The options for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism in patients with patent foramen ovale are administration of antithrombotic medications or percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ...ovale. We investigated whether closure is superior to medical therapy.
We performed a multicenter, superiority trial in 29 centers in Europe, Canada, Brazil, and Australia in which the assessors of end points were unaware of the study-group assignments. Patients with a patent foramen ovale and ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or a peripheral thromboembolic event were randomly assigned to undergo closure of the patent foramen ovale with the Amplatzer PFO Occluder or to receive medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal stroke, TIA, or peripheral embolism. Analysis was performed on data for the intention-to-treat population.
The mean duration of follow-up was 4.1 years in the closure group and 4.0 years in the medical-therapy group. The primary end point occurred in 7 of the 204 patients (3.4%) in the closure group and in 11 of the 210 patients (5.2%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for closure vs. medical therapy, 0.63; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.24 to 1.62; P=0.34). Nonfatal stroke occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the closure group and 5 patients (2.4%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.72; P=0.14), and TIA occurred in 5 patients (2.5%) and 7 patients (3.3%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.23 to 2.24; P=0.56).
Closure of a patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism did not result in a significant reduction in the risk of recurrent embolic events or death as compared with medical therapy. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00166257.).
Summary Stable coronary artery disease is the most common clinical manifestation of ischaemic heart disease and a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Myocardial revascularisation is a mainstay in ...the treatment of symptomatic patients or those with ischaemia-producing coronary lesions, and reduces ischaemia to a greater extent than medical treatment. Documentation of ischaemia and plaque burden is fundamental in the risk stratification of patients with stable coronary artery disease, and several invasive and non-invasive techniques are available (eg, fractional flow reserve or intravascular ultrasound) or being validated (eg, instantaneous wave-free ratio and optical coherence tomography). The use of new-generation drug-eluting stents and arterial conduits greatly improve clinical outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). PCI is feasible, safe, and effective in many patients with stable coronary artery disease who remain symptomatic despite medical treatment. In patients with multivessel and left main coronary artery disease, the decision between PCI or CABG is guided by the local Heart Team (team of different cardiovascular specialists, including non-invasive and invasive cardiologists, and cardiac surgeons), who carefully judge the possible benefits and risks inherent to PCI and CABG. In specific subsets, such as patients with diabetes and advanced, multivessel coronary artery disease, CABG remains the standard of care in view of improved protection against recurrent ischaemic adverse events.
Summary Background Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor prevents ischaemic events after coronary stenting, but increases bleeding. Guidelines support weighting ...bleeding risk before the selection of treatment duration, but no standardised tool exists for this purpose. Methods A total of 14 963 patients treated with DAPT after coronary stenting—largely consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel and without indication to oral anticoagulation—were pooled at a single-patient level from eight multicentre randomised clinical trials with independent adjudication of events. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified predictors of out-of-hospital Thrombosis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding stratified by trial, and developed a numerical bleeding risk score. The predictive performance of the novel score was assessed in the derivation cohort and validated in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial (n=8595) and BernPCI registry (n=6172). The novel score was assessed within patients randomised to different DAPT durations (n=10 081) to identify the effect on bleeding and ischaemia of a long (12–24 months) or short (3–6 months) treatment in relation to baseline bleeding risk. Findings The PRECISE-DAPT score (age, creatinine clearance, haemoglobin, white-blood-cell count, and previous spontaneous bleeding) showed a c-index for out-of-hospital TIMI major or minor bleeding of 0·73 (95% CI 0·61–0·85) in the derivation cohort, and 0·70 (0·65–0·74) in the PLATO trial validation cohort and 0·66 (0·61–0·71) in the BernPCI registry validation cohort. A longer DAPT duration significantly increased bleeding in patients at high risk (score ≥25), but not in those with lower risk profiles (pinteraction =0·007), and exerted a significant ischaemic benefit only in this latter group. Interpretation The PRECISE-DAPT score is a simple five-item risk score, which provides a standardised tool for the prediction of out-of-hospital bleeding during DAPT. In the context of a comprehensive clinical evaluation process, this tool can support clinical decision making for treatment duration. Funding None.
