Body Mass Index and Clinical and Health Status Outcomes in Chronic Coronary Disease and Advanced Kidney Disease in the ISCHEMIA-CKD Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess whether an obesity paradox (lower event rates with higher body mass index [BMI]) exists in participants with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and chronic coronary disease in the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness of Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA)-CKD, and whether BMI modified the effect of initial treatment strategy. METHODS: Baseline BMI was analyzed as both a continuous and categorical variable (< 25, ≥ 25 to < 30, ≥ 30 kg/m2). Associations between BMI and the primary outcome of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (D/MI), and all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and MI individually were estimated. Associations with health status were also evaluated using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire-7, the Rose Dyspnea Scale, and the EuroQol-5D Visual Analog Scale. RESULTS: Body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2 vs < 25 kg/m2 demonstrated increased risk for MI (hazard ratio [HR] [95% confidence interval] = 1.81 [1.12-2.92]) and for D/MI (HR 1.45 [1.06-1.96]) with a HR for MI of 1.22 (1.05-1.40) per 5 kg/m2 increase in BMI in unadjusted analysis. In multivariate analyses, a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 was marginally associated with D/MI (HR 1.43 [1.00-2.04]) and greater dyspnea throughout follow-up (P < .05 at all time points). Heterogeneity of treatment effect between baseline BMI was not evident for any outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial, an obesity paradox was not detected. Higher BMI was associated with worse dyspnea, and a trend toward increased D/MI and MI risk. Larger studies to validate these findings are warranted.

Bifurcation left main stenting with or without intracoronary imaging: Outcomes from the EBC MAIN trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of intracoronary imaging on outcomes, after provisional versus dual-stenting for bifurcation left main (LM) lesions, is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the effect of intracoronary imaging in the EBC MAIN trial (European Bifurcation Club LM Coronary Stent study). METHODS: Four hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized to dual-stenting or a stepwise provisional strategy. Four hundred and fifty-five patients were included. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) was undertaken at the operator's discretion. The primary endpoint was death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization at 1-year. RESULTS: Intracoronary imaging was undertaken in 179 patients (39%; IVUS = 151, OCT = 28). As a result of IVUS findings, operators reintervened in 42 procedures. The primary outcome did not differ with intracoronary imaging versus angiographic-guidance (17% vs. 16%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-1.63) p = 0.767), nor for reintervention based on IVUS versus none (14% vs. 16%; OR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.32-2.43] p = 0.803), adjusted for syntax score, lesion calcification and ischemic symptoms. With angiographic-guidance, primary outcome events were more frequent with dual versus provisional stenting (21% vs. 10%; adjusted OR: 2.11 [95% CI: 1.04-4.30] p = 0.039). With intracoronary imaging, there were numerically fewer primary outcome events with dual versus provisional stenting (13% vs. 21%; adjusted OR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.22-1.46] p = 0.220). CONCLUSIONS: In EBC MAIN, the primary outcome did not differ with intracoronary imaging versus none. However, in patients with angiographic-guidance, outcomes were worse with a dual-stent than provisional strategy When intracoronary imaging was used, there was a trend toward better outcomes with the dual-stent than provisional strategy.

Impact of technique on bifurcation stent outcomes in the European Bifurcation Club Left Main Coronary Trial.

