Long-term clinical outcomes of image-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry.

Imaging modalities for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), such as intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT), have increased in the current PCI era. However, their clinical benefits in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have not been fully elucidated. This study investigated the long-term outcomes of image-guided PCI in patients with AMI using data from the Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. A total of 9,271 patients with AMI, who underwent PCI with second-generation drug-eluting stents between November 2011 and December 2015, were retrospectively examined, and target lesion failure (TLF) at 3 years (defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) was evaluated. From the registry, 2,134 patients (23.0%) underwent image-guided PCI (IVUS-guided: n = 1,919 [20.6%]; OCT-guided: n = 215 patients [2.3%]). Based on propensity score matching, image-guided PCI was associated with a significant reduction in TLF (hazard ratio: 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.98, p = 0.035). In addition, the TLF incidence in the OCT-guided PCI group was comparable to that in the IVUS-guided PCI group (5.3% vs 4.7%, p = 0.903). Image-guided PCI, including IVUS and OCT, is associated with favorable clinical outcomes in patients with AMI at 3 years post-intervention. Additionally, OCT-guided PCI is not inferior to IVUS-guided PCI in patients with AMI.

Very early vs delayed invasive strategy in high-risk NSTEMI patients without hemodynamic instability: Insight from the KAMIR-NIH.

BACKGROUND: High-risk non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients' optimal timing for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is debated despite the recommendation for early invasive revascularization. This study aimed to compare outcomes of NSTEMI patients without hemodynamic instability undergoing very early invasive strategy (VEIS, ≤ 12 hours) versus delayed invasive strategy (DIS, >12 hours). METHODS: Excluding urgent indications for PCI including initial systolic blood pressure under 90 mmHg, ventricular arrhythmia, or Killip class IV, 4,733 NSTEMI patients were recruited from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health (KAMIR-NIH). Patients were divided into low and high- global registry of acute coronary events risk score risk score (GRS) groups based on 140. Both groups were then categorized into VEIS and DIS. Clinical outcomes, including all-cause death (ACD), cardiac death (CD), recurrent MI, and cerebrovascular accident at 12 months, were evaluated. RESULTS: Among 4,733 NSTEMI patients, 62% had low GRS, and 38% had high GRS. The proportions of VEIS and DIS were 43% vs. 57% in the low GRS group and 47% vs. 53% in the high GRS group. In the low GRS group, VEIS and DIS demonstrated similar outcomes; however, in the high GRS group, VEIS exhibited worse ACD outcomes compared to DIS (HR = 1.46, P = 0.003). The adverse effect of VEIS was consistent with propensity score matched analysis (HR = 1.34, P = 0.042). CONCLUSION: VEIS yielded worse outcomes than DIS in high-risk NSTEMI patients without hemodynamic instability in real-world practice.

Acute myocardial infarction prognosis prediction with reliable and interpretable artificial intelligence system.

OBJECTIVE: Predicting mortality after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is crucial for timely prescription and treatment of AMI patients, but there are no appropriate AI systems for clinicians. Our primary goal is to develop a reliable and interpretable AI system and provide some valuable insights regarding short, and long-term mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We propose the RIAS framework, an end-to-end framework that is designed with reliability and interpretability at its core and automatically optimizes the given model. Using RIAS, clinicians get accurate and reliable predictions which can be used as likelihood, with global and local explanations, and "what if" scenarios to achieve desired outcomes as well. RESULTS: We apply RIAS to AMI prognosis prediction data which comes from the Korean Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry. We compared FT-Transformer with XGBoost and MLP and found that FT-Transformer has superiority in sensitivity and comparable performance in AUROC and F1 score to XGBoost. Furthermore, RIAS reveals the significance of statin-based medications, beta-blockers, and age on mortality regardless of time period. Lastly, we showcase reliable and interpretable results of RIAS with local explanations and counterfactual examples for several realistic scenarios. DISCUSSION: RIAS addresses the "black-box" issue in AI by providing both global and local explanations based on SHAP values and reliable predictions, interpretable as actual likelihoods. The system's "what if" counterfactual explanations enable clinicians to simulate patient-specific scenarios under various conditions, enhancing its practical utility. CONCLUSION: The proposed framework provides reliable and interpretable predictions along with counterfactual examples.

