Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND: Prior randomized trials have shown reduced bleeding with bivalirudin compared with unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is not known if this benefit is also present when UFH doses are more tightly controlled (as measured by activated clotting time, ACT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients enrolled in the EVENT (Evaluation of Drug-Eluting Stents and Ischemic Events) registry, were divided into 3 groups, based on the antithrombotic drug used during PCI (UFH monotherapy, UFH+glycoprotein IIb-IIIa receptor inhibitor [GPI], or bivalirudin alone). Propensity score matching was used to adjust for measured covariates (89 variables) and to compare bivalirudin versus UFH monotherapy and bivalirudin versus UFH+GPI groups. The UFH groups were stratified based on ACT achieved (optimal ACT defined as 250-300 for UFH monotherapy and 200-250 when GPI was also used). The primary bleeding outcome was in-hospital composite bleeding, defined as events of access site bleeding, Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction major/minor bleeding, or transfusion. Primary (in-hospital death/myocardial infarction) and secondary ischemic outcomes (death/MI/unplanned repeat revascularization at 12 months) were also evaluated. Propensity score matching yielded 3022 patients for the UFH monotherapy versus bivalirudin comparison and 3520 patients for the UFH+GPI versus bivalirudin comparison. Bivalirudin use was associated with numerically lower bleeding rates at all categories of achieved ACT when compared with UFH (low, optimal, high ACT: 2.5% versus 4.7%, 1.9% versus 6.0%, 3.1% versus 4.8%, respectively) or heparin+GPI groups (low, optimal, high ACT: 0.0% versus 2.7%, 2.7% versus 5.2%, 2.4% versus 6.1%, respectively) and was not associated with any statistically significant increase in either primary or secondary ischemic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Among unselected patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin use during PCI was associated with a lower risk of bleeding at all comparator ACT levels without an increase in ischemic outcomes

BACKGROUND: Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and thienopyridines (clopidogrel or prasugrel) is required after placement of coronary stents to prevent thrombotic complications. Although current clinical practice guidelines recommend 12-month treatment after drug-eluting stent placement, even longer durations may prevent thrombotic events. STUDY DESIGN: The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) Study is comparing the benefits and risks of 12 versus 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in preventing stent thrombosis or major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events in subjects undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for the treatment of coronary artery obstructive lesions. The DAPT Study is a multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that will enroll 15,245 subjects treated with drug-eluting stent (DES) and 5,400 subjects treated with bare-metal stents (BMS). All subjects will receive 12 months of open-label thienopyridine treatment in addition to aspirin. After 12 months, subjects who are free from death, myocardial infarction, or stroke (MACCE), repeat revascularization, and GUSTO (Global Use of Strategies to Open Occluded Coronary Arteries) moderate or severe bleeding events will be randomized to receive either 18 additional months of thienopyridine (clopidogrel or prasugrel) (30 month DAPT arm) or placebo (12 month DAPT arm) plus aspirin. Coprimary end points are MACCE and stent thrombosis. The primary safety end point is GUSTO moderate or severe bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial is designed to define the relative safety and effectiveness of 12 versus 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy across the broad spectrum of patients receiving coronary stents.

BACKGROUND: Dry cough is a common, annoying adverse effect of all angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. The present study was designed to compare the rate of coughs reported in the literature with reported rates in the Physicians' Desk Reference (PDR)/drug label. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE/EMBASE/CENTRAL for articles published from 1990 to the present about randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of ACE inhibitors with a sample size of at least 100 patients in the ACE inhibitors arm with follow-up for at least 3 months and reporting the incidence or withdrawal rates due to cough. Baseline characteristics, cohort enrolled, metrics used to assess cough, incidence, and withdrawal rates due to cough were abstracted. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-five studies that satisfied our inclusion criteria enrolled 198,130 patients. The pooled weighted incidence of cough for enalapril was 11.48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 9.54% to 13.41%), which was ninefold greater compared to the reported rate in the PDR/drug label (1.3%). The pooled weighted withdrawal rate due to cough for enalapril was 2.57% (95% CI, 2.40-2.74), which was 31-fold greater compared to the reported rate in the PDR/drug label (0.1%). The incidence of cough has increased progressively over the last 2 decades with accumulating data, but it has been reported consistently several-fold less in the PDR compared to the RCTs. The results were similar for most other ACE inhibitors. CONCLUSION: The incidence of ACE inhibitor-associated cough and the withdrawal rate (the more objective metric) due to cough is significantly greater in the literature than reported in the PDR/drug label and is likely to be even greater in the real world when compared with the data from RCTs. There exists a gap between the data available from the literature and that which is presented to the consumers (prescribing physicians and patients).

