Bioresorbable scaffolds: current concepts and future technology / "Scaffolds" bioabsorbibles: conceptos actuales y tecnología futura

The introduction of the drug-eluting (DES) stent to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) had a significant impact on patient management of coronary artery disease and has been called the "third revolution" in interventional cardiology after the first 2 revolutions of balloon angioplasty and bare-metal stents. The promise of adaptive remodeling, restoration of vasomotion, late luminal enlargement, and retained potential for future coronary artery bypass grafting at the site of previous PCI has been the driving force behind bioresorbable stent/scaffold (BRS) technology development. Moreover, because of the inherent risk of late and very late stent thrombosis, BRS potentially offers a solution and recent years have seen heightened interest, hype, and hope. In this current review, we are aiming to shed light on strength and weakness of various BRS including the future perspective. (AU)

La introducción del stent liberador de fármacos (DES) en la intervención coronaria percutánea (ICP) tuvo un impacto significativo en el tratamiento de los pacientes con enfermedad de las arterias coronarias y se ha denominado la "tercera revolución" en cardiología intervencionista después de las dos primeras revoluciones de la angioplastia con balón y stents de metal desnudo. La promesa de remodelación adaptativa, restauración de la vasomoción, agrandamiento luminal tardío y potencial retenido para futuros injertos de derivación de la arteria coronaria en el sitio de la PCI anterior ha sido la fuerza impulsora detrás del desarrollo de la tecnología de stent/armazón biorreabsorbible (BRS). Además, debido al riesgo inherente de trombosis del stent tardía y muy tardía, la BRS ofrece potencialmente una solución y en los últimos años se ha visto un mayor interés, entusiasmo y esperanza. En esta revisión actual, nuestro objetivo es arrojar luz sobre la fortaleza y la debilidad de varios BRS, incluida la perspectiva futura. (AU)

Antiagregación plaquetaria: stents, isquemia y sangrado ¿Qué sabemos al respecto? / Platelet antiaggregation: stents, ischemia and bleeding What do we know about it?

Antiplatelet therapy and percutaneous coronary intervention are two of the most important interventions in the management of coronary artery disease. In the last 20 years there has been groundbreaking advances in the pharmacotherapy and stent technology. Bleeding is the most feared complication of antiplatelet therapy, mainly due to the increase in major adverse cardiovascular events besides the bleeding itself. Different clinical decision tools have developed with the aim to define which patients have a high ischemic or bleeding risk, thus individualizing treatment.

Hospital Characteristics and Early Enrollment Trends in the American College of Cardiology Voluntary Public Reporting Program.

Importance: Limited data exist regarding the characteristics of hospitals that do and do not participate in voluntary public reporting programs. Objective: To describe hospital characteristics and trends associated with early participation in the American College of Cardiology (ACC) voluntary reporting program for cardiac catheterization-percutaneous coronary intervention (CathPCI) and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) registries. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study analyzed enrollment trends and characteristics of hospitals that did and did not participate in the ACC voluntary public reporting program. All hospitals reporting procedure data to the National Cardiovascular Data Registry (NCDR) CathPCI or ICD registries that were eligible for the public reporting program from July 2014 (ie, program launch date) to May 2017 were included. Stepwise logistic regression was used to identify hospital characteristics associated with voluntary participation. Enrollment trends were evaluated considering the date US News & World Report (USNWR) announced that it would credit participating hospitals. Data analysis was performed from March 2017 to January 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Hospital characteristics and participation in the public reporting program. Results: By May 2017, 561 of 1747 eligible hospitals (32.1%) had opted to participate in the program. Enrollment increased from 240 to 376 hospitals (56.7%) 1 month after the USNWR announcement that program participation would be considered as a component of national hospital rankings. Compared with hospitals that did not enroll, program participants had increased median (IQR) procedural volumes for PCI (481 [280-764] procedures vs 332 [186-569] procedures; P < .001) and ICD (114 [56-220] procedures vs 62 [25-124] procedures; P < .001). Compared with nonparticipating hospitals, an increased mean (SD) proportion of participating hospitals adhered to composite discharge medications after PCI (0.96 [0.03] vs 0.92 [0.07]; P < .001) and ICD (0.88 [0.10] vs 0.81 [0.12]; P < .001). Hospital factors associated with enrollment included participation in 5 or more NCDR registries (odds ratio [OR],1.98; 95% CI, 1.24-3.19; P = .005), membership in a larger hospital system (ie, 3-20 hospitals vs ≤2 hospitals in the system: OR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.65-3.17; P = .001), participation in an NCDR pilot public reporting program of PCI 30-day readmissions (OR, 2.93; 95% CI, 2.19-3.91; P < .001), university affiliation (vs government affiliation: OR, 3.85, 95% CI, 1.03-14.29; P = .045; vs private affiliation: OR, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.35-3.57; P < .001), Midwest location (vs South: OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.06-2.08; P = .02), and increased comprehensive quality ranking (4 vs 1-2 performance stars in CathPCI: OR, 8.08; 95% CI, 5.07-12.87; P < .001; 4 vs 1 performance star in ICD: OR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.48-3.44; P < .001) (C statistic = 0.829). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that one-third of eligible hospitals participated in the ACC voluntary public reporting program and that enrollment increased after the announcement that program participation would be considered by USNWR for hospital rankings. Several hospital characteristics, experience with public reporting, and quality of care were associated with increased odds of participation.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on STEMI undergoing primary PCI treatment in Beijing, China.

