Multivessel Versus Culprit-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Cardiogenic Shock

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare in-hospital outcomes and long-term mortality of multivessel versus culprit vessel–only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), multivessel disease (MVD) and cardiogenic shock.BackgroundThe clinical benefits of complete revascularization in patients with NSTEMI, MVD, and cardiogenic shock remain uncertain.MethodsAmong 25,324 patients included in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI Registry from July 2009 to March 2018, the rates of in-hospital procedural outcomes were compared between those undergoing multivessel PCI and those undergoing culprit vessel–only PCI after 1:1 propensity score matching. Among patients aged ≥65 years matched to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services database, long-term mortality was compared using proportional hazards analysis.ResultsMultivessel PCI was performed in 9,791 patients (38.7%), which increased from 32.2% in 2010 to 44.2% in 2017 (p for trend <0.001). After 1:1 propensity matching (n = 7,864 in each group), those undergoing multivessel PCI had a 3.5% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0% to 5.0%) lower absolute rate of in-hospital mortality (30.9% vs. 34.4%; p < 0.001; odds ratio [OR]: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.80 to 0.91), but a higher risk for bleeding (13.2% vs. 10.8%; p < 0.001; OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.15 to 1.40) and new requirement for dialysis (5.7% vs. 4.6%; p = 0.001; OR: 1.26; 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.46). Among those surviving to discharge, all-cause mortality was similar through 7 years (conditional hazard ratio: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.03; p = 0.20).ConclusionsNearly 40% of patients with NSTEMI with MVD and cardiogenic shock underwent multivessel PCI, which was associated with lower in-hospital mortality but greater peri-procedural complications. Among those surviving to discharge, multivessel PCI did not confer additional long-term mortality benefit.     

Multivessel Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization in STEMI and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

ObjectivesThe goal of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive evaluation of contemporary randomized trials addressing the efficacy and safety of multivessel versus culprit vessel–only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel coronary artery disease.BackgroundMultivessel coronary artery disease is present in about one-half of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel and culprit vessel–only PCI produced conflicting results regarding the benefits of a multivessel PCI strategy.MethodsA comprehensive search for published randomized controlled trials comparing multivessel PCI with culprit vessel–only PCI was conducted on ClinicalTrials.gov, PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO Services, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Google Scholar, and scientific conference sessions from inception to September 15, 2019. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Primary efficacy outcomes were all-cause mortality and reinfarction.ResultsTen randomized controlled trials were included, representing 7,030 patients: 3,426 underwent multivessel PCI and 3,604 received culprit vessel–only PCI. Compared with culprit vessel–only PCI, multivessel PCI was associated with no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.05) and lower risk for reinfarction (RR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.50 to 0.95), cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.00), and repeat revascularization (RR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.25 to 0.44). Major bleeding (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.50 to 1.67), stroke (RR: 1.15; 95% CI: 0.65 to 2.01), and contrast-induced nephropathy (RR: 1.25; 95% CI: 0.80 to 1.95) were not significantly different between the 2 groups.ConclusionsMultivessel PCI was associated with a lower risk for reinfarction, without any difference in all-cause mortality, compared with culprit vessel–only PCI in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.     

Effect of Evolocumab on Complex Coronary Disease Requiring Revascularization

ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the ability of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor evolocumab to reduce the risk of complex coronary atherosclerosis requiring revascularization.BackgroundPCSK9 inhibitors induce plaque regression and reduce the risk of coronary revascularization overall.MethodsFOURIER (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk) was a randomized trial of the PCSK9 inhibitor evolocumab versus placebo in 27,564 patients with stable atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease on statin therapy followed for a median of 2.2 years. Clinical documentation of revascularization events was blindly reviewed to assess coronary anatomy and procedural characteristics. Complex revascularization was the composite of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (as per previous analyses, ≥1 of: multivessel PCI, ≥3 stents, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation PCI, or total stent length >60 mm) or coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG).ResultsIn this study, 1,724 patients underwent coronary revascularization, including 1,482 who underwent PCI, 296 who underwent CABG, and 54 who underwent both. Complex revascularization was performed in 632 (37%) patients. Evolocumab reduced the risk of any coronary revascularization by 22% (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.71 to 0.86; p < 0.001), simple PCI by 22% (HR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.70 to 0.88; p < 0.001), complex PCI by 33% (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.84; p < 0.001), CABG by 24% (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.60 to 0.96; p = 0.019), and complex revascularization by 29% (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.61 to 0.84; p < 0.001). The magnitude of the risk reduction with evolocumab in complex revascularization tended to increase over time (20%, 36%, and 41% risk reductions in the first, second, and beyond second years).ConclusionsAdding evolocumab to statin therapy significantly reduced the risk of developing complex coronary disease requiring revascularization, including complex PCI and CABG individually. (Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects with Elevated Risk (FOURIER); NCT01764633.)     

