Experience and perspective with intravascular imaging and invasive coronary physiology: Insights from allied health professionals.

BACKGROUND: Although intravascular imaging (IVI) and invasive coronary physiology (ICP) are utilized in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with robust positive clinical evidence, their adoption in cardiac catheterization laboratories (CCLs) is still limited. AIMS: The aim of our survey was to assess the perspectives on the experiences of allied health professionals in CCLs' utility of IVI and ICP. METHODS: An anonymous online survey was conducted through multiple channels, including the Cardiovascular Research Technologies (CRT) 2023 Nurses and Technologists Symposium, social media, Cath Lab Digest link, and field requests, leading to diverse representation of allied health professionals. RESULTS: A total of 101 CCL members participated in the survey. First, 59% of responders noted an increased use of IVI in their institutions over recent years. For those experiencing an increase, 49% credited training, 45% emerging evidence, and 34% attributed new CCL members. Barriers to IVI usage were perceived increased procedure time (58%), staff resistance (56%), procedural cost (48%), and difficulty interpreting findings (44%). Regarding ICP, 61% reported using it in approximately 25% to 75% of cases, while 10% utilized it in 75% to 100% of CCL procedures. Interpreting ICP results was mixed, with 56% confident in interpreting all ICP results and 6% unable to interpret any ICP results. CONCLUSION: Our findings highlight opportunities for increasing routine utilization of IVI and ICP in the CCL through allied health professionals. By providing education and training, we can elevate familiarity with the equipment and subsequently build a CCL culture that advocates for both IVI and ICP.

Clinical outcomes after PCI treatment of very long lesions with the XIENCE V everolimus eluting stent; Pooled analysis from the SPIRIT and XIENCE V USA prospective multicenter trials.

BACKGROUND: Lesion length has been an important factor in predicting a worse outcome after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI); however, the safety and efficacy of second-generation drug eluting stents in very long coronary lesions has not been validated in large scale randomized controlled trials. METHODS: We performed a patient level pooled analysis of 13,266 patients undergoing planned overlapping stent treatment of very long coronary lesions with the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system from 6 trials evaluating the XIENCE V stent (Spirit II, III, IV, V, Spirit Small Vessel and XIENCE V USA). Patients were divided into two cohorts, a very long lesion (VLL) group (lesions ≥35 mm) and a control group (lesions >24 to <35 mm). The primary outcome measures were Target Lesion Failure (TLF), Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), and Academic Research Consortium (ARC) defined definite and probable stent thrombosis at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 13,266 patients were included in the pooled analysis of which 2.4% (323 patients with 328 total lesions) had a mean lesion length of 47.1 ± 13.7 mm in the VLL group which were compared to controls comprised of 3.6% of the cohort (482 patients with 500 total lesions) with mean lesion length of 28.1 ± 2.4 mm.There was no significant difference in the rates of TLF between the VVL and control groups (8.9 vs. 10%, P = 0.63), MACE (9.2 vs. 10%, P = 0.74) or stent thrombosis (1.6 vs. 1.5%, P = 0.92) at 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of very long coronary lesions, the XIENCE V stent appears as safe and effective as percutaneous coronary interventions for long lesions. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Role of prophylactic intra-aortic balloon pump in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) has been shown to support patients who are at high risk for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) or becoming hemodynamically unstable during PCI, but the longer term outcomes of these strategies are unknown. This study investigated the outcomes of high-risk patients who received a prophylactic IABP (P-IABP) versus patients who required rescue IABP (R-IABP) because of intraprocedural complications. Clinical outcomes of 68 consecutive patients (69 procedures) who underwent high-risk PCI with P-IABP support were compared with those of 46 patients who required R-IABP. Patients who presented with cardiogenic shock or acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, and those who were on mechanical ventilators were excluded. Clinical baseline characteristics were similar between groups except for more diabetics and patients with hypercholesterolemia in the P-IABP group. The procedural success was higher in the P-IABP group, with lower in-hospital mortality and major complications, than in the R-IABP group. At 6 months, the mortality and major adverse cardiac event rates were lower in the P-IABP group (8% vs 29%, p < 0.01, and 12% vs 32%, p = 0.02, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed that prophylactic insertion of an IABP is the only independent predictor of survival at 6 months. The incidence of vascular complications was low and comparable except for more major bleeding (15% vs 3%, p = 0.03) in the R-IABP group. In conclusion, patients who undergo high-risk PCI and then receive P-IABP support have favorable outcomes compared with those who require R-IABP for intraprocedural complications. Therefore, in high-risk patients undergoing PCI, liberal use of a P-IABP should be considered.

