ISAR-SAFE: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 6 vs. 12 months of clopidogrel therapy after drug-eluting stenting.

BACKGROUND: In patients receiving aspirin, the optimal duration of clopidogrel therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains unclear. METHODS: This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial tested the hypothesis that in patients undergoing DES implantation, 6 months of clopidogrel is non-inferior to 12 months in terms of clinical outcomes. At 6 months after DES implantation, patients on clopidogrel were randomly assigned to either a 6-month period of placebo or an additional 6-month period of clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding at 9 months after randomization. RESULTS: Owing to slow recruitment and low event rates, the trial was stopped prematurely after enrolment of 4005 of 6000 planned patients. Of 4000 patients included in the final analysis, 1997 received 6 months of clopidogrel and 2003 received 12 months. The primary endpoint occurred in 29 patients (1.5%) assigned to 6 months of clopidogrel and 32 patients (1.6%) assigned to 12 months, observed difference -0.1%, upper limit of one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5%, limit of non-inferiority 2%, Pfor noninferiority <0.001. Stent thrombosis was observed in five patients (0.3%) assigned to 6 months of clopidogrel and three patients (0.2%) assigned to 12 months; hazard ratio (HR) 1.66, 95% CI: 0.40-6.96, P = 0.49. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding was observed in 4 patients (0.2%) assigned to 6 months clopidogrel and 5 patients (0.3%) assigned to 12 months; HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.21-2.98, P = 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: In the present trial, characterized by low event rates, we did not observe a significant difference in net clinical outcome between 6 and 12 months of clopidogrel therapy after DES implantation. However, the results of the trial must be considered in view of its premature termination and lower than expected event rates. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00661206.

Abciximab and heparin versus bivalirudin for non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: The combination of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and heparin has not been compared with bivalirudin in studies specifically involving patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compared the two treatments in this patient population. METHODS: Immediately before PCI, we randomly assigned, in a double-blind manner, 1721 patients with acute non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to receive abciximab plus unfractionated heparin (861 patients) or bivalirudin (860 patients). The study tested the hypothesis that abciximab and heparin would be superior to bivalirudin with respect to the primary composite end point of death, large recurrent myocardial infarction, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or major bleeding within 30 days. Secondary end points included the composite of death, any recurrent myocardial infarction, or urgent target-vessel revascularization (efficacy end point) and major bleeding (safety end point) within 30 days. RESULTS: The primary end point occurred in 10.9% of the patients in the abciximab group (94 patients) and in 11.0% in the bivalirudin group (95 patients) (relative risk with abciximab, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.32; P=0.94). Death, any recurrent myocardial infarction, or urgent target-vessel revascularization occurred in 12.8% of the patients in the abciximab group (110 patients) and in 13.4% in the bivalirudin group (115 patients) (relative risk, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.25; P=0.76). Major bleeding occurred in 4.6% of the patients in the abciximab group (40 patients) as compared with 2.6% in the bivalirudin group (22 patients) (relative risk, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.10 to 3.07; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Abciximab and unfractionated heparin, as compared with bivalirudin, failed to reduce the rate of the primary end point and increased the risk of bleeding among patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were undergoing PCI. (Funded by Nycomed Pharma and others; ISAR-REACT 4 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00373451.).

Three-dimensional echocardiographic optimization improves outcome in cardiac resynchronization therapy compared to ECG optimization: a randomized comparison.

