An Aspirin-Free Versus Dual Antiplatelet Strategy for Coronary Stenting: STOPDAPT-3 Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding rates on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) within 1 month after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain high in clinical practice, particularly in patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk. Aspirin-free strategy might result in lower bleeding early after PCI without increasing cardiovascular events, but its efficacy and safety have not yet been proven in randomized trials. METHODS: We randomly assigned 6002 patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk just before PCI either to prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) monotherapy or to DAPT with aspirin (81-100 mg/day) and prasugrel (3.75 mg/day) after loading of 20 mg of prasugrel in both groups. The coprimary end points were major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5) for superiority and cardiovascular events (a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischemic stroke) for noninferiority with a relative 50% margin. RESULTS: The full analysis set population consisted of 5966 patients (no-aspirin group, 2984 patients; DAPT group, 2982 patients; age, 71.6±11.7 years; men, 76.6%; acute coronary syndrome, 75.0%). Within 7 days before randomization, aspirin alone, aspirin with P2Y12 inhibitor, oral anticoagulants, and intravenous heparin infusion were given in 21.3%, 6.4%, 8.9%, and 24.5%, respectively. Adherence to the protocol-specified antiplatelet therapy was 88% in both groups at 1 month. At 1 month, the no-aspirin group was not superior to the DAPT group for the coprimary bleeding end point (4.47% and 4.71%; hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.75-1.20]; Psuperiority=0.66). The no-aspirin group was noninferior to the DAPT group for the coprimary cardiovascular end point (4.12% and 3.69%; hazard ratio, 1.12 [95% CI, 0.87-1.45]; Pnoninferiority=0.01). There was no difference in net adverse clinical outcomes and each component of coprimary cardiovascular end point. There was an excess of any unplanned coronary revascularization (1.05% and 0.57%; hazard ratio, 1.83 [95%CI, 1.01-3.30]) and subacute definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.58% and 0.17%; hazard ratio, 3.40 [95% CI, 1.26-9.23]) in the no-aspirin group compared with the DAPT group. CONCLUSIONS: The aspirin-free strategy using low-dose prasugrel compared with the DAPT strategy failed to attest superiority for major bleeding within 1 month after PCI but was noninferior for cardiovascular events within 1 month after PCI. However, the aspirin-free strategy was associated with a signal suggesting an excess of coronary events. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04609111.

Influence of Pathophysiologic Patterns of Coronary Artery Disease on Immediate Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Diffuse coronary artery disease affects the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Pathophysiologic coronary artery disease patterns can be quantified using fractional flow reserve (FFR) pullbacks incorporating the pullback pressure gradient (PPG) calculation. This study aimed to establish the capacity of PPG to predict optimal revascularization and procedural outcomes. METHODS: This prospective, investigator-initiated, single-arm, multicenter study enrolled patients with at least one epicardial lesion with an FFR ≤0.80 scheduled for PCI. Manual FFR pullbacks were used to calculate PPG. The primary outcome of optimal revascularization was defined as an FFR ≥0.88 after PCI. RESULTS: A total of 993 patients with 1044 vessels were included. The mean FFR was 0.68±0.12, PPG 0.62±0.17, and the post-PCI FFR was 0.87±0.07. PPG was significantly correlated with the change in FFR after PCI (r=0.65 [95% CI, 0.61-0.69]; P<0.001) and demonstrated excellent predictive capacity for optimal revascularization (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.79-0.84]; P<0.001). FFR alone did not predict revascularization outcomes (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, 0.54 [95% CI, 0.50-0.57]). PPG influenced treatment decisions in 14% of patients, redirecting them from PCI to alternative treatment modalities. Periprocedural myocardial infarction occurred more frequently in patients with low PPG (<0.62) compared with those with focal disease (odds ratio, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.00-2.97]). CONCLUSIONS: Pathophysiologic coronary artery disease patterns distinctly affect the safety and effectiveness of PCI. PPG showed an excellent predictive capacity for optimal revascularization and demonstrated added value compared with an FFR measurement. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04789317.