Association between body mass index and three-year outcome of acute myocardial infarction.

Body mass index (BMI), as an important risk factor related to metabolic disease. However, in some studies higher BMI was emphasized as a beneficial factor in the clinical course of patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a concept known as the "BMI paradox." The purpose of this study was to investigate how clinical outcomes of patients treated for AMI differed according to BMI levels. A total of 10,566 patients in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health (KAMIR-NIH) from May 2010 to June 2015 were divided into three BMI groups (group 1: BMI < 22 kg/m2, group 2: ≥ 22 and < 26 kg/m2, and group 3: ≥ 26 kg/m2). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) at 3 years of follow-up. At 1 year of follow-up, the incidence of MACCE in group 1 was 10.1% of that in group 3, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.27, and 6.5% in group 2, with an HR of 1.415. This tendency continued up to 3 years of follow-up. The study demonstrated that lower incidence of MACCE in the high BMI group of Asians during the 3-year follow-up period compared to the low BMI group. The results implied higher BMI could exert a positive effect on the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

Transradial Versus Transfemoral Access for Bifurcation Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent.

BACKGROUND: The benefits of transradial access (TRA) over transfemoral access (TFA) for bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are uncertain because of the limited availability of device selection. This study aimed to compare the procedural differences and the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of TRA and TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs). METHODS: Based on data from the Coronary Bifurcation Stenting Registry III, a retrospective registry of 2,648 patients undergoing bifurcation PCI with second-generation DES from 21 centers in South Korea, patients were categorized into the TRA group (n = 1,507) or the TFA group (n = 1,141). After propensity score matching (PSM), procedural differences, in-hospital outcomes, and device-oriented composite outcomes (DOCOs; a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) were compared between the two groups (772 matched patients each group). RESULTS: Despite well-balanced baseline clinical and lesion characteristics after PSM, the use of the two-stent strategy (14.2% vs. 23.7%, P = 0.001) and the incidence of in-hospital adverse outcomes, primarily driven by access site complications (2.2% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.015), were significantly lower in the TRA group than in the TFA group. At the 5-year follow-up, the incidence of DOCOs was similar between the groups (6.3% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.639). CONCLUSION: The findings suggested that TRA may be safer than TFA for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DESs. Despite differences in treatment strategy, TRA was associated with similar long-term clinical outcomes as those of TFA. Therefore, TRA might be the preferred access for bifurcation PCI using second-generation DES. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03068494.

Comparison of Antiplatelet Monotherapies After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention According to Clinical, Ischemic, and Bleeding Risks.

BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel was superior to aspirin monotherapy in secondary prevention after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefits of clopidogrel across high-risk subgroups METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the HOST-EXAM (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of coronary artery diseases-EXtended Antiplatelet Monotherapy) trial that randomly assigned patients who were event free for 6 to 18 months post-PCI on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) to clopidogrel or aspirin monotherapy. Two clinical risk scores were used for risk stratification: the DAPT score and the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction Risk Score for Secondary Prevention (TRS 2°P) (the sum of age ≥75 years, diabetes, hypertension, current smoking, peripheral artery disease, stroke, coronary artery bypass grafting, heart failure, and renal dysfunction). The primary composite endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, readmission because of acute coronary syndrome, and major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type ≥3) at 2 years after randomization. RESULTS: Among 5,403 patients, clopidogrel monotherapy showed a lower rate of the primary composite endpoint than aspirin monotherapy (HR: 0.73; 95% CI: 0.59-0.90). The benefit of clopidogrel over aspirin was consistent regardless of TRS 2°P (high TRS 2°P [≥3] group: HR: 0.65 [95% CI: 0.44-0.96]; and low TRS 2°P [<3] group: HR: 0.77 [95% CI: 0.60-0.99]) (P for interaction = 0.454) and regardless of DAPT score (high DAPT score [≥2] group: HR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.46-1.00]; and low DAPT score [<2] group: HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.59-0.96]) (P for interaction = 0.662). The association was similar for the individual outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The beneficial effect of clopidogrel over aspirin monotherapy was consistent regardless of clinical risk or relative ischemic and bleeding risks compared with aspirin monotherapy. (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis- EXtended Antiplatelet Monotherapy [HOST-EXAM]; NCT02044250).

