Comparison of dual antiplatelet therapy versus oral anticoagulation following transcatheter aortic valve replacement: A retrospective single-center registry analysis

Background: The choice of optimal antithrombotic regimen after transcatheter aortic valve replace-ment (TAVR) remains a matter of debate. The objective of this study was to compare both efficacy and safety outcomes based on the type of antithrombotic therapy prescribed after TAVR Methods: This is a retrospective analysis of 514 consecutive patients treated with either dual antiplate¬let therapy (DAPT) (n = 315; 61.3%) or oral anticoagulation (OAC) plus clopidogrel (n = 199; 38.7%) for a minimum of 3 months after TAVR followed by antiplatelet monotherapy or OAC only, respectively. Patients had pre-defined clinical and echocardiographic follow-ups at 30 days, 6 and 12 months. The key efficacy endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke and valve throm¬bosis at 1 year. The key safety endpoint was the occurrence of life-threatening/major bleeding at 1 year. Results: Baseline characteristics did not differ between both groups, except for a higher incidence of atrial fibrillation in the OAC group. No significant differences in both efficacy and safety endpoints were observed at 30 days and 6 months. At 1 year, the key efficacy endpoint occurred in 21.5% of the DAPT group compared to 19.7% of the OAC group (p = 0.61). The key safety endpoint occurred in 25.1% and 27.8%, respectively (p = 0.53). However, after 1 year valve thrombosis was reported in 8 (2.5%) patients in the DAPT group but not in the OAC group (p = 0.02). Conclusions: OAC after TAVR seems to reduce the risk of clinical valve thrombosis without a statisti-cally significant increase in bleeding complications

Two-year Optical Coherence Tomography Findings after Balloon-Only Treatment of Bioresorbable Scaffold Restenosis in a Calcified Coronary Lesion: A Case Report

<p><b>Article full text</b></p> <p><br></p> <p>The full text of this article can be found here<b>.</b> <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40119-016-0068-0">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40119-016-0068-0</a></p><p></p> <p><br></p> <p><b>Provide enhanced content for this article</b></p> <p><br></p> <p>If you are an author of this publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/”mailto:[email protected]”"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p> <p><br></p> <p>The journal offers a range of additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are charged for hosting additional open access content.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Other enhanced features include, but are not limited to:</p> <p><br></p> <p>• Slide decks</p> <p>• Videos and animations</p> <p>• Audio abstracts</p> <p>• Audio slides</p

Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Early Generation Versus New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in 481 Patients Undergoing Rotational Atherectomy: A Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION New-generation drug-eluting stents (NG-DES) are superior to early generation DES (EG-DES) in the majority of lesion and patient subsets, but comparative data in patients with severely calcified coronary lesions are lacking. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes of EG-DES and NG-DES in patients undergoing rotational atherectomy (RA) in calcified lesions. METHODS Data of 268 patients (288 lesions) treated with EG-DES and 213 patients (225 lesions) receiving NG-DES after RA were retrospectively analyzed from a single-center registry. All major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were assessed at 2 years. RESULTS Compared to the EG-DES group, patients with NG-DES more commonly had diabetes mellitus (31.9% vs. 40.9%; p = 0.04), left main lesions (7.6% vs. 17.3%; p < 0.001) and chronic total occlusions (3.5% vs. 8.5%; p = 0.016), and had a higher total stent length (30.5, IQR 20-40 mm, vs. 38, IQR 22-53 mm, p < 0.001). The Kaplan-Meier estimated rate of cardiovascular events at 2 years showed a lower incidence of death (13.5% vs. 8.2%, log-rank p = 0.13; adjusted HR after Cox regression analysis 0.49; 95% CI 0.26-0.92; p = 0.03) and a lower MACE rate (31.1% vs. 21.1%, log-rank p = 0.04; adjusted HR 0.65; 95% CI 0.42-0.98; p = 0.04) in the NG-DES group. CONCLUSIONS Although RA is performed in more complex patients and lesions in the NG-DES era, use of NG-DES is associated with lower rates of death and MACE at 2 years as compared to EG-DES

Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Early Generation Versus New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in 481 Patients Undergoing Rotational Atherectomy: A Retrospective Analysis

<p><b>Article full text</b></p> <p><br></p> <p>The full text of this article can be found here<b>. </b><a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40119-017-0101-y">https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40119-017-0101-y</a></p><p></p> <p><br></p> <p><b>Provide enhanced content for this article</b></p> <p><br></p> <p>If you are an author of this publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/”mailto:[email protected]”"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p> <p><br></p> <p>The journal offers a range of additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are charged for hosting additional open access content.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Other enhanced features include, but are not limited to:</p> <p><br></p> <p>• Slide decks</p> <p>• Videos and animations</p> <p>• Audio abstracts</p> <p>• Audio slides</p

Impact of Lesion Preparation Technique on Side Branch Compromise in Calcified Coronary Bifurcations: A Subgroup Analysis of the PREPARE-CALC Trial

