High platelet adrenergic activity and concomitant activation of the pituitary/medullar axis as alarming laboratory parameters in ACS survivors-the STRESS-AMI study.

Introduction: Kinetics of stress-related biological parameters were determined in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients undergoing complex cardiovascular rehabilitation. Methods: We determined platelet functionality in the absence/presence of a selective alpha-2 adrenergic receptor inhibitor, atipemazole parallel with salivary cortisol levels at enrolment, and at 3- and 12-months follow-up in 75 ACS patients with percutaneous coronary intervention. Results: Pharmacological/non-pharmacological secondary prevention methods have been efficiently applied. Baseline aggregometry indicated platelet hyperactivity, decreasing gradually and being significantly reduced late, at 12 months (p < 0.05). Cortisol levels followed similar kinetics (p < 0.05). Baseline epinephrine-induced aggregations (EIA) significantly correlated with most of the other platelet agonists, even at subsequent time-points. Patients with upper-quartile EIA at enrolment (EIA-UQ) had significantly higher ADP- and collagen-induced aggregations at enrolment, at 3- and 12-months follow-up as well, indicating that high adrenergic response in the acute phase is accompanied by general platelet hyperactivity and predicts sustained platelet activation. In the EIA-UQ group higher cardiac biomarker release, elevated C-reactive protein and cortisol levels, and lower baseline left ventricular ejection fraction were detected.Atipemazole significantly reduced platelet aggregation induced by several platelet agonists, being most potent and comparable to full in vitro P2Y12 inhibition on collagen-induced aggregations (p < 0.05), indicating that catecholamines might serve as promt/long-term modulators of platelet function. Discussion: Despite effective CCR programme and dual antiplatelet therapy, prolonged activation of sympathetic neuroendocrine system and general platelet hyperactivity can be detected up to one year in ACS patients with high adrenergic platelet activity. Moreover, initial high adrenergic activity is accompanied by clinical parameters associated to increased cardiovascular risk, therefore early identification of these patients might support complex optimal long-term therapy.

The prognostic value of immediate post-TAVI hemodynamic evaluation is superior to aortography and transoesophageal echocardiography in predicting patient survival.

BACKGROUND: Although post-TAVI PAR is commonly seen, its exact evaluation, grading and the true impact on patients' survival are still debated. This single center study aimed to evaluate the effect of post transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR) on patients' survival. The outcome was evaluated by the three most commonly used techniques just after TAVI in the interventional arena. METHODS: 201 high risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis underwent TAVI with the self-expandable system. The severity of post-TAVI PAR was prospectively evaluated by aortography and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) using a four-class scheme and hemodynamic evaluation by calculation of the regurgitation index (RI). Median follow up time was 763 days. RESULTS: Post-TAVI PAR results of the three different modalities were concordant with each other (all p < 0.001). Patients with grade 0-I PAR by aortography had better long term outcomes compared to those who had grade II-III PAR (unadjusted HR 1.77 [95% CI, 1.04-3.01], p = 0.03). Although in multivariate analysis neither aortography nor TEE were shown to be significant predictors of survival, hemodynamic assessment using the exact RI result was a significant predictor of survival and its effect was found to be linear (adjusted HR 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52-0.98] for 10% point increase in RI, p = 0.03595). CONCLUSIONS: Among the three modalities that are frequently used to evaluate the outcome, post-TAVI RI showed the highest added predictive value for survival.

Impact of Selective Aspiration Thrombectomy on Mortality in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Although routine aspiration thrombectomy (AT) is not recommended by the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guideline, for selected cases, a class IIb indication is given because of lack of data. We studied the impact of selective AT on mortality in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction using a prospective registry. We analyzed data of 1,255 patients, of whom 535 underwent AT based on operator's decision. Separate propensity score matching procedures were performed including all patients and only those with initial TIMI (Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction) 0 to 1 flow, indicating the highest thrombus burden. Primary outcome measure was time to all-cause death at 1 year. Both studies were sufficiently powered to detect the hazard ratio (HR) of 0.52 seen in the TAPAS (Thrombus Aspiration during Percutaneous coronary intervention in Acute myocardial infarction Study) trial. In the study with open inclusion criteria, 1-year mortality rates were 15.5% and 14.5% in the AT and conventional percutaneous coronary intervention arm, respectively (p = 0.77). The unadjusted HR was 1.05 (95% CI 0.73 to 1.51), p = 0.80, whereas the adjusted HR was 0.97 (95% CI 0.66 to 1.41), p = 0.87. In patients with initial TIMI 0 to 1 flow, mortality rate at 1 year was 15.6% in the AT and 16.7% in the standard percutaneous coronary intervention group (p = 0.76). The unadjusted and adjusted HRs were similar: 0.91 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.34), p = 0.65 and 0.93 (95% CI 0.62 to 1.37), p = 0.70, respectively. In conclusion, selective AT based on operator's discretion offers no mortality benefit of the magnitude detected in the TAPAS trial, even for patients with initial TIMI 0 to 1 flow grade.