Among patients with acute myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, and multivessel coronary artery disease, the risk of a composite of death from any cause or severe renal failure leading to ...renal-replacement therapy at 30 days was found to be lower with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the culprit lesion only than with immediate multivessel PCI. We evaluated clinical outcomes at 1 year.
We randomly assigned 706 patients to either culprit-lesion-only PCI or immediate multivessel PCI. The results for the primary end point of death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days have been reported previously. Prespecified secondary end points at 1 year included death from any cause, recurrent myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, rehospitalization for congestive heart failure, the composite of death or recurrent infarction, and the composite of death, recurrent infarction, or rehospitalization for heart failure.
As reported previously, at 30 days, the primary end point had occurred in 45.9% of the patients in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group and in 55.4% in the multivessel PCI group (P=0.01). At 1 year, death had occurred in 172 of 344 patients (50.0%) in the culprit-lesion-only PCI group and in 194 of 341 patients (56.9%) in the multivessel PCI group (relative risk, 0.88; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.76 to 1.01). The rate of recurrent infarction was 1.7% with culprit-lesion-only PCI and 2.1% with multivessel PCI (relative risk, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.29 to 2.50), and the rate of a composite of death or recurrent infarction was 50.9% and 58.4%, respectively (relative risk, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.00). Repeat revascularization occurred more frequently with culprit-lesion-only PCI than with multivessel PCI (in 32.3% of the patients vs. 9.4%; relative risk, 3.44; 95% CI, 2.39 to 4.95), as did rehospitalization for heart failure (5.2% vs. 1.2%; relative risk, 4.46; 95% CI, 1.53 to 13.04).
Among patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock, the risk of death or renal-replacement therapy at 30 days was lower with culprit-lesion-only PCI than with immediate multivessel PCI, and mortality did not differ significantly between the two groups at 1 year of follow-up. (Funded by the European Union Seventh Framework Program and others; CULPRIT-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01927549 .).
Abstract
Aims
Owing to new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in low-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, we compared the collective safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic ...valve implantation (TAVI) vs. surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) across the entire spectrum of surgical risk patients.
Methods and results
The meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016037273). We identified RCTs comparing TAVI with SAVR in patients with severe aortic stenosis reporting at different follow-up periods. We extracted trial, patient, intervention, and outcome characteristics following predefined criteria. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality up to 2 years for the main analysis. Seven trials that randomly assigned 8020 participants to TAVI (4014 patients) and SAVR (4006 patients) were included. The combined mean STS score in the TAVI arm was 9.4%, 5.1%, and 2.0% for high-, intermediate-, and low surgical risk trials, respectively. Transcatheter aortic valve implantation was associated with a significant reduction of all-cause mortality compared to SAVR {hazard ratio HR 0.88 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78–0.99, P = 0.030}; an effect that was consistent across the entire spectrum of surgical risk (P-for-interaction = 0.410) and irrespective of type of transcatheter heart valve (THV) system (P-for-interaction = 0.674). Transcatheter aortic valve implantation resulted in lower risk of strokes HR 0.81 (95% CI 0.68–0.98), P = 0.028. Surgical aortic valve replacement was associated with a lower risk of major vascular complications HR 1.99 (95% CI 1.34–2.93), P = 0.001 and permanent pacemaker implantations HR 2.27 (95% CI 1.47–3.64), P < 0.001 compared to TAVI.
Conclusion
Compared with SAVR, TAVI is associated with reduction in all-cause mortality and stroke up to 2 years irrespective of baseline surgical risk and type of THV system.
