A systematic review and meta-analysis on the hazards of discontinuing or not adhering to aspirin among 50,279 patients at risk for coronary artery disease.

AIMS: The role of aspirin in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) is well established, yet patients happen to discontinue aspirin according to physician's advice or unsupervised. We thus undertook a systematic review to appraise the hazards inherent to aspirin withdrawal or non-compliance in subjects at risk for or with CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic databases were systematically searched (updated January 2006). Study designs, patient characteristics, and outcomes were abstracted. Pooled estimates for odds ratios (OR) were computed according to random-effect methods. From the 612 screened studies, six were selected (50,279 patients). One study (31,750 patients) focused on adherence to aspirin therapy in the secondary prevention of CAD, two studies (2594) on aspirin discontinuation in acute CAD, two studies (13,706) on adherence to aspirin therapy before or shortly after coronary artery bypass grafting, and another (2229) on aspirin discontinuation among patients undergoing drug-eluting stenting. Overall, aspirin non-adherence/withdrawal was associated with three-fold higher risk of major adverse cardiac events (OR=3.14 [1.75-5.61], P=0.0001). This risk was magnified in patients with intracoronary stents, as discontinuation of antiplatelet treatment was associated with an even higher risk of adverse events (OR=89.78 [29.90-269.60]). CONCLUSION: Non-compliance or withdrawal of aspirin treatment has ominous prognostic implication in subjects with or at moderate-to-high risk for CAD. Aspirin discontinuation in such patients should be advocated only when bleeding risk clearly overwhelms that of atherothrombotic events.     

The 'Open-Artery Hypothesis': new clinical and pathophysiologic insights

The open-artery hypothesis states that myocardial reperfusion, even if late for myocardial salvage, provides benefits and prevents adverse cardiac remodeling. While observational data in humans regarding the deleterious impact of a permanent infarct-related artery occlusion and the benefits of spontaneous reperfusion are quite consistent, the reports regarding late revascularization are inconclusive in order to prove such a hypothesis. The observational studies tend to have selection biases, while randomized trials to date are too small to be conclusive. Moreover, the pathophysiological mechanisms underlying presumed benefits of reperfusion are still unclear. However, although the open-artery hypothesis remains unproven, the current evidence suggesting benefits calls for additional studies. Limitations of ischemic left ventricular dilatation and myopathy could markedly reduce cardiovascular morbidity and mortality after acute myocardial infarction.     

Percutaneous unprotected left main angioplasty with drug-eluting stents in a nonagenarian: feasible and safe despite recurrent restenosis

The management of severe coronary artery disease in the very elderly is challenging and the most appropriate revascularization strategy highly debated. To date, coronary artery bypass surgery has been the treatment of choice for significant stenosis of unprotected left main (ULM) coronary. Whether this holds true also in very old patients is unknown. The Authors hereby report the case of a 91-year-old diabetic man who underwent coronary angiography in June 2005 for subacute unstable angina. Angiography disclosed a critical stenoses in the distal unprotected left main, left anterior descending, and distal left circumflex, which were treated with a paclitaxel-eluting stent and a bare-metal stent (BMS), respectively. Four months later, recurrent angina lead to a second angiography which showed critical restenosis in the left anterior descending and significant ostial stenosis in the left circumflex. Another paclitaxel-eluting stent was implanted in the left anterior descending, followed by kissing balloon in the left main, achieving a good angiographic result. Six months later angina recurred again: at angiography diffuse restenosis in the left main, left anterior descending and left circumflex was documented. A crushing technique was thus employed to deliver 2 sirolimus-eluting stents, achieving a satisfactory final result. Since then, and to date for more than 17 months since the last procedure, this nonagenarian has remained free from anginal chest. This case highlights the potentials and drawbacks of percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main disease, suggesting nonetheless, that this revascularization strategy can be safely repeated even in elderly patients.     

Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention for failed thrombolysis in a patient with anomalous coronary arteries

Coronary artery anomalies (CAA) often render technically difficult the completion of coronary angiography and intervention. Their presence in patients undergoing emergency angiography for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is particularly challenging for interventional cardiologists. In this article, we report, for the first time in the literature, a case of rescue percutaneous coronary intervention for failed thrombolysis in a patient with AMI due to occlusion of a left circumflex coronary artery with anomalous origin from right sinus of Valsalva (in an anomalous left coronary system also including an anomalous origin of the left anterior descending artery from the right sinus). In particular, the present clinical vignette emphasizes the importance of a thorough search for the culprit vessel during cardiac catheterization. Especially in the emergency setting, non-invasive methods of ischemia localization, such as ST-segment elevation at the ECG and wall motion abnormalities at echocardiography, are of pivotal usefulness to guide the interventional cardiologist in identifying and treating the diseased coronary vessel in a timely and effective fashion.     

Radial versus femoral approach for percutaneous coronary diagnostic and interventional procedures; Systematic overview and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare, through a meta-analytic process, the transradial and transfemoral approaches for coronary procedures in terms of clinical and procedural outcomes. BACKGROUND: The radial approach has been increasingly used as an alternative to femoral access. Several trials have compared these two approaches, with inconclusive results. METHODS: The MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and conference proceedings from major cardiologic associations were searched. Random-effect odds ratios (ORs) for failure of the procedure (crossover to different entry site or impossibility to perform the planned procedure), entry site complications (major hematoma, vascular surgery, or arteriovenous fistula), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction, emergency revascularization, or stroke, were computed. RESULTS: Twelve randomized trials (n = 3,224) were included in the analysis. The risk of MACE was similar for the radial versus femoral approach (OR 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.57 to 1.48; p = 0.7). Instead, radial access was associated with a significantly lower rate of entry site complications (OR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.42; p < 0.0001), even if at the price of a higher rate of procedural failure (OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.63 to 6.71; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The radial approach for coronary procedures appears as a safe alternative to femoral access. Moreover, radial access virtually eliminates local vascular complications, thanks to a time-sparing hemostasis technique. However, gaining radial access requires higher technical skills, thus yielding an overall lower success rate. Nonetheless, a clear ongoing trend toward equalization of the two procedures, in terms of procedural success, is evident through the years, probably due to technologic progress of materials and increased operator experience.