One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in diabetic patients: Insight from the ULISSE registry (ULtimaster Italian multicenter all comerS Stent rEgistry).

BACKGROUND: The ULISSE registry evaluated the real-world performance of the Ultimaster® biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in a multicenter-independent cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, including a large proportion of diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. METHODS: In this subgroup analysis, 1,660 consecutive patients, 2,422 lesions, treated with BP-SES enrolled in the ULISSE registry were divided in two groups: DM (485 patients, 728 lesions) and non-DM (1,175 patients, 1,694 lesions). Primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite endpoint of cardiac-death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1-year. Secondary endpoint was TLR at 1-year. RESULTS: At 1-year follow-up TLF occurred in 5% overall patients and was significantly higher in DM patients (8 vs. 3.7%; p = .001), due to more cardiac deaths (3.4 vs. 1.1%; p = .002). TLR occurred in 3.2% overall patients, and it was not significantly higher in DM compared to non-DM patients (4.4 vs. 2.8%; p = .114). The incidence of stent thrombosis was low and similar between groups (0.4 vs. 0.9%; p = .526). Insulin-treated DM (ITDM) patients showed higher rate of TLF as compared to non-ITDM patients (13 vs. 6.5%; p = .041), but similar rate of TLR (6 vs. 4%; p = .405). After adjustment for relevant comorbidities, DM was not significantly associated with TLF or cardiac death in patients undergoing BP-SES implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first all-comers evaluation of BP-SES in DM patients. Our findings show that DM patients, mostly those with ITDM, still represent a vulnerable population and experience significantly higher rate of TLF. Overall BP-SES efficacy is considerable, although not statistically significant higher rate of TLR is still present in DM compared to non-DM patients.

One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction: Insight from the ULISSE registry.

BACKGROUND: The ULISSE registry has demonstrated the real-world performance of the Ultimaster biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in a large cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, including a large proportion of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We performed a subgroup analysis of the ULISSE registry in AMI patients and compared the outcomes of this vulnerable cohort with that of patients presenting without AMI (non-AMI). The primary end point was the incidence of 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: Of 1,660 patients included in the ULISSE registry, 381(23%) presented with AMI, 207(54.3%) non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, and 174(45.7%) ST-elevation myocardial infarction. Compared with non-AMI patients, those with AMI were more frequently female and smokers, with lower left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and chronic kidney disease requiring dialysis. At 1 year, TLF rate was significantly higher in AMI than non-AMI patients (7.9 vs. 4.1%; HR 1.98, CI 95% 1.22-3.23; p = .005) driven by higher rate of cardiac death (4.0 vs. 1.1%; HR 3.59, CI 95% 1.64-7.88; p = .01) and TV-MI (2.8 vs 0.9%; HR 2.99,CI 95% 1.22-7.37; p = .01), without differences in TLR rate (4.3 vs. 2.9%,HR 0.66, CI95% 0.35-1.25; p = .2). At multivariate Cox regression analysis, eGFR <40 mL/min (HR: 2.868) and LVEF <40% (HR: 2.394) were the only independent predictors of TLF. CONCLUSIONS: In AMI patients, Ultimaster BP-SES implantation was associated with higher rate of TLF and definite stent thrombosis compared with non-AMI patients. The high incidence of adverse events was mainly driven by the unfavorable baseline risk profile.

[SICI-GISE/SICOA Consensus document: Clinical follow-up of patients after acute coronary syndrome or percutaneous coronary intervention]. / Documento di consenso SICI-GISE/SICOA: La gestione del follow-up del paziente dopo sindrome coronarica acuta e/o angioplastica coronarica.

In the last decades, advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies have significantly reduced the risk of procedural complications and in-hospital mortality of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS), thus increasing the population of stable post-ACS patients. This novel epidemiological scenario emphasizes the importance of implementing secondary preventive and follow-up strategies. The follow-up of patients after ACS or elective PCI should be based on common pathways and on the close collaboration between hospital cardiologists and primary care physicians. However, the follow-up strategies of these patients are still poorly standardized. This SICI-GISE/SICOA consensus document was conceived as a proposal for the long-term management of post-ACS or post-PCI patients based on their individual residual risk of cardiovascular adverse events. We defined five patient risk classes and five follow-up strategies including medical visits and examinations according to a specific time schedule. We also provided a short guidance for the selection of the appropriate imaging technique for the assessment of left ventricular ejection fraction and of non-invasive anatomical or functional tests for the detection of obstructive coronary artery disease. Physical and pharmacological stress echocardiography was identified as the first-line imaging technique in most of cases, while cardiovascular magnetic resonance should be preferred when an accurate evaluation of left ventricular ejection fraction is needed. The standardization of the follow-up pathways of patients with a history of ACS or elective PCI, shared between hospital doctors and primary care physicians, could result in a more cost-effective use of resources and potentially improve patient's long-term outcome.

Current Use of Oral Anticoagulation Therapy in Elderly Patients with Atrial Fibrillation: Results from an Italian Multicenter Prospective Study-The ISNEP Study.

Background: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common heart arrhythmia, and its prevalence increases with age. Oral Anticoagulant Therapy (OAT) with non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) or vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) is essential to avoid thromboembolic events in AF. However, this treatment is associated with a high risk of bleeding and low adherence in elderly patients. Aim: The aim was to evaluate the real-world use of OAT in a population of patients aged ≥80 years in twenty-three Italian centers and to investigate the tolerance of and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Methods: The ISNEP Study is a multicenter cross-sectional study enrolling patients with AF and aged ≥80 years and treated with either NOACs or VKAs. A written questionnaire was administered to each patient to evaluate the adherence to and patient satisfaction with this therapy. Results: The study included 641 patients with a mean age of 85 (82−87) years. The use of NOACs was reported in 93.0% of cases, with the remaining 7.0% treated with VKAs. A history of stroke events was reported in five (11.1%) and one (0.2%) patients in the VKA and NOAC groups, respectively. The rate of referred ecchymosis/epistaxis was significantly higher in the VKA group compared to the NOAC group (p < 0.001). Patients receiving NOACs reported a substantial improvement in their quality of life compared to the VKA group. Conclusions: A small, but not negligible, proportion of elderly AF patients is still treated with VKAs. Patients treated with NOAC have a higher level of satisfaction with the therapy and complete adherence.

Real-world outcome of coronary bifurcation lesions in the drug-eluting stent era: results from the 4,314-patient Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology (SICI-GISE) Italian Multicenter Registry on Bifurcations (I-BIGIS).

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DESs) introduction has somewhat renewed the issues of strategy and stenting technique for treatment of bifurcation lesions. In particular, concerns remain on extensive use of DESs, especially in the side branch, and on time of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT) discontinuation, reflecting lack of pertinent long-term data. This study aimed to evaluate clinical safety and efficacy of different strategies for bifurcations treatment in a large observational real-world registry. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective Italian study of consecutive patients undergoing bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention between January 2002 and December 2006 was performed. The primary end point was the long-term rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The role of DAT length on outcome was also analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 4,314 patients (4,487 lesions) were enrolled at 22 independent centers. In-hospital procedural success rate was 98.7%. After median follow-up of 24 months, MACEs occurred in 17.7%, with cardiac death in 3.4%, myocardial infarction in 4.0%, target lesion revascularization in 13.2%, and stent thrombosis in 2.9%. Extensive multivariable analysis showed that MACEs were independently predicted by age, diabetes, renal failure, systolic dysfunction, multivessel disease, myocardial infarction at admission, restenotic lesion, bare-metal stent implantation, complex stenting strategy, and short duration of DAT. CONCLUSIONS: This large study based on current clinical practice in an unselected patient population presenting with bifurcation disease and submitted to percutaneous coronary intervention demonstrated favorable long-term clinical results in this challenging patient setting, especially when DESs, simple stenting strategy, and DAT for at least 6 months are used.

Are drug-eluting stents superior to bare-metal stents in patients with unprotected non-bifurcational left main disease? Insights from a multicentre registry.