Comparison of outcomes between bare metal stents and drug-eluting stents for percutaneous revascularization of internal mammary grafts.

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) decrease the need for repeat revascularization in native coronary arteries and vein grafts. This study examined the safety and efficacy of DESs for the treatment of lesions in the internal mammary artery (IMA) conduits and compared the outcomes with those from bare metal stents (BMSs). Records of 69 consecutive patients who underwent stenting of the IMA from 2001 to 2004 were reviewed and analyzed. Of these, 30 patients were treated with DESs (sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) and 39 patients with BMSs. In-hospital and 6-month clinical outcomes were recorded and compared. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 groups. Lesion location and characteristics were also similar, except for a trend toward longer stent lengths in the DES group (DES 20.2 +/- 7.7 mm vs BMS 14.8 +/- 3.5 mm, p = 0.255). There was no late thrombosis in either group. There were no significant differences in in-hospital and 1- and 6-month outcomes between the 2 groups, including target lesion revascularization with DESs (DESs 3.33% vs BMSs 10%, p = 0.38). In conclusion, DES implantation into IMAs appears safe and is associated with low rates of recurrences. These results may support expansion of use of DESs for the management of IMA stenotic lesions.

Intravascular brachytherapy versus drug-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis.

Drug-eluting stents (DESs), although promising technology, still are associated with restenosis; therefore, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravascular radiation therapy for the treatment of DES in-stent restenosis (ISR). Treatment of DES ISR has not been established, although intravascular radiation therapy is an effective treatment for patients with ISR of bare metal stents. Other modalities are conventional percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including restenting with DES. Radiation for Eluting Stents in Coronary FailUrE (RESCUE) is an international, Internet-based registry of 61 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to intravascular radiation therapy with commercially available systems after PCI. Outcomes of these patients were compared with those of a consecutive series of 50 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to repeat DES (r-DES) treatment. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for more Cypher stents as the initial DES that restenosed in the r-DES group than in the intravascular radiation therapy group (88.5% vs 69%, p = 0.01). At 8 months there were fewer overall major adverse cardiac events in the intravascular radiation therapy group compared with the r-DES group (9.8% vs 24%, p = 0.044). The need for target vessel and target lesion revascularizations was similar in the 2 groups at 8 months. There has been no report of subacute thrombosis in either group. In conclusion, intravascular radiation therapy as adjunct therapy to PCI for patients presenting with ISR of a DES is safe and should be considered an alternative therapeutic option for this difficult subset of patients.

Impact of chronic renal insufficiency on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare metal stents.

Patients with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) have higher rates of target vessel revascularization and mortality. The efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) to improve the clinical outcomes of these patients is unknown. We investigated the effect of SESs versus bare metal stents (BMSs) on outcomes of patients with CRI. Among the first 1,522 patients treated with SESs, 76 were identified with CRI and 1,446 without CRI. In-hospital and 1- and 6-month clinical outcomes were compared with 153 patients with CRI who were treated with BMSs. Patients with CRI were older, hypertensive, and diabetic and had more previous myocardial infarctions, revascularizations, and decreased left ventricular function (p <0.001). These patients had more saphenous vein graft lesions, were treated with more debulking devices (p <0.003), and had higher rates of in-hospital complications and mortality (p <0.001) compared with those without CRI. Among patients with CRI, treatment with SESs did not affect clinical outcomes at 1 month and was associated with lower incidences of target vessel revascularization (7.1% vs 22.1%, p = 0.02) at 6 months but did not affect other events, including mortality (16.7% vs 14.7% p = 0.89), compared with BMSs. However, treatment with SESs in patients without CRI was associated with significantly lower rates of major adverse cardiac events at 6 months (p <0.001). In conclusion, percutaneous coronary intervention with SESs in patients with CRI is associated with low rates of repeat revascularization compared with BMSs but has no effect on mortality at 6 months.

Five-year follow-up after intracoronary gamma radiation therapy for in-stent restenosis.

