Faculty Bibliography

Total occlusion of both coronary ostia is a rare and potentially life-threatening complication following surgical aortic valve replacement. This report presents a case of a patient with known total occlusion of both coronary artery ostia following combined coronary artery bypass graft surgery and aortic valve replacement who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention through a retrograde approach.

AIMS/OBJECTIVE:Prior trials have demonstrated that intravascular imaging (IVI)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) results in less frequent target lesion revascularization and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) compared with standard angiographic guidance. The uptake and associated outcomes of IVI-guided PCI in contemporary clinical practice in the USA remain unclear. Accordingly, temporal trends and comparative outcomes of IVI-guided PCI relative to PCI with angiographic guidance alone were examined in a broad, unselected population of Medicare beneficiaries. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:Retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiary data from 1 January 2013, through 31 December 2019 to evaluate temporal trends and comparative outcomes of IVI-guided PCI as compared with PCI with angiography guidance alone in both the inpatient and outpatient settings. The primary outcomes were 1 year mortality and MACE, defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat PCI, or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Secondary outcomes were MI or repeat PCI at 1 year. Multivariable Cox regression was used to estimate the adjusted association between IVI guidance and outcomes. Falsification endpoints (hospitalized pneumonia and hip fracture) were used to assess for potential unmeasured confounding. The study population included 1 189 470 patients undergoing PCI (38.0% female, 89.8% White, 65.1% with MI). Overall, IVI was used in 10.5% of the PCIs, increasing from 9.5% in 2013% to 15.4% in 2019. Operator IVI use was variable, with the median operator use of IVI 3.92% (interquartile range 0.36%-12.82%). IVI use during PCI was associated with lower adjusted rates of 1 year mortality [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-0.98], MI (aHR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95-0.99), repeat PCI (aHR 0.74, 95% CI 0.73-0.75), and MACE (aHR 0.85, 95% CI 0.84-0.86). There was no association with the falsification endpoint of hospitalized pneumonia (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 0.99-1.04) or hip fracture (aHR 1.02, 95% CI 0.94-1.10). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Among Medicare beneficiaries undergoing PCI, use of IVI has increased over the previous decade but remains relatively infrequent. IVI-guided PCI was associated with lower risk-adjusted mortality, acute MI, repeat PCI, and MACE.

BACKGROUND:Based on recent clinical data, the 2020 ESC guidelines on non-ST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) suggest to tailor antithrombotic strategy on individual thrombotic risk. Nonetheless, prevalence and prognostic impact of the high thrombotic risk (HTR) criteria proposed are yet to be described. METHODS AND RESULTS/RESULTS:PROMETHEUS was a multicenter prospective study comparing prasugrel vs. clopidogrel in ACS patients undergoing PCI. In this analysis, we assessed prevalence and prognostic impact of HTR, defined according to the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines, and if the benefits associated with prasugrel vs. clopidogrel vary with thrombotic risk. Patients were at HTR if presenting with one clinical plus one procedural risk feature. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or unplanned revascularization, at 1 year. Adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated with propensity score stratification and multivariable Cox regression.Among 16065 patients, 4293 (26.7%) were at HTR and 11772 (73.3%) at low-to-moderate thrombotic risk. HTR conferred increased incidence of MACE (23.3 vs. 13.6%, HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.71 - 2.00, p < 0.001) and its single components. Prasugrel was prescribed in patients with less comorbidities and risk factors and was associated with reduced risk of MACE (HTR: adjHR 0.83, 95%CI 0.68-1.02; low-to-moderate risk: adjHR 0.75, 95%CI 0.64-0.88; pinteraction = 0.32). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:High thrombotic risk, as defined by the 2020 ESC NSTE-ACS guidelines, is highly prevalent among ACS patients undergoing PCI. The high thrombotic risk definition had a strong prognostic impact, as it successfully identified patients at increased 1-year risk of ischemic events.

Acute myocardial infarction is an important cause of death worldwide. While it often affects patients of older age, acute myocardial infarction is garnering more attention as a significant cause of morbidity and mortality among young patients (<45 years of age). More specifically, there is a focus on recognizing the unique etiologies for myocardial infarction in these younger patients as nonatherosclerotic etiologies occur more frequently in this population. As such, there is a potential for delayed and inaccurate diagnoses and treatments that can carry serious clinical implications. The understanding of acute myocardial infarction manifestations in young patients is evolving, but there remains a significant need for better strategies to rapidly diagnose, risk stratify, and manage such patients. This comprehensive review explores the various etiologies for acute myocardial infarction in young adults and outlines the approach to efficient diagnosis and management for these unique patient phenotypes.

The role of continuous hemodynamic assessment with pulmonary artery (PA) catheter placement in cardiogenic shock (CS) remains debated. We aimed to assess the association between PA catheter placement and clinical outcomes in patients with CS secondary to ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with an intravascular microaxial flow pump. We identified patients hospitalized with STEMI complicated by CS on mechanical circulatory support with an intravascular microaxial flow pump (Impella, Abiomed, Danvers, Massachusetts) using the National Inpatient Sample database and compared the outcomes in those treated with and without PA catheters. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. The secondary outcomes included in-hospital complications, hospital length of stay, inpatient costs, and temporal trends. The total cohort included 14,635 hospitalizations for STEMI complicated by CS treated with Impella between 2016 and 2020, of whom 5,505 (37.6%) received PA catheters. Over the study period, the use of PA catheters increased significantly from 25.9% to 41.8% (p_trend <0.01). Similarly, the use of Impella increased from 9.9% to 18.9% (p_trend <0.01). After adjustment for baseline characteristics using a multivariate logistic regression analysis, PA catheter use was associated with lower in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.96, p = 0.01) and similar cardiovascular, neurologic, renal, and hematologic complications; length of stay; and inpatient costs compared with no PA catheter use. In conclusion, PA catheter use in patients with STEMI complicated by CS treated with Impella is associated with reduced in-hospital mortality and similar complication rates. Given the mortality benefit, further research is necessary to optimize PA catheter use in patients with STEMI with CS.

BACKGROUND:Contemporary guidelines emphasize the value of incorporating frailty into clinical decision-making regarding revascularization strategies for coronary artery disease. Yet, there are limited data describing the association between frailty and longer-term mortality among coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) patients. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective cohort study (2016-2020, 40 VA medical centers) of US veterans nationwide that underwent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Frailty was quantified by the Veterans Administration Frailty Index (VA-FI), which applies the cumulative deficit method to render a proportion of 30 pertinent diagnosis codes. Patients were classified as non-frail (VA-FI ≤ 0.1), pre-frail (0.1 < VA-FI ≤ 0.2), or frail (VA-FI > 0.2). We used Cox proportional hazards models to ascertain the association of frailty with all-cause mortality. Our primary study outcome was 5-year all-cause mortality; the co-primary outcome was days alive and out of the hospital within the first postoperative year. RESULTS:There were 13,554 CABG patients (median 69 years, 79% White, 1.5% women). The mean pre-operative VA-FI was 0.21 (SD: 0.11); 31% were pre-frail (VA-FI: 0.17) and 47% were frail (VA-FI: 0.31). Frail patients were older and had higher co-morbidity burdens than pre-frail and non-frail patients. Compared with non-frail patients (13.0% [11.4, 14.7]), there was a significant association between frail and pre-frail patients and increased cumulative 5-year all-cause mortality (frail: 24.8% [23.3, 26.1]; HR: 1.75 [95% CI 1.54, 2.00]; pre-frail 16.8% [95% CI 15.3, 18.4]; HR 1.2 [1.08,1.34]). Compared with non-frail patients (mean 362[SD 12]), pre-frail (mean 361 [SD 14]; p < 0.01) and frail patients (mean 358[SD 18]; p < 0.01) spent fewer days alive and out of the hospital in the first postoperative year. CONCLUSIONS:Pre-frailty and frailty were prevalent among US veterans undergoing CABG and associated with worse mid-term outcomes. Given the high prevalence of frailty with attendant adverse outcomes, there may be an opportunity to improve outcomes by identifying and mitigating frailty before surgery.

BACKGROUND:Intracoronary imaging modalities, including intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and optical coherence tomography (OCT), provide valuable supplemental data unavailable on coronary angiography (CA) and have shown to improve clinical outcomes. We sought to compare the clinical efficacy of IVUS, OCT, and conventional CA-guided percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). METHODS:Frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials were performed to compare clinical outcomes of PCI performed with IVUS, OCT, or CA alone. RESULTS:A total of 28 trials comprising 12,895 patients were included. IVUS when compared with CA alone was associated with a significantly reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (risk ratio: [RR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval: [CI] 0.63-0.88), cardiac death (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.43-0.94), target lesion revascularization (RR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.57-0.80), and target vessel revascularization (RR: 0.64, 95% CI: 0.50-0.81). No differences in comparative clinical efficacy were found between IVUS and OCT. Rank probability analysis bestowed the highest probability to IVUS in ranking as the best imaging modality for all studied outcomes except for all-cause mortality. CONCLUSION:Compared with CA, the use of IVUS in PCI guidance provides significant benefit in reducing MACE, cardiac death, and revascularization. OCT had similar outcomes to IVUS, but more dedicated studies are needed to confirm the superiority of OCT over CA.

BACKGROUND:The optimal strategy to prevent no-reflow in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is unknown. AIMS/OBJECTIVE:We aimed to examine the effect of thrombectomy on the outcome of no-reflow in key subgroups and the adverse clinical outcomes associated with no-reflow. METHODS:We performed a post hoc analysis of the TOTAL Trial, a randomised trial of 10,732 patients comparing thrombectomy versus PCI alone. This analysis utilised the angiographic data of 1,800 randomly selected patients. RESULTS:No-reflow was diagnosed in 196 of 1,800 eligible patients (10.9%). No-reflow occurred in 95/891 (10.7%) patients randomised to thrombectomy compared with 101/909 (11.1%) in the PCI-alone arm (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71-1.28; p-value=0.76). In the subgroup of patients who underwent direct stenting, those randomised to thrombectomy compared with PCI alone experienced less no-reflow (19/371 [5.1%] vs 21/216 [9.7%], OR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96). In patients who did not undergo direct stenting, there was no difference between the groups (64/504 [12.7%] vs 75/686 [10.9%)], OR 1.18, 95% CI: 0.82-1.69; interaction p-value=0.02). No-reflow patients had a significantly increased risk of experiencing the primary composite outcome (cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA Class IV heart failure) at 1 year (adjusted hazard ratio 1.70, 95% CI: 1.13-2.56; p-value=0.01). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with STEMI treated by PCI, thrombectomy did not reduce no-reflow in all patients but may be synergistic with direct stenting. No-reflow is associated with increased adverse clinical outcomes.