Efficacy and Safety of a Single-Pill Triple Combination of Olmesartan, Amlodipine, and Rosuvastatin in Hypertensive Patients with Low-to-Moderate Cardiovascular Risk: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Active-Control, Phase IV Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a single-pill triple-combination of olmesartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin (Olme/Amlo/Rosu) in comparison with a single-pill dual-combination of olmesartan/amlodipine (Olme/Amlo) in hypertensive patients with low-to-moderate cardiovascular risk. METHODS: This multicenter, active-control, randomized study included 106 hypertensive patients at low-to-moderate cardiovascular risk who were randomly assigned to receive either Olme/Amlo/Rosu 20/5/5 mg (Treatment 1), Olme/Amlo/Rosu 20/5/10 mg (Treatment 2), or Amlo/Olme 20/5 mg (Control) once daily for 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was the difference of the percent change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level at 8 weeks from baseline in the 3 groups. RESULTS: The difference in the least square mean percent change (standard deviation) of LDL-C in the Treatment 1 and 2 groups compared with the Control group at 8 weeks was -32.6 (3.7) % and -45.9 (3.3) %, respectively (P < .001). The achievement rates of LDL-C level <100 mg/dL at 8 weeks were significantly different between the 3 groups (65.8%, 86.7%, and 6.3% for Treatment 1, 2, and Control groups, respectively, P < .001). The results of total cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, and apolipoprotein B/apolipoprotein A1 were superior in the Treatment 1 and 2 groups compared with the Control group. Serious adverse drug reaction did not occur in the 3 groups. Medication adherence rates were excellent in the 3 groups (98.0% for Treatment 1 group, 99.7% for Treatment 2 group, and 96.3% for the Control group, P > .05). CONCLUSION: Single-pill triple-combination of olmesartan/amlodipine/rosuvastatin was superior to the single-pill dual-combination of amlodipine/olmesartan in LDLC-lowering effects, with excellent safety profiles and adherence rates, in hypertensive patients at low-to-moderate cardiovascular risk.Trial Registration: CLinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04120753.

Efficacy and safety of standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg in primary hypertension: A randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, multicenter phase 3 trial.

The authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and characteristics of patients who respond well to standard dose triple combination therapy including chlorthalidone 25 mg with telmisartan 80 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg in hypertensive patients. This is a multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 3, randomized trial. Patients are randomized to triple combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 12.5 mg, TEL/AML/CHTD group) or dual combination (telmisartan 40 mg/amlodipine 5 mg, TEL/AML group) treatment and then dose up titration to TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg and TEL80/AML5, respectively. The primary endpoint is the change of mean sitting systolic blood pressure (MSSBP) at week 8. A Target BP achievement rate, a response rate, and the safety endpoints are also evaluated. Total 374 patients (mean age = 60.9 ± 10.7 years, male = 78.3%) were randomized to the study. The baseline MSSBPs/diastolic BPs were 149.9 ± 12.2/88.5 ± 10.4 mm Hg. After 8 weeks treatment, the change of MSSBPs at week 8 are -19.1 ± 14.9 mm Hg (TEL/AML/CHTD) and -11.4 ± 14.7 mm Hg (TEL/AML) (p < .0001). The achievement rates of target BP (53.8% vs. 37.8%, p = .0017) and responder rate (54.8% vs. 35.6%, p = .0001) at week 8 were significantly higher in TEL/AML/CHTD. There are no serious adverse event and no one discontinued medication due to adverse event. Among the TEL 80/AML5/CHTD25mg treatment group, patients of female or age ≥ 65 years old showed higher rate of target BP achievement than relatively young male. (61.4 vs. 46.8%, p = .042) Our study showed standard dose triple combination of telmisartan 80 mg/amlodipine 5 mg/chlorthalidone 25 mg is efficacious and safe in treatment of primary hypertension. Target BP achievement with triple therapy would be facilitated in female or old age.

