Prospective observational registry of perioperative and periprocedural management of antithrombotic therapy in "real world": the REQXAA study.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There is scarce real-world evidence on the management of perioperative antithrombotic treatment according to current recommendations. The aim of this study was to analyze the management of antithrombotic treatment in patients undergoing surgery or another invasive intervention and to assess the consequences of this management on the occurrence thrombotic or bleeding events. METHODS: This prospective, observational, multicenter and multispecialty study analyzed patients receiving antithrombotic therapy who underwent surgery or another invasive intervention. The primary endpoint was defined as the incidence of adverse (thrombotic and/or hemorrhagic) events after 30 days of follow-up with respect to management of perioperative antithrombotic drugs. RESULTS: We included 1266 patients (male: 63.5%; mean age 72.6 years). Nearly half of the patients (48.6%) were under chronic anticoagulation therapy (mainly for atrial fibrillation; CHA2DS2-VASC: 3.7), while 53.3% of the patients were under chronic antiplatelet therapy (mainly for coronary artery disease). Low ischemic and hemorrhagic risk was found in 66.7% and 51.9%, respectively. Antithrombotic therapy management was in line with current recommendations in only 57.3% of the patients. Inappropriate management of antithrombotic therapy was an independent risk factor for both thrombotic and hemorrhagic events. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of recommendations on the perioperative/periprocedural management of antithrombotic therapy in real-world patients is poor. Inappropriate management of antithrombotic treatment is associated with an increase in both thrombotic and hemorrhagic events.

Repeat cryoablation as a redo procedure for atrial fibrillation ablation: Is it a good choice?

BACKGROUND: Ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF), both cryoablation ablation (CBA) and radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA), have demonstrated to be safe and effective. About 1 in 3 patients may face a redo due to recurrence and the best technique is unknown. The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of CBA as a repeat procedure in patients with prior CBA or RFCA. METHODS: A nation-wide CBA registry (RECABA) was analyzed and patients were compared who had previously undergone CBA (Prior-CB) or RFCA (Prior-RF). The primary endpoint was AF recurrence at 12 months after a 3-month blanking period. A survival analysis was performed, univariate and multivariate Cox models were also built. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were included. Thirty-three (44.6%) were in the Prior-CB group and 41 (55.4%) in the Prior-RF. There were more reconnected pulmonary veins in the Prior-RF than in Prior-CB group (40.4% vs.16.5%, p = 0.0001). The 12-month Kaplan-Meier estimate of freedom from AF recurrence after the blanking period was 61.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.4-75.8%) in the Prior-CB, and 89.2% (95% CI 73.6-95.9%) in the Prior-RF group (p = 0.002). Multivariate Cox regression pointed Prior-CB as the sole independent predictor of AF recurrence, with an adjusted HR of 2.67 (95% CI 1.05-6.79). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat CBA shows higher rates of AF recurrences compared to CBA after a previous RFCA despite presenting less reconnected veins at the procedure. These data suggest that patients with AF recurrence after CBA may benefit from other ablation techniques after a recurrence. RECABA is registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the Unique Identifier NCT02785991.

Time to -30°C as a predictor of acute success during cryoablation in patients with atrial fibrillation.

BACKGROUND: Freezing rate of second-generation cryoballoon (CB) is a biophysical parameter that could assist pulmonary vein isolation. The aim of this study is to assess freezing rate (time to reach -30°C ([TT-30C]) as an early predictor of acute pulmonary vein isolation using the CB. METHODS: Biophysical data from CB freeze applications within a multicenter, nation-wide CB ablation registry were gathered. Successful application (SA), was defined as achieving durable intraprocedural vein isolation. And SA with time to isolation under 60 s (SA-TTI<60) as achieving durable vein isolation in under 60 s. Logistic regressions were performed and predictive models were built for the data set. RESULTS: 12,488 CB applications from 1,733 atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation procedures were included within 27 centers from a Spanish CB AF ablation registry. SA was achieved in 6,349 of 9,178 (69.2%) total freeze applications, and SA-TTI<60 was obtained in 2,673 of 4,784 (55.9%) freezes where electrogram monitoring was present. TT-30C was shorter in the SA group (33.4 ± 9.2 vs 39.3 ± 12.1 s; p < 0.001) and SA-TTI<60 group (31.8 ± 7.6 vs. 38.5 ± 11.5 s; p < 0.001). Also, a 10 s increase in TT-30C was associated with a 41% reduction in the odds for an SA (odds ratio [OR] 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.63) and a 57% reduction in the odds for achieving SA-TTI<60 (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.39-0.49), when corrected for electrogram visualization, vein position, and application order. CONCLUSIONS: Time to reach -30°C is an early predictor of the quality of a CB application and can be used to guide the ablation procedure even in the absence of electrogram monitoring.

Cardiovascular risk factors during cancer treatment. Prevalence and prognostic relevance: insights from the CARDIOTOX registry.

