Abstract Pressure wire–based fractional flow reserve is considered the standard of reference for evaluation of the ischemic potential of coronary stenoses and the expected benefit from ...revascularization. Accordingly, its application in daily practice or for research purposes has to be as standardized as possible to avoid technical or operator-related artifacts in pressure recordings. This document proposes a standardized way of acquiring, recording, interpreting, and archiving the pressure tracings for daily practice and for the purpose of clinical research involving a core laboratory. Proposed standardized steps enhance the uniformity of clinical practices and data interpretation.
The appropriate duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients at high risk for bleeding after the implantation of a drug-eluting coronary stent remains unclear.
One month after they had undergone ...implantation of a biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent, we randomly assigned patients at high bleeding risk to discontinue dual antiplatelet therapy immediately (abbreviated therapy) or to continue it for at least 2 additional months (standard therapy). The three ranked primary outcomes were net adverse clinical events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding), major adverse cardiac or cerebral events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke), and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding; cumulative incidences were assessed at 335 days. The first two outcomes were assessed for noninferiority in the per-protocol population, and the third outcome for superiority in the intention-to-treat population.
Among the 4434 patients in the per-protocol population, net adverse clinical events occurred in 165 patients (7.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 172 (7.7%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -0.23 percentage points; 95% confidence interval CI, -1.80 to 1.33; P<0.001 for noninferiority). A total of 133 patients (6.1%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and 132 patients (5.9%) in the standard-therapy group had a major adverse cardiac or cerebral event (difference, 0.11 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.29 to 1.51; P = 0.001 for noninferiority). Among the 4579 patients in the intention-to-treat population, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 148 patients (6.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 211 (9.4%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -2.82 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.40 to -1.24; P<0.001 for superiority).
One month of dual antiplatelet therapy was noninferior to the continuation of therapy for at least 2 additional months with regard to the occurrence of net adverse clinical events and major adverse cardiac or cerebral events; abbreviated therapy also resulted in a lower incidence of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. (Funded by Terumo; MASTER DAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03023020.).
Advances in antiplatelet therapies for patients with cardiovascular disease have improved patient outcomes over time, but the challenge of balancing the risks of ischaemia and bleeding remains ...substantial. Moreover, many patients with cardiovascular disease have a residual risk of ischaemic events despite receiving antiplatelet therapy. Therefore, novel strategies are needed to prevent clinical events through mechanisms beyond platelet inhibition and with an acceptable associated risk of bleeding. The advent of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants, which attenuate fibrin formation by selective inhibition of factor Xa or thrombin, has renewed the interest in dual-pathway inhibition strategies that combine an antiplatelet agent with an anticoagulant drug. In this Review, we highlight the emerging pharmacological rationale and clinical development of dual-pathway inhibition strategies for the prevention of atherothrombotic events in patients with different manifestations of cardiovascular disease, such as coronary artery disease, cerebrovascular disease and peripheral artery disease.
Whether the direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban can prevent thromboembolic events after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is unclear.
We randomly assigned 1644 patients without an ...established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR to receive rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg daily (with aspirin at a dose of 75 to 100 mg daily for the first 3 months) (rivaroxaban group) or aspirin at a dose of 75 to 100 mg daily (with clopidogrel at a dose of 75 mg daily for the first 3 months) (antiplatelet group). The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of death or thromboembolic events. The primary safety outcome was major, disabling, or life-threatening bleeding. The trial was terminated prematurely by the data and safety monitoring board because of safety concerns.
After a median of 17 months, death or a first thromboembolic event (intention-to-treat analysis) had occurred in 105 patients in the rivaroxaban group and in 78 patients in the antiplatelet group (incidence rates, 9.8 and 7.2 per 100 person-years, respectively; hazard ratio with rivaroxaban, 1.35; 95% confidence interval CI, 1.01 to 1.81; P = 0.04). Major, disabling, or life-threatening bleeding (intention-to-treat analysis) had occurred in 46 and 31 patients, respectively (4.3 and 2.8 per 100 person-years; hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.95 to 2.37; P = 0.08). A total of 64 deaths occurred in the rivaroxaban group and 38 in the antiplatelet group (5.8 and 3.4 per 100 person-years, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.13 to 2.53).
