Coronary flow velocity reserve after percutaneous interventions is predictive of periprocedural outcome

BACKGROUND: Because heterogeneous results have been reported, we assessed coronary flow velocity changes in individuals who underwent percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) and examined their impact on clinical outcome. METHODS AND RESULTS: As part of the Doppler Endpoints Balloon Angioplasty Trial Europe (DEBATE) II study, 379 patients underwent Doppler flow-guided angioplasty. All patients were evaluated according to their coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) results (> or =2.5 or < 2.5) at the end of the procedure. A CFVR < 2.5 after angioplasty was associated with an elevated baseline blood flow velocity in both the target artery and reference artery. CFVR before PTCA and CFVR in the reference artery were independent predictors of an optimal CFVR after balloon angioplasty (CFVR before PTCA: odds ratio [OR], 2.26; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.57 to 3.24; CFVR in reference artery: OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.98; both P<0.001) and stent implantation (before PTCA: OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.47 to 4.36; reference artery: OR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.07 to 3.87; both P<0.05). A low CFVR at the end of the procedure was an independent p

Uncomplicated moderate coronary artery dissections after balloon angioplasty: good outcome without stenting

OBJECTIVE: To study the relation between moderate coronary dissections, coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR), and long term outcome. METHODS: 523 patients undergoing balloon angioplasty and sequential intracoronary Doppler measurements were examined as part of the DEBATE II trial (Doppler endpoints balloon angioplasty trial Europe). After successful balloon angioplasty, patients were randomised to stenting or no further treatment. Dissections were graded at the core laboratory by two observers and divided into four categories: none, mild (type A-B), moderate (type C), severe (types D to F). Patients with severe dissections (n = 128) or without available reference vessel CFVR (n = 139) were excluded. The remaining 256 patients were divided into two groups according to the presence (group A, n = 45) or absence (group B, n = 211) of moderate dissection. RESULTS: Following balloon angioplasty, there was no difference in CFVR between the two groups. At 12 months follow up, a higher rate of major adverse cardiac events was observed overall in group A than in group B (10 (22%) v 23 (11%), p = 0.041). However, the risk of major adverse events was similar in the subgroups receiving balloon angioplasty (group A, 6 (19%) v group B, 16 (16%), NS). Among group A patients, the adverse events risk was greater in those randomised to stenting (odds ratios 6.603 v 1.197, p = 0.046), whereas there was no difference in risk if the group was analysed according to whether the CFVR was /= 2.5 after balloon angioplasty. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate dissections left untreated result in no increased risk of major adverse cardiac events. Additional stenting does not improve the long term outcome

Randomized comparison of primary stenting and provisional balloon angioplasty guided by flow velocity measurement.

BACKGROUND: Coronary stenting improves outcomes compared with balloon angioplasty, but it is costly and may have other disadvantages. Limiting stent use to patients with a suboptimal result after angioplasty (provisional angioplasty) may be as effective and less expensive. METHODS AND RESULTS: To analyze the cost-effectiveness of provisional angioplasty, patients scheduled for single-vessel angioplasty were first randomized to receive primary stenting (97 patients) or balloon angioplasty guided by Doppler flow velocity and angiography (523 patients). Patients in the latter group were further randomized after optimization to either additional stenting or termination of the procedure to further investigate what is "optimal." An optimal result was defined as a flow reserve >2.5 and a diameter stenosis <36%. Bailout stenting was needed in 129 patients (25%) who were randomized to balloon angioplasty, and an optimal result was obtained in 184 of the 523 patients (35%). There was no significant difference in event-free survival at 1 year between primary stenting (86.6%) and provisional angioplasty (85.6%). Costs after 1 year were significantly higher for provisional angioplasty (EUR 6573 versus EUR 5885; P:=0.014). Results after the second randomization showed that stenting was also more effective after optimal balloon angioplasty (1-year event free survival, 93.5% versus 84.1%; P:=0. 066). CONCLUSIONS: After 1 year of follow-up, provisional angioplasty was more expensive and without clinical benefit. The beneficial value of stenting is not limited to patients with a suboptimal result after balloon angioplasty

Risk profiles and one-year outcomes of patients with newly diagnosed atrial fibrillation in India: Insights from the GARFIELD-AF Registry.

