Stopping Aspirin Within 1 Month After Stenting for Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome: The T-PASS Randomized Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Stopping aspirin within 1 month after implantation of a drug-eluting stent for ticagrelor monotherapy has not been exclusively evaluated for patients with acute coronary syndrome. The aim of this study was to investigate whether ticagrelor monotherapy after <1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is noninferior to 12 months of ticagrelor-based DAPT for adverse cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients with acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: In this randomized, open-label, noninferiority trial, 2850 patients with acute coronary syndrome who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation at 24 centers in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either ticagrelor monotherapy (90 mg twice daily) after <1 month of DAPT (n=1426) or 12 months of ticagrelor-based DAPT (n=1424) between April 24, 2019, and May 31, 2022. The primary end point was the net clinical benefit as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding at 1 year after the index procedure in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary end points were the individual components of the primary end point. RESULTS: Among 2850 patients who were randomized (mean age, 61 years; 40% ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction), 2823 (99.0%) completed the trial. Aspirin was discontinued at a median of 16 days (interquartile range, 12-25 days) in the group receiving ticagrelor monotherapy after <1 month of DAPT. The primary end point occurred in 40 patients (2.8%) in the group receiving ticagrelor monotherapy after <1-month DAPT, and in 73 patients (5.2%) in the ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT group (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.37-0.80]; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.002 for superiority). This finding was consistent in the per-protocol population as a sensitivity analysis. The occurrence of major bleeding was significantly lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy after <1-month DAPT group compared with the 12-month DAPT group (1.2% versus 3.4%; hazard ratio, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.20-0.61]; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that stopping aspirin within 1 month for ticagrelor monotherapy is both noninferior and superior to 12-month DAPT for the 1-year composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, and major bleeding, primarily because of a significant reduction in major bleeding, among patients with acute coronary syndrome receiving drug-eluting stent implantation. Low event rates, which may suggest enrollment of relatively non-high-risk patients, should be considered in interpreting the trial. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03797651.

Intravascular ultrasound-guided drug-coated balloon angioplasty for femoropopliteal artery disease: a clinical trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have demonstrated favourable outcomes following endovascular therapy for femoropopliteal artery (FPA) disease. However, uncertainty remains whether the use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) can improve the outcomes of DCBs. METHODS: This prospective, multicentre, randomized trial, conducted at seven centres in South Korea, compared the outcomes of IVUS-guided vs. angiography-guided angioplasty for treating FPA disease with DCBs. Patients were assigned to receive IVUS-guided (n = 119) or angiography-guided (n = 118) angioplasty using DCBs. The primary endpoint was 12-month primary patency. RESULTS: Between May 2016 and August 2022, 237 patients were enrolled and 204 (86.0%) completed the trial (median follow-up; 363 days). The IVUS guidance group showed significantly higher primary patency [83.8% vs. 70.1%; cumulative difference 19.6% (95% confidence interval 6.8 to 32.3); P = .01] and increased freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization [92.4% vs. 83.0%; difference 11.6% (95% confidence interval 3.1 to 20.1); P = .02], sustained clinical improvement (89.1% vs. 76.3%, P = .01), and haemodynamic improvement (82.4% vs. 66.9%, P = .01) at 12 months compared with the angiography guidance group. The IVUS group utilized larger balloon diameters and pressures for pre-dilation, more frequent post-dilation, and higher pressures for post-dilation, resulting in a greater post-procedural minimum lumen diameter (3.90 ± 0.59 vs. 3.71 ± 0.73 mm, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Intravascular ultrasound guidance significantly improved the outcomes of DCBs for FPA disease in terms of primary patency, freedom from clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and sustained clinical and haemodynamic improvement at 12 months. These benefits may be attributed to IVUS-guided optimization of the lesion before and after DCB treatment.