AIMS: To compare long-term clinical outcome following drug-eluting stents (DES) or bare-metal stents (BMS) implantation on lesions located at the ostium or the shaft of the left main in a large real-world population. The advent of DES decreased the risk of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) restenosis when compared with BMS, but it is unclear if this advantage continues when non-bifurcational lesions are considered. METHODS AND RESULTS: The GISE-SICI registry is a retrospective, observational multicentre registry promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology in which 19 high-volume participating centres enrolled 1453 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention on ULMCA between January 2002 and December 2006. From the registry, a total of 479 consecutive patients with ostial and shaft lesions who underwent DES (n = 334) or BMS (n = 145) implantation were analysed with extensive multivariable and propensity score adjustments. At 3-year follow-up, risk-adjusted survival rates were higher in patients treated with DES than in those treated with BMS. The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for the risk of mortality after DES implantation relative to BMS implantation was 0.37 (95% CI: 0.15-0.96, P = 0.04). The adjusted HR for the risk of cardiac mortality was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.09-1.04, P = 0.06). The adjusted 3-year rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were not significantly lower in the DES group than in the BMS group (P = 0.60). CONCLUSION: In a large population of patients with lesions located at the ostium or the shaft of the left main in a real-world setting, DES were associated with favourable clinical outcomes when compared with BMS, although there was no evidence of a significant reduction in TLR with DES vs. BMS.

Ostial and midshaft lesions vs. bifurcation lesions in 1111 patients with unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis treated with drug-eluting stents: results of the survey from the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology.

AIMS: In this study, we compared the cumulative risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) of patients with distal unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis with those of patients with ostial and midshaft lesions treated with drug-eluting stent (DES). METHODS AND RESULTS: The survey promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology on ULMCA stenosis was an observational study involving 19 high-volume Italian centres. We enrolled 1111 patients with ULMCA stenosis treated with DES. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Three hundred and thirty-four patients had ostial or midshaft lesions (group 1) and 777 bifurcations (group 2). The adjusted hazards ratio of the risk of 2 year MACE of patients in group 2 vs. patients in group 1 was 1.50 (P = 0.024). However, we observed that there was a significant difference between patients with bifurcations treated with two stents and those in group 1 (P = 0.001), but not between patients with bifurcations treated with one stent and those in group 1 (P = 0.38). CONCLUSION: Patients with bifurcations have a worse outcome than patients with ostial and midshaft lesions. However, the technique used to treat bifurcations has a significant impact on clinical outcomes.

Long-term clinical benefit of drug-eluting stents over bare-metal stents in diabetic patients with de novo left main coronary artery disease: results from a real-world multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available on diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the context of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. The main goal of this study was to present the long-term relative benefits of using drug-eluting stent (DES) instead of bare-metal stent (BMS) for diabetic patients submitted to percutaneous ULMCA treatment in a large real world multicenter registry. METHODS: The GISE-SICI registry is a retrospective, observational multicenter registry promoted by the Italian Society of Invasive Cardiology in which 19 high-volume participating centers enrolled 1,453 consecutive patients who underwent PCI on ULMCA between January 2002 and December 2006. From the registry, a total of 398 consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus who underwent DES (n = 321) or BMS (n = 77) implantation were analyzed, with extensive multivariable adjustments. RESULTS: At 3-years, use of DES in diabetic patients resulted in no significant differences with respect to death (HR 0.56, 95% CIs 0.24-1.28), myocardial infarction (HR 0.82, 95% CIs 0.21-3.26), and the composite end-point of death or myocardial infarction (HR 0.56, 95% CIs 0.27-1.20). Conversely, DES were associated with significant reduction of target lesion revascularization (TLR, HR 0.33; 95% CIs 0.14-0.80, P = 0.001) rates. CONCLUSIONS: Patients presenting with ULMCA disease in the context of diabetes mellitus who are treated with stent-supported PCI have a significant reduction in the rate of TLR with no increased risk of death or myocardial infarction.

One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in patients needing short dual antiplatelet therapy. Insight from the ULISSE registry (ULtimaster Italian multicenter all comerS Stent rEgistry).