Incidence, Relevant Patient Factors, and Clinical Outcomes of the Misdiagnosis of ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry.

Background Data on the incidence, relevant patient factors, and clinical outcomes of the misdiagnosis of ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the modern era of percutaneous coronary intervention are limited. Methods and Results Data from KAMIR (Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry) between November 2011 and June 2020 were analyzed. Out of 28 470 patients with acute myocardial infarction, 11 796 were eventually diagnosed with STEMI following a coronary angiogram. They were classified into 2 groups: patients with an initial working diagnosis of STEMI before starting the initial treatment and patients with an initial working diagnosis of non-STEMI (misdiagnosed group). Out of 11 796 patients with a final diagnosis of STEMI, 165 (1.4%) were misdiagnosed. The door-to-angiography time in the misdiagnosed group was 5 times longer than that in the timely diagnosed group (median 220 [interquartile range {IQR}, 66-1177] versus 43 [IQR, 31-58] minutes; P<0.001). In a multivariable adjustments model, patients with a history of heart failure, atypical chest pain, anemia, or symptom-to-door time ≥4 hours had significantly higher odds, whereas those with systolic blood pressure <100 mm Hg or anterior ST elevation or left bundle-branch block on ECG had lower odds of STEMI misdiagnosis. For patients with culprit lesions in the left anterior descending artery (n=5838), the adjusted 1-year mortality risk for STEMI misdiagnosis was 1.84 (95% CI, 1.01-3.38). Conclusions Misdiagnosis of STEMI is not rare and is associated with a significant delay in coronary angiography, resulting in increased 1-year mortality for patients with culprit lesions in the left anterior descending artery.

Adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy and 3-year clinical outcome following acute myocardial infarction.

Aims: Despite the well-established clinical benefits and strong recommendations in clinical guidelines, adherence to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) is known to be insufficient. We investigated the adherence to GDMT and its impact on the 3-year clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods and results: Source data were obtained from KAMIR-NIH, a Korean multi-centre observational registry. GDMT was defined according to the ACC/AHA Class I recommendations. Adherence to GDMT was assessed at discharge and every year thereafter. The differences in clinical characteristics between patients receiving and those not receiving GDMT were adjusted using propensity score matching (PSM) or inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW). The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which was a composite of all-cause death and non-fatal MACE, including myocardial infarction (MI), revascularization, or stroke. Of 12 815 patients, GDMT adherence was 70.2% at discharge, and decreased gradually into 54.6% at 3-year. GDMT at discharge was associated with lower MACE risk in the unadjusted analysis [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% confidence intervals (CI) = 0.47-0.55, P < 0.001] and also in the PSM- or IPTW-adjusted analyses (HR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.69-0.86; HR = 0.79, 95% CI = 0.72-0.86; P < 0.001, all). These findings were replicated in the 1-year or 2-year landmark analyses (HR = 0.58 to 0.82, P < 0.01, all). Conclusion: Adherence to GDMT was sub-optimal among patients with AMI in Korea. As the adherence to GDMT was associated with a lower incidence of MACE during 3-year follow-up, the maintenance of long-term GDMT might be crucial for patients with AMI.

Adjusted mortality of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for acute myocardial infarction patients in cardiogenic shock.

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a common cause of death following acute myocardial infarction (MI). This study aimed to evaluate the adjusted mortality of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) with intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABP) for patients with MI-CS. We included 300 MI patients selected from a multinational registry and categorized into VA-ECMO + IABP (N = 39) and no VA-ECMO (medical management ± IABP) (N = 261) groups. Both groups' 30-day and 1-year mortality were compared using the weighted Kaplan-Meier, propensity score, and inverse probability of treatment weighting methods. Adjusted incidences of 30-day (VA-ECMO + IABP vs No VA-ECMO, 77.7% vs 50.7; P = .083) and 1-year mortality (92.3% vs 84.8%; P = .223) along with propensity-adjusted and inverse probability of treatment weighting models in 30-day (hazard ratio [HR], 1.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-2.77; P = .346 and HR, 1.44; 95% CI, 0.42-3.17; P = .452, respectively) and 1-year mortality (HR, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.95-2.56; P = .076 and HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.57-3.06; P = .51, respectively) did not differ between the groups. However, better survival benefit 30 days post-ECMO could be supposed (31.6% vs 83.4%; P = .022). Therefore, patients with MI-CS treated with IABP with additional VA-ECMO and those not supported with ECMO have comparable overall 30-day and 1-year mortality risks. However, VA-ECMO-supported survivors might have better long-term clinical outcomes.

The effect of nicorandil on cardiac function and clinical outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the effect of nicorandil on infarct size, cardiac function assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) and outcomes in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: In a prospective, randomised, controlled trial, 83 patients with STEMI receiving primary PCI were randomised into the nicorandil (n =  40) or placebo (n  =  43) groups. Nicorandil was administered in the emergency room before primary PCI as an intravenous bolus of 4 mg followed by a continuous infusion of 6 mg/h for 24 h and as 2-mg intracoronary injections prior to balloon dilatation and coronary stenting. Nicorandil was continued orally at 10-20 mg/d for 6 months. Infarct size and cardiac function were measured by CMR at 5 d and 6 months after primary PCI. Furthermore, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) including all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), any revascularisation, stroke, and definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) were compared. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics between the groups. Infarct size at baseline and 6 months as well as infarct size changes during 6 months as measured by CMR were similar between the groups. Similarly, other CMR parameters were comparable at baseline and 6 months between the groups. MACEs occurred in four patients (4.8%) during 6 months. No significant difference in the risk of MACEs was observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with nicorandil for 6 months after primary PCI was not associated with any improvement in infarct size, CMR-determined cardiac function, and outcomes in STEMI patients.

Immediate versus staged complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease: results from a prematurely discontinued randomized multicenter trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between immediate and staged complete revascularization in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for treating ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD). METHODS: A total of 248 patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, and multicenter registry. Immediate revascularization was defined as one-time PCI of culprit and non-culprit lesions at the initial procedure. Staged revascularization was defined as PCI of non-culprit lesions at a later date (mean, 4.4 days; interquartile range, 1-11.4), following initial culprit revascularization. The end points were major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; composite of total death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and revascularization), any individual components of MACE, cardiac death, stent thrombosis, and stroke at 12 months. RESULTS: During a follow-up of 1 year, MACE occurred in 12 patients (11.6%) in the immediate revascularization group and in 8 patients (7.5%) in staged revascularization group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.65-3.91). The incidence of total death was numerically higher in the immediate group than in the staged group (9.7% vs 2.8%, HR 3.53, 95% CI 0.97-12.84); There were no significant differences between the 2 groups in risks of any individual component of MACE, cardiac death, stroke, and in-hospital complications, such as need for transfusion, bleeding, acute renal failure, and acute heart failure. This study was prematurely terminated due to halt of production of everolimus-eluting stents (manufactured as PROMUS Element by Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). CONCLUSIONS: Due to its limited power, no definite conclusion can be drawn regarding complete revascularization strategy from the present study. Further large randomized clinical trials would be warranted to confirm optimal timing of complete revascularization for patients with STEMI and MVD.

BioMatrix Versus Orsiro Stents for Coronary Artery Disease: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study.

BACKGROUND: Comparative studies of ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) have reported promising results and validated its excellent outcomes in terms of safety and efficacy. However, there are limited studies comparing BP drug-eluting stents with struts of different thicknesses. We compared the long-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with an ultrathin-strut BP-SES or a thick-strut biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BP-BES). METHODS: The BIODEGRADE trial (Biomatrix and Orsiro Drug-Eluting Stents in Angiographic Result in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) is a multicenter prospective randomized study comparing coronary revascularization in patients with ultrathin-strut BP-SES and thick-strut BP-BES with the primary end point of target lesion failure at 18 months posttreatment. We performed the prespecified analysis of 3-year clinical outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 2341 patients were randomized to receive treatment with ultrathin-strut BP-SES (N=1175) or thick-strut BP-BES (N=1166). The 3-year incidence rate of target lesion failure was 3.2% for BP-SES and 5.1% for BP-BES (P=0.023). The difference was primarily due to differences in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (BP-SES, 1.5%; BP-BES, 2.8%; P=0.035) between groups. A landmark analysis of the late follow-up period showed significant differences in target lesion failure, with outcomes being better in BP-SES. Cardiac death and target lesion revascularization were significantly lower in the BP-SES group. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, randomized trial, the long-term clinical outcome of target lesion failure at 3 years was significantly better among patients treated with the ultrathin-strut BP-SES. The results indicate the superiority of the ultrathin-strut BP-SES compared with the thick-strut BP-BES. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02299011.

Long-term use of renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors after acute myocardial infarction is not associated with survival benefits: Analysis of data from the Korean acute myocardial infarction registry-national institutes of health registry.

Introduction: Renin-angiotensin-system inhibitors (RASi) have shown survival benefits after acute myocardial infarction (MI), but the role of routine long-term use of RASi remains unclear. Thereby, we explored the therapeutic effects of RASi medication at 1-year follow-up from acute MI. Methods: Using the nationwide Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institutes of Health (KAMIR-NIH) registry, we included and analyzed 10,822 subjects. Patients were stratified into those taking RASi at 1-year follow-up (n = 7,696) and those not taking RASi at 1-year follow-up (n = 3,126). Patients were followed up for 2-years from the 1-year follow-up; 2-year all-cause mortality and cardiac mortality were analyzed as primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Results: The use of RASi at 1-year follow-up was not associated with decreased all-cause mortality (log-rank P = 0.195) or cardiac mortality (log-rank P = 0.337). In multivariate analyses, RASi medication at 1-year follow-up did not reduce all-cause mortality (P = 0.758) or cardiac mortality (P = 0.923), while RASi medication at discharge substantially reduced 1-year all-cause and cardiac mortality. Treatment with either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker at 1-year follow-up did not show survival benefits from 1-year follow-up, respectively. The use of RASi at 1-year follow-up did not show a prognostic interaction between previous history of chronic kidney disease, post-MI acute heart failure, concomitant use of beta-blockers at 1-year follow-up, or 1-year LVEF. Conclusion: Acute MI patients taking RASi at 1-year follow-up were not associated with improved 2-year all-cause mortality or cardiac mortality from the 1-year follow-up. This study provides valuable information regarding tailored medication strategy after acute MI. Clinical trial registration: [www.ClinicalTrials.gov], identifier [KCT0000863].

Predictors of recurrent acute myocardial infarction despite successful percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Recurrent acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is an adverse cardiac event in patients with a first AMI. The predictors of recurrent AMI after the first AMI in patients who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have not been elucidated. METHODS: We analyzed the data collected from 9,869 patients (63.2 ± 12.4 years, men:women = 7,446:2,423) who were enrolled in the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry-National Institute of Health between November 2011 and October 2015, had suffered their first AMI and had received successful PCI during the index hospitalization. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the independent predictors of recurrent AMI following the first AMI. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of recurrent AMI after successful PCI was 3.6% (359/9,869). According to the multivariable logistic regression analysis, the significant predictive factors for recurrent AMI were diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, atypical chest pain, and multivessel disease. CONCLUSION: In this Korean prospective cohort study, the independent predictors of recurrent AMI after successful PCI for the first AMI were diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, atypical chest pain, and multivessel disease.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes and Its Predictors Between the 1- and 2-Stent Strategy in Coronary Bifurcation Lesions　- A Baseline Clinical and Lesion Characteristic-Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Differences in the impact of the 1- or 2-stent strategy in similar coronary bifurcation lesion conditions are not well understood. This study investigated the clinical outcomes and its predictors between 1 or 2 stents in propensity score-matched (PSM) complex bifurcation lesions.Methods and Results: We analyzed the data of patients with bifurcation lesions, obtained from a multicenter registry of 2,648 patients (median follow up, 53 months). The patients were treated by second generation drug-eluting stents (DESs). The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). PSM was performed to balance baseline clinical and angiographic discrepancies between 1 and 2 stents. After PSM (N=333 from each group), the 2-stent group had more TLRs (hazard ratio [HR] 3.14, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.42-6.97, P=0.005) and fewer hard endpoints (composite of cardiac death and TVMI; HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.19-1.01, P=0.054), which resulted in a similar TLF rate (HR 1.40, 95% CI 0.83-2.37, P=0.209) compared to the 1-stent group. Compared with 1-stent, the 2-stent technique was more frequently associated with less TLF in the presence of main vessel (pinteraction=0.008) and side branch calcification (pinteraction=0.010). CONCLUSIONS: The 2-stent strategy should be considered to reduce hard clinical endpoints in complex bifurcation lesions, particularly those with calcifications.

