Optimal Workflow and Process-Based Performance Measures for Endovascular Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Analysis of the Solitaire FR Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE We report on workflow and process-based performance measures and their effect on clinical outcome in Solitaire FR Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization (STAR), a multicenter, prospective, single-arm study of Solitaire FR thrombectomy in large vessel anterior circulation stroke patients. METHODS Two hundred two patients were enrolled across 14 centers in Europe, Canada, and Australia. The following time intervals were measured: stroke onset to hospital arrival, hospital arrival to baseline imaging, baseline imaging to groin puncture, groin puncture to first stent deployment, and first stent deployment to reperfusion. Effects of time of day, general anesthesia use, and multimodal imaging on workflow were evaluated. Patient characteristics and workflow processes associated with prolonged interval times and good clinical outcome (90-day modified Rankin score, 0-2) were analyzed. RESULTS Median times were onset of stroke to hospital arrival, 123 minutes (interquartile range, 163 minutes); hospital arrival to thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b/3 or final digital subtraction angiography, 133 minutes (interquartile range, 99 minutes); and baseline imaging to groin puncture, 86 minutes (interquartile range, 24 minutes). Time from baseline imaging to puncture was prolonged in patients receiving intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (32-minute mean delay) and when magnetic resonance-based imaging at baseline was used (18-minute mean delay). Extracranial carotid disease delayed puncture to first stent deployment time on average by 25 minutes. For each 1-hour increase in stroke onset to final digital subtraction angiography (or TICI 2b/3) time, odds of good clinical outcome decreased by 38%. CONCLUSIONS Interval times in the STAR study reflect current intra-arterial therapy for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Improving workflow metrics can further improve clinical outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01327989.

Radiotherapy and temozolomide for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: recursive partitioning analysis of the EORTC 26981/22981-NCIC CE3 phase III randomized trial

PURPOSE: The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer and National Cancer Institute of Canada trial on temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy (RT) in glioblastoma (GBM) has demonstrated that the combination of TMZ and RT conferred a significant and meaningful survival advantage compared with RT alone. We evaluated in this trial whether the recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) retains its overall prognostic value and what the benefit of the combined modality is in each RPA class. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Five hundred seventy-three patients with newly diagnosed GBM were randomly assigned to standard postoperative RT or to the same RT with concomitant TMZ followed by adjuvant TMZ. The primary end point was overall survival. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer RPA used accounts for age, WHO performance status, extent of surgery, and the Mini-Mental Status Examination. RESULTS: Overall survival was statistically different among RPA classes III, IV, and V, with median survival times of 17, 15, and 10 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 32%, 19%, and 11%, respectively (P < .0001). Survival with combined TMZ/RT was higher in RPA class III, with 21 months median survival time and a 43% 2-year survival rate, versus 15 months and 20% for RT alone (P = .006). In RPA class IV, the survival advantage remained significant, with median survival times of 16 v 13 months, respectively, and 2-year survival rates of 28% v 11%, respectively (P = .0001). In RPA class V, however, the survival advantage of RT/TMZ was of borderline significance (P = .054). CONCLUSION: RPA retains its prognostic significance overall as well as in patients receiving RT with or without TMZ for newly diagnosed GBM, particularly in classes III and IV.

A systematic review of the performance of ceramic and metal implant abutments supporting fixed implant reconstructions

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the 5-year survival rates and incidences of complications associated with ceramic abutments and to compare them with those of metal abutments. METHODS: An electronic Medline search complemented by manual searching was conducted to identify randomized-controlled clinical trials, and prospective and retrospective studies providing information on ceramic and metal abutments with a mean follow-up time of at least 3 years. Patients had to have been examined clinically at the follow-up visit. Assessment of the identified studies and data abstraction was performed independently by three reviewers. Failure rates were analyzed using standard and random-effects Poisson regression models to obtain summary estimates of 5-year survival proportions. RESULTS: Twenty-nine clinical and 22 laboratory studies were selected from an initial yield of 7136 titles and data were extracted. The estimated 5-year survival rate of ceramic abutments was 99.1% [95% confidence interval (CI): 93.8-99.9%] and 97.4% (95% CI: 96-98.3%) for metal abutments. The estimated cumulative incidence of technical complications after 5 years was 6.9% (95% CI: 3.5-13.4%) for ceramic abutments and 15.9% (95% CI: 11.6-21.5%) for metal abutments. Abutment screw loosening was the most frequent technical problem, occurring at an estimated cumulative incidence after 5 years of 5.1% (95% CI: 3.3-7.7%). All-ceramic crowns supported by ceramic abutments exhibited similar annual fracture rates as metal-ceramic crowns supported by metal abutments. The cumulative incidence of biological complications after 5 years was estimated at 5.2% (95% CI: 0.4-52%) for ceramic and 7.7% (95% CI: 4.7-12.5%) for metal abutments. Esthetic complications tended to be more frequent at metal abutments. A meta-analysis of the laboratory data was impossible due to the non-standardized test methods of the studies included. CONCLUSION: The 5-year survival rates estimated from annual failure rates appeared to be similar for ceramic and metal abutments. The information included in this review did not provide evidence for differences of the technical and biological outcomes of ceramic and metal abutments. However, the information for ceramic abutments was limited in the number of studies and abutments analyzed as well as the accrued follow-up time. Standardized methods for the analysis of abutment strength are needed.

Clinical outcome of patients with and without diabetes mellitus after percutaneous coronary intervention with the resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent: 2-year results from the prospectively pooled analysis of the international global RESOLUTE program

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to describe the process to obtain Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the expanded indication for treatment with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) (Medtronic, Inc., Santa Rosa, California) in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes. BACKGROUND The R-ZES is the first drug-eluting stent specifically indicated in the United States for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes. METHODS We pooled patient-level data for 5,130 patients from the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Program. A performance goal prospectively determined in conjunction with the FDA was established as a rate of target vessel failure at 12 months of 14.5%. In addition to the FDA pre-specified cohort of less complex patients with diabetes (n = 878), we evaluated outcomes of the R-ZES in all 1,535 patients with diabetes compared with all 3,595 patients without diabetes at 2 years. RESULTS The 12-month rate of target vessel failure in the pre-specified diabetic cohort was 7.8% (upper 95% confidence interval: 9.51%), significantly lower than the performance goal of 14.5% (p < 0.001). After 2 years, the cumulative incidence of target lesion failure in patients with noninsulin-treated diabetes was comparable to that of patients without diabetes (8.0% vs. 7.1%). The higher risk insulin-treated population demonstrated a significantly higher target lesion failure rate (13.7%). In the whole population, including complex patients, rates of stent thrombosis were not significantly different between patients with and without diabetes (1.2% vs. 0.8%). CONCLUSIONS The R-ZES is safe and effective in patients with diabetes. Long-term clinical data of patients with noninsulin-treated diabetes are equivalent to patients without diabetes. Patients with insulin-treated diabetes remain a higher risk subset. (The Medtronic RESOLUTE Clinical Trial; NCT00248079; Randomized, Two-arm, Non-inferiority Study Comparing Endeavor-Resolute Stent With Abbot Xience-V Stent [RESOLUTE-AC]; NCT00617084; The Medtronic RESOLUTE US Clinical Trial (R-US); NCT00726453; RESOLUTE International Registry: Evaluation of the Resolute Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent System in a 'Real-World' Patient Population [R-Int]; NCT00752128; RESOLUTE Japan-The Clinical Evaluation of the MDT-4107 Drug-Eluting Coronary Stent [RJ]; NCT00927940).

Evidence for mental ability related individual differences in the attentional blink obtained by an analysis of the P300 component

Attentional blink (AB) refers to impaired identification of a target (T2) when this target follows a preceding target (T1) after about 150-450 ms within a stream of rapidly presented stimuli. Previous research on a possible relation between AB and mental ability (MA) turned out to be highly ambiguous. The present study investigated MA-related individual differences in consolidation of T2 in working memory during the AB as indicated by the P300 component of the event-related potential. Thirty high (HA) and 30 low MA (LA) female participants performed an AB task while their brain activity was recorded. The AB did not differ between the two groups. HA individuals exhibited a larger P300 amplitude and longer P300 latencies during the AB suggesting higher mental effort. This higher mental effort, however, did not result in better performance presumably because of more competition between target and distractor stimuli in HA than LA individuals.

Drug-eluting stents compared to bare-metal stents improve short-term survival in patients with acute myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention: a nationwide prospective analysis of the AMIS Plus registry

BACKGROUND Recently, it has been suggested that the type of stent used in primary percutaneous coronary interventions (pPCI) might impact upon the outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Indeed, drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce neointimal hyperplasia compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). Moreover, the later generation DES, due to its biocompatible polymer coatings and stent design, allows for greater deliverability, improved endothelial healing and therefore less restenosis and thrombus generation. However, data on the safety and performance of DES in large cohorts of AMI is still limited. AIM To compare the early outcome of DES vs. BMS in AMI patients. METHODS This was a prospective, multicentre analysis containing patients from 64 hospitals in Switzerland with AMI undergoing pPCI between 2005 and 2013. The primary endpoint was in-hospital all-cause death, whereas the secondary endpoint included a composite measure of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) of death, reinfarction, and cerebrovascular event. RESULTS Of 20,464 patients with a primary diagnosis of AMI and enrolled to the AMIS Plus registry, 15,026 were referred for pPCI and 13,442 received stent implantation. 10,094 patients were implanted with DES and 2,260 with BMS. The overall in-hospital mortality was significantly lower in patients with DES compared to those with BMS implantation (2.6% vs. 7.1%,p < 0.001). The overall in-hospital MACCE after DES was similarly lower compared to BMS (3.5% vs. 7.6%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for all confounding covariables, DES remained an independent predictor for lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.51,95% CI 0.40-0.67, p < 0.001). Since groups differed as regards to baseline characteristics and pharmacological treatment, we performed a propensity score matching (PSM) to limit potential biases. Even after the PSM, DES implantation remained independently associated with a reduced risk of in-hospital mortality (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.39-0.76, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In unselected patients from a nationwide, real-world cohort, we found DES, compared to BMS, was associated with lower in-hospital mortality and MACCE. The identification of optimal treatment strategies of patients with AMI needs further randomised evaluation; however, our findings suggest a potential benefit with DES.

Clinical Outcomes According to Diabetic Status in Patients Treated With Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.

BACKGROUND Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-2.56; P=0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67-2.10; P=0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.33; P=0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49-3.41; P=0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39-1.25; P=0.23, in nondiabetics). CONCLUSIONS In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.