Postprocedural Anticoagulation After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postprocedural anticoagulation (PPA) is frequently administered after primary percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, although no conclusive data support this practice. METHODS: The RIGHT trial (Comparison of Anticoagulation Prolongation vs no Anticoagulation in STEMI Patients After Primary PCI) was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, superiority trial conducted at 53 centers in China. Patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly assigned by center to receive low-dose PPA or matching placebo for at least 48 hours. Before trial initiation, each center selected 1 of 3 PPA regimens (40 mg of enoxaparin once daily subcutaneously; 10 U·kg·h of unfractionated heparin intravenously, adjusted to maintain activated clotting time between 150 and 220 seconds; or 0.2 mg·kg·h of bivalirudin intravenously). The primary efficacy objective was to demonstrate superiority of PPA to reduce the primary efficacy end point of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, stent thrombosis (definite), or urgent revascularization (any vessel) within 30 days. The key secondary objective was to evaluate the effect of each specific anticoagulation regimen (enoxaparin, unfractionated heparin, or bivalirudin) on the primary efficacy end point. The primary safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding at 30 days. RESULTS: Between January 10, 2019, and September 18, 2021, a total of 2989 patients were randomized. The primary efficacy end point occurred in 37 patients (2.5%) in both the PPA and placebo groups (hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.63 to 1.57]). The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 to 5 bleeding did not differ between the PPA and placebo groups (8 [0.5%] vs 11 [0.7%] patients; hazard ratio, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.30 to 1.83]). CONCLUSIONS: Routine PPA after primary percutaneous coronary intervention was safe but did not reduce 30-day ischemic events. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03664180.

Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of TWILIGHT and TICO Randomized Trials.

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor coupled with aspirin for 1 year is the recommended treatment for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). As an alternative, monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor after a short period of dual antiplatelet therapy has emerged as a bleeding reduction strategy. METHODS: We pooled individual patient data from randomized trials that included patients with ACS undergoing PCI treated with an initial 3-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy followed by ticagrelor monotherapy versus continued ticagrelor plus aspirin. Patients sustaining a major ischemic or bleeding event in the first 3 months after PCI were excluded from analysis. The primary outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding occurring between 3 and 12 months after index PCI. The key secondary end point was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Hazard ratios and 95% CIs were generated using Cox regression with a one-stage approach in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: The pooled cohort (n=7529) had a mean age of 62.8 years, 23.2% were female, and 55% presented with biomarker-positive ACS. Between 3 and 12 months, ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin (0.8% versus 2.1%; hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.24-0.56]; P<0.001). Rates of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke were not significantly different between groups (2.4% versus 2.7%; hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.68-1.21]; P=0.515). Findings were unchanged among patients presenting with biomarker-positive ACS. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with ACS undergoing PCI who have completed a 3-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy, discontinuation of aspirin followed by ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced major bleeding without incremental ischemic risk compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero; Unique identifier: CRD42023449646.

Demystifying the Contemporary Role of 12-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Acute Coronary Syndrome.

For almost two decades, 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) has been the only class I recommendation on DAPT in American and European guidelines, which has resulted in 12-month durations of DAPT therapy being the most frequently implemented in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) across the globe. Twelve-month DAPT was initially grounded in the results of the CURE (Clopidogrel in Unstable Angina to Prevent Recurrent Events) trial, which, by design, studied DAPT versus no DAPT rather than the optimal DAPT duration. The average DAPT duration in this study was 9 months, not 12 months. Subsequent ACS studies, which were not designed to assess DAPT duration, rather its composition (aspirin with prasugrel or ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel) were further interpreted as supportive evidence for 12-month DAPT duration. In these studies, the median DAPT duration was 9 or 15 months for ticagrelor and prasugrel, respectively. Several subsequent studies questioned the 12-month regimen and suggested that DAPT duration should either be fewer than 12 months in patients at high bleeding risk or more than 12 months in patients at high ischemic risk who can safely tolerate the treatment. Bleeding, rather than ischemic risk assessment, has emerged as a treatment modifier for maximizing the net clinical benefit of DAPT, due to excessive bleeding and no clear benefit of prolonged treatment regimens in high bleeding risk patients. Multiple DAPT de-escalation treatment strategies, including switching from prasugrel or ticagrelor to clopidogrel, reducing the dose of prasugrel or ticagrelor, and shortening DAPT duration while maintaining monotherapy with ticagrelor, have been consistently shown to reduce bleeding without increasing fatal or nonfatal cardiovascular or cerebral ischemic risks compared with 12-month DAPT. However, 12-month DAPT remains the only class-I DAPT recommendation for patients with ACS despite the lack of prospectively established evidence, leading to unnecessary and potentially harmful overtreatment in many patients. It is time for clinical practice and guideline recommendations to be updated to reflect the totality of the evidence regarding the optimal DAPT duration in ACS.

