Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), it remains unclear whether intravascular imaging guidance or functional guidance is the best strategy to optimize outcomes and if the results are different in patients with vs without acute coronary syndromes (ACS). OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes with imaging-guided PCI or functionally guided PCI when compared with conventional angiography-guided PCI. METHODS:We searched PUBMED and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials investigating outcomes with intravascular imaging-guided, functionally guided, or angiography-guided PCI. The primary outcome from this network meta-analysis was trial-defined major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE)-a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR). PCI strategies were ranked (best to worst) using P scores. RESULTS:Our search identified 32 eligible randomized controlled trials and included a total of 22,684 patients. Compared with angiography-guided PCI, intravascular imaging-guided PCI was associated with reduced risk of MACE (relative risk [RR]: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.62-0.82), cardiovascular death (RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.42-0.75), MI (RR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.66-0.99), stent thrombosis (RR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.31-0.73), and TLR (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57-0.99). Similarly, when compared with angiography-guided PCI, functionally guided PCI was associated with reduced risk of MACE and MI. Intravascular imaging-guided PCI ranked first for the outcomes of MACE, cardiovascular death, stent thrombosis, and TLR. The results were consistent in the ACS and non-ACS cohorts. CONCLUSIONS:Angiography-guided PCI had consistently worse outcomes compared with intravascular imaging-guided and functionally guided PCI. Intravascular imaging-guided PCI was the best strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events.

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.

There remains significant controversy in the risk stratification and management of patients with anomalous right coronary artery originating from the opposite sinus (R-ACAOS). We present the case of a patient with an inferior ST-elevation myocardial infarction, found to have R-ACAOS and severe atherosclerotic right coronary artery disease, treated with fractional flow reserve and intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention.

In their recent guidelines, the European Society of Hypertension upgraded β blockers, putting them on equal footing with thiazide diuretics, renin-angiotensin system blockers (eg, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers), and calcium channel blockers. The reason offered for upgrading β blockers was the observation that they are often used for many other clinical conditions commonly encountered with hypertension. This upgrade would allow for the treatment of two conditions with a single drug (a so-called twofer). In most current national and international hypertension guidelines, β blockers are only considered to be an alternative when there are specific indications. Compared with the other first-line antihypertensive drug classes, β blockers are significantly less effective in preventing stroke and cardiovascular mortality. To relegate β blockers to an inferiority status as previous guidelines have done was based on the evidence in aggregate, and still stands. No new evidence supports the switch of β blockers back to first-line therapy. We are concerned that this move might lead to widespread harm because of inferior stroke protection.

BACKGROUND:The optimal treatment strategy of patients with pulmonary embolism (PE) (especially those with intermediate risk) continues to evolve and remains controversial. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:This study sought to compare the efficacy and safety of anticoagulation (AC) alone, catheter-directed thrombolysis (CDT), and systemic thrombolysis (ST) in patients with acute PE. METHODS:PubMed and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials or observational studies which compared outcomes of AC alone, CDT, and ST in acute PE. Efficacy outcome was all-cause mortality. Safety outcomes were major bleeding and intracranial hemorrhage (ICH). RESULTS:We identified 45 studies (17 randomized controlled trials, 2 prospective nonrandomized trials, and 26 retrospective observational trials), which included 81,705 patients. When compared with AC alone, CDT had lower mortality (OR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.39-0.80) but higher major bleeding (OR: 1.84; 95% CI: 1.10-3.08) and numerically higher ICH (OR: 1.51; 95% CI: 0.75-3.04). ST was associated with no difference in mortality but higher major bleeding (OR: 2.16; 95% CI: 1.38-3.38) and ICH (OR: 2.26; 95% CI: 1.14-4.48) when compared with AC alone. The risk of mortality (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.46-2.89) and ICH (OR: 1.50; 95% CI: 1.13-1.99) was higher with ST when compared with CDT. Findings were similar when analysis was restricted to trials of intermediate risk PE. CONCLUSIONS:In patients with acute PE, when compared with AC alone, CDT was associated with a lower mortality but higher risk of bleeding. Moreover, CDT had an enhanced safety profile when compared with ST.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are hematopoietic stem cell neoplasms with a high risk of thrombosis, including acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, outcomes after AMI have not been thoroughly characterized. OBJECTIVES/UNASSIGNED:The purpose of this study was to characterize outcomes after AMI in patients with MPNs compared with patients without MPNs. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:Patients with a primary admission of AMI from January 2006 to December 2018 were identified using the National Inpatient Sample. Outcomes of interest included in-hospital death or cardiac arrest (CA) and major bleeding. Propensity score weighting was used to compare outcomes between MPN and non-MPN groups. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED: CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:Among patients hospitalized with AMI, patients with MPNs have a lower risk of in-hospital death or CA compared with patients without MPNs, although they have a higher risk of bleeding. More investigation is needed in order to improve post-AMI bleeding outcomes in patients with MPN.

BACKGROUND:Short-term (≤6 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and DAPT de-escalation become attractive for patients with acute coronary syndrome. METHODS:inhibitor or clopidogrel at 1 month; and (5) guided selection DAPT with genotype or platelet function tests. The primary efficacy outcome (major adverse cardiovascular events) was a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The primary safety outcome was major or minor bleeding. RESULTS:inhibitor was ranked the best for major bleeding and all-cause death. CONCLUSIONS:inhibitor was associated with the lowest risk of major bleeding and all-cause death.

IMPORTANCE:Biomarkers may improve prediction of cardiovascular events for patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), but their importance in addition to clinical tests of inducible ischemia and CAD severity is unknown. OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the prognostic value of multiple biomarkers in stable outpatients with obstructive CAD and moderate or severe inducible ischemia. DESIGN AND SETTING:The ISCHEMIA and ISCHEMIA CKD trials randomized 5,956 participants with CAD to invasive or conservative management from July 2012 to January 2018; 1,064 participated in the biorepository. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest. Secondary outcome was cardiovascular death or MI. Improvements in prediction were assessed by cause-specific hazard ratios (HR) and area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) for an interquartile increase in each biomarker, controlling for other biomarkers, in a base clinical model of risk factors, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and ischemia severity. Secondary analyses were performed among patients in whom core-lab confirmed severity of CAD was ascertained by computed cardiac tomographic angiography (CCTA). EXPOSURES:Baseline levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), high sensitivity troponin T (hsTnT), growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15), N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), lipoprotein a (Lp[a]), high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), Cystatin C, soluble CD 40 ligand (sCD40L), myeloperoxidase (MPO), and matrix metalloproteinase 3 (MMP3). RESULTS:Among 757 biorepository participants, median (IQR) follow-up was 3 (2-5) years, age was 67 (61-72) years, and 144 (19%) were female; 508 had severity of CAD by CCTA available. In an adjusted multimarker model with hsTnT, GDF-15, NT-proBNP and sCD40L, the adjusted HR for the primary outcome per interquartile increase in each biomarker was 1.58 (95% CI 1.22, 2.205), 1.60 (95% CI 1.16, 2.20), 1.61 (95% 1.22, 2.14), and 1.46 (95% 1.12, 1.90), respectively. The adjusted multimarker model also improved prediction compared with the clinical model, increasing the AUC from 0.710 to 0.792 (P < .01) and 0.714 to 0.783 (P < .01) for the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Similar findings were observed after adjusting for core-lab confirmed atherosclerosis severity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:Among ISCHEMIA biorepository participants, biomarkers of myocyte injury/distension, inflammation, and platelet activity improved cardiovascular event prediction in addition to risk factors, LVEF, and assessments of ischemia and atherosclerosis severity. These biomarkers may improve risk stratification for patients with stable CAD.

BACKGROUND:The impact of complete revascularization (CR) on angina-related health status (symptoms, function, quality of life) in chronic coronary disease (CCD) has not been well studied. OBJECTIVES:Among patients with CCD randomized to invasive (INV) vs conservative (CON) management in ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches), we compared the following: 1) the impact of anatomic and functional CR on health status compared with incomplete revascularization (ICR); and 2) the predicted impact of achieving CR in all INV patients compared with CON. METHODS:Multivariable regression adjusting for patient characteristics was used to compare 12-month health status after independent core laboratory-defined CR vs ICR in INV patients who underwent revascularization. Propensity-weighted modeling was then performed to estimate the treatment effect had CR or ICR been achieved in all INV patients, compared with CON. RESULTS:Anatomic and functional CR were achieved in 43.3% and 57.8% of 1,641 INV patients, respectively. Among revascularized patients, CR was associated with improved Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency compared with ICR after adjustment for baseline differences. After modeling CR and ICR in all INV patients, patients with CR and ICR each had greater improvements in health status than CON, with better health status with CR than ICR. The projected benefits of CR were most pronounced in patients with baseline daily/weekly angina and not seen in those with no angina. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients with CCD in ISCHEMIA, health status improved more with CR compared with ICR or CON, particularly in those with frequent angina. Anatomic and functional CR provided comparable improvements in quality of life. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).