Ticagrelor monotherapy for acute coronary syndrome: an individual patient data meta-analysis of TICO and T-PASS trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin and a potent P2Y12 inhibitor is recommended for 12 months after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. Monotherapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor after short-term DAPT is an attractive option to better balance the risks of ischaemia and bleeding. Therefore, this study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT, especially in patients with ACS. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched from inception to 11 November 2023, and for the primary analysis, individual patient data were pooled from the relevant randomized clinical trials comparing ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term (≤3 months) DAPT with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT, exclusively in ACS patients undergoing DES implantation. The co-primary endpoints were ischaemic endpoint (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and bleeding endpoint [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding] at 1 year. RESULTS: Individual patient data from two randomized clinical trials including 5906 ACS patients were analysed. At 1 year, the primary ischaemic endpoint did not differ between the ticagrelor monotherapy and ticagrelor-based DAPT groups [1.9% vs. 2.5%; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.56-1.13; P = .194]. The incidence of the primary bleeding endpoint was lower in the ticagrelor monotherapy group (2.4% vs. 4.5%; adjusted HR 0.54; 95% CI 0.40-0.72; P < .001). The results were consistent in a secondary aggregate data meta-analysis including the ACS subgroup of additional randomized clinical trials which enrolled patients with ACS as well as chronic coronary syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: In ACS patients undergoing DES implantation, ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term DAPT was associated with less major bleeding without a concomitant increase in ischaemic events compared with ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (ID: CRD42023476470).

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: A post-hoc analysis of the RACING trial.

AIM: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with metabolic syndrome (MetS) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this post-hoc subgroup analysis of the RACING trial, patients were analysed based on the presence of MetS. MetS was defined as meeting at least three of the five following criteria: (a) elevated waist circumference; (b) elevated triglycerides; (c) reduced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol; (d) elevated blood pressure; and (e) elevated fasting glucose. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. RESULTS: Of the 3780 patients enrolled in the RACING trial, 1703 (45.1%) had MetS at baseline. The primary outcome rate was 10.1% and 10.3% in patients with MetS receiving ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio = 0.97; 95% confidence interval = 0.72-1.32; p = .868). Lower rates of intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction (3.9% vs. 8.0%; p < .001) and lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (57 vs. 65 mg/dl; p < .001) were observed with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy. Furthermore, the rate of new-onset diabetes was 18.5% and 19.1% in each group (p = .822). There were no significant interactions between MetS and therapy regarding study outcomes in the total population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MetS and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, a moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy had comparable cardiovascular benefits with those of high-intensity statin monotherapy. Meanwhile, ezetimibe combination therapy was associated with lower drug intolerance and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, but there was no apparent between-group difference in new-onset diabetes.

Long-Term Outcomes of Endovascular Repair Within and Outside the Instructions for Use in Korean Patients With Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) has been used worldwide to treat abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs). Outcomes after EVAR within and outside the instruction for use (IFU) remain controversial. We analyzed long-term outcomes of EVAR within-the-IFU compared with that outside-the-IFU and baseline clinical/anatomical characteristics that influence outcomes of EVAR. METHODS: The study included 546 patients who underwent EVAR for infrarenal AAA from 1997 to 2021 at 2 Korean medical centers. The primary endpoint was graft-related adverse events (GRAEs), including type 1 or 3 endoleak, reintervention (included open conversion), aneurysm sac enlargement, aneurysm-related mortality (ARM), rupture, stent-graft migration, and stent thrombotic occlusion. RESULTS: The patients who underwent EVAR outside the IFU were 287 (52.6%). A neck angle of >60° was most common outside the IFU criteria (n=146, 50.9%). This study revealed that patients outside the IFU had a higher rate of GRAEs compared with patients within the IFU (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.879; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.045-2.386). A neck angle of >60° was a significant risk factor for GRAEs (adjusted HR: 2.229; 95% CI: 1.418-3.503), type 1 or 3 endoleak (adjusted HR: 2.640; 95% CI: 1.343-5.189), and reintervention (adjusted HR: 1.891; 95% CI: 1.055-3.388). CONCLUSIONS: Our study revealed EVAR with outside the IFU was associated with increased GRAEs, mainly attributed to endoleak and ARM, compared with EVAR with within the IFU. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak, and reintervention. CLINICAL IMPACT: Our study revealed endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with outside-the-instruction for use (IFU) was associated with increased graft-related adverse events (GRAEs) compared with EVAR with within-the-IFU. In the low-risk population, the incidence of GRAEs and Aneurysm related mortality were higher in the outside-the-IFU group rather than within-the-IFU group. In addition, severe neck angulation was an independent risk factor for GRAEs, type 1 or 3 endoleak and reintervention.

