Sex- and gender-related risk factor burden in patients with premature acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND Few contemporary data exist on traditional (TRF) and non-TRF (NTRF) burden in patients with premature acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS Prevalence of TRFs and NTRFs were measured in 1015 young (55 years old or younger) ACS patients recruited from 26 centres in Canada, the United States, and Switzerland. Risk factors were compared across sex and family history categories, and against a sample of the general Canadian population based on the 2000-2001 Canadian Community Health Survey. The 10- and 30-year risks of cardiovascular disease (CVD) were estimated using Framingham Risk Scores. RESULTS Risk factors were more prevalent in premature ACS patients compared with the general population. Young women with a family history of coronary artery disease showed the greatest risk factor burden including TRFs of hypertension (67%), dyslipidemia (67%), obesity (53%), smoking (42%), and diabetes (33%), and NTRFs of anxiety (55%), low household income (44%), and depression (37%). The estimated median 10-year risk of CVD was 7% (interquartile range [IQR], 3%-9%) in women and 13% (IQR, 7%-17%) in men, whereas the 30-year risk of CVD was 36% (IQR, 22%-49%) in women and 44% (IQR, 31%-57%) in men. CONCLUSIONS Patients with premature ACS, especially women with a positive family history, are characterized by a very high risk factor burden that is poorly captured by 10-year risk estimates but better captured by 30-year estimates. Consideration of NTRFs and use of 30-year risk estimates might better estimate risk in young individuals and improve the prevention of premature ACS.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial.

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.

Plasma T-cadherin negatively associates with coronary lesion severity and acute coronary syndrome.

AIMS This study evaluated associations between plasma T-cadherin levels and severity of atherosclerotic disease. METHODS AND RESULTS Three hundred and ninety patients undergoing coronary angiography were divided into three groups based on clinical and angiographic presentation: a group (n=40) with normal coronary arteries, a group (n=250) with chronic coronary artery disease and a group (n=100) with acute coronary syndrome. Plasma T-cadherin levels were measured by double sandwich ELISA. Intravascular ultrasound data of the left-anterior descending artery were acquired in a subgroup of 284 patients. T-cadherin levels were lower in patients with acute coronary syndrome than in normal patients (p=0.007) and patients with chronic coronary artery disease (p=0.002). Levels were lower in males (p=0.002), in patients with hypertension (p=0.002) and inpatients with diabetes (p=0.008), and negatively correlated with systolic blood pressure (p=0.014), body mass index (p=0.001) and total number of risk factors (p=0.001). T-cadherin negatively associated with angiographic severity of disease (p=0.001) and with quantitative intravascular ultrasound measures of lesion severity (p<0.001 for plaque, necrotic core and dense calcium volumes). Significant associations between T-cadherin and intravascular ultrasound measurements persisted even if the regression model was adjusted for the presence of acute coronary syndrome. Multivariate analysis identified a strong (p=0.002) negative association of T-cadherin with acute coronary syndrome, and lower T-cadherin levels significantly (p=0.002) associated with a higher risk of acute coronary syndrome independently of age, gender and cardiovascular risk factors. CONCLUSIONS A reduction in plasma T-cadherin levels is associated with increasing severity of coronary artery disease and a higher risk for acute coronary syndrome.

Circulating FABP4 Is a Prognostic Biomarker in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome but Not in Asymptomatic Individuals.

OBJECTIVE Blood-borne biomarkers reflecting atherosclerotic plaque burden have great potential to improve clinical management of atherosclerotic coronary artery disease and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). APPROACH AND RESULTS Using data integration from gene expression profiling of coronary thrombi versus peripheral blood mononuclear cells and proteomic analysis of atherosclerotic plaque-derived secretomes versus healthy tissue secretomes, we identified fatty acid-binding protein 4 (FABP4) as a biomarker candidate for coronary artery disease. Its diagnostic and prognostic performance was validated in 3 different clinical settings: (1) in a cross-sectional cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease, ACS, and healthy individuals (n=820), (2) in a nested case-control cohort of patients with ACS with 30-day follow-up (n=200), and (3) in a population-based nested case-control cohort of asymptomatic individuals with 5-year follow-up (n=414). Circulating FABP4 was marginally higher in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (24.9 ng/mL) compared with controls (23.4 ng/mL; P=0.01). However, elevated FABP4 was associated with adverse secondary cerebrovascular or cardiovascular events during 30-day follow-up after index ACS, independent of age, sex, renal function, and body mass index (odds ratio, 1.7; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-2.5; P=0.02). Circulating FABP4 predicted adverse events with similar prognostic performance as the GRACE in-hospital risk score or N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide. Finally, no significant difference between baseline FABP4 was found in asymptomatic individuals with or without coronary events during 5-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS Circulating FABP4 may prove useful as a prognostic biomarker in risk stratification of patients with ACS.

Percutaneous coronary interventional strategies for treatment of in-stent restenosis: a network meta-analysis.

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.

Report of a European Society of Cardiology-European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions task force on the evaluation of coronary stents in Europe: executive summary.

The evaluation for European Union market approval of coronary stents falls under the Medical Device Directive that was adopted in 1993. Specific requirements for the assessment of coronary stents are laid out in supplementary advisory documents. In response to a call by the European Commission to make recommendations for a revision of the advisory document on the evaluation of coronary stents (Appendix 1 of MEDDEV 2.7.1), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) established a Task Force to develop an expert advisory report. As basis for its report, the ESC-EAPCI Task Force reviewed existing processes, established a comprehensive list of all coronary drug-eluting stents that have received a CE mark to date, and undertook a systematic review of the literature of all published randomized clinical trials evaluating clinical and angiographic outcomes of coronary artery stents between 2002 and 2013. Based on these data, the TF provided recommendations to inform a new regulatory process for coronary stents. The main recommendations of the task force include implementation of a standardized non-clinical assessment of stents and a novel clinical evaluation pathway for market approval. The two-stage clinical evaluation plan includes recommendation for an initial pre-market trial with objective performance criteria (OPC) benchmarking using invasive imaging follow-up leading to conditional CE-mark approval and a subsequent mandatory, large-scale randomized trial with clinical endpoint evaluation leading to unconditional CE-mark. The data analysis from the systematic review of the Task Force may provide a basis for determination of OPC for use in future studies. This paper represents an executive summary of the Task Force's report.

Synchronous carotid and coronary bypass surgery using minimal extracorporeal circulation does not increase the risk of in-hospital stroke compared to isolated carotid endarterectomy under general anaesthesia

Gebiet: Chirurgie Abstract: Introduction: Carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) could be approached in a combined or a staged fashion. Some crucial studies have shown no significant difference in peri-operative stroke and death rate in combined versus staged CEA/CABG. At present conventional extracorporeal circulation (CECC) is regarded as the gold standard for performing on-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. On contrary, the use of minimized extracorporeal circulation (MECC) for CABG diminishes hemodilution, blood-air contact, foreign surface contact and inflammatory response. At the same time, general anaesthesia (GA) is a potential risk factor for higher perioperative stroke rate after isolated CEA, not only for the ipsilateral but also for the contralateral side especially in case of contralateral high-grade stenosis or occlusion. The aim of the study was to analyze if synchronous CEA/CABG using MECC (CEA/CABG group) allows reducing the perioperative stroke risk to the level of isolated CEA performed under GA (CEA-GA group). – Methods: A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent CEA at our institution between January 2005 and December 2012 was performed. We compared outcomes between all patients undergoing CEA/CABG to all isolated CEA-GA during the same time period. The CEA/CABG group was additionally compared to a reference group consisting of patients undergoing isolated CEA in local anaesthesia. Primary outcome was in-hospital stroke. – Results: A total of 367 CEAs were performed, from which 46 patients were excluded having either off-pump CABG or other cardiac surgery procedures than CABG combined with CEA. Out of 321 patients, 74 were in the CEA/CABG and 64 in the CEA-GA group. There was a significantly higher rate of symptomatic stenoses among patients in the CEA-GA group (p<0.002). Three (4.1%) strokes in the CEA/CABG group were registered, two ipsilateral (2.7%) and one contralateral (1.4%) to the operated side. In the CEA-GA group 2 ipsilateral strokes (3.1%) occurred. No difference was noticed between the groups (p=1.000). One patient with stroke in each group had a symptomatic stenosis preoperatively. – Conclusions: Outcome with regard to mortality and neurologic injury is very good in both -patients undergoing CEA alone as well as patients undergoing synchronous CEA and CABG using the MECC system. Although the CEA/CABG group showed slightly increased risk of stroke, it can be considered as combined treatment in particular clinical situations.

Impact of Clinical Presentation (Stable Angina Pectoris vs Unstable Angina Pectoris or Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction vs ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) on Long-Term Outcomes in Women Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Drug-Eluting Stents

The long-term risk associated with different coronary artery disease (CAD) presentations in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) is poorly characterized. We pooled patient-level data for women enrolled in 26 randomized clinical trials. Of 11,577 women included in the pooled database, 10,133 with known clinical presentation received a DES. Of them, 5,760 (57%) had stable angina pectoris (SAP), 3,594 (35%) had unstable angina pectoris (UAP) or non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), and 779 (8%) had ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) as clinical presentation. A stepwise increase in 3-year crude cumulative mortality was observed in the transition from SAP to STEMI (4.9% vs 6.1% vs 9.4%; p <0.01). Conversely, no differences in crude mortality rates were observed between 1 and 3 years across clinical presentations. After multivariable adjustment, STEMI was independently associated with greater risk of 3-year mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 3.45; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.99 to 5.98; p <0.01), whereas no differences were observed between UAP or NSTEMI and SAP (HR 0.99; 95% CI 0.73 to 1.34; p = 0.94). In women with ACS, use of new-generation DES was associated with reduced risk of major adverse cardiac events (HR 0.58; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.98). The magnitude and direction of the effect with new-generation DES was uniform between women with or without ACS (pinteraction = 0.66). In conclusion, in women across the clinical spectrum of CAD, STEMI was associated with a greater risk of long-term mortality. Conversely, the adjusted risk of mortality between UAP or NSTEMI and SAP was similar. New-generation DESs provide improved long-term clinical outcomes irrespective of the clinical presentation in women.

Efficacy and safety of a novel bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting coronary stent: the EVOLVE II Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND Drug eluting stents with durable polymers may be associated with hypersensitivity, delayed healing, and incomplete endothelialization, which may contribute to late/very late stent thrombosis and the need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy. Bioabsorbable polymers may facilitate stent healing, thus enhancing clinical safety. The SYNERGY stent is a thin-strut, platinum chromium metal alloy platform with an ultrathin bioabsorbable Poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) abluminal everolimus-eluting polymer. We performed a multicenter, randomized controlled trial for regulatory approval to determine noninferiority of the SYNERGY stent to the durable polymer PROMUS Element Plus everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients (n=1684) scheduled to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome or stable coronary artery disease were randomized to receive either the SYNERGY stent or the PROMUS Element Plus stent. The primary end point of 12-month target lesion failure was observed in 6.7% of SYNERGY and 6.5% PROMUS Element Plus treated subjects by intention-to-treat (P=0.83 for difference; P=0.0005 for noninferiority), and 6.4% in both the groups by per-protocol analysis (P=0.0003 for noninferiority). Clinically indicated revascularization of the target lesion or definite/probable stent thrombosis were observed in 2.6% versus 1.7% (P=0.21) and 0.4% versus 0.6% (P=0.50) of SYNERGY versus PROMUS Element Plus-treated subjects, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In this randomized trial, the SYNERGY bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent was noninferior to the PROMUS Element Plus everolimus-eluting stent with respect to 1-year target lesion failure. These data support the relative safety and efficacy of SYNERGY in a broad range of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01665053.

Validity of SYNTAX score II for risk stratification of percutaneous coronary interventions: A patient-level pooled analysis of 5,433 patients enrolled in contemporary coronary stent trials.

OBJECTIVES To assess the clinical profile and long-term mortality in SYNTAX score II based strata of patients who received percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in contemporary randomized trials. BACKGROUND The SYNTAX score II was developed in the randomized, all-comers' SYNTAX trial population and is composed by 2 anatomical and 6 clinical variables. The interaction of these variables with the treatment provides individual long-term mortality predictions if a patient undergoes coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or PCI. METHODS Patient-level (n=5433) data from 7 contemporary coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) trials were pooled. The mortality for CABG or PCI was estimated for every patient. The difference in mortality estimates for these two revascularization strategies was used to divide the patients into three groups of theoretical treatment recommendations: PCI, CABG or PCI/CABG (the latter means equipoise between CABG and PCI for long term mortality). RESULTS The three groups had marked differences in their baseline characteristics. According to the predicted risk differences, 5115 patients could be treated either by PCI or CABG, 271 should be treated only by PCI and, rarely, CABG (n=47) was recommended. At 3-year follow-up, according to the SYNTAX score II recommendations, patients recommended for CABG had higher mortality compared to the PCI and PCI/CABG groups (17.4%; 6.1% and 5.3%, respectively; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS The SYNTAX score II demonstrated capability to help in stratifying PCI procedures.

Minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation should become the standard practice in coronary revascularization surgery†.

We read with great interest the large-scale network meta-analysis by Kowalewski et al. comparing clinical outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) operated on using minimal invasive extracorporeal circulation (MiECC) or off-pump (OPCAB) with those undergoing surgery on conventional cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) [1]. The authors actually integrated into single study two recently published meta-analysis comparing MiECC and OPCAB with conventional CPB, respectively [2, 3] into a single study. According to the results of this study, MiECC and OPCAB are both strongly associated with improved perioperative outcomes following CABG when compared with CABG performed on conventional CPB. The authors conclude that MiECC may represent an attractive compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB. After carefully reading the whole manuscript, it becomes evident that the role of MiECC is clearly undervalued. Detailed statistical analysis using the surface under the cumulative ranking probabilities indicated that MiECC represented the safer and more effective intervention regarding all-cause mortality and protection from myocardial infarction, cerebral stroke, postoperative atrial fibrillation and renal dysfunction when compared with OPCAB. Even though no significant statistical differences were demonstrated between MiECC and OPCAB, the superiority of MiECC is obvious by the hierarchy of treatments in the probability analysis, which ranked MiECC as the first treatment followed by OPCAB and conventional CPB. Thus, MiECC does not represent a compromise between OPCAB and conventional CPB, but an attractive dominant technique in CABG surgery. These results are consistent with the largest published meta-analysis by Anastasiadis et al. comparing MiECC versus conventional CPB including a total of 2770 patients. A significant decrease in mortality was observed when MiECC was used, which was also associated with reduced risk of postoperative myocardial infarction and neurological events [4]. Similarly, another recent meta-analysis by Benedetto et al. compared MiECC versus OPCAB and resulted in comparable outcomes between these two surgical techniques [5]. As stated in the text, superiority of MiECC observed in the current network meta-analysis, when compared with OPCAB, could be attributed to the fact that MiECC offers the potential for complete revascularization, whereas OPCAB poses a challenge for unexperienced surgeons; especially when distal marginal branches on the lateral and/or posterior wall of the heart need revascularization. This is reflected by a significantly lower number of distal anastomoses performed in OPCAB when compared with conventional CPB. Therefore, taking into consideration the literature published up to date, including the results of the current article, we advocate that MiECC should be integrated in the clinical practice guidelines as a state-of-the-art technique and become a standard practice for perfusion in coronary revascularization surgery.

Ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography with high pitch: diagnostic yield of a volumetric planning scan and effects on dose reduction and imaging strategy

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role of an ultra-low-dose dual-source CT coronary angiography (CTCA) scan with high pitch for delimiting the range of the subsequent standard CTCA scan. METHODS 30 patients with an indication for CTCA were prospectively examined using a two-scan dual-source CTCA protocol (2.0 × 64.0 × 0.6 mm; pitch, 3.4; rotation time of 280 ms; 100 kV): Scan 1 was acquired with one-fifth of the tube current suggested by the automatic exposure control software [CareDose 4D™ (Siemens Healthcare, Erlangen, Germany) using 100 kV and 370 mAs as a reference] with the scan length from the tracheal bifurcation to the diaphragmatic border. Scan 2 was acquired with standard tube current extending with reduced scan length based on Scan 1. Nine central coronary artery segments were analysed qualitatively on both scans. RESULTS Scan 2 (105.1 ± 10.1 mm) was significantly shorter than Scan 1 (127.0 ± 8.7 mm). Image quality scores were significantly better for Scan 2. However, in 5 of 6 (83%) patients with stenotic coronary artery disease, a stenosis was already detected in Scan 1 and in 13 of 24 (54%) patients with non-stenotic coronary arteries, a stenosis was already excluded by Scan 1. Using Scan 2 as reference, the positive- and negative-predictive value of Scan 1 was 83% (5 of 6 patients) and 100% (13 of 13 patients), respectively. CONCLUSION An ultra-low-dose CTCA planning scan enables a reliable scan length reduction of the following standard CTCA scan and allows for correct diagnosis in a substantial proportion of patients. ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE Further dose reductions are possible owing to a change in the individual patient's imaging strategy as a prior ultra-low-dose CTCA scan may already rule out the presence of a stenosis or may lead to a direct transferal to an invasive catheter procedure.

Salient features of the coronary collateral circulation and its clinical relevance

The coronary collateral circulation provides an alternative source of blood supply to myocardium jeopardised by ischaemia. Collaterals enlarge with obstructive coronary artery disease to allow bulk flow, but blood flow deliverable by the native, pre-formed collateral extent can already be sizeable. Genetic determinants contribute significantly to the wide variability observed in both native collateral extent and its capacity to enlarge, and the severity of the coronary stenosis is the most significant environmental determinant for collateral enlargement. The protective effect of a well-developed coronary collateral circulation translates into relevant improvements in all-cause and cardiac mortality in the acute and chronic phases of coronary artery disease, as well as into a reduction of future adverse cardiovascular events.

Developing drugs for use before, during and soon after percutaneous coronary intervention.

INTRODUCTION Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a milestone for treating coronary artery disease (CAD). Antithrombotic therapy is essential to prevent ischemic complications, including the microvascular no-reflow, while minimizing bleeding events. Areas covered: This overview discusses available and developing drugs for PCI including anticoagulants, antiplatelets and treatment of no-reflow. Expert opinion: For years unfractionated heparin (UFH) has been the unique anticoagulant to be used before and during PCI. Enoxaparin showed similar efficacy and safety, yet, based on recent trials, bivalirudin has been shown to have some benefits, particularly for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The evidence concerning new anticoagulants is still preliminary, except for new oral anticoagulants, particularly rivaroxaban that showed intriguing findings and is currently under investigation. Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the standard of care after PCI, but new developments have recently emerged. Indeed, ticagrelor and prasugrel are currently recommended over clopidogrel due to their significant reduction of ischemic events in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) whereas clopidogrel remains the choice in stable CAD. Among new agents, vorapaxar and cangrelor showed positive but limited evidence and might be considered at least in selected patients. Conversely, evidence on effective treatments for no-reflow remains limited and would require future dedicated research.

Changes of coronary plaque composition correlate with C-reactive protein levels in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction following high-intensity statin therapy.

OBJECTIVES Levels of inflammatory biomarkers associate with changes of coronary atheroma burden in statin-treated patients with stable coronary artery disease. This study sought to determine changes of plaque composition in vivo in relation to high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) receiving high-intensity statin therapy. METHODS The IBIS-4 study performed serial (baseline and 13-month), 2-vessel intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and radiofrequency-IVUS of the non-infarct-related arteries in patients with STEMI treated with high-intensity statin therapy. The present analysis included 44 patients (80 arteries) with serial measurements of hs-CRP. RESULTS At follow-up, median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels decreased from 126 to 77 mg/dl, HDL-C increased from 44 to 47 mg/dl, and hs-CRP decreased from 1.6 to 0.7 mg/L. Regression of percent atheroma volume (-0.99%, 95% CI -1.84 to -0.14, p = 0.024) was accompanied by reduction of percent fibro-fatty (p = 0.04) and fibrous tissue (p < 0.001), and increase in percent necrotic core (p = 0.006) and dense calcium (p < 0.001). Follow-up levels of hs-CRP, but not LDL-C, correlated with changes in percent necrotic core (p = 0.001) and inversely with percent fibrous tissue volume (p = 0.008). Similarly, baseline-to-follow-up change of hs-CRP correlated with the change in percent necrotic core volume (p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS In STEMI patients receiving high-intensity statin therapy, stabilization of VH-IVUS-defined necrotic core was confined to patients with lowest on-treatment levels and greatest reduction of hs-CRP. Elevated CRP levels at follow-up may identify progression of high-risk coronary plaque composition despite intensive statin therapy and overall regression of atheroma volume.