Ten-Year Outcome of Recanalization or Medical Therapy for Concomitant Chronic Total Occlusion After Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: The EXPLORE (Evaluating Xience and Left Ventricular Function in PCI on Occlusions After STEMI) trial was the first and only randomized trial investigating chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) early after primary PCI for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, compared with medical therapy for the CTO. We performed a 10-year follow-up of EXPLORE to investigate long-term safety and clinical impact of CTO PCI after ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, compared with no-CTO PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: In EXPLORE, 302 patients post-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction with concurrent CTO were randomized to CTO PCI within ≈1 week or no-CTO PCI. We performed an extended clinical follow-up for the primary end point of major adverse cardiac events, consisting of cardiovascular death, coronary artery bypass grafting, or myocardial infarction. Secondary end points included all-cause death, angina, and dyspnea. Median follow-up was 10 years (interquartile range, 8-11 years). The primary end point occurred in 25% of patients with CTO PCI and in 24% of patients with no-CTO PCI (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.70-1.76]). Cardiovascular mortality was higher in the CTO PCI group (HR, 2.09 [95% CI, 1.10-2.50]), but all-cause death was similar (HR, 1.53 [95% CI, 0.93-2.50]). Dyspnea relief was more frequent after CTO PCI (83% versus 65%, P=0.005), with no significant difference in angina. CONCLUSIONS: This 10-year follow-up of patients post-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction randomized to CTO PCI or no-CTO PCI demonstrated no clinical benefit of CTO PCI in major adverse cardiac events or overall mortality. However, CTO PCI was associated with a higher cardiovascular mortality compared with no-CTO PCI. Our long-term data support a careful weighing of effective symptom relief against an elevated cardiovascular mortality risk in CTO PCI decisions. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.trialregister.nl; Unique identifier: NTR1108.

Impact of a Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion on the Incidence of Appropriate Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Shocks and Mortality: A Substudy of the Dutch Outcome in ICD Therapy (DO-IT)) Registry.

BACKGROUND: Chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) substantially increase the risk for sudden cardiac death. Among patients with chronic ischemic heart disease at risk for sudden cardiac death, an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the favored therapy for primary prevention of sudden cardiac death. This study sought to investigate the impact of CTOs on the risk for appropriate ICD shocks and mortality within a nationwide prospective cohort. METHODS AND RESULTS: This is a subanalysis of the nationwide Dutch-Outcome in ICD Therapy (DO-IT) registry of primary prevention ICD recipients in The Netherlands between September 2014 and June 2016 (n=1442). We identified patients with chronic ischemic heart disease (n=663) and assessed available coronary angiograms for CTO presence (n=415). Patients with revascularized CTOs were excluded (n=79). The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shocks. Clinical follow-up was conducted for at least 2 years. A total of 336 patients were included, with an average age of 67±9 years, and 20.5% was female (n=69). An unrevascularized CTO was identified in 110 patients (32.7%). During a median follow-up period of 27 months (interquartile range, 24-32), the primary end point occurred in 21.1% of patients with CTO (n=23) compared with 11.9% in patients without CTO (n=27; P=0.034). Corrected for baseline characteristics including left ventricular ejection fraction, and the presence of a CTO was an independent predictor for the primary end point (hazard ratio, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.03-3.22]; P=0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Within this nationwide prospective registry of primary prevention ICD recipients, the presence of an unrevascularized CTO was an independent predictor for the composite outcome of all-cause mortality and appropriate ICD shocks.

Correction: van Veelen et al. First-in-Human Drug-Eluting Balloon Treatment of Vulnerable Lipid-Rich Plaques: Rationale and Design of the DEBuT-LRP Study. J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 5807.

In the original publication [...].

Native coronary artery or bypass graft percutaneous coronary intervention in patients after previous coronary artery bypass surgery: A large nationwide analysis from the Netherlands Heart Registration.

