with graft/stent failure (17%) and residual disease (18%), hazard ratio 0.67 (95% confidence interval: 0.45-0.99), p = 0.043. At 1 year, the SR group had less chronic persistent angina (19% vs. 34%, p < 0.001), but a higher rate of repeat revascularization (9% vs. 2.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: MRF was found in 84% of patients with prior revascularization referred for coronary angiography. Stent/graft failure and residual coronary disease were associated with a worse prognosis. SR provided better symptom control at the expense of a higher rate of new revascularization.

Impacto del COVID-19 en pacientes con estenosis aórtica severa: análisis basado en inteligencia artificial / The impact of COVID-19 in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Artificial intelligence research

Introducción: La estenosis aórtica severa es una enfermedad mortal en caso de no ser intervenida. Este estudio pretende conocer el impacto de la pandemia por COVID-19 en la mortalidad de pacientes con estenosis severa durante la primera ola y compararlo con el mismo período del año anterior. Métodos: Se analizaron mediante software basado en inteligencia artificial todos los pacientes que acudieron al hospital en una región española durante la primera ola y en el año anterior, evaluándose la mortalidad comparada entre pacientes con estenosis aórtica severa con y sin COVID-19 durante la pandemia y la era pre-COVID. Se comparó la mortalidad en tres grupos diferentes. En cuanto al número de cirugías cardiacas, se observó una tendencia a la baja en los pacientes sin COVID-19 con respecto al mismo período del año anterior (p = 0,07), y un descenso significativo entre pacientes COVID-19 positivo y COVID-19 negativo. Resultados: Durante la primera ola, acudieron un 13,82% menos de pacientes. Un total de 1.112 tenían estenosis aórtica, de los cuales un 5,48% fueron COVID-19 positivo. La mortalidad fue mayor (p=0,01) en COVID-19 negativo durante la pandemia (4,37%) frente a los de la era pre-COVID-19 (2,57%); también lo fue en el grupo COVID-19 positivo (11,47%) frente a los COVID-19 negativo (4,37%) durante la primera ola (p=0,01). Se observó una tendencia a la disminución de cirugías (p=0,07) en los pacientes COVID-19 negativo durante la pandemia y disminuyeron significativamente en pacientes COVID-19 positivo, frente a los COVID-19 negativo (p=0,04). Conclusiones: El estudio reveló una disminución de los pacientes que acudieron al hospital y un exceso de mortalidad en pacientes con estenosis aórtica severa sin la infección durante la primera ola, frente al mismo período del año anterior; y también, en los pacientes COVID-19 positivo, frente a los COVID-19 negativo. (AU)

Introduction: Untreated, severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis is associated with an ominous diagnosis without intervention. This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mortality of patients with severe stenosis during the first wave and compare it with the same period last year. Methods: All patients who went to the hospitals in an Spanish region during the first wave, and in the same period of previous year, were analyzed using artificial intelligence-based software, evaluating the mortality of patients with severe aortic stenosis with and without COVID-19 during the pandemic and the pre-COVID era. Mortality of the 3 groups was compared. Regarding cardiac surgeries was a tendency to decrease (P=.07) in patients without COVID-19 between the pandemic and the previous period was observed. A significant decrease of surgeries between patients with COVID-19 and without COVID-19 was shown. Results: Data showed 13.82% less admitted patients during the first wave. A total of 1,112 of them had aortic stenosis and 5.48% were COVID-19 positive. Mortality was higher (P=.01), in COVID-19 negative during the pandemic (4.37%) versus those in the pre-COVID-19 era (2.57%); it was also in the COVID-19 positive group (11.47%), versus COVID-19 negative (4.37%) during the first wave (P=.01). Conclusions: The study revealed a decrease in patients who went to the hospital and an excess of mortality in patients with severe aortic stenosis without infection during the first wave, compared to the same period last year; and also, in COVID-19 positive patients versus COVID-19 negative. (AU)