Sex Differences in Outcomes of Ticagrelor Therapy With or Without Aspirin After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Post Hoc Secondary Analysis of the TICO Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: We sought to explore the sex differences in clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with ticagrelor monotherapy after ticagrelor-based 3-month versus 12-month dual-antiplatelet therapy. METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of the TICO trial (Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3 Months in the Patients Treated With New Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent for Acute Coronary Syndrome; n=3056)-a randomized controlled trial for patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with drug-eluting stent. The primary outcome was a net adverse clinical event (composite of major bleeding, death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or target-vessel revascularization) 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation. Secondary outcomes included major bleeding and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. RESULTS: There were 27.3% (n=628) women in the TICO trial; they were older with lower body mass index and higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, or chronic kidney disease than men. Compared with men, women had higher risk of net adverse clinical events (hazard ratio [HR], 1.89 [95% CI, 1.34-2.67]), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (HR, 1.69 [95% CI, 1.07-2.68]), and major bleeding (HR, 2.04 [95% CI, 1.25-3.35]). Among the groups stratified by sex and dual-antiplatelet therapy strategy, the incidences of primary and secondary outcomes were significantly different and the highest in women with ticagrelor-based 12-month dual-antiplatelet therapy (P<0.001). There was no significant heterogeneity in the impact of treatment strategy on the risks of primary and secondary outcomes between both sexes. Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of the primary outcome in women (HR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.26-0.85]; P=0.02) and comparable in men (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.52-1.14]; P=0.19) without significant interaction (P for interaction, 0.18). CONCLUSIONS: After percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome, women demonstrated worse clinical outcomes than men. Ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual-antiplatelet therapy was associated with significantly lower risk of net adverse clinical events in women without sex interaction.

Treat-to-target or high-intensity statin treatment in older adults with coronary artery disease: a post hoc analysis of the LODESTAR trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal statin treatment strategy that is balanced for both efficacy and safety has not been clearly determined in older adults with coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: In the post hoc analysis of the LODESTAR (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol-targeting statin therapy versus intensity-based statin therapy in patients with coronary artery disease) trial, the impact between a treat-to-target strategy versus a high-intensity statin therapy strategy was compared in older adults (aged 75 years or older). The goal of treat-to-target low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level was 50-70 mg/dl. The primary endpoint comprised the three-year composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke or coronary revascularisation. RESULTS: Among 4,400 patients with CAD enrolled in the LODESTAR trial, 822 (18.7%) were aged 75 years or older. Poor clinical outcomes and risk factors for atherosclerosis were more frequently observed in older adults than in younger population (<75 years old). Among these older adults with CAD, the prescription rate of high-intensity statin was significantly lower in the treat-to-target strategy group throughout the study period (P < 0.001). The mean LDL-C level for three years was 65 ± 16 mg/dl in the treat-to-target strategy group and 64 ± 18 mg/dl in the high-intensity statin group (P = 0.34). The incidence of primary endpoint occurrence was 10.9% in the treat-to-target strategy group and 12.0% in the high-intensity statin group (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.61-1.38, P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: High-intensity statin therapy is theoretically more necessary in older adults because of worse clinical outcomes and greater number of risk factors for atherosclerosis. However, the primary endpoint occurrence with a treat-to-target strategy with an LDL-C goal of 50-70 mg/dl was comparable to that of high-intensity statin therapy and reduced utilisation of a high-intensity statin. Taking efficacy as well as safety into account, adopting a tailored approach may be considered for this high-risk population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02579499.

Moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe vs. high-intensity statin in patients with diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease in the RACING trial.