OBJECTIVE: Strict control measures under the COVID epidemic have brought an inevitable impact on ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI)'s emergency treatment. We investigated the impact of the COVID on the treatment of patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI. METHODS: In this single center cohort study, we selected a time frame of 6 month after declaration of COVID-19 infection (Jan 24-July 24, 2020); a group of STEMI patients in the same period of 2019 was used as control. Finally, a total of 246 STEMI patients, who were underwent primary PCI, were enrolled into the study (136 non COVID-19 outbreak periods and 110 COVID-19 outbreak periods). The impact of COVID on the time of symptom onset to the first medical contact (symptom-to-FMC) and door to balloon (D-to-B) was investigated. Moreover, the primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, heart failure and malignant arrhythmia. RESULTS: Compared with the same period in 2019, there was a 19% decrease in the total number of STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI at the peak of the pandemic in 2020. The delay in symptom-to-FMC was significantly longer in COVID Outbreak period (180 [68.75, 342] vs 120 [60,240] min, P = 0.003), and the D-to-B times increased significantly (148 [115-190] vs 84 [70-120] min, P < 0.001). However, among patients with STEMI, MACE was similar in both time periods (18.3% vs 25.7%, p = 0.168). On multivariable analysis, COVID was not independently associated with MACE; the history of diabetes, left main disease and age>65 years were the strongest predictors of MACE in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID pandemic was not independently associated with MACE; suggesting that active primary PCI treatment preserved high-quality standards even when challenged by a severe epidemic. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://ClinicalTrials.gov Unique identifier: NCT04427735.

COVID-19 pandemic, mechanical reperfusion and 30-day mortality in ST elevation myocardial infarction.

OBJECTIVE: The initial data of the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes - ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction COVID-19 showed in Europe a remarkable reduction in primary percutaneous coronary intervention procedures and higher in-hospital mortality during the initial phase of the pandemic as compared with the prepandemic period. The aim of the current study was to provide the final results of the registry, subsequently extended outside Europe with a larger inclusion period (up to June 2020) and longer follow-up (up to 30 days). METHODS: This is a retrospective multicentre registry in 109 high-volume primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) centres from Europe, Latin America, South-East Asia and North Africa, enrolling 16 674 patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing PPPCI in March/June 2019 and 2020. The main study outcomes were the incidence of PPCI, delayed treatment (ischaemia time >12 hours and door-to-balloon >30 min), in-hospital and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: In 2020, during the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in PPCI as compared with 2019 (incidence rate ratio 0.843, 95% CI 0.825 to 0.861, p<0.0001). This reduction was significantly associated with age, being higher in older adults (>75 years) (p=0.015), and was not related to the peak of cases or deaths due to COVID-19. The heterogeneity among centres was high (p<0.001). Furthermore, the pandemic was associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon time (40 (25-70) min vs 40 (25-64) min, p=0.01) and total ischaemia time (225 (135-410) min vs 196 (120-355) min, p<0.001), which may have contributed to the higher in-hospital (6.5% vs 5.3%, p<0.001) and 30-day (8% vs 6.5%, p=0.001) mortality observed during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: Percutaneous revascularisation for STEMI was significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, with a 16% reduction in PPCI procedures, especially among older patients (about 20%), and longer delays to treatment, which may have contributed to the increased in-hospital and 30-day mortality during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.

Scope of Practice of US Interventional Cardiologists from an Analysis of Medicare Billing Data.

The contemporary scope of practice of interventional cardiologists (ICs) in the United States and recent trends are unknown. Using Medicare claims from 2013 to 2017, we categorized ICs into 4 practice categories (only percutaneous coronary intervention [PCI], PCI with noninvasive imaging, PCI with specialized interventions [peripheral/structural], and all 3 services) and evaluated associations with region, hospital bed size and teaching status, gender, and graduation year. Of 6,083 ICs in 2017, 10.9% performed only PCI, 68.3% PCI with noninvasive imaging, 5.7% PCI with specialized interventions, and 15.1% all 3 services. A higher proportion of Northeast ICs (vs South ICs) were performing only PCI (24.8% vs 7.3%) and PCI with specialized interventions (12% vs 3.4%), but lower PCI and noninvasive imaging (53.8% vs 71.7%) and all 3 services (9.3% and 17.6%). Regarding ICs at larger hospitals (bed size >575 vs <218), a higher proportion was performing only PCI (23.8% vs 5.2%) or PCI with specialized interventions (13.5% vs 1.7%) and lower proportion was performing PCI with noninvasive imaging (48.8% vs 78%), similar to teaching hospitals. Female ICs (vs male ICs) more frequently performed only PCI (18.9% vs 10.6%) and less frequently all 3 services (8.3% vs 15.4%). A lower proportion of recent graduates (2001 to 2016) performed only PCI (9.8% vs 13.8%) and PCI with noninvasive imaging (66.3% vs 72.6%) but a higher proportion performed all 3 services (18% vs 8.4%) than earlier graduates (1959 to 1984). From 2013 to 2017, only PCI and PCI with noninvasive imaging decreased, whereas PCI and specialized interventions and all 3 services increased (all p <0.001). In conclusion, there is marked heterogeneity in practice responsibilities among ICs, which has implications for training and competency assessments.

Cardiology providers' recommendations for treatments and use of patient decision aids for multivessel coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Rates of recommending percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vary across clinicians. Whether clinicians agree on preferred treatment options for multivessel coronary artery disease patients has not been well studied. METHODS AND RESULTS: We distributed a survey to 104 clinicians from the Northern New England Cardiovascular Study Group through email and at a regional meeting with 88 (84.6%) responses. The survey described three clinical vignettes of multivessel coronary artery disease patients. For each patient vignette participants selected appropriate treatment options and whether they would use a patient decision aid. The likelihood of choosing PCI only or PCI/CABG over CABG only was modeled using a multinomial regression. Across all vignettes, participants selected CABG only as an appropriate treatment option 24.2% of the time, PCI only 25.4% of the time, and both CABG or PCI as appropriate treatment options 50.4% of the time. Surgeons were less likely to choose PCI over CABG (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03, 0.59) or both treatments over CABG only (RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.03, 0.34) relative to cardiologists. Overall, 65% of participants responded they would use a patient decision aid with each vignette. CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of consensus on the appropriate treatment options across cardiologists and surgeons for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Treatment choice is influenced by both patient characteristics and clinician specialty.

Review of Irish patients meeting ST elevation criteria during the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has seen the introduction of important public health measures to minimise the spread of the virus. We aim to identify the impact government restrictions and hospital-based infection control procedures on ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) care during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Patients meeting ST elevation criteria and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention from 27 March 2020, the day initial national lockdown measures were announced in Ireland, were included in the study. Patients presenting after the lockdown period, from 18 May to 31 June 2020, were also examined. Time from symptom onset to first medical contact (FMC), transfer time and time of wire cross was noted. Additionally, patient characteristics, left ventricular ejection fraction, mortality and biochemical parameters were documented. Outcomes and characteristics were compared against a control group of patients meeting ST elevation criteria during the month of January. RESULTS: A total of 42 patients presented with STEMI during the lockdown period. A significant increase in total ischaemic time (TIT) was noted versus controls (8.81 hours (±16.4) vs 2.99 hours (±1.39), p=0.03), with increases driven largely by delays in seeking FMC (7.13 hours (±16.4) vs 1.98 hours (±1.46), p=0.049). TIT remained significantly elevated during the postlockdown period (6.1 hours (±5.3), p=0.05), however, an improvement in patient delays was seen versus the control group (3.99 hours (±4.5), p=0.06). There was no difference seen in transfer times and door to wire cross time during lockdown, however, a significant increase in transfer times was seen postlockdown versus controls (1.81 hours (±1.0) vs 1.1 hours (±0.87), p=0.004). CONCLUSION: A significant increase in TIT was seen during the lockdown period driven mainly by patient factors highlighting the significance of public health messages on public perception. Additionally, a significant delay in transfer times to our centre was seen postlockdown.

Coronary Revascularization in the Past Two Decades in Japan (From the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registries Cohort-1, -2, and -3).

The treatment of coronary artery disease has substantially changed over the past two decades. However, it is unknown whether and how much these changes have contributed to the improvement of long-term outcomes after coronary revascularization. We assessed trends in the demographics, practice patterns and long-term outcomes in 24,951 patients who underwent their first percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (n = 20,106), or isolated coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n = 4,845) using the data in a series of the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG Registries (Cohort-1 [2000 to 2002]: n = 7,435, Cohort-2 [2005 to 2007]: n = 8,435, and Cohort-3 [2011 to 2013]: n = 9,081). From Cohort-1 to Cohort-3, the patients got progressively older across subsequent cohorts (67.0 ± 10.0, 68.4 ± 9.9, and 69.8 ± 10.2 years, ptrend < 0.001). There was increased use of PCI over CABG (73.5%, 81.9%, and 85.2%, ptrend < 0.001) and increased prevalence of evidence-based medications use over time. The cumulative 3-year incidence of all-cause death was similar across the 3 cohorts (9.0%, 9.0%, and 9.3%, p = 0.74), while cardiovascular death decreased over time (5.7%, 5.1%, and 4.8%, p = 0.03). The adjusted risk for all-cause death and for cardiovascular death progressively decreased from Cohort-1 to Cohort-2 (HR:0.89, 95%CI:0.80 to 0.99, p = 0.03, and HR:0.80, 95%CI:0.70 to 0.92, p = 0.002, respectively), and from Cohort-2 to Cohort-3 (HR:0.86, 95%CI:0.78 to 0.95, p = 0.004, and HR:0.77, 95%CI:0.67-0.89, p < 0.001, respectively). The risks for stroke and repeated coronary revascularization also improved over time. In conclusions, we found a progressive and substantial reduction of adjusted risk for all-cause death, cardiovascular death, stroke, and repeated coronary revascularization over the past two decades in Japan.

Current trends in optimal medical therapy after PCI and its influence on clinical outcomes in China.

BACKGROUND: Limited data were available on the current trends in optimal medical therapy (OMT) after PCI and its influence on clinical outcomes in China. We aimed to evaluate the utilization and impact of OMT on the main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) in post-PCI patients and analyzed the factors predictive of OMT after discharge. METHODS: We collected data from 3812 individuals from 2016.10 to 2017.09 at TEDA International Cardiovascular Hospital. They were classified into an OMT group and a non-OMT group according to their OMT status, which was defined as the combination of dual antiplatelet therapy, statins, ß-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers after PCI. Multivariable Cox regression models were developed to assess the association between OMT and MACCEs, defined as all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and target vessel revascularization. A logistic regression model was established to analyze the factors predictive of OMT. RESULTS: Our results revealed that the proportion of patients receiving OMT and its component drugs decreased over time. A total of 36.0% of patients were still adherent to OMT at the end of follow-up. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that baseline OMT (P < 0.001, OR = 52.868) was the strongest predictor of OMT after PCI. The Cox hazard model suggested that smoking after PCI was associated with the 1-year risk of MACCE (P = 0.001, HR = 2.060, 95% CI 1.346-3.151), while OMT (P = 0.001, HR = 0.486, 95% CI 0.312-0.756) was an independent protective factor against postoperative MACCEs. CONCLUSIONS: There was still a gap between OMT utilization after PCI and the recommendations in the evidence-based guidelines. Sociodemographic and clinical factors influence the application of OMT. The management of OMT and smoking cessation after PCI should be emphasized.

Impact of the COVID-19 outbreak on hospitalizations and outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction in a Japanese Single Center.