A Differential Profile of Biomarkers between Patients with Atrial Fibrillation and Healthy Controls.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is explained by anatomical and electrophysiological changes in the atria determined by high pressure, dilatation, infiltration and inflammation in the myocardium. There are some biomarkers implicated in these processes, namely, NT-proBNP, high sensitivity troponin (Hs-Tn), urate, galectin-3, ST2, C reactive protein and fibrinogen. The aim of this study was to assess differences in these biomarkers between patients with AF and healthy controls. We designed a cross-sectional study consecutively including all patients undergoing electrical cardioversion in our hospital for persistent AF and matched healthy controls. We included 115 patients with persistent non-valvular AF and 33 healthy subjects. The biomarkers NT-proBNP, ST2 and Hs-Tn T were significantly related to the presence of AF (1054 ± 833.30 vs. 58.31 ± 59.40, p < 0.001; 35.43 ± 15.89 vs. 27.43 ± 10.95, p < 0.001 and 10.25 ± 6.11 vs. 8.42 ± 6.85, p < 0.001, respectively). NT-proBNP was the best biomarker differentiating AF patients (area under the curve 0.995). The best NT-proBNP cut-off point to differentiate AF was 102 pg/mL; for Hs-Tn T it was 11.5 ng/L and for ST2 it was 37.7 ng/mL. It is possible that these biomarkers intervene at the onset of AF and have no role in AF maintenance.

The impact of COVID-19 in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Artificial intelligence research.

INTRODUCTION: Untreated, severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis is associated with an ominous diagnosis without intervention. This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mortality of patients with severe stenosis during the first wave and compare it with the same period last year. METHODS: All patients who went to the hospitals in a spanish region during the first wave, and in the same period of previous year, were analysed using Artificial Intelligence-based software, evaluating the mortality of patients with severe aortic stenosis with and without COVID-19 during the pandemic and the pre-COVID era. Mortality of the three groups were compared. Regarding cardiac surgeries was a tendency to decrease (p = .07) in patients without COVID-19 between the pandemic and the previous period was observed. A significant decrease of surgeries between patients with COVID-19 and without COVID-19 was shown. RESULTS: Data showed 13.82% less admitted patients during the first wave. 1112 of them, had aortic stenosis and 5.48% were COVID-19 positive. Mortality was higher (p = .01), in COVID-19 negative during the pandemic (4.37%) versus those in the pre-COVID19 era (2.57%); it was also in the COVID-19 positive group (11.47%), versus covid-19 negative (4.37%) during the first wave (p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: The study revealed a decrease in patients who went to the hospital and an excess of mortality in patients with severe AD without infection during the first wave, compared to the same period last year; and also, in COVID-19 positive patients versus COVID-19 negative.

[The impact of COVID-19 in patients with severe aortic stenosis: Artificial intelligence research]. / Impacto del COVID-19 en pacientes con estenosis aórtica severa: análisis basado en inteligencia artificial.

Introduction: Untreated, severe, symptomatic aortic stenosis is associated with an ominous diagnosis without intervention. This study aims to determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mortality of patients with severe stenosis during the first wave and compare it with the same period last year. Methods: All patients who went to the hospitals in an Spanish region during the first wave, and in the same period of previous year, were analyzed using artificial intelligence-based software, evaluating the mortality of patients with severe aortic stenosis with and without COVID-19 during the pandemic and the pre-COVID era. Mortality of the 3 groups was compared. Regarding cardiac surgeries was a tendency to decrease (P = .07) in patients without COVID-19 between the pandemic and the previous period was observed. A significant decrease of surgeries between patients with COVID-19 and without COVID-19 was shown. Results: Data showed 13.82% less admitted patients during the first wave. A total of 1,112 of them had aortic stenosis and 5.48% were COVID-19 positive. Mortality was higher (P = .01), in COVID-19 negative during the pandemic (4.37%) versus those in the pre-COVID-19 era (2.57%); it was also in the COVID-19 positive group (11.47%), versus COVID-19 negative (4.37%) during the first wave (P = .01). Conclusions: The study revealed a decrease in patients who went to the hospital and an excess of mortality in patients with severe aortic stenosis without infection during the first wave, compared to the same period last year; and also, in COVID-19 positive patients versus COVID-19 negative.

Amphilimus- vs. zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the SUGAR trial.

AIM: Patients with diabetes mellitus are at high risk of adverse events after percutaneous revascularization, with no differences in outcomes between most contemporary drug-eluting stents. The Cre8 EVO stent releases a formulation of sirolimus with an amphiphilic carrier from laser-dug wells, and has shown clinical benefits in diabetes. We aimed to compare Cre8 EVO stents to Resolute Onyx stents (a contemporary polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent) in patients with diabetes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We did an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial at 23 sites in Spain. Eligible patients had diabetes and required percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 1175 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Cre8 EVO or Resolute Onyx stents. The primary endpoint was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. The trial had a non-inferiority design with a 4% margin for the primary endpoint. A superiority analysis was planned if non-inferiority was confirmed. There were 106 primary events, 42 (7.2%) in the Cre8 EVO group and 64 (10.9%) in the Resolute Onyx group [hazard ratio (HR): 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.96; Pnon-inferiority < 0.001; Psuperiority = 0.030]. Among the secondary endpoints, Cre8 EVO stents had significantly lower rate than Resolute Onyx stents of target-vessel failure (7.5% vs. 11.1%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.042). Probable or definite stent thrombosis and all-cause death were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with diabetes, Cre8 EVO stents were non-inferior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to target-lesion failure composite outcome. An exploratory analysis for superiority at 1 year suggests that the Cre8 EVO stents might be superior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to the same outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03321032.

Design and Rationale for a Real-World Prospective, Multicenter Registry of Myocardial Revascularization Failure and Secondary Revascularization: The REVASEC Study.

AIM: To investigate key aspects of the problem of myocardial revascularization failure (MRF) and repeat or secondary myocardial revascularization (SR) in contemporary practice. METHODS: The registry of secondary revascularization (REVASEC) is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, prospective registry enhanced with data monitoring and independent event adjudication (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03349385). It includes patients with prior revascularization referred to coronary angiography for suspected MRF with broad inclusion criteria. The main objectives are to describe the characteristics of patients with prior revascularization referred for repeat angiography, to describe and the rate and mechanisms of MRF (stent or graft failure, coronary artery disease progression or residual coronary artery disease); to evaluate the management including medical treatment and SR of these patients; and to assess the prognosis according to the outlined causative mechanisms. The registry has one year follow up for the primary endpoint (Patient-oriented composite endpoint including all-cause death, any myocardial infarction or any new unplanned revascularization according to subsets of MRF), but extended follow-up will be carried out up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: The REVASEC Registry will provide updated data on the characteristics, patterns of treatment, and 1-year outcomes of patients with MRF and SR in contemporary clinical practice.

sST2 and Galectin-3 genotyping in patients with persistent atrial fibrillation.

Genotyping of ST2 and galectin-3 in atrial fibrillation (AF) is not well analyzed. The aim of our study was to analyze the possible relationship between levels of sST2 and galectin-3 and three polymorphisms in patients with AF. We included 125 patients with persistent AF undergoing electric cardioversion. We analyzed sST2 and galectin-3 levels and three polymorphisms in peripheral blood samples. Rs2274273 was significantly related with levels of galectin-3. Rs1558648 was associated with levels of sST2 but rs13019803 were not. None of the polymorphisms were connected to the variation of biomarkers levels during the follow up. We found a relationship between rs2274273 and galectin-3 levels and rs1558648 and sST2 levels in patients with AF.

Biomarkers in atrial fibrillation and heart failure with non-reduced ejection fraction: Diagnostic application and new cut-off points.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) and heart failure (HF) with non-reduced left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF) present a diagnostic overlap. In this paper, we analyze differences in biomarkers between patients with and without HF, in a cohort of patients presenting with symptomatic AF. Differences in biomarkers between patients with medium range ejection fraction HF (HFmrEF) and those with preserved ejection fraction HF (HFpEF) are also analyzed. METHODS: A total of 115 patients with symptomatic persistent AF were included. Seven biomarkers were measured: NT-proBNP, high sensitivity T troponin (hsTNT), galectin-3, ST2, fibrinogen, urate and C-reactive protein. RESULTS: Patients with non-reduced LVEF HF had significantly higher NT-proBNP levels than those without HF. This biomarker was the only variable independently related with the presence of non-reduced LVEF HF. Troponin was the only factor independently related with the presence of HFmrEF. CONCLUSIONS: NT-proBNP showed the best diagnostic accuracy for detecting the presence of non-reduced LVEF HF. We found higher diagnostic NT-proBNP cut-off values than those previously reported. Troponin was the most accurate biomarker differentiating HFmrEF from HFpEF.

Evolución a largo plazo de pacientes con coartación de aorta reparada que presentan hemoptisis / Long-term follow-up of patients with repaired coarctation of the aorta who develop hemoptysis

No disponible

Reparación percutánea de comunicación interauricular tipo seno venoso superior y drenaje venoso pulmonar anómalo parcial con técnica de doble stent en chimenea / Transcatheter repair of superior sinus venosus atrial septal defect with partial anomalous pulmonary venous drainage with the chimney double stent technique

No disponible

Prótesis aórtica percutánea supraanular valve-in-valve sobre bioprótesis degenerada / Supra-annular transcatheter aortic valve-in-valve implantation for a degenerative bioprosthesis

No disponible