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Left Main Disease With and Without Diabetes: Findings From a Pooled Analysis of 4 Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes may be associated with differential outcomes in patients undergoing left main coronary revascularization with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes in patients with left main disease with and without diabetes randomized to PCI versus CABG. METHODS: Individual patient data were pooled from 4 trials (SYNTAX [Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery], PRECOMBAT [Premier of Randomized Comparison of Bypass Surgery Versus Angioplasty Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Left Main Coronary Artery Disease], NOBLE [Nordic-Baltic-British Left Main Revascularisation Study], and EXCEL [Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization]) that randomized patients with left main disease to PCI or CABG. Patients were considered suitable for either approach. Patients were categorized by diabetes status. Kaplan-Meier event rates, Cox model hazard ratios, and interactions were assessed. RESULTS: Among 4393 patients, 1104 (25.1%) had diabetes. Patients with diabetes experienced higher rates of 5-year death (158/1104 [Kaplan-Meier rate, 14.7%] versus 297/3289 [9.3%]; P<0.001), spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI; 67/1104 [6.7%] versus 114/3289 [3.7%]; P<0.001), and repeat revascularization (189/1104 [18.5%] versus 410/3289 [13.2%]; P<0.001). Rates of all-cause mortality did not differ after PCI versus CABG in those with (84/563 [15.3%] versus 74/541 [14.1%]; hazard ratio, 1.11 [95% CI, 0.82-1.52]) or without (155/1634 [9.7%] versus 142/1655 [8.9%]; hazard ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.86-1.36; PintHR=0.87) diabetes. Rates of stroke within 1 year were lower with PCI versus CABG in the entire population, with no heterogeneity based on diabetes status (PintHR=0.51). The 5-year rates of spontaneous MI and repeat coronary revascularization were higher after PCI regardless of diabetes status (spontaneous MI: 45/563 [8.9%] versus 22/541 [4.4%] in diabetes and 82/1634 [5.3%] versus 32/1655 [2.1%] in no diabetes, PintHR=0.47; repeat revascularization: 127/563 [24.5%] versus 62/541 [12.4%] in diabetes and 254/1634 [16.3%] versus 156/1655 [10.1%] in no diabetes, PintHR=0.18). For spontaneous MI and repeat revascularization, there were greater absolute risk differences beyond 1 year in patients with diabetes (4.9% and 9.9%) compared with those without (2.1% and 4.3%; PintARD=0.047 and 0.016). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with left main disease considered equally suitable for PCI or CABG and with largely low to intermediate SYNTAX scores, diabetes was associated with higher rates of death and cardiovascular events through 5 years. Compared with CABG, PCI resulted in no difference in the risk of death and a lower risk of early stroke regardless of diabetes status, and a higher risk of spontaneous MI and repeat coronary revascularization, with larger late absolute excess risks in patients with diabetes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01205776, NCT0146651, NCT00422968, and NCT00114972.

