Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction With or Without ST-Segment Elevation.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of complete revascularization is well established in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), but it is less investigated in those with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess whether complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, was associated with consistent outcomes in older patients with STEMI and NSTEMI. METHODS: In the FIRE (Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients with Multivessel Disease) trial, 1,445 older patients with myocardial infarction (MI) were randomized to culprit-only or physiology-guided complete revascularization, stratified by STEMI (n = 256 culprit-only vs n = 253 complete) and NSTEMI (n = 469 culprit-only vs n = 467 complete). The primary outcome comprised a composite of death, MI, stroke, or revascularization at 1 year. The key secondary outcome included a composite of cardiovascular death or MI at 1 year. RESULTS: In the overall study population, physiology-guided complete revascularization reduced both primary and key secondary outcomes. The primary outcome occurred in 54 (21.1%) STEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 41 (16.2%) STEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.50-1.13) and in 98 (20.9%) NSTEMI patients randomized to culprit-only vs 72 (15.4%) NSTEMI patients of the complete group (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.53-0.97), with negative interaction testing (P for interaction, 0.846). Similarly, no signal of heterogeneity with respect to the initial clinical presentation was observed for the key secondary endpoint (P for interaction, 0.654). CONCLUSIONS: Physiology-guided complete revascularization, compared with culprit-only revascularization, provided consistent benefit across the whole spectrum of patients with MI. (FIRE [Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease]; NCT03772743).

Contrast-enhanced excimer laser stepwise approach during PCI for resistant coronary lesions.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of resistant coronary lesions (RCL) is a great challenge for interventional cardiologists. The excimer laser coronary atherectomy (ELCA) is a plaque modification tool based on a main mechanism of photomechanical effect leading to mechanical disruption of the plaque. Contrast dye injection during laser delivery has demonstrated to enhance its power. AIM: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the contrast-enhanced ELCA by a stepwise approach in the treatment of RCLs. METHODS: We retrospectively examined consecutive patients undergoing contrast-enhanced ELCA-assisted PCI between 2018 and 2021 at two Italian sites. RCLs were defined as novo or in-stent undilatable/uncrossable with conventional balloons (SC/NC balloon). The primary endpoint was ELCA technical success defined as the laser catheter crossing the entire length of the target lesion established by angiographic evidence of the catheter tip in the artery distal to the stenosis. RESULTS: We enrolled 114 patients who underwent contrast-enhanced ELCA-assisted PCI: 58% of the patients had acute coronary syndrome while the left anterior descending artery was the target vessel in 42.1% of cases. The target lesion was most commonly in-stent (56.2%). The 0.9 mm ELCA catheter tip was employed in 89.5% of cases. The most used frequency/fluency profile was 70/70 (39.5%). The use of contrast-enhanced ELCA was associated with high technical, procedural, and clinical success rates (97.4%, 93.7%, and 90.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The contrast-enhanced ELCA seems to be a safe and effective treatment option for the management of both de novo and in-stent-resistant coronary lesions.

Complete vs Culprit-Only Revascularization in Older Patients With Myocardial Infarction and High Bleeding Risk: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) have a poor prognosis, and it is not known if they may benefit from complete revascularization after myocardial infarction (MI). Objective: To investigate the benefit of physiology-guided complete revascularization vs a culprit-only strategy in patients with HBR, MI, and multivessel disease. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified analysis of the Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease (FIRE) randomized clinical trial data. FIRE was an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter trial. Patients 75 years or older with MI and multivessel disease were enrolled at 34 European centers from July 2019 through October 2021. Physiology treatment was performed either by angiography- or wire-based assessment. Patients were divided into HBR or non-HBR categories in accordance with the Academic Research Consortium HBR document. Interventions: Patients were randomized to either physiology-guided complete revascularization or culprit-only strategy. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome comprised a composite of death, MI, stroke, or revascularization at 1 year. Secondary outcomes included a composite of cardiovascular death or MI and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) types 3 to 5. Results: Among 1445 patients (mean [SD] age, 81 [5] years; 917 male [63%]), 1025 (71%) met HBR criteria. Patients with HBR were at higher risk for the primary end point (hazard ratio [HR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.47-2.76), cardiovascular death or MI (HR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.26-2.83), and BARC types 3 to 5 (HR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.40-7.64). The primary end point was significantly reduced with physiology-guided complete revascularization as compared with culprit-only strategy in patients with HBR (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.55-0.96). No indication of interaction was noted between revascularization strategy and HBR status for primary and secondary end points. Conclusions and Relevance: HBR status is prevalent among older patients with MI, significantly increasing the likelihood of adverse events. Physiology-guided complete revascularization emerges as an effective strategy, in comparison with culprit-only revascularization, for mitigating ischemic adverse events, including cardiovascular death and MI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03772743.

QFR for the Revascularization of Nonculprit Vessels in MI Patients: Insights From the FIRE Trial.

