The use of modern telemedicine technologies in an innovative optimal cardiac rehabilitation program for patients after myocardial revascularization: Concept and design of RESTORE, a randomized clinical trial

Despite proven efficacy of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) in reducing the all-cause mortality in patients after myocardial revascularization, the penetration of CR, due to patient-related factors and referral rates remains limited. To improve the outcomes, home-based tele-rehabilitation (TR) has been proposed recently. In theory TR enhances the effects of standard CR procedures due to implementation of an intelligent monitoring system designed to ensure optimal training through on-demand transmission of vital signs, aimed at motivating the patients through daily schedule reminders, setting daily goals and creating a platform for mutual feedback. Several meta-analyses assessing various studies comparing these two methods (CR and TR) have proven that they are at least equally effective, with some of the research showing superiority of TR. Although there was a small sample size, lack of long-term follow-up, reporting effects of TR itself, no integration with tools designed for coaching, motivating and promoting a healthy lifestyle constitutes an important limitation. The latter carries a hopeful prognosis for improvement when utilizing a broad-spectrum approach, especially with use of dedicated technological solutions exploiting the fact of a large and yet rapidly increasing penetration of smartphones, mobile PCs and tablets in the population. The above-mentioned findings worked as the basis and rationale for commencing the RESTORE project aimed at developing and delivering state-of-the-art, comprehensive TR for patients after myocardial revascularization and evaluating its molecular aspect in view of how it influences the atherosclerosis progression attenuation. This paper presents the current state and rationale behind the project based on up-to-date TR efficacy data

Early and Long-Term Results of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting The LE MANS (Left Main Coronary Artery Stenting) Registry

ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to evaluate early and late outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery disease (ULMCA) and to compare bare-metal stent (BMS) and drug-eluting stent (DES) subgroups.BackgroundPCI is an increasingly utilized method of revascularization in patients with ULMCA.MethodsThis multicenter prospective registry included 252 patients after ULMCA stenting enrolled between March 1997 and February 2008. Non–ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome was diagnosed in 58% of patients; ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction cases were excluded. Drug-eluting stents were implanted in 36.2% of patients.ResultsMajor adverse cardiovascular and cerebral events (MACCE) occurred in 12 (4.8%) patients during the 30-day period, which included 4 (1.5%) deaths. After 12 months there were 17 (12.1%) angiographically confirmed cases of restenosis. During long-term follow-up (1 to 11 years, mean 3.8 years) there were 64 (25.4%) MACCE and 35 (13.9%) deaths. The 5- and 10-year survival rates were 78.1% and 68.9%, respectively. Despite differences in demographical and clinical data in favor of BMS patients, unmatched analysis showed a significantly lower MACCE rate in DES patients (25.9% vs. 14.9%, p = 0.039). This difference was strengthened after propensity score matching. The DES lowered both mortality and MACCE for distal ULMCA lesions when compared with BMS. Ejection fraction <50% was the only independent risk factor influencing long-term survival.ConclusionsStenting of ULMCA is feasible and offers good long-term outcome. Implantation of DES for ULMCA decreased the risk of long-term MACCE, and particularly improved survival in patients with distal ULMCA disease

Influence of Bleeding Risk on Outcomes of Radial and Femoral Access for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: An Analysis From the GLOBAL LEADERS Trial