AIMS: This study evaluated the effect of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a pre-specified, stratified subgroup analysis of the DM cohort in the RACING trial. The primary outcome was a 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke. Among total patients, 1398 (37.0%) had DM at baseline. The incidence of the primary outcome was 10.0% and 11.3% among patients with DM randomized to ezetimibe combination therapy vs. high-intensity statin monotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval: 0.64-1.22; P = 0.460). Intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug was observed in 5.2% and 8.7% of patients in each group, respectively (P = 0.014). LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 81.0%, 83.1%, and 79.9% of patients in the ezetimibe combination therapy group, and 64.1%, 70.2%, and 66.8% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all P < 0.001). In the total population, no significant interactions were found between DM status and therapy regarding primary outcome, intolerance-related discontinuation or dose reduction, and the proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol levels <70 mg/dL. CONCLUSION: Ezetimibe combination therapy effects observed in the RACING trial population are preserved among patients with DM. This study supports moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy as a suitable alternative to high-intensity statins if the latter cannot be tolerated, or further reduction in LDL cholesterol is required among patients with DM and ASCVD. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier:NCT03044665.

Long-term efficacy and safety of moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy versus high-intensity statin monotherapy in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (RACING): a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug combinations rather than increasing doses of one drug can achieve greater efficacy and lower risks. Thus, as an alternative to high-intensity statin monotherapy, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy can lower LDL cholesterol concentrations effectively while reducing adverse effects. However, evidence from randomised trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes is needed. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial, patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) at 26 clinical centres in South Korea were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy (rosuvastatin 10 mg with ezetimibe 10 mg) or high-intensity statin monotherapy (rosuvastatin 20 mg). The primary endpoint was the 3-year composite of cardiovascular death, major cardiovascular events, or non-fatal stroke, in the intention-to-treat population with a non-inferiority margin of 2·0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03044665 and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Feb 14, 2017, and Dec 18, 2018, 3780 patients were enrolled: 1894 patients to the combination therapy group and 1886 to the high-intensity statin monotherapy group. The primary endpoint occurred in 172 patients (9·1%) in the combination therapy group and 186 patients (9·9%) in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (absolute difference -0·78%; 90% CI -2·39 to 0·83). LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL at 1, 2, and 3 years were observed in 73%, 75%, and 72% of patients in the combination therapy group, and 55%, 60%, and 58% of patients in the high-intensity statin monotherapy group (all p<0·0001). Discontinuation or dose reduction of the study drug by intolerance was observed in 88 patients (4·8%) and 150 patients (8·2%), respectively (p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Among patients with ASCVD, moderate-intensity statin with ezetimibe combination therapy was non-inferior to high-intensity statin monotherapy for the 3-year composite outcomes with a higher proportion of patients with LDL cholesterol concentrations of less than 70 mg/dL and lower intolerance-related drug discontinuation or dose reduction. FUNDING: Hanmi Pharmaceutical.

Impact of guideline-directed medical therapy on 5-year mortality in patients with newly diagnosed peripheral artery disease.

OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines recommend that patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) should be treated with antithrombotic agents, renin-angiotensin-system blockers, and statins. However, the clinical impact of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) on long-term mortality in patients with newly diagnosed PAD remains unclear. We aimed to investigate the prevalence of GDMT and evaluate 5-year mortality according to GDMT after PAD diagnosis. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study, using nationwide health insurance claims data in Korea, included patients newly diagnosed with PAD between 2006 and 2015. GDMT was defined as the use of all drugs, including antithrombotic agents, renin-angiotensin-system blockers, and statins, within 3 months of PAD diagnosis. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. RESULTS: We investigated 19,561 newly diagnosed patients with PAD without proven cardiovascular disease. Among the study population, 4378 patients (22.4%) were categorized in the GDMT and 15,183 (77.6%) in the non-GDMT groups. During the 5-year follow-up, GDMT showed a lower incidence of all-cause mortality than that of non-GDMT (2.8% vs 4.8%; adjusted hazard ratio, 0.329; 95% confidence interval, 0.257-0.421; P < .001). Even in the propensity-matched population, GDMT showed a lower mortality rate than non-GDMT (hazard ratio, 0.283; 95% confidence interval, 0.217-0.370; P < .001). As the number of guideline-recommended drugs increased, the mortality rate decreased proportionately. CONCLUSIONS: After PAD diagnosis, GDMT was associated with a lower incidence of mortality regardless of proven cardiovascular disease. This retrospective analysis showed an insufficient prevalence of GDMT among patients with PAD in real-world practice.