BACKGROUND: The role of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in the treatment of nonculprit vessels of patients with myocardial infarction (MI) is a topic of ongoing discussion. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the predictive capability of QFR for adverse events and its noninferiority compared to wire-based functional assessment in nonculprit vessels of MI patients. METHODS: The FIRE (Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease) trial randomized 1,445 older MI patients to culprit-only (n = 725) or physiology-guided complete revascularization (n = 720). In the culprit-only arm, angiographic projections of nonculprit vessels were prospectively collected, centrally reviewed for QFR computation, and associated with endpoints. In the complete revascularization arm, endpoints were compared between nonculprit vessels investigated with QFR or wire-based functional assessment. The primary endpoint was the vessel-oriented composite endpoint (VOCE) at 1 year. RESULTS: QFR was measured on 903 nonculprit vessels from 685 patients in the culprit-only arm. Overall, 366 (40.5%) nonculprit vessels showed a QFR value ≤0.80, with a significantly higher incidence of VOCEs (22.1% vs 7.1%; P < 0.001). QFR ≤0.80 emerged as an independent predictor of VOCEs (HR: 2.79; 95% CI: 1.64-4.75). In the complete arm, QFR was used in 320 (35.2%) nonculprit vessels to guide revascularization. When compared with propensity-matched nonculprit vessels in which treatment was guided by wire-based functional assessment, no significant difference was observed (HR: 0.57; 95% CI: 0.28-1.15) in VOCEs. CONCLUSIONS: This prespecified subanalysis of the FIRE trial provides evidence supporting the safety and efficacy of QFR-guided interventions for the treatment of nonculprit vessels in MI patients. (Functional Assessment in Elderly MI Patients With Multivessel Disease [FIRE]; NCT03772743).

Acute and long-term results of percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions with the dedicated Bioss Lim C stent: the Italian BIfurcation Observational Spontaneous Study (IBIOSS).

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for bifurcation lesions still represents a clinical challenge. The Bioss Lim C is a dedicated device for bifurcation lesions, features a tapered shape and large cells, and thus appears as a promising adjunct to the current interventional cardiologists' armamentarium. We aimed at conducting a prospective multicenter study focusing on early and long-term results after Bioss Lim C implantation for true coronary bifurcation lesions. METHODS: Patients with true bifurcation lesions in whom Bioss Lim C implantation was attempted were enrolled in four Italian centers. An explicit bifurcation management approach was recommended, leaving however the choice between one- vs. two-stent strategies at operator's discretion. Acute and long-term results were systematically appraised, focusing on an acute composite of complex side branch (SB) rewiring, SB pinching, or SB occlusion (primary efficacy endpoint), as well as major adverse events (MACE, i.e. death, myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization [TVR]), individual components of MACE, and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: A total of 207 patients were included, with age of 67.3±10.8 years, and 40 (19.3%) women. The target lesion was located in the left main in 48 (23.2%) patients, whereas proximal reference vessel diameter was 3.69±0.48 mm, and lesion length 20.3±3.4 mm. According to the Medina classification, most patients (60 [30.9%]) had 1-1-1 lesions. Drug-eluting stent implantation in the SB was carried out in 19 (9.3%) subjects, and kissing balloon inflation was used in 67 (32.5%). The primary efficacy endpoint occurred in 27 (13.0%), with side branch (SB) occlusion in two (1.0%), SB pinching in 23 (11.1%), and complex SB rewiring in six (2.9%), and was most frequent in patients with lower body mass index or dyslipidemia. After 24.1±19.5 months, MACE were adjudicated in 23 (11.1%) subjects, with death in 10 (4.8%), MI in six (2.9%), and TVR in seven (3.4%), as well as stent thrombosis in one (0.5%). CONCLUSIONS: This study supports a wider adoption of the Bioss Lim C dedicated bifurcation device, thanks to the favorable acute results as well as long-term clinical outcomes, as well as its versatility for the stenting strategy provisionally or eventually adopted by operators.

Impact of pre-admission physical activity on benefits of physiology-guided complete revascularization in older patients with myocardial infarction: insights from the FIRE trial.

AIMS: The present analysis from the Functional Assessment in Elderly Myocardial Infarction Patients with Multivessel Disease (FIRE) trial aims to explore the significance of pre-admission physical activity and assess whether the benefits of physiology-guided complete revascularization apply consistently to sedentary and active older patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients aged 75 years or more with myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel disease were randomized to receive physiology-guided complete revascularization or culprit-only strategy. The primary outcome was a composite of death, MI, stroke, or any revascularization within a year. Secondary endpoints included the composite of cardiovascular death or MI, as well as single components of the primary endpoint. Pre-admission physical activity was categorized into three groups: (i) absent (sedentary), (ii) light, and (iii) vigorous. Among 1445 patients, 692 (48%) were sedentary, whereas 560 (39%) and 193 (13%) performed light and vigorous physical activity, respectively. Patients engaging in light or vigorous pre-admission physical activity exhibited a reduced risk of the primary outcome compared with sedentary individuals [light hazard ratio (HR) 0.70, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-0.91 and vigorous HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.91, respectively]. These trends were also observed for death, cardiovascular death, or MI. When comparing physiology-guided complete revascularization vs. culprit-only strategy, no significant interaction was observed for primary and secondary endpoints when stratified by sedentary or active status. CONCLUSION: In older patients with MI, pre-admission physical activity emerges as a robust and independent prognostic determinant. Physiology-guided complete revascularization stands out an effective strategy in reducing ischaemic adverse events, irrespective of pre-admission physical activity status. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03772743.

The Functional Assessment in Elderly Myocardial Infarction Patients with Multivessel Disease (FIRE) trial has shown that physiology-guided complete revascularization reduces ischaemic adverse events in older patients with myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel disease. Older patients who engage in light or vigorous physical activity before hospitalization for MI have a reduced risk of the primary composite outcome of death, MI, stroke, or ischaemia-driven revascularization. These benefits extend to all secondary cardiovascular outcomes as well. In the present subanalysis of the FIRE trial, we find that the positive prognosis associated with physiology-guided complete revascularization holds true even for patients with a sedentary lifestyle. This means that this type of revascularization can effectively reduce ischaemic adverse events in older patients with MI and multivessel disease, regardless of their physical activity levels.

Complete or Culprit-Only PCI in Older Patients with Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of complete revascularization in older patients (≥75 years of age) with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease remains unclear. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized trial, we assigned older patients with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease who were undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion to receive either physiology-guided complete revascularization of nonculprit lesions or to receive no further revascularization. Functionally significant nonculprit lesions were identified either by pressure wire or angiography. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any revascularization at 1 year. The key secondary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction. Safety was assessed as a composite of contrast-associated acute kidney injury, stroke, or bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 1445 patients underwent randomization (720 to receive complete revascularization and 725 to receive culprit-only revascularization). The median age of the patients was 80 years (interquartile range, 77 to 84); 528 patients (36.5%) were women, and 509 (35.2%) were admitted for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. A primary-outcome event occurred in 113 patients (15.7%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 152 patients (21.0%) in the culprit-only group (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 0.93; P = 0.01). Cardiovascular death or myocardial infarction occurred in 64 patients (8.9%) in the complete-revascularization group and in 98 patients (13.5%) in the culprit-only group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.88). The safety outcome did not appear to differ between the groups (22.5% vs. 20.4%; P = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients who were 75 years of age or older with myocardial infarction and multivessel disease, those who underwent physiology-guided complete revascularization had a lower risk of a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischemia-driven revascularization at 1 year than those who received culprit-lesion-only PCI. (Funded by Consorzio Futuro in Ricerca and others; FIRE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03772743.).

Intracardiac echocardiography probe via oesophageal to guide percutaneous left atrial appendage closure procedure: a case series.

Background: Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) can be an alternative to oral anticoagulant therapy in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation, characterized by high risk of stroke (CHA2D2VASC ≥ two for men and CHA2D2VA2SC ≥ three for women) and high risk of bleeding (HASBLED = 3). Case summary: We describe three case reports in which an intracardiac echocardiography probe was used via the oesophageal route as an alternative to traditional transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or ICE methods to guide LAAC. Guiding the procedure via conventional TEE, even if feasible, could be difficult in these patients due to different causes: one patient was affected by Brugada syndrome while the other two patients reported oropharyngeal abnormalities. For these reasons, we performed an alternative use of the ICE probe to guide the entire LAAC procedure. Discussion: Currently, LAAC is performed using intracardiac or transoesophageal echocardiography. This alternative use of ICE probe via oesophageal (ICE-TEE) is reported in previous studies that describe the feasibility of this technique both in excluding the presence of thrombus in left atrial appendage before cardioversion and in guiding percutaneous foramen ovale closure. Therefore, the ICE probe has been used as an intraoperative transoesophageal echocardiographic probe to repair congenital heart disease in infants or children with oropharyngeal abnormalities.This case series reports the first use of ICE-TEE to guide the entire LAAC procedure, guaranteeing the visualization of all echocardiographic views needed to perform it. The present case series highlights the potential of ICE-TEE to safely perform both pre-procedural and intraoperative evaluations in LAAC procedure.

Imaging Modality to Guide Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Current Status and Future Perspectives.

Atrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia in adults. The left atrial appendage (LAA) is the most likely source of thrombus formation in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) represents an effective alternative to NOAC in patients with NVAF. Expert consensus documents recommend intraprocedural imaging by means of either transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) or intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) in addition to standard fluoroscopy to guide LAAC. TEE-guided LAAC usually requires general anesthesia. The ICE technique is a "minimalist approach", without general anesthesia, but ICE imaging techniques are not yet simplified and standardize, and the ICE may result in inferior image quality compared with that of TEE. Another "minimalist approach" can be the use of ICE via the esophageal route (ICE-TEE), that jet is validated to identify the presence of LAA thrombi in patients and to perform other procedures. In our cath laboratory ICE-TEE to guide LAAC is used in some complex patients. Indeed, our single center experience suggests that ICE-TEE could be a good alternative imaging technique to guide LAAC procedure without general anesthesia.