Randomized controlled trials have shown improved short-term bleeding outcomes for bivalirudin compared to unfractionated heparin (UFH) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable angina and acute coronary syndrome. This study analyzed the impact of bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy versus UFH-based anticoagulation strategy on long-term bleeding complications and major adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing PCI in routine clinical practice. From September 2005 to April 2009, 3,367 consecutive patients who underwent PCI for stable angina or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome at Brigham and Women's Hospital were studied. Of these patients, 2,228 patients (66%) received UFH and 1,139 (34%) received bivalirudin. Bleeding complication and major adverse cardiac event rates were compared at discharge, 30 days, and 1 year. In a propensity-score matched analysis, bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy was associated with lower bleeding complications at 30 days (7.0% vs 13.7%, p = 0.001) and 1 year (12.7% vs 18.9%, p = 0.013). Major adverse cardiac event rates were not significantly different between groups at discharge, 30 days, and 1 year (6.4% vs 8.3%, p = 0.103; 9.4% vs 10.9%, p = 0.449; 12.1% vs 14.8%, p = 0.235, respectively). There was no difference in all-cause mortality rates between the 2 groups (0.9% vs 0.8%, p = 0.808, at discharge; 1.9% vs 3.6%, p = 0.112, at 30 days; 3.6% vs 5.5%, p = 0.195, at 1 year). In conclusion, in a real-world cohort of patients undergoing PCI, bivalirudin-based anticoagulation strategy is associated with a significant decrease in risk of bleeding complications after 30 days and 1 year compared to a UFH-based anticoagulation strategy with no increase in risk for major adverse cardiac events.

AIM: In patients with coronary artery disease (CAD), a J-curve relationship has been reported between blood pressure (BP) and future cardiovascular events. However, this is controversial. The purpose of the study was to determine the relationship between on-treatment BP and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 10 001 patients with CAD and a low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level <130 mg/dL, randomized to atorvastatin 80 vs. 10 mg, enrolled in the TNT trial. The post-baseline, time-dependent BPs [systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)] were categorized into 10 mmHg increments. The primary outcome was a composite of death from coronary disease, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), resuscitated cardiac arrest, and fatal or non-fatal stroke. Among the 10 001 patients, 982 (9.82%) experienced a primary outcome at 4.9 years (median) of follow-up. The relationship between SBP or DBP and primary outcome followed a J-curve with increased event rates above and below the reference BP range, both unadjusted and adjusted (for baseline covariates, treatment effect, and LDL levels). A time-dependent, non-linear, multivariate Cox proportional hazard model identified a nadir of 146.3/81.4 mmHg where the event rate was lowest. A similar non-linear relationship with a higher risk of events at lower pressures was found for most of the secondary outcomes of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal MI, or angina. However, for the outcome of stroke, lower was better for SBP. CONCLUSION: In patients with CAD, a low BP (<110-120/<60-70 mmHg) portends an increased risk of future cardiovascular events (except stroke)

BACKGROUND: In patients with carotid artery disease, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and carotid stenting (CAS) are treatment options. Controversy exists as to the relative efficacy of the 2 techniques in preventing late events. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Reduction of Atherothrombosis for Continued Health (REACH) Registry recruited > 68,000 outpatients >/= 45 years of age with established atherothrombotic disease or >/= 3 risk factors for atherothrombosis. Patients with CAS or CEA were chosen and followed up prospectively for the occurrence of cardiovascular events. Propensity score matching was performed to assemble a cohort of patients in whom all baseline covariates would be well balanced. Primary outcome was defined as death or stroke at the 2-year follow-up. Secondary outcome was stroke or transient ischemic attack. Tertiary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke and the individual outcomes. Of the 68 236 patients with atherothrombosis, 3412 patients (5%) had a history of carotid artery revascularization (70% asymptomatic carotid stenosis), 1025 (30%) with CAS and 2387 (70%) with CEA. Propensity score analyses matched 836 CAS patients with 836 CEA patients. At the end of 2 years of follow-up, in the propensity score-matched cohort, CAS was associated with a risk similar to CEA for the primary (hazard ratio [HR], 0.85; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 1.26), secondary (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.96), and tertiary (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.01) composite outcome, death (HR, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.40 to 1.00), and stroke (HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 0.79 to 2.80). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world cohort of patients with a history of carotid artery revascularization, CAS was comparable to CEA for late outcomes

AIMS: To evaluate the relationship between presenting heart rate (HR) and in-hospital events in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). METHODS AND RESULTS: We evaluated 139 194 patients with NSTE-ACS in the CRUSADE quality improvement initiative. The presenting HR was summarized as 10 beat increments. Patients with systolic BP < 90 mm Hg (4030 patients) were excluded to avoid the confounding effect of cardiogenic shock. An adjusted odds ratio (OR) was calculated using a reference OR = 1 for HR of 60-69 b.p.m. after controlling for baseline variables. Primary outcome was a composite of in-hospital events all-cause mortality, non-fatal re-infarction, and stroke. Secondary outcomes were each of these considered separately. From the cohort of 135 164 patients, 8819 (6.52%) patients had a primary outcome (death/re-infarction or stroke) of which 5271 (3.90%) patients died, 3578 (2.65%) patients had re-infarction, and 1038 (0.77%) patients had a stroke during hospitalization. The relationship between presenting HR and primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and stroke followed a 'J-shaped' curve with an increased event rate at very low and high HR even after controlling for baseline variables. However, there was no relationship between presenting HR and risk of re-infarction. CONCLUSION: In contrast to patients with stable CAD, in the acute setting, the relationship between presenting HR and in-hospital cardiovascular outcomes has a 'J-shaped' curve (higher event rates at very low and high HRs). These associations should be considered in ACS prognostic models