Rationale and design of the Statins Evaluation in Coronary procedUres and REvascularization: The SECURE-PCI Trial.

BACKGROUND: Previous evidence suggests that acute treatment with statins reduce atherosclerotic complications, including periprocedural myocardial infarction, but currently, there are no large, adequately powered studies to define the effects of early, high-dose statins in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and planned invasive management. OBJECTIVES: The main goal of Statins Evaluation in Coronary procedUres and REvascularization (SECURE-PCI) Trial is to determine whether the early use of a loading dose of 80 mg of atorvastatin before an intended percutaneous coronary intervention followed by an additional dose of 80 mg 24 hours after the procedure will be able to reduce the rates of major cardiovascular events at 30 days in patients with an ACS. DESIGN: The SECURE-PCI study is a pragmatic, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial planned to enroll around 4,200 patients in 58 different sites in Brazil. The primary outcome is the rate of major cardiovascular events at 30 days defined as a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and coronary revascularization. SUMMARY: The SECURE PCI is a large randomized trial testing a strategy of early, high-dose statin in patients with ACS and will provide important information about the acute treatment of this patient population.

Clinical impact of sex differences and procedural setting in transcatheter aortic valve implantation.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis. Yet, the impact of sex differences and public vs. private procedural setting on TAVI outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: The RIBAC-NT (Brazilian Registry for Evaluation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes) dataset included 3194 TAVI patients from 2009 to 2021. This retrospective analysis explored disparities in baseline characteristics, procedural and in-hospital outcomes stratifying patients by sex and procedural setting. Temporal trends were also investigated. RESULTS: We included 1551 (49 %) female and 1643 (51 %) male patients. Women were older (83 [78-87] vs. 81 [75-85] years; p < 0.01) but had a lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus (30.2 % vs. 36.3 %, p < 0.01) and coronary artery disease (39.0 % vs. 52.2 %, p < 0.01). However, women had a 3-fold higher higher risk of life-threatening bleeding (6.1 % vs. 2.4 %, p < 0.01). Women presented higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates (4.4 % vs. 2.5 % and 7.7 % vs. 4.5 %, all p < 0.01, respectively). Although public hospitals presented ~2-fold higher procedural mortality rate compared with private settings (5.0 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.01), after multivariable analysis procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Women had higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates after TAVI as compared with men, while facing higher life-threatening bleeding and adverse events rates. Although public hospitals exhibited higher mortality rates than private centers, procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality.

Offline Assessment of the Quantitative Flow Ratio: Is it Useful in Clinical Practice?

INTRODUCTION: Fractional flow reserve (FFR) has been established as the gold standard in the physiological assessment of coronary obstructions severity. However, the need to insert an intracoronary pressure guidewire is a factor that limits its use. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a method that infers the value of FFR from 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography (3D-QCA), eliminating the use of a pressure wire and coronary hyperemia. The present study aims to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of QFR and 3D-QCA in comparison with FFR for the identification of significant obstructive coronary lesions (FFR ≤.80) and the feasibility to assess QFR in a cohort of patients without dedicated angiographic acquisition. METHODS: Consecutive patients with coronary angiography with moderate obstructive lesions that had previous FFR measurement were evaluated. Validation of QFR was assessed by the area under the curve (AUC) and other statistical tools, using FFR as the reference method. RESULTS: Seventy-five arteries from 69 patients were evaluated. The accuracy of the QFR to detect FFR ≤.80 was 84.0% (95% confidence interval, 75.6-92.4). The correlation and agreement between FFR and QFR were r=0.54 (P<.01) and mean difference was -0.02 ± 0.09 (P=.09), respectively. The AUC of QFR and 3D-QCA identifying stenosis >50% was 0.854 and 0.755, respectively (P=.09). CONCLUSION: QFR demonstrated good accuracy compared with FFR for the assessment of moderate obstructive coronary lesions in an unselected clinical practice population. However, many patients were excluded from the analysis and there was no statistical difference between the receiver operator characteristic curves of the QFR and percent diameter stenosis.

Clinical impact of sex differences and procedural setting in transcatheter aortic valve implantation

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a well-established treatment for symptomatic patients with aortic stenosis. Yet, the impact of sex differences and public vs. private procedural setting on TAVI outcomes remain uncertain. METHODS: The RIBAC-NT (Brazilian Registry for Evaluation of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement Outcomes) dataset included 3194 TAVI patients from 2009 to 2021. This retrospective analysis explored disparities in baseline characteristics, procedural and in-hospital outcomes stratifying patients by sex and procedural setting. Temporal trends were also investigated. RESULTS: We included 1551 (49 %) female and 1643 (51 %) male patients. Women were older (83 [78-87] vs. 81 [75-85] years; p < 0.01) but had a lower prevalence of diabetes mellitus (30.2 % vs. 36.3 %, p < 0.01) and coronary artery disease (39.0 % vs. 52.2 %, p < 0.01). However, women had a 3-fold higher higher risk of life-threatening bleeding (6.1 % vs. 2.4 %, p < 0.01). Women presented higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates (4.4 % vs. 2.5 % and 7.7 % vs. 4.5 %, all p < 0.01, respectively). Although public hospitals presented ~2-fold higher procedural mortality rate compared with private settings (5.0 % vs. 2.7 %, p < 0.01), after multivariable analysis procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Women had higher procedural and in-hospital mortality rates after TAVI as compared with men, while facing higher life-threatening bleeding and adverse events rates. Although public hospitals exhibited higher mortality rates than private centers, procedural setting was not independently associated with in-hospital mortality.