Background: Radial artery access has been shown to reduce mortality and bleeding events, especially in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Despite this, interventional cardiologists experienced in femoral artery access still prefer that route for percutaneous coronary intervention. Little is known regarding the merits of each vascular access in patients stratified by their risk of bleeding. Methods: Patients from the Global Leaders trial were dichotomized into low or high risk of bleeding by the median of the PRECISE-DAPT score. Clinical outcomes were compared at 30 days. Results: In the overall population, there were no statistical differences between radial and femoral access in the rate of the primary end point, a composite of all-cause mortality, or new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.42-1.15). Radial access was associated with a significantly lower rate of the secondary safety end point, Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36-0.84). Compared by bleeding risk strata, in the high bleeding score population, the primary (HR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26-0.85; P = 0.012; Pinteraction = 0.019) and secondary safety (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.95; P = 0.030; Pinteraction = 0.631) end points favoured radial access. In the low bleeding score population, however, the differences in the primary and secondary safety end points between radial and femoral artery access were no longer statistically significant. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the outcomes of mortality or new Q-wave MI and BARC 3 or 5 bleeding favour radial access in patients with a high, but not those with a low, risk of bleeding. Because thisContexte : Il a et e d emontr e que l ’accès par l’artère radiale reduit la mortalite et les h emorragies, en particulier chez les patients presentant un syndrome coronarien aigu. Malgr e cela, les cardiologues interventionnels qui ont acquis de l’experience en matière d ’accès par l’artère femorale pr efèrent encore utiliser cette voie lorsqu ’ils doivent pratiquer une intervention coronarienne percutanee. On connaît mal l’interêt de chacune de ces techniques d ’accès vasculaire au regard du risque d’hemorragie. Methodologie : Les patients de l’essai GLOBAL LEADERS ont et e repartis en deux groupes, selon qu ’ils presentaient un risque d’hemorragie faible ou elev e d ’après le score PRECISE-DAPT median, puis les resultats cliniques ont et e compar es à 30 jours. Resultats : Dans l’ensemble de la population, aucune difference sta- tistiquement significative n’a et e observ ee entre l ’accès radial et l’accès femoral quant au critère d ’evaluation principal, compos e de la mortalite toutes causes confondues et d ’un nouvel infarctus du myocarde (IM) avec onde Q (rapport des risques instantanes [RRI] de 0,70; intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 % : 0,42-1,15). L’accès radial a et e associe à un taux signi ficativement plus faible de survenue du critère secondaire d’evaluation de l ’innocuite, c ’est-à-dire une hemorragie de type 3 ou 5 selon la classification du BARC (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium) (RRI de 0,55; IC à 95 % : 0,36-0,84). Lorsqu’on compare les sujets en fonction du risque d’hemorragie, les critères d’evaluation de l ’innocuite principal (RRI de 0,47; IC à 95 % : 0,26- 0,85; p ¼ 0,012; pinteraction ¼ 0,019) et secondaire (RRI de 0,57; IC à 95 % : 0,35-0,95; p ¼ 0,030; pinteraction ¼ 0,631) sont favorables à l’accès radial au sein de la population presentant un risque d ’hemor- ragie elev e. Dans la population pr esentant un risque d ’hemorragie faible, les differences entre l ’accès radial et l’accès femoral quant aux critères d’evaluation de l ’innocuite principal et secondaire ne sont toutefois plus statistiquement significatives. Conclusions : Selon ces observations, les resultats concernant la mortalite ou la survenue d ’un nouvel IM avec onde Q et le risque d’hemorragie de type 3 ou 5 selon la classi fication du BARC indiquent que l’accès radial serait à privilegier lorsque le risque d ’hemorragie est elev e, mais pas lorsqu ’il est faible. Comme il ne s’agissait pas d’une analyse principale, il convient de considerer ces observations comme etant g en eratrices d ’hypothèses

New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation After PCI or CABG for Left Main Disease: The EXCEL Trial