BACKGROUND: Patients with previous coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG) who require repeat revascularization frequently undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to identify factors associated with the decision to intervene on the native vessel versus a bypass graft and investigate their outcomes in a large nationwide prospective registry. METHODS: We identified patients who underwent PCI with a history of prior CABG from the Netherlands Heart Registration between 2017 and 2021 and stratified them by isolated native vessel PCI versus PCI including at least one venous- or arterial graft. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was a composite of all-cause death and target vessel revascularization (TVR) at one-year post PCI. The key secondary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and TVR at 30 days. RESULTS: Out of 154,146 patients who underwent PCI, 12,822 (8.3%) had a prior CABG. Isolated native vessel PCI was most frequently performed (75.2%), while an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) presentation was most strongly associated with graft interventions. The primary outcome of MACE at one-year post PCI occurred more frequently in interventions including grafts compared with native vessels alone (19.7% vs. 14.3%; adjOR 1.267; 95% CI 1.101-1.457); p < 0.001) driven by TVR. There was however no difference in mortality or the key secondary endpoint between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide prospective registry, ACS presentation was strongly associated with bypass graft PCI. At one year after PCI, interventions including bypass grafts had a higher composite of MACE compared with isolated native vessel interventions.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of early aortic valve replacement versus conservative therapy in patients with asymptomatic aortic valve stenosis with preserved left ventricle systolic function.

BACKGROUND: A quarter of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) were asymptomatic, and only a third of them survived at the end of 4 years. Only a select subset of these patients was recommended for aortic valve replacement (AVR) by the current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines. We intended to study the effect of early AVR (eAVR) in this subset of asymptomatic patients with preserved left ventricle function. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched PubMed and Embase for randomised and observational studies comparing the effect of eAVR versus conservative therapy in patients with severe, asymptomatic AS and normal left ventricular function. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were composite major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (study defined), myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, cardiac death, sudden death, the development of symptoms, heart failure hospitalisations and major bleeding. We used GRADEPro to assess the certainty of the evidence. In the randomised controlled trial (RCT) only analysis, we found no significant difference in all-cause mortality between the early aortic intervention group versus the conservative arm (CA) (incidence rate ratio, IRR (CI): 0.5 (0.2 to 1.1), I2=31%, p=0.09). However, in the overall cohort, we found mortality benefit for eAVR over CA (IRR (CI): 0.4 (0.3 to 0.7), I2=84%, p<0.01). There were significantly lower MACE, cardiac death, sudden death, development of symptoms and heart failure hospitalisations in the eAVR group. We noticed no difference in MI, stroke and major bleeding. CONCLUSION: We conclude that there is no reduction in all-cause mortality in the eAVR arm in patients with asymptomatic AS with preserved ejection fraction. However, eAVR reduces heart failure related hospitalisations and death or heart failure hospitalisations. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022306132.

Corrigendum: The safety and efficacy of balloon-expandable versus self-expanding trans-catheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2023.1130354.].

One-year follow-up of patients treated with single antiplatelet therapy directly after percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.

Graphical AbstractClinical outcomes and treatment adherence during 12 months follow-up. *Second bleeding event in same patient. PCI, percutaneous coronary intervention; TVR, target vessel revascularization.

First-in-Human Drug-Eluting Balloon Treatment of Vulnerable Lipid-Rich Plaques: Rationale and Design of the DEBuT-LRP Study.

Patients with non-obstructive lipid-rich plaques (LRPs) on combined intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) are at high risk for future events. Local pre-emptive percutaneous treatment of LRPs with a paclitaxel-eluting drug-coated balloon (PE-DCB) may be a novel therapeutic strategy to prevent future adverse coronary events without leaving behind permanent coronary implants. In this pilot study, we aim to investigate the safety and feasibility of pre-emptive treatment with a PE-DCB of non-culprit non-obstructive LRPs by evaluating the change in maximum lipid core burden in a 4 mm segment (maxLCBImm4) after 9 months of follow up. Therefore, patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome underwent 3-vessel IVUS-NIRS after treatment of the culprit lesion to identify additional non-obstructive non-culprit LRPs, which were subsequently treated with PE-DCB sized 1:1 to the lumen. We enrolled 45 patients of whom 20 patients (44%) with a non-culprit LRP were treated with PE-DCB. After 9 months, repeat coronary angiography with IVUS-NIRS will be performed. The primary endpoint at 9 months is the change in maxLCBImm4 in PE-DCB-treated LRPs. Secondary endpoints include clinical adverse events and IVUS-derived parameters such as plaque burden and luminal area. Clinical follow-up will continue until 1 year after enrollment. In conclusion, this first-in-human study will investigate the safety and feasibility of targeted pre-emptive PE-DCB treatment of LRPs to promote stabilization of vulnerable coronary plaque at risk for developing future adverse events.

