Abrupt closure: The CAVEAT I experience

Objectives.This study sought to assess the incidence and consequences of abrupt closure in a series of patients undergoing directional coronary atherectomy versus percutaneous coronary angioplasty.Background.Abrupt closure with coronary angioplasty has been associated with adverse outcome. The results from the Coronary Angioplasty Versus Excisional Atherectomy Trial (CAVEAT) I, a randomized trial of coronary angioplasty versus directional coronary atherectomy, were analyzed.Method.This multicenter trial enrolled 1,012 patients from 1991 to 1992. All records from patients with abrupt closure, which was coded as a discrete complication, were reviewed.Results.Abrupt closure occurred in 60 patients (5.9%) and was associated with a significantly longer hospital stay (median 8 vs. 3 days). Severe proximal target vessel tortuosity was more common in patients with abrupt closure (20.3% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.046), as was preexistent coronary artery thrombus (30.5% vs. 18.3%, p = 0.02). Abrupt closure was associated with a marked increase in subsequent complications (myocardial infarction 46.7% vs. 2.1%, emergency bypass surgery 383% vs. 0.32%, death 33% vs. 0%) and occurred more frequently in the directional coronary atherectomy group (8.0% vs. 3.8%, p = 0.005). In the coronary angioplasty group, the occlusion usually occurred at the target lesion (91%), presumably related to the effects of barotrauma. In the directional coronary atherectomy group, the site of the occlusion was the target lesion in only 58% (p = 0.045). The remaining occlusions related to problems with the technique (guide catheter or nose cone trauma), reflecting the fact that directional coronary atherectomy is a more complex procedure.Conclusions.Abrupt closure remains the principal determinant of adverse outcome after percutaneous procedures for the treatment of coronary artery disease. Although abrupt closure is more common with directional atherectomy than angioplasty, the sequelae are similar

Is glycoprotein IIb/IIIa antagonism as effective in women as in men following percutaneous coronary intervention? Lessons from the ESPRIT study

AbstractObjectivesThe study was done to determine whether eptifibatide, a platelet glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa antagonist, prevents ischemic complications following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in women as well as in men.BackgroundEptifibatide reduces ischemic complications after nonurgent coronary stent interventions.MethodsWe compared outcomes in women (n = 562) and men (n = 1,502) enrolled in the Enhanced Suppression of the Platelet GP IIb/IIIa Receptor with Integrilin Therapy (ESPRIT) trial of double-bolus eptifibatide during PCI.ResultsWomen in the ESPRIT trial were older, and more frequently had hypertension, diabetes mellitus, or acute coronary syndromes, but were less likely to have prior PCI or coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The primary end point, a composite at 48 h of death, myocardial infarction (MI), urgent target vessel revascularization (TVR), and unplanned GP IIb/IIIa use, occurred in 10.5% of women and 7.9% of men (p = 0.082). The composite of death, MI, or TVR after one year occurred in 24.5% of women compared with 18% of men (p = 0.0008). At 48 h, eptifibatide reduced the composite of death, MI, and TVR from 14.5% to 6.0% in women versus 9.0% to 6.8% in men. At one year, these differences persisted: 28.9% versus 20.0% for women and 19.5% versus 16.6% for men. No statistical interaction existed between treatment and gender at either 48 h (p = 0.063) or one year (p = 0.2). Bleeding occurred more commonly in women (5.5% vs. 2.6%, p = 0.002), and was more common in eptifibatide-treated women. After adjustment for age, weight, and hypertension, no interaction between treatment and gender was present.ConclusionsEptifibatide is effective to prevent ischemic complications of PCI in women and may eliminate gender-related differences in PCI outcomes

Systematic adjudication of myocardial infarction end-points in an international clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Clinical events committees (CEC) are used routinely to adjudicate suspected end-points in cardiovascular trials, but little information has been published about the various processes used. We reviewed results of the CEC process used to identify and adjudicate suspected end-point (post-enrolment) myocardial infarction (MI) in the large Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (Eptifibatide) Therapy (PURSUIT) trial. METHODS: The PURSUIT trial randomised 10,948 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive eptifibatide or placebo. A central adjudication process was established prospectively to identify all suspected MIs and adjudicate events based on protocol definitions of MI. Suspected MIs were identified by systematic review of data collection forms, cardiac enzyme results, and electrocardiograms. Two physicians independently reviewed all suspected events. If they disagreed whether a MI had occurred, a committee of cardiologists adjudicated the case. RESULTS: The CEC identified 5005 patients with suspected infarction (46%), of which 1415 (28%) were adjudicated as end-point infarctions. As expected, the process identified more end-point events than did the site investigators. Absolute and relative treatment effects of eptifibatide were smaller when using CEC-determined MI rates rather than site investigator-determined rates. The site-investigator reporting of MI and the CEC assessment of MI disagreed in 20% of the cases reviewed by the CEC. CONCLUSIONS: End-point adjudication by a CEC is important, to provide standardised, systematic, independent, and unbiased assessment of end-points, particularly in trials that span geographic regions and clinical practice settings. Understanding the CEC process used is important in the interpretation of trial results and event rates

