Ventricular Rupture at the Site of a Septic Myocardial Abscess After Acute Myocardial Infarction.

Mechanical complications after acute myocardial infarction are well-described yet catastrophic complications of acute coronary syndromes. Uniquely, we describe a rare case of left ventricular free wall rupture at the site of a septic myocardial abscess after an anterior wall myocardial infarction. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).

The association of PRECISE-DAPT score with ischaemic outcomes in patients taking dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis.

AIMS: The PRECISE-DAPT (Predicting Bleeding Complication in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) score identifies patients at high risk of bleeding complications following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). International guidelines recommend the PRECISE-DAPT score to identify patients at high risk for bleeding, who may benefit from shortened dual antiplatelet therapy. The association of the PRECISE-DAPT score with ischaemic outcomes remains unclear. We performed a meta-analysis investigating the association between a high PRECISE-DAPT score and ischaemic outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted on articles published between 11 March 2017 and 5 June 2021. Two reviewers independently screened articles for inclusion using pre-defined criteria. The outcome measures extracted included composite ischaemic events, major bleeding events, and all-cause mortality. A random effects model was applied to obtain combined risk estimates for outcomes. From 12 included studies, there were 39 459 patients with PRECISE-DAPT <25 and 14 761 patients with PRECISE-DAPT ≥25. PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 was associated with increased risk of composite ischaemic events [odds ratio (OR) 2.16; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.77-2.65], myocardial infarction (OR 2.06; 95% CI 1.38-3.08), and ischaemic stroke (OR 2.90; 95% CI 1.76-4.78). Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 had increased risk of major bleeding (OR 3.62; 95% CI 2.62-4.99). Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 had higher risk of all-cause mortality (OR 5.83; 95% CI 5.37-6.33). CONCLUSION: Patients with a PRECISE-DAPT score ≥25 are at increased risk for ischaemic events, bleeding, and all-cause mortality. Prospective evaluation of a PRECISE-DAPT guided approach to antiplatelet therapy is required to demonstrate benefit in this high-risk population.

Outcomes in Patients Stratified by PRECISE-DAPT Versus DAPT Scores After Percutaneous Coronary Interventions.

The optimal length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains debated. Current guidelines recommend individualized treatment with consideration of risk scores. We sought to evaluate the degree of agreement in treatment recommendations and the ability to predict ischemic and bleeding complications of the PRECISE-DAPT (predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy) and DAPT scores. Consecutive patients receiving 12 months of DAPT were grouped based on score treatment recommendation at the time of PCI: PRECISE-DAPT prolonged or shortened (PRECISE DAPT <25 vs ≥25) and DAPT prolonged or shortened (DAPT ≥2 vs <2). One-year ischemic and bleeding outcomes were compared for each group. In 451 patients, the PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT score recommendations were concordant in 56.7% of patients (Cohen's kappa for agreement of k = 0.139, 95% confidence interval 0.065 to 0.212). There was no difference in composite major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events between patients with high versus low PRECISE-DAPT or DAPT scores. In patients with a high PRECISE-DAPT score versus a low score, there was an increased incidence of 1-year all-cause mortality (2.13% vs 0%, p = 0.04) and an increase in bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium ≥3a: 17.0% vs 2.8%; p <0.001; Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3b/c and 5: 8.5% vs 1.4%; p = 0.001). There were no differences in rates of mortality or bleeding for patients with high versus low DAPT scores. In conclusion, when applied at the baseline, the PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT scores frequently make discordant DAPT duration recommendations. The PRECISE-DAPT, but not the DAPT score, demonstrated associations with all-cause mortality and bleeding in patients prescribed 12 months of DAPT after PCI.

De-escalation of P2Y12 Inhibitor Use After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Acute Coronary Syndromes.

BACKGROUND: De-escalation from potent platelet P2Y12 inhibitors to clopidogrel is common. Despite having a clinical rationale, non-bleeding-related de-escalation when a lateral change between potent agents is an option may put patients at increased ischemic risk. We set out to define the scope of P2Y12 inhibitor de-escalation in a large clinical registry and evaluate the potential impact of non-bleeding-related de-escalation on clinical outcomes. METHODS: : A retrospective cohort study was performed on consecutive patients in the Cardiovascular Percutaneous Intervention Trial (CAPITAL) registry to identify those who underwent a switch in therapy within 1 year of percutaneous coronary intervention. The de-escalations were categorized as bleeding-related or non-bleeding-related. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events, a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual components of major adverse cardiovascular events and a safety endpoint of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction bleeding. RESULTS: Of 1854 patients, 209 (11.3%) underwent de-escalation: 24.9% of cases were bleeding-related, 37.8% were non-bleeding-related, and 37.3% were for unknown reasons. All patients with non-bleeding-related de-escalation were switched from ticagrelor to clopidogrel. The primary outcome occurred in 14 (6.7%) patients, of which 50% underwent non-bleeding-related de-escalation (P = 0.430). Among those with non-bleeding-related de-escalation, 7.6% were hospitalized for myocardial infarction, compared to 1.9% and 3.8% among those with a bleeding-related and unknown rationale, respectively (P = 0.293). CONCLUSIONS: De-escalation, particularly non-bleeding-related de-escalation, of P2Y12 inhibitors is common. A substantial proportion of such de-escalation may be avoidable. Given the potential risk of ischemic complications, strategies should be considered to encourage both the upfront use of potent P2Y12 inhibitors and alternative strategies to de-escalation.

CONTEXTE: La désescalade thérapeutique consistant à passer d'un inhibiteur puissant du récepteur plaquettaire P2Y12 au clopidogrel est pratique courante. En dépit de son fondement clinique, la désescalade non liée aux saignements lorsqu'une substitution d'inhibiteurs puissants est possible peut entraîner une augmentation du risque d'ischémie chez les patients. L'objectif de notre étude était d'analyser, dans un vaste registre clinique, l'amplitude du recours à la désescalade à partir d'un inhibiteur du récepteur P2Y12 et d'évaluer les conséquences possibles de la désescalade non liée aux saignements sur les résultats cliniques. MÉTHODOLOGIE: Une étude de cohorte rétrospective a été effectuée sur une série de patients consécutifs inscrits au registre CAPITAL ( Ca rdiovascular P ercutaneous I ntervention T ri al ) afin de recenser ceux qui avaient fait l'objet d'un changement de traitement au cours de l'année suivant leur intervention coronarienne percutanée. Les désescalades ont été classées en deux catégories selon qu'elles étaient liées ou non liées aux saignements. Le critère d'évaluation principal, soit la survenue d'un événement cardiovasculaire indésirable majeur (ECIM), était un critère composite regroupant le décès, l'infarctus du myocarde et l'accident vasculaire cérébral. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient chaque composante individuelle du critère composite et un critère d'évaluation de l'innocuité mesuré par le score TIMI (thrombolyse dans l'infarctus du myocarde) relatif aux saignements. RÉSULTATS: Sur 1854 patients, 209 (11,3 %) avaient fait l'objet d'une désescalade, qui était liée aux saignements dans 24,9 % des cas, non liée aux saignements dans 37,8 % des cas et sans raison indiquée dans 37,3 % des cas. Tous les patients ayant fait l'objet d'une désescalade non liée aux saignements étaient passés du ticagrélor au clopidogrel. Le critère d'évaluation principal a été observé chez 14 (6,7 %) patients, dont 50 % avaient fait l'objet d'une désescalade non liée aux saignements (p = 0,430). Parmi les patients ayant fait l'objet d'une désescalade non liée aux saignements, 7,6 % avaient été hospitalisés pour un infarctus du myocarde, comparativement à 1,9 % et 3,8 % des patients chez qui la désescalade était liée aux saignements ou n'avait pas de raison connue, respectivement (p = 0,293). CONCLUSIONS: La désescalade à partir d'inhibiteurs du récepteur P2Y12, et particulièrement la désescalade non liée aux saignements, est pratique courante, alors qu'elle pourrait être évitée dans une proportion élevée de cas. Compte tenu du risque de complications ischémiques d'une telle pratique, des stratégies devraient être envisagées afin d'encourager à la fois le recours dès le départ à des inhibiteurs puissants du récepteur P2Y12 et l'adoption de stratégies de remplacement de la désescalade.

Delays in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Care During the COVID-19 Lockdown: An Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Management of ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) necessitates rapid reperfusion. Delays prolong myocardial ischemia and increase the risk of complications, including death. The COVID-19 pandemic may have impacted STEMI management. We evaluated the relative volume of hospitalizations and clinical time intervals within a regional STEMI system. METHODS: 494 patients with STEMI were grouped into pre-lockdown, lockdown and re-opening cohorts. Clinical, temporal and outcome data were collected and compared between groups for both urban and rural patients, receiving primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and pharmacoinvasive revascularization, respectively. Data was compared to a 10-year historical comparator. RESULTS: During pre-lockdown there was 238 cases versus 193 in lockdown; a 19.0% reduction in volume. When lockdown was compared to the median caseload from a 10-year historical cohort, a 19.8% reduction was observed. For patients treated with primary PCI during lockdown, median symptom-to-balloon time increased by 44-minutes [217 (IQR 157-387) vs. 261 (160-659) minutes; p=0.03]; driven by an increase in median symptom-to-door time of 41-minutes [136 (IQR 80-267) vs. 177 (IQR 90-569) minutes; p<0.01]. Only patients transferred from non-PCI facilities demonstrated an increase in door-to-reperfusion time [116 (IQR 93-150) vs. 139 (IQR 100-199) minutes; p<0.01]. More patients had left ventricular dysfunction during the lockdown [35% vs. 44%; p=0.04], but there was no difference in mortality. CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 lockdown, fewer patients presented with STEMI. Time-to-reperfusion was significantly prolonged and appeared driven predominantly by patient-level and transfer delays. Public education and systems-level changes will be integral to STEMI care during the second wave of COVID-19.