Facilitating Safe Trans-femoral ACCESS for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement in High Body Mass Index Patients—The FAST-ACCESS Cohort Study

Background: Transfemoral  (TF) access is the safest, quickest, and most studied access route for  transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR).1  While TAVR has demonstrated excellent clinical outcomes, femoral access  site complications remain one of the most common adverse events of  TAVR,2 with attendant morbidity and even mortality. Despite  contemporary safety refinements in obtaining wide-bore TF access (e.g.,  the routine use of vascular ultrasound and micropuncture), high body  mass index (BMI)3 and increased femoral arterial depth (FAD)4  are strong predictors of vascular complications during TF-TAVR. In such  high BMI patients, panniculus retraction (by a variety of  nonstandardized methods) may reduce the FAD and thus facilitate safer TF  access. Locally, we have standardized this technique  by repurposed use of a dedicated adhesive panniculus retractor (APR)  device, initially designed for use in obese patients during caesarean  section. The FAST-ACCESS study reports our clinical experience using  this APR device during TF-TAVR in high BMI patients. Specifically, we  report (i) the reduction in FAD achieved using the dedicated APR device  and (ii) the vascular complication rate in consecutive patients with  high BMI undergoing TF-TAVR when using the dedicated APR device.</p

The challenges of a randomised placebo-controlled trial of CTO PCI vs. placebo with optimal medical therapy: The ORBITA-CTO pilot study design and protocol

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) has been performed for the improvement of symptoms and quality of life in patients with stable angina. The ORBITA study demonstrated the role of the placebo effect in contemporary PCI in non-CTO chronic coronary syndromes. However, the benefit of CTO PCI beyond that of a placebo has not been demonstrated.AimsThe ORBITA-CTO pilot study will be a double-blind, placebo-controlled study of CTO PCI randomising patients who have: (1) been accepted by a CTO operator for PCI; (2) experienced symptoms due to a CTO; (3) evidence of ischaemia; (4) evidence of viability within the CTO territory; and (5) a J-CTO score ≤3.MethodsPatients will undergo medication optimisation that will ensure they are on at least a minimum amount of anti-anginals and complete questionnaires. Patients will record their symptoms on an app daily throughout the study. Patients will undergo randomisation procedures, including an overnight stay, and be discharged the following day. All anti-anginals will be stopped after randomisation and re-initiated on a patient-led basis during the 6-month follow-up period. At follow-up, patients will undergo repeat questionnaires and unblinding, with a further 2-week unblinded follow