There are a few Japanese data regarding the incidence and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak. We retrospectively reviewed the data of AMI patients admitted to the Nihon University Itabashi Hospital after a COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 (COVID-19 period) and the same period from 2017 to 2019 (control period). The patients' characteristics, time course of admission, diagnosis, and treatment of AMI, and 30-day mortality were compared between the two period-groups for both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI), respectively. The AMI inpatients decreased by 5.7% after the COVID-19 outbreak. There were no differences among most patient backgrounds between the two-period groups. For NSTEMI, the time from the symptom onset to admission was significantly longer, and that from the AMI diagnosis to the catheter examination tended to be longer during the COVID-19 period than the control period, but not for STEMI. The 30-day mortality was significantly higher during the COVID-19 period for NSTEMI (23.1% vs. 1.9%, P = 0.004), but not for STEMI (9.4% vs. 8.3%, P = 0.77). In conclusion, hospitalizations for AMI decreased after the COVID-19 outbreak. Acute cardiac care for STEMI and the associated outcome did not change, but NSTEMI outcome worsened after the COVID-19 outbreak, which may have been associated with delayed medical treatment due to the indirect impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Association Between Antifibrinolytic Therapy and Perioperative Outcomes in Patients With Coronary Artery Stents Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Patients with existing coronary artery stents are at an increased risk for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) when undergoing noncardiac surgery (NCS). Although the use of antifibrinolytic (AF) therapy in NCS has significantly increased in the past decade, the relationship between perioperative AF use and its association with MACEs among patients with existing coronary artery stents has yet to be assessed. In this study, we aim to evaluate the association of MACEs in patients with existing coronary artery stents who receive perioperative AF therapy during orthopedic surgery. METHODS: A single-center retrospective cohort study was conducted in adult patients with existing coronary artery stents who underwent orthopedic surgery from 2008 to 2018. Two cohorts were established: patients with existing coronary artery stents who did not receive perioperative AF and patients with coronary artery stents who received perioperative AF. Associations between AF use and the primary outcome of MACEs within 30 days postoperatively and the secondary outcomes of thrombotic complications, excessive surgical bleeding, and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were analyzed using logistic regression models. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to control for confounding. Secondary analyses examining the association between coronary stent type/timing and the outcomes of interest were performed using unadjusted logistic regression models. RESULTS: A total of 473 patients met study criteria, including 294 who did not receive AF and 179 patients who received AF. MACEs occurred in 15 (5.1%) patients who did not receive AF and 1 (0.6%) who received AF (P = .007). In weighted analyses, no significant difference was found in patients who received AF with regard to MACEs (odds ratio [OR] = 0.13, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.01-1.74, P = .12), thrombotic complications (OR = 1.19, 95% CI, 0.53-2.68, P = .68), or excessive surgical bleeding (OR = 0.13, 95% CI, 0.01-2.23, P = .16) compared to patients who did not receive AF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study are inconclusive whether an association exists between perioperative AF use in patients with coronary artery stents and the outcome of MACEs compared to patients who did not receive perioperative AF therapy. The authors acknowledge that the imprecise CI hinders the ability to definitively determine whether an association exists in the study population. Further large prospective studies, powered to detect differences in MACEs, are needed to assess the safety of perioperative AF in patients with existing coronary artery stents and to clarify the mechanism of perioperative MACEs in this high-risk population.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on cardiovascular mortality and catherization activity during the lockdown in central Germany: an observational study.

AIMS: During the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital admissions for cardiac care have declined. However, effects on mortality are unclear. Thus, we sought to evaluate the impact of the lockdown period in central Germany on overall and cardiovascular deaths. Simultaneously we looked at catheterization activities in the same region. METHODS AND RESULTS: Data from 22 of 24 public health-authorities in central Germany were aggregated during the pandemic related lockdown period and compared to the same time period in 2019. Information on the total number of deaths and causes of death, including cardiovascular mortality, were collected. Additionally, we compared rates of hospitalization (n = 5178) for chronic coronary syndrome (CCS), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and out of hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) in 26 hospitals in this area. Data on 5,984 deaths occurring between March 23, 2020 and April 26, 2020 were evaluated. In comparison to the reference non-pandemic period in 2019 (deaths: n = 5832), there was a non-significant increase in all-cause mortality of 2.6% [incidence rate ratio (IRR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.06; p = 0.16]. Cardiovascular and cardiac mortality increased significantly by 7.6% (IRR 1.08, 95%-CI 1.01-1.14; p = 0.02) and by 11.8% (IRR 1.12, 95%-CI 1.05-1.19; p < 0.001), respectively. During the same period, our data revealed a drop in cardiac catherization procedures. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19-related lockdown a significant increase in cardiovascular mortality was observed in central Germany, whereas catherization activities were reduced. The mechanisms underlying both of these observations should be investigated further in order to better understand the effects of a pandemic-related lockdown and social-distancing restrictions on cardiovascular care and mortality.