Ischemic Burden Reduction and Long-Term Clinical Outcomes After Chronic Total Occlusion Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ObjectivesThe authors sought to evaluate the impact of ischemic burden reduction after chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on long-term prognosis and cardiac symptom relief.BackgroundThe clinical benefit of CTO PCI is questioned.MethodsIn a high-volume CTO PCI center, 212 patients prospectively underwent quantitative [¹⁵O]H₂O positron emission tomography perfusion imaging before and three months after successful CTO PCI between 2013-2019. Perfusion defects (PD) (in segments) and hyperemic myocardial blood flow (hMBF) (in ml · min^?1 · g^?1) allocated to CTO areas were related to prognostic outcomes using unadjusted (Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank test) and risk-adjusted (multivariable Cox regression) analyses. The prognostic endpoint was a composite of all-cause death and nonfatal myocardial infarction.ResultsAfter a median [interquartile range] of 2.8 years [1.8 to 4.3 years], event-free survival was superior in patients with ≥3 versus <3 segment PD reduction (p < 0.01; risk-adjusted p = 0.04; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.34 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.13 to 0.93]) and with hMBF increase above (Δ≥1.11 ml · min^?1 · g^?1) versus below the population median (p < 0.01; risk-adjusted p < 0.01; HR: 0.16 [95% CI: 0.05 to 0.54]) after CTO PCI. Furthermore, event-free survival was superior in patients without versus any residual PD (p < 0.01; risk-adjusted p = 0.02; HR: 0.22 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.76]) or with a residual hMBF level >2.3 versus ≤2.3 ml · min^?1 · g^?1 (p < 0.01; risk-adjusted p = 0.03; HR: 0.25 [95% CI: 0.07 to 0.91]) at follow-up positron emission tomography. Patients with residual hMBF >2.3 ml · min^?1 · g^?1 were more frequently free of angina and dyspnea on exertion at long-term follow-up (p = 0.04).ConclusionsPatients with extensive ischemic burden reduction and no residual ischemia after CTO PCI had lower rates of all-cause death and nonfatal myocardial infarction. Long-term cardiac symptom relief was associated with normalization of hMBF levels after CTO PCI.     

Ticagrelor vs Prasugrel in a Contemporary Real-World Cohort Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundPotent P2Y₁₂ agents such as ticagrelor and prasugrel are increasingly utilized across the clinical spectrum of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). There is a paucity of data supporting their use in a patient population inclusive of both acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) patients.ObjectivesThe authors compared the efficacy and safety of ticagrelor and prasugrel in a real-world contemporary PCI cohort.MethodsConsecutive patients undergoing PCI between 2014 and 2019 discharged on either prasugrel or ticagrelor were included from the prospectively collected institutional PCI registry. Primary endpoint was the composite of death and myocardial infarction (MI), with secondary outcomes including rates of bleeding, stroke, and target vessel revascularization at 1 year.ResultsOverall, 3,858 patients were included in the study (ticagrelor: n = 2,771; prasugrel: n = 1,087), and a majority (48.4%) underwent PCI in the context of CCS. Patients prescribed ticagrelor were more likely to be female, have a history of cerebrovascular disease, and have ACS presentation, while those receiving prasugrel were more likely to be White with a higher prevalence of prior revascularization. No difference in the risk of death or MI was noted across the groups (ticagrelor vs prasugrel: 3.3% vs 3.1%; HR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.54-1.43; P = 0.59). Rates of target vessel revascularization were significantly lower in the ticagrelor cohort (9.3% vs 14.0%; adjusted HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.55-0.91; P = 0.007) with no differences in stroke or bleeding. The results were consistent in patients with CCS (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54) and ACS (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.46-1.54), without evidence of interaction (P = 0.37), and confirmed across multivariable adjustment and propensity score stratification analysis.ConclusionsIn this contemporary patient population undergoing PCI, prasugrel and ticagrelor were associated with similar 1-year efficacy and safety.     

Ticagrelor Monotherapy Versus Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: An Individual Patient-Level Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare ticagrelor monotherapy with dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents.BackgroundThe role of abbreviated DAPT followed by an oral P2Y₁₂ inhibitor after PCI remains uncertain.MethodsTwo randomized trials, including 14,628 patients undergoing PCI, comparing ticagrelor monotherapy with standard DAPT on centrally adjudicated endpoints were identified, and individual patient data were analyzed using 1-step fixed-effect models. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019143120). The primary outcomes were the composite of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding tested for superiority and, if met, the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 1 year, tested for noninferiority against a margin of 1.25 on a hazard ratio (HR) scale.ResultsBleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding occurred in fewer patients with ticagrelor than DAPT (0.9% vs. 1.7%, respectively; HR: 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41 to 0.75; p < 0.001). The composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 231 patients (3.2%) with ticagrelor and in 254 patients (3.5%) with DAPT (HR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.76 to 1.10; p < 0.001 for noninferiority). Ticagrelor was associated with lower risk for all-cause (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.96; p = 0.027) and cardiovascular (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.47 to 0.99; p = 0.044) mortality. Rates of myocardial infarction (2.01% vs. 2.05%; p = 0.88), stent thrombosis (0.29% vs. 0.38%; p = 0.32), and stroke (0.47% vs. 0.36%; p = 0.30) were similar.ConclusionsTicagrelor monotherapy was associated with a lower risk for major bleeding compared with standard DAPT, without a concomitant increase in ischemic events.     

Influence of Anatomical and Clinical Characteristics on Long-Term Prognosis of FFR-Guided Deferred Coronary Lesions

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and anatomical features to predict the long-term outcomes in patients with fractional flow reserve (FFR)–guided deferred lesions, verified by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).BackgroundDeferral of nonsignificant lesion by FFR is associated with a low risk of clinical events. However, the impact of combined information on clinical and anatomical factors is not well known.MethodsThe study included 459 patients with 552 intermediate lesions who had deferred revascularization on the basis of a nonischemic FFR (>0.80). Grayscale IVUS was examined simultaneously. The primary endpoint was patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO) (a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and any revascularization) during 5-year follow-up.ResultsThe rate of 5-year POCO was 9.8%. Diabetes mellitus (hazard ratio: 3.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.86 to 6.57; p < 0.001), left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% (hazard ratio: 4.80; 95% CI: 1.57 to 14.63; p = 0.006), and positive remodeling (hazard ratio: 2.04; 95% CI: 1.03 to 4.03; p = 0.041) were independent predictors for POCO. When the lesions were classified according to the presence of the adverse clinical characteristics (diabetes, left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%) or adverse plaque characteristics (positive remodeling, plaque burden ≥70%), the risk of POCO was incrementally increased (4.3%, 13.6%, and 21.3%, respectively; p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn patients with FFR-guided deferred lesions, 5-year clinical outcomes were excellent. Lesion-related anatomical factors from intravascular imaging as well as patient-related clinical factors could provide incremental information about future clinical risks.     

Morphine and Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes Undergoing Coronary Angiography

BackgroundMechanistic studies have shown that morphine blunts the antiplatelet effects of oral adenosine diphosphate receptor blockers. However, the clinical relevance of this interaction is controversial.ObjectivesThis study sought to explore the association between morphine and ischemic events in 5,438 patients treated with concomitant clopidogrel presenting with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS) in the EARLY ACS (Early Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibition in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial. Patients not treated with clopidogrel (n = 3,462) were used as negative controls.MethodsEndpoints were the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), recurrent ischemia, or thrombotic bailout at 96 h (4-way endpoint) and the composite of death or MI at 30 days.ResultsIn patients treated with clopidogrel, morphine use was associated with higher rates of the 4-way endpoint at 96 h (adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 1.40; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.87; p = 0.026). There was a trend for higher rates of death or MI at 30 days (adjusted OR: 1.29; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.70; p = 0.072), driven by events in the first 48 h (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.07 to 2.23; p = 0.021). In patients not treated with clopidogrel, morphine was not associated with either the 4-way endpoint at 96 h (adjusted OR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.49; p = 0.79; p_interaction = 0.36 ) or death or MI at 30 days (adjusted OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.77 to 1.48; p = 0.70; p_interaction = 0.46).ConclusionsWhen used concomitantly with clopidogrel pre-treatment, morphine was associated with higher rates of ischemic events in patients with NSTEACS. (EARLY ACS: Early Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibition in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome; NCT00089895)     

Prognostic Value of Coronary CT Angiography in Patients With Non–ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndromes

BackgroundSeverity and extent of coronary artery disease (CAD) assessed by invasive coronary angiography (ICA) guide treatment and may predict clinical outcome in patients with non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS).ObjectivesThis study tested the hypothesis that coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) is equivalent to ICA for risk assessment in patients with NSTEACS.MethodsThe VERDICT (Very Early Versus Deferred Invasive Evaluation Using Computerized Tomography in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes) trial evaluated timing of treatment in relation to outcome in patients with NSTEACS and included a clinically blinded coronary CTA conducted prior to ICA. Severity of CAD was defined as obstructive (coronary stenosis ≥50%) or nonobstructive. Extent of CAD was defined as high risk (obstructive left main or proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis and/or multivessel disease) or non–high risk. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal recurrent myocardial infarction, hospital admission for refractory myocardial ischemia, or heart failure.ResultsCoronary CTA and ICA were conducted in 978 patients. During a median follow-up time of 4.2 years (interquartile range: 2.7 to 5.5 years), the primary endpoint occurred in 208 patients (21.3%). The rate of the primary endpoint was up to 1.7-fold higher in patients with obstructive CAD compared with in patients with nonobstructive CAD as defined by coronary CTA (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.74; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.22 to 2.49; p = 0.002) or ICA (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.11; p = 0.007). In patients with high-risk CAD, the rate of the primary endpoint was 1.5-fold higher compared with the rate in those with non–high-risk CAD as defined by coronary CTA (HR: 1.56; 95% CI: 1.18 to 2.07; p = 0.002). A similar trend was noted for ICA (HR: 1.28; 95% CI: 0.98 to 1.69; p = 0.07).ConclusionsCoronary CTA is equivalent to ICA for the assessment of long-term risk in patients with NSTEACS. (Very Early Versus Deferred Invasive Evaluation Using Computerized Tomography in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes [VERDICT]; NCT02061891)     

Invasive Approaches in the Management of Cocaine-Associated Non–ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the impact of invasive approaches and revascularization in patients with cocaine-associated non–ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI).BackgroundThe role of invasive approaches in cocaine-associated NSTEMI is uncertain.MethodsThis retrospective cohort study identified 3,735 patients with NSTEMI and history of cocaine use from the Nationwide Readmissions Database from 2016 to 2017. Invasive approaches were defined as coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Revascularization was defined as PCI and CABG. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and the primary safety outcome was emergent revascularization. Nonadherence was identified using appropriate International Classification of Diseases-Tenth Revision codes. Two propensity-matched cohorts were generated (noninvasive vs. invasive and noninvasive vs. revascularization) through multivariate logistic regression.ResultsIn the propensity score–matched cohorts, an invasive approach (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.56 to 0.92; p = 0.008) and revascularization (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.73; p < 0.001) (compared with a noninvasive approach) were associated with a lower rate of MACE, without an increase in emergent revascularization. On stratification, PCI and CABG individually were associated with a lower rate of MACE. Emergent revascularization was increased with PCI (HR: 1.78; 95% CI: 1.12 to 2.81; p = 0.014) but not with CABG. Nonadherent patients after PCI and CABG did not have significant difference in rate of MACE. PCI in nonadherent patients was associated with an increase in emergent revascularization (HR: 4.45; 95% CI: 2.07 to 9.57; p < 0.001).ConclusionsInvasive approaches and revascularization for cocaine-associated NSTEMI are associated with lower morbidity. A history of medical nonadherence was not associated with a difference in morbidity but was associated with an increased risk for emergent revascularization with PCI.     

Ticagrelor or Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome in Relation to Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor versus prasugrel for patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) according to their estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs).BackgroundThe outcomes of ticagrelor versus prasugrel in patients with ACS according to eGFR have not been defined.MethodsPatients (n = 4,012) were categorized into 3 groups: low eGFR (<60 mL/min/1.73 m²), intermediate eGFR (≥60 and <90 mL/min/1.73 m²), and high eGFR (≥90 mL/min/1.73 m²). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke; the secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium types 3 to 5 bleeding, both at 1 year.ResultsPatients with low eGFRs had a higher risk for the primary endpoint compared with patients with intermediate eGFRs (adjusted HR: 1.89; 95% CI: 1.46-2.46]) and those with high eGFRs (adjusted HR: 2.33; 95% CI: 1.57-3.46). A risk excess for low eGFR was also observed for bleeding (adjusted HR: 1.55 [95% CI: 1.12-2.13] vs intermediate eGFR; adjusted HR: 1.59 [95% CI: 1.01-2.50] vs high eGFR). However, eGFR did not affect the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. In patients with low eGFR, the primary endpoint occurred in 20.5% with ticagrelor and in 14.7% with prasugrel (HR: 1.47; 95% CI: 1.04-2.08; P = 0.029); there was no significant difference in bleeding.ConclusionsThese results show that among patients with ACS, reduction of eGFR is associated with increased risk for ischemic and bleeding events but has no significant impact on the relative efficacy and safety of ticagrelor versus prasugrel. (Prospective, Randomized Trial of Ticagrelor Versus Prasugrel in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome [ISAR-REACT 5]; NCT01944800)     

Mortality 10 Years After Percutaneous or Surgical Revascularization in Patients With Total Coronary Artery Occlusions

BackgroundThe long-term clinical benefit after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with total occlusions (TOs) and complex coronary artery disease has not yet been clarified.ObjectivesThe objective of this analysis was to assess 10-year all-cause mortality in patients with TOs undergoing PCI or CABG.MethodsThis is a subanalysis of patients with at least 1 TO in the SYNTAXES (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Extended Survival) study, which investigated 10-year all-cause mortality in the SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial, beyond its original 5-year follow-up. Patients with TOs were further stratified according to the status of TO recanalization or revascularization.ResultsOf 1,800 randomized patients to the PCI or CABG arm, 460 patients had at least 1 lesion of TO. In patients with TOs, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization was not associated with 10-year all-cause mortality, irrespective of the assigned treatment (PCI arm: 29.9% vs. 29.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.992; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.474 to 2.075; p = 0.982; and CABG arm: 28.0% vs. 21.4%; adjusted HR: 0.656; 95% CI: 0.281 to 1.533; p = 0.330). When TOs existed in left main and/or left anterior descending artery, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization did not have an impact on the mortality (34.5% vs. 26.9%; adjusted HR: 0.896; 95% CI: 0.314 to 2.555; p = 0.837).ConclusionsAt 10-year follow-up, the status of TO recanalization or revascularization did not affect mortality, irrespective of the assigned treatment and location of TOs. The present study might support contemporary practice among high-volume chronic TO-PCI centers where recanalization is primarily offered to patients for the management of angina refractory to medical therapy when myocardial viability is confirmed. (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES]; NCT03417050; SYNTAX Study: TAXUS Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Narrowed Arteries [SYNTAX]; NCT00114972)     

Differential Effects of Newer-Generation Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thicker-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Chronic and Acute Coronary Syndromes

ObjectivesThe authors sought to compare the differential effects of ultrathin-strut and thicker-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with chronic (CCS) versus acute (ACS) coronary syndromes.BackgroundNewest-generation ultrathin-strut DES reduce target lesion failure (TLF) compared with thicker-strut second-generation DES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing newer-generation ultrathin-strut (<70 μm) versus thicker-strut (≥70 μm) DES. Patients were divided based on baseline clinical presentation (CCS versus ACS). The primary endpoint was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR).ResultsA total of 22,766 patients from 16 randomized controlled trials were included, of which 9 trials reported TLF rates in ACS patients. At a mean follow-up of 12.2 months, the risk of TLF was lower among patients treated with ultrathin-strut compared with thicker-strut DES (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.75-0.95; P = 0.006). The difference was driven by a lower risk of clinically-indicated TLR (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.63-0.89; P < 0.001) among patients treated with ultrathin-strut DES. The treatment effect was consistent between patients presenting with CCS and ACS (relative RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.73-1.31; P for interaction = 0.854). In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, TLF risk was lower among those treated with ultrathin- compared with thicker-strut DES (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.54-0.99; P = 0.049).ConclusionsUltrathin-strut DES reduce the risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut second-generation DES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, a difference caused by a lower risk of ischemia-driven TLR. The treatment effect was consistent among patients with CCS and ACS.     

Prevalence and Impact of High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Left Main Artery Disease PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and prognostic impact of high bleeding risk (HBR), as determined by the Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria, in real-world patients undergoing left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundLM PCI is often reserved for patients at increased risk for periprocedural adverse events. Patients at HBR represent a relevant percentage of this cohort, but their outcomes after LM PCI are still poorly investigated.MethodsAll patients undergoing LM PCI between 2014 and 2017 at a tertiary care center were prospectively enrolled. Patients were defined as having HBR if they met at least 1 major or 2 minor Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 12 months.ResultsAmong 619 enrolled patients, 55.3% were at HBR. The rate of the primary endpoint was 4-fold higher in patients at HBR compared with those without HBR (20.5% vs 4.9%; HR: 4.43; 95% CI: 2.31-8.48), driven by an increased risk for all-cause death (HR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.88-8.02) and MI (HR: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.83-20.9). Rates of target vessel or lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable in the 2 groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in patients at HBR (HR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.83-7.76). Consistent findings were observed after Cox multivariable regression adjustment.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing LM PCI, those with HBR are at increased risk for all-cause death, MI, and bleeding. Conversely, rates of repeat revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable, suggesting frailty and comorbidities as primary causes of worse outcomes in patients at HBR.     

Long-Term Outcomes in Women and Men Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundStudies examining sex-related outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) have reported conflicting results.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the sex-related risk of 5-year cardiovascular outcomes after PCI.MethodsThe authors pooled patient-level data from 21 randomized PCI trials and assessed the association between sex and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization [ID-TLR]) as well as its individual components at 5 years.ResultsAmong 32,877 patients, 9,141 (27.8%) were women. Women were older and had higher body mass index, more frequent hypertension and diabetes, and less frequent history of surgical or percutaneous revascularization compared with men. By angiographic core laboratory analysis, lesions in women had smaller reference vessel diameter and shorter lesion length. At 5 years, women had a higher unadjusted rate of MACE (18.9% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.003), all-cause death (10.4% vs. 8.7%; p = 0.0008), cardiac death (4.9% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.003) and ID-TLR (10.9% vs. 10.2%; p = 0.02) compared with men. By multivariable analysis, female sex was an independent predictor of MACE (hazard ratio [HR:]: 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI:]: 1.01 to 1.30; p = 0.04) and ID-TLR (HR: 1.23; 95% CI: 1.05 to 1.44; p = 0.009) but not all-cause death (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.75 to 1.09; p = 0.30) or cardiac death (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.29; p = 0.85).ConclusionsIn the present large-scale, individual patient data pooled analysis of contemporary PCI trials, women had a higher risk of MACE and ID-TLR compared with men at 5 years following PCI.     

Revascularization Deferral of Nonculprit Stenoses on the Basis of Fractional Flow Reserve: 1-Year Outcomes of 8,579 Patients

BackgroundIntracoronary physiology is increasingly used in nonculprit stenoses of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). However, evidence regarding the safety of fractional flow reserve-based deferral in patients with ACS, compared with patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP), is scarce.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of revascularization deferral on the basis of fractional flow reserve interrogation of nonculprit lesions in patients with ACS.MethodsA pooled analysis was performed of individual patient data included in 5 large international published studies on physiology-guided revascularization. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization) at 1-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes of patients with ACS and SAP were compared in both the deferred and the revascularized groups.ResultsA total of 8,579 patients were included in the analysis, 6,461 with SAP and 2,118 with ACS and nonculprit stenoses. Using fractional flow reserve, revascularization was deferred in 5,129 patients (59.8%) and performed in 3,450 patients (40.2%). In the deferred ACS group, a higher MACE rate was observed compared with the deferred SAP group (4.46% vs. 2.83%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 1.72; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.17 to 2.53; p < 0.01). In particular, early unplanned revascularization (3.34% and 2.04% in ACS and SAP; adjusted HR: 1.81; 95% CI: 1.09 to 3.00; p = 0.02) contributed to this excess in MACE but the difference between the ACS and SAP groups did not reach statistical significance. On the contrary, no differences in outcomes linked to clinical presentation were found in treated patients (MACE rate 6.51% vs. 6.20%; adjusted HR: 1.21; 95% CI: 0.88 to 1.26; p = 0.24).ConclusionsPatients with ACS in whom revascularization of nonculprit lesions was deferred on the basis of fractional flow reserve have more MACE at 1 year compared with patients with SAP with deferred revascularization. Unplanned revascularization mainly contributed to this excess of MACE.     

Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Ambulatory Surgery Centers

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to explore characteristics and outcomes of patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs).BackgroundLittle is known about patients who underwent ASC PCI before Medicare reimbursement was instituted in 2020.MethodsUsing commercial insurance claims from MarketScan, adults who underwent hospital outpatient department (HOPD) or ASC PCI for stable ischemic heart disease from 2007 to 2016 were studied. Propensity score analysis was used to measure the association between treatment setting and the primary composite outcome of 30-day myocardial infarction, bleeding complications, and hospital admission.ResultsThe unmatched sample consisted of 95,492 HOPD and 849 ASC PCIs. Patients who underwent ASC PCI were more likely to be younger than 65 years, to live in the southern United States, and to have managed or consumer-driven health insurance. ASC PCI was also associated with decreased fractional flow reserve utilization (odds ratio [OR]: 0.31; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.20 to 0.48; p < 0.001). In unmatched, multivariate analysis, ASC PCI was associated with increased odds of the primary outcome (OR: 1.25; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.56; p = 0.039) and bleeding complications (OR: 1.80; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.90; p = 0.016). In propensity-matched analysis, ASC PCI was not associated with the primary outcome (OR: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.60; p = 0.124) but was significantly associated with increased bleeding complications (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.25 to 4.95; p = 0.009).ConclusionsCommercially insured patients undergoing ASC PCI were less likely to undergo fractional flow reserve testing and had higher odds of bleeding complications than HOPD-treated patients. Further study is warranted as Medicare ASC PCI volume increases.     

Cancer Patients Have a Higher Risk of Thrombotic and Ischemic Events After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ObjectivesThis study sought to define the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) and myocardial infarction (MI) in cancer patients compared with noncancer patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundCancer patients are considered to be at high thrombotic risk, but data on whether this is the case after PCI remain inconclusive.MethodsCancer patients undergoing PCI at Mayo Clinic Rochester from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2013, were identified by cross-linking institutional cancer and PCI databases and by propensity score matching to noncancer patients. The combined primary endpoint was all-cause mortality, MI, and revascularization rate at 5-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints were the individual primary endpoint components, cause of mortality, ST, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2+ bleeding.ResultsThe primary endpoint occurred in 48.6% of 416 cancer and in 33.0% of 768 noncancer patients (p < 0.001). In competing risk analyses, cancer patients had a higher rate of noncardiac death (24.0% vs. 10.5%; p < 0.001) and a lower rate of cardiac death (5.0% vs. 11.7%; p < 0.001). Cancer patients had a higher rate of MI (16.1% vs. 8.0%; p < 0.001), ST (6.0% vs. 2.3%; p < 0.001), repeat revascularization (21.2% vs. 10.0%; p < 0.001), and bleeding (6.7% vs. 3.9%; p = 0.03). The most critical period for ST in cancer patients was in the first year after PCI. The dual antiplatelet therapy score was predictive of thrombotic and ischemic events in both groups.ConclusionsCancer patients have a higher risk of thrombotic and ischemic events after PCI, identifiable by a high dual antiplatelet therapy score. These findings have important implications for antiplatelet therapy decisions.     

Predictive Value of the Residual SYNTAX Score in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

BackgroundIn hemodynamically stable patients, complete revascularization (CR) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with a better prognosis in chronic and acute coronary syndromes.ObjectivesThis study sought to assess the extent, severity, and prognostic value of remaining coronary stenoses following PCI, by using the residual SYNTAX score (rSS), in patients with cardiogenic shock (CS) related to myocardial infarction (MI).MethodsThe CULPRIT-SHOCK (Culprit Lesion Only Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] Versus Multivessel PCI in Cardiogenic Shock) trial compared a multivessel PCI (MV-PCI) strategy with a culprit lesion–only PCI (CLO-PCI) strategy in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who presented with MI-related CS. The rSS was assessed by a central core laboratory. The study group was divided in 4 subgroups according to tertiles of rSS of the participants, thereby isolating patients with an rSS of 0 (CR). The predictive value of rSS for the 30-day primary endpoint (mortality or severe renal failure) and for 30-day and 1-year mortality was assessed using multivariate logistic regression.ResultsAmong the 587 patients with an rSS available, the median rSS was 9.0 (interquartile range: 3.0 to 17.0); 102 (17.4%), 100 (17.0%), 196 (33.4%), and 189 (32.2%) patients had rSS = 0, 0 < rSS ≤5, 5 < rSS ≤14, and rSS >14, respectively. CR was achieved in 75 (25.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3% to 30.5%) and 27 (9.3%; 95% CI: 6.2% to 13.3%) of patients treated using the MV-PCI and CLO-PCI strategies, respectively. After multiple adjustments, rSS was independently associated with 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio per 10 units: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.01) and 1-year mortality (adjusted odds ratio per 10 units: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.11 to 2.07).ConclusionsAmong patients with multivessel disease and MI-related CS, CR is achieved only in one-fourth of the patients treated using an MV-PCI strategy. and the residual SYNTAX score is independently associated with early and late mortality.     

International Prospective Registry of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients With COVID-19

BackgroundPublished data suggest worse outcomes in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients and concurrent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) infection. Mechanisms remain unclear.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to report the demographics, angiographic findings, and in-hospital outcomes of COVID-19 ACS patients and compare these with pre–COVID-19 cohorts.MethodsFrom March 1, 2020 to July 31, 2020, data from 55 international centers were entered into a prospective, COVID-ACS Registry. Patients were COVID-19 positive (or had a high index of clinical suspicion) and underwent invasive coronary angiography for suspected ACS. Outcomes were in-hospital major cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, re–myocardial infarction, heart failure, stroke, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis). Results were compared with national pre–COVID-19 databases (MINAP [Myocardial Ischaemia National Audit Project] 2019 and BCIS [British Cardiovascular Intervention Society] 2018 to 2019).ResultsIn 144 ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and 121 non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients, symptom-to-admission times were significantly prolonged (COVID-STEMI vs. BCIS: median 339.0 min vs. 173.0 min; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS vs. MINAP: 417.0 min vs. 295.0 min; p = 0.012). Mortality in COVID-ACS patients was significantly higher than BCIS/MINAP control subjects in both subgroups (COVID-STEMI: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; p < 0.001; COVID NSTE-ACS: 6.6% vs. 1.2%; p < 0.001), which remained following multivariate propensity analysis adjusting for comorbidities (STEMI subgroup odds ratio: 3.33 [95% confidence interval: 2.04 to 5.42]). Cardiogenic shock occurred in 20.1% of COVID-STEMI patients versus 8.7% of BCIS patients (p < 0.001).ConclusionsIn this multicenter international registry, COVID-19–positive ACS patients presented later and had increased in-hospital mortality compared with a pre–COVID-19 ACS population. Excessive rates of and mortality from cardiogenic shock were major contributors to the worse outcomes in COVID-19 positive STEMI patients.