BACKGROUND: Techniques for provisional and dual-stent left main bifurcation stenting require optimization. AIM: To identify technical variables influencing procedural outcomes and periprocedural myocardial infarction following left main bifurcation intervention. METHODS: Procedural and outcome data were analyzed in 438 patients from the per-protocol cohort of the European Bifurcation Club Left Main Trial (EBC MAIN). These patients were randomized to the provisional strategy or a compatible dual-stent extension (T, T-and-protrude, or culotte). RESULTS: Mean age was 71 years and 37.4% presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Transient reduction of side vessel thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow occurred after initial stent placement in 5% of procedures but was not associated with periprocedural myocardial infarction. Failure to rewire a jailed vessel during any strategy was more common when jailed wires were not used (9.5% vs. 2.5%, odds ratio [OR]: 6.4, p = 0.002). In the provisional cohort, the use of the proximal optimization technique was associated with less subsequent side vessel intervention (23.3% vs. 41.9%, OR: 0.4, p = 0.048). Side vessel stenting was predominantly required for dissection, which occurred more often following side vessel preparation (15.3% vs. 4.4%, OR: 3.1, p = 0.040). Exclusive use of noncompliant balloons for kissing balloon inflation was associated with reduced need for side vessel intervention in provisional cases (20.5% vs. 38.5%, OR: 0.4, p = 0.013), and a reduced risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction across all strategies (2.9% vs. 7.7%, OR: 0.2, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: When performing provisional or compatible dual-stent left main bifurcation intervention, jailed wire use is associated with successful jailed vessel rewiring. Side vessel preparation in provisional patients is linked to increased side vessel dissection requiring stenting. Use of the proximal optimization technique may reduce the need for additional side vessel intervention, and noncompliant balloon use for kissing balloon inflation is associated with a reduction in both side vessel stenting and periprocedural myocardial infarction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02497014.

Cause-Specific Mortality in Patients With Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease in the ISCHEMIA-CKD Trial.

BACKGROUND: In ISCHEMIA-CKD, 777 patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and chronic coronary disease had similar all-cause mortality with either an initial invasive or conservative strategy (27.2% vs 27.8%, respectively). OBJECTIVES: This prespecified secondary analysis from ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease) was conducted to determine whether an initial invasive strategy compared with a conservative strategy decreased the incidence of cardiovascular (CV) vs non-CV causes of death. METHODS: Three-year cumulative incidences were calculated for the adjudicated cause of death. Overall and cause-specific death by treatment strategy were analyzed using Cox models adjusted for baseline covariates. The association between cause of death, risk factors, and treatment strategy were identified. RESULTS: A total of 192 of the 777 participants died during follow-up, including 94 (12.1%) of a CV cause, 59 (7.6%) of a non-CV cause, and 39 (5.0%) of an undetermined cause. The 3-year cumulative rates of CV death were similar between the invasive and conservative strategies (14.6% vs 12.6%, respectively; HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.75-1.70). Non-CV death rates were also similar between the invasive and conservative arms (8.4% and 8.2%, respectively; HR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.75-2.09). Sudden cardiac death (46.8% of CV deaths) and infection (54.2% of non-CV deaths) were the most common cause-specific deaths and did not vary by treatment strategy. CONCLUSIONS: In ISCHEMIA-CKD, CV death was more common than non-CV or undetermined death during the 3-year follow-up. The randomized treatment assignment did not affect the cause-specific incidences of death in participants with advanced CKD and moderate or severe myocardial ischemia. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease [ISCHEMIA-CKD]; NCT01985360).

Bioabsorbable polymer drug-eluting stents with 4-month dual antiplatelet therapy versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents with 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with left main coronary artery disease: the IDEAL-LM randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Improvements in drug-eluting stent design have led to a reduced frequency of repeat revascularisation and new biodegradable polymer coatings may allow a shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AIMS: The Improved Drug-Eluting stent for All-comers Left Main (IDEAL-LM) study aims to investigate long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of a biodegradable polymer platinum-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (BP-PtCr-EES) followed by 4 months DAPT compared to a durable polymer cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (DP-CoCr-EES) followed by 12 months DAPT in patients undergoing PCI of unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. METHODS: This is a multicentre randomised clinical trial study in patients with an indication for coronary artery revascularisation who have been accepted for PCI for LMCA disease after Heart Team consultation. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the BP-PtCr-EES or the DP-CoCr-EES. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of the rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation at 2 years. RESULTS: Between December 2014 and October 2016, 818 patients (410 BP-PtCr-EES and 408 DP-CoCr-EES) were enrolled at 29 centres in Europe. At 2 years, the primary endpoint of MACE occurred in 59 patients (14.6%) in the BP-PtCr-EES group and 45 patients (11.4%) in the DP-CoCr-EES group; 1-sided upper 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.18%; p=0.04 for non-inferiority; p=0.17 for superiority. The secondary endpoint event of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding occurred in 11 patients (2.7%) in the BP-PtCr-EES group and 2 patients (0.5%) in the DP-CoCr-EES group (p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI of LMCA disease, after two years of follow-up, the use of a BP-PtCr-EES with 4 months of DAPT was non-inferior to a DP-CoCr-EES with 12 months of DAPT with respect to the composite endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction or ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularisation.

The European bifurcation club Left Main Coronary Stent study: a randomized comparison of stepwise provisional vs. systematic dual stenting strategies (EBC MAIN).

BACKGROUND: Patients with non-left-main coronary bifurcation lesions are usually best treated with a stepwise provisional approach. However, patients with true left main stem bifurcation lesions have been shown in one dedicated randomized study to benefit from systematic dual stent implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-seven patients with true left main stem bifurcation lesions requiring intervention were recruited to the EBC MAIN study in 11 European countries. Patients were aged 71 ± 10 years; 77% were male. Patients were randomly allocated to a stepwise layered provisional strategy (n = 230) or a systematic dual stent approach (n = 237). The primary endpoint (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 12 months) occurred in 14.7% of the stepwise provisional group vs. 17.7% of the systematic dual stent group (hazard ratio 0.8, 95% confidence interval 0.5-1.3; P = 0.34). Secondary endpoints were death (3.0% vs. 4.2%, P = 0.48), myocardial infarction (10.0% vs. 10.1%, P = 0.91), target lesion revascularization (6.1% vs. 9.3%, P = 0.16), and stent thrombosis (1.7% vs. 1.3%, P = 0.90), respectively. Procedure time, X-ray dose and consumables favoured the stepwise provisional approach. Symptomatic improvement was excellent and equal in each group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with true bifurcation left main stem stenosis requiring intervention, fewer major adverse cardiac events occurred with a stepwise layered provisional approach than with planned dual stenting, although the difference was not statistically significant. The stepwise provisional strategy should remain the default for distal left main stem bifurcation intervention. STUDY REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov NCT02497014.

Pulmonary Artery Denervation for Patients With Residual Pulmonary Hypertension After Pulmonary Endarterectomy.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary artery denervation (PADN) procedure has not been applied to patients with residual chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) after pulmonary endarterectomy (PEA). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the safety and efficacy of PADN using remote magnetic navigation in patients with residual CTEPH after PEA. METHODS: Fifty patients with residual CTEPH despite medical therapy at least 6 months after PEA, who had mean pulmonary artery pressure ≥25 mm Hg or pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) > 400 dyn‧s‧cm-5 based on right heart catheterization were randomized to treatment with PADN (PADN group; n = 25) using remote magnetic navigation for ablation or medical therapy with riociguat (MED group; n = 25). In the MED group, a sham procedure with mapping but no ablation was performed. The primary endpoint was PVR at 12 months after randomization. Key secondary endpoint included 6-min walk test. RESULTS: After PADN procedure, 2 patients (1 in each group) developed groin hematoma that resolved without any consequences. At 12 months, mean PVR reduction was 258 ± 135 dyn‧s‧cm-5 in the PADN group versus 149 ± 73 dyn‧s‧cm-5 in the MED group, mean between-group difference was 109 dyn‧s‧cm-5 (95% confidence interval: 45 to 171; p = 0.001). The 6-min walk test distance was significantly increased in the PADN group as compared to distance in the MED group (470 ± 84 m vs. 399 ± 116 m, respectively; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: PADN in patients with residual CTEPH resulted in substantial reduction of PVR at 12 months of follow-up, accompanied by improved 6-min walk test.

Management of Coronary Disease in Patients with Advanced Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS: We randomly assigned 777 patients with advanced kidney disease and moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing to be treated with an initial invasive strategy consisting of coronary angiography and revascularization (if appropriate) added to medical therapy or an initial conservative strategy consisting of medical therapy alone and angiography reserved for those in whom medical therapy had failed. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. A key secondary outcome was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, a primary outcome event had occurred in 123 patients in the invasive-strategy group and in 129 patients in the conservative-strategy group (estimated 3-year event rate, 36.4% vs. 36.7%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.29; P = 0.95). Results for the key secondary outcome were similar (38.5% vs. 39.7%; hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.29). The invasive strategy was associated with a higher incidence of stroke than the conservative strategy (hazard ratio, 3.76; 95% CI, 1.52 to 9.32; P = 0.004) and with a higher incidence of death or initiation of dialysis (hazard ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.04 to 2.11; P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable coronary disease, advanced chronic kidney disease, and moderate or severe ischemia, we did not find evidence that an initial invasive strategy, as compared with an initial conservative strategy, reduced the risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and others; ISCHEMIA-CKD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01985360.).

The Functional Properties of Mg-Zn-X Biodegradable Magnesium Alloys.

The implantation of metallic devices in orthopaedic surgical procedures and coronary angioplasty is associated with the risk of various adverse events: (i) mechanical (premature failure), (ii) chemo-mechanical (corrosion and corrosion-fatigue degradation) and (iii) biomedical (chronic local inflammatory reactions, tissue necrosis, etc.). In this regard, the development of biodegradable implants/stents, which provide the necessary mechanical support for the healing period of the bone or the vessel wall and then are completely resorbed, has bright prospects. Magnesium alloys are the most suitable candidates for that purpose due to their superior mechanical performance, bioresorbability and biocompatibility. This article presents the results of the comparative research on several wrought biodegradable alloys, assessing their potential for biomedical applications. The Mg-Zn-X alloys with different chemical compositions and microstructures were produced using severe plastic deformation techniques. Functional properties pivotal for biomedical applications-mechanical strength, in vitro corrosion resistance and cytotoxic activity-were included in the focus of the study. Excellent mechanical performance and low cytotoxic effects are documented for all alloys with a notable exception for one of two Mg-Zn-Zr alloys. The in vitro corrosion resistance is, however, below expectations due to critical impurities, and this property has yet to be drastically improved through the cleaner materials fabrication processing before they can be considered for biomedical applications.

Angiographic and clinical outcomes of STEMI patients treated with bioresorbable or metallic everolimus-eluting stents: a pooled analysis of individual patient data.

AIMS: Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were conceived to ensure transient coronary artery support during antiproliferative drug delivery. However, the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold was found to be inferior to everolimus-eluting metallic stents (EES) in moderately complex coronary anatomies. We sought to investigate whether the Absorb represents a valuable option for the percutaneous treatment of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled the individual patient data of two randomised trials specifically designed to investigate the performance of Absorb versus EES in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI). The primary outcome was lesion (in-segment) diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up. The main secondary outcome was the device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) of cardiac death, target vessel MI and target lesion revascularisation at one year. A total of 388 patients with STEMI were allocated to Absorb (n=227) or EES (n=161). Angiographic follow-up at one year was available for 332 (85.6%) patients. Lesion diameter stenosis was comparable between Absorb and EES (22.8±9.8% versus 23.6±11.2%; mean difference -0.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.18-1.48, p=0.47). DOCE occurred in 21 patients at one year, with similar distribution between the Absorb and EES groups (5.3% versus 5.6%; hazard ratio 0.95, 95% CI: 0.40-2.26, p=0.91). CONCLUSIONS: This pooled analysis provides evidence for a comparable angiographic performance and suggests similar clinical performance of Absorb and EES in STEMI patients undergoing percutaneous revascularisation. The long-term durability of Absorb and the extent to which newer BRS platforms might have a potential role in STEMI deserve further investigation. Both trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01942070 and NCT01986803).

Prospective, randomized trial of bioresorbable scaffolds vs. everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary stenting for myocardial infarction: the Intracoronary Scaffold Assessment a Randomized evaluation of Absorb in Myocardial Infarction (ISAR-Absorb MI) trial.

Aims: Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) provide short-term coronary artery scaffolding and drug delivery. Although prior trials showed a higher rate of device failure compared with conventional drug-eluting stents (DES), only a single trial investigated patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (MI). We aimed to compare outcomes with BRS vs. DES in patients undergoing PCI for MI. Methods and results: We did a prospective, randomized, multicentre, non-inferiority, clinical trial of everolimus-eluting BRS vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute MI. Patients were eligible for enrolment if they presented with ST-elevation MI, or non-ST-elevation MI with thrombosis visual at angiography and were randomly allocated to treatment with BRS or EES in 2:1 proportion. Angiographic follow-up was scheduled at 6-8 months and clinical follow-up was done at 12 months. The primary endpoint was percentage diameter stenosis in-segment at follow-up. A total of 262 patients were enrolled and were allocated to BRS (n = 173) or EES (n = 89). Angiographic follow-up was available for 213 (81.3%) patients. Mean diameter stenosis was 24.6 ± 12.2% with BRS vs. 27.3 ± 11.7% with EES (mean difference -2.7%, upper limit of one-sided 97.5% confidence limit 0.7%, pre-specified margin of non-inferiority 5%, Pnon-inferiority <0.001). The rate of the device-oriented composite of cardiac death/target vessel MI/target lesion revascularization [BRS: 12 (7.0%) vs. EES: 6 (6.7%), hazard ratio (HR) 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-2.78] and definite/probable stent thrombosis [3 (1.7%) vs. 2 (2.3%), HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.13-4.56] were comparable in both groups. Conclusion: In patients undergoing PCI for acute MI BRS were non-inferior to EES for percentage diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up. Rates of clinical events were comparable between the treatment groups, although the study was not powered to detect differences in clinical outcomes. Clinical trial registration: The trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01942070).

Drug-Eluting vs Bare-Metal Stents in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease and Coronary Artery Disease: Insights From a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Most drug-eluting stent (DES) trials have excluded patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). The efficacy of DES implantation in patients with CKD is therefore not known. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the outcomes with DES vs bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with CKD. METHODS AND RESULTS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL were searched for studies including at least 100 patients with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤60 mL/min/1.73 m² or on dialysis) treated with DES or BMS and followed for at least 1 month and reporting outcomes of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular (CV) mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis (ST). Thirty-one studies (5 randomized) with 91,817 participants (49,081 DES and 42,736 BMS) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. DES was associated with lower all-cause mortality (relative risk [RR], 0.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.84), CV mortality (RR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.38-0.70), MI (RR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86-0.95), TVR (RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.47-0.80), and numerically lower ST (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.55-1.01) when compared with BMS. Analysis by study type (RCTs vs non-RCTs) showed similar results for most outcomes (Pinteraction>.05) except all-cause mortality, where there was no difference between DES vs BMS in RCTs (Pinteraction=.04). The effects were greater with 2nd-generation DES vs BMS (for example, ST: RR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.72). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CKD, the available evidence, largely from observational studies, suggests significantly fewer events with DES vs BMS with even a lower ST rate with 2nd-generation DES. These findings should be tested in large, randomized trials.

Does left atrial appendage closure improve the success of pulmonary vein isolation? Results of a randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The combination of left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion with pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) potentially represents a comprehensive treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF), controlling symptoms while at the same time reducing the risk of stroke and the need for chronic anticoagulation. The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to assess the impact of LAA closure added to PVI in patients with high-risk AF. METHODS: Patients with a history of symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent AF refractory to ≥ 2 antiarrhythmic drugs, CHA2DS2-VASc score ≥ 2, and HAS-BLED score ≥ 3 were randomized to PVI-only (n = 44) or PVI with LAA closure (n = 45). RESULTS: Six patients in PVI + LAA closure group crossed over to PVI-only group due to failure of LAA closure device implantation. On-treatment comparisons at the 24 month follow-up revealed that 33 (66%) of the 50 PVI group and 23 (59%) of the 39 PVI with LAA closure group were AF-free on no antiarrhythmic drugs (p = 0.34). The PVI + LAA closure treatment was significantly associated with a higher AF burden during the blanking period: 9.7 ± 10.8 vs 4.2 ± 4.1% (p = 0.004). At the end follow-up, there were no serious complications and no strokes or thromboembolic events in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of LAA closure device implantation with PVI was safe but was not observed to influence the success of PVI in patients with symptomatic refractory AF. Early AF after ablation, however, is increased by LAA closure. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01695824.