Faculty Bibliography

The society for cardiovascular angiography and interventions (SCAI) think tank is a collaborative venture that brings together interventional cardiologists, administrative partners, and select members of the cardiovascular industry community for high-level field-wide discussions. The 2020 think tank was organized into four parallel sessions reflective of the field of interventional cardiology: (a) coronary intervention, (b) endovascular medicine, (c) structural heart disease, and (d) congenital heart disease (CHD). Each session was moderated by a senior content expert and co-moderated by a member of SCAI's emerging leader mentorship program. This document presents the proceedings to the wider cardiovascular community in order to enhance participation in this discussion, create additional dialogue from a broader base, and thereby aid SCAI and the industry community in developing specific action items to move these areas forward.

OBJECTIVES:We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin versus heparin in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing transradial artery coronary intervention (TRI). BACKGROUND:Bivalirudin and radial artery access are independently associated with improved cardiovascular outcomes. However, data supporting a strategy of combining both to achieve additive improvements in cardiovascular outcomes provide conflicting results. METHODS:A systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bivalirudin, in which vascular access sites were reported. The primary outcome was net adverse clinical events (NACE) at 30 days. Secondary outcomes were long-term NACE, short-, and long-term major adverse cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned revascularization, stent thrombosis, and major bleeding. RESULTS:inhibitors, or glycoprotein IIb/IIIa-receptor inhibitors (GPI) use. There were no significant differences between groups in any prespecified secondary outcomes. There was, however, a significant reduction of major bleeding in the bivalirudin group compared with heparin when used in combination with routine GPI (RR = 0.41; 95% CI = 0.19-0.90; p = .03). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing TRI, use of bivalirudin was associated with significantly reduced 30-day NACE compared with heparin. There was no significant difference in long term NACE, ischemic, or bleeding events compared with heparin.

BACKGROUND:For low-risk patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) the recommended optimal discharge timing is inconsistent in guidelines. The European Society of Cardiology guidelines recommend early discharge within 48-72 h, while the American College of Cardiology guidelines do not recommend a specific discharge strategy. In this systematic review and meta-analysis we compared outcomes with early discharge (≤3 days) versus late discharge (>3 days). METHODS:Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were selected after searching MEDLINE and EMBASE database. Meta-analysis was stratified according to study design. Outcomes were reported as random effects risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS:Seven RCTs comprising 1780 patients and 4 observational studies comprising 39,288 patients were selected. The RCT-restricted analysis did not demonstrate significant differences in terms of all-cause mortality (RR, 0.97 [0.23-4.05]) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (RR, 0.84 [0.56-1.26]). Conversely, observational study restricted analysis showed that early vs late discharge strategy was associated with a reduction in all-cause mortality (RR, 0.40 [0.23-0.71]) and MACE (RR, 0.45 [0.26-0.78]). There were no significant differences in hospital readmissions between early vs late discharge in both RCT or observational study analyses. CONCLUSIONS:Early discharge strategy in appropriately selected low-risk patients with STEMI undergoing PCI is safe and it has the potential to improve cost of care.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the association of plasma long pentraxin 3 (PTX3) concentration with angiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated by primary angioplasty. BACKGROUND:Whether concentration of PTX3, a sensitive marker of inflammation, associates with angiographic and clinical outcomes in STEMI patients treated by primary angioplasty is unknown. METHODS:We prospectively enrolled 335 consecutive patients with acute STEMI undergoing primary angioplasty. Blood samples for plasma PTX3 measurement were drawn in all patients at the emergency department before primary angioplasty, and were measured by ELISA method. RESULTS:The median PTX3 concentrations were higher in patients with thrombus burden grade 4 and 5 versus grade <4 on initial coronary angiogram (0.29 ng/ml vs. 0.24 ng/ml, p = .02), thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) grade <3 vs. TIMI grade-3 flow after primary angioplasty (0.31 ng/ml vs. 0.24 ng/ml, p < .001), incomplete versus complete ST-segment resolution within 12 hr after angioplasty (0.29 ng/ml vs. 0.22 ng/ml, p = .001) and in patients who did not survive versus those who survived at 30 days (0.44 ng/ml vs. 0.26 ng/ml, p = .001). A linear correlation was observed between PTX3 concentration and baseline leukocyte count (Spearman correlation = 0.21, p < .001). After adjustment for laboratory and selected clinical variables, patients in the highest quartile of PTX3 concentration (≥0.4 ng/ml) were associated with increased risk of 30-day mortality (hazard ratio = 11.83; 95% confidence interval = 1.52-92.27, p = .01). CONCLUSION:This study suggests that higher plasma PTX3 concentration associates with worse angiographic and clinical outcomes in STEMI patients treated by primary angioplasty.

BACKGROUND:Previous studies published before the era of systematic early invasive strategy have reported a higher mortality in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with heart failure. The aim of our study was to compare the clinical characteristics, outcomes and causes of death of patients according to their heart failure status at admission in a large non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction population with planned early invasive management. METHODS:We performed a post-hoc analysis of the Treatment of Acute Coronary Syndrome with Otamixaban randomised trial which included non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with systematic coronary angiography within 72 h. Patients were categorised according to presence or absence of heart failure (Killip grade ≥2) at admission. RESULTS: = 0.04). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients with heart failure at admission still have worse outcomes than those without heart failure, even with systematic early invasive strategy. Further efforts are needed to improve the prognosis of these high risk patients.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) began reimbursement for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) performed in ambulatory surgical centers (ASC) in January 2020. The ability to perform PCI in an ASC has been made possible due to the outcomes data from observational studies and randomized controlled trials supporting same day discharge (SDD) after PCI. In appropriately selected patients for outpatient PCI, clinical outcomes for SDD or routine overnight observation are comparable without any difference in short-term or long-term adverse events. Furthermore, a potential for lower cost of care without a compromise in clinical outcomes exists. These studies provide the framework and justification for performing PCI in an ASC. The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) supported this coverage decision provided the quality and safety standards for PCI in an ASC were equivalent to the hospital setting. The current position paper is written to provide guidance for starting a PCI program in an ASC with an emphasis on maintaining quality standards. Regulatory requirements and appropriate standards for the facility, staff and physicians are delineated. The consensus document identified appropriate patients for consideration of PCI in an ASC. The key components of an ongoing quality assurance program are defined and the ethical issues relevant to PCI in an ASC are reviewed. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting.

Standard evaluation and management of the patient with suspected or proven cardiovascular complications of coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19), the disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome related-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), is challenging. Routine history, physical examination, laboratory testing, electrocardiography, and plain x-ray imaging may often suffice for such patients, but given overlap between COVID-19 and typical cardiovascular diagnoses such as heart failure and acute myocardial infarction, need frequently arises for advanced imaging techniques to assist in differential diagnosis and management. This document provides guidance in several common scenarios among patients with confirmed or suspected COVID-19 infection and possible cardiovascular involvement, including chest discomfort with electrocardiographic changes, acute hemodynamic instability, newly recognized left ventricular dysfunction, as well as imaging during the subacute/chronic phase of COVID-19. For each, the authors consider the role of biomarker testing to guide imaging decision-making, provide differential diagnostic considerations, and offer general suggestions regarding application of various advanced imaging techniques.

The worldwide pandemic caused by the novel acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 has resulted in a new and lethal disease termed coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). Although there is an association between cardiovascular disease and COVID-19, the majority of patients who need cardiovascular care for the management of ischemic heart disease may not be infected with this novel coronavirus. The objective of this document is to provide recommendations for a systematic approach for the care of patients with an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) during the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a recognition of two major challenges in providing recommendations for AMI care in the COVID-19 era. Cardiovascular manifestations of COVID-19 are complex with patients presenting with AMI, myocarditis simulating an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, stress cardiomyopathy, non-ischemic cardiomyopathy, coronary spasm, or nonspecific myocardial injury, and the prevalence of COVID-19 disease in the U.S. population remains unknown with risk of asymptomatic spread. This document addresses the care of these patients focusing on 1) the varied clinical presentations; 2) appropriate personal protection equipment (PPE) for health care workers; 3) role of the Emergency Department, Emergency Medical System and the Cardiac Catheterization Laboratory; and 4) Regional STEMI systems of care. During the COVID-19 pandemic, primary PCI remains the standard of care for STEMI patients at PCI capable hospitals when it can be provided in a timely fashion, with an expert team outfitted with PPE in a dedicated CCL room. A fibrinolysis-based strategy may be entertained at non-PCI capable referral hospitals or in specific situations where primary PCI cannot be executed or is not deemed the best option.