RESUMO
Platelets are key mediators of atherothrombosis, yet, limited tools exist to identify individuals with a hyperreactive platelet phenotype. In this study, we investigate the association of platelet hyperreactivity and cardiovascular events, and introduce a tool, the Platelet Reactivity ExpreSsion Score (PRESS), which integrates platelet aggregation responses and RNA sequencing. Among patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD), those with a hyperreactive platelet response (>60% aggregation) to 0.4 µM epinephrine had a higher incidence of the 30 day primary cardiovascular endpoint (37.2% vs. 15.3% in those without hyperreactivity, adjusted HR 2.76, 95% CI 1.5-5.1, p = 0.002). PRESS performs well in identifying a hyperreactive phenotype in patients with PAD (AUC [cross-validation] 0.81, 95% CI 0.68 -0.94, n = 84) and in an independent cohort of healthy participants (AUC [validation] 0.77, 95% CI 0.75 -0.79, n = 35). Following multivariable adjustment, PAD individuals with a PRESS score above the median are at higher risk for a future cardiovascular event (adjusted HR 1.90, CI 1.07-3.36; p = 0.027, n = 129, NCT02106429). This study derives and validates the ability of PRESS to discriminate platelet hyperreactivity and identify those at increased cardiovascular risk. Future studies in a larger independent cohort are warranted for further validation. The development of a platelet reactivity expression score opens the possibility for a personalized approach to antithrombotic therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction.
Assuntos
Plaquetas , Doenças Cardiovasculares , Doença Arterial Periférica , Agregação Plaquetária , Humanos , Doença Arterial Periférica/sangue , Doença Arterial Periférica/epidemiologia , Masculino , Feminino , Plaquetas/metabolismo , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Agregação Plaquetária/efeitos dos fármacos , Doenças Cardiovasculares/sangue , Fatores de Risco de Doenças Cardíacas , Ativação Plaquetária , Epinefrina/sangue , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA)-derived atherosclerotic plaque analysis in ISCHEMIA. METHODS: Atherosclerosis imaging quantitative computed tomography (AI-QCT) was performed on all available baseline CCTAs to quantify plaque volume, composition, and distribution. Multivariable Cox regression was used to examine the association between baseline risk factors (age, sex, smoking, diabetes, hypertension, ejection fraction, prior coronary disease, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and statin use), number of diseased vessels, atherosclerotic plaque characteristics determined by AI-QCT, and a composite primary outcome of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction over a median follow-up of 3.3 (interquartile range 2.2-4.4) years. The predictive value of plaque quantification over risk factors was compared in an area under the curve (AUC) analysis. RESULTS: Analysable CCTA data were available from 3711 participants (mean age 64 years, 21% female, 79% multivessel coronary artery disease). Amongst the AI-QCT variables, total plaque volume was most strongly associated with the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio 1.56, 95% confidence interval 1.25-1.97 per interquartile range increase [559 mm3]; P = .001). The addition of AI-QCT plaque quantification and characterization to baseline risk factors improved the model's predictive value for the primary outcome at 6 months (AUC 0.688 vs. 0.637; P = .006), at 2 years (AUC 0.660 vs. 0.617; P = .003), and at 4 years of follow-up (AUC 0.654 vs. 0.608; P = .002). The findings were similar for the other reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: In ISCHEMIA, total plaque volume was associated with cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. In this highly diseased, high-risk population, enhanced assessment of atherosclerotic burden using AI-QCT-derived measures of plaque volume and composition modestly improved event prediction.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Tolerância ao Exercício , Isquemia Miocárdica , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Humanos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/fisiopatologia , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico , Isquemia Miocárdica/fisiopatologia , Isquemia Miocárdica/diagnóstico , Teste de EsforçoRESUMO