Background: There is limited information on the incidence and prognostic impact of new-onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). Objectives: This study sought to determine the incidence of NOAF following PCI and CABG for LMCAD and its effect on 3-year cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: In the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, 1,905 patients with LMCAD and low or intermediate SYNTAX scores were randomized to PCI with everolimus-eluting stents versus CABG. Outcomes were analyzed according to the development of NOAF during the initial hospitalization following revascularization. Results: Among 1,812 patients without atrial fibrillation on presentation, NOAF developed at a mean of 2.7 ± 2.5 days after revascularization in 162 patients (8.9%), including 161 of 893 (18.0%) CABG-treated patients and 1 of 919 (0.1%) PCI-treated patients (p < 0.0001). Older age, greater body mass index, and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction were independent predictors of NOAF in patients undergoing CABG. Patients with versus without NOAF had a significantly longer duration of hospitalization, were more likely to be discharged on anticoagulant therapy, and had an increased 30-day rate of Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction major or minor bleeding (14.2% vs. 5.5%; p < 0.0001). By multivariable analysis, NOAF after CABG was an independent predictor of 3-year stroke (6.6% vs. 2.4%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 4.19; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.74 to 10.11; p = 0.001), death (11.4% vs. 4.3%; adjusted HR: 3.02; 95% CI: 1.60 to 5.70; p = 0.0006), and the primary composite endpoint of death, MI, or stroke (22.6% vs. 12.8%; adjusted HR: 2.13; 95% CI: 1.39 to 3.25; p = 0.0004). Conclusions: In patients with LMCAD undergoing revascularization in the EXCEL trial, NOAF was common after CABG but extremely rare after PCI. The development of NOAF was strongly associated with subsequent death and stroke in CABG-treated patients. Further studies are warranted to determine whether prophylactic strategies to prevent or treat atrial fibrillation may improve prognosis in patients with LMCAD who are undergoing CABG. (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularizatio

Five-year outcomes of chronic total occlusion treatment with a biolimus A9-eluting biodegradable polymer stent versus a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent in the LEADERS all-comers trial

Background: Few data are available on long-term follow-up of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of chronic total occlusion (CTO). The LEADERS CTO sub-study compared the long-term results in CTO and non-CTO lesions of a Biolimus A9™-eluting stent (BES) with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). Methods: Among 1,707 patients enrolled in the prospective, multi-center, all-comers LEADERS trial, 81 with CTOs were treated with either a BES (n = 45) or a SES (n = 36). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE): cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: At 5 years, the rate of MACE was numerically higher in the CTO group than in the non-CTO group (29.6% vs. 23.3%; p = 0.173), with a significant increase in the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (21.0 vs. 12.6; p = 0.033), but no difference in stent thrombosis (ST). Patients with CTO receiving a BES demonstrated a lower incidence of MACE (22.2% vs. 38.9%; p = 0.147) with a significant reduction in TLR compared to patients receiving a SES (11.1% vs. 33.3%, p = 0.0214) with an incidence similar to that observed in the non-CTO group treated with BES (11.6%). Definite ST at 5 years nearly halved in the BES group (4.4% vs. 8.3%, p = 0.478) with no ST in the BES group after the first year (0% vs. 8.3%, p for interaction = 0.009). Conclusions: The use of a BES showed a reduction in MACE, TVR, TLR, and ST over time in the CTO subset with similar outcome as for non-CTO lesions

Rationale and design of a prospective substudy of clinical endpoint adjudication processes within an investigator-reported randomised controlled trial in patients with coronary artery disease: the GLOBAL LEADERS Adjudication Sub-StudY (GLASSY)

pragmatic and superiority randomised controlled trial designed to challenge the current treatment paradigm of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for 12 months followed by aspirin monotherapy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. By design, all study endpoints are investigator reported (IR) and not subject to formal adjudication by an independent Clinical Event Committee (CEC), which may introduce detection, reporting or ascertainment bias. Methods and analysis We designed the GLOBAL LEADERS Adjudication Sub-StudY (GLASSY) to prospectively implement, in a large sample of patients enrolled within the GLOBAL LEADERS trial (7585 of 15 991, 47.5%), an independent adjudication process of reported and unreported potential endpoints, using standardised CEC procedures, in order to assess whether 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy (90mg twice daily) after 1-month DAPT is non-inferior to a standard regimen of DAPT for 12 months followed by aspirin monotherapy for the primary efficacy endpoint of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or urgent target vessel revascularisation and superior for the primary safety endpoint of type 3 or 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria. This study will comprehensively assess the comparative safety and efficacy of the two tested antithrombotic strategies on CEC-adjudicated ischaemic and bleeding endpoints and will provide insights into the role of a standardised CEC adjudication process on the interpretation of study findings by quantifying the level of concordance between IR-reported and CEC-adjudicated events. Ethics and dissemination GLASSY has been approved by local ethics committee of all study sites and/or by the central ethics committee for the country depending on country-specific regulations. In all cases, they deemed that it was not neces