AIMS: There is little consensus on optimal atrioventricular (AV) and ventricular-to-ventricular (VV) intervals in cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT). The aim of this study was to examine a novel combination of Doppler echocardiography (DE) and three-dimensional echocardiography (3DE) for individualized AV- and VV-interval optimization compared to conventional electrocardiogram (ECG) optimization. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, 77 patients (male: 57, age: 68 ± 10 years) with severely reduced ejection fraction (EF), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III or IV, and wide QRS complex (>120 ms) have been included. Patients were randomized to either AV- and VV-interval optimization using DE and 3DE (group 1, n = 39) or ECG (group 2, n = 38). 3DE was performed in all patients for the evaluation of left ventricular (LV) dimensions, EF and systolic dyssynchrony index (SDI), and NYHA class obtained before CRT and after 3 months. Primary endpoint of the study was clinical response to CRT, defined as a reduction of NYHA class by ≥1 score. Secondary endpoints were change of EF, LV volumes, and SDI. RESULTS: There were significantly more responders in group 1 (82%) than in group 2 (58%, P = 0.021). Similarly, group 1 showed a larger increase in EF (7.0 ± 6.0% vs 3.4 ± 5.6%, P = 0.015) and a more pronounced reduction of SDI (-4.5 ± 5.9% vs -1.5 ± 5.6%, P = 0.039) than group 2. CONCLUSION: Compared with conventional ECG optimization, this novel echocardiographic optimization protocol resulted in a significantly higher response rate, improved LV systolic function, and may be used to select the optimal AV and VV intervals in CRT.

Prognostic value of coronary computed tomography angiography during 5 years of follow-up in patients with suspected coronary artery disease.

AIMS: Coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) has a high accuracy for detection of obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Several studies also showed a good predictive value for subsequent cardiac events. However, the follow-up period of these studies was limited to ~2 years and long-term follow-up data on prognosis out to 5 years are very limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study is based on 1584 patients with suspected CAD undergoing CCTA between December 2003 and November 2006. Among other CCTA parameters, the total plaque score defined as number of abnormal segments (having either a non-obstructive plaque or a stenosis) and the most severe stenosis were recorded. The primary endpoint was a composite of death and non-fatal myocardial infarction. Revascularization procedures later than 90 days after the CT study were assessed as secondary endpoints. During a median follow-up of 5.6 years (IQR: 5.1-6.3 years) 61 patients suffered death or myocardial infarction and 52 underwent late revascularization. The severity of CAD and the total plaque score were the best predictors of death and non-fatal myocardial infarction, both significantly improving prediction over standard clinical risk scores (multivariate c-index 0.60 and 0.66, respectively, P = 0.002 and <0.0001, respectively). The annual event rate ranged from 0.24% for patients with no CAD to 1.1% for patients with obstructive CAD and 1.5% for patients with CAD and extensive plaque load (>5 segments). Both parameters also improved prediction of need for subsequent revascularization (c-index 0.72 and 0.63, respectively, P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0013, respectively). CONCLUSION: Data from CCTA predict both death and myocardial infarction as well as need for subsequent revascularizations out to 5 years. CCTA imaging may be a valuable tool in the assessment of long-term prognosis in patients with suspected CAD.

Validation of the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition of bleeding in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: The Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) has recently proposed a unified definition of bleeding in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. We investigated the relationship between bleeding events as defined by BARC and 1-year mortality in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and assessed whether the BARC bleeding definition is superior to existing bleeding definitions in regard to mortality prediction in patients after PCI procedures. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study represents a patient-level pooled analysis of 12 459 patients recruited in 6 randomized trials of patients undergoing PCI. Bleeding events were assessed with the use of BARC, Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI), and Randomized Evaluation in PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events (REPLACE-2) trial criteria. The primary outcome was 1-year mortality. Bleeding occurred in 1233 patients (9.9%) according to BARC (679 patients or 5.4% with BARC class ≥2 bleeding), in 374 patients (3.0%) according to TIMI, and in 491 patients (3.9%) according to REPLACE-2 criteria. There were 340 deaths (2.7%) over the first year after PCI. BARC class ≥2 bleeding was associated with a significant increase in 1-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 2.72; 95% confidence interval, 2.03-3.63). The predictivity of a multivariable model for 1-year mortality was significantly improved after inclusion of bleeding defined according to BARC to an extent comparable to that provided by TIMI and REPLACE-2 criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated a close association between bleeding events defined according to BARC and 1-year mortality after PCI.

Two rare variants explain association with acute myocardial infarction in an extended genomic region including the apolipoprotein(A) gene.