Background: Clinical trials suggest that therapeutic-dose heparin may prevent critical illness and vascular complications due to COVID-19, but knowledge gaps exist regarding the efficacy of therapeutic heparin including its comparative effect relative to intermediate-dose anticoagulation. Objectives: The authors performed 2 complementary secondary analyses of a completed randomized clinical trial: 1) a prespecified per-protocol analysis; and 2) an exploratory dose-based analysis to compare the effect of therapeutic-dose heparin with low- and intermediate-dose heparin. Methods: Patients who received initial anticoagulation dosed consistently with randomization were included. The primary outcome was organ support-free days (OSFDs), a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support through day 21. Results: Among 2,860 participants, 1,761 (92.8%) noncritically ill and 857 (89.1%) critically ill patients were treated per-protocol. Among noncritically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic-dose heparin improved OSFDs as compared with usual care was 99.3% (median adjusted OR: 1.36; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 1.07-1.74). Therapeutic heparin had a high posterior probability of efficacy relative to both low- (94.6%; adjusted OR: 1.26; 95% CrI: 0.95-1.64) and intermediate- (99.8%; adjusted OR: 1.80; 95% CrI: 1.22-2.62) dose thromboprophylaxis. Among critically ill per-protocol patients, the posterior probability that therapeutic heparin improved outcomes was low. Conclusions: Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized for COVID-19 who were randomized to and initially received therapeutic-dose anticoagulation, heparin, compared with usual care, was associated with improved OSFDs, a combination of in-hospital death and days free of organ support. Therapeutic heparin appeared superior to both low- and intermediate-dose thromboprophylaxis.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock is a morbid complication of heart disease that claims the lives of more than 1 in 3 patients presenting with this syndrome. Supporting a unique collaboration across clinical specialties, federal regulators, payors, and industry, the American Heart Association volunteers and staff have launched a quality improvement registry to better understand the clinical manifestations of shock phenotypes, and to benchmark the management patterns, and outcomes of patients presenting with cardiogenic shock to hospitals across the United States. METHODS: Participating hospitals will enroll consecutive hospitalized patients with cardiogenic shock, regardless of etiology or severity. Data are collected through individual reviews of medical records of sequential adult patients with cardiogenic shock. The electronic case record form was collaboratively designed with a core minimum data structure and aligned with Shock Academic Research Consortium definitions. This registry will allow participating health systems to evaluate patient-level data including diagnostic approaches, therapeutics, use of advanced monitoring and circulatory support, processes of care, complications, and in-hospital survival. Participating sites can leverage these data for onsite monitoring of outcomes and benchmarking versus other institutions. The registry was concomitantly designed to provide a high-quality longitudinal research infrastructure for pragmatic randomized trials as well as translational, clinical, and implementation research. An aggregate deidentified data set will be made available to the research community on the American Heart Association's Precision Medicine Platform. On March 31, 2022, the American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry received its first clinical records. At the time of this submission, 100 centers are participating. CONCLUSIONS: The American Heart Association Cardiogenic Shock Registry will serve as a resource using consistent data structure and definitions for the medical and research community to accelerate scientific advancement through shared learning and research resulting in improved quality of care and outcomes of shock patients.