Coronary Angiography, Intravascular Ultrasound, and Optical Coherence Tomography for Guiding of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Results from multiple randomized clinical trials comparing outcomes after intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- and optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with invasive coronary angiography (ICA)-guided PCI as well as a pivotal trial comparing the 2 intravascular imaging (IVI) techniques have provided mixed results. METHODS: Major electronic databases were searched to identify eligible trials evaluating at least 2 PCI guidance strategies among ICA, IVUS, and OCT. The 2 coprimary outcomes were target lesion revascularization and myocardial infarction. The secondary outcomes included ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, death, cardiac death, target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major adverse cardiac events. Frequentist random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted. The results were replicated by Bayesian random-effects models. Pairwise meta-analyses of the direct components, multiple sensitivity analyses, and pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA were supplemented. RESULTS: The results from 24 randomized trials (15 489 patients: IVUS versus ICA, 46.4%, 7189 patients; OCT versus ICA, 32.1%, 4976 patients; OCT versus IVUS, 21.4%, 3324 patients) were included in the network meta-analyses. IVUS was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization compared with ICA (odds ratio [OR], 0.69 [95% CI, 0.54-0.87]), whereas no significant differences were observed between OCT and ICA (OR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.63-1.09]) and OCT and IVUS (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 0.88-1.66]). Myocardial infarction did not significantly differ between guidance strategies (IVUS versus ICA: OR, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.70-1.19]; OCT versus ICA: OR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.68-1.11]; OCT versus IVUS: OR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.69-1.33]). These results were consistent with the secondary outcomes of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, and sensitivity analyses generally did not reveal inconsistency. OCT was associated with a significant reduction of stent thrombosis compared with ICA (OR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.26-0.92]) but only in the frequentist analysis. Similarly, the results in terms of survival between IVUS or OCT and ICA were uncertain across analyses. A total of 25 randomized trials (17 128 patients) were included in the pairwise meta-analyses IVI versus ICA where IVI guidance was associated with reduced target lesion revascularization, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: IVI-guided PCI was associated with a reduction in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization compared with ICA-guided PCI, with the difference most evident for IVUS. In contrast, no significant differences in myocardial infarction were observed between guidance strategies.

Effect of Cangrelor on Infarct Size in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated by Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial (The PITRI Trial).

BACKGROUND: The administration of intravenous cangrelor at reperfusion achieves faster onset of platelet P2Y12 inhibition than oral ticagrelor and has been shown to reduce myocardial infarction (MI) size in the preclinical setting. We hypothesized that the administration of cangrelor at reperfusion will reduce MI size and prevent microvascular obstruction in patients with ST-segment-elevation MI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: This was a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial conducted between November 2017 to November 2021 in 6 cardiac centers in Singapore. Patients were randomized to receive either cangrelor or placebo initiated before the primary percutaneous coronary intervention procedure on top of oral ticagrelor. The key exclusion criteria included presenting <6 hours of symptom onset; previous MI and stroke or transient ischemic attack; on concomitant oral anticoagulants; and a contraindication for cardiovascular magnetic resonance. The primary efficacy end point was acute MI size by cardiovascular magnetic resonance within the first week expressed as percentage of the left ventricle mass (%LVmass). Microvascular obstruction was identified as areas of dark core of hypoenhancement within areas of late gadolinium enhancement. The primary safety end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-defined major bleeding in the first 48 hours. Continuous variables were compared by Mann-Whitney U test (reported as median [first quartile-third quartile]), and categorical variables were compared by Fisher exact test. A 2-sided P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Of 209 recruited patients, 164 patients (78%) completed the acute cardiovascular magnetic resonance scan. There were no significant differences in acute MI size (placebo, 14.9% [7.3-22.6] %LVmass versus cangrelor, 16.3 [9.9-24.4] %LVmass; P=0.40) or the incidence (placebo, 48% versus cangrelor, 47%; P=0.99) and extent of microvascular obstruction (placebo, 1.63 [0.60-4.65] %LVmass versus cangrelor, 1.18 [0.53-3.37] %LVmass; P=0.46) between placebo and cangrelor despite a 2-fold decrease in platelet reactivity with cangrelor. There were no Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-defined major bleeding events in either group in the first 48 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Cangrelor administered at the time of primary percutaneous coronary intervention did not reduce acute MI size or prevent microvascular obstruction in patients with ST-segment-elevation MI given oral ticagrelor despite a significant reduction of platelet reactivity during the percutaneous coronary intervention procedure. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03102723.

2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2023 ACC/AHA/ACCP/HRS Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Atrial Fibrillation" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 12, 2022, to November 3, 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through November 2022, during the guideline writing process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables, where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Atrial fibrillation is the most sustained common arrhythmia, and its incidence and prevalence are increasing in the United States and globally. Recommendations from the "2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" and the "2019 AHA/ACC/HRS Focused Update of the 2014 AHA/ACC/HRS Guideline for the Management of Patients With Atrial Fibrillation" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing atrial fibrillation and thromboembolic risk assessment, anticoagulation, left atrial appendage occlusion, atrial fibrillation catheter or surgical ablation, and risk factor modification and atrial fibrillation prevention have been developed.

