Impact of in-Hospital Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction Recovery on Long-Term Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Impella Support for HR PCI or Cardiogenic Shock: A Sub-Analysis from the IMP-IT Registry.

(1) Background: Percutaneous left ventricle assist devices (pLVADs) demonstrated an improvement in mid-term clinical outcomes in selected patients with severely depressed left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. However, the prognostic impact of in-hospital LVEF recovery is unclear. Accordingly, the present sub-analysis aims to evaluate the impact of LVEF recovery in both cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR PCI) supported with pLVADs in the IMP-IT registry. (2) Methods: A total of 279 patients (116 patients in CS and 163 patients in HR PCI) treated with Impella 2.5 or CP in the IMP-IT registry were included in this analysis, after excluding those who died while in the hospital or with missing data on LVEF recovery. The primary study objective was a composite of all-cause death, rehospitalisation for heart failure, left ventricle assist device (LVAD) implantation, or heart transplantation (HT), overall referred to as the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year. The study aimed to evaluate the impact of in-hospital LVEF recovery on the primary study objective in patients treated with Impella for HR PCI and CS, respectively. (3) Results: The mean in-hospital change in LVEF was 10 ± 1% (p < 0.001) in the CS cohort and 3 ± 7% (p < 0.001) in the HR PCI group, achieved by 44% and 40% of patients, respectively. In the CS group, patients with less than 10% in-hospital LVEF recovery experienced higher rates of MACE at 1 year of follow-up (FU) (51% vs. 21%, HR 3.8, CI 1.7-8.4, p < 0.01). After multivariate analysis, LVEF recovery was the main independent protective factor for MACE at FU (HR 0.23, CI 0.08-0.64, p = 0.02). In the HR PCI group, LVEF recovery (>3%) was not associated with lower MACE at multivariable analysis (HR 0.73, CI 0.31-1.72, p = 0.17). Conversely, the completeness of revascularisation was found to be a protective factor for MACE (HR 0.11, CI 0.02-0.62, p = 0.02) (4) Conclusions: Significant LVEF recovery was associated with improved outcomes in CS patients treated with PCI during mechanical circulatory support with Impella, whereas complete revascularisation showed a significant clinical relevance in HR PCI.

Comparing Left Internal Mammary Angiography via Right Radial or Femoral Access With a Single-Catheter Technique.

BACKGROUND: We compared the safety and effectiveness of left internal mammary artery (LIMA) angiography through right radial (Rad) or femoral (Fem) artery access with a single-catheter technique. METHODS: LIMA selective imaging was attempted through Rad access with a Bartorelli-Cozzi 5.2Fr catheter in 190 consecutive patients. They were compared with 190 consecutive patients in whom LIMA was imaged with a mammary catheter via Fem access. Successful LIMA imaging within 15 min and time needed for imaging were efficacy end-point. Safety metrics were cerebral ischemic events and access site complications. RESULTS: Overall success rate of Rad LIMA imaging was 62 %. The success rate of Fem LIMA imaging was 97 %. In Rad group, patient age emerged as the single independent correlate of success at multivariate analysis (OR 9.938, CI 0.902-0.977 p = 0.002), with 77 % success rate in the lowest age quartile (<67 years). Median time needed to obtain selective LIMA imaging was significantly longer in Rad than in Fem (5.5 min vs. 4.0 min, p < 0.001), but right radial access was not a significant predictor of time needed to image LIMA at multivariate analysis (K 0.726, CI [-0.130-1.581], p = 0.09). Access site complications (6 vs. 0 cases, p = 0.030), and clinically significant bleeding (4 vs. 0 cases, p = 0.1) occurred in Fem group only. No peri-procedural cerebrovascular events were seen in either Group. CONCLUSIONS: Right radial artery is a suboptimal, yet reasonable access for LIMA-graft selective imaging in younger patients. The technique is free from vascular complications and peri-procedural cerebrovascular events.

Polymer-Free Biolimus-Eluting Stents or Polymer-Based Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Bifurcation Lesions.

BACKGROUND: A polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent (PF-BES) and a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) recently showed similar clinical profiles and appear to be competing options in specific clinical settings of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether they perform similarly also in complex procedural settings as coronary bifurcation lesions remains unaddressed. METHODS: All consecutive patients undergoing coronary bifurcation PCI with PF-BES or the new iteration of the ZES from three large multicenter real-world registries were included. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and stent thrombosis (ST). Multiple analyses to adjust for baseline differences were carried out including propensity-score matching, propensity-score stratification and inverse-probability-weighting. Outcomes are reported according to Cox proportional hazard models censored at 400-day follow-up. RESULTS: 1169 patients treated with PF-BES (n = 440) or ZES (n = 729) on the main branch of a coronary bifurcation lesion were included (mean age 69 ± 11 years, 75.4% male, 53.8% acute coronary syndrome at presentation, 26.6% left main bifurcation, median dual antiplatelet therapy duration 12 [range 12-12] months). MACE, all-cause death, TLR and ST tended towards non-statistically higher rates with the PF-BES as compared to the ZES. Higher MI and target vessel revascularization occurrence was observed with PF-BES. CONCLUSIONS: In this large contemporary cohort of patients undergoing coronary bifurcation PCI, the occurrence of MACE was non-statistically different with the use of PF-BES and ZES devices. However, differences favoring the ZES device that may entail clinical relevance were observed. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings and explore whether they remain valid when a short dual antiplatelet therapy is adopted.

Device-related complications after Impella mechanical circulatory support implantation: an IMP-IT observational multicentre registry substudy.

AIMS: To report the incidence, the predictors and clinical impact of device-related complications (DRCs) in the IMP-IT (IMPella Mechanical Circulatory Support Device in Italy) registry. Impella is percutaneous left ventricular assist devices, which provides mechanical circulatory support both in cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). The IMP-IT registry is a multicentre registry evaluating the trends in use and clinical outcomes of Impella in Italy. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 406 patients have been included in this registry: 56.4% in the setting of CS, while 43.6% patients in the setting of HR-PCI. DRCs were defined as a composite endpoint of access-site bleeding, limb ischaemia, vascular complication requiring treatment, haemolysis, aortic injury, and left ventricular perforation. DRC incidence in the overall population was 25.6%, with significantly higher rate in the CS (37.1%) than in the HR-PCI (10.7%) group. The most frequent complication was haemolysis (11.8%), which occurred almost exclusively in CS population. Access-site bleeding was observed in 9.6% of the overall population, with no significant difference between the two groups. Limb ischaemia was observed in 8.3% of the overall population, with significantly higher rate in the CS group. CS and right ventricular dysfunction appear as the strongest independent predictors of DRC. One-year mortality in patients with DRC appears higher than in patients with no DRC. However, DRC was not confirmed as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality at multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: In the IMP-IT registry, the rate of DRC was 25.6%, with CS being the strongest independent predictor. DRC was not found as an independent predictor of 1-year mortality.

[A case of concomitant aortic stenosis and aortic arch aneurysm: a combined endovascular approach]. / Aneurisma dell'arco aortico e stenosi valvolare aortica: un approccio endovascolare combinato.

Aortic valve stenosis and aortic aneurysmal disease are increasingly prevalent with advancing age. When associated, their treatment is very challenging. A female patient with previous Tirone-David procedure presented to our hospital with acute heart failure. She was diagnosed with severe aortic stenosis, aneurysm of the aortic arch and the descending thoracic aorta. She underwent successful concomitant aortic arch TEVAR and transcatheter aortic valve repair, with optimal acute and mid-term result. Our case demonstrates that a careful pre-procedural planning, along with a good cooperation between interventional cardiologists, cardiac surgeons, radiologists and clinical cardiologists, are essential in order to guarantee an excellent outcome for the patient.

Timing of Impella implantation and outcomes in cardiogenic shock or high-risk percutaneous coronary revascularization.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of the microaxial percutaneous mechanical circulatory support device (Impella® pump) implantation pre-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus during/after PCI in cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk PCI populations. BACKGROUND: A better understanding of the safety and effectiveness of the Impella and the role of timing of this support initiation in specific clinical settings is of utmost clinical relevance. METHODS: A total of 365 patients treated with Impella 2.5/CP in the 17 centers of the IMP-IT Registry were included. Through propensity-score weighting (PSW) analysis, 1-year clinical outcomes were assessed separately in CS and HR-PCI patients, stratified by timing of Impella support. RESULTS: Pre-procedural insertion was associated with an improvement in 1-year survival in patients with CS due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI) treated with PCI (p = .04 before PSW, p = .009 after PSW) and HR-PCI (p < .01 both before and after PSW). Among patients undergoing HR-PCI, early Impella support was also associated with a lower rate of the composite of mortality, re-hospitalization for heart failure, and need for left-ventricular assist device/heart transplantation at 1-year (p = .04 before PSW, p = .01 after PSW). Furthermore, Impella use during/after PCI was associated with an increased in-hospital life-threatening and severe bleeding among patients with AMI-CS receiving PCI (7 vs. 16%, p = .1) and HR-PCI (1 vs. 9%, p = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggested a survival benefit and reduced rates of major bleeding when a pre-PCI Impella implantation instead of during-after procedure was used in the setting of HR-PCI and AMI-CS.

Real-world reasons and outcomes for 1-month versus longer dual antiplatelet therapy strategies with a polymer-free BIOLIMUS A9-coated stent.

BACKGROUND: A large trial established the favorable profile of a new polymer-free biolimus A9-eluting stent (PF-BES) with a 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients. This is the first study comparing outcomes for a 1-month versus longer DAPT strategies following PF-BES-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: All patients undergoing PF-BES-PCI (January 2016 to July 2018) were included in the multicenter CHANCE registry. Patients were stratified according to DAPT strategy at discharge (planned 1-month vs. planned >1-month). Primary outcomes were the 390-day estimates of a patient-oriented and of a device-oriented composite endpoints (POCE: death, myocardial infarction [MI] or target vessel revascularization; DOCE: cardiac death, target vessel-MI or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization). Landmark analyses from 1-month post-PCI were carried. RESULTS: Following PF-BES-PCI, 328(40.3%) and 485(59.6%) patients were discharged with 1-month and longer DAPT (12 months [6-12]), respectively. Patients with a previous or index MI were less likely to be discharged on 1-month DAPT. Patients prescribed with 1-month DAPT were more likely to be at HBR than those with longer DAPT (90.2% vs. 69.9%, p = .001). No between-groups differences in the primary outcomes (planned 1-month vs. planned >1-month DAPT: POCE 11.9% vs. 13.2%, p = .747; DOCE: 4.8% vs. 8.1%, p = .500) were observed, also after adjusting for confoundings (POCE: adjusted-hazard ratio [adj-HR] 1.26, 95%CI 0.74-2.13; DOCE: adj-HR 1.00, 95%CI 0.49-1.99). Landmark analyses showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: In a large all-comers registry of PF-BES PCI, no interaction of planned DAPT strategy (1-month vs. >1-month) with outcomes was found. This observation warrants investigation in adequately powered randomized studies (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03622203).

Safety and efficacy of polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents versus ultrathin stents in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcation: A propensity score analysis from the RAIN and CHANCE registries.

OBJECTIVES: Evaluate safety and efficacy of polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents (PF-BESs) versus ultrathin stents in unprotected left main (ULM) or bifurcation. BACKGROUND: PF-BESs due to reduced length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are increasingly used. However, there are limited data about safety and efficacy for ULM or bifurcation. METHODS: We selected all-patients treated for ULM or bifurcation from two multicenter real life registries (RAIN [NCT03544294] evaluating ultrathin stents, CHANCE [NCT03622203] appraising PF-BES). After propensity score with matching, the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE; a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization [TLR], and stent thrombosis [ST]), while its components along with target vessel revascularization (TVR) secondary endpoints. RESULTS: Three thousand and three patients treated with ultrathin stents and 446 with PF-BESs, resulting respectively in 562 and 281 after propensity score with matching (33 and 22%, respectively, with ULM disease). After 12 (8-20) months, rates of MACE were similar (9 vs. 8%, p = 0.56) without difference in TLR and ST (3.0 vs. 1.7%, p = .19 and 1.8 vs. 1.1%, p = .42). These results were consistent for ULM group (3 vs. 1.7% and 1.8 vs. 1.1%, p = .49 and .76), for non-ULM group (2.1 vs. 3.4%, p = .56 and 1.2 vs. 1.7%, p = .78) and for two-stent strategy (8.7 vs. 4.5% and 4.3 vs. 3.2%, p = .75 and .91). Among patients treated with 1 month of DAPT in both groups, those with ultrathin stents experienced higher rates of MACE related to all-cause death (22 vs. 12%, p = .04) with higher although not significant rates of ST (3 vs. 0%, p = .45). CONCLUSIONS: PF-BES implanted on ULM or BiF offered freedom from TLR and ST comparable to ultrathin stents. PF-BESs patients assuming DAPT for 1 month experienced a lower despite not significant incidence of ST.

Dual antiplatelet therapy strategies and clinical outcomes in patients treated with polymer-free biolimus A9-coated stents.

