Bivalirudin Versus Heparin Monotherapy in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin was not superior to unfractionated heparin in patients with myocardial infarction (MI) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and no planned use of GPI (glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors) in contemporary clinical practice of radial access and potent P2Y12-inhibitors in the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART randomized clinical trial (Bivalirudin Versus Heparin in STEMI and NSTEMI Patients on Modern Antiplatelet Therapy-Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies Registry). METHODS: In this prespecified separately powered subgroup analysis, we included patients with ST-segment-elevation MI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with the primary composite end point of all-cause death, MI, or major bleeding event within 180 days. RESULTS: Among the 6006 patients enrolled in the trial, 3005 patients with ST-segment-elevation MI were randomized to receive bivalirudin or heparin. The mean age was 66.8 years. According to protocol recommendations, 87% were treated with potent oral P2Y12-inhibitors before start of angiography and radial access was used in 90%. GPI was used in 51 (3.4%) and 74 (4.9%) of patients randomized to receive bivalirudin and heparin, respectively. The primary end point occurred in 12.5% (187 of 1501) and 13.0% (196 of 1504; hazard ratio [HR], 0.95 [95% CI, 0.78-1.17], P=0.64) with consistent results in all major subgroups. All-cause death occurred in 3.9% versus 3.9% (HR, 1.00 [0.70-1.45], P=0.98), MI in 1.7% versus 2.2% (HR, 0.76 [0.45-1.28], P=0.30), major bleeding in 8.3% versus 8.0% (HR, 1.04 [0.81-1.33], P=0.78), and definite stent thrombosis in 0.5% versus 1.3% (HR, 0.42 [0.18-0.96], P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-segment-elevation MI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with radial access and receiving current recommended treatments with potent P2Y12-inhibitors rate of the composite of all-cause death, MI, or major bleeding was not lower in those randomized to receive bivalirudin as compared with heparin. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02311231.

Long-term efficacy of drug coated balloons compared with new generation drug-eluting stents for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing drug coated balloons (DCB) with new generation drug-eluting stents (nDES) for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions are lacking. METHODS: From 2009 to 2016, DCB or nDES used for treatment of de novo coronary lesions at our institution were included, in total 1,197 DEB and 6,458 nDES. We evaluated target lesions restenosis (TLR) and definite target lesion thrombosis (TLT). Propensity score modeling were utilized to study adjusted associations between treatment and outcomes. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 901days. DCB patients were older, with higher cardiovascular risk profile. Bailout stenting after DCB was performed in 8% of lesions. The cumulative rate of TLR and TLT was 7.0 vs. 4.9% and 0.2 vs. 0.8% for DCB vs. nDES, respectively. Before adjustment, DCB was associated with a higher risk of TLR [hazard ratio (HR) 1.44; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-1.94] and a non-significantly lower risk of TLT (HR 0.30; 95% CI 0.07-1.24), compared to nDES. In the propensity matched population consisted of 1,197 DCB and 1,197 nDES, treatment with DCB was associated with similar risk for TLR (adjusted HR 1.05; 95% CI 0.72-1.53) but significantly lower risk for TLT (adjusted HR 0.18; 95% CI 0.04-0.82) compared to nDES. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with DCB was associated with a similar risk of TLR and a lower risk of definite TLT compared with nDES. In selected cases, DCB appears as a good alternative to nDES for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions.

Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio versus Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide PCI.

BACKGROUND: The instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) is an index used to assess the severity of coronary-artery stenosis. The index has been tested against fractional flow reserve (FFR) in small trials, and the two measures have been found to have similar diagnostic accuracy. However, studies of clinical outcomes associated with the use of iFR are lacking. We aimed to evaluate whether iFR is noninferior to FFR with respect to the rate of subsequent major adverse cardiac events. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label clinical trial using the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry for enrollment. A total of 2037 participants with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome who had an indication for physiologically guided assessment of coronary-artery stenosis were randomly assigned to undergo revascularization guided by either iFR or FFR. The primary end point was the rate of a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization within 12 months after the procedure. RESULTS: A primary end-point event occurred in 68 of 1012 patients (6.7%) in the iFR group and in 61 of 1007 (6.1%) in the FFR group (difference in event rates, 0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.5 to 2.8; P=0.007 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.58; P=0.53); the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for the difference in event rates fell within the prespecified noninferiority margin of 3.2 percentage points. The results were similar among major subgroups. The rates of myocardial infarction, target-lesion revascularization, restenosis, and stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the two groups. A significantly higher proportion of patients in the FFR group than in the iFR group reported chest discomfort during the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with stable angina or an acute coronary syndrome, an iFR-guided revascularization strategy was noninferior to an FFR-guided revascularization strategy with respect to the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months. (Funded by Philips Volcano; iFR SWEDEHEART ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02166736 .).

Computed tomography coronary angiography in patients with acute myocardial infarction and normal invasive coronary angiography.

BACKGROUND: Three to five percent of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) have normal coronary arteries on invasive coronary angiography (ICA). The aim of this study was to assess the presence and characteristics of atherosclerotic plaques on computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) and describe the clinical characteristics of this group of patients. METHODS: This was a multicentre, prospective, descriptive study on CTCA evaluation in thirty patients fulfilling criteria for AMI and without visible coronary plaques on ICA. CTCA evaluation was performed head to head in consensus by two experienced observers blinded to baseline patient characteristics and ICA results. Analysis of plaque characteristics and plaque effect on the arterial lumen was performed. Coronary segments were visually scored for the presence of plaque. Seventeen segments were differentiated, according to a modified American Heart Association classification. Echocardiography performed according to routine during the initial hospitalisation was retrieved for analysis of wall motion abnormalities and left ventricular systolic function in most patients. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients presented with non ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and five with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Mean age was 60.2 years and 23/30 were women. The prevalence of risk factors of coronary artery disease (CAD) was low. In total, 452 coronary segments were analysed. Eighty percent (24/30) had completely normal coronary arteries and twenty percent (6/30) had coronary atherosclerosis on CTCA. In patients with atherosclerotic plaques, the median number of segments with plaque per patient was one. Echocardiography was normal in 4/22 patients based on normal global longitudinal strain (GLS) and normal wall motion score index (WMSI); 4/22 patients had normal GLS with pathological WMSI; 3/22 patients had pathological GLS and normal WMSI; 11/22 patients had pathological GLS and WMSI and among them we could identify 5 patients with a Takotsubo pattern on echo. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a diagnosis of AMI, 80 % of patients with normal ICA showed no coronary plaques on CTCA. The remaining 20 % had only minimal non-obstructive atherosclerosis. Patients fulfilling clinical criteria for AMI but with completely normal ICA need further evaluation, suggestively with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).