Summary Background Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents is the standard of care for treatment of native coronary artery stenoses, but optimum treatment strategies for ...bare metal stent and drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (ISR) have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank percutaneous treatment strategies for ISR. Methods We did a network meta-analysis to synthesise both direct and indirect evidence from relevant trials. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase for randomised controlled trials published up to Oct 31, 2014, of different PCI strategies for treatment of any type of coronary ISR. The primary outcome was percent diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014014191. Findings We deemed 27 trials eligible, including 5923 patients, with follow-up ranging from 6 months to 60 months after the index intervention. Angiographic follow-up was available for 4975 (84%) of 5923 patients 6–12 months after the intervention. PCI with everolimus-eluting stents was the most effective treatment for percent diameter stenosis, with a difference of −9·0% (95% CI −15·8 to −2·2) versus drug-coated balloons (DCB), −9·4% (–17·4 to −1·4) versus sirolimus-eluting stents, −10·2% (–18·4 to −2·0) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents, −19·2% (–28·2 to −10·4) versus vascular brachytherapy, −23·4% (–36·2 to −10·8) versus bare metal stents, −24·2% (–32·2 to −16·4) versus balloon angioplasty, and −31·8% (–44·8 to −18·6) versus rotablation. DCB were ranked as the second most effective treatment, but without significant differences from sirolimus-eluting (–0·2% 95% CI −6·2 to 5·6) or paclitaxel-eluting (–1·2% –6·4 to 4·2) stents. Interpretation These findings suggest that two strategies should be considered for treatment of any type of coronary ISR: PCI with everolimus-eluting stents because of the best angiographic and clinical outcomes, and DCB because of its ability to provide favourable results without adding a new stent layer. Funding None.
In view of the currently available evidence from randomized trials, we aimed to compare the collective safety and efficacy of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) vs. surgical aortic valve ...replacement (SAVR) across the spectrum of risk and in important subgroups.
Trials comparing TAVI vs. SAVR were identified through Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 2 years. We performed random-effects meta-analyses to combine the available evidence and to evaluate the effect in different subgroups. This systematic review and meta-analysis is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42016037273). We identified four eligible trials including 3806 participants, who were randomly assigned to undergo TAVI (n = 1898) or SAVR (n = 1908). For the primary outcome of death from any cause, TAVI when compared with SAVR was associated with a significant 13% relative risk reduction hazard ratio (95% CI): 0.87 (0.76-0.99); P = 0.038 with homogeneity across all trials irrespective of TAVI device (P
= 0.306) and baseline risk (P
= 0.610). In subgroup analyses, TAVI showed a robust survival benefit over SAVR for patients undergoing transfemoral access 0.80 (0.69-0.93); P = 0.004, but not transthoracic access 1.17 (0.88-1.56); P = 0.293 (P
= 0.024) and in female 0.68 (0.50-0.91); P = 0.010, but not male patients 0.99 (0.77-1.28); P = 0.952 (P
= 0.050). Secondary outcomes of kidney injury, new-onset atrial fibrillation, and major bleeding favoured TAVI, while major vascular complications, incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation, and paravalvular regurgitation favoured SAVR.
Compared with SAVR, TAVI is associated with a significant survival benefit throughout 2 years of follow-up. Importantly, this superiority is observed irrespective of the TAVI device across the spectrum of intermediate and high-risk patients, and is particularly pronounced among patients undergoing transfemoral TAVI and in females.
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.).
Complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with higher ischemic risk, which can be mitigated by long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, concomitant high bleeding risk ...(HBR) may be present, making it unclear whether short- or long-term DAPT should be prioritized.
This study investigated the effects of ischemic (by PCI complexity) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT PREdicting bleeding Complications in patients undergoing stent Implantation and SubsequEnt Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy score) risks on clinical outcomes and on the impact of DAPT duration after coronary stenting.
Complex PCI was defined as ≥3 stents implanted and/or ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation stenting and/or stent length >60 mm, and/or chronic total occlusion revascularization. Ischemic and bleeding outcomes in high (≥25) or non-high (<25) PRECISE-DAPT strata were evaluated based on randomly allocated duration of DAPT.
Among 14,963 patients from 8 randomized trials, 3,118 underwent complex PCI and experienced a higher rate of ischemic, but not bleeding, events. Long-term DAPT in non-HBR patients reduced ischemic events in both complex (absolute risk difference: −3.86%; 95% confidence interval: −7.71 to +0.06) and noncomplex PCI strata (absolute risk difference: −1.14%; 95% confidence interval: −2.26 to −0.02), but not among HBR patients, regardless of complex PCI features. The bleeding risk according to the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction scale was increased by long-term DAPT only in HBR patients, regardless of PCI complexity.
Patients who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of ischemic events, but benefitted from long-term DAPT only if HBR features were not present. These data suggested that when concordant, bleeding, more than ischemic risk, should inform decision-making on the duration of DAPT.
Display omitted
PDF