Assuntos
American Heart Association , Melhoria de Qualidade , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Sistema de Registros , Choque Cardiogênico , Humanos , Choque Cardiogênico/diagnóstico , Choque Cardiogênico/terapia , Choque Cardiogênico/mortalidade , Choque Cardiogênico/fisiopatologia , Choque Cardiogênico/etiologia , Estados Unidos , Resultado do Tratamento , Benchmarking , Projetos de Pesquisa , Fatores de Tempo , Registros Eletrônicos de Saúde , Desenvolvimento de Programas , Mortalidade HospitalarRESUMO
Cardiometabolic co-morbidities, diabetes (DM), hypertension (HTN), and obesity contribute to cardiovascular disease. Circulating biomarkers facilitate prognostication for patients with cardiovascular disease. We explored the relation between cardiometabolic co-morbidity burden in patients with chronic coronary disease and biomarkers of myocardial stretch, injury, inflammation, and platelet activity. We analyzed participants from the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA) trials biorepository with plasma biomarkers (N-terminal probrain natriuretic peptide, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, soluble CD40 ligand, and growth differentiation factor-15) and clinical risk factors (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c], systolic blood pressure [SBP], and body mass index [BMI]) at baseline. We defined cardiometabolic co-morbidities as DM, HTN, and obesity at baseline. Co-morbidity burden is characterized by the number and severity of co-morbidities. Controlled co-morbidities were defined as HbA1c <7% for those with DM, SBP <130 mm Hg for those with HTN, and BMI <30 kg/m2. Severely uncontrolled was defined as HbA1c ≥8%, SBP ≥160 mm Hg, and BMI ≥35 kg/m2. We performed linear regression analyses to examine the association between co-morbidity burden and log-transformed biomarker levels, adjusting for age, gender, estimated glomerular filtration rate controlled for hemodialysis, and left ventricular ejection fraction. A total of 752 participants (mean age 66 years, 19% women, 84% White) were included in this analysis. Self-reported Black race, current smokers, history of myocardial infarction, and heart failure had a greater cardiometabolic co-morbidity burden. The presence of ≥1 severely uncontrolled co-morbidity was associated with significantly higher baseline levels of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, interleukin-6, and growth differentiation factor-15 than participants with no co-morbidities. In conclusion, increasing cardiometabolic co-morbidity burden in patients with chronic coronary disease is associated with higher levels of circulating biomarkers of myocardial injury and inflammation.
Assuntos
Biomarcadores , Comorbidade , Troponina T , Humanos , Feminino , Masculino , Biomarcadores/sangue , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Troponina T/sangue , Obesidade/epidemiologia , Obesidade/complicações , Obesidade/sangue , Hipertensão/epidemiologia , Hipertensão/sangue , Doença Crônica , Proteína C-Reativa/metabolismo , Proteína C-Reativa/análise , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus/sangue , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Doença das Coronárias/epidemiologia , Doença das Coronárias/sangue , Fatores de Risco Cardiometabólico , Fragmentos de Peptídeos/sangue , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/sangue , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/epidemiologia , Interleucina-6/sangue , Peptídeo Natriurético Encefálico/sangueRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ISCHEMIA trial found that patients with chronic coronary disease randomized to invasive strategy had better health status than those randomized to conservative strategy. It is unclear how best to translate these population-level results to individual patients. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to identify patient characteristics associated with health status from invasive and conservative strategies, and develop a prediction algorithm for shared decision-making. METHODS: One-year disease-specific health status was assessed in ISCHEMIA with the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) Summary Score (SAQ SS) and Angina Frequency, Physical Limitations (PL), and Quality of Life (QL) domains (range 0-100, higher = less angina/better health status). RESULTS: Among 4,617 patients from 320 sites in 37 countries, mean SAQ SS was 74.1 ± 18.9 at baseline and 85.7 ± 15.6 at 1 year. Lower baseline SAQ SS and younger age were associated with better 1-year health status with invasive strategy (P interaction = 0.009 and P interaction = 0.004, respectively). For the individual domains, there were significant treatment interactions for baseline SAQ score (Angina Frequency, PL), age (PL, QL), anterior ischemia (PL), and number of baseline antianginal medications (QL), with more benefit of invasive in patients with worse baseline health status, younger age, anterior ischemia, and on more antianginal medications. Parsimonious prediction models were developed for 1-year SAQ domains with invasive or conservative strategies to support shared decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: In the management of chronic coronary disease, individual patient characteristics are associated with 1-year health status, with younger age and poorer angina-related health status showing greater benefit from invasive management. This prediction algorithm can support the translation of the ISCHEMIA trial results to individual patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Doença das Coronárias , Humanos , Qualidade de Vida , Tratamento Conservador , Nível de Saúde , Angina Pectoris , Doença Crônica , Isquemia , Resultado do Tratamento , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) did