Monotherapy with a P2Y
inhibitor after a minimum period of dual antiplatelet therapy is an emerging approach to reduce the risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
In a ...double-blind trial, we examined the effect of ticagrelor alone as compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin with regard to clinically relevant bleeding among patients who were at high risk for bleeding or an ischemic event and had undergone PCI. After 3 months of treatment with ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients who had not had a major bleeding event or ischemic event continued to take ticagrelor and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary end point was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. We also evaluated the composite end point of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, using a noninferiority hypothesis with an absolute margin of 1.6 percentage points.
We enrolled 9006 patients, and 7119 underwent randomization after 3 months. Between randomization and 1 year, the incidence of the primary end point was 4.0% among patients randomly assigned to receive ticagrelor plus placebo and 7.1% among patients assigned to receive ticagrelor plus aspirin (hazard ratio, 0.56; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.45 to 0.68; P<0.001). The difference in risk between the groups was similar for BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (incidence, 1.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus placebo and 2.0% among patients receiving ticagrelor plus aspirin; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.74). The incidence of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was 3.9% in both groups (difference, -0.06 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.97 to 0.84; hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.25; P<0.001 for noninferiority).
Among high-risk patients who underwent PCI and completed 3 months of dual antiplatelet therapy, ticagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower incidence of clinically relevant bleeding than ticagrelor plus aspirin, with no higher risk of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by AstraZeneca; TWILIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02270242.).
Clinical trials that have assessed the effect of revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease have routinely excluded those with advanced chronic kidney disease.
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.
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).
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.).
Conflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome.
We randomly ...assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event). The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events.
The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (10.3% and 10.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.81 to 1.09; P=0.44), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (11.2% and 12.4%, respectively; relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.03; P=0.12). Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (11.0% and 11.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P=0.34).
In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin. The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion. (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01433627.).
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.
Summary Background The relative safety of drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents, especially with respect to stent thrombosis, continues to be debated. In view of the overall low frequency of ...stent thrombosis, large sample sizes are needed to accurately estimate treatment differences between stents. We compared the risk of thrombosis between bare-metal and drug-eluting stents. Methods For this network meta-analysis, randomised controlled trials comparing different drug-eluting stents or drug-eluting with bare-metal stents currently approved in the USA were identified through Medline, Embase, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of international meetings. Information about study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted. Findings 49 trials including 50 844 patients randomly assigned to treatment groups were analysed. 1-year definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower with cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents (CoCr-EES) than with bare-metal stents (odds ratio OR 0·23, 95% CI 0·13–0·41). The significant difference in stent thrombosis between CoCr-EES and bare-metal stents was evident as early as 30 days (OR 0·21, 95% CI 0·11–0·42) and was also significant between 31 days and 1 year (OR 0·27, 95% CI 0·08–0·74). CoCr-EES were also associated with significantly lower rates of 1-year definite stent thrombosis compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (OR 0·28, 95% CI 0·16–0·48), permanent polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·41, 95% CI 0·24–0·70), phosphorylcholine-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·21, 95% CI 0·10–0·44), and Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (OR 0·14, 95% CI 0·03–0·47). At 2-year follow-up, CoCr-EES were still associated with significantly lower rates of definite stent thrombosis than were bare-metal (OR 0·35, 95% CI 0·17–0·69) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (OR 0·34, 95% CI 0·19–0·62). No other drug-eluting stent had lower definite thrombosis rates compared with bare-metal stents at 2-year follow-up. Interpretation In randomised studies completed to date, CoCr-EES has the lowest rate of stent thrombosis within 2 years of implantation. The finding that CoCr-EES also reduced stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents, if confirmed in future randomised trials, represents a paradigm shift. Funding The Cardiovascular Research Foundation.
Abstract Background The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients at high risk of bleeding or thrombosis has not been prospectively studied; limited data are available in patients who have a low ...restenosis risk. Objectives This study sought to compare a hydrophilic polymer-based, second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with a unique drug fast-release profile versus bare-metal stents (BMS) under similar durations of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Methods We randomly assigned 1,606 patients with stable or unstable symptoms, and who on the basis of thrombotic bleeding or restenosis risk criteria, qualified as uncertain candidates for DES, to receive ZES or BMS. DAPT duration was on the basis of patient characteristics, rather than stent characteristics, and allowed for a personalized 1-month dual antiplatelet regimen. The primary endpoint was the risk of 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which included death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results Median DAPT duration was 32 days (interquartile range IQR: 30 to 180 days) and did not differ between the groups. In the ZES group, 140 patients (17.5%) reached the primary endpoint, compared with 178 patients (22.1%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio: 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.61 to 0.95; p = 0.011) as a result of lower MI (2.9% vs. 8.1%; p < 0.001) and TVR rates (5.9% vs.10.7%; p = 0.001) in the ZES group. Definite or probable stent thrombosis was also significantly reduced in ZES recipients (2.0% vs. 4.1%; p = 0.019). Conclusions Compared with BMS, DES implantation using a stent with a biocompatible polymer and fast drug-eluting characteristics, combined with an abbreviated, tailored DAPT regimen, resulted in a lower risk of 1-year MACE in uncertain candidates for DES implantation. (Zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates ZEUS Study; NCT01385319 )
The role of statins in the prevention of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CIAKI) is controversial.