Clinical outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with de novo three vessel disease: 1-year results of the SYNTAX II study

Aims To investigate if recent technical and procedural developments in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly influence outcomes in appropriately selected patients with three-vessel (3VD) coronary artery disease. Methods and Results The SYNTAX II study is a multicenter, all-comers, open-label, single arm study that investigated the impact of a contemporary PCI strategy on clinical outcomes in patients with 3VD in 22 centres from four European countries. The SYNTAX-II strategy includes: heart team decision-making utilizing the SYNTAX Score II (a clinical tool combining anatomical and clinical factors), coronary physiology guided revascularisation, implantation of thin strut bioresorbable-polymer drug-eluting stents, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation, contemporary chronic total occlusion revascularisation techniques and guideline-directed medical therapy. The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE [composite of all-cause death, cerebrovascular event, any myocardial infarction and any revascularisation]) at one year was compared to a predefined PCI cohort from the original SYNTAX-I trial selected on the basis of equipoise 4-year mortality between CABG and PCI. As an exploratory endpoint, comparisons were made with the historical CABG cohort of the original SYNTAX-I trial. Overall 708 patients were screened and discussed within the heart team; 454 patients were deemed appropriate to undergo PCI. At one year, the SYNTAX-II strategy was superior to the equipoise-derived SYNTAX-I PCI cohort (MACCE SYNTAX-II 10.6% vs. SYNTAX-I 17.4%; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39–0.85, P = 0.006). This difference was driven by a significant reduction in the incidence of MI (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11–0.70, P = 0.007) and revascularisation (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37–0.9, P = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27–1.73, P = 0.43) and stroke (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.10–4.89, P = 0.71) were similar. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower in SYNTAX-II (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07–0.97, P = 0.045). Conclusion At one year, clinical outcomes with the SYNTAX-II strategy were associated with improved clinical results compared to the PCI performed in comparable patients from the original SYNTAX-I trial. Longer term follow-up is awaited and a randomized clinical trial with contemporary CABG is warranted.</p

Clinical outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with de novo three vessel disease: 1-year results of the SYNTAX II study

Aims: To investigate if recent technical and procedural developments in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly influence outcomes in appropriately selected patients with three-vessel (3VD) coronary artery disease. Methods and results: The SYNTAX II study is a multicenter, all-comers, open-label, single arm study that investigated the impact of a contemporary PCI strategy on clinical outcomes in patients with 3VD in 22 centres from four European countries. The SYNTAX-II strategy includes: heart team decision-making utilizing the SYNTAX Score II (a clinical tool combining anatomical and clinical factors), coronary physiology guided revascularisation, implantation of thin strut bio-resorbable-polymer drug-eluting stents, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation, contemporary chronic total occlusion revascularisation techniques and guideline-directed medical therapy. The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE [composite of all-cause death, cerebrovascular event, any myocardial infarction and any revascularisation]) at one year was compared to a predefined PCI cohort from the original SYNTAX-I trial selected on the basis of equipoise 4-year mortality between CABG and PCI. As an exploratory endpoint, comparisons were made with the historical CABG cohort of the original SYNTAX-I trial. Overall 708 patients were screened and discussed within the heart team; 454 patients were deemed appropriate to undergo PCI. At one year, the SYNTAX-II strategy was superior to the equipoise-derived SYNTAX-I PCI cohort (MACCE SYNTAX-II 10.6% vs. SYNTAX-I 17.4%; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.85, P= 0.006). This difference was driven by a significant reduction in the incidence of MI (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.70, P= 0.007) and revascularisation (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.9, P = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27-1.73, P = 0.43) and stroke (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.10-4.89, P = 0.71) were similar. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower in SYNTAX-II (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.97, P = 0.045). Conclusion: At one year, clinical outcomes with the SYNTAX-II strategy were associated with improved clinical results compared to the PCI performed in comparable patients from the original SYNTAX-I trial. Longer term follow-up is awaited and a randomized clinical trial with contemporary CABG is warranted