Objectives. To analyze the impact of different techniques of lesion preparation of severely calcified coronary bifurcation lesions. Background. The impact of different techniques of lesion preparation of severely calcified coronary bifurcation lesions is poorly investigated. Methods. We performed an as-treated analysis on 47 calcified bifurcation lesions treated with scoring/cutting balloons (SCB) and 68 lesions treated with rotational atherectomy (RA) in the PREPARE-CALC trial. Compromised side branch (SB) as assessed in the final angiogram was the primary outcome measure and was defined as any significant stenosis, dissection, or thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow <3. Results. True bifurcation lesions were present in 49% vs. 43% of cases in the SCB and RA groups, respectively. After stent implantation, SB balloon dilatation was necessary in around one-third of cases (36% vs. 38%; p=0.82), and a two-stent technique was performed in 21.3% vs. 25% (p=0.75). At the end of the procedure, the SB remained compromised in 15 lesions (32%) in the SCB group and 5 lesions (7%) in the RA group (p=0.001). Large coronary dissections were more frequently observed in the SCB group (13% vs. 2%; p=0.02). Postprocedural levels of cardiac biomarkers were significantly higher in patients with a compromised SB at the end of the procedure. Conclusions. In the PREPARE-CALC trial, side branch compromise was more frequently observed after lesion preparation with SCB as compared with RA. Consequently, in calcified bifurcation lesions, an upfront debulking with an RA-based strategy might optimize the result in the side branch

Polymer-free drug-coated vs. bare-metal coronary stents in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a subgroup analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial

Aims: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS) after PCI with either a drug-coated stent (DCS) or a bare-metal stent (BMS), followed by 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy and to explore the impact of the timing of NCS. Methods: This is a subgroup analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial. The primary safety end point was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis, and the primary efficacy end point was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: Out of 2432 patients included in the LEADERS FREE trial, 278 (11.4%) underwent NCS within 1 year after PCI. Among NCS patients, the 1-year safety end point was numerically lower with DCS; however, this difference was not significant as compared to BMS (4.7% vs. 10.1%, HR: 0.459 [0.178–1.183], p = 0.099), clinically driven TLR was significantly lower after DCS (2.4% vs. 8.3%, HR: 0.281 [0.079—0.996], p = 0.036), and BARC 3–5 bleeding was similar with DCS vs. BMS (10.2% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.438). In patients treated with BMS, NCS within 3 months after PCI was associated with higher incidence of the safety end point than NCSs performed later: 14.9% vs. 4.4%, HR: 3.586 [1.012–12.709], p = 0.034. The timing of surgery had no impact on patients treated with DCS (4.7% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.947). Conclusions: Among patients undergoing NCS after PCI, DCS-treated patients had a lower probability of clinically driven TLR compared with BMS. However, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of the primary composite safety end point or bleeding complications. Early NCS after BMS-PCI was associated with impaired safety, while the timing of NCS had no such influence after DCS implantation. Graphic abstract: [Figure not available: see fulltext.

Impact of prosthesis-iteration evolution and sizing practice on the incidence of prosthesis–patient mismatch after transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Objectives: To investigate the impact of the introduction of the next generation self-expanding (SE) and balloon-expandable (BE) transcatheter heart valves (THVs) on the incidence of prosthesis–patient mismatch (PPM) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Background: PPM is a risk factor for accelerated degeneration of bioprosthetic aortic valves. Data on PPM after TAVR are derived mainly from studies of older generation THVs. Methods: PPM was assessed at 30 days post-TAVR with the older generation (Medtronic CoreValve, n = 120 and Edwards Sapien XT, n = 121) and the next generation THVs (Medtronic Evolut R/Pro, n = 136 and Edwards Sapien 3, n = 363). Results: The incidence of any and severe PPM was 15.1% and 0.0% for the older generation THVs, and 42.8% and 12.1% for the next generation THVs. The incidence of moderate and severe PPM was 23.3% and 3.5% in patients who received an Evolut R/Pro vs. 33.1% and 14.7% in those who received a Sapien 3 (P < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, TAVR with the Sapien 3 THV was not associated with PPM, while left ventricular ejection fraction (0.97 [0.95–0.99], P = 0.002), history of myocardial infarction (2.09 [1.00–4.34], P = 0.049), annulus maximum diameter (0.84 [0.77–0.92], P < 0.001), and THV oversizing (0.90 [0.87–0.94], P < 0.001) were independently associated with PPM. In Sapien 3, the risk of any and severe PPM was higher in those with no oversizing (odds ratio: 3.25 [1.23–8.53], P = 0.017 and 5.79[2.33–14.36], P < 0.001). Conclusions: The incidence of PPM in contemporary TAVR is significant, especially with the next generation BE THV without adequate oversizing

Patients with higher-atherothrombotic risk vs. lower-atherothrombotic risk undergoing coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials.

BACKGROUND Patients with atherothrombotic risk are at high hazard of ischemic events. Preventive medicine plays a major role in modifying their outcomes. Whether the choice of a BP-SES or DP-EES can contribute to the occurrence of events remains unclear. We sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with higher atherothrombotic risk (H-ATR) versus lower atherothrombotic risk (L-ATR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). METHODS Patients (n = 2361) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into H-ATR vs. L-ATR. L-ATR patients had ≤ 1 and H-ATR ≥ 2 of the following criteria: presentation in ACS, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI/CABG, or previous stroke. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and stent thrombosis (ST) at three years. RESULTS H-ATR patients (n = 1023) were more morbid than L-ATR patients (n = 1338). TLF rate was significantly higher in H-ATR patients as compared with L-ATR (11.6% vs. 7.0%; HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.20, p < 0.0001). With BP-SES TLF rates were numerically lower as compared with DP-EES in H-ATR (10.5% vs. 13.5%; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14, p = 0.20) and significantly lower in L-ATR (5.6% vs. 9.8%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, p = 0.006). CONCLUSION In the era of newer-generation DES, patients with H-ATR still are at hazard for ischemic events. Patients with BP-SES had lower TLF rates as compared with DP-EES, most consistent in L-ATR whereas in H-ATR patients most probably secondary preventive strategies are of higher value. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrial.gov. NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946. https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946