2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines.

AIM: The "2024 ACC/AHA/AACVPR/APMA/ABC/SCAI/SVM/SVN/SVS/SIR/VESS Guideline for the Management of Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the treatment of patients with lower extremity peripheral artery disease across its multiple clinical presentation subsets (ie, asymptomatic, chronic symptomatic, chronic limb-threatening ischemia, and acute limb ischemia). METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted from October 2020 to June 2022, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that was published in English from PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINHL Complete, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline. Additional relevant studies, published through May 2023 during the peer review process, were also considered by the writing committee and added to the evidence tables where appropriate. STRUCTURE: Recommendations from the "2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease" have been updated with new evidence to guide clinicians. In addition, new recommendations addressing comprehensive care for patients with peripheral artery disease have been developed.

Periprocedural myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention and long-term mortality: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Conflicting data are available regarding the association between periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) and mortality following percutaneous coronary intervention. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence and prognostic implication of PMI according to the Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction (UDMI), the Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 definition, and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) definition. METHODS: Studies reporting adjusted effect estimates were systematically searched. The primary outcome was all-cause death, while cardiac death was included as a secondary outcome. Studies defining PMI according to biomarker elevation without further evidence of myocardial ischaemia ('ancillary criteria') were included and reported as 'definition-like'. Data were pooled in a random-effect model. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies and 109 568 patients were included. The incidence of PMI was progressively lower across the UDMI, ARC-2, and SCAI definitions. All PMI definitions were independently associated with all-cause mortality [UDMI: hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32-1.97; I2 34%; ARC-2: HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.40-3.08, I2 0%; SCAI: HR 3.24, 95% CI 2.36-4.44, I2 78%]. Including ancillary criteria in the PMI definitions were associated with an increased prognostic performance in the UDMI but not in the SCAI definition. Data were consistent after evaluation of major sources of heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: All currently available international definitions of PMI are associated with an increased risk of all-cause death after percutaneous coronary intervention. The magnitude of this latter association varies according to the sensitivity and prognostic relevance of each definition.

Merging machine learning and patient preference: a novel tool for risk prediction of percutaneous coronary interventions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Predicting personalized risk for adverse events following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains critical in weighing treatment options, employing risk mitigation strategies, and enhancing shared decision-making. This study aimed to employ machine learning models using pre-procedural variables to accurately predict common post-PCI complications. METHODS: A group of 66 adults underwent a semiquantitative survey assessing a preferred list of outcomes and model display. The machine learning cohort included 107 793 patients undergoing PCI procedures performed at 48 hospitals in Michigan between 1 April 2018 and 31 December 2021 in the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Consortium (BMC2) registry separated into training and validation cohorts. External validation was conducted in the Cardiac Care Outcomes Assessment Program database of 56 583 procedures in 33 hospitals in Washington. RESULTS: Overall rate of in-hospital mortality was 1.85% (n = 1999), acute kidney injury 2.51% (n = 2519), new-onset dialysis 0.44% (n = 462), stroke 0.41% (n = 447), major bleeding 0.89% (n = 942), and transfusion 2.41% (n = 2592). The model demonstrated robust discrimination and calibration for mortality {area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC]: 0.930 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.920-0.940]}, acute kidney injury [AUC: 0.893 (95% CI 0.883-0.903)], dialysis [AUC: 0.951 (95% CI 0.939-0.964)], stroke [AUC: 0.751 (95%CI 0.714-0.787)], transfusion [AUC: 0.917 (95% CI 0.907-0.925)], and major bleeding [AUC: 0.887 (95% CI 0.870-0.905)]. Similar discrimination was noted in the external validation population. Survey subjects preferred a comprehensive list of individually reported post-procedure outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Using common pre-procedural risk factors, the BMC2 machine learning models accurately predict post-PCI outcomes. Utilizing patient feedback, the BMC2 models employ a patient-centred tool to clearly display risks to patients and providers (https://shiny.bmc2.org/pci-prediction/). Enhanced risk prediction prior to PCI could help inform treatment selection and shared decision-making discussions.