In patients without an established indication for oral anticoagulation after successful TAVR, a treatment strategy including rivaroxaban at a dose of 10 mg daily was associated with a higher risk of death or thromboembolic complications and a higher risk of bleeding than an antiplatelet-based strategy. (Funded by Bayer and Janssen Pharmaceuticals; GALILEO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02556203.).
Abstract
The Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 initiative revisited the clinical and angiographic end point definitions in coronary device trials, proposed in 2007, to make them more suitable for ...use in clinical trials that include increasingly complex lesion and patient populations and incorporate novel devices such as bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. In addition, recommendations for the incorporation of patient-related outcomes in clinical trials are proposed. Academic Research Consortium-2 is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe, device manufacturers, and European, US, and Asian regulatory bodies. Several in-person meetings were held to discuss the changes that have occurred in the device landscape and in clinical trials and regulatory pathways in the last decade. The consensus-based end point definitions in this document are endorsed by the stakeholders of this document and strongly advocated for clinical trial purposes. This Academic Research Consortium-2 document provides further standardization of end point definitions for coronary device trials, incorporating advances in technology and knowledge. Their use will aid interpretation of trial outcomes and comparison among studies, thus facilitating the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of these devices.
The Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 initiative revisited the clinical and angiographic end point definitions in coronary device trials, proposed in 2007, to make them more suitable for use in ...clinical trials that include increasingly complex lesion and patient populations and incorporate novel devices such as bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. In addition, recommendations for the incorporation of patient-related outcomes in clinical trials are proposed. Academic Research Consortium-2 is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe, device manufacturers, and European, US, and Asian regulatory bodies. Several in-person meetings were held to discuss the changes that have occurred in the device landscape and in clinical trials and regulatory pathways in the last decade. The consensus-based end point definitions in this document are endorsed by the stakeholders of this document and strongly advocated for clinical trial purposes. This Academic Research Consortium-2 document provides further standardization of end point definitions for coronary device trials, incorporating advances in technology and knowledge. Their use will aid interpretation of trial outcomes and comparison among studies, thus facilitating the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of these devices.
Vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) such as warfarin are the most commonly prescribed oral anticoagulants worldwide. However, factors affecting the pharmacokinetics of VKAs, such as food and drugs, can ...cause deviations from their narrow therapeutic window, increasing the bleeding or thrombosis risk and complicating their long-term use. The use of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) offers a safer and more convenient alternative to VKAs. However, it is important to be aware that plasma levels of DOACs are affected by drugs that alter the cell efflux transporter P-glycoprotein and/or cytochrome P450. In addition to these pharmacokinetic-based interactions, DOACs have the potential for pharmacodynamic interaction with antiplatelet agents and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. This is an important consideration in patient groups already at high risk of bleeding, such as patients with renal impairment.
Summary Background In the RESOLUTE All Comers trial, the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the Xience V everolimus-eluting stent for the primary stent-related endpoint of target ...lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation) at 1 year. However, data for long-term safety and efficacy from randomised studies of new generation drug-eluting coronary stents in patients treated in routine clinical practice are scarce. We report the prespecified 2-year clinical outcomes from the RESOLUTE All Comers trial. Methods In 2008, patients with at least one coronary lesion 2·25–4·0 mm in diameter, with greater than 50% stenosis, were randomly assigned to a Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent or a Xience V everolimus-eluting stent at 17 centres in Europe and Israel. Randomisation was by an interactive voice response system stratified by centre. Study investigators were not masked to treatment allocation; but those who did data management and analysis, and patients were masked. There were no restrictions as to the number of vessels or lesions treated, or the number of stents implanted. We assessed prespecified safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all myocardial infarction, all revascularisation) and stent-related composite outcomes. Analyses were by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00617084. Findings 1140 patients were assigned to the zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1152 to the everolimus-eluting stent; 1121 and 1128 patients, respectively, completed 2-year follow-up. The patient-related outcome (231 20·6% zotarolimus vs 231 20·5% everolimus; difference 0·1%, 95% CI −3·2 to 3·5; p=0·958) and stent-related outcome (126 11·2% vs 121 10·7%; difference 0·5%, −2·1 to 3·1; p=0·736) did not differ between groups, although rates of the stent-related outcome were substantially lower than were those for the patient-related outcome. Three patients in each group (0·3%) had very late (after 1 year) stent thrombosis. Interpretation Similar safety and efficacy outcomes were sustained between two new generation drug-eluting stents at 2-year follow-up. The greater number of patient-related than stent-related events in patients with complex clinical and lesion characteristics emphasises that during long-term follow-up, the optimisation of secondary prevention is at least as important as the selection of which new generation drug-eluting stent to implant in a specific lesion. Funding Medtronic (USA).
Summary Background It is unclear whether radial compared with femoral access improves outcomes in unselected patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management. Methods We did a ...randomised, multicentre, superiority trial comparing transradial against transfemoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were about to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to radial or femoral access with a web-based system. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, blocked, and stratified by use of ticagrelor or prasugrel, type of acute coronary syndrome (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, troponin positive or negative, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome), and anticipated use of immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events, defined as major adverse cardiovascular events or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The analysis was by intention to treat. The two-sided α was prespecified at 0·025. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT01433627. Findings We randomly assigned 8404 patients with acute coronary syndrome, with or without ST-segment elevation, to radial (4197) or femoral (4207) access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. 369 (8·8%) patients with radial access had major adverse cardiovascular events, compared with 429 (10·3%) patients with femoral access (rate ratio RR 0·85, 95% CI 0·74–0·99; p=0·0307), non-significant at α of 0·025. 410 (9·8%) patients with radial access had net adverse clinical events compared with 486 (11·7%) patients with femoral access (0·83, 95% CI 0·73–0·96; p=0·0092). The difference was driven by BARC major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1·6% vs 2·3%, RR 0·67, 95% CI 0·49–0·92; p=0·013) and all-cause mortality (1·6% vs 2·2%, RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·53–0·99; p=0·045). Interpretation In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality. Funding The Medicines Company and Terumo.
Abstract Objectives This study sought to investigate the ischemic and bleeding outcomes of patients fulfilling high bleeding risk (HBR) criteria who were randomized to zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor ...Sprint stent (E-ZES) or bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation followed by an abbreviated dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for stable or unstable coronary artery disease. Background DES instead of BMS use remains controversial in HBR patients, in whom long-term DAPT poses safety concerns. Methods The ZEUS (Zotarolimus-Eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates) is a multinational, randomized single-blinded trial that randomized among others, in a stratified manner, 828 patients fulfilling pre-defined clinical or biochemical HBR criteria—including advanced age, indication to oral anticoagulants or other pro-hemorrhagic medications, history of bleeding and known anemia—to receive E-ZES or BMS followed by a protocol-mandated 30-day DAPT regimen. The primary endpoint of the study was the 12-month major adverse cardiovascular event rate, consisting of death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Results Compared with patients without, those with 1 or more HBR criteria had worse outcomes, owing to higher ischemic and bleeding risks. Among HBR patients, major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 22.6% of the E-ZES and 29% of the BMS patients (hazard ratio: 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.57 to 0.98; p = 0.033), driven by lower myocardial infarction (3.5% vs. 10.4%; p < 0.001) and target vessel revascularization (5.9% vs. 11.4%; p = 0.005) rates in the E-ZES arm. The composite of definite or probable stent thrombosis was significantly reduced in E-ZES recipients, whereas bleeding events did not differ between stent groups. Conclusions Among HBR patients with stable or unstable coronary artery disease, E-ZES implantation provides superior efficacy and safety as compared with conventional BMS. (Zotarolimus-Eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates ZEUS; NCT01385319 )
PDF