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate real-world clinical outcome of patients needing short dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) following PCI with Ultimaster® thin-strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES), which was supposed to induce faster stent endothelialization and reduce device thrombogenicity. METHODS: In this sub-group analysis of patients enrolled in the ULISSE registry, two groups were identified: 1) patients discharged with S-DAPT (≤3-month) due to high bleeding risk or need for urgent major non-cardiac surgery and 2) patients discharged with recommended DAPT (R-DAPT) duration (≥6-month). The primary ischemic-safety and bleeding-safety endpoints were TLF (composite of cardiac-death, target vessel MI, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization), and BARC major bleedings (≥type-3a) at 1-year follow-up. To account for events occurring before DAPT discontinuation we performed 3-month landmark analysis. RESULTS: 82 patients (5%) were discharged with ≤3-month DAPT (57 ±â€¯27 days), and 1558 patients (94%) were discharged with ≥6-month DAPT (318 ±â€¯75 days). No significant differences between S-DAPT and R-DAPT group were observed in TLF at 1-year (7.9% vs. 4.6%). The rate of BARC major bleeding resulted significantly higher in S-DAPT group (3.9% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.001), with the majority of bleeding events occurring within 3 months. The landmark analysis showed no significant differences in BARC major bleedings between groups (1.4% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.142). CONCLUSIONS: As compared to those treated with R-DAPT (≥6-month), patients needing -S-DAPT (≤3-month) after PCI with Ultimaster® BP-SES had similar rates of 1-year TLF and BARC major bleedings following early DAPT discontinuation.

Long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents: two-year results of the REAL (REgistro AngiopLastiche dell'Emilia Romagna) multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) have been questioned recently. METHODS AND RESULTS: Between July 2002 and June 2005, 10,629 patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention with either DES (n=3064) or bare-metal stents (BMS, n=7565) were enrolled in a prospective registry comprising 13 hospitals. We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, acute myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) and angiographic stent thrombosis during 2-year follow-up. A propensity score analysis to adjust for different baseline clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics was performed. The 2-year unadjusted cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 17.8% in the DES group and 21.0% in the BMS group (P=0.003 by log-rank test). Angiographic stent thrombosis was 1.0% in the DES group and 0.6% in the BMS group (P=0.09). After adjustment, the 2-year cumulative incidence of death was 6.8% in the DES group and 7.4% in the BMS group (P=0.35), whereas the rates were 5.3% in DES and 5.8% in BMS for acute myocardial infarction (P=0.46), 9.1% in DES and 12.9% in BMS for target-vessel revascularization (P<0.00001), and 16.9% in DES and 21.8% in BMS for major adverse cardiac events (P<0.0001). Independent predictors of target-vessel revascularization in the DES group were diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 1.76), renal failure (hazard ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.06 to 2.69), and reference vessel diameter (hazard ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: In this large real-world population, the beneficial effect of DES in reducing the need for new revascularization compared with BMS extends to 2 years without evidence of a worse safety profile.

Long-term outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in the treatment of saphenous vein graft disease (results from the REgistro Regionale AngiopLastiche Emilia-Romagna registry).

Percutaneous revascularization of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remains a challenging task. Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have been shown to decrease the incidence of restenosis in de novo native coronary artery lesions. However, their clinical value in SVGs remains to be established. We compared long-term clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention with DESs and bare metal stents (BMSs) for de novo lesions in SVGs. In a large prospective, multicenter registry, 360 patients underwent stenting of a de novo lesion in SVGs using BMSs (288 patients) or DESs (72 patients). Incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality, reinfarction, and target vessel revascularization, was recorded at a 12-month follow-up. Compared with the DES group, patients receiving BMSs were more likely to be men, to have chronic renal insufficiency or higher Charlson scores, but less likely to have undergone previous percutaneous coronary intervention. Incidence of MACEs at 12-month follow-up was similar in the 2 groups (17.8% in DES group vs 20.3% in BMS group, respectively, p = 0.460). Cox regression analysis identified age, chronic renal failure, cardiogenic shock at presentation, and ostial location of stenosis as independent predictors of long-term MACEs. In conclusion, our data suggest that rates of 12-month MACEs associated with the use of DESs and BMSs are similar in patients undergoing treatment of de novo lesions in SVGs.

Lack of clinical long-term benefit with the use of a drug eluting stent compared to use of a bare metal stent in saphenous vein grafts.

BACKGROUND: Small randomized trials have shown short-term improved outcome with drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare metal stent (BMS) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions by reducing in-stent restenosis and target vessel revascularization (TVR). It is not clear, however, if these benefits are maintained long term. The aim of this study is to compare the outcome in a larger cohort of patients undergoing SVG stent implantation with DES or BMS, at 2 years. METHODS: From among 250 patients who underwent SVG stenting, 225 patients with available follow-up were selected from data bases at the three participating institutions. One-hundred-six patients had DES (sirolimus, paclitaxel or tacrolimus eluting stent) and 119 patients had any available BMS from April 2002 to December 2006. The primary endpoint was MACE rate, a combination of cardiac death, S-T elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and target lesion revascularization. Secondary end points were the individual components of the primary endpoint. Follow-up was obtained by mailed interviews or telephone calls and review of the hospital chart. RESULTS: The DES and BMS groups had similar age (71 +/- 8 years vs. 70 +/- 7 years, P = 1.0), diabetes (45% vs. 36%, P = 0.3), history of MI (58% vs. 51%, P = 0.6), EF (44% vs. 47%, P = 0.2) and previous PCI (40% vs. 35%, P = 0.4). Reference vessel diameter (3.15 +/- 0.5 mm vs. 3.5 +/- 0.5 mm. P = 0.001) and stent size (3.3 +/- 0.4 mm vs. 3.9 +/- 0.5 mm, P = 0.001) were smaller in the DES group; however, the BMS were longer (24 +/- 10 mm vs. 21 +/- 6 mm, P = 0.05). At one year there was a trend (P = 0.1) for lower MACE rate in the DES group, but at two years there was no difference in MACE free survival between the DES and BMS groups (81 % vs. 82%, P = 0.9). The death rate was similar (6% each) with three patients having STEMI (two in the DES and one in the BMS). TVR was also similar (14% in each group). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing treatment of SVG disease with a stent, the marginal benefit of DES seen at 1 year was lost at 2-year follow-up.

One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in all-comers population. Insight from the ULISSE registry (ULtimaster Italian multicenter all comerS Stent rEgistry).

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to confirm in a large population of unselected patients the promising results of Ultimaster® biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) already shown in previous trial. METHODS: ULISSE is an observational, multicenter, national registry evaluating all patients undergoing PCI with the Ultimaster® BP-SES. Incidence of 1-year TLF (cardiac death or target vessel MI or clinically indicated TLR) was the primary endpoint. Pre-specified subgroup analysis was performed for diabetic patients and for those with lesion longer than 25 mm, bifurcation and CTO lesions. RESULTS: 1660 patients were enrolled in 9 Italian cardiology centers, 82% were males, mean age of 68 ±â€¯10 years, and 29% were diabetics. Overall 2422 lesions were treated, 65% type B2/C lesions, 7% CTOs, 17% bifurcations and 38% long lesions. The incidence of 1-year TLF was 5%, with 3.2% of clinically indicated TLR. TLF occurred in 8% of the patients with diabetes mellitus, and 7% in bifurcation, 6.7% in CTO and 6.2% in long lesions. Definite overall ST was 0.9%, and 1.2% in patients treated for type B2/C lesions. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified stenting on unprotected LMT (OR = 4.80), stenting on ISR lesion (OR = 3.19) and need for rotational atherectomy (OR = 6.24) as the strongest independent predictors of TLF. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this national all-comers registry show that the Ultimaster® BP-SES real-world performance was comparable with that observed in the clinical trial, with low rate of primary endpoint and TLR. Long term follow-up will be necessary to prove the theoretical advantage of the BP-SES over time.

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

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

Comparison of two antiplatelet regimens (aspirin alone versus aspirin + ticlopidine or clopidogrel) after intracoronary implantation of a carbofilm-coated stent.

Stent thrombosis (ST) is an infrequent (0.5% to 1.5%) complication of intracoronary stenting, with severe clinical consequences. This multicenter, randomized study evaluated the clinical outcome in 479 patients (598 lesions treated) who underwent elective coronary stenting with a Carbofilm-coated stent (CarboStent) who met prespecified eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin alone (n = 235) or aspirin plus a thienopyridine antiplatelet regimen (n = 244). Clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics were similar between groups. The primary end point was the incidence of 30-day ST; secondary end points included major vascular or bleeding complications within 30 days and death, acute myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 6 months. ST occurred in 4 patients (1.4%) in the aspirin-only group and in 1 patient (0.3%) in the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 2.08, p = NS). After careful review of cases, 89 patients (19%) with protocol deviations were identified. When they were excluded from the analysis, no ST was observed in either group. Secondary end points were reached by 4% of the aspirin-alone group and 8% of the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 2.35, 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 5.85, p = NS). In conclusion, after optimal intracoronary implantation of the CarboStent, antiplatelet therapy with aspirin alone was safe and provided efficacy comparable to aspirin plus a thienopyridine in the prevention of ST.

Comparison of effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients at high risk for coronary restenosis or clinical adverse events.

We evaluated the clinical effect of selective use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) in real-world, high-risk patients. A total of 4,237 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (SES, n = 872, bare metal stents [BMSs], n = 3,365) was enrolled in a prospective regional survey. A prespecified high-risk subset of patients was selected on the basis of clinical and angiographic characteristics. A propensity score analysis was performed to compare patients who received SESs with those who received BMSs. Patients in the SES group more often had diabetes and more frequently had previous myocardial infarction or coronary revascularization, type C lesions, and multivessel procedures. Patients who presented with acute myocardial infarction were treated more often with BMSs. At 9 months, the use of SESs was associated with fewer major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization; hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 0.85) and target lesion revascularizations (hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval 0.20 to 0.91). This decrease was more evident in a prespecified high-risk subgroup of patients (major adverse cardiac events, 8.0% SES vs 15.6% BMS, hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.72). We conclude that selective SES use in real-world patients who have high-risk clinical and angiographic characteristics is associated with significant decreases in major adverse cardiac events and repeat revascularizations compared with BMS use.

Early and long-term outlook of percutaneous coronary intervention for bifurcation lesions in young patients.

BACKGROUND: Coronary artery disease is most common in older patients, but may occur in younger subjects. The outlook of young patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of challenging lesion subsets such as coronary bifurcations, is not established. We thus aimed to appraise the early and long-term results of PCI for bifurcations in young patients. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted enrolling consecutive patients undergoing bifurcation PCI between 2002 and 2006 in 22 Italian centers. Patients were divided in 2 groups: age ≤ 45 years, and age > 45 years. The primary end-point was long-term rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). RESULTS: 4,314 patients were included: 195 (4.5%) in the younger group, and 4119 (95.5%) in the older group. 30-day outcomes did not show significant differences in MACE rates, with 1.0% in the ≤ 45 years group and 2.1% in the >45 years group (p=0.439), with death in 0.5% and 1.2% (p=0.388). At long-term follow-up (24.4 ± 15.1 months), younger patients showed similar rates of MACE, (12.8% vs. 16.6%, p=0.161), myocardial infarction (3.1% vs. 3.7%, p=0.633), target lesion revascularization (11.3% vs. 12.5%, p=0.627), or stent thrombosis (1.5% vs. 2.8%, p=0.294), despite an increased risk of death in older patients (1.0% vs. 5.0%, p=0.012). Even at extensive multivariable analysis, younger patients still faced a similar risk of MACE (HR=0.78 [0.48-1.27], p=0.318). CONCLUSIONS: Despite their low age, young patients undergoing PCI for bifurcation face a significant risk of early and late non-fatal adverse events. Thus, they should not be denied careful medical management and follow-up.

Antithrombotic management and 1-year outcome of patients on oral anticoagulation undergoing coronary stent implantation (from the Registro Regionale Angioplastiche Emilia-Romagna Registry).

Current recommendations for the antithrombotic management of patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation (PCI-S) are based on limited and relatively weak data. To broaden and strengthen available evidence, the management and 1-year outcomes of OAC patients who underwent PCI-S and were included in a prospective, multicenter registry from 2003 to 2007 were evaluated. Among the 632 patients receiving OAC, mostly because of atrial fibrillation (58%), who underwent PCI-S, mostly because of acute coronary syndromes (63%), dual-antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel was the most frequently prescribed at discharge (48%), followed by triple therapy with OAC, aspirin, and clopidogrel (32%) and OAC plus aspirin (18%). The choice of antithrombotic therapy largely matched the thromboembolic risk profiles of patients, with the prescription of regimens including OAC predicted by the presence of non-low-risk features. The cumulative 1-year occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events was as high as 27% and was not significantly different among the 3 treatment groups. Stroke and stent thrombosis were limited to 2% and 3%, respectively, and although no significant differences were found among the 3 groups, stroke was 4 times less frequent when OAC, with either 1 or 2 antiplatelet agents, was administered. Major bleeding was also limited to 3%, with no significant differences among the 3 groups. In conclusion, these findings suggest overall real-world management of OAC patients who undergo PCI-S that is in accordance with their clinical risk profiles and give further support to the reported efficacy and safety of triple therapy for the optimal treatment of these patients.

