Use of the Instantaneous Wave-free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve in PCI

BACKGROUND: Coronary revascularization guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is associated with better patient outcomes after the procedure than revascularization guided by angiography alone. It is unknown whether the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR), an alternative measure that does not require the administration of adenosine, will offer benefits similar to those of FFR. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2492 patients with coronary artery disease, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo either iFR-guided or FFR-guided coronary revascularization. The primary end point was the 1-year risk of major adverse cardiac events, which were a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. The trial was designed to show the noninferiority of iFR to FFR, with a margin of 3.4 percentage points for the difference in risk. RESULTS: At 1 year, the primary end point had occurred in 78 of 1148 patients (6.8%) in the iFR group and in 83 of 1182 patients (7.0%) in the FFR group (difference in risk, -0.2 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -2.3 to 1.8; P<0.001 for noninferiority; hazard ratio, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.68 to 1.33; P=0.78). The risk of each component of the primary end point and of death from cardiovascular or noncardiovascular causes did not differ significantly between the groups. The number of patients who had adverse procedural symptoms and clinical signs was significantly lower in the iFR group than in the FFR group (39 patients [3.1%] vs. 385 patients [30.8%], P<0.001), and the median procedural time was significantly shorter (40.5 minutes vs. 45.0 minutes, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Coronary revascularization guided by iFR was noninferior to revascularization guided by FFR with respect to the risk of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year. The rate of adverse procedural signs and symptoms was lower and the procedural time was shorter with iFR than with FFR. (Funded by Philips Volcano; DEFINE-FLAIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02053038 .)info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Machine Learning Framework to Identify Individuals at Risk of Rapid Progression of Coronary Atherosclerosis: From the PARADIGM Registry.

Background Rapid coronary plaque progression (RPP) is associated with incident cardiovascular events. To date, no method exists for the identification of individuals at risk of RPP at a single point in time. This study integrated coronary computed tomography angiography-determined qualitative and quantitative plaque features within a machine learning (ML) framework to determine its performance for predicting RPP. Methods and Results Qualitative and quantitative coronary computed tomography angiography plaque characterization was performed in 1083 patients who underwent serial coronary computed tomography angiography from the PARADIGM (Progression of Atherosclerotic Plaque Determined by Computed Tomographic Angiography Imaging) registry. RPP was defined as an annual progression of percentage atheroma volume ≥1.0%. We employed the following ML models: model 1, clinical variables; model 2, model 1 plus qualitative plaque features; model 3, model 2 plus quantitative plaque features. ML models were compared with the atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, Duke coronary artery disease score, and a logistic regression statistical model. 224 patients (21%) were identified as RPP. Feature selection in ML identifies that quantitative computed tomography variables were higher-ranking features, followed by qualitative computed tomography variables and clinical/laboratory variables. ML model 3 exhibited the highest discriminatory performance to identify individuals who would experience RPP when compared with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, the other ML models, and the statistical model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve in ML model 3, 0.83 [95% CI 0.78-0.89], versus atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk score, 0.60 [0.52-0.67]; Duke coronary artery disease score, 0.74 [0.68-0.79]; ML model 1, 0.62 [0.55-0.69]; ML model 2, 0.73 [0.67-0.80]; all P&lt;0.001; statistical model, 0.81 [0.75-0.87], P=0.128). Conclusions Based on a ML framework, quantitative atherosclerosis characterization has been shown to be the most important feature when compared with clinical, laboratory, and qualitative measures in identifying patients at risk of RPP

Bivalirudin started during emergency transport for primary PCI.

BACKGROUND: Bivalirudin, as compared with heparin and glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, has been shown to reduce rates of bleeding and death in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Whether these benefits persist in contemporary practice characterized by prehospital initiation of treatment, optional use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors and novel P2Y12 inhibitors, and radial-artery PCI access use is unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2218 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who were being transported for primary PCI to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated or low-molecular-weight heparin with optional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (control group). The primary outcome at 30 days was a composite of death or major bleeding not associated with coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG), and the principal secondary outcome was a composite of death, reinfarction, or non-CABG major bleeding. RESULTS: Bivalirudin, as compared with the control intervention, reduced the risk of the primary outcome (5.1% vs. 8.5%; relative risk, 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.82; P=0.001) and the principal secondary outcome (6.6% vs. 9.2%; relative risk, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.54 to 0.96; P=0.02). Bivalirudin also reduced the risk of major bleeding (2.6% vs. 6.0%; relative risk, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66; P<0.001). The risk of acute stent thrombosis was higher with bivalirudin (1.1% vs. 0.2%; relative risk, 6.11; 95% CI, 1.37 to 27.24; P=0.007). There was no significant difference in rates of death (2.9% vs. 3.1%) or reinfarction (1.7% vs. 0.9%). Results were consistent across subgroups of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Bivalirudin, started during transport for primary PCI, improved 30-day clinical outcomes with a reduction in major bleeding but with an increase in acute stent thrombosis. (Funded by the Medicines Company; EUROMAX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01087723.)

Comparison Between Treatment Outcomes in Ischaemic Heart Disease Using Surveys of Medical Care in Japan,

Objective The treatments of ischaemic heart disease have drastically changed due to the developments in coronary-anterial bypass graft operations and coronary intervention procedures. The treatment outcomes of these procedures are compared using observational data. Method The data used are microdata from Surveys of Medical Care (SMC) in Japan from 1992 to 1998, which are claim data, not using a randomized controlled trial. Hence, endogeneity in the choice of treatment should be important and thus both the instrumental variables method and the nonparametric propensity score matching method are adopted for estimation. Result Although the instrumental variables method and nonparametric propensity score matching method produce different results in many cases, predominance of the latter over the instrumental method is confirmed. Although claimed with some reservations, patients treated with precutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) have significantly lower possibility of severe heart failure than those treated with coronary artery by-pass grafting (CABG). The results of comparing invasive procedures with preserving treatment depend on the existence of constraints. In data for more acute situations, invasive procedures have a significantly higher possibility of severe heart failure than preserving treatment.

Women, men and coronary heart disease: a review of the qualitative literature

Aim. This paper presents a review of the qualitative literature which examines the experiences of patients with coronary heart disease. The paper also assesses whether the experiences of both female and male patients are reflected in the literature and summarizes key themes. Background. Understanding patients' experiences of their illness is important for coronary heart disease prevention and education. Qualitative methods are particularly suited to eliciting patients' detailed understandings and perceptions of illness. As much previous research has been 'gender neutral', this review pays particular attention to gender. Methods. Published papers from 60 qualitative studies were identified for the review through searches in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PREMEDLINE, PsychINFO, Social Sciences Citation Index and Web of Science using keywords related to coronary heart disease. Findings. Early qualitative studies of patients with coronary heart disease were conducted almost exclusively with men, and tended to generalize from 'male' experience to 'human' experience. By the late 1990s this pattern had changed, with the majority of studies including women and many being conducted with solely female samples. However, many studies that include both male and female coronary heart disease patients still do not have a specific gender focus. Key themes in the literature include interpreting symptoms and seeking help, belief about coronary 'candidates' and relationships with health professionals. The influence of social roles is important: many female patients have difficulties reconciling family responsibilities and medical advice, while male patients worry about being absent from work. Conclusions. There is a need for studies that compare the experiences of men and women. There is also an urgent need for work that takes masculinity and gender roles into account when exploring the experiences of men with coronary heart disease