not find an overall reduction in cardiovascular events with an initial invasive versus conservative management strategy in chronic coronary disease; however, there were conservative strategy participants who underwent invasive coronary angiography early postrandomization (within 6 months). Identifying factors associated with angiography in conservative strategy participants will inform clinical decision-making in patients with chronic coronary disease. METHODS: Factors independently associated with angiography performed within 6 months of randomization were identified using Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models, including demographics, region of randomization, medical history, risk factor control, symptoms, ischemia severity, coronary anatomy based on protocol-mandated coronary computed tomography angiography, and medication use. RESULTS: Among 2591 conservative strategy participants, angiography within 6 months of randomization occurred in 8.7% (4.7% for a suspected primary end point event, 1.6% for persistent symptoms, and 2.6% due to protocol nonadherence) and was associated with the following baseline characteristics: enrollment in Europe versus Asia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.14-2.86]), daily and weekly versus no angina (HR, 5.97 [95% CI, 2.78-12.86] and 2.63 [95% CI, 1.51-4.58], respectively), poor to fair versus good to excellent health status (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.23-3.32]) assessed with Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and new/more frequent angina prerandomization (HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.34-2.40]). Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL was associated with a lower risk of angiography (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46-0.91) but not baseline ischemia severity nor the presence of multivessel or proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis >70% on coronary computed tomography angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Among ISCHEMIA participants randomized to the conservative strategy, angiography within 6 months of randomization was performed in <10% of patients. It was associated with frequent or increasing baseline angina and poor quality of life but not with objective markers of disease severity. Well-controlled baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was associated with a reduced likelihood of angiography. These findings point to the importance of a comprehensive assessment of symptoms and a review of guideline-directed medical therapy goals when deciding the initial treatment strategy for chronic coronary disease. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.
Assuntos
Angiografia por Tomografia Computadorizada , Tratamento Conservador , Angiografia Coronária , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Fatores de Tempo , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Tratamento Conservador/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Fatores de Risco , Medição de Risco , Doença CrônicaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) did not find an overall reduction in cardiovascular events with an initial invasive versus conservative management strategy in chronic coronary disease; however, there were conservative strategy participants who underwent invasive coronary angiography early postrandomization (within 6 months). Identifying factors associated with angiography in conservative strategy participants will inform clinical decision-making in patients with chronic coronary disease. METHODS: Factors independently associated with angiography performed within 6 months of randomization were identified using Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models, including demographics, region of randomization, medical history, risk factor control, symptoms, ischemia severity, coronary anatomy based on protocol-mandated coronary computed tomography angiography, and medication use. RESULTS: Among 2591 conservative strategy participants, angiography within 6 months of randomization occurred in 8.7% (4.7% for a suspected primary end point event, 1.6% for persistent symptoms, and 2.6% due to protocol nonadherence) and was associated with the following baseline characteristics: enrollment in Europe versus Asia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.142.86]), daily and weekly versus no angina (HR, 5.97 [95% CI, 2.7812.86] and 2.63 [95% CI, 1.514.58], respectively), poor to fair versus good to excellent health status (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.233.32]) assessed with Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and new/more frequent angina prerandomization (HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.342.40]). Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL was associated with a lower risk of angiography (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.460.91) but not baseline ischemia severity nor the presence of multivessel or proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis >70% on coronary computed tomography angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Among ISCHEMIA participants randomized to the conservative strategy, angiography within 6 months of randomization was performed in <10% of patients. It was associated with frequent or increasing baseline angina and poor quality of life but not with objective markers of disease severity. Well-controlled baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was associated with a reduced likelihood of angiography. These findings point to the importance of a comprehensive assessment of symptoms and a review of guideline-directed medical therapy goals when deciding the initial treatment strategy for chronic coronary disease.