Treat-to-Target or High-Intensity Statin in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In patients with coronary artery disease, some guidelines recommend initial statin treatment with high-intensity statins to achieve at least a 50% reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). An alternative approach is to begin with moderate-intensity statins and titrate to a specific LDL-C goal. These alternatives have not been compared head-to-head in a clinical trial involving patients with known coronary artery disease. Objective: To assess whether a treat-to-target strategy is noninferior to a strategy of high-intensity statins for long-term clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized, multicenter, noninferiority trial in patients with a coronary disease diagnosis treated at 12 centers in South Korea (enrollment: September 9, 2016, through November 27, 2019; final follow-up: October 26, 2022). Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the LDL-C target strategy, with an LDL-C level between 50 and 70 mg/dL as the target, or high-intensity statin treatment, which consisted of rosuvastatin, 20 mg, or atorvastatin, 40 mg. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary end point was a 3-year composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization with a noninferiority margin of 3.0 percentage points. Results: Among 4400 patients, 4341 patients (98.7%) completed the trial (mean [SD] age, 65.1 [9.9] years; 1228 females [27.9%]). In the treat-to-target group (n = 2200), which had 6449 person-years of follow-up, moderate-intensity and high-intensity dosing were used in 43% and 54%, respectively. The mean (SD) LDL-C level for 3 years was 69.1 (17.8) mg/dL in the treat-to-target group and 68.4 (20.1) mg/dL in the high-intensity statin group (n = 2200) (P = .21, compared with the treat-to-target group). The primary end point occurred in 177 patients (8.1%) in the treat-to-target group and 190 patients (8.7%) in the high-intensity statin group (absolute difference, -0.6 percentage points [upper boundary of the 1-sided 97.5% CI, 1.1 percentage points]; P < .001 for noninferiority). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with coronary artery disease, a treat-to-target LDL-C strategy of 50 to 70 mg/dL as the goal was noninferior to a high-intensity statin therapy for the 3-year composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or coronary revascularization. These findings provide additional evidence supporting the suitability of a treat-to-target strategy that may allow a tailored approach with consideration for individual variability in drug response to statin therapy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02579499.

Two-year outcomes between ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing newer-generation drug-eluting stent implantation.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the 2-year clinical outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-STEMI (NSTEMI) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) who received newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: Overall, 18,875 acute myocardial infarction patients were divided into two groups: CKD (STEMI, n = 1707; NSTEMI, n = 1648) and non-CKD (STEMI, n = 8660; NSTEMI, n = 6860). The occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), any repeat coronary revascularization, and definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), was evaluated. RESULTS: After multivariable-adjusted analysis, in the CKD group, the MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.365, p = 0.004), all-cause death (aHR: 1.503, p = 0.004), noncardiac death (non-CD; aHR: 1.960, p = 0.004), and all-cause death or MI rates (aHR: 1.458, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group. In the non-CKD group, the non-CD rate (aHR: 1.78, p = 0.006) was also higher in the NSTEMI group. The CD, re-MI, any repeat revascularization, and ST rates were similar between groups. In the CKD group, from 6 months to 2 years after the index procedure, all-cause death, non-CD, and all-cause death or MI rates were significantly higher in the NSTEMI group than in the STEMI group. These results may be related to the higher non-CD rate in the NSTEMI group. CONCLUSIONS: In the era of contemporary newer-generation DES, NSTEMI showed a relatively higher non-CD rate than STEMI in both CKD and non-CKD groups.

Clinical implication of neointimal burden in in-stent restenosis treated with drug-coated balloon.

