63 research outputs found
Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffolds in Daily Clinical Practice Is the Essential Really Invisible to the Eyes?∗
Evaluation of Four-Year Coronary Artery Response After Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation Using Serial Quantitative Intravascular Ultrasound and Computer-Assisted Grayscale Value Analysis for Plaque Composition in Event-Free Patients
ObjectivesThis study sought to evaluate the long-term arterial response after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation.BackgroundSirolimus-eluting stents are effective in inhibiting neointimal hyperplasia without affecting plaque volume behind the stent struts at six months.MethodsSerial quantitative intravascular ultrasound and computer-assisted grayscale value analysis over four years were performed in 23 event-free patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents.ResultsIn the first two years, the mean plaque volume (155.5 ± 42.8 mm3post-procedure and 156.8 ± 57.7 mm3at two years, p = 0.86) and plaque compositional change expressed as mean percent hypoechogenic tissue of the plaque behind the stent struts (78.9 ± 8.6% post-procedure and 78.2 ± 8.9% at two years, p = 0.67) did not significantly change. However, significant plaque shrinking (change in plaque volume = −18.4 mm3, p = 0.02) with an increase in plaque echogenicity (change in percent hypoechogenic tissue = −7.8%, p < 0.0001) was observed between two and four years. The mean neointimal volume increased over four years from 0 to 8.4 ± 5.8 mm3(p < 0.0001). However, no further statistically significant change occurred between two and four years (7.0 ± 6.7 mm3vs. 8.4 ± 5.8 mm3, p = 0.25).ConclusionsBetween two and four years after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation, peri-stent tissue shrank with a concomitant increase in echogenicity. These intravascular ultrasound findings suggest that late chronic artery responses may evolve for up to four years after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. In addition, the fact that the neointima does not significantly change from two to four years may suggest that the biological phenomenon of a delayed healing response has begun to subside
Intravascular ultrasound findings in the multicenter, randomized, double-blind RAVEL (RAndomized study with the sirolimus-eluting VElocity balloon- expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery Lesions) trial
BACKGROUND: The goal of this intravascular ultrasound investigation was to provide a more detailed morphological analysis of the local biological effects of the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the RAVEL trial, 238 patients with single de novo lesions were randomized to receive either an 18-mm sirolimus-eluting stent (Bx VELOCITY stent, Cordis) or an uncoated stent (Bx VELOCITY stent). In a subset of 95 patients (sirolimus-eluting stent=48, uncoated stent=47), motorized intravascular ultrasound pullback (0.5 mm/s) was performed at a 6-month follow-up. Stent volumes, total vessel volumes, and plaque-behind-stent volumes were comparable. However, the difference in neointimal hyperplasia (2+/-5 versus 37+/-28 mm3) and percent of volume obstruction (1+/-3% versus 29+/-20%) at 6 months between the 2 groups was highly significant (P<0.001), emphasizing the nearly complete abolition of the proliferative process inside the drug-eluting stent. Analysis of the proximal and distal edge volumes showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in external elastic membrane or lumen and plaque volume at the proximal and distal edges. There was also no evidence of intrastent thrombosis or persisting dissection at the stent edges. Although there was a higher incidence of incomplete stent apposition
DE NOVO CORONARY LESIONS TREATED WITH THE NOVEL POLYMER-FREE BIOLIMUS-A9 COATED STENTS: 12-MONTH ANGIOGRAPHIC RESULTS FROM THE PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED MULTICENTER BIOFREEDOM CLINICAL TRIAL
Randomized Trial of Anticoagulation Strategies for Noncritically Ill Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.
BACKGROUND
Prior studies of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in patients with COVID-19 have reported conflicting results.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to determine the safety and effectiveness of therapeutic-dose anticoagulation in noncritically ill patients with COVID-19.
METHODS
Patients hospitalized with COVID-19 not requiring intensive care unit treatment were randomized to prophylactic-dose enoxaparin, therapeutic-dose enoxaparin, or therapeutic-dose apixaban. The primary outcome was the 30-day composite of all-cause mortality, requirement for intensive care unit-level of care, systemic thromboembolism, or ischemic stroke assessed in the combined therapeutic-dose groups compared with the prophylactic-dose group.