A novel risk model including vascular access site for predicting 30-day mortality after primary PCI: The ALPHA score.

BACKGROUND: The mortality benefit of transradial primary PCI has been shown by several studies. Previous risk models have not considered access site as a candidate predictor and many of them were developed using low risk populations of randomized trials. We conducted a prospective cohort study to construct and validate an admission risk model including access site as candidate variable for predicting 30-day mortality after primary PCI. METHODS: We analyzed data of 1255 patients using variables readily available at presentation. Predictor selection was based on backward logistic regression combined with bootstrap resampling. The model has been validated internally and temporally externally. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was independently associated with older age, faster heart rate, need for life support on or prior to admission, and femoral access while it was inversely related to systolic blood pressure. ROC curve analysis revealed high discriminatory power, which was preserved in the validation set (c-statistic: 0.88 and 0.87, respectively). For the new score the acronym ALPHA (Age, Life support, Pressure, Heart rate, Access site) has been coined. Compared with previous models, our score achieved the highest c-statistic (0.87) followed by the GRACE 2.0 (0.86), APEX-AMI (0.86), and CADILLAC (0.85) models, the other scoring systems (TIMI, Zwolle, and PAMI) performed less well. The ALPHA, GRACE 2.0, APEX-AMI, and CADILLAC models predicted 30-day mortality better than the PAMI score (p=0.005, 0.004, 0.01, and 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Using this tool, mortality risk may be precisely assessed at admission and patients who may benefit most from transradial access may be identified.

Need for prophylactic application of verapamil in transradial coronary procedures: a randomized trial. The VITRIOL (is Verapamil In TransRadial Interventions OmittabLe?) trial.

BACKGROUND: Verapamil is traditionally applied prophylactically in transradial procedures to prevent radial artery spasm. However, verapamil may have side effects and is contraindicated in some clinical settings. METHODS AND RESULTS: During an investigator-initiated, randomized, double-blind trial, we evaluated the need for preventive verapamil administration. After vascular access was established, patients received either 5 mg verapamil (n=297) or placebo (n=294). We compared the rate of access site conversions as primary end point using a superiority margin of 5%. Occurrence of code breaks (composite of conversions and unplanned use of verapamil), overall verapamil use, procedural and fluoroscopic times, contrast volume, and subjective pain were investigated as secondary end points. The rate of access site conversions was not different in the 2 arms (placebo 1.7% versus verapamil 0.7%, P=0.28, difference 1.0%, 95% CI for the difference -1.1% to 3.3%). Proportion of code breaks was similar in the 2 groups (3.4% versus 1.3%, P=0.11), whereas overall verapamil use was markedly lower in the placebo arm (2.0% versus 100%, P<0.0001). Procedural time (median [IQR] 16.0 minutes [9.0 to 30.0 minutes] versus 17.0 minutes [10.0 to 31.0 minutes], P=0.37), fluoroscopic time (4.4 minutes [2.1 to 9.6 minutes] versus 4.8 minutes [2.4 to 10.7 minutes], P=0.28), contrast volume (72.5 mL [48.0 to 146.0 mL] versus 75.5 mL [47.0 to 156.5 mL], P=0.74), and pain score (P for trend=0.12) were comparable in the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: The preventive use of verapamil may be unnecessary for transradial procedures. The omission of prophylactic verapamil may not only reduce the rate of potential complications related to the drug but also allow the safe extension of the transradial method to those with contraindications to verapamil. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01402427.