Routine stress testing in diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: the POST-PCI trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The optimal follow-up surveillance strategy for high-risk diabetic patients with had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unknown. METHODS: The POST-PCI (Pragmatic Trial Comparing Symptom-Oriented versus Routine Stress Testing in High-Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) study was a randomized trial comparing a follow-up strategy of routine functional testing at 1 year vs. standard care alone after high-risk PCI. Randomization was stratified according to diabetes status. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina at 2 years. RESULTS: Among 1706 randomized patients, participants with diabetes (n = 660, 38.7%) had more frequent comorbidities and a higher prevalence of complex anatomical or procedural characteristics than those without diabetes (n = 1046, 61.3%). Patients with diabetes had a 52% greater risk of primary composite events [hazard ratio (HR) 1.52; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.27; P = .039]. The 2-year incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar between strategies of routine functional testing or standard care alone in diabetic patients (7.1% vs. 7.5%; HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.53-1.66; P = .82) and non-diabetic patients (4.6% vs. 5.1%; HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.51-1.55; P = .68) (interaction term for diabetes: P = .91). The incidences of invasive coronary angiography and repeat revascularization after 1 year were higher in the routine functional-testing group than the standard-care group irrespective of diabetes status. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being at higher risk for adverse clinical events, patients with diabetes who had undergone high-risk PCI did not derive incremental benefit from routine surveillance stress testing compared with standard care alone during follow-up.

Long-term outcomes of high bleeding risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a Korean nationwide registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at increased risk of not only bleeding, but also ischaemic events. This study aimed to determine the long-term relative risk of ischaemic and bleeding events in HBR patients. METHODS: This study was a nationwide cohort study, based on the Korean National Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. Patients diagnosed with stable angina or acute coronary syndrome and those who underwent PCI in Korea between 2009 and 2018 were included in the analysis. According to the Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria, the total population was divided into HBR and non-HBR groups. The co-primary outcomes were major bleeding events and ischaemic (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischaemic stroke) events. RESULTS: Among a total of 325 417 patients who underwent PCI, 66 426 patients (20.4%) had HBR. During the follow-up period, HBR patients had a higher risk for major bleeding events (23.9% vs. 8.9%, P < .001) and ischaemic events (33.8% vs. 14.4%, P < .001). However, the impact of HBR was significant for major bleeding events [hazard ratio (HR) 3.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.04-3.21, P < .001] and for ischaemic events (HR 2.50, 95% CI 2.45-2.56, P < .001). The HBR group was also associated with a greater risk of all-cause mortality (HR 3.73, 95% CI 3.66-3.79, P < .001). The average annual rate of major bleeding events within the first year after PCI was 5.5% for a single major criterion, and 2.9% for a single minor criterion. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing PCI, those with HBR were at increased long-term risk for both bleeding and ischaemic events, with a greater risk of mortality compared to non-HBR patients.

Impact of untreated chronic obstructive coronary artery disease on outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) recipients, the optimal management of concomitant chronic obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) remains unknown. Some advocate for pre-TAVR percutaneous coronary intervention, while others manage it expectantly. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of varying degrees and extent of untreated chronic obstructive CAD on TAVR and longer-term outcomes. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of TAVR recipients from January 2015 to November 2021, separating patients into stable non-obstructive or varying degrees of obstructive CAD. The major outcomes of interest were procedural all-cause mortality and complications, major adverse cardiovascular events, and post-TAVR unplanned coronary revascularization. RESULTS: Of the 1911 patients meeting inclusion, 75%, 6%, 10%, and 9% had non-obstructive, intermediate-risk, high-risk, and extreme-risk CAD, respectively. Procedural complication rates overall were low (death 0.4%, shock 0.1%, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation 0.1%), with no difference across groups. At a median follow-up of 21 months, rates of acute coronary syndrome and unplanned coronary revascularization were 0.7% and 0.5%, respectively, in the non-obstructive population, rising in incidence with increasing severity of CAD (P < .001 for acute coronary syndrome/unplanned coronary revascularization). Multivariable analysis did not yield a significantly greater risk of all-cause mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events across groups. One-year acute coronary syndrome and unplanned coronary revascularization rates in time-to-event analyses were significantly greater in the non-obstructive (98%) vs. obstructive (94%) subsets (Plog-rank< .001). CONCLUSIONS: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement can be performed safely in patients with untreated chronic obstructive CAD, without portending higher procedural complication rates and with relatively low rates of unplanned coronary revascularization and acute coronary syndrome at 1 year.

Catheter-based therapy for high-risk or intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism: death and re-hospitalization.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Catheter-based therapies (CBTs) have been developed as a treatment option in patients with pulmonary embolism (PE). There remains a paucity of data to inform decision-making in patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk PE. The aim of this study was to characterize in-hospital and readmission outcomes in patients with intermediate-risk or high-risk PE treated with vs. without CBT in a large retrospective registry. METHODS: Patients hospitalized with intermediate-risk or high-risk PE were identified using the 2017-20 National Readmission Database. In-hospital outcomes included death and bleeding and 30- and 90-day readmission outcomes including all-cause, venous thromboembolism (VTE)-related and bleeding-related readmissions. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was utilized to compare outcomes between CBT and no CBT. RESULTS: A total of 14 903 [2076 (13.9%) with CBT] and 42 829 [8824 (20.6%) with CBT] patients with high-risk and intermediate-risk PE were included, respectively. Prior to IPTW, patients with CBT were younger and less likely to have cancer and cardiac arrest, receive systemic thrombolysis, or be on mechanical ventilation. In the IPTW logistic regression model, CBT was associated with lower odds of in-hospital death in high-risk [odds ratio (OR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.80-0.87] and intermediate-risk PE (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.70-0.83). Patients with high-risk PE treated with CBT were associated with lower risk of 90-day all-cause [hazard ratio (HR) 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.83] and VTE (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.34-0.63) readmission. Patients with intermediate-risk PE treated with CBT were associated with lower risk of 90-day all-cause (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.72-0.79) and VTE (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.57-0.76) readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with high-risk or intermediate-risk PE, CBT was associated with lower in-hospital death and 90-day readmission. Prospective, randomized trials are needed to confirm these findings.

Invasive vs. conservative management of older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome: individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Older patients with non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS) are less likely to receive guideline-recommended care including coronary angiography and revascularization. Evidence-based recommendations regarding interventional management strategies in this patient cohort are scarce. This meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of routine invasive vs. conservative management of NSTEACS by using individual patient data (IPD) from all available randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including older patients. METHODS: MEDLINE, Web of Science and Scopus were searched between 1 January 2010 and 11 September 2023. RCTs investigating routine invasive and conservative strategies in persons >70 years old with NSTEACS were included. Observational studies or trials involving populations outside the target range were excluded. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction (MI) at 1 year. One-stage IPD meta-analyses were adopted by use of random-effects and fixed-effect Cox models. This meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023379819). RESULTS: Six eligible studies were identified including 1479 participants. The primary endpoint occurred in 181 of 736 (24.5%) participants in the invasive management group compared with 215 of 743 (28.9%) participants in the conservative management group with a hazard ratio (HR) from random-effects model of 0.87 (95% CI 0.63-1.22; P = .43). The hazard for MI at 1 year was significantly lower in the invasive group compared with the conservative group (HR from random-effects model 0.62, 95% CI 0.44-0.87; P = .006). Similar results were seen for urgent revascularization (HR from random-effects model 0.41, 95% CI 0.18-0.95; P = .037). There was no significant difference in mortality. CONCLUSIONS: No evidence was found that routine invasive treatment for NSTEACS in older patients reduces the risk of a composite of all-cause mortality and MI within 1 year compared with conservative management. However, there is convincing evidence that invasive treatment significantly lowers the risk of repeat MI or urgent revascularisation. Further evidence is needed from ongoing larger clinical trials.