RESULTS
Between August 26, 2020, and September 19, 2022, 3,398 noncritically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19 were randomized to prophylactic-dose enoxaparin (n = 1,141), therapeutic-dose enoxaparin (n = 1,136), or therapeutic-dose apixaban (n = 1,121) at 76 centers in 10 countries. The 30-day primary outcome occurred in 13.2% of patients in the prophylactic-dose group and 11.3% of patients in the combined therapeutic-dose groups (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.69-1.04; P = 0.11). All-cause mortality occurred in 7.0% of patients treated with prophylactic-dose enoxaparin and 4.9% of patients treated with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.93; P = 0.01), and intubation was required in 8.4% vs 6.4% of patients, respectively (HR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.58-0.98; P = 0.03). Results were similar in the 2 therapeutic-dose groups, and major bleeding in all 3 groups was infrequent.
CONCLUSIONS
Among noncritically ill patients hospitalized with COVID-19, the 30-day primary composite outcome was not significantly reduced with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation compared with prophylactic-dose anticoagulation. However, fewer patients who were treated with therapeutic-dose anticoagulation required intubation and fewer died (FREEDOM COVID [FREEDOM COVID Anticoagulation Strategy]; NCT04512079).Dr Stone has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Pulnovo,
Infraredx, Abiomed, and Abbott; has served as a consultant to
Daiichi-Sankyo, Valfix, TherOx, Robocath, HeartFlow, Ablative Solutions, Vectorious, Miracor, Neovasc, Ancora, Elucid Bio, Occlutech,
CorFlow, Apollo Therapeutics, Impulse Dynamics, Cardiomech, Gore,
Amgen, Adona Medical, and Millennia Biopharma; and has equity/
options from Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, Biostar family of
funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra Biomed, Aria, Cardiac Success, Valfix,
and Xenter; his daughter is an employee at IQVIA; and his employer,
Mount Sinai Hospital, receives research support from Abbott,
Abiomed, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems Inc, Phillips, BiosenseWebster, Shockwave, Vascular Dynamics, Pulnovo, and V-wave. Dr
Farkouh has received institutional research grants from Amgen,
AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, and Novartis; has received consulting
fees from Otitopic; and has received honoraria from Novo Nordisk. Dr
Lala has received consulting fees from Merck and Bioventrix; has
received honoraria from Zoll Medical and Novartis; has served on an
advisory board for Sequana Medical; and is the Deputy Editor for the
Journal of Cardiac Failure. Dr Moreno has received honoraria from
Amgen, Cuquerela Medical, and Gafney; has received payment for
expert testimony from Koskoff, Koskoff & Dominus, Dallas W. Hartman, and Riscassi & Davis PC; and has stock options in Provisio. Dr
Goodman has received institutional research grants from Bristol
Myers Squibb/Pfizer Alliance, Bayer, and Boehringer Ingelheim; has
received consulting fees from Amgen, Anthos Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL
Behring, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, Novartis, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, and Sanofi; has received
honoraria from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim,
Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, and Servier; has served on Data
Safety and Monitoring boards for Daiichi-Sankyo/American Regent
and Novo Nordisk A/C; has served on advisory boards for Amgen,
AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, CSL
Behring, Eli Lilly, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, HLS Therapeutics, JAMP
Pharma, Merck, Novartis, Pendopharm/Pharmascience, Pfizer,
Regeneron, Sanofi, Servier, and Tolmar Pharmaceuticals; has a leadership role in the Novartis Council for Heart Health (unpaid); and
otherwise has received salary support or honoraria from the Heart
and Stroke Foundation of Ontario/University of Toronto (Polo) Chair,
Canadian Heart Failure Society, Canadian Heart Research Centre and
MD Primer, Canadian VIGOUR Centre, Cleveland Clinic Coordinating
Centre for Clinical Research, Duke Clinical Research Institute, New
York University Clinical Coordinating Centre, PERFUSE Research
Institute, and the TIMI Study Group (Brigham Health). Dr Ricalde has
received consulting fees from Medtronic, Servier, and Boston Scientific; has received honoraria from Medtronic, Pfizer, Merck, Boston
Scientific, Biosensors, and Bayer; has served on an advisory board for
Medtronic; and has leadership roles in SOLACI and Kardiologen. Dr
Payro has received consulting fees from Bayer Mexico; has received
honoraria from Bayer, Merck, AstraZeneca, Medtronic, and Viatris;
has received payments for expert testimony from Bayer; has received
travel support from AstraZeneca; has served on an advisory board for
Bayer; and his institution has received equipment donated from