Impact of multivessel versus single-vessel disease on the association between low diastolic blood pressure and mortality after acute myocardial infarction with revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies demonstrated a J-shaped relationship between low diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and adverse clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) that was sensitive to revascularization. Hypothesized herein, was that this relationship differs between patients with multivessel disease (MVD) and those with single-vessel disease due to differing degrees of myocardial ischemic burden. METHODS: Among 9,983 AMI patients from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry database who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and were followed up for a median duration of 3.2 years, average on-treatment DBP was calculated at admission, discharge, and every scheduled visit and divided into these parameters: < 70 mmHg, 70-74 mmHg, 75-79 mmHg, and ≥ 80 mmHg. The relationship between average on-treatment DBP and clinical outcomes including all-cause death, cardiovascular (CV) death, non-CV death, and hospitalization for heart failure was analyzed using the Cox regression models adjusted for clinical covariates. RESULTS: In patients with MVD, all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.06-2.04, p = 0.012) and CV death (HR: 1.59; 95% CI: 1.02-2.46, p = 0.027) were significantly increased in patients with a DBP < 70 mmHg, showing a J-shaped relationship. However, these findings were not significant for single-vessel disease. On a sensitivity analysis excluding subjects with a baseline SBP < 120 mmHg, an increased risk of a low DBP < 70 mmHg remained in MVD. CONCLUSIONS: The J-shaped relationship between low DBP and adverse clinical outcomes in AMI patients who underwent revascularization persisted in MVD, which has a high ischemic burden. These high-risk patients require cautious treatment.

Erratum: Correction of Text in the Article "Prasugrel-based De-Escalation of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With STEMI".

This corrects the article on p. 304 in vol. 52, PMID: 35129316.

Target Low-Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol and Secondary Prevention for Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Korean Nationwide Cohort Study.

Although lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels following acute myocardial infarction (MI) is the cornerstone of secondary prevention, the attainment of recommended LDL-C goals remains suboptimal in real-world practice. We sought to investigate recurrent adverse events in post-MI patients. From the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction-National Institutes of Health registry, a total of 5049 patients with both measurements of plasma LDL-C levels at index admission and at the one-year follow-up visit were identified. Patients who achieved an LDL-C reduction ≥ 50% from the index MI and an LDL-C level ≤ 70 mg/dL at follow-up were classified as target LDL-C achievers. The primary endpoint was a two-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE), including cardiovascular mortality, recurrent MI, and ischemic stroke. Among the 5049 patients, 1114 (22.1%) patients achieved the target LDL-C level. During a median follow-up of 2.1 years, target LDL-C achievers showed a significantly lower incidence (2.2% vs. 3.5%, log-rank p = 0.022) and a reduced adjusted hazard of MACCE (0.63; p = 0.041). In patients with acute MI, achieving a target LDL-C level was associated with a lower incidence and a reduced hazard of recurrent clinical events. These results highlight the need to improve current practices for managing LDL-C levels in real-world settings.