Relatively low numbers of kringle 4 type 2 repeats in apolipoprotein(a) and specific haplotypes of the SLC22A3-LPAL2-LPA region on chromosome 6 are associated with an increased risk of coronary disease. We examined the possibility that rs3798220 and rs10455872, short variations located in LPA [the apolipoprotein(a) gene], and related to the number of kringle 4 type 2 repeats, may serve as markers for the association between haplotypes and acute myocardial infarction. Genotypes were determined with TaqMan assays in a sample of 2136 cases and 1211 controls. The minor alleles of rs3798220 and rs10455872 were associated with increased risks (rs3798220-C: adjusted OR 2.14, 95% CI, 1.37-3.33, P = 0.00080; rs10455872-G: adjusted OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.36-2.24, P < 0.00001). After adjustments were made for potential confounders, none of nine polymorphisms included in a haplotype analysis were singly related to disease. Two risk haplotypes were identified; one (CCTTGTGTG; OR 1.25, 95% CI 1.08-1.45, P = 0.0022) was correlated with rs3798220-C and the other (CCCTGGATC; OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.14-2.38, P = 0.0074) with rs10455872-G. Thus, the findings allowed for a more precise definition of risk-associated markers: specific nucleotides in LPA instead of standard haplotypes defined by noneffective variants from the extensive SLC22A3-LPAL2-LPA region.

Patient-specific induced pluripotent stem-cell models for long-QT syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Long-QT syndromes are heritable diseases associated with prolongation of the QT interval on an electrocardiogram and a high risk of sudden cardiac death due to ventricular tachyarrhythmia. In long-QT syndrome type 1, mutations occur in the KCNQ1 gene, which encodes the repolarizing potassium channel mediating the delayed rectifier I(Ks) current. METHODS: We screened a family affected by long-QT syndrome type 1 and identified an autosomal dominant missense mutation (R190Q) in the KCNQ1 gene. We obtained dermal fibroblasts from two family members and two healthy controls and infected them with retroviral vectors encoding the human transcription factors OCT3/4, SOX2, KLF4, and c-MYC to generate pluripotent stem cells. With the use of a specific protocol, these cells were then directed to differentiate into cardiac myocytes. RESULTS: Induced pluripotent stem cells maintained the disease genotype of long-QT syndrome type 1 and generated functional myocytes. Individual cells showed a "ventricular," "atrial," or "nodal" phenotype, as evidenced by the expression of cell-type­specific markers and as seen in recordings of the action potentials in single cells. The duration of the action potential was markedly prolonged in "ventricular" and "atrial" cells derived from patients with long-QT syndrome type 1, as compared with cells from control subjects. Further characterization of the role of the R190Q­KCNQ1 mutation in the pathogenesis of long-QT syndrome type 1 revealed a dominant negative trafficking defect associated with a 70 to 80% reduction in I(Ks) current and altered channel activation and deactivation properties. Moreover, we showed that myocytes derived from patients with long-QT syndrome type 1 had an increased susceptibility to catecholamine-induced tachyarrhythmia and that beta-blockade attenuated this phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: We generated patient-specific pluripotent stem cells from members of a family affected by long-QT syndrome type 1 and induced them to differentiate into functional cardiac myocytes. The patient-derived cells recapitulated the electrophysiological features of the disorder. (Funded by the European Research Council and others.)

Comparative efficacy of 2 zotarolimus-eluting stent generations: resolute versus endeavor stents in patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: The Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) utilizes the same metallic platform and anti-restenotic drug as the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) but is coated with a more biocompatible polymer with enhanced drug-release kinetics. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of 2 zotarolimus-eluting stent generations. METHODS: In two randomized trials with broad inclusion criteria (ISAR-TEST 2 and ISAR-TEST 5), 1,000 patients were treated with R-ZES and 339 patients treated with E-ZES. In both trials follow-up angiography was scheduled at 6 to 8 months. The efficacy endpoint of interest was target lesion revascularization and the safety endpoints were the combined incidence of cardiac death or myocardial infarction related to target vessel as well as the incidence of definite stent thrombosis at 2-year follow-up. RESULTS: The incidence of target lesion revascularization at 2 years was 12.0% in the R-ZES group and 16.0% in the E-ZES (HR 0.72 [95% CI: 0.52-1.00], P = .052). The incidence of cardiac death or myocardial infarction was 5.5% vs. 4.8% (HR 1.15, [95% CI: 0.66-2.02], P = .62) and of definite stent thrombosis was 0.4% vs. 0.6% (HR 0.68, [95% CI: 0.12-3.72], P = .66), respectively. All measures of angiographic restenosis were in favor of the R-ZES; in-stent late lumen loss was 0.29 ± 0.56 with the R-ZES versus 0.58 ± 0.55 with the E-ZES (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Comparison of the 2 Food and Drug Administration-approved zotarolimus-eluting stents suggested that the R-ZES as compared to the E-ZES displayed overall superior antirestenotic efficacy. Both devices were associated with a similar low risk of adverse safety events through 2 years.

Uric acid and prognosis in angiography-proven coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: The optimal uric acid (UA) level associated with the lowest mortality and the strength of association between UA and mortality in various subgroups of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) are unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study included 13 273 patients with angiographic confirmation of CAD and UA measurements available. The primary outcome analysis was 1-year mortality. RESULTS: Based on the receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, the best cut-off of UA for mortality prediction was 7·11 mg/dL. Using this cut-off, patients were divided into two groups: the group with UA ≤ 7·11 mg/dL (n = 9075) and the group with UA > 7·11 mg/dL (n = 4198). Cardiac mortality was 6·3% (256 deaths) in patients with UA > 7·11 mg/dL and 2·3% (201 deaths) in patients with UA ≤ 7·11 mg/dL [hazard ratio (HR) = 2·82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2·36-3·36; P < 0·001]. After adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors, UA remained an independent correlate of cardiac mortality (HR = 1·20, 95% CI 1·08-1·34; P = 0·001, for each standard deviation increase in the logarithmic scale of UA). The relationship between cardiac or all-cause mortality and UA showed a J-shaped pattern with lowest mortality in patients with UA between 5·17 and 6·76 mg/dL. UA predicted mortality across all subgroups of patients, with strongest association in women and patients without arterial hypertension. CONCLUSIONS: UA predicted an increased risk of cardiac mortality across all subgroups of patients with CAD. The association between UA and cardiac or all-cause mortality had a 'J-shaped' pattern with lowest risk of death in patients with UA levels between 5·17 and < 6·76 mg/dL.

Prognostic value of uric acid in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease.

Studies investigating the prognostic role of UA (uric acid) in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus have given conflicting findings. We undertook the present study to assess the association between UA and outcome in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and CAD (coronary artery disease). The study included 3705 patients with diabetes mellitus and angiography-proven CAD. UA was measured before coronary angiography. The primary outcome was 1-year all-cause mortality. The UA concentration [median (25th-75th quartiles)] was 6.44 mg/dl (5.40-7.70 mg/dl). There were 264 deaths (7.1%) during follow-up: 45 deaths in patients of the first UA quartile, 43 deaths in patients of the second UA quartile, 51 deaths in patients of the third UA quartile and 125 deaths in patients of the fourth UA quartile {Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality, 5.1, 4.8, 5.6 and 14.0% respectively; unadjusted HR (hazard ratio), 2.81 [95% CI (confidence interval), 2.21-3.58]; P<0.001 for fourth quartile compared with first-third quartiles combined}. In the multivariable analysis, UA predicted all-cause mortality with an adjusted HR of 1.29 (95% CI, 1.12-1.48; P<0.001), for each S.D. increase in the logarithmic scale of UA level. The inclusion of UA in the multivariable model alongside known cardiovascular risk factors and other relevant variables increased the discriminatory power of the model regarding prediction of all-cause mortality [absolute and relative IDI (integrated discrimination improvement) 0.034 and 20.5% respectively; P<0.001]. In conclusion, in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and confirmed CAD, elevated levels of UA predict mortality independently of known cardiovascular risk factors.

Five-year clinical outcomes of a polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent versus a permanent polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent: final results of the intracoronary stenting and angiographic restenosis - test equivalence between two drug-eluting stents (ISAR-TEST) trial.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence exists regarding the long-term performance of polymer-free (PF) drug-eluting stents (DES) in comparison to permanent polymer DES. This study investigated the 5-year efficacy and safety of a PF sirolimus-eluting stent (PF-SES) versus a permanent polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in the setting of the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Restenosis-Test Equivalence Between Two Drug-Eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST) randomized trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 450 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to receive either PF-SES (Yukon, Translumina; n = 225) or PES (Taxus, Boston Scientific; n = 225). Clinical follow-up was performed to 5 years after enrollment. The endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), the composite of death or any myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis (ST). The incidence of MACE at 5 years was 27.3% (57 patients) in the PF-SES group and 31.7% (65 patients) in the PES group [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.87 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.61-1.24]; P = 0.40]. The combined incidence of death or MI was 16.6% (34 patients) in the PF-SES group and 20.0% (39 patients) in the PES group (HR = 0.86 [95% CI = 0.54-1.36]; P = 0.52). The incidence of TLR was 16.5% (34 patients) in the PF-SES group and 16.4% (33 patients) in the PES group (HR = 1.03 [95% CI = 0.64-1.66]; P = 0.89). ST occurred in 0.5% (one patient) in the PF-SES group and 1.6% (three patients) in the PES group (HR = 0.33 [95% CI = 0.03-3.14]; P = 0.32). CONCLUSION: Overall there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between PF-SES and PES to 5 years. Extended follow-up supports the durability of efficacy and safety of PF-SES.

Second-versus first-generation "Limus"-eluting stents in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized comparison in setting of ISAR-TEST-4 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes mellitus remain at higher risk for adverse events following percutaneous coronary intervention and the identification of the optimum drug eluting stents (DES) in these patients is of high clinical relevance. We compared effectiveness of everolimus-eluting stents (EES; Xience) versus sirolimus-eluting stents (SES; Cypher) in patients with diabetes mellitus enrolled in the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of 3 Limus-Eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST-4) trial. METHODS: In the setting of the ISAR-TEST-4 trial, 1304 patients with broad inclusion criteria were randomized to treatment with EES or SES. The focus of the present analysis is on a cohort of 377 patients with diabetes mellitus assigned to receive EES (n = 184) or SES (n = 193). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) related to the target vessel, or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 3-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints were parameters of angiographic and clinical restenosis (in-stent late lumen loss, binary restenosis, and TLR), all-cause mortality and definite/probable stent thrombosis. RESULTS: EES was comparable to SES concerning the incidence of the primary endpoint (21% vs. 24%, respectively; relative risk = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.34; P = 0.53). Concerning the secondary endpoint, TLR at 3 years with EES versus SES stents was not statistically different (14.7% vs. 16.6%, respectively; relative risk = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.51-1.43; P = 0.55). In terms of angiographic outcomes patients treated with EES as compared to SES had significantly lower late lumen loss (0.22 ± 0.46 mm vs. 0.44 ± 0.66 mm, respectively; P < 0.001) and binary restenosis (8.4% vs. 17%, respectively; P = 0.02) at 6- to 8-month angiographic follow-up. EES was comparable to SES concerning the incidence of all-cause death (10% vs. 16%, respectively; relative risk = 0.66; 95% CI, 0.37-1.18; P = 0.16) and stent thrombosis (1.1% vs. 3.1%, respectively; P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with diabetes mellitus enrolled in a real-world randomized control trial, EES is comparable to SES in terms of clinical efficacy and safety out to 3 years; angiographic markers of antirestenotic efficacy favored EES.

A prospective randomized trial comparing the recovery of platelet function after loading dose administration of prasugrel or clopidogrel.

UNLABELLED: Prasugrel results in greater platelet inhibition compared to clopidogrel which may prolong the time to platelet P2Y(12) receptor function recovery following drug cessation after loading dose (LD) administration. This randomized study assessed the time to recovery of platelet function in patients with coronary artery disease after a LD of prasugrel or clopidogrel. Enrolled patients (n = 21) received either prasugrel (30 mg or 60 mg) or clopidogrel (600 mg) in preparation for coronary angiography. Platelet function was assessed by the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay, Multiplate and LTA at baseline and over time (1, 3, 5, 7, 9, and 11 days) post-LD treatment. Recovery of platelet function was defined as occurring on the first day that P2Y12 reaction units were ≤60 below pre-drug values and remained in this range. The relationship between platelet inhibition at 24 h post-LD to time of recovery was also evaluated. Recovery of platelet function occurred from days 3-7 for clopidogrel-treated subjects, by day 7 for patients treated with prasugrel 30 mg and from days 7-9 for patients treated with prasugrel 60 mg. Time for platelet function to return to baseline was independent of treatment assignment, reflecting instead the extent of platelet inhibition at 24 h post-LD (correlation coefficient = 0.81, p < 0.001), which was greater following a prasugrel LD. CONCLUSIONS: Prasugrel-treated subjects require a longer time for recovery compared with clopidogrel due to greater post-LD platelet inhibition. Platelet function testing after cessation of P2Y(12) receptor blockers may prove useful to guide the timing of surgical procedures (clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01107899).

Association of ST-elevation and non-ST-elevation presentation on ECG with transmurality and size of myocardial infarction as assessed by contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging.

BACKGROUND: It is the general perception, that ST-elevation myocardial infarction is associated with transmural ischemia while Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction is found in non-transmural subendocardial ischemia. This association, however, derives primarily from post mortem studies. METHODS: A total of 220 patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) who had PCI on admission and contrast-enhanced cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) within one week were included into the study. Size and transmural extent of MI was quantified by CMR and correlated with the ECG on admission. RESULTS: Based on the ECG findings, 57% were classified as STEMI and 43% as NSTEMI. CMR infarct size was significantly larger in STEMI than NSTEMI (23.2 vs. 14.2 LV%, p<0.001). As assessed by CMR, STEMI patients were transmural in 63% as compared to 27% of patients with NSTEMI (p<0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression model, total infarct size was significantly associated with presence of STEMI (OR: 1.045, 95% CI [1.014-1.077], p=0.004) whereas the number of transmural segments did not significantly add further information for a STEMI/NSTEMI classification (p=0.054, change of c-index from 0.69 to 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: The electrocardiographic STEMI/NSTEMI classification does rather characterize the total size of MI than the transmural extent as assessed by CMR.

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents reduce the risk of stent thrombosis at 4 years in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4, and LEADERS randomized trials.

AIMS: The efficacy of durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DES) is delivered at the expense of delayed healing of the stented vessel. Biodegradable polymer DES aim to avoid this shortcoming and may potentially improve long-term clinical outcomes, with benefit expected to accrue over time. We sought to compare long-term outcomes in patients treated with biodegradable polymer DES vs. durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled individual patient data from three large-scale multicentre randomized clinical trials (ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4, and LEADERS) comparing biodegradable polymer DES with durable polymer SES and assessed clinical outcomes during follow-up through 4 years. The efficacy endpoint of interest was target lesion revascularization and the safety endpoint of interest was definite stent thrombosis. Out of 4062 patients included in the present analysis, 2358 were randomly assigned to treatment with biodegradable polymer DES (sirolimus-eluting, n= 1501; biolimus-eluting, n= 857) and 1704 patients to durable polymer SES. No heterogeneity across the trials was observed in analyses of the primary and secondary endpoints. At 4 years, the risk of target lesion revascularization was significantly lower among patients treated with biodegradable polymer DES vs. durable polymer SES (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.68-0.98, P= 0.029). In addition, the risk of stent thrombosis was significantly reduced with biodegradable polymer DES vs. durable polymer SES (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% CI 0.35-0.90, P= 0.015), driven by a lower risk of very late stent thrombosis (hazard ratio 0.22, 95% CI 0.08-0.61, P= 0.004). In keeping with this, in landmark analysis between 1 and 4 years, the incidence of myocardial infarction was lower for patients treated with biodegradable polymer DES vs. durable polymer SES (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% CI 0.73-0.95, P= 0.031). CONCLUSION: Biodegradable polymer DES improve safety and efficacy compared with durable polymer SES during long-term follow-up to 4 years.

Machine Learning Identifies New Predictors on Restenosis Risk after Coronary Artery Stenting in 10,004 Patients with Surveillance Angiography.

OBJECTIVE: Machine learning (ML) approaches have the potential to uncover regular patterns in multi-layered data. Here we applied self-organizing maps (SOMs) to detect such patterns with the aim to better predict in-stent restenosis (ISR) at surveillance angiography 6 to 8 months after percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting. METHODS: In prospectively collected data from 10,004 patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for 15,004 lesions, we applied SOMs to predict ISR angiographically 6-8 months after index procedure. SOM findings were compared with results of conventional uni- and multivariate analyses. The predictive value of both approaches was assessed after random splitting of patients into training and test sets (50:50). RESULTS: Conventional multivariate analyses revealed 10, mostly known, predictors for restenosis after coronary stenting: balloon-to-vessel ratio, complex lesion morphology, diabetes mellitus, left main stenting, stent type (bare metal vs. first vs. second generation drug eluting stent), stent length, stenosis severity, vessel size reduction, and prior bypass surgery. The SOM approach identified all these and nine further predictors, including chronic vessel occlusion, lesion length, and prior PCI. Moreover, the SOM-based model performed well in predicting ISR (AUC under ROC: 0.728); however, there was no meaningful advantage in predicting ISR at surveillance angiography in comparison with the conventional multivariable model (0.726, p = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: The agnostic SOM-based approach identified-without clinical knowledge-even more contributors to restenosis risk. In fact, SOMs applied to a large prospectively sampled cohort identified several novel predictors of restenosis after PCI. However, as compared with established covariates, ML technologies did not improve identification of patients at high risk for restenosis after PCI in a clinically relevant fashion.

Polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting versus new generation zotarolimus-eluting stents in coronary artery disease: the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting versus Zotarolimus-eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST 5) trial.

BACKGROUND: Durable polymer coatings have been implicated in mid- and long-term adverse events after drug-eluting stent implantation. A polymer-free dual-drug sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and a new generation permanent polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent are recently developed technologies demonstrating encouraging results. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a clinical trial with minimal exclusion criteria, we randomly assigned 3002 patients to treatment with sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority of the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents. The primary end point was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at 6 to 8 months. The sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of occurrence of the primary end point (13.1% versus 13.5%, respectively, P(noninferiority)=0.006; hazard ratio=0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.19; P(superiority)=0.74). The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis was low in both groups (1.1% versus 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratio=0.91 [95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 1.84], P=0.80). With regard to angiographic efficacy, there were no differences between the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of either in-segment binary angiographic restenosis (13.3% versus 13.4% respectively; P=0.95) or in-stent late luminal loss (0.31±0.58 mm versus 0.29±0.56 mm, respectively; P=0.46). CONCLUSION: In this large-scale study powered for clinical end points, a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to a new generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent out to 12 months. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier NCT 00598533.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (ISAR-CABG): a randomised controlled superiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Comparative assessment of clinical outcomes after use of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for treatment of aortocoronary saphenous vein graft lesions has not been undertaken in large randomised trials. We aimed to undertake a comparison in a randomised trial powered for clinical endpoints. METHODS: In this randomised superiority trial, patients with de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions were assigned by computer-generated sequence (1:1:1:3) to receive either drug-eluting stents (one of three types: permanent-polymer paclitaxel-eluting stents, permanent-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, or biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents) or bare-metal stents. Randomisation took place immediately after crossing of the lesion with a guidewire, and was stratified for each participating centre. Investigators assessing data were masked to treatment allocation; patients were not masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00611910. FINDINGS: 610 patients were allocated to treatment groups (303 drug-eluting stent, 307 bare-metal stent). Drug-eluting stents reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint compared with bare-metal stents (44 [15%] vs 66 [22%] patients; hazard ratio [HR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.94; p=0.02). Target lesion revascularisation rate was reduced by drug-eluting stents (19 [7%] vs 37 [13%] patients; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.86; p=0.01). No significant differences were seen between drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents regarding all-cause mortality (15 [5%] vs 14 [5%] patients; HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.52-2.24; p=0.83), myocardial infarction (12 [4%] vs 18 [6%]; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.32-1.37; p=0.27), or definite or probable stent thrombosis (2 [1%] in both groups; HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.10; p=0.99). INTERPRETATION: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions, drug-eluting stents are the preferred treatment option because they reduce the risk of adverse events compared with bare-metal stents. FUNDING: Deutsches Herzzentrum.

Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation in patients with acute myocardial infarction without cardiogenic shock. A meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Conflicting data on intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation (IABC) as adjunctive therapy in high-risk acute myocardial infarction (AMI) without cardiogenic shock (CS) have been published. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the benefits of IABC in patients with AMI without CS. METHODS: We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and relevant Web sites for randomized trials comparing IABC versus no IABC in patients with AMI without CS. No language, publication date, or publication status restrictions were applied. Primary end point was all-cause death. Secondary end points were congestive heart failure (CHF), reinfarction, recurrent myocardial ischemia, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), and bleeding (moderate to severe) according to per protocol definitions. RESULTS: Six trials were included (1,054 patients, 49.1% IABC vs 50.9% no IABC). At follow-up, counterpulsation does not reduce all-cause death (4.4% vs 4.1%, odds ratio [OR] [95% CI] 1.11 [0.49-2.54], P = .80), CHF (17.1% vs 18%, OR 0.92 [0.43-1.96], P = .83), or reinfarction (5.3% vs 7.7%, OR 0.68 [0.23-1.76], P = .42). Intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation versus no IABC significantly reduces recurrent myocardial ischemia (3.6% vs 20.3%, OR 0.15 [0.08-0.28], P < .00001), but it increases the risk of CVA (2% vs 0.3%, OR 4.39 [1.11-17.36], P = .03) and bleeding (21.4% vs 16.1%, respectively, OR 1.46 [1.05-2.04], P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Counterpulsation does not reduce death, CHF, or reinfarction in patients with AMI without CS. The significant reduction of recurrent myocardial ischemia associated with IABC use is offset by a higher risk of CVAs and bleeding.

Association of midregional proadrenomedullin with coronary artery stenoses, soft atherosclerotic plaques and coronary artery calcium.

Midregional proadrenomedullin (MR-proADM) is elevated in patients with heart failure and myocardial infarction. The aim of this study was to evaluate the association of MR-proADM with the grade of coronary artery stenosis, presence of coronary artery soft plaques and coronary artery calcification score (CACS), determined by 64-multislice computed tomography (MSCT) in patients without known prior cardiovascular disease. This retrospective study included 107 patients undergoing MSCT for confirmation (or exclusion) of coronary artery disease. MR-proADM levels were measured in all patients. The assessment of coronary artery stenoses, CACS and soft coronary plaques was made by MSCT using known criteria. The MR-proADM [median (25th-75th percentiles)] level was 0.33 (0.21-0.43) nmol/l. The MR-proADM level was 0.28 (0.22-0.40) nmol/l in patients with coronary stenoses ≥50% (n = 23) versus 0.33 (0.27-0.40) nmol/l in patients with coronary stenoses <50% (n = 83, P = 0.59), 0.33 (0.26-0.40) nmol/l in patients with soft plaques (n = 56) versus 0.33 (0.25-0.41) nmol/l in patients without soft plaques (n = 50, P = 0.73) and 0.33 (0.25-0.39) nmol/l in patients with CACS <200 (n = 81) versus 0.32 (0.26-0.44) nmol/l in patients with CACS ≥200 (n = 26, P = 0.77). In multivariate analysis, the MR-proADM level was a significant correlate of coronary artery stenoses [odds ratio (OR) = 0.93; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86-0.99; P = 0.026] and soft plaques (OR = 0.94; 95% CI 0.90-0.99; P = 0.015) but not of CACS (OR = 0.98; 95% CI 0.93-1.03; P = 0.36). A decreased MR-proADM level is an independent correlate of the presence of coronary artery disease and of soft atherosclerotic plaques. Patients with decreased MR-proADM levels may need invasive examinations to diagnose more severe forms of coronary artery disease.