AstraZeneca. Dr Castellano has received consulting fees and honoraria from Ferrer International, Servier, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and has
received travel support from Ferrer International. Dr Hung has served
as an advisory board member for Pfizer, Merck, AstraZeneca, Fosun,
and Gilead. Dr Nadkarni has received consulting fees from Renalytix,
Variant Bio, Qiming Capital, Menarini Health, Daiichi-Sankyo, BioVie,
and Cambridge Health; has received honoraria from Daiichi-Sankyo
and Menarini Health; has patents for automatic disease diagnoses
using longitudinal medical record data, methods, and apparatus for
diagnosis of progressive kidney function decline using a machine
learning model, electronic phenotyping technique for diagnosing
chronic kidney disease, deep learning to identify biventricular
structure and function, fusion models for identification of pulmonary
embolism, and SparTeN: a novel spatio-temporal deep learning
model; has served on a Data Safety and Monitoring Board for CRIC
OSMB; has leadership roles for Renalytix scientific advisory board,
Pensive Health scientific advisory board, and ASN Augmented Intelligence and Digital Health Committee; has ownership interests in
Renalytix, Data2Wisdom LLC, Verici Dx, Nexus I Connect, and Pensieve Health; and his institution receives royalties from Renalytix. Dr
Goday has received the Frederick Banting and Charles Best Canada
Graduate Scholarship (Doctoral Research Award) from the Canadian
Institutes of Health Research. Dr Furtado has received institutional
research grants from AstraZeneca, CytoDin, Pfizer, Servier, Amgen,
Alliar Diagnostics, and the Brazilian Ministry of Health; has received
consulting fees from Biomm and Bayer; has received honoraria from
AstraZeneca, Bayer, Servier, and Pfizer; and has received travel support from Servier, AstraZeneca, and Bayer. Dr Granada has received
consulting fees, travel support, and stock from Cogent Technologies
Corp; and has received stock from Kutai. Dr Contreras has served as a
consultant for Merck, CVRx, Novodisk, and Boehringer Ingelheim;
and has received educational grants from Alnylam Pharmaceuticals
and AstraZeneca. Dr Bhatt has received research funding from Abbott,
Acesion Pharma, Afimmune, Aker Biomarine, Amarin, Amgen,
AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beren, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific,
Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardax, CellProthera, Cereno Scientific, Chiesi,
Cincor, CSL Behring, Eisai, Ethicon, Faraday Pharmaceuticals, Ferring
Pharmaceuticals, Forest Laboratories, Fractyl, Garmin, HLS Therapeutics, Idorsia, Ironwood, Ischemix, Janssen, Javelin, Lexicon, Lilly,
Medtronic, Merck, Moderna, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo
Nordisk, Owkin, Pfizer Inc, PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Recardio, Regeneron, Reid Hoffman Foundation, Roche, Sanofi, Stasys, Synaptic, The
Medicines Company, Youngene, and 89bio; has received royalties
from Elsevier; has received consultant fees from Broadview Ventures
and McKinsey; has received honoraria from the American College of
Cardiology, Baim Institute for Clinical Research, Belvoir Publications,
Boston Scientific, Cleveland Clinic, Duke Clinical Research Institute,
Mayo Clinic, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Novartis, Population
Health Research Institute, Rutgers University, Canadian Medical and
Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group, Cowen and Company, HMP Global, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, K2P,
Level Ex, Medtelligence/ReachMD, MJH Life Sciences, Oakstone CME,
Piper Sandler, Population Health Research Institute, Slack Publications, WebMD, Wiley, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care; has
received fees from expert testimony from the Arnold and Porter law
firm; has received travel support from the American College of Cardiology, Society of Cardiovascular Patient Care, American Heart Association; has a patent for otagliflozin assigned to Brigham and
Women’s Hospital who assigned to Lexicon; has participated on a
data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Acesion Pharma,
Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, AngioWave, Baim Institute,
Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Cardax, CellProthera,
Cereno Scientific, Cleveland Clinic, Contego Medical, Duke Clinical
Research Institute, Elsevier Practice Update Cardiology, Janssen,
Level Ex, Mayo Clinic, Medscape Cardiology, Merck, Mount Sinai
School of Medicine, MyoKardia, NirvaMed, Novartis, Novo Nordisk,
PhaseBio, PLx Pharma, Regado Biosciences, Population Health
Research Institute, and Stasys; serves as a trustee or director for
American College of Cardiology, AngioWave, Boston VA Research
Institute, Bristol Myers Squibb, DRS.LINQ, High Enroll, Society of
Cardiovascular Patient Care, and TobeSoft; has ownership interests in