Less bleeding by omitting aspirin in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: Rationale and design of the LEGACY study.

BACKGROUND: Early aspirin withdrawal, also known as P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy, following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) can reduce bleeding without a trade-off in efficacy. Still the average daily bleeding risk is highest during the first months and it remains unclear if aspirin can be omitted immediately following PCI. METHODS: The LEGACY study is an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of immediate P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy versus dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 12 months in 3,090 patients. Patients are randomized immediately following successful PCI for NSTE-ACS to 75-100 mg aspirin once daily versus no aspirin. The primary hypothesis is that immediately omitting aspirin is superior to DAPT with respect to major or minor bleeding defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding, while maintaining noninferiority for the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction and stroke compared to DAPT. CONCLUSIONS: The LEGACY study is the first randomized study that is specifically designed to evaluate the impact of immediately omitting aspirin, and thus treating patients with P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy, as compared to DAPT for 12 months on bleeding and ischemic events within 12 months following PCI for NSTE-ACS.

The safety and efficacy of balloon-expandable versus self-expanding trans-catheter aortic valve replacement in high-risk patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis.

Aim: Transfemoral Trans-catheter Aortic Valve Replacement (TF-TAVR) is a safe and effective therapy compared with surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients across all risk profiles using balloon-expandable valves (BEV) and self-expanding valves (SEV). Our aim was to compare safety and efficacy of BEV vs. SEV in high-risk patients undergoing TF-TAVR. Methods and results: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Clinicaltrials.gov, Scopus, and Web of sciences for studies on patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. Primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes defined by Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC-2) criteria were also examined. Six studies with 2,935 patients (1,439 to BEV and 1,496 to SEV) were included. BEV was associated with lower risk of all-cause mortality (2.2% vs. 4.5%; RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.82; p < 0.006) and cardiovascular mortality [(2.5% vs. 4.3%; RR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.32-0.90; p = 0.01) at 30 days compared with SEV. Implantation of more than one valve per procedure (0.78% vs. 5.11%; RR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.31; p < 0.00001), and moderate/severe AR/PVL (2.5% vs. 9.01%; RR: 0.3; 95% CI: 0.17-0.48); p < 0.00001) were also lower in the BEV arm. Conclusion: BEV TAVR is associated with reduced all-cause mortality (High level of GRADE evidence), cardiovascular mortality (very low level) at 30 days compared with SEV TAVR in high surgical risk patients. Data are necessary to determine if the difference in outcomes persists in longer-term and if the same effects are seen in lower-risk patients. Systematic Review Registration: identifier, CRD42020181190.

Impact of the COVID-19 Outbreak on the Treatment of Myocardial Infarction Patients.