BACKGROUND: The Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial is a double-blinded randomized study evaluating the effects of intracoronary radiation therapy (IRT) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS AND RESULTS: One hundred thirty patients with ISR (100 native coronary and 30 vein grafts) underwent percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty, laser ablation, rotational atherectomy, or additional stenting (36% of lesions). Patients were randomized to either 192-Iridium IRT or placebo, with a prescribed dose of 15 Gy to a 2-mm radial distance from the center of the source. Angiographic restenosis (27% versus 56%, P=0.002) and target vessel revascularization (26% versus 68%, P<0.001) were reduced at 6 months in patients treated with IRT. Between 6 and 60 months, patients treated with IRT compared with placebo had more target lesion revascularization (IRT, 21.6% versus placebo, 4.7%; P=0.04) and target vessel revascularization (IRT, 21.5% versus placebo, 6.1%; P=0.03). At 5 years, the major adverse cardiac event rate was significantly reduced with IRT (46.2% versus 69.2%, P=0.008). CONCLUSIONS: In the Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial, patients with ISR treated with IRT using 192-Iridium had a reduction in the need for repeat target lesion and vessel revascularization at 6 months and 5 years.

Intracoronary radiation therapy improves the clinical and angiographic outcomes of diffuse in-stent restenotic lesions: results of the Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial for Long Lesions (Long WRIST) Studies.

BACKGROUND: The Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial for long lesions (Long WRIST) was designed to determine the safety and efficacy of vascular brachytherapy for the treatment of diffuse in-stent restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 120 patients with diffuse in-stent restenosis in native coronary arteries (lesion length, 36 to 80 mm) were randomized for either radiation with 192Ir with 15 Gy at 2 mm from the source axis or placebo. After enrollment, 120 additional patients with the same inclusion criteria were treated with 192Ir with 18 Gy and included in the Long WRIST High Dose registry. Antiplatelet therapy was initially prescribed for 1 month and was extended to 6 months in the last 60 patients of the Long WRIST High Dose registry. At 6 months, the binary angiographic restenosis rate was 73%, 45%, and 38% in the placebo, 15 Gy, and 18 Gy radiated groups, respectively (P<0.05). At 1 year, the primary clinical end point of major cardiac events was 63% in the placebo group and 42% in the radiated group with 15 Gy (P<0.05). The major cardiac event rate was further reduced with 18 Gy (22%; P<0.05 versus 15 Gy). Late thrombosis was 12%, 15%, and 9% in the placebo group, 15 Gy group with 1 month of antiplatelet therapy, and 18 Gy group with 6 months of antiplatelet therapy, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Vascular brachytherapy with 192Ir is safe and reduces the rate of recurrent restenosis in diffuse in-stent restenosis. The efficacy of vascular brachytherapy on angiographic and clinical outcomes is enhanced with a radiation dose of 18 Gy and prolonged antiplatelet therapy.

The impact of obesity on the short-term and long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: the obesity paradox?

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of body mass index (BMI) on the short- and long-term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Obesity is associated with advanced coronary artery disease (CAD). However, the relation between BMI and outcome after PCI remains controversial. METHODS: We studied 9,633 consecutive patients who underwent PCI between January 1994 and December 1999. Patients were divided into three groups according to BMI: normal, BMI between 18.5 and 24.9 (n = 1,923); overweight, BMI between 25 and 30 (n = 4,813); and obese, BMI >30 (n = 2,897). RESULTS: Obese patients were significantly younger and had consistently worse baseline clinical characteristics than normal or overweight patients, with a higher incidence of hypertension, diabetes, hypercholesterolemia and smoking history (p < 0.0001). Despite similar angiographic success rates among the three groups, normal BMI patients had a higher incidence of major in-hospital complications, including cardiac death (p = 0.001). At one-year follow-up, overall mortality rates were significantly higher for normal BMI patients compared with overweight or obese patients (p < 0.0001). Myocardial infarction and revascularization rates did not differ among the three groups. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, diabetes, hypertension, age, BMI and left ventricular function were independent predictors of long-term mortality. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with known CAD who undergo PCI, very lean patients (BMI <18.5) and those with BMI within the normal range are at the highest risk for in-hospital complications and cardiac death and for increased one-year mortality.

Impact of treatment of coronary artery disease with sirolimus-eluting stents on outcomes of diabetic and nondiabetic patients.

Patients with diabetes mellitus are at increased risk for repeat interventions and mortality after coronary angioplasty and stenting. The efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) to improve the outcomes of these patients is a focus of interest. In the first 1,407 patients treated with SESs at our institution, 492 were diabetic (insulin dependent diabetes mellitus [IDDM], n = 160 and non-insulin-dependent DM [NIDDM], n = 332). The in-hospital and 1- and 6-month clinical outcomes were compared with those of 915 patients without DM (non-DM). The baseline characteristics were similar, except for more women, obesity, previous myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, and renal insufficiency in the DM group (p <0.001). Compared with non-DM patients, DM patients had higher in-hospital (p <0.05) and 1-month mortality (p = 0.02). IDDM patients had more in-hospital renal failure (p = 0.04) and Q-wave myocardial infarctions (1.6% vs 0%, p = 0.04) compared with NIDDM patients, and higher mortality (3.1% vs 0.8%, p = 0.04) and subacute stent thromboses (2.3% vs 0.5%, p = 0.07) than non-DM patients at 30 days. At 6 months, DM patients had a higher incidence of Q-wave myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization-major adverse cardiac events, and composite of death and Q-wave myocardial infarction than non-DM patients (6.0% vs 2.7%, p = 0.01). Late outcomes between the IDDM and NIDDM groups were similar. Multivariate analysis showed diabetes and acute renal failure as independent predictors of target lesion revascularization-major adverse cardiac events. In conclusion, our data showed that, despite a reduction in repeat revascularization, coronary intervention with SESs in diabetic patients is limited by higher mortality at 1 month and a higher incidence of Q-wave myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization-major adverse cardiac events at 6 months compared with non-DM patients. Careful surveillance is required in IDDM patients undergoing SES implantation.

Real-world clinical practice of intracoronary radiation therapy as compared to investigational trials.

Intracoronary radiation therapy (IRT) is well established in clinical practice as an effective treatment for in-stent restenosis. We aimed to determine if the 6-month clinical outcome of patients treated postapproval for marketing [commercial radiation (CR)] is equivalent to those patients enrolled in the Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trials [Gamma WRIST and Beta WRIST; investigational radiation (IR)]. The 6-month clinical outcome of 110 consecutive patients with 125 lesions who received IRT (gamma, (192)Ir, 15-18 Gy, n = 6; or beta, (32)P, 20 Gy, n = 20; or (90)Sr/Y, 18.4-23.0 Gy, n = 99) in CR was compared with the 6-month clinical outcome of 117 patients with 117 lesions who received IRT ((192)Ir, 15 Gy, n = 65, in Gamma WRIST; and (90)Y, 20.6 Gy, n = 52, in Beta WRIST) in IR. Patients in CR were treated with wider radiation margins. The CR received antiplatelet therapy for at least 6 months and the IR for 1 month. The baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. Use of atheroablation devices was less in CR than IR (15.2% vs. 32.8%, respectively; P = 0.001). The overall major adverse cardiac events (death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization; 18.2% vs. 29.1% in IR; P = 0.05) were significantly lower in the CR when compared with patients in the IR. The real-world clinical practice of IRT demonstrates lower events and better clinical outcomes. This is most likely a result of implementation of the lessons learned from the clinical trials such as optimizing the dosimetry by using a higher dose, treating wider margins to minimize edge effect, and administering prolonged antiplatelet therapy to abolish late thrombosis.

Use of IIb/IIIa inhibitors in patients with in-stent restenosis treated with intracoronary gamma-radiation. Integrilin WRIST.

The Integrilin Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial (WRIST) aimed to study the impact of IIb/IIIa inhibitors as adjunct therapy to intracoronary radiation therapy (IRT) for patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR). The impact of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor (eptifibatide) as adjunct therapy to vascular brachytherapy using (192)Ir emitter was examined in patients with in-stent restenosis. In the study, 150 patients were assigned to eptifibatide (Integrilin) and 150 patients to heparin only. Clinical composite endpoints at 30 days were similar between the patients treated with and without eptifibatide (4.7% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.78). There was a similarity in the non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) rates between the eptifibatide and the control group. Major bleeding was similar in patients treated with and without eptifibatide. Overall, the use of eptifibatide as adjunct therapy for patients with ISR that are treated with IRT did not impact the clinical outcome at 30 days.