First, we investigated the in vivo effects of atorvastatin on CIAKI. Patients with chronic ...kidney disease enrolled in the Novel Approaches for Preventing or Limiting Events (NAPLES) II trial were randomly assigned to (1) the atorvastatin group (80 mg within 24 hours before contrast media CM exposure; n=202) or (2) the control group (n=208). All patients received a high dose of N-acetylcysteine and sodium bicarbonate solution. Second, we investigated the in vitro effects of atorvastatin pretreatment on CM-mediated modifications of intracellular pathways leading to apoptosis or survival in renal tubular cells. CIAKI (ie, an increase >10% of serum cystatin C concentration within 24 hours after CM exposure) occurred in 9 of 202 patients in the atorvastatin group (4.5%) and in 37 of 208 patients in the control group (17.8%) (P=0.005; odds ratio=0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.69). CIAKI rate was lower in the atorvastatin group in both diabetics and nondiabetics and in patients with moderate chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate, 31-60 mL/min per 1.73 m(2)). In the in vitro model, pretreatment with atorvastatin (1) prevented CM-induced renal cell apoptosis by reducing stress kinases activation and (2) restored the survival signals (mediated by Akt and ERK pathways).
A single high loading dose of atorvastatin administered within 24 hours before CM exposure is effective in reducing the rate of CIAKI. This beneficial effect is observed only in patients at low to medium risk.
Cystatin C (CyC) is more sensitive than serum creatinine (sCr) to rapidly detect acute changes in renal function.
We measured CyC together with sCr in 410 consecutive patients with chronic kidney ...disease undergoing either coronary and/or peripheral angiography and/or angioplasty. sCr was assessed at baseline and 24 and 48 hours after contrast media exposure. CyC was assessed at baseline and at 24 hours. Major adverse events (including death of any cause and dialysis) at 12 months were assessed. At 48 hours after contrast media exposure, contrast-induced acute kidney injury (defined as a sCr increase > or =0.3 mg/dL) occurred in 34 patients (8.2%). A CyC increase concentration > or =10% at 24 hours after contrast media exposure was detected in 87 patients (21.2%). This was the best CyC cutoff for the early identification of patients at risk for contrast-induced acute kidney injury (negative predictive value=100%; positive predictive value=39.1%). According to the defined cutoffs (that is, increase in CyC > or =10% and sCr > or =0.3 mg/dL), major adverse events occurred in 16 of 297 patients (5.4%) without any cutoffs satisfied (group 1), in 9 of 49 patients (18.4%) with only a CyC increase > or =10% (group 2), and in 9 of 31 patients (29%) with both cutoffs satisfied (group 3). By logistic regression analysis, the independent predictors of major adverse events at 1 year were group 2 (odds ratio=2.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.17 to 5.41; P=0.02), group 3 (odds ratio=4.45; 95% confidence interval, 1.72 to 11.54; P=0.002), and baseline glomerular filtration rate (odds ratio=0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 0.95; P<0.001).
In patients with chronic kidney disease, CyC seems to be a reliable marker for the early diagnosis and prognosis of contrast-induced acute kidney injury.
The need for prolonged aspirin and thienopyridine therapy and the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) remain as drawbacks associated with drug-eluting stents.
A prospective observational cohort study was ...conducted between June 2002 and January 2004 on 3021 patients consecutively and successfully treated in 5389 lesions with drug-eluting stents. Detailed patient information was collected on antiplatelet therapy. We analyzed the incidence of ST throughout the 18-month follow-up period and its relationship with thienopyridine therapy. ST occurred in 58 patients (1.9%) at 18 months. Forty-two patients (1.4%) experienced the event within 6 months of stent implantation. Acute myocardial infarction (fatal or nonfatal) occurred in 46 patients (79%) and death in 23 patients (39%) with ST. The median interval from discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy to ST was 13.5 days (interquartile range 5.2 to 25.7 days) for the first 6 months and 90 days (interquartile range 30 to 365 days) between 6 and 18 months. On multivariable analysis, the strongest predictor for ST within 6 months of stenting was discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy (hazard ratio, 13.74; 95% CI, 4.04 to 46.68; P<0.001). Thienopyridine discontinuation after 6 months did not predict the occurrence of ST (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.30 to 2.98; P=0.92).
Discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy was the major determinant of ST within the first 6 months, but insufficient information is available to determine whether there is benefit in continuing a thienopyridine beyond 6 months.
Aims
In acute heart failure (AHF), relationships between changes in B‐type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and worsening renal function (WRF) and its prognostic implications have not been fully determined. ...We investigated the relationship between WRF and a decrease in BNP with in‐hospital and 1‐year mortality in AHF.
Methods and results
The Acute Kidney Injury NGAL Evaluation of Symptomatic heart faIlure Study (AKINESIS) was a prospective, international, multicentre study of AHF patients. Severe WRF (sWRF) was a sustained increase of ≥44.2 μmol/L (0.5 mg/dL) or ≥50% in creatinine, non‐severe WRF (nsWRF) was a non‐sustained increase of ≥26.5 μmol/L (0.3 mg/dL) or ≥50% in creatinine, and WRF with clinical deterioration was nsWRF with renal replacement therapy, inotrope use, or mechanical ventilation. Decreased BNP was defined as a ≥30% reduction in the last measured BNP compared to admission BNP. Among 814 patients, the incidence of WRF was not different between patients with or without decreased BNP (nsWRF: 33% vs. 31%, P = 0.549; sWRF: 11% vs. 9%, P = 0.551; WRF with clinical deterioration: 8% vs. 10%, P = 0.425). Decreased BNP was associated with better in‐hospital and 1‐year mortality regardless of WRF, while WRF was associated with worse outcomes only in patients without decreased BNP. In multivariate Cox regression analysis, decreased BNP, sWRF, and WRF with clinical deterioration were significantly associated with 1‐year mortality.
Conclusions
Decreased BNP was associated with better in‐hospital and long‐term outcomes. WRF was only associated with adverse outcomes in patients without decreased BNP.
PDF
