FFR-Guided Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Patients with Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease remains unclear. METHODS: In this multinational, registry-based, randomized trial, we assigned patients with STEMI or very-high-risk non-STEMI (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease who were undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion to receive either FFR-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or no further revascularization. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The two key secondary outcomes were a composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction and unplanned revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 1542 patients underwent randomization, with 764 assigned to receive FFR-guided complete revascularization and 778 assigned to receive culprit-lesion-only PCI. At a median follow-up of 4.8 years (interquartile range, 4.3 to 5.2), a primary-outcome event had occurred in 145 patients (19.0%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 159 patients (20.4%) in the culprit-lesion-only group (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74 to 1.17; P = 0.53). With respect to the secondary outcomes, no apparent between-group differences were observed in the composite of death from any cause or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.44) or unplanned revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.04). There were no apparent between-group differences in safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with STEMI or very-high-risk NSTEMI and multivessel coronary artery disease, FFR-guided complete revascularization was not shown to result in a lower risk of a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization than culprit-lesion-only PCI at 4.8 years. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; FULL REVASC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02862119.).

Real-World Data on Potent P2Y12 Inhibition in Patients with Suspected Chronic Coronary Syndrome, Referred for Coronary Angiography.

INTRODUCTION: Potential benefit with potent platelet inhibition in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been discussed. The aim of this study was to compare a potent P2Y12 inhibition strategy using ticagrelor with clopidogrel in CCS patients referred for coronary angiography (CA) and PCI if feasible. METHODS: In this retrospective real-world study, patients referred for outpatient CA due to suspected CCS were included. To adjust for group differences, a propensity score reflecting the probability of being treated with ticagrelor was calculated and added to the logistic regression outcome model. RESULTS: In total, 1,003 patients were included in the primary analysis (577 treated with clopidogrel and 426 with ticagrelor). Among clopidogrel-treated patients, 132 (22.9%) experienced a bleeding complication compared with 93 (21.8%) among ticagrelor-treated patients, with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.70). There was no difference in bleeding severity. Furthermore, we observed no statistically significant difference in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE [death, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, or stroke]) (1.2% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.17). A subgroup analysis restricted to patients undergoing PCI ad hoc displayed a similar pattern. Also, patients undergoing CA without PCI ad hoc frequently experienced a bleeding complication, with no difference between the two treatments (21.0% vs. 17.3%, p = 0.27). Propensity score adjusted analyses confirmed the results. DISCUSSION: In patients with CCS referred for CA and PCI if feasible, a more potent P2Y12 inhibition strategy with ticagrelor was not associated with bleeding complications or MACE compared with clopidogrel.

Management and outcome in foreign-born vs native-born patients with myocardial infarction in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies on disparities in healthcare and outcome have shown conflicting results. The aim of this study was to assess differences in baseline characteristics, management, and outcome in myocardial infarction (MI) patients, by country of birth. METHODS: In total, 194 259 MI patients (64% male, 15% foreign-born) from the nationwide SWEDEHEART registry were included and compared by geographic region of birth. The primary outcome was one-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including all-cause death, MI, and stroke. Secondary outcomes were long-term MACE (up to 12 years), the individual components of MACE, 30-day mortality, management, and risk factors. Logistic regression, Cox proportional hazard models and propensity score matching (PSM), accounting for baseline differences, were used. RESULTS: Foreign-born patients were younger, often male, and had a higher cardiovascular (CV) risk factor burden, including smoking, diabetes, and hypertension. In PSM analyses, Asia-born patients had higher likelihood of revascularisation (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04-1.30), statins and betablocker prescription at discharge and a 34% lower risk of 30-day mortality. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were found in the primary outcomes except for Asia-born patients having lower risk of one-year MACE (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.98), driven by lower mortality (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.57-0.91). The results persisted over long-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that in a system with universal healthcare coverage in which acute and secondary preventive treatments do not differ by country of birth, foreign-born patients, despite higher CV risk factor burden, will do at least as well as native-born patients.

Provision of professional interpreters and Heart School attendance for foreign-born compared with native-born myocardial infarction patients in Sweden.

Objective: Interactive patient education, referred to as Heart School (HS), is an important part of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) after myocardial infarction (MI), which has been associated with improved outcomes. Little is known about HS attendance among foreign-born patients. The aims were to assess; 1) HS attendance in foreign-born versus native-born patients, 2) the association between the provision of professional interpreters and HS attendance, and 3) secondary prevention goal attainment after MI based on HS attendance. Methods: The provision of professional interpreters during post-MI follow-up was assessed by a questionnaire sent to all 78 Swedish CR sites. Patient-specific data was retrieved from the SWEDEHEART registry. The association between the provision of professional interpreters and HS attendance was estimated with logistic regression models. HS attendance and attainment of secondary prevention goals by country of birth were investigated. Results: In total, 8377 patients < 75 years (78 % male) were included. Foreign-born (19.8 %) had a higher prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and were less likely to attend HS (33.7 vs 51.3 %, p < 0.001), adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.59 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.68), compared with native-born patients. CR centers providing professional interpreters had higher HS attendance among foreign-born (adjusted OR 1.55, 95 % CI 1.20-2.01) but not among native-born patients. Attending HS was similarly associated with improved secondary prevention goal attainment in both groups. Conclusions: Despite similar positive association between HS attendance and attainment of secondary prevention goals, foreign-born patients attended HS less often. With the provision of professional interpreters, HS attendance increased in foreign-born patients.

