Searched for: in-biosketch:true
person:raos12
Distal vs Conventional Radial Access for Coronary Angiography and/or Intervention: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials
Ferrante, Giuseppe; Condello, Francesco; Rao, Sunil V; Maurina, Matteo; Jolly, Sanjit; Stefanini, Giulio G; Reimers, Bernhard; Condorelli, Gianluigi; Lefèvre, Thierry; Pancholy, Samir B; Bertrand, Olivier; Valgimigli, Marco
BACKGROUND:Emerging evidence from randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing distal radial access (DRA) with conventional radial access (RA) is available. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to provide a quantitative appraisal of the effects of DRA) vs conventional RA for coronary angiography with or without intervention. METHODS:The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for RCT comparing DRA vs conventional RA for coronary angiography and/or intervention. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random-effects model. The primary endpoint was radial artery occlusion (RAO) at the longest available follow-up. RESULTS:Fourteen studies enrolling 6,208 participants were included. Compared with conventional RA, DRA was associated with a significant lower risk of RAO, either detected at latest follow-up (risk ratio [RR]: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.23-0.56; P < 0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] = 30) or in-hospital (RR: 0.32; 95% CI: 0.19-0.53; P < 0.001; NNT = 28), as well as EASY (Early Discharge After Transradial Stenting of Coronary Arteries) ≥II hematoma (RR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.27-0.96; P = 0.04; NNT = 107). By contrast, DRA was associated with a higher risk of access site crossover (RR: 3.08; 95% CI: 1.88-5.06; P < 0.001; NNT = 12), a longer time for radial puncture (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 3.56; 95% CI: 0.96-6.16; P < 0.001), a longer time for sheath insertion (SMD: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.16-0.58; P < 0.001), and a higher number of puncture attempts (SMD: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.48-0.69; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS:Compared with conventional RA, DRA is associated with lower risks of RAO and EASY ≥II hematoma but requires longer time for radial artery cannulation and sheath insertion, more puncture attempts, and a higher access site crossover.
PMID: 36423974
ISSN: 1876-7605
CID: 5365902
Position Statement on Vascular Access Safety for Percutaneous Devices in AMIÂ Complicated by Cardiogenic Shock
Damluji, Abdulla A; Tehrani, Behnam; Sinha, Shashank S; Samsky, Marc D; Henry, Timothy D; Thiele, Holger; West, Nick E J; Senatore, Fortunato F; Truesdell, Alexander G; Dangas, George D; Smilowitz, Nathaniel R; Amin, Amit P; deVore, Adam D; Moazami, Nader; Cigarroa, Joaquin E; Rao, Sunil V; Krucoff, Mitchell W; Morrow, David A; Gilchrist, Ian C
In the United States, the frequency of using percutaneous mechanical circulatory support devices for acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock is increasing. These devices require large-bore vascular access to provide left, right, or biventricular cardiac support, frequently under urgent/emergent circumstances. Significant technical and logistical variability exists in device insertion, care, and removal in the cardiac catheterization laboratory and in the cardiac intensive care unit. This variability in practice may contribute to adverse outcomes observed in centers that receive patients with cardiogenic shock, who are at higher risk for circulatory insufficiency, venous stasis, bleeding, and arterial hypoperfusion. In this position statement, we aim to: 1) describe the public health impact of bleeding and vascular complications in cardiogenic shock; 2) highlight knowledge gaps for vascular safety and provide a roadmap for a regulatory perspective necessary for advancing the field; 3) propose a minimum core set of process elements, or "vascular safety bundle"; and 4) develop a possible study design for a pragmatic trial platform to evaluate which structured approach to vascular access drives most benefit and prevents vascular and bleeding complications in practice.
PMID: 36265932
ISSN: 1876-7605
CID: 5352542
A Multicenter, Phase 2, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Parallel-Group, Dose-Finding Trial of the Oral Factor XIa Inhibitor Asundexian to Prevent Adverse Cardiovascular Outcomes After Acute Myocardial Infarction
Rao, Sunil V; Kirsch, Bodo; Bhatt, Deepak L; Budaj, Andrzej; Coppolecchia, Rosa; Eikelboom, John; James, Stefan K; Jones, W Schuyler; Merkely, Bela; Keller, Lars; Hermanides, Renicus S; Campo, Gianluca; Ferreiro, José Luis; Shibasaki, Taro; Mundl, Hardi; Alexander, John H
BACKGROUND:Oral activated factor XI (FXIa) inhibitors may modulate coagulation to prevent thromboembolic events without substantially increasing bleeding. We explored the pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of the oral FXIa inhibitor asundexian for secondary prevention after acute myocardial infarction (MI). METHODS:We randomized 1601 patients with recent acute MI to oral asundexian 10, 20, or 50 mg or placebo once daily for 6 to 12 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2, dose-ranging trial. Patients were randomized within 5 days of their qualifying MI and received dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor. The effect of asundexian on FXIa inhibition was assessed at 4 weeks. The prespecified main safety outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding comparing all pooled asundexian doses with placebo. The prespecified efficacy outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis comparing pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg doses with placebo. RESULTS:The median age was 68 years, 23% of participants were women, 51% had ST-segment-elevation MI, 80% were treated with aspirin plus ticagrelor or prasugrel, and 99% underwent percutaneous coronary intervention before randomization. Asundexian caused dose-related inhibition of FXIa activity, with 50 mg resulting in >90% inhibition. Over a median follow-up of 368 days, the main safety outcome occurred in 30 (7.6%), 32 (8.1%), 42 (10.5%), and 36 (9.0%) patients receiving asundexian 10 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg, or placebo, respectively (pooled asundexian versus placebo: hazard ratio, 0.98 [90% CI, 0.71-1.35]). The efficacy outcome occurred in 27 (6.8%), 24 (6.0%), 22 (5.5%), and 22 (5.5%) patients assigned asundexian 10 mg, 20 mg, or 50 mg, or placebo, respectively (pooled asundexian 20 and 50 mg versus placebo: hazard ratio, 1.05 [90% CI, 0.69-1.61]). CONCLUSIONS:In patients with recent acute MI, 3 doses of asundexian, when added to aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor, resulted in dose-dependent, near-complete inhibition of FXIa activity without a significant increase in bleeding and a low rate of ischemic events. These data support the investigation of asundexian at a dose of 50 mg daily in an adequately powered clinical trial of patients who experienced acute MI. REGISTRATION:URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS:gov; Unique identifier: NCT04304534; URL: https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search; Unique identifier: 2019-003244-79.
PMID: 36030390
ISSN: 1524-4539
CID: 5350962
Complete Revascularization vs Culprit Lesion-Only Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Angina-Related Quality of Life in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From the COMPLETE Randomized Clinical Trial
Mehta, Shamir R; Wang, Jia; Wood, David A; Spertus, John A; Cohen, David J; Mehran, Roxana; Storey, Robert F; Steg, Philippe Gabriel; Pinilla-Echeverri, Natalia; Sheth, Tej; Bainey, Kevin R; Bangalore, Sripal; Cantor, Warren J; Faxon, David P; Feldman, Laurent J; Jolly, Sanjit S; Kunadian, Vijay; Lavi, Shahar; Lopez-Sendon, Jose; Madan, Mina; Moreno, Raul; Rao, Sunil V; Rodés-Cabau, Josep; Stankovic, Goran; Bangdiwala, Shrikant I; Cairns, John A
Importance/UNASSIGNED:In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), complete revascularization reduces major cardiovascular events compared with culprit lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether complete revascularization also improves angina-related health status is unknown. Objective/UNASSIGNED:To determine whether complete revascularization improves angina status in patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD. Design, Setting, and Participants/UNASSIGNED:This secondary analysis of a randomized, multinational, open label trial of patient-reported outcomes took place in 140 primary PCI centers in 31 countries. Patients presenting with STEMI and multivessel CAD were randomized between February 1, 2013, and March 6, 2017. Analysis took place between July 2021 and December 2021. Interventions/UNASSIGNED:Following PCI of the culprit lesion, patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD were randomized to receive either complete revascularization with additional PCI of angiographically significant nonculprit lesions or to no further revascularization. Main Outcomes and Measures/UNASSIGNED:Seattle Angina Questionnaire Angina Frequency (SAQ-AF) score (range, 0 [daily angina] to 100 [no angina]) and the proportion of angina-free individuals by study end. Results/UNASSIGNED:Of 4041 patients, 2016 were randomized to complete revascularization and 2025 to culprit lesion-only PCI. The mean (SD) age of patients was 62 (10.7) years, and 3225 (80%) were male. The mean (SD) SAQ-AF score increased from 87.1 (17.8) points at baseline to 97.1 (9.7) points at a median follow-up of 3 years in the complete revascularization group (score change, 9.9 [95% CI, 9.0-10.8]; P < .001) compared with an increase of 87.2 (18.4) to 96.3 (10.9) points (score change, 8.9 [95% CI, 8.0-9.8]; P < .001) in the culprit lesion-only group (between-group difference, 0.97 points [95% CI, 0.27-1.67]; P = .006). Overall, 1457 patients (87.5%) were free of angina (SAQ-AF score, 100) in the complete revascularization group compared with 1376 patients (84.3%) in the culprit lesion-only group (absolute difference, 3.2% [95% CI, 0.7%-5.7%]; P = .01). This benefit was observed mainly in patients with nonculprit lesion stenosis severity of 80% or more (absolute difference, 4.7%; interaction P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance/UNASSIGNED:In patients with STEMI and multivessel CAD, complete revascularization resulted in a slightly greater proportion of patients being angina-free compared with a culprit lesion-only strategy. This modest incremental improvement in health status is in addition to the established benefit of complete revascularization in reducing cardiovascular events.
PMID: 36129696
ISSN: 2380-6591
CID: 5335412
Defining the Normal Values for Left Ventricular Global Longitudinal Strain in Adult Heart Transplanted Patients [Meeting Abstract]
Sikand, N. V.; Maidman, S.; Saric, M.; Reyentovich, A.; Saraon, T.; Rao, S.; Katz, S.; Goldberg, R.; Kadosh, B.; DiVita, M.; Cruz, J.; Riggio, S.; Moazami, N.; Gidea, C.
ISI:000780119701376
ISSN: 1053-2498
CID: 5243562
Transplant Outcomes in Hearts with Moderate to Severe Left Ventricular Hypertrophy After the 2018 OPTN/UNOS Allocation Changes [Meeting Abstract]
Ramachandran, A.; Siddiqui, E.; Reyentovich, A.; Lonze, B.; Saraon, T.; Rao, S.; Katz, S.; Goldberg, R.; Kadosh, B.; DiVita, M.; Cruz, J.; Carillo, J.; Smith, D.; Moazami, N.; Gidea., C.
ISI:000780119700501
ISSN: 1053-2498
CID: 5243542
Results of Heart Transplants from Donation After Circulatory Death (DCD) Donors Using Thoraco-Abdominal Normothermic Regional Perfusion (TA-NRP) Compared to Donation After Brain Death ( [Meeting Abstract]
Gidea, C G; James, L; Smith, D; Carillo, J; Reyentovich, A; Saraon, T; Rao, S; Goldberg, R; Kadosh, B; Ngai, J; Piper, G; Narula, N; Moazami, N
Purpose: In the U.S., heart transplantation from donation after circulatory death (DCD) is increasing. We present our institutional experience of DCD transplantation by using a thoracoabdominal-normothermic regional perfusion (TA-NRP) protocol and compare the results to a cohort concomitantly transplanted, from standard brain death (
EMBASE:2017591137
ISSN: 1557-3117
CID: 5240352
Review of Cardiogenic Shock After Acute Myocardial Infarction-Reply [Comment]
Samsky, Marc D; Rao, Sunil V
PMID: 35230396
ISSN: 1538-3598
CID: 5223242
Heart Team Without Borders: Taking the Heart Team Beyond the Institution [Comment]
Senman, Balimkiz; Rao, Sunil V
PMID: 35225005
ISSN: 2047-9980
CID: 5223232
SCAI SHOCK Stage Classification Expert Consensus Update: A Review and Incorporation of Validation Studies: This statement was endorsed by the American College of Cardiology (ACC), American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP), American Heart Association (AHA), European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Association for Acute Cardiovascular Care (ACVC), International Society for Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT), Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) in December 2021
Naidu, Srihari S; Baran, David A; Jentzer, Jacob C; Hollenberg, Steven M; van Diepen, Sean; Basir, Mir B; Grines, Cindy L; Diercks, Deborah B; Hall, Shelley; Kapur, Navin K; Kent, William; Rao, Sunil V; Samsky, Marc D; Thiele, Holger; Truesdell, Alexander G; Henry, Timothy D
PMID: 35115207
ISSN: 1558-3597
CID: 5223222