BACKGROUND: Although drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty is a well-established drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) strategy, there are minimal data regarding the association of neointimal burden on optical coherence tomography (OCT) before and after DCB and adverse clinical events. This study aimed to investigate the clinical impact of neointimal burden measured with OCT in patients with DES ISR after DCB angioplasty. METHODS: From 2010 through 2013, a total of 122 patients with 122 ISR lesions were treated with DCB, which was preceded and followed by OCT examination. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE, a composite occurrence of cardiovascular cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) were evaluated. RESULTS: MACE occurred in 27 patients (4 nonfatal MIs and 23 TLRs) during the follow-up (median: 55.3 months, interquartile range 43.1-66.0). The mean lumen area was significantly smaller (3.21 ± 2.42 mm2 vs. 4.80 ± 2.53 mm2 , p = .005) and the mean percentage of neointimal volume derived by OCT was greater (49.3 ± 9.2% vs. 38.3 ± 17.5%, p = .006) in patients with MACE before DCB angioplasty. The pre-procedural mean percentage of neointimal volume (cut-off 50%, area under the receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve = 0.644, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.531-0.758, p = .022) and post-procedural mean percentage of neointimal volume (cut-off 25%, area under ROC curve = 0.659, 95% CI = 0.546-0.773, p = .012) were identified as significant parameters to predict MACE. CONCLUSION: The OCT-derived mean percentages of neointimal volume before and after DCB angioplasty can be important parameters for predicting future MACE in patients with DES ISR.

Safety and usefulness of a novel short track sliding balloon catheter.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and technical utility of the short track sliding (STS) balloon catheter. BACKGROUND: An STS balloon catheter is designed to ensure a low profile at the shaft and perform distal anchoring using a single guidewire. However, its clinical practice with the STS balloon catheter has not been reported. METHODS: This prospective multi-center registry enrolled 100 patients with significant coronary artery disease who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention using an STS balloon catheter at three hospitals in Korea from March 2019 to July 2020. Overall safety was assessed as any occurrences of device-related malfunction during the pre-dilation of the lesions. Its technical success rates of the kissing balloon technique or the distal anchoring technique using a single guidewire were also evaluated. RESULTS: Of the 118 lesions pre-dilated using the STS balloon, no significant complication was observed except for three significant coronary dissections, which were completely covered with stents. There was no incidence of balloon catheter malfunction, such as fracture, entrapment, or perforation. With 13 attempts of kissing ballooning techniques with the STS balloon with a 6F guiding catheter, all cases were successful. The distal anchoring techniques were attempted in 10 cases, the stent was successfully crossed to the target lesion in all 10 cases. CONCLUSIONS: The novel STS balloon catheter can be safely applied in routine coronary intervention with minimal complications. In addition, this catheter could be useful for performing the kissing balloon technique with a small-caliber guiding catheter and distal anchoring technique with a single guidewire.

Ten-Year Clinical Outcomes of Late-Acquired Stent Malapposition After Coronary Stent Implantation.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to determine the impact of late-acquired stent malapposition (LASM) on long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated with coronary stent implantation. Approach and Results: We investigated major adverse cardiac event during 10 years after 6-month intravascular ultrasound examination using our previous studies database. A total of 732 patients treated with bare-metal stent (54 LASM versus 678 non-LASM) and 529 patients treated with first-generation drug-eluting stent (82 LASM versus 447 non-LASM), who did not have clinical event or censoring at the time of follow-up intravascular ultrasound, were included for the present analysis. major adverse cardiac event was defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis. Multivariable adjustment and inverse probability weight were performed to consider baseline differences. After multivariable adjustment, LASM was related to a greater risk of major adverse cardiac event (hazard ratio, 1.666 [95% CI, 1.041-2.665]; P=0.0333) and very-late stent thrombosis (hazard ratio, 3.529 [95% CI, 1.153-10.798]; P=0.0271) than non-LASM in patients treated with first-generation drug-eluting stent, but not in those treated with bare-metal stent. Results were consistent after inverse probability weight. Among patients with LASM of first-generation drug-eluting stent, no late stent thrombosis occurred in patients who continued to receive dual antiplatelet therapy. CONCLUSIONS: The relationship between LASM and major adverse cardiac event might depend on the type of implanted stents during the long-term follow-up, highlighting the clinical significance of polymers and drugs in drug-eluting stent system.

Drug Eluting Stent vs. Drug Coated Balloon for Native Femoropopliteal Artery Disease: A Two Centre Experience.