Purpose of review: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to an overburdened healthcare system. While an increased rate of ACS is expected due to the pro-thrombotic state of COVID patients, observed ACS incidence and admission rates were paradoxically decreased during the (first wave of the) pandemic. In this narrative review, we will discuss potential reasons for this decrease in ACS incidence. Furthermore, we will discuss ACS management during the COVID-19 pandemic, and we will discuss outcomes in ACS. Recent findings: A reluctance to seek medical contact (in order not to further overburden the health system or due to fear of being infected with COVID-19 while in hospital) and unavailability of medical services seem to be important factors. This may have led to an increased symptom onset to first medical contact time and an increased rate of out-of-hospital cardiac arrests. A trend towards less invasive management was observed (less invasive coronary angiography in NSTEMI patients and more "fibrinolysis-first" in STEMI patients), although a large variation was observed with some centers having a relative increase in early invasive management. Patients with ACS and concomitant COVID-19 infection have worse outcomes compared to ACS patients without COVID-19 infection. All of the above led to worse clinical outcomes in patients presenting with ACS during the COVID-19 pandemic. Interestingly, staffing and hospital bed shortages led to experimentation with very early discharge (24 h after primary PCI) in low-risk STEMI patients which had a very good prognosis and resulted in significant shorter hospital duration. Summary: During the COVID-19 pandemic, ACS incidence and admission rates were decreased, symptom onset to first medical contact time prolonged, and out-of-hospital rates increased. A trend towards less invasive management was observed. Patients presenting with ACS during the COVID-19 pandemic had a worse outcome. On the other hand, experimental very early discharge in low-risk patients may relieve the healthcare system. Such initiatives, and strategies to lower the reluctance of patients with ACS symptoms to seek medical help, are vital to improve prognosis in ACS patients in future pandemics.

Coronary Stent Infections - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Coronary stent infection (CSI) represents a rare but potentially fatal complication of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). A systematic review and meta-analysis of published reports was performed to profile CSI and its management strategies. METHODS: Online database searches were performed using MeSH and keywords. The primary outcome of the study was in-hospital mortality. A unique Artificial Intelligence-based predictive model was developed for need for delayed surgery and probability of survival on medical therapy alone. RESULTS: A total of 79 subjects were included in the study. Twenty eight (35.0 %) patients had type 2 diabetes mellitus. Subjects most commonly reported symptoms within the first week of the procedure (43 %). Fever was the most common initial symptom (72 %). Thirty eight percent of patients presented with acute coronary syndrome. The presence of mycotic aneurysms was described in 62 % of patients. Staphylococcus species were the most common (65 %) isolated organism. The primary outcome of in-hospital mortality was seen in a total of 24 patients out of 79 (30.3 %). A comparative univariate analysis comparing those encountering in-hospital mortality versus otherwise revealed the presence of structural heart disease (83 % mortality vs 17 % survival, p = 0.009), and the presence of non ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (11 % mortality vs 88 % survival, p = 0.03), to be a statistically significant factor predicting in-hospital mortality. In an analysis between patients with successful versus failed initial medical therapy, patients from private teaching hospitals (80.0 % vs 20.0 %; p = 0.01, n = 10) had a higher survival with medical therapy alone. CONCLUSION: CSI is a highly under-studied disease entity with largely unknown risk factors and clinical outcomes. Larger studies are needed to further define the characteristics of CSI. (PROSPERO ID CRD42021216031).

Single antiplatelet therapy directly after percutaneous coronary intervention in non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients: the OPTICA study.

BACKGROUND: Early P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy has emerged as a promising alternative to 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AIMS: In this single-arm pilot study, we evaluated the feasibility and safety of ticagrelor or prasugrel monotherapy directly following PCI in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS). METHODS: Patients received a loading dose of ticagrelor or prasugrel before undergoing platelet function testing and subsequent PCI using new-generation drug-eluting stents. The stent result was adjudicated with optical coherence tomography in the first 35 patients. Ticagrelor or prasugrel monotherapy was continued for 12 months. The primary ischaemic endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or stroke within 6 months. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding within 6 months. RESULTS: From March 2021 to March 2022, 125 patients were enrolled, of whom 75 ultimately met all in- and exclusion criteria (mean age 64.5 years, 29.3% women). Overall, 70 out of 75 (93.3%) patients were treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel monotherapy directly following PCI. The primary ischaemic endpoint occurred in 3 (4.0%) patients within 6 months. No cases of stent thrombosis or spontaneous myocardial infarction occurred. The primary bleeding endpoint occurred in 7 (9.3%) patients within 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides first-in-human evidence that P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy directly following PCI for NSTE-ACS is feasible, without any overt safety concerns, and highlights the need for randomised controlled trials comparing direct P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy with the current standard of care.

