ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) requiring lower extremity revascularization (LER) have a high risk of adverse limb and cardiovascular events. The results from the VOYAGER PAD (efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in reducing the risk of major thrombotic vascular events in subjects with symptomatic peripheral artery disease undergoing peripheral revascularization procedures of the lower extremities) trial have demonstrated that rivaroxaban significantly reduced this risk with an overall favorable net benefit for patients undergoing surgical revascularization. However, the efficacy and safety for those treated by surgical bypass, including stratification by bypass conduit (venous or prosthetic), has not yet been described. METHODS: In the VOYAGER PAD trial, patients who had undergone surgical and endovascular infrainguinal LER to treat PAD were randomized to rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily or placebo on top of background antiplatelet therapy (aspirin 100 mg to be used in all and clopidogrel in some at the treating physician's discretion) and followed up for a median of 28 months. The primary end point was a composite of acute limb ischemia, major amputation of vascular etiology, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death. The principal safety outcome was major bleeding using the TIMI (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction) scale. The index procedure details, including conduit type (venous vs prosthetic), were collected at baseline. RESULTS: Among 6564 randomized patients, 2185 (33%) had undergone surgical LER. Of these 2185 patients, surgical bypass had been performed for 1448 (66%), using a prosthetic conduit for 773 patients (53%) and venous conduit for 646 patients (45%). Adjusting for the baseline differences and anatomic factors, the risk of unplanned limb revascularization in the placebo arm was 2.5-fold higher for those receiving a prosthetic conduit vs a venous conduit (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 2.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65-3.90; P < .001), and the risk of acute limb ischemia was three times greater (adjusted HR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.84-5.11; P < .001). The use of rivaroxaban reduced the primary outcome for the patients treated with bypass surgery (HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.62-0.98), with consistent benefits for those receiving venous (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49-0.96) and prosthetic (HR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.66-1.15) conduits (Pinteraction = .254). In the overall trial, major bleeding using the TIMI scale was increased with rivaroxaban. However, the numbers for those treated with bypass surgery were low (five with rivaroxaban vs nine with placebo; HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.18-1.65) and not powered to show statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical bypass with a prosthetic conduit was associated with significantly higher rates of major adverse limb events relative to venous conduits even after adjustment for patient and anatomic characteristics. Adding rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily to aspirin or dual antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced this risk, with an increase in the bleeding risk, but had a favorable benefit risk for patients treated with bypass surgery, regardless of conduit type. Rivaroxaban should be considered after lower extremity bypass for symptomatic PAD to reduce ischemic complications of the heart, limb, and brain.
Subject(s)
Myocardial Infarction , Peripheral Arterial Disease , Humans , Rivaroxaban/adverse effects , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/adverse effects , Aspirin/therapeutic use , Peripheral Arterial Disease/diagnostic imaging , Peripheral Arterial Disease/surgery , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Ischemia/diagnostic imaging , Ischemia/drug therapy , Ischemia/surgery , Lower Extremity/blood supply , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There are limited options for percutaneous mechanical circulatory support (pMCS) in patients requiring high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. OBJECTIVES: This first-in-human, single-center study aimed to evaluate the safety and feasibility of a novel pMCS device in high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention patients. METHODS: Aortix (Procyrion, Houston, Texas) is a pMCS device deployed in the descending aorta via the femoral artery that uses axial flow to provide cardiac unloading and augment renal and systemic perfusion. We assessed the use and effect of the Aortix device in six patients undergoing high-risk PCI. All patients had impaired left ventricular function, complex coronary disease, renal dysfunction, and suitable iliofemoral anatomy for Aortix placement via transfemoral approach. We recorded periprocedural events including hemodynamic effects of the device on cardiac output and urine output. We then followed patients up to 30 days following the PCI procedure for adverse events. RESULTS: Aortix delivery (18 Fr sheath) took 4-9 min, mean support time was 70 (range 47-95) min, and mean flow rate through the device was 3.5 L/min. During support, mean rate of urine output increased 10-fold (range 2.5-25.0x). Estimated GFR improved at discharge compared with baseline (mean increase 6.95 ± 8.09 mL/min). There were no device failures and PCI was successful in all patients. Aortix was removed and hemostasis was achieved with a vascular closure device and manual pressure. No patients experienced adverse events or hemodynamic compromise. No clinically significant hemolysis occurred (mean LDH 239.2 ± 73.6 mU/mL at baseline and 206.4 ± 82.2 mU/mL at discharge). No vascular access complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Aortix, a novel pMCS device, was successfully deployed and retrieved in all initial patients undergoing high-risk PCI. We noted no significant hemolysis with temporary use of this axial flow device. Improvement in eGFR suggests a potential renal protective effect and is an important area for future investigation in patients with impaired left ventricular function and renal dysfunction.