Assuntos
Angiografia por Tomografia Computadorizada , Angiografia Coronária , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Humanos , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/diagnóstico por imagem , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Prognóstico , Vasos Coronários/diagnóstico por imagem , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Masculino , Feminino , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como Assunto , Fatores de TempoRESUMO
PURPOSE: The Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS) is the first randomized clinical trial to study the efficacy of long-term (1 year) suppressive valacyclovir treatment on herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO) outcomes. This article details the baseline characteristics of participants. SETTING: The study was set at 95 participating clinical centers in 33 states, Canada, and New Zealand. STUDY POPULATION: Immunocompetent adults with a history of a characteristic HZO unilateral rash and documentation of an episode of active dendriform epithelial keratitis, stromal keratitis, endothelial keratitis, or iritis within the preceding year, enrolled in ZEDS from November 2017 to January 2023. INTERVENTION: Participants were randomized to double-masked oral valacyclovir 1 gm daily versus placebo for 1 year of treatment and followed for 18 months. RESULTS: Five hundred twenty-seven participants were enrolled across 4 strata according to age at HZO onset (younger or older than 60 years) and duration of HZO at enrollment (less or greater than 6 months), with an even distribution of men and women and a median age of 60 years. More participants with recent (57%, 300/527) than chronic HZO and younger than 60 years at HZO onset (54%, 286/527) were enrolled. Most participants were treated acutely with a recommended antiviral regimen (91%, 480/527) and had not been vaccinated against zoster (79%, 418/527). CONCLUSIONS: The broad ZEDS study population enhances the likelihood that ZEDS will provide generalizable high-quality evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of suppressive valacyclovir for HZO immunocompetent adults and whether it should become standard of care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03134196.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Women with chronic coronary disease are generally older than men and have more comorbidities but less atherosclerosis. We explored sex differences in revascularization, guideline-directed medical therapy, and outcomes among patients with chronic coronary disease with ischemia on stress testing, with and without invasive management. METHODS AND RESULTS: The ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial randomized patients with moderate or severe ischemia to invasive management with angiography, revascularization, and guideline-directed medical therapy, or initial conservative management with guideline-directed medical therapy alone. We evaluated the primary outcome (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest) and other end points, by sex, in 1168 (22.6%) women and 4011 (77.4%) men. Invasive group catheterization rates were similar, with less revascularization among women (73.4% of invasive-assigned women revascularized versus 81.2% of invasive-assigned men; P<0.001). Women had less coronary artery disease: multivessel in 60.0% of invasive-assigned women and 74.8% of invasive-assigned men, and no ≥50% stenosis in 12.3% versus 4.5% (P<0.001). In the conservative group, 4-year catheterization rates were 26.3% of women versus 25.6% of men (P=0.72). Guideline-directed medical therapy use was lower among women with fewer risk factor goals attained. There were no sex differences in the primary outcome (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for women versus men, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.77-1.13]; P=0.47) or the major secondary outcome of cardiovascular death/myocardial infarction (adjusted HR, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.76-1.14]; P=0.49), with no significant sex-by-treatment-group interactions. CONCLUSIONS: Women had less extensive coronary artery disease and, therefore, lower revascularization rates in the invasive group. Despite lower risk factor goal attainment, women with chronic coronary disease experienced similar risk-adjusted outcomes to men in the ISCHEMIA trial. REGISTRATION: URL: http://wwwclinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01471522.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Infarto do Miocárdio , Isquemia Miocárdica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Doença Crônica , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/terapia , Doença da Artéria Coronariana/complicações , Objetivos , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Isquemia Miocárdica/terapia , Isquemia Miocárdica/complicações , Caracteres Sexuais , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
Background: The long-term effect of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) acute treatments on postacute sequelae of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection (PASC) is unknown. The CONTAIN-Extend study explores the long-term impact of COVID-19 convalescent plasma (CCP) therapy on postacute sequelae of SARS-CoV-2 infection (PASC) symptoms and general health 18 months following hospitalization. Methods: The CONTAIN-Extend study examined 281 participants from the original CONTAIN COVID-19 trial (CONTAIN-RCT, NCT04364737) at 18 months post-hospitalization for acute COVID-19. Symptom surveys, global health assessments, and biospecimen collection were performed from November 2021 to October 2022. Multivariable logistic and linear regression estimated associations between the randomization arms and self-reported symptoms and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) scores and adjusted for covariables, including age, sex, race/ethnicity, disease severity, and CONTAIN enrollment quarter and sites. Results: There were no differences in symptoms or PROMIS scores between CCP and placebo (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] of general symptoms, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.54-1.67). However, females (aOR, 3.01; 95% CI, 1.73-5.34), those 45-64 years (aOR, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.14-6.23), and April-June 2020 enrollees (aOR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.10-5.19) were more likely to report general symptoms and have poorer PROMIS physical health scores than their respective reference groups. Hispanic participants (difference, -3.05; 95% CI, -5.82 to -0.27) and Black participants (-4.48; 95% CI, -7.94 to -1.02) had poorer PROMIS physical health than White participants. Conclusions: CCP demonstrated no lasting effect on PASC symptoms or overall health in comparison to the placebo. This study underscores the significance of demographic factors, including sex, age, and timing of acute infection, in influencing symptom reporting 18 months after acute hypoxic COVID-19 hospitalization.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anatomic complete revascularization (ACR) and functional complete revascularization (FCR) have been associated with reduced death and myocardial infarction (MI) in some prior studies. The impact of complete revascularization (CR) in patients undergoing an invasive (INV) compared with a conservative (CON) management strategy has not been reported. OBJECTIVES: Among patients with chronic coronary disease without prior coronary artery bypass grafting randomized to INV vs CON management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial, we examined the following: 1) the outcomes of ACR and FCR compared with incomplete revascularization; and 2) the potential impact of achieving CR in all INV patients compared with CON management. METHODS: ACR and FCR in the INV group were assessed at an independent core laboratory. Multivariable-adjusted outcomes of CR were examined in INV patients. Inverse probability weighted modeling was then performed to estimate the treatment effect had CR been achieved in all INV patients compared with CON management. RESULTS: ACR and FCR were achieved in 43.4% and 58.4% of 1,824 INV patients. ACR was associated with reduced 4-year rates of cardiovascular death or MI compared with incomplete revascularization. By inverse probability weighted modeling, ACR in all 2,296 INV patients compared with 2,498 CON patients was associated with a lower 4-year rate of cardiovascular death or MI (difference -3.5; 95% CI: -7.2% to 0.0%). In comparison, the event rate difference of cardiovascular death or MI for INV minus CON in the overall ISCHEMIA trial was -2.4%. Results were similar but less pronounced with FCR. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of an INV strategy may be improved if CR (especially ACR) is achieved. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria CoronarianaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).
Assuntos
Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Idoso , Qualidade de Vida , Doença da Artéria CoronarianaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) postulated that patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate or severe ischemia would benefit from revascularization. We investigated the relationship between severity of CAD and ischemia and trial outcomes, overall and by management strategy. METHODS: In total, 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia were randomized to an initial invasive or conservative management strategy. Blinded, core laboratoryinterpreted coronary computed tomographic angiography was used to assess anatomic eligibility for randomization. Extent and severity of CAD were classified with the modified Duke Prognostic Index (n=2475, 48%). Ischemia severity was interpreted by independent core laboratories (nuclear, echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, exercise tolerance testing, n=5105, 99%). We compared 4-year event rates across subgroups defined by severity of ischemia and CAD. The primary end point for this analysis was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular death or MI, and the trial primary end point (cardiovascular death, MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest). RESULTS: Relative to mild/no ischemia, neither moderate ischemia nor severe ischemia was associated with increased mortality (moderate ischemia hazard ratio [HR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.611.30]; severe ischemia HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.571.21]; P=0.33). Nonfatal MI rates increased with worsening ischemia severity (HR for moderate ischemia, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.861.69] versus mild/no ischemia; HR for severe ischemia, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.981.91]; P=0.04 for trend, P=NS after adjustment for CAD). Increasing CAD severity was associated with death (HR, 2.72 [95% CI, 1.066.98]) and MI (HR, 3.78 [95% CI, 1.638.78]) for the most versus least severe CAD subgroup. Ischemia severity did not identify a subgroup with treatment benefit on mortality, MI, the trial primary end point, or cardiovascular death or MI. In the most severe CAD subgroup (n=659), the 4-year rate of cardiovascular death or MI was lower in the invasive strategy group (difference, 6.3% [95% CI, 0.2%12.4%]), but 4-year all-cause mortality was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Ischemia severity was not associated with increased risk after adjustment for CAD severity. More severe CAD was associated with increased risk. Invasive management did not lower all-cause mortality at 4 years in any ischemia or CAD subgroup.
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea , Isquemia , Revascularização Miocárdica , Ponte de Artéria CoronáriaRESUMO
Study objective: The Coronary Vasomotor Disorders International Study Group (COVADIS) invited leading experts to address strategies to enhance our clinical understanding of INOCA with an emphasis on the management of coronary vasomotor disorders. Design: Under-recognition of coronary vasomotor disorders, distinguishing different presentations of angina due to vasospasm and/or abnormal microvascular vasodilatation, developing invasive/non-invasive testing and treatment protocols, integrating diagnostic protocols into cardiologists' workflow and trials to inform guideline development were identified as key knowledge gaps and will be briefly addressed in this Viewpoint article. Setting: Virtual international meeting. Participants: Leading international experts in ischemic heart disease with no obstructive coronary artery disease. Interventions: None. Main outcome measures: None. Results: Topics discussed include: 1. Obstructive epicardial disease, functional vasospasm and microvascular disorders; 2. Under-recognition of coronary vasomotor disorders in clinical practice; 3. Complexity of coronary vasomotor disorders; 4. Understanding different presentations - vasospastic disease and microvascular angina; 5. Invasive/noninvasive testing and treatment protocols for vasospasm and microvascular angina assessment; 6. Treatment challenges; 7. Integrating diagnostic protocols into cardiologists' workflow; 8. The path forward to advance our approach to managing myocardial ischemia. Conclusions: Obstructive epicardial disease, functional vasospasm and microvascular disorders often co-exist and contribute to myocardial ischemia. Under-recognition, the complexity of coronary vasomotor disorders, understanding different presentations, testing and treatment protocols, treatment challenges, and integrating diagnostic protocols into cardiologists' workflow all contribute to the path forward to advance our management of myocardial ischemia for improved patient outcomes.
RESUMO
Background: It is unknown whether an initial invasive strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia improves outcomes in patients with a history of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) when EF >35%, but <45%. Methods: Among 5179 participants randomized into the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA), all of whom had LVEF >35%, we compared cardiovascular outcomes by treatment strategy in those with a history of HF or LV dysfunction (HF/LVD) at baseline versus those without HF/LVD. Median follow up was 3.2 years. Results: There were 398 (7.7%) participants with HF/LVD at baseline of whom 177 had HF/LVEF>45%, 28 had HF/LVEF 35-45% and 193 had LVEF 35-45% but no prior history of HF. HF/LVD was associated with more comorbidities at baseline, particularly prior myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and hypertension. Compared to those without HF/LVD, those with HF/LVD were more likely to experience a primary outcome composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, HF, or resuscitated cardiac arrest; four-year cumulative incidence rate (22.7% vs. 13.8%), cardiovascular death or MI (19.7% vs. 12.3%), and all-cause death or HF (15.0% vs. 6.9%). Those with HF/LVD randomized to the invasive versus conservative strategy had a lower rate of the primary outcome (17.2% vs. 29.3%, difference in 4- year event rate -12.1%; 95% CI: -22.6, -1.6%), whereas those without HF/LVD did not (13.0% vs. 14.6%, difference in 4-year event rate -1.6%; 95% CI: -3.8%, 0.7%; p-interaction = 0.055). A similar differential effect was seen for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and CV mortality when invasive versus conservative strategy associated outcomes were analyzed with LVEF as a continuous variable for those with and without prior HF. Conclusions: ISCHEMIA trial participants with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia with a history of HF or LVD were at increased risk for the primary outcome. In the small, high-risk subgroup with HF and LVEF 35-45%, an initial invasive approach was associated with a better event-free survival. This result should be considered hypothesis generating.