Explore the vast range of titles available.

No medium-term data are available on the random comparison between everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds and everolimus-eluting metallic stents. The study aims to demonstrate two mechanistic properties of the bioresorbable scaffold: increase in luminal dimensions as a result of recovered vasomotion of the scaffolded vessel. The ABSORB II trial is a prospective, randomised, active-controlled, single-blind, parallel two-group, multicentre clinical trial. We enrolled eligible patients aged 18–85 years with evidence of myocardial ischaemia and one or two de-novo native lesions in different epicardial vessels. We randomly assigned patients (2:1) to receive treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) or treatment with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent (Xience; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetes status and number of planned target lesions. At 3 year follow-up, the primary endpoint was superiority of the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold versus the Xience metallic stent in angiographic vasomotor reactivity after administration of intracoronary nitrate. The co-primary endpoint is the non-inferiority of angiographic late luminal loss. For the endpoint of vasomotion, the comparison was tested using a two-sided t test. For the endpoint of late luminal loss, non-inferiority was tested using a one-sided asymptotic test, against a non-inferiority margin of 0·14 mm. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01425281. Between Nov 28, 2011, and June 4, 2013, we enrolled 501 patients and randomly assigned them to the Absorb group (335 patients, 364 lesions) or the Xience group (166 patients, 182 lesions). The vasomotor reactivity at 3 years was not statistically different (Absorb group 0·047 mm [SD 0·109] vs Xience group 0·056 mm [0·117]; psuperiority=0·49), whereas the late luminal loss was larger in the Absorb group than in the Xience group (0·37 mm [0·45] vs 0·25 mm [0·25]; pnon-inferiority=0·78). This difference in luminal dimension was confirmed by intravascular ultrasound assessment of the minimum lumen area (4·32 mm2 [SD 1·48] vs 5·38 mm2 [1·51]; p<0·0001). The secondary endpoints of patient-oriented composite endpoint, Seattle Angina Questionnaire score, and exercise testing were not statistically different in both groups. However, a device-oriented composite endpoint was significantly different between the Absorb group and the Xience group (10% vs 5%, hazard ratio 2·17 [95% CI 1·01–4·70]; log-rank test p=0·0425), mainly driven by target vessel myocardial infarction (6% vs 1%; p=0·0108), including peri-procedural myocardial infarction (4% vs 1%; p=0·16). The trial did not meet its co-primary endpoints of superior vasomotor reactivity and non-inferior late luminal loss for the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold with respect to the metallic stent, which was found to have significantly lower late luminal loss than the Absorb scaffold. A higher rate of device-oriented composite endpoint due to target vessel myocardial infarction, including peri-procedural myocardial infarction, was observed in the Absorb group. The patient-oriented composite endpoint, anginal status, and exercise testing, were not statistically different between both devices at 3 years. Future studies should investigate the clinical impact of accurate intravascular imaging in sizing the device and in optimising the scaffold implantation. The benefit and need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable scaffold implantation could also become a topic for future clinical research. Abbott Vascular.