Platelet-fibrin clot strength and platelet reactivity predicting cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary interventions.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Platelet-fibrin clot strength (PFCS) is linked to major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) risk. However, the association between PFCS and platelet reactivity and their prognostic implication remains uncertain in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: In PCI-treated patients (n = 2512) from registry data from January 2010 to November 2018 in South Korea, PFCS using thromboelastography and platelet reactivity using VerifyNow were measured. High PFCS (PFCSHigh) was defined as thromboelastography maximal amplitude ≥ 68 mm, and high platelet reactivity (HPR) was defined as >208 P2Y12 reaction units. Patients were stratified into four groups according to maximal amplitude and P2Y12 reaction unit levels: (i) normal platelet reactivity (NPR)-PFCSNormal (31.8%), (ii) HPR-PFCSNormal (29.0%), (iii) NPR-PFCSHigh (18.1%), and (iv) HPR-PFCSHigh (21.1%). Major adverse cardiovascular event (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and major bleeding were followed up to 4 years. RESULTS: High platelet reactivity and PFCSHigh showed an additive effect for clinical outcomes (log-rank test, P < .001). Individuals with NPR-PFCSNormal, NPR-PFCSHigh, HPR-PFCSNormal, and HPR-PFCSHigh demonstrated MACE incidences of 7.5%, 12.6%, 13.4%, and 19.3%, respectively. The HPR-PFCSHigh group showed significantly higher risks of MACE compared with the NPR-PFCSNormal group [adjusted hazard ratio (HRadj) 1.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-2.91; P = .004] and the HPR-PFCSNormal group (HRadj 1.60; 95% CI 1.12-2.27; P = .009). Similar results were observed for all-cause death. Compared with HPR-PFCSNormal phenotype, NPR-PFCSNormal phenotype was associated with a higher risk of major bleeding (HRadj 3.12; 95% CI 1.30-7.69; P = .010). CONCLUSIONS: In PCI patients, PFCS and platelet reactivity demonstrated important relationships in predicting clinical prognosis. Their combined assessment may enhance post-PCI risk stratification for personalized antithrombotic therapy.

Coronary artery disease management in older adults: revascularization and exercise training.

The mean age of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) is steadily increasing. In older patients, there is a tendency to underutilize invasive approach, coronary revascularization, up-to-date pharmacological therapies, and secondary prevention strategies, including cardiac rehabilitation. Older adults with CAD commonly exhibit atypical symptoms, multi-vessel disease involvement, complex coronary anatomy, and a higher presence of risk factors and comorbidities. Although both invasive procedures and medical treatments are characterized by a higher risk of complications, avoidance may result in a suboptimal outcome. Often, overlooked factors, such as coronary microvascular disease, malnutrition, and poor physical performance, play a key role in determining prognosis, yet they are not routinely assessed or addressed in older patients. Historically, clinicians have relied on sub-analyses or observational findings to make clinical decisions, as older adults were frequently excluded or under-represented in clinical studies. Recently, dedicated evidence through randomized clinical trials has become available for older CAD patients. Nevertheless, the management of older CAD patients still raises several important questions. This review aims to comprehensively summarize and critically evaluate this emerging evidence, focusing on invasive management and coronary revascularization. Furthermore, it seeks to contextualize these interventions within the framework of improved risk stratification tools for older CAD patients, through user-friendly scales along with emphasizing the importance of promoting physical activity and exercise training to enhance the outcomes of invasive and medical treatments. This comprehensive approach may represent the key to improving prognosis in the complex and growing patient population of older CAD patients.

Ischaemic heart disease in patients with cancer.

Cardiologists are encountering a growing number of cancer patients with ischaemic heart disease (IHD). Several factors account for the interrelationship between these two conditions, in addition to improving survival rates in the cancer population. Established cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, such as hypercholesterolaemia and obesity, predispose to both IHD and cancer, through specific mechanisms and via low-grade, systemic inflammation. This latter is also fuelled by clonal haematopoiesis of indeterminate potential. Furthermore, experimental work indicates that IHD and cancer can promote one another, and the CV or metabolic toxicity of anticancer therapies can lead to IHD. The connections between IHD and cancer are reinforced by social determinants of health, non-medical factors that modify health outcomes and comprise individual and societal domains, including economic stability, educational and healthcare access and quality, neighbourhood and built environment, and social and community context. Management of IHD in cancer patients is often challenging, due to atypical presentation, increased bleeding and ischaemic risk, and worse outcomes as compared to patients without cancer. The decision to proceed with coronary revascularization and the choice of antithrombotic therapy can be difficult, particularly in patients with chronic coronary syndromes, necessitating multidisciplinary discussion that considers both general guidelines and specific features on a case by case basis. Randomized controlled trial evidence in cancer patients is very limited and there is urgent need for more data to inform clinical practice. Therefore, coexistence of IHD and cancer raises important scientific and practical questions that call for collaborative efforts from the cardio-oncology, cardiology, and oncology communities.