Smart materials in cardiovascular implants: Shape memory alloys and shape memory polymers.

Smart materials have intrinsic properties that change in a controlled fashion in response to external stimuli. Currently, the only smart materials with a significant clinical impact in cardiovascular implant design are shape memory alloys, particularly Nitinol. Recent prodigious progress in material science has resulted in the development of sophisticated shape memory polymers. In this article, we have reviewed the literature and outline the characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages of shape memory alloys and shape memory polymers which are relevant to clinical cardiovascular applications, and describe the potential of these smart materials for applications in coronary stents and transcatheter valves.

Impact of public health emergency response to COVID-19 on management and outcome for NSTEMI patients in Beijing: A single-center historic control.

BACKGROUND: During coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic, reducing the number of invasive procedure and choosing conservative medication strategy for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is unavoidable. Whether this relatively conservative strategy will impact in-hospital outcome for NSTEMI patients remains unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: The current study included all consecutive NSTEMI patients who visited the emergency department in Fuwai Hospital from February 1 to March 31, 2020 and all the NSTEMI patients in the same period of 2019 as a historical control. Very-high-risk patients were defined as clinical presentation of heart failure, cardiac shock, cardiac arrest, recurrent chest pain, and life-threatening arrhythmias. The primary outcome was in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or heart failure. A total of 115 NSTEMI patients were enrolled since the outbreak of COVID-19, and a total of 145 patients were included in the control group. There was a tendency toward higher MACE risk in 2020 compared with 2019 (18.3% vs. 11.7%, p = .14). Among very-high-risk patients, early percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy in 2019 was associated with reduced MACE risk compared with delayed PCI in 2020 (60.6% [20/33] in 2020 vs. 27.9% [12/43] in 2019, p = .01). CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 pandemic results in a significant reduction in immediate/early PCI and a trend toward higher adverse event rate during hospitalization, particular in very-high-risk patients.

Temporal Trends in Invasive Management and In-Hospital Mortality of Patients With Non-ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes and Chronic Kidney Disease.

We analyzed data from 4 nationwide prospective registries of consecutive patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) admitted to the Italian Intensive Cardiac Care Unit network between 2005 and 2014. Out of 26 315 patients with ACS enrolled, 13 073 (49.7%) presented a diagnosis of non-ST elevation (NSTE)-ACS and had creatinine levels available at hospital admission: 1207 (9.2%) had severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <30), 3803 (29.1%) mild to moderate CKD (eGFR 31-59), and 8063 (61.7%) no CKD (eGFR > 60 mL/min/1.73 m2). Patients with severe CKD had worse clinical characteristics compared with those with mild-moderate or no kidney dysfunction, including all the key predictors of mortality (P < .0001) which became worse over time (all P < .0001). Over the decade of observation, a significant increase in percutaneous coronary intervention rates was observed in patients without CKD (P for trend = .0001), but not in those with any level of CKD. After corrections for significant mortality predictors, severe CKD (odds ratio, OR: 5.49; 95% CI: 3.24-9.29; P < .0001) and mild-moderate CKD (OR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.52-3.59; P < .0001) remained strongly associated with higher in-hospital mortality. The clinical characteristics of patients with NSTE-ACS and CKD remain challenging and their mortality rate is still higher compared with patients without CKD.

Temporal Changes and Institutional Variation in Use of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease in the United States: An NCDR Research to Practice Project.