Subject(s)
Aorta/physiopathology , Coronary Artery Disease/therapy , Heart-Assist Devices , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention , Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/therapy , Aged , Coronary Artery Disease/diagnosis , Coronary Artery Disease/physiopathology , Coronary Circulation , Device Removal , Feasibility Studies , Female , Glomerular Filtration Rate , Hemodynamics , Humans , Kidney/physiopathology , Kidney Diseases/physiopathology , Male , Middle Aged , Paraguay , Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Prosthesis Design , Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Recovery of Function , Regional Blood Flow , Renal Circulation , Risk Factors , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Urination , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/diagnosis , Ventricular Dysfunction, Left/physiopathology , Ventricular Function, LeftABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) undergoing a lower-extremity revascularization are at heightened risk for ischemic cardiac and limb events. Although intensification of antithrombotic therapy after revascularization has demonstrated benefit in coronary disease populations, this approach has not been well studied or shown consistent benefit in PAD. Recent trial evidence demonstrated that a treatment strategy of rivaroxaban added to background antiplatelet therapy reduced ischemic risk in patients following recent acute coronary syndromes, as well as in patients with stable atherosclerotic vascular disease. Whether these benefits extend to the population of patients with symptomatic lower-extremity PAD undergoing revascularization is the objective of the VOYAGER PAD trial. STUDY DESIGN: VOYAGER PAD is an international randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban in symptomatic PAD patients undergoing a peripheral surgical and/or endovascular revascularization. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either rivaroxaban 2.5 mg twice daily or placebo, on a background of low-dose aspirin (100 mg daily). In addition, the use of a limited course of P2Y12 inhibition is allowed at the discretion of the site investigator. The primary efficacy end point is a novel composite of myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, cardiovascular death, acute limb ischemia, and major amputation of vascular etiology. The primary safety end point is major bleeding according to the Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction definition. Enrolment began in August 2015 and will complete randomization of at least 6,500 patients by January 2018. This event-driven trial is expected to observe outcomes over a mean patient follow-up of 30 months. CONCLUSIONS: VOYAGER PAD is evaluating the efficacy of rivaroxaban added to background antiplatelet therapy to reduce major cardiovascular and limb ischemic vascular outcomes in the high-risk population of PAD patients undergoing peripheral revascularization.
Subject(s)
Aspirin/administration & dosage , Endovascular Procedures/methods , Lower Extremity/blood supply , Peripheral Arterial Disease/drug therapy , Rivaroxaban/administration & dosage , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Double-Blind Method , Drug Therapy, Combination , Factor Xa Inhibitors/administration & dosage , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Peripheral Arterial Disease/surgery , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors , Purinergic P2Y Receptor Antagonists/administration & dosage , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Atrial fibrillation is associated with higher mortality. Identification of causes of death and contemporary risk factorsfor all-cause mortality may guide interventions. Methods and Results-In the Rivaroxaban Once Daily Oral Direct Factor Xa Inhibition Compared with Vitamin K Antagonism for Prevention of Stroke and Embolism Trial in Atrial Fibrillation (ROCKET AF) study, patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation were randomized to rivaroxaban or dose-adjusted warfarin. Cox proportional hazards regression with backward elimination identifiedfactors at randomization that were independently associated with all-cause mortality in the 14 171 participants in the intentionto-treat population. The median age was 73 years, and the mean CHADS2 score was 3.5. Over 1.9 years of median follow-up,1214 (8.6%) patients died. KaplanMeier mortality rates were 4.2% at 1 year and 8.9% at 2 years. The majority of classified deaths (1081) were cardiovascular (72%), whereas only 6% were nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. No significant difference in all-cause mortality was observed between the rivaroxaban and warfarin arms (P=0.15). Heart failure (hazard ratio1.51, 95% CI 1.331.70, P<0.0001) and age ≥75 years (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% CI 1.511.90, P<0.0001) were associated with higher all-cause mortality. Multiple additional characteristics were independently associated with higher mortality, with decreasing creatinine clearance, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, male sex, peripheral vascular disease, and diabetes being among the most strongly associated (model C-index 0.677). Conclusions-In a large population of patients anticoagulated for nonvalvular atrial fibrillation, 7 in 10 deaths were cardiovascular, whereas <1 in 10 deaths were caused by nonhemorrhagic stroke or systemic embolism. Optimal prevention and treatment of heart failure, renal impairment, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and diabetes may improve survival...
Subject(s)
Stroke , Atrial Fibrillation , Mortality , WarfarinABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Vitamin K antagonist (VKA) therapy remains the most common method of stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. Time in therapeutic range (TTR) is a widely cited measure of the quality of VKA therapy. We sought to identify factors associated with TTR in a large, international clinical trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: TTR (international normalized ratio [INR] 2.0 to 3.0) was determined using standard linear interpolation in patients randomized to warfarin in the ROCKET AF trial. Factors associated with TTR at the individual patient level (i-TTR) were determined via multivariable linear regression. Among 6983 patients taking warfarin, recruited from 45 countries grouped into 7 regions, the mean i-TTR was 55.2% (SD 21.3%) and the median i-TTR was 57.9% (interquartile range 43.0% to 70.6%). The mean time with INR <2 was 29.1% and the mean time with an INR >3 was 15.7%. While multiple clinical features were associated with i-TTR, dominant determinants were previous warfarin use (mean i-TTR of 61.1% for warfarin-experienced versus 47.4% in VKA-naïve patients) and geographic region where patients were managed (mean i-TTR varied from 64.1% to 35.9%). These effects persisted in multivariable analysis. Regions with the lowest i-TTRs had INR distributions shifted toward lower INR values and had longer inter-INR test intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Independent of patient clinical features, the regional location of medical care is a dominant determinant of variation in i-TTR in global studies of warfarin. Regional differences in mean i-TTR are heavily influenced by subtherapeutic INR values and are associated with reduced frequency of INR testing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: ClinicalTrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00403767.