AIMS: The actual usefulness of cardiovascular (CV) risk factor assessment in the prognostic evaluation of cancer patients treated with cardiotoxic treatment remains largely unknown. Prospective multicentre study in patients scheduled to receive anticancer therapy related with moderate/high cardiotoxic risk. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1324 patients underwent follow-up in a dedicated cardio-oncology clinic from April 2012 to October 2017. Special care was given to the identification and control of CV risk factors. Clinical data, blood samples, and echocardiographic parameters were prospectively collected according to protocol, at baseline before cancer therapy and then at 3 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 1.5 years, and 2 years after initiation of cancer therapy. At baseline, 893 patients (67.4%) presented at least one risk factor, with a significant number of patients newly diagnosed during follow-up. Individual risk factors were not related with worse prognosis during a 2-year follow-up. However, a higher Systemic Coronary Risk Estimation (SCORE) was significantly associated with higher rates of severe cardiotoxicity (CTox) and all-cause mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.79 (95% confidence interval, CI 1.16-2.76) for SCORE 5-9 and HR 4.90 (95% CI 2.44-9.82) for SCORE ≥10 when compared with patients with lower SCORE (0-4)]. CONCLUSIONS: This large cohort of patients treated with a potentially cardiotoxic regimen showed a significant prevalence of CV risk factors at baseline and significant incidence during follow-up. Baseline CV risk assessment using SCORE predicted severe CTox and all-cause mortality. Therefore, its use should be considered in the evaluation of cancer patients.

Classification, prevalence, and outcomes of anticancer therapy-induced cardiotoxicity: the CARDIOTOX registry.

AIM: Cardiotoxicity (CTox) is a major side effect of cancer therapies, but uniform diagnostic criteria to guide clinical and research practices are lacking. METHODS AND RESULTS: We prospectively studied 865 patients, aged 54.7 ± 13.9; 16.3% men, scheduled for anticancer therapy related with moderate/high CTox risk. Four groups of progressive myocardial damage/dysfunction were considered according to current guidelines: normal, normal biomarkers (high-sensitivity troponin T and N-terminal natriuretic pro-peptide), and left ventricular (LV) function; mild, abnormal biomarkers, and/or LV dysfunction (LVD) maintaining an LV ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50%; moderate, LVD with LVEF 40-49%; and severe, LVD with LVEF ≤40% or symptomatic heart failure. Cardiotoxicity was defined as new or worsening of myocardial damage/ventricular function from baseline during follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 24 months. Cardiotoxicity was identified in 37.5% patients during follow-up [95% confidence interval (CI) 34.22-40.8%], 31.6% with mild, 2.8% moderate, and 3.1% with severe myocardial damage/dysfunction. The mortality rate in the severe CTox group was 22.9 deaths per 100 patients-year vs. 2.3 deaths per 100 patients-year in the rest of groups, hazard ratio of 10.2 (95% CI 5.5-19.2) (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of patients present objective data of myocardial injury/dysfunction during or after cancer therapy. Nevertheless, severe CTox, with a strong prognostic relationship, was comparatively rare. This should be reflected in protocols for clinical and research practices.

Clinical outcomes in myocardial infarction and multivessel disease after a cardiac rehabilitation programme: Partial versus complete revascularization.

BACKGROUND: Current guideline recommendations encourage culprit vessel only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease. However, recent studies have shown a better clinical outcome in patients who receive multivessel PCI. AIM: To measure and compare clinical outcomes between partial revascularization (PR) versus complete revascularization (CR) in patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who underwent a cardiac rehabilitation programme. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 282 patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who received PR or CR and were subsequently enrolled in a cardiac rehabilitation programme between July 2006 and November 2013 at La Paz University Hospital. The incidences of cardiovascular events, new PCI, hospital admissions for cardiovascular reasons and mortality were compared between the PR and CR groups. RESULTS: Overall, 143 patients received PR and 139 received CR. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, except for mean age (59.3 vs. 56.7 years; P=0.02), diabetes mellitus prevalence (34.3% vs. 20.1%; P=0.01) and number of arteries with stenosis (2.6 vs. 2.3; P=0.001). During the mean follow-up of 48.0±25.9 months, a cardiovascular event occurred in 23 (16.1%) PR patients and 20 (14.4%) CR patients, with no statistically significant differences in the early (hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.19-1.89) or late (hazard ratio: 1.40, 95% confidence interval: 0.62-3.14) follow-up periods. Cox regression, adjusted for age, sex, presence of diabetes mellitus and number of affected coronary vessels, showed no difference in new cardiovascular event risk. CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistical differences in clinical outcomes between PR and CR among patients who received cardiac rehabilitation.

Respuesta al ECG de diciembre de 2015 / Response to ECG, December 2015

No disponible

ECG de diciembre de 2015 / ECG, December 2015

No disponible