Transradial versus trans-femoral access site in high-speed rotational atherectomy in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Radial artery is the preferred access site in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, limited data exist regarding utilization pattern, safety, and long-term efficacy of transradial artery access (TRA) PCI in heavily calcified lesions using high-speed rotational atherectomy (HSRA). METHODS: All patients who underwent HSRA-PCI in Sweden between 2005 and 2016 were included. Outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACE, including death, myocardial infarction (MI) or target vessel revascularisation (TVR)), in-hospital bleeding and restenosis. Inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for the non-randomized access site selection. RESULTS: We included 1479 patients of whom 649 had TRA and 782 transfemoral artery access (TFA) HSRA-PCI. The rate of TRA increased significantly by 18% per year but remained lower in HSRA-PCI (60%) than in the overall PCI population (85%) in 2016. TRA was associated with comparable angiographic success but significantly lower risk for major (adjusted OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.05-0.47) or any in-hospital bleeding (adjusted OR 0.32; 95% CI 0.13-0.78). At one year, the adjusted risk for MACE (HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.67-1.13) and its individual components did not differ between TRA and TFA patients. The risk for restenosis did not significantly differ between TRA and TFA HSRA-PCI treated lesions (adjusted HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.46-1.81). CONCLUSION: HSRA-PCI by TRA was associated with significantly lower risk for in-hospital bleeding and equivalent long-term efficacy when compared with TFA. Our data support the feasibility and superior safety profile of TRA in HSRA-PCI.

Pretreatment With P2Y12 Inhibitors in Patients With Chronic Coronary Syndrome Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Report From the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry.

BACKGROUND: In patients with chronic coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the optimal timing of P2Y12 inhibitors' administration is uncertain. We compared pretreatment versus treatment in the catheterization laboratory (In-Cathlab) in a real-world population. METHODS: In Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, all patients with chronic coronary syndrome undergoing coronary angiography and ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention, between 2006 and 2017 were identified. Pretreatment was defined as P2Y12 inhibitor administration before coronary angiography, outside the catheterization laboratory. Outcomes were net adverse clinical events including death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or bleeding within 30 days of the index procedure and in-hospital bleeding. RESULTS: We included 26 814 patients, 8237 in the In-Cathlab, and 18 577 in the pretreatment group. In-Cathlab treatment compared with pretreatment was associated with lower risk for net adverse clinical event (4.2 versus 5.1%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.79 [0.63-0.99]), bleeding (2.3 versus 2.6%, adjusted hazard ratio, 0.76 [0.57-1.01]). and in-hospital bleeding (1.9 versus 2.1%, adjusted odds ratio, 0.70 [0.51-0.96]). The risk for death, myocardial infarction, or stroke did not significantly differ between the groups. Among the In-Cathlab treated patients, 41% received ticagrelor or prasugrel and 59% clopidogrel. Treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel was associated with higher risk for net adverse clinical events (5.4% versus 3.4%, adjusted hazard ratio, 1.66 [1.12-2.48]), bleeding (3.4 versus 1.6%, adjusted hazard ratio, 2.14 [1.34-3.42]), and in-hospital bleeding (2.9 versus 1.2%, adjusted odds ratio, 2.24 [1.29-3.90]) but similar risk for death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, compared with clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary syndrome undergoing coronary angiography and ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention, pretreatment with P2Y12 inhibitors, before arrival to the catheterization laboratory, was not associated with improved clinical outcomes but was associated with increased risk for bleeding. Our data support clopidogrel administration in the catheterization laboratory as the standard of care. Graphic Abstract: A graphic abstract is available for this article.

Prasugrel versus ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVE: The comparative efficacy and safety of prasugrel and ticagrelor in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain unclear. We aimed to investigate the association of treatment with clinical outcomes. METHODS: In the SWEDEHEART (Swedish Web-system for enhancement and development of evidence-based care in heart disease evaluated according to recommended therapies) registry, all patients with MI treated with PCI and discharged on prasugrel or ticagrelor from 2010 to 2016 were included. Outcomes were 1-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE, death, MI or stroke), individual components and bleeding. Multivariable adjustment, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were used to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: We included 37 990 patients, 2073 in the prasugrel group and 35 917 in the ticagrelor group. Patients in the prasugrel group were younger, more often admitted with ST elevation MI and more likely to have diabetes. Six to twelve months after discharge, 20% of patients in each group discontinued the P2Y12 receptor inhibitor they received at discharge. The risk for MACCE did not significantly differ between prasugrel-treated and ticagrelor-treated patients (adjusted HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.24). We found no significant difference in the adjusted risk for death, recurrent MI or stroke alone between the two treatments. There was no significant difference in the risk for bleeding with prasugrel versus ticagrelor (2.5% vs 3.2%, adjusted HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.22). IPTW and PSM analyses confirmed the results. CONCLUSION: In patients with MI treated with PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar efficacy and safety during 1-year follow-up.