BACKGROUND: The Global Anticoagulant Registry in the FIELD-Atrial Fibrillation (GARFIELD-AF) is an ongoing prospective noninterventional registry, which is providing important information on the baseline characteristics, treatment patterns, and 1-year outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). This report describes data from Indian patients recruited in this registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 52,014 patients with newly diagnosed AF were enrolled globally; of these, 1388 patients were recruited from 26 sites within India (2012-2016). In India, the mean age was 65.8 years at diagnosis of NVAF. Hypertension was the most prevalent risk factor for AF, present in 68.5% of patients from India and in 76.3% of patients globally (P < 0.001). Diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) were prevalent in 36.2% and 28.1% of patients as compared with global prevalence of 22.2% and 21.6%, respectively (P < 0.001 for both). Antiplatelet therapy was the most common antithrombotic treatment in India. With increasing stroke risk, however, patients were more likely to receive oral anticoagulant therapy [mainly vitamin K antagonist (VKA)], but average international normalized ratio (INR) was lower among Indian patients [median INR value 1.6 (interquartile range {IQR}: 1.3-2.3) versus 2.3 (IQR 1.8-2.8) (P < 0.001)]. Compared with other countries, patients from India had markedly higher rates of all-cause mortality [7.68 per 100 person-years (95% confidence interval 6.32-9.35) vs 4.34 (4.16-4.53), P < 0.0001], while rates of stroke/systemic embolism and major bleeding were lower after 1 year of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Compared to previously published registries from India, the GARFIELD-AF registry describes clinical profiles and outcomes in Indian patients with AF of a different etiology. The registry data show that compared to the rest of the world, Indian AF patients are younger in age and have more diabetes and CAD. Patients with a higher stroke risk are more likely to receive anticoagulation therapy with VKA but are underdosed compared with the global average in the GARFIELD-AF. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01090362

Comparison of clinical outcomes after multivessel versus single-vessel stenting with the zotarolimus-eluting stent in the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Trial Program

Aims: Our aim was to investigate whether long-term (three-year) clinical outcomes after multivessel treatment with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) were similar to single-vessel treatment. Methods and results: The RESOLUTE Global Clinical Trial Program enrolled 7,618 patients, of whom 1,562 underwent multivessel and 6,053 single-vessel treatment with the R-ZES. Patients in the multivessel group were more likely to have complex lesions (58% vs. 44%, p<0.001). Clinical outcomes were compared using a Cox regression model adjusted by propensity score to account for differences in baseline characteristics. Compared with single-vessel treatment, multivessel treatment was associated with more complex anatomy and longer mean total stent length (57.8±28.6 vs. 26.7±15.2 mm, p<0.001). At three years, the cumulative incidence of target lesion failure was similar in patients with multivessel and singlevessel treatment (11.0% vs. 9.1%, adjusted p=0.986), as was the incidence of cardiac death or target vessel myocardial infarction (6.7% vs. 5.7%, adjusted p=0.793), the incidence of clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (5.1% vs. 4.4%, adjusted p=0.904), and the incidence of Academic Research Consortium definite or probable stent thrombosis (1.2% vs. 0.9%, adjusted p=0.544). Conclusions: Multivessel treatment with R-ZES provided good long-term clinical outcomes that were comparable to those achieved with single-vessel stenting, supporting the efficacy and safety of R-ZES in patients in this setting

A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease

Balloon-expandable coronary-artery stents were developed to prevent coronary restenosis after coronary angioplasty. These devices hold coronary vessels open at sites that have been dilated. However, it is unknown whether stenting improves long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes as compared with standard balloon angioplasty