Despite rapid dissemination of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold for treatment for coronary artery disease, no data from comparisons with its metallic stent counterpart are available. In a randomised controlled trial we aimed to compare an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent. Here we report secondary clinical and procedural outcomes after 1 year of follow-up. In a single-blind, multicentre, randomised trial, we enrolled eligible patients aged 18–85 years with evidence of myocardial ischaemia and one or two de-novo native lesions in different epicardial vessels. We randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) or treatment with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent (Xience, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetes status and number of planned target lesions. The co-primary endpoints of this study are vasomotion (change in mean lumen diameter before and after nitrate administration at 3 years) and difference between minimum lumen diameter (after nitrate administration) after the index procedure and at 3 years. Secondary endpoints were procedural performance assessed by quantitative angiography and intravascular ultrasound; composite clinical endpoints based on death, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularisation; device and procedural success; and angina status assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and exercise testing at 6 and 12 months. Cumulative angina rate based on adverse event reporting was analysed post hoc. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01425281. Between Nov 28, 2011, and June 4, 2013, we enrolled 501 patients and randomly assigned them to the bioresorbable scaffold group (335 patients, 364 lesions) or the metallic stent group (166 patients, 182 lesions). Dilatation pressure and balloon diameter at the highest pressure during implantation or postdilatation were higher and larger in the metallic stent group, whereas the acute recoil post implantation was similar (0·19 mm for both, p=0·85). Acute lumen gain was lower for the bioresorbable scaffold by quantitative coronary angiography (1·15 mm vs 1·46 mm, p<0·0001) and quantitative intravascular ultrasound (2·85 mm2vs 3·60 mm2, p<0·0001), resulting in a smaller lumen diameter or area post procedure. At 1 year, however, cumulative rates of first new or worsening angina from adverse event reporting were lower (72 patients [22%] in the bioresorbable scaffold group vs 50 [30%] in the metallic stent group, p=0·04), whereas performance during maximum exercise and angina status by SAQ were similar. The 1-year composite device orientated endpoint was similar between the bioresorbable scaffold and metallic stent groups (16 patients [5%] vs five patients [3%], p=0·35). Three patients in the bioresorbable scaffold group had definite or probable scaffold thromboses (one definite acute, one definite sub-acute, and one probable late), compared with no patients in the metallic stent group. There were 17 (5%) major cardiac adverse events in the bioresorbable scaffold group compared with five (3%) events in the metallic stent group, with the most common adverse events being myocardial infarction (15 cases [4%] vs two cases [1%], respectively) and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularisation (four cases [1%] vs three cases [2%], respectively). The everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold showed similar 1-year composite secondary clinical outcomes to the everolimus-eluting metallic stent. Abbott Vascular.

Data for the safety and efficacy of new-generation drug-eluting stents at long-term follow-up, and specifically in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, are scarce. In the EXAMINATION trial, we compared everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with bare-metal stents (BMS) in an all-comer population with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. In this study, we assessed the 5-year outcomes of the population in the EXAMINATION trial. In the multicentre EXAMINATION trial, done in Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive EES or BMS. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated and central randomisation (by telephone) was used to allocate patients in blocks of four or six, stratified by centre. Patients were masked to treatment assignment. At 5 years, we assessed the combined patient-oriented outcome of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00828087. 1498 patients were randomly assigned to receive either EES (n=751) or BMS (n=747). At 5 years, complete clinical follow-up data were obtained for 731 patients treated with EES and 727 treated with BMS (97% of both groups). The patient-oriented endpoint occurred in 159 (21%) patients in the EES group versus 192 (26%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·65–0·98; p=0·033). This difference was mainly driven by a reduced rate of all-cause mortality (65 [9%] vs 88 [12%]; 0·72, 0·52–0·10; p=0·047). Our findings should be taken as a point of reference for the assessment of new bioresorbable polymer-based metallic stents or bioresorbable scaffolds in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Spanish Heart Foundation.

In this trial, vorapaxar, a protease-activated–receptor 1 antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation, was not effective in reducing the primary cardiovascular efficacy end point, and it increased rates of bleeding, including serious bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage. The risk of recurrent ischemic complications among patients with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation remains high despite contemporary treatment strategies, including the use of early revascularization and dual antiplatelet therapy. 1 , 2 Hence, the assessment of new platelet inhibitors has continued to be an important avenue of investigation. 3 – 5 Thrombin activates platelets through two protease-activated receptors (PARs), PAR-1 and PAR-4. 6 PAR-1 is activated by lower concentrations of thrombin than PAR-4 and mediates a more rapid platelet-activation response. 7 In preclinical models, selective PAR-1 blockade resulted in potent inhibition of thrombin-induced platelet aggregation but appeared to preserve primary hemostatic function. 8 Vorapaxar (SCH . . .