Importance: After disparate results from observational and small randomized studies, the COMPLETE trial demonstrated superiority of multivessel (MV) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) over culprit-only PCI for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Objective: To describe temporal trends and institutional variation of MV PCI use for STEMI in the United States to inform how new evidence may influence clinical practice. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included STEMI admissions involving MV disease from 1598 institutions in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry from the third quarter of 2009 to the first quarter of 2018. An MV PCI was defined as a PCI to a nonculprit lesion within 45 days of the index procedure. Exposures: Multivessel PCI, defined as placement of coronary stents in 2 or more major epicardial vessels or the staged placement of 1 or more coronary stents in a major epicardial vessel distinct from the index culprit vessel, within 45 days of the index PCI. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included the proportional use of MV PCI among STEMI admissions with MV disease, and the timing of MV PCI (an index procedure, a staged procedure during index hospitalization, or a postdischarge procedure within 45 days). Results: Among 359 879 admissions with STEMI and MV disease, MV PCI was performed in 38.5% (n = 138 380; mean [SD] age of patients, 62.3 [12.3] years; 102 266 men [73.9%]) within 45 days. Of those receiving MV PCIs, 30.8% (n = 42 629) had a procedure performed during the index procedure, 31.6% (n = 43 696) as a staged procedure during the index hospitalization, and 37.6% (n = 52 055) within 45 days of discharge. Complete revascularization of all diseased arteries was performed in 76.2% (n = 105 389). From the third quarter of 2009 to the second quarter of 2013, MV PCI use declined by 10%, from 42.7% (3230 of 7572 cases) to a nadir of 32.7% (3386 of 10 342 cases), followed by an increase to 44.0% (5062 of 11 497 cases) by the fourth quarter of 2017. During this time, there was a 13.6% decline in use of postdischarge staged MV PCI (from 23.4% of STEMI cases [1772 of 7572 cases] in the third quarter of 2009 to 9.9% [1094 of 11 171 cases] in the fourth quarter of 2014) and an 12.5% increase in MV PCI performed during the index admission (from 19.3% [1458 of 7572 cases] in the third quarter of 2009 to 31.8% [3557 of 11 171 cases] in the first quarter of 2018). Multivessel PCI use varied substantially across institutions, with a median use of 37.9% (interquartile range, 30.0%-46.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: In this large, nationwide analysis, MV PCI use for patients with STEMI has been increasing through early 2018 but was used in the minority of patients and with wide variability across US institutions. The adoption of new trial results into guidelines and practice may further promote the growth of MV PCI.

Impact of COVID-19 pandemic and diabetes on mechanical reperfusion in patients with STEMI: insights from the ISACS STEMI COVID 19 Registry.

BACKGROUND: It has been suggested the COVID pandemic may have indirectly affected the treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, by avoidance or significant delays in contacting the emergency system. No data have been reported on the impact of diabetes on treatment and outcome of STEMI patients, that was therefore the aim of the current subanalysis conducted in patients included in the International Study on Acute Coronary Syndromes-ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction (ISACS-STEMI) COVID-19. METHODS: The ISACS-STEMI COVID-19 is a retrospective registry performed in European centers with an annual volume of > 120 primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and assessed STEMI patients, treated with primary PCI during the same periods of the years 2019 versus 2020 (March and April). Main outcomes are the incidences of primary PCI, delayed treatment, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: A total of 6609 patients underwent primary PCI in 77 centers, located in 18 countries. Diabetes was observed in a total of 1356 patients (20.5%), with similar proportion between 2019 and 2020. During the pandemic, there was a significant reduction in primary PCI as compared to 2019, similar in both patients with (Incidence rate ratio (IRR) 0.79 (95% CI: 0.73-0.85, p < 0.0001) and without diabetes (IRR 0.81 (95% CI: 0.78-0.85, p < 0.0001) (p int = 0.40). We observed a significant heterogeneity among centers in the population with and without diabetes (p < 0.001, respectively). The heterogeneity among centers was not related to the incidence of death due to COVID-19 in both groups of patients. Interaction was observed for Hypertension (p = 0.024) only in absence of diabetes. Furthermore, the pandemic was independently associated with a significant increase in door-to-balloon and total ischemia times only among patients without diabetes, which may have contributed to the higher mortality, during the pandemic, observed in this group of patients. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the treatment of patients with STEMI, with a similar reduction in primary PCI procedures in both patients with and without diabetes. Hypertension had a significant impact on PCI reduction only among patients without diabetes. We observed a significant increase in ischemia time and door-to-balloon time mainly in absence of diabetes, that contributed to explain the increased mortality observed in this group of patients during the pandemic. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04412655.