Faculty Bibliography

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:In the COMPLETE trial (Complete Versus Culprit-Only Revascularization to Treat Multivessel Disease After Early PCI for STEMI), a strategy of complete revascularization reduced the risk of major cardiovascular events compared with culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention in patients presenting with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary artery disease. Patients with diabetes have a worse prognosis following STEMI. We evaluated the consistency of the effects of complete revascularization in patients with and without diabetes. METHODS:values were calculated to evaluate whether there was a differential treatment effect in patients with and without diabetes. RESULTS:=0.27) of complete revascularization was found in patients with diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.43-0.87]) and without diabetes (hazard ratio, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.39-0.60]). CONCLUSIONS:Among patients presenting with STEMI and multivessel disease, the benefit of complete revascularization over a culprit-lesion-only percutaneous coronary intervention strategy was consistent regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes.

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: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.

The outcomes of chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention have considerably improved during the last decade with continued emphasis on improving procedural safety. Vascular access site bleeding remains one of the most frequent complications. Several procedural strategies have been implemented to reduce the rate of vascular access site complications. This state-of-the-art review summarizes and describes the current evidence on optimal vascular access strategies for chronic total occlusion percutaneous coronary intervention.

Stent failure remains the major drawback to the use of coronary stents as a revascularization strategy. Recent advances in imaging have substantially improved our understanding of the mechanisms underlying these occurrences, which have in common numerous clinical risk factors and mechanical elements at the time of stent implantation. In-stent restenosis remains a common clinical problem despite numerous improvements in-stent design and polymer coatings over the past 2 decades. It generates significant health care cost and is associated with an increased risk of death and rehospitalization. Stent thrombosis causes abrupt closure of the stented artery and therefore carries a high risk of myocardial infarction and death. This Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI) Expert Consensus Statement suggests updated practical algorithmic approaches to in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. A pragmatic outline of assessment and management of patients presenting with stent failure is presented. A new SCAI classification that is time-sensitive with mechanistic implications of in-stent restenosis is proposed. Emphasis is placed on frequent use of intracoronary imaging and assessment of timing to determine the precise etiology because that information is crucial to guide selection of the best treatment option. SCAI recommends image-guided coronary stenting at the time of initial implantation to minimize the occurrence of stent failure. When in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis are encountered, imaging should be strongly considered to optimize the subsequent approach.

BACKGROUND:In patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis, percutaneous debulking is a treatment option. However, the outcomes of this approach are less well known. METHODS:We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent percutaneous vegetation debulking for tricuspid valve infective endocarditis from August 2020 to November 2022 at a large academic tertiary care public hospital. The primary efficacy outcome was procedural success defined by clearance of blood cultures. The primary safety outcome was any procedural complication. For the composite outcome of in-hospital mortality or heart block, outcomes were compared (sequential noninferiority and superiority) with published surgical outcomes data. RESULTS:=0.016). CONCLUSIONS:Percutaneous debulking is feasible, effective, and safe in treating patients with tricuspid valve infective endocarditis refractory to medical therapy.