In this trial, patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing an early invasive approach were randomly assigned to treatment with heparin or enoxaparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, bivalirudin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, or bivalirudin alone. Rates of ischemic events at 30 days were similar for all three groups, whereas major bleeding was significantly reduced in the group receiving bivalirudin alone. The trial suggests that bivalirudin monotherapy may be similar in efficacy to standard therapy, although bivalirudin monotherapy is associated with a reduced risk of bleeding. Pretreatment with a thienopyridine seems to be necessary if bivalirudin monotherapy is used. This trial suggests that bivalirudin monotherapy may be similar in efficacy to standard therapy, although bivalirudin monotherapy is associated with a reduced risk of bleeding. More than 1.4 million persons are admitted to hospitals in the United States every year with acute coronary syndromes (e.g., unstable angina or myocardial infarction without ST-segment elevation). 1 An early invasive strategy for patients with moderate- or high-risk acute coronary syndromes, consisting of angiography followed by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG), or medical management, results in higher rates of event-free survival than does conservative care 2 and is recommended by the American Heart Association, the American College of Cardiology, and the European Society of Cardiology. 3 – 5 Aspirin, clopidogrel, a platelet glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, and an antithrombotic agent (either . . .

Selecting an ideal antithrombotic therapy for elderly patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) can be challenging since they have a higher thromboembolic and bleeding risk than younger patients. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of triple therapy (TT: oral anticoagulation plus dual antiplatelet therapy: aspirin plus clopidogrel) in patients ≥75 years of age with atrial fibrillation (AF) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A prospective multicenter study was conducted from 2003 to 2012 at 6 Spanish teaching hospitals. A cohort study of consecutive patients with AF undergoing PCI and treated with TT or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was analyzed. All outcomes were evaluated at 1-year of follow-up. Five hundred and eighty-five patients, 289 (49%) of whom were ≥75 years of age (79.6±3.4 years; 33% women) were identified. TT was prescribed in 55.9% of patients at discharge who had a higher thromboembolic risk (CHA2DS2VASc score: 4.23±1.51 vs 3.76±1.40, p = 0.007 and a higher bleeding risk (HAS-BLED ≥3: 88.6% vs 79.2%, p = 0.02) than those on DAPT. Therefore, patients on TT had a lower rate of thromboembolism than those on DAPT (0.6% vs 6.9%, p = 0.004; HR 0.08, 95% CI: 0.01-0.70, p = 0.004). Major bleeding events occurred more frequently in patients on TT than in those on DAPT (11.7% vs 2.4%, p = 0.002; HR 5.2, 95% CI: 1.53-17.57, p = 0.008). The overall mortality rate was similar in both treatment groups (11.9% vs 13.9%, p = 0.38); however, after adjustment for confounding variables, TT was associated with a reduced mortality rate (HR 0.33, 95% CI: 0.12-0.86, p = 0.02). In elderly patients with AF undergoing PCI, the use of TT compared to DAPT was associated with reduced thromboembolism and mortality rates, although a higher rate of major bleeding.

Atrial myopathy, atriotomies, and fibrotic scars are the pathophysiological substrate of lines of conduction block, promoting atrial macroreentry. The aim of this study was to determine the acute and long-term outcome of radiofrequency catheter ablation (RFCA) for right atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) in adults after cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease (CHD) and acquired heart disease (AHD) and predictors of these outcomes. Clinical records of adults after surgery for heart disease undergoing RFCA of right-sided AT were analyzed retrospectively. Multivariate analyses identified clinical and procedural factors predicting acute and long-term outcomes. A total of 372 patients (69% men; age 61 ± 15 years) after surgical repair of CHD (n = 111) or AHD (n = 261) were studied. Cavotricuspid isthmus–dependent atrial flutter (CTI-AFL) was observed in 300 patients and non-CTI-AFL in 72 patients. Ablation was successful in 349 cases (94%). During a mean follow-up of 51 ± 30 months, recurrences were observed in 24.5% of patients. Multivariate analysis showed that non-CTI-AFL (hazard ratio [HR] 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.1 to 2.9) and CHD (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.9) were independent predictors of long-term recurrences. Multivariate analysis showed that female gender (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.6 to 3.3), surgery for AHD (HR 95% 2.31, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.7), and left atrial dilatation (HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3 to 3.2) were independent predictors of long-term atrial fibrillation. In conclusion, RFCA of right-sided AT after cardiac surgery is associated with high acute success rates and significant long-term recurrences. Non–CTI-dependent AFL and surgery for CHD are at higher risk of recurrence. Atrial fibrillation is common during follow-up, particularly in patients with AHD and enlarged left atrium.

Use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) has proven to be clinically effective and safe in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction but it remains unclear whether it is cost-effective compared to bare-metal stents (BMS) in the long-term. We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of EES versus BMS based on the 5-year results of the EXAMINATION trial, from a Spanish health service perspective. Decision analysis of the use of EES versus BMS was based on the patient-level clinical outcome data of the EXAMINATION trial. The analysis adopted a lifelong time horizon, assuming that long-term survival was independent of the initial treatment strategy after the end of follow-up. Life-expectancy, health-state utility scores and unit costs were extracted from published literature and publicly available sources. Non-parametric bootstrapping was combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis to co-assess the impact of patient-level variation and parameter uncertainty. The main outcomes were total costs and quality-adjusted life-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained. Costs and effects were discounted at 3%. The model predicted an average survival time in patients receiving EES and BMS of 10.52 and 10.38 undiscounted years, respectively. Over the life-long time horizon, the EES strategy was €430 more costly than BMS (€8,305 vs. €7,874), but went along with incremental gains of 0.10 quality-adjusted life-years. This resulted in an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over all simulations of €3,948 per quality-adjusted life-years gained and was below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000 per quality-adjusted life-years gained in 86.9% of simulation runs. Despite higher total costs relative to BMS, EES appeared to be a cost-effective therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients due to their incremental effectiveness. Predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below generally acceptable threshold values.

Because of the potential source of thrombus that they convey, the investigators emphasize the need for consideration of long-term oral anticoagulation in these patients, although administrated not indiscriminately to all of them, but on the basis of a \"case-by-case\" basis.

A higher risk of atherothrombotic cardiovascular events, which are platelet-driven processes, has been described during acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD). However, the relevance of platelet reactivity during AECOPD and whether this is affected by antiplatelet agents are not fully elucidated to date. This study aimed to evaluate whether platelet reactivity is augmented during an exacerbation in COPD patients with and without antiplatelet therapy and its association with systemic inflammatory parameters. Prospective, observational, ex vivo investigation was conducted in consecutive patients suffering an exacerbation of COPD. Platelet reactivity was assessed during AECOPD and at stable state. Platelet function assays included: 1) vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay expressed as P2Y reactivity index (PRI), 2) multiple electrode aggregometry and 3) optical aggregometry. Systemic inflammatory parameters such as leukocyte count, interleukin-6 and fibrinogen were also assessed. Higher platelet reactivity was observed during AECOPD compared to stability measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (PRI: 75.2%±1.9% vs 68.8%±2.4%, =0.001). This augmented platelet aggregability was also observed in the subset of patients on antiplatelet therapy (PRI: 72.8%±3.1% vs 61.7%±7.5%, =0.071). Consistent findings were observed with all other platelet function tests. Patients with greater enhancement of inflammatory markers during AECOPD were more likely to present a higher increase in platelet reactivity. Platelet reactivity is increased during AECOPD, which may contribute to the augmented cardiovascular risk of these patients. Additionally, the increase in platelet reactivity might be associated with an increment in inflammatory markers during exacerbations.