Meta-Analysis Comparing Fractional Flow Reserve and Angiography-Guided Complete Revascularization of Nonculprit Artery for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

This study aimed to compare complete revascularization (CR) guided by angiography with a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided strategy in patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD). CR is preferred to culprit-only revascularization for patients with STEMI and MVD. However, whether FFR-guided CR is superior to angiography-guided CR is unclear in patients presenting with STEMI who have MVD. Randomized controlled trials comparing CR with an FFR- or angiography-guided strategy to culprit-only revascularization in patients with STEMI and MVD were systematically identified. A random-effects network meta-analysis was performed comparing clinical outcomes in the 3 arms. A total of 13 studies with a total of 8,927 patients were included in our analysis. Compared with culprit-only revascularization, angiography-guided CR was associated with a significantly decreased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.82), all-cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.97), and cardiovascular death (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.85) but FFR-guided CR was not (MI: HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.12; cardiovascular death: HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.24; all-cause death: HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.18). The network meta-analysis comparison of angiography- versus FFR-guided CR showed an HR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.50 to 1.11) for all-cause death and an HR of 0.71 (95% CI 0.54 to 1.17) for MI. In conclusion, for patients with MVD presenting with STEMI, angiography-guided CR may provide additional benefits compared with FFR-guided CR.

P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy after coronary stenting: are all P2Y12-inhibitors equal?

INTRODUCTION: P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy following 1-3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) reduces (major) bleeding without an apparent increase in ischemic events and has therefore emerged as an alternative to 6-12 months of DAPT following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there are important differences between the available P2Y12-inhibitors (clopidogrel, prasugrel, and ticagrelor) as agents of choice for P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy. AREAS COVERED: This review critically appraises the evidence for P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy after PCI using either clopidogrel, prasugrel, or ticagrelor. Furthermore, we discuss ongoing trials and future directions for research. EXPERT OPINION: P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy following 1-3 months of DAPT is an alternative to 6-12 months of DAPT following PCI. Ticagrelor may be considered the current preferred option due to its reliable effect on platelet reactivity and its predominant use in clinical trials. Prasugrel could serve as a useful substitute for those not tolerating ticagrelor, but more research into prasugrel monotherapy is warranted. Alternatively, clopidogrel can be used, although there are concerns of high platelet reactivity, especially when genotyping and/or platelet function testing are not used. Future research will need to address the minimal duration of DAPT before switching to P2Y12-inhibitor monotherapy and what the optimal antithrombotic therapy beyond 12 months is.

Ticagrelor with and without aspirin in patients with a prior coronary artery bypass graft undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the TWILIGHT-CABG study.

BACKGROUND: Prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are often older and present with multiple comorbidities. Ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has emerged as an effective bleeding-avoidance strategy among high-risk patients. AIMS: We aimed to examine the effects of ticagrelor with or without aspirin in prior CABG patients undergoing PCI within the TWILIGHT trial. METHODS: After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were randomised to either aspirin or placebo, in addition to ticagrelor, for 12 months and compared by prior CABG status. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. RESULTS: Out of 7,119 patients, a total of 703 (10.8%) patients had prior CABG within the randomised cohort. Prior CABG patients had more comorbidities and a higher incidence of BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding and death, MI or stroke at 1 year after randomisation, compared with patients without prior CABG. Ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with significantly less BARC 2, 3, or 5 bleeding among prior CABG patients compared with DAPT (4.9% vs 9.6%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.28 to 0.90; pinteraction=0.676) and similar rates of death, MI or stroke (10.0% vs 8.7%, HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.87; pinteraction=0.484). When comparing target vessel type, treatment effects were consistent among graft- and native-vessel interventions. CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients with prior CABG, ticagrelor monotherapy reduced bleeding without compromising ischaemic outcomes compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin.