Faculty Bibliography

Background Although current guidelines recommend dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 3 to 6 months following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), there are no studies directly comparing outcomes of different durations of DAPT following TAVR. Methods and Results PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Database were searched through November 2020 to identify clinical studies that investigated single antiplatelet therapy versus DAPT use following TAVR. Studies using oral anticoagulants and antiplatelet therapy concomitantly were excluded. The DAPT group was subdivided by the duration of DAPT. We extracted the risk ratios (RRs) of major or life-threatening bleeding, stroke, and all-cause mortality. Four randomized controlled trials, 2 propensity-score matched studies, and 1 observational study were identified, yielding a total of 2498 patients who underwent TAVR assigned to the single antiplatelet therapy group (n=1249), 3-month DAPT group (n=485), or 6-month DAPT group (n=764). Pooled analyses demonstrated that when compared with the single antiplatelet therapy group, the rates of major or life-threatening bleeding were significantly higher in the 3- and 6-month DAPT groups (RR [95% CI]=2.13 [1.33-3.40], P=0.016; RR [95% CI]=2.54 [1.49-4.33], P=0.007, respectively) with no difference between the 3-month DAPT versus 6-month DAPT groups. The rates of stroke and all-cause mortality were similar among the 3 groups. Conclusions In this network meta-analysis of antiplatelet therapy following TAVR, single antiplatelet therapy with aspirin had lower bleeding without increasing stroke or death when compared with either 3- or 6-month DAPT.

Guideline-based medical therapy is the foundation of treatment for individuals with coronary artery disease. However, revascularization with either percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting may be beneficial in patients with acute coronary syndromes, refractory symptoms, or in other specific scenarios (eg, left main disease and heart failure). While the goal of percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting is to achieve complete revascularization, anatomical and ischemic definitions of complete revascularization and their methodology for assessment remain highly variable. Such lack of consensus invariably contributes to the absence of standardized approaches for invasive treatment of coronary artery disease. Herein, we propose a novel, comprehensive, yet pragmatic algorithm with both anatomical and ischemic parameters that aims to provide a systematic method to assess complete revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary artery bypass grafting in both clinical practice and clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Alport syndrome is a rare genetic disorder that affects as many as 60,000 persons in the USA and a total of 103,000 persons (<5 per 10,000) in the European Union [1, 2]. It is the second most common inherited cause of kidney failure and is characterized by progressive loss of kidney function that often leads to end-stage kidney disease. Currently, there are no approved disease-specific agents for therapeutic use. We designed a phase 3 study (CARDINAL; NCT03019185) to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of bardoxolone methyl in patients with Alport syndrome. METHODS:The CARDINAL phase 3 study is an international, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized registrational trial. Eligible patients were of ages 12-70 years with confirmed genetic or histologic diagnosis of Alport syndrome, eGFR 30-90 mL/min/1.73 m2, and urinary albumin to creatinine ratio (UACR) ≤3,500 mg/g. Patients with B-type natriuretic peptide values >200 pg/mL at baseline or with significant cardiovascular histories were excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to bardoxolone methyl or placebo, with stratification by baseline UACR. RESULTS:A total of 371 patients were screened, and 157 patients were randomly assigned to receive bardoxolone methyl (n = 77) or placebo (n = 80). The average age at screening was 39.2 years, and 23 (15%) were <18 years of age. Of the randomized population, 146 (93%) had confirmed genetic diagnosis of Alport syndrome, and 62% of patients had X-linked mode of inheritance. Mean baseline eGFR was 62.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, and the geometric mean UACR was 141.0 mg/g. The average annual rate of eGFR decline prior to enrollment in the study was -4.9 mL/min/1.73 m2 despite 78% of the patient population receiving ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or ARB therapy. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:CARDINAL is one of the largest interventional, randomized controlled trials in Alport syndrome conducted to date. Despite the use of ACEi or ARB, patients were experiencing significant loss of kidney function prior to study entry.

BACKGROUND:Potent P2Y12 inhibitors reduce cardiovascular events but increase bleeding in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Elderly patients are at increased risk of bleeding and whether the benefit-risk ratio of potent P2Y12 inhibitors remains favorable is not known. OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:To investigate the efficacy and safety of potent P2Y12 inhibitors versus clopidogrel in elderly patients with ACS. METHODS:PUBMED and EMBASE were searched through July 2020 for randomized control trials (RCTs) or subgroup analyses of RCTs investigating potent P2Y12 inhibitors (prasugrel or ticagrelor) or clopidogrel in elderly (age ≥ 65 years) patients with ACS. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). RESULTS:=0%). In a subgroup analysis, ticagrelor reduced all-cause mortality (HR: 0.73; 95% CI [0.55-0.98]) and cardiovascular death (HR: 0.70; 95% CI [0.54-0.90]) compared with clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS:Among elderly patients with ACS, potent P2Y12 inhibitors reduce cardiovascular death but increase bleeding with no difference in MACE or all-cause death when compared with clopidogrel. Further RCTs are needed to refine P2Y12 inhibitor selection for elderly patients with ACS.

Data on ischemic and bleeding outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are scarce. We aimed to evaluate the association between CKD and ischemic and bleeding outcomes in HBR patients who underwent PCI. Among 10,502 patients in the four post-approval registries evaluating patients undergoing PCI, 2,300 patients presented with at least one major or two minor ARC-HBR criteria. CKD was defined as eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m². These HBR patients were divided into 3 groups: eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m² defined as severe CKD (N = 221), eGFR 30- < 60 mL/min/1.73 m² defined as moderate CKD (N = 970), eGFR ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73 m² defined as no CKD (N = 1,109). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis, and the safety endpoint was major bleeding up to 4-year follow-up. HBR patients with CKD were more often female and had higher rates of comorbidities compared to those without CKD. Reduced renal function was associated with higher rates of the primary endpoint (severe CKD vs. moderate CKD vs. no CKD: 30.2% vs. 12.5% vs. 9.1%, P < 0.01) as well as major bleeding (10.3% vs. 8.9% vs. 6.4%, P = 0.03). After adjustment, severe CKD and moderate CKD in HBR patients remained independent predictors for the primary endpoint (HR [95%CI] 2.84 [1.94-4.16], P < 0.01, 1.48 [1.10-2.00], P < 0.01) compared to those with no CKD. However, decreased renal function was no longer significantly associated with major bleeding after adjustment. In conclusions, in HBR patients undergoing PCI, CKD has an important impact on major ischemic events after PCI.