AIMS: A large trial established the favourable clinical profile of a new polymer-free biolimus A9-eluting stent (PF-BES) with a one-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). We aimed to evaluate the real-world patterns of indications, DAPT strategies and outcomes for the PF-BES following this evidence. METHODS AND RESULTS: CHANCE is a multicentre registry including all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with at least one PF-BES. The reasons for the PF-BES PCI and planned antithrombotic regimens were collected. Primary outcomes were the 390-day Kaplan-Meier estimates of patient-oriented and device-oriented composite endpoints (POCE: death, myocardial infarction [MI] or target vessel revascularisation [TVR]; DOCE: cardiac death, target vessel MI or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation [ID-TLR]). Between January 2016 and July 2018, 858 patients (age 74±10 years, 64.6% male, 58.7% acute coronary syndrome presentation) underwent PF-BES PCI. The main reasons for the physicians' choice of PF-BES reflected a perceived HBR in 77.7% of patients. One-month DAPT was planned in 40.3% of patients. At 390-day follow-up (median 340 days, interquartile range: 187-390 days), the estimated incidence of POCE was 13.1% (any MI 3.7%, any TVR 3.4%) and of DOCE was 7.1% (TV-MI 3.6%, ID-TLR 1.4%), while the 390-day estimate of any bleeding event was 11.1% (BARC 3-5 bleeding 3.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In a large all-comers registry, PF-BES was used mostly in HBR patients, frequently followed by a very short DAPT regimen. The reported outcomes suggest a favourable safety and efficacy profile for the PF-BES in a real-world clinical setting. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03622203.

Observational multicentre registry of patients treated with IMPella mechanical circulatory support device in ITaly: the IMP-IT registry.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate nationwide trends and clinical outcomes of the Impella device for cardiogenic shock (CS) and high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (HR-PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The IMP-IT study was a multicentre observational national registry which enrolled all patients treated with Impella 2.5, Impella CP, Impella 5.0 and Impella RP, both for CS and HR-PCI indications, across 17 Italian centres from 2004 to June 2018. A total of 406 patients were included: 229 had CS (56.4%) and 177 underwent HR-PCI (43.6%). The use of Impella increased significantly during the study period (average annual percent change 39.8%, 95% confidence interval: 30.4 to 49.9; p<0.0001) for both indications. The Impella 2.5 was the most commonly used device (N=242; 59.6%). Rates of in-hospital and one-year all-cause death in patients with CS were 46.9% and 57.0%, respectively; 18.5% underwent left ventricular assist device implantation or heart transplant at one year. Rates of in-hospital and one-year all-cause death in patients who underwent HR-PCI were 5.7% and 15.6%, respectively. Rates of device-related complications were 37.1% and 10.7% in the setting of CS and HR-PCI, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the Impella for CS and HR-PCI is increasing substantially in Italy, despite relatively high rates of device-related complications.

[Updated SICI-GISE position paper on institutional and operator requirements for transcatheter aortic valve implantation]. / Update del documento di posizione della Società Italiana di Cardiologia Interventistica (SICI-GISE) sui requisiti minimi per ospedali ed operatori che eseguono procedure di impianto transcatetere di protesi valvolare aortica.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has revolutionized the management of patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis and has become the standard of care for inoperable patients and the preferred therapy for those at increased surgical risk with peculiar clinical and anatomic features. Technology advances, growing experience and accumulating data prompted the update of the 2011 Italian Society of Interventional Cardiology (SICI-GISE) position paper on institutional and operator requirements to perform TAVI. The main objective of this document is to provide a guidance to assess the potential of institutions and operators to initiate and maintain an efficient TAVI program.

Myocardial ischemia due to a coronary-pulmonary fistula treated with coil embolization.

We describe one case of myocardial ischemia due to a coronary-pulmonary fistula, successfully treated with coils. Coronary fistulae are a rare cause of angina in adults with normal coronary arteries. Percutaneous treatment represents an alternative to surgery and may be offered as a relatively low risk procedure. The choice between surgical and percutaneous treatment must take into account clinical and anatomical considerations.

Off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting without mechanical stabilization in minipericardiotomy: a preliminary experience.

We describe a new off-pump coronary bypass technique, the "double suspension-stabilization stitch", performed without the support of mechanical stabilizers. This technique is very cheap and yields good hemodynamic stability, with no epicardial damage.

Coronary vasospasm and aborted sudden death treated with an implantable defibrillator and stenting.

In selected patients suffering from variant angina, an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) and coronary stenting can be helpful to prevent sudden death and treat coronary artery spasm. We report a case of a 47-year-old woman suffering from variant angina, who experienced an episode of ventricular fibrillation promptly cardioverted. After coronary angiography documentation of a mild atherosclerosis, an ICD was implanted and oral nitrates and calcium antagonists were prescribed. The recurrence of chest pain and palpitations prompted us to perform a second coronary angiography that documented a focal coronary artery spasm successfully treated with stent implantation. No other episodes of angina or ventricular arrhythmia were documented during the following 6 months of follow-up.