AngioWave, Bristol Myers Squibb, DRS.LINQ, and High Enroll; has
other interests in Clinical Cardiology, the NCDR-ACTION Registry
Steering Committee; has conducted unfunded research with FlowCo
and Takeda, Contego Medical, American Heart Association Quality
Oversight Committee, Inaugural Chair, VA CART Research and Publications Committee; and has been a site co-investigator for Abbott,
Biotronik, Boston Scientific, CSI, St Jude Medical (now Abbott),
Phillips SpectraWAVE, Svelte, and Vascular Solutions. Dr Fuster declares that he raised $7 million from patients for this study granted to
Mount Sinai Heart, unrelated to industry. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this
paper to disclose.S
Comparison of clinical outcomes between Magmaris and Orsiro drug eluting stent at 12 months: Pooled patient level analysis from BIOSOLVE II–III and BIOFLOW II trials
Background: The aim of this study was to compare the 12-month clinical outcomes of patients treated with Magmaris or Orsiro. Second generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold Magmaris (Dreams 2G) has proved to be safe and effective in the BIOSOLVE-II study. Similarly, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent, Orsiro has shown notable clinical results even in all-comer populations. Methods: Magmaris group patients were taken from the BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III trials, while the patients from Orsiro group were enrolled in BIOFLOW-II trial. The primary outcome was explored using a time-to-event assessment of the unadjusted clinical outcomes for target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months, followed by a multivariate analysis adjusting for all the significantly different covariates between the groups. Results: The study population consisted of 482 patients (521 lesions), 184 patients (189 lesions) in Magmaris group and 298 patients (332 lesions) in Orsiro group. The mean age was 65.5 ± 10.8 and 62.7 ± 10.4 years in Magmaris and Orsiro groups, respectively (p = 0.005). Magmaris and Orsiro unadjusted TLF rates were 6.0 and 6.4% with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.869). In the multivariate analysis, there were no meaningful differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups. Finally, none of the groups presented device thrombosis cases at 12 months. Conclusion: At 12 months there were no significant differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups neither in the unadjusted assessment nor in the multivariate analysis for target lesion failure. These results should be taken as hypothesis generating and may warrant a head to head comparison on a randomized fashion
Multimodality imaging methods and systemic biomarkers in classical low-flow low-gradient aortic stenosis: Key findings for risk stratification
ObjectivesThe aim of the present study is to assess multimodality imaging findings according to systemic biomarkers, high-sensitivity troponin I (hsTnI) and B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels, in low-flow, low-gradient aortic stenosis (LFLG-AS).BackgroundElevated levels of BNP and hsTnI have been related with poor prognosis in patients with LFLG-AS.MethodsProspective study with LFLG-AS patients that underwent hsTnI, BNP, coronary angiography, cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) with T1 mapping, echocardiogram and dobutamine stress echocardiogram. Patients were divided into 3 groups according to BNP and hsTnI levels: Group 1 (n = 17) when BNP and hsTnI levels were below median [BNP < 1.98 fold upper reference limit (URL) and hsTnI < 1.8 fold URL]; Group 2 (n = 14) when BNP or hsTnI were higher than median; and Group 3 (n = 18) when both hsTnI and BNP were higher than median.Results49 patients included in 3 groups. Clinical characteristics (including risk scores) were similar among groups. Group 3 patients had lower valvuloarterial impedance (P = 0.03) and lower left ventricular ejection fraction (P = 0.02) by echocardiogram. CMR identified a progressive increase of right and left ventricular chamber from Group 1 to Group 3, and worsening of left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) (40 [31–47] vs. 32 [29–41] vs. 26 [19–33]%; p < 0.01) and right ventricular EF (62 [53–69] vs. 51 [35–63] vs. 30 [24–46]%; p < 0.01). Besides, there was a marked increase in myocardial fibrosis assessed by extracellular volume fraction (ECV) (28.4 [24.8–30.7] vs. 28.2 [26.9–34.5] vs. 31.8 [28.9–35.5]%; p = 0.03) and indexed ECV (iECV) (28.7 [21.2–39.1] vs. 28.8 [25.4–39.9] vs. 44.2 [36.4–51.2] ml/m2, respectively; p < 0.01) from Group 1 to Group 3.ConclusionsHigher levels of BNP and hsTnI in LFLG-AS patients are associated with worse multi-modality evidence of cardiac remodeling and fibrosis
Diretriz sobre Diagnóstico e Tratamento da Cardiomiopatia Hipertrófica – 2024
Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) is a form of genetically caused heart muscle disease, characterized by the thickening of the ventricular walls. Diagnosis requires detection through imaging methods (Echocardiogram or Cardiac Magnetic Resonance) showing any segment of the left ventricular wall with a thickness > 15 mm, without any other probable cause. Genetic analysis allows the identification of mutations in genes encoding different structures of the sarcomere responsible for the development of HCM in about 60% of cases, enabling screening of family members and genetic counseling, as an important part of patient and family management. Several concepts about HCM have recently been reviewed, including its prevalence of 1 in 250 individuals, hence not a rare but rather underdiagnosed disease. The vast majority of patients are asymptomatic. In symptomatic cases, obstruction of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) is the primary disorder responsible for symptoms, and its presence should be investigated in all cases. In those where resting echocardiogram or Valsalva maneuver does not detect significant intraventricular gradient (> 30 mmHg), they should undergo stress echocardiography to detect LVOT obstruction. Patients with limiting symptoms and severe LVOT obstruction, refractory to beta-blockers and verapamil, should receive septal reduction therapies or use new drugs inhibiting cardiac myosin. Finally, appropriately identified patients at increased risk of sudden death may receive prophylactic measure with implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) implantation.La miocardiopatÃa hipertrófica (MCH) es una forma de enfermedad cardÃaca de origen genético, caracterizada por el engrosamiento de las paredes ventriculares. El diagnóstico requiere la detección mediante métodos de imagen (Ecocardiograma o Resonancia Magnética CardÃaca) que muestren algún segmento de la pared ventricular izquierda con un grosor > 15 mm, sin otra causa probable. El análisis genético permite identificar mutaciones en genes que codifican diferentes estructuras del sarcómero responsables del desarrollo de la MCH en aproximadamente el 60% de los casos, lo que permite el tamizaje de familiares y el asesoramiento genético, como parte importante del manejo de pacientes y familiares. Varios conceptos sobre la MCH han sido revisados recientemente, incluida su prevalencia de 1 entre 250 individuos, por lo tanto, no es una enfermedad rara, sino subdiagnosticada. La gran mayorÃa de los pacientes son asintomáticos. En los casos sintomáticos, la obstrucción del tracto de salida ventricular izquierdo (TSVI) es el trastorno principal responsable de los sÃntomas, y su presencia debe investigarse en todos los casos. En aquellos en los que el ecocardiograma en reposo o la maniobra de Valsalva no detecta un gradiente intraventricular significativo (> 30 mmHg), deben someterse a ecocardiografÃa de esfuerzo para detectar la obstrucción del TSVI. Los pacientes con sÃntomas limitantes y obstrucción grave del TSVI, refractarios al uso de betabloqueantes y verapamilo, deben recibir terapias de reducción septal o usar nuevos medicamentos inhibidores de la miosina cardÃaca. Finalmente, los pacientes adecuadamente identificados con un riesgo aumentado de muerte súbita pueden recibir medidas profilácticas con el implante de un cardioversor-desfibrilador implantable (CDI).A cardiomiopatia hipertrófica (CMH) é uma forma de doença do músculo cardÃaco de causa genética, caracterizada pela hipertrofia das paredes ventriculares. O diagnóstico requer detecção por métodos de imagem (Ecocardiograma ou Ressonância Magnética CardÃaca) de qualquer segmento da parede do ventrÃculo esquerdo com espessura > 15 mm, sem outra causa provável. A análise genética permite identificar mutações de genes codificantes de diferentes estruturas do sarcômero responsáveis pelo desenvolvimento da CMH em cerca de 60% dos casos, permitindo o rastreio de familiares e aconselhamento genético, como parte importante do manejo dos pacientes e familiares. Vários conceitos sobre a CMH foram recentemente revistos, incluindo sua prevalência de 1 em 250 indivÃduos, não sendo, portanto, uma doença rara, mas subdiagnosticada. A vasta maioria dos pacientes é assintomática. Naqueles sintomáticos, a obstrução do trato de saÃda do ventrÃculo esquerdo (OTSVE) é o principal distúrbio responsável pelos sintomas, devendo-se investigar a sua presença em todos os casos. Naqueles em que o ecocardiograma em repouso ou com Manobra de Valsalva não detecta gradiente intraventricular significativo (> 30 mmHg), devem ser submetidos à ecocardiografia com esforço fÃsico para detecção da OTSVE. Pacientes com sintomas limitantes e grave OTSVE, refratários ao uso de betabloqueadores e verapamil, devem receber terapias de redução septal ou uso de novas drogas inibidoras da miosina cardÃaca. Por fim, os pacientes adequadamente identificados com risco aumentado de morta súbita podem receber medida profilática com implante de cardiodesfibrilador implantável (CDI)
Revascularização miocárdica em multiarteriais Myocardial revascularization in patients with multivessel disease
- …