Disagreements between central clinical events committee and site investigator assessments of myocardial infarction endpoints in an international clinical trial: review of the PURSUIT study

BACKGROUND: Limited information has been published regarding how specific processes for event adjudication can affect event rates in trials. We reviewed nonfatal myocardial infarctions (MIs) reported by site investigators in the international Platelet Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa in Unstable Angina: Receptor Suppression Using Integrilin (Eptifibatide) Therapy (PURSUIT) trial and those adjudicated by a central clinical events committee (CEC) to determine the reasons for differences in event rates. METHODS: The PURSUIT trial randomised 10,948 patients with acute coronary syndromes to receive eptifibatide or placebo. The primary end-point was death or post-enrolment MI at 30 days as assessed by the CEC; this end-point was also constructed using site-reported events. The CEC identified suspected MIs by systematic review of clinical, cardiac enzyme, and electrocardiographic data. RESULTS: The CEC identified 5005 (46%) suspected events, of which 1415 (28%) were adjudicated as MI. The site investigator and CEC assessments of whether a MI had occurred disagreed in 983 (20%) of the 5005 patients with suspected MI, mostly reflecting site misclassification of post-enrolment MIs (as enrolment MIs) or underreported periprocedural MIs. Patients for whom the CEC and site investigator agreed that no end-point MI had occurred had the lowest mortality at 30 days and between 30 days and 6 months, and those with agreement that a MI had occurred had the highest mortality. CONCLUSION: CEC adjudication provides a standard, systematic, independent, and unbiased assessment of end-points, particularly for trials that span geographic regions and clinical practice settings. Understanding the review process and reasons for disagreement between CEC and site investigator assessments of MI is important to design future trials and interpret event rates between trials

Comparison of Site-Reported and Core Laboratory-Reported Creatine Kinase-MB Values in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome (from the International Trial SYNERGY)

The effect of nonstandardized creatine kinase (CK)-MB assays on the assessment of myocardial infarction (MI) end points in multicenter international trials has not been evaluated. We compared the site-reported and corresponding core laboratory CK-MB measures from 5 countries participating in the Superior Yield of the New Strategy of Enoxaparin, Revascularization, and Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors (SYNERGY) trial. Samples for CK-MB were collected locally, with corresponding samples sent to a core laboratory at enrollment and after recurrent ischemic events, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting. The measured values were compared to the reported assay upper limits of normal (ULN) used at the site (or core laboratory for the core laboratory samples). The CK-MB results were available locally and from the core laboratory for 913 patients, constituting 4,693 time-matched laboratory values. The agreement between the core and site laboratory CK-MB/ULN ratio was moderate (concordance correlation coefficient 0.45) and varied considerably by geographic location and site. The CK-MB values were elevated (>= 2 times the ULN) by the core laboratory but normal (< 2 times the ULN) by local standards in 708 instances (15%). There were 162 MI end points according to the core laboratory values versus 91 MI end points using the site-reported CK-MB data (kappa statistic 0.48). Compared with patients with no MI by the core or site laboratory values, patients with MI, as determined by both the core and the site laboratories, had significantly lower unadjusted 1-year survival rates (80.6% vs 93.5%, p < 0.0001). Patients with MI, as determined by the core laboratory but not by the site laboratory, showed a trend toward a lower 1-year survival rate (89.8% vs 93.5%, p = 0.20). In conclusion, a substantial variation in CK-MB ratios and MI outcomes between the site and core laboratory data was observed in the SYNERGY trial. More MI outcomes were identified by the core laboratory, and patients with MI as defined by core laboratory data had lower 1-year survival, making these events potentially clinically important. (c) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2009;104:1330-1335

Lesion-directed administration of alteplase with intracoronary heparin in patients with unstable angina and coronary thrombus undergoing angioplasty

Percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with unstable angina and coronary thrombus carries a high complication rate. A new strategy to reduce thrombus burden before revascularization was tested in a multicenter prospective trial. Patients with unstable angina and coronary thrombus (n = 45) received alteplase through an infusion catheter at the proximal aspect of the target lesion and concomitant intracoronary heparin via a standard guiding catheter. Angiography was performed before and after lesiondirected therapy and post-intervention. Systemic fibrinogen depletion and thrombin activation were not observed, while fibrinolysis was evident for ≥4 hr after treatment. Target lesion stenosis did not change significantly after lesion-directed therapy, but thrombus score was reduced, particularly among patients who had large thrombi (mean 2.2 vs. 1.6, P = 0.02). Revascularization was successful in 89% of patients. Median final stenosis was 30% and mean final thrombus score was 0.4. Complications included recurrent ischemia (11%), MI (7%), abrupt closure (7%), severe bleeding (4%), and repeat emergency angioplasty (2%). Patients with overt thrombus appeared to derive the most angiograpnic benefit from lesion-directed alteplase plus intracoronary heparin. Later revascularization was highly successful. This strategy may be a useful adjunct to percutaneous revascularization for patients with unstable angina and frank intracoronary thrombus. © 1996 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/38222/1/1810370409_ftp.pd