Transradial versus transfemoral intervention for acute myocardial infarction: a propensity score-adjusted and -matched analysis from the REAL (REgistro regionale AngiopLastiche dell'Emilia-Romagna) multicenter registry.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess whether transradial intervention, by minimizing access-site bleeding and vascular events, improves outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared with the transfemoral approach. BACKGROUND: Bleeding and consequent blood product transfusions have been causally associated with a higher mortality rate in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing coronary angioplasty. METHODS: We identified all adults undergoing percutaneous intervention for acute myocardial infarction in Emilia-Romagna, a region in the north of Italy of 4 million residents, between January 1, 2003, and July 30, 2009, at 12 referral hospitals using a region-mandated database of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures. Differences in the risk of death at 2 years between patients undergoing transfemoral versus transradial intervention, assessed on an intention-to-treat basis, were determined from vital statistics records and compared based on propensity score adjustment and matching. RESULTS: A total of 11,068 patients were treated for acute myocardial infarction (8,000 via transfemoral and 3,068 via transradial route). According to analysis of matched pairs, the 2-year, risk-adjusted mortality rates were lower for the transradial than for the transfemoral group (8.8% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.0250). The rate of vascular complications requiring surgery or need for blood transfusion were also significantly decreased in the transradial group (1.1% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.0052). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction, transradial treatment is associated with decreased 2-year mortality rates and a reduction in the need for vascular surgery and/or blood transfusion compared with transfemoral intervention.

Simplifying clinical risk prediction for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions: the case for the ACEF (age, creatinine, ejection fraction) score.

AIMS: We aimed to appraise the predictive accuracy of a novel and user-friendly risk score, the ACEF (age, creatinine, ejection fraction), in patients undergoing PCI for coronary bifurcations. METHODS AND RESULTS: A multicentre, retrospective study was conducted enrolling consecutive patients undergoing bifurcation PCI between January 2002 and December 2006 in 22 Italian centres. Patients with complete data to enable computation of the ACEF score were divided into three groups according to tertiles of ACEF score. The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. The discrimination of the ACEF score as a continuous variable was also appraised with area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver-operating characteristic. A total of 3,535 patients were included: 1,119 in the lowest tertile of ACEF score, 1,190 in the mid tertile, and 1,153 in the highest tertile. Increased ACEF score was associated with significantly different rates of 30-day mortality (0.1% in the lowest tertile vs. 0.5% in the mid tertile and 3.0% in the highest tertile, p<0.001), with similar differences in myocardial infarction (0.3% vs. 0.7% and 1.8%, p<0.001) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE, 0.5% vs. 1.2% and 4.3%, p<0.001). After an average follow-up of 24.4±15.1 months, increased ACEF score was still associated with a higher rate of all-cause death (1.3% vs. 2.4% and 11.0%, p<0.001), cardiac death (0.9% vs. 1.4% and 7.2%, p<0.001), myocardial infarction (3.4% vs. 2.7% and 5.7%, p<0.001), MACE (13.6% vs. 15.9% and 22.3%, p<0.001), and stent thrombosis (2.3% vs. 1.8% and 5.0%, p<0.001). Discrimination of ACEF score was satisfactory for 30-day mortality (AUC=0.82 [0.77-0.87], p<0.001), 30-day MACE (AUC=0.73 [0.67-0.78], p<0.001), long-term mortality (AUC=0.77 [0.74-0.81], p<0.001), and moderate for long-term MACE (AUC=0.60 [0.57-0.62], p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The simple and extremely user-friendly ACEF score can accurately identify patients undergoing PCI for coronary bifurcation lesions at high risk of early fatal or non-fatal complications, as well as long-term fatality.