OBJECTIVE: There have been limited clinical trials comparing drug eluting stents (DESs) and drug coated balloons (DCBs) in the treatment of femoropopliteal artery disease. This two centre retrospective and prospective cohort study sought to compare DES with DCB for the treatment of native femoropopliteal artery disease. METHODS: A total of 288 limbs (242 patients) with native femoropopliteal artery disease were treated with DESs (Zilver PTX; 102 limbs) or DCBs (IN.PACT Admiral; 186 limbs) in two Korean endovascular centres between 19 January 2013 and 5 May 2018 and followed for a median duration of 19.6 months. The primary endpoint was primary clinical patency. Propensity score matching (PSM, 162 limbs) and inverse probability weighted (IPW) adjustment were performed to adjust for confounding baseline characteristics. RESULTS: The DCB group had fewer lesions with Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) II type C/D (55.9% vs. 70.6%, p = .021) or total occlusions (43.5% vs. 77.5%, p < .001) and showed shorter lesion lengths (164.2 ± 105.4 mm vs. 194.8 ± 86.8 mm, p = .009) than the DES group. After PSM, baseline clinical and lesion characteristics of the two groups were comparable except for larger reference vessel diameter in the DES group (5.4 ± 0.6 vs. 5.1 ± 0.7, p = .025). Adjunctive atherectomy was performed in 32.1% of the DCB group and in 2.5% of the DES group (p < .001). The provisional stenting was required in 14.8% of the DCB group. At two year follow up, the DCB group showed higher primary clinical patency (74.6% vs. 56.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.27-0.96, p = .032) and freedom from target lesion revascularisation (85.9% vs. 71.3%, HR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.89, p = .021) than the DES group. Survival from all cause death did not differ between groups (87.6% vs. 92.1%, HR 1.85, 95% CI 0.62-5.52, p = .26). CONCLUSION: In this two centre cohort, DCBs with selective use of adjunctive atherectomy achieved more favourable outcomes than DESs for native femoropopliteal artery disease.

Skin Perfusion Pressure Predicts Early Wound Healing After Endovascular Therapy in Chronic Limb Threatening Ischaemia.

OBJECTIVE: Skin perfusion pressure (SPP) has been proposed as a method to predict wound healing in chronic limb threatening ischaemia (CLTI). However, studies regarding the impact of SPP before and after endovascular therapy (EVT) on wound healing are limited. This study sought to evaluate the predictive value of SPP for early wound healing in CLTI treated by EVT. METHODS: Between January 2018 and June 2020, 236 limbs (172 patients) with CLTI that underwent SPP measurement before and after EVT were included. SPP was measured before and 24 - 48 hours after the procedure. Early wound healing was defined as the achievement of complete epithelisation of all wounds without major amputation within three months of EVT. RESULTS: Early wound healing was achieved in 145 (61.4%) limbs after EVT. Baseline SPP (44.1 ± 21.0 mmHg vs. 33.5 ± 21.7 mmHg; p < .001) and post-procedural SPP (61.8 ± 18.5 mmHg vs. 37.4 ± 19.9 mmHg; p < .001) were significantly higher in the wound healing (+) group than in the wound non-healing (-) group. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for early wound healing was 0.82 for post-procedural SPP with a cutoff value of 50 mmHg (sensitivity 74.5%, specificity 78.0%). The early wound healing rate was significantly higher with a post-procedural SPP ≥ 50 mmHg compared with a SPP < 50 mmHg (84.4% vs. 35.0%; p < .001). CONCLUSION: Post-procedural SPP with a cutoff value of 50 mmHg was capable of predicting early wound healing after EVT in CLTI.

Impact of PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT Scores on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration After 2nd Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation.

PURPOSE: Determining the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is an important clinical issue. We evaluated the effects of ischemia (by DAPT score) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT score), as well as the impact of DAPT duration, on clinical outcomes. METHODS: From pooled analysis of four randomized clinical trials, 5131 patients undergoing second-generation DES implantation were randomized to short-duration (n = 2575; ≤ 6 months) or standard-duration (n = 2556; ≥ 12 months) DAPT groups. This population was further divided into four subgroups according to PRECISE-DAPT (high bleeding risk ≥ 25) and DAPT (high ischemic risk ≥ 2) scores. RESULTS: Net clinical outcomes (1.3% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.89) and ischemic events (5.0% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.44) did not differ between the two duration groups, although bleeding events were more frequent in patients with standard-duration DAPT (0.4% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.04). Standard-duration DAPT was associated with fewer ischemic events (6.9% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.02) and no increase in bleeding events only among patients at low bleeding risk and high ischemic risk. The other groups show no differences in net clinical outcomes, ischemic events, or bleeding events according to DAPT duration. CONCLUSION: Compared with short-duration DAPT, standard-duration DAPT was associated with similar net clinical outcomes and ischemic events, but more bleeding events at 12 months after second-generation DES implantation. However, standard-duration DAPT reduced ischemic events without increasing bleeding events among patients at low bleeding and high ischemic risk. When determining DAPT duration, considering both ischemic and bleeding risk can help optimize patient benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EXCELLENT (NCT00698607), RESET (NCT01145079), IVUS-XPL (NCT01308281), OPTIMA-C (NCT03056118).

Comparative effect of statin intensity between prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus after implanting newer-generation drug-eluting stents in Korean acute myocardial infarction patients: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Comparative studies regarding the long-term clinical outcomes of statin intensity between acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients with prediabetes and those with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), after successful implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) with statin treatment, are limited. We compared the 2-year clinical outcomes between these patients. METHODS: A total of 11,612 AMI patients were classified as statin users (n = 9893) and non-users (n = 1719). Thereafter, statin users were further divided into high-intensity (n = 2984) or low-moderate-intensity statin (n = 6909) treatment groups. Those in these two groups were further classified into patients with normoglycemia, prediabetes, and T2DM. The major outcomes were the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), or any repeat coronary revascularization. RESULTS: After adjusting for both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin users, the cumulative incidences of MACE (p = 0.737, p = 0.062, respectively), all-cause death, Re-MI, and any repeat revascularization were similar between the prediabetes and T2DM groups. In the total study population, both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin treatments showed comparable results. However, in the patients who enrolled after October 2012, the cumulative incidences of MACE (aHR 1.533; 95% CI 1.144-2.053; p = 0.004) and any repeat revascularization (aHR, 1.587; 95% CI 1.026-2.456; p = 0.038) were significantly lower in high-intensity statin users than in low-moderate intensity statin users. The beneficial effects of high-intensity compared to low-moderate-intensity statin therapy were more apparent in the normoglycemia group than hyperglycemia group, as it reduced the cumulative incidences of MACE (aHR 1.903; 95% CI 1.203-3.010; p = 0.006) and any repeat revascularization (aHR 3.248; 95% CI 1.539-6.854; p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective registry study, prediabetes and T2DM groups showed comparable clinical outcomes, after administering both high-intensity and low-moderate-intensity statin treatments. However, these results are likely to be clearly proved by further studies, especially in patients with AMI who are being treated in contemporary practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered.

Outcomes between prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus in older adults with acute myocardial infarction in the era of newer-generation drug-eluting stents: a retrospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The comparative clinical outcomes between prediabetes and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in older adults with AMI in the era of newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are limited. We investigated the 2-year clinical outcomes of these patients. METHODS: A total of 5492 AMI patients aged ≥65 years were classified into three groups according to their glycemic status: normoglycemia (group A: 1193), prediabetes (group B: 1696), and T2DM (group C: 2603). The primary outcome was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), and any repeat revascularization. The secondary outcome was stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: The primary and secondary outcomes cumulative incidences were similar between the prediabetes and T2DM groups. In both the prediabetes and T2DM groups, the cumulative incidences of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.373; p = 0.020 and aHR: 1.479; p = 0.002, respectively) and all-cause death or MI (aHR: 1.436; p = 0.022 and aHR: 1.647; p = 0.001, respectively) were significantly higher than those in the normoglycemia group. Additionally, the cumulative incidence of all-cause death in the T2DM group was significantly higher than that in the normoglycemia group (aHR, 1.666; p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, despite the 2-year clinical outcomes of the patients with prediabetes and T2DM in the older adults were worse than those in the normoglycemia group; they were similar between the prediabetes and T2DM groups. Hence, comparable treatment strategies should be strengthened between prediabetes and T2DM in older adults with AMI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered.