Impact of age on access site-related outcomes in 469,983 percutaneous coronary intervention procedures : Insights from the British Cardiovascular Intervention Society

© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Determinants and Outcomes of Stroke Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention by Indication

© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.

Meta-Analysis of the Prognostic Impact of Anemia in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Peer reviewed

Self-management of coronary heart disease in angina patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: A mixed methods study.

After having elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients are expected to self-manage their coronary heart disease (CHD) by modifying their risk factors, adhering to medication and effectively managing any recurring angina symptoms but that may be ineffective. Objective: Explore how patients self-manage their coronary heart disease (CHD) after elective PCI and identify any factors that may infl uence that. Design and method: This mixed methods study recruited a convenience sample of patients (n=93) approximately three months after elective PCI. Quantitative data were collected using a survey and were subject to univariate, bivariate and multi-variate analysis. Qualitative data from participant interviews was analysed using thematic analysis. Findings: After PCI, 74% of participants managed their angina symptoms inappropriately. Younger participants and those with threatening perceptions of their CHD were more likely to know how to effectively manage their angina symptoms. Few patients adopted a healthier lifestyle after PCI. Qualitative analysis revealed that intentional non-adherence to some medicines was an issue. Some participants felt unsupported by healthcare providers and social networks in relation to their self-management. Participants reported strong emotional responses to CHD and this had a detrimental effect on their self-management. Few patients accessed cardiac rehabilitation.

Early intravenous beta-blockers in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction before primary percutaneous coronary intervention

The impact of intravenous (IV) beta-blockers before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) on infarct size and clinical outcomes is not well established. This study sought to conduct the first double-blind, placebo-controlled international multicenter study testing the effect of early IV beta-blockers before PPCI in a general ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population. STEMI patients presenting <12 h from symptom onset in Killip class I to II without atrioventricular block were randomized 1:1 to IV metoprolol (2 × 5-mg bolus) or matched placebo before PPCI. Primary endpoint was myocardial infarct size as assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging (CMR) at 30 days. Secondary endpoints were enzymatic infarct size and incidence of ventricular arrhythmias. Safety endpoints included symptomatic bradycardia, symptomatic hypotension, and cardiogenic shock. A total of 683 patients (mean age 62 ± 12 years; 75% male) were randomized to metoprolol (n = 336) or placebo (n = 346). CMR was performed in 342 patients (54.8%). Infarct size (percent of left ventricle [LV]) by CMR did not differ between the metoprolol (15.3 ± 11.0%) and placebo groups (14.9 ± 11.5%; p = 0.616). Peak and area under the creatine kinase curve did not differ between both groups. LV ejection fraction by CMR was 51.0 ± 10.9% in the metoprolol group and 51.6 ± 10.8% in the placebo group (p = 0.68). The incidence of malignant arrhythmias was 3.6% in the metoprolol group versus 6.9% in placebo (p = 0.050). The incidence of adverse events was not different between groups. In a nonrestricted STEMI population, early intravenous metoprolol before PPCI was not associated with a reduction in infarct size. Metoprolol reduced the incidence of malignant arrhythmias in the acute phase and was not associated with an increase in adverse events.

Does Ad Hoc Coronary Intervention Reduce Radiation Exposure? – Analysis of 568 Patients

Background:Advantages and disadvantages of ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention have been described. However little is known about the radiation exposure of that procedure as compared with the staged intervention.Objective:To compare the radiation dose of the ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention with that of the staged procedureMethods:The dose-area product and total Kerma were measured, and the doses of the diagnostic and therapeutic procedures were added. In addition, total fluoroscopic time and number of acquisitions were evaluated.Results:A total of 568 consecutive patients were treated with ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 320) or staged percutaneous coronary intervention (n = 248). On admission, the ad hoc group had less hypertension (74.1% vs 81.9%; p = 0.035), dyslipidemia (57.8% vs. 67.7%; p = 0.02) and three-vessel disease (38.8% vs. 50.4%; p = 0.015). The ad hoc group was exposed to significantly lower radiation doses, even after baseline characteristic adjustment between both groups. The ad hoc group was exposed to a total dose-area product of 119.7 ± 70.7 Gycm2, while the staged group, to 139.2 ± 75.3 Gycm2 (p < 0.001).Conclusion:Ad hoc percutaneous coronary intervention reduced radiation exposure as compared with diagnostic and therapeutic procedures performed at two separate times.

Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE): a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Refinements in stent design affecting strut thickness, surface polymer, and drug release have improved clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a novel, ultrathin strut cobalt-chromium stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer with a thin strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS: We did a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial with minimum exclusion criteria at nine hospitals in Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents. Randomisation was via a central web-based system and stratified by centre and presence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians were not. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularisation at 12 months. A margin of 3·5% was defined for non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104. FINDINGS: Between Feb 24, 2012, and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned 2119 patients with 3139 lesions to treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents (1063 patients, 1594 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (1056 patients, 1545 lesions). 407 (19%) patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Target lesion failure with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (69 cases; 6·5%) was non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (70 cases; 6·6%) at 12 months (absolute risk difference -0·14%, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·97%, p for non-inferiority <0·0004). No significant differences were noted in rates of definite stent thrombosis (9 [0·9%] vs 4 [0·4%], rate ratio [RR] 2·26, 95% CI 0·70-7·33, p=0·16). In pre-specified stratified analyses of the primary endpoint, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with improved outcome compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7 [3·3%] vs 17 [8·7%], RR 0·38, 95% CI 0·16-0·91, p=0·024, p for interaction=0·014). INTERPRETATION: In a patient population with minimum exclusion criteria and high adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for the combined safety and efficacy outcome target lesion failure at 12 months. The noted benefit in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction needs further study. FUNDING: Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, and Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland.

New universal definition of myocardial infarction applicable after complex percutaneous coronary interventions?

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to characterize myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) based on cardiac marker elevation as recommended by the new universal definition and on the detection of late gadolinium enhancement (LGE) by cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR). It is also assessed whether baseline inflammatory biomarkers are higher in patients developing myocardial injury. BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular magnetic resonance accurately assesses infarct size. Baseline C-reactive protein (CRP) and neopterin predict prognosis after stent implantation. METHODS: Consecutive patients with baseline troponin (Tn) I within normal limits and no LGE in the target vessel underwent baseline and post-PCI CMR. The Tn-I was measured until 24 h after PCI. Serum high-sensitivity CRP and neopterin were assessed before coronary angiography. RESULTS: Of 45 patients, 64 (53 to 72) years of age, 33% developed LGE with infarct size of 0.83 g (interquartile range: 0.32 to 1.30 g). A Tn-I elevation >99% upper reference limit (i.e., myocardial necrosis) (median Tn-I: 0.51 μg/l, interquartile range: 0.16 to 1.23) and Tn-I > 3× upper reference limit (i.e., type 4a myocardial infarction [MI]) occurred in 58% and 47% patients, respectively. LGE was undetectable in 42% and 43% of patients with periprocedural myocardial necrosis and type 4a MI, respectively. Agreement between LGE and type 4a MI was moderate (kappa = 0.45). The levels of CRP or neopterin did not significantly differ between patients with or without myocardial injury, detected by CMR or according to the new definition (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports the lack of substantial agreement between the new universal definition and CMR for the diagnosis of small-size periprocedural myocardial damage after complex PCI. Baseline levels of CRP or neopterin were not predictive for the development of periprocedural myocardial damage.

Impact of body mass index on the five-year outcome of patients having percutaneous coronary interventions with drug-eluting stents

The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of body mass index (BMI) on clinical outcome of patients treated by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents. Patients were stratified according to BMI as normal (<25 kg/m(2)), overweight (25 to 30 kg/m(2)), or obese (>30 kg/m(2)). At 5-year follow-up all-cause death, myocardial infarction, clinically justified target vessel revascularization (TVR), and definite stent thrombosis were assessed. A complete dataset was available in 7,427 patients, of which 45%, 22%, and 33% were classified according to BMI as overweight, obese, and normal, respectively. Mean age of patients was significantly older in those with a normal BMI (p <0.05). Incidence of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and dyslipidemia increased as BMI increased (p <0.05). Significantly higher rates of TVR (15.3% vs 12.8%, p = 0.02) and early stent thrombosis (1.5% vs 0.9%, p = 0.04) were observed in the obese compared to the normal BMI group. No significant difference among the 3 BMI groups was observed for the composite of death/myocardial infarction/TVR or for definite stent thrombosis at 5 years, whereas the normal BMI group was at higher risk for all-cause death at 5 years (obese vs normal BMI, hazard ratio 0.74, confidence interval 0.53 to 0.99, p = 0.05; overweight vs normal BMI, hazard ratio 0.73, confidence interval 0.59 to 0.94, p = 0.01) in the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. Age resulted in a linearly dependent covariate with BMI in the all-cause 5-year mortality multivariate model (p = 0.001). In conclusion, the "obesity paradox" observed in 5-year all-cause mortality could be explained by the higher rate of elderly patients in the normal BMI group and the existence of colinearity between BMI and age. However, obese patients had a higher rate of TVR and early stent thrombosis and a higher rate of other risk factors such as diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and hypercholesterolemia.

Value of age, creatinine, and ejection fraction (ACEF score) in assessing risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions in the 'All-Comers' LEADERS trial

Background— The age, creatinine, and ejection fraction (ACEF) score (age/left ventricular ejection fraction+1 if creatinine >2.0 mg/dL) has been established as an effective predictor of clinical outcomes in patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery; however, its utility in “all-comer” patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is yet unexplored. Methods and Results— The ACEF score was calculated for 1208 of the 1707 patients enrolled in the LEADERS trial. Post hoc analysis was performed by stratifying clinical outcomes at the 1-year follow-up according to ACEF score tertiles: ACEFlow ≤1.0225, 1.0225< ACEFmid ≤1.277, and ACEFhigh >1.277. At 1-year follow-up, there was a significantly lower number of patients with major adverse cardiac event–free survival in the highest tertile of the ACEF score (ACEFlow=92.1%, ACEFmid=89.5%, and ACEFhigh=86.1%; P=0.0218). Cardiac death was less frequent in ACEFlow than in ACEFmid and ACEFhigh (0.7% vs 2.2% vs 4.5%; hazard ratio=2.22, P=0.002) patients. Rates of myocardial infarction were significantly higher in patients with a high ACEF score (6.7% for ACEFhigh vs 5.2% for ACEFmid and 2.5% for ACEFlow; hazard ratio=1.6, P=0.006). Clinically driven target-vessel revascularization also tended to be higher in the ACEFhigh group, but the difference among the 3 groups did not reach statistical significance. The rate of composite definite, possible, and probable stent thrombosis was also higher in the ACEFhigh group (ACEFlow=1.2%, ACEFmid=3.5%, and ACEFhigh=6.2%; hazard ratio=2.04, P<0.001). Conclusions— ACEF score may be a simple way to stratify risk of events in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention with respect to mortality and risk of myocardial infarction.

Safety and outcome of patients with an acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction transferred for primary coronary intervention: the Neuchâtel experience

BACKGROUND: Transferring patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) for primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from a community hospital to a PCI centre has been evaluated in randomised trials and shown to be safe and effective. A prolonged transfer time may restrict the benefit of this strategy. AIM: We sought to assess 1) safety of transfer from Neuchâtel to Berne, 2) time intervals of patients transferred either directly from on-site or after evaluation in the local emergency room, and 3) clinical long-term outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: 42 patients with STEMI eligible for reperfusion therapy were prospectively included between January 2003 and June 2004. Twenty patients (48%, group 1) were directly transferred to the PCI centre from on-site. Twenty-two were transferred after initial treatment in the local emergency room: 11 patients (26%, group 2) presented spontaneously at the hospital and 11 patients (26%, group 3) were admitted by the rescue team. No major complication occurred during transport. Median transport time was 33 minutes. Median time from first healthcare contact to balloon consisted of 131 minutes in group 1, 158 minutes in group 2 and 174 minutes in group 3. The overall rate of Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE) at 6 months amounted to 9.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Transfer for primary PCI of our patients with acute STEMI was safe. Direct transfer from on-site to the PCI centre reduced the time of ischaemia. The overall MACE rate was low.

Effects of percutaneous coronary interventions in silent ischemia after myocardial infarction: the SWISSI II randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT: The effect of a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on the long-term prognosis of patients with silent ischemia after a myocardial infarction (MI) is not known. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PCI compared with drug therapy improves long-term outcome of asymptomatic patients with silent ischemia after an MI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, unblinded, controlled trial (Swiss Interventional Study on Silent Ischemia Type II [SWISSI II]) conducted from May 2, 1991, to February 25, 1997, at 3 public hospitals in Switzerland of 201 patients with a recent MI, silent myocardial ischemia verified by stress imaging, and 1- or 2-vessel coronary artery disease. Follow-up ended on May 23, 2006. INTERVENTIONS: Percutaneous coronary intervention aimed at full revascularization (n = 96) or intensive anti-ischemic drug therapy (n = 105). All patients received 100 mg/d of aspirin and a statin. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival free of major adverse cardiac events defined as cardiac death, nonfatal MI, and/or symptom-driven revascularization. Secondary measures included exercise-induced ischemia and resting left ventricular ejection fraction during follow-up. RESULTS: During a mean (SD) follow-up of 10.2 (2.6) years, 27 major adverse cardiac events occurred in the PCI group and 67 events occurred in the anti-ischemic drug therapy group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.55; P<.001), which corresponds to an absolute event reduction of 6.3% per year (95% confidence interval, 3.7%-8.9%; P<.001). Patients in the PCI group had lower rates of ischemia (11.6% vs 28.9% in patients in the drug therapy group at final follow-up; P = .03) despite fewer drugs. Left ventricular ejection fraction remained preserved in PCI patients (mean [SD] of 53.9% [9.9%] at baseline to 55.6% [8.1%] at final follow-up) and decreased significantly (P<.001) in drug therapy patients (mean [SD] of 59.7% [11.8%] at baseline to 48.8% [7.9%] at final follow-up). CONCLUSION: Among patients with recent MI, silent myocardial ischemia verified by stress imaging, and 1- or 2-vessel coronary artery disease, PCI compared with anti-ischemic drug therapy reduced the long-term risk of major cardiac events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00387231.

Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE): a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Refinements in stent design affecting strut thickness, surface polymer, and drug release have improved clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a novel, ultrathin strut cobalt-chromium stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer with a thin strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS We did a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial with minimum exclusion criteria at nine hospitals in Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents. Randomisation was via a central web-based system and stratified by centre and presence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians were not. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularisation at 12 months. A margin of 3·5% was defined for non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104. FINDINGS Between Feb 24, 2012, and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned 2119 patients with 3139 lesions to treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents (1063 patients, 1594 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (1056 patients, 1545 lesions). 407 (19%) patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Target lesion failure with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (69 cases; 6·5%) was non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (70 cases; 6·6%) at 12 months (absolute risk difference -0·14%, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·97%, p for non-inferiority <0·0004). No significant differences were noted in rates of definite stent thrombosis (9 [0·9%] vs 4 [0·4%], rate ratio [RR] 2·26, 95% CI 0·70-7·33, p=0·16). In pre-specified stratified analyses of the primary endpoint, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with improved outcome compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7 [3·3%] vs 17 [8·7%], RR 0·38, 95% CI 0·16-0·91, p=0·024, p for interaction=0·014). INTERPRETATION In a patient population with minimum exclusion criteria and high adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for the combined safety and efficacy outcome target lesion failure at 12 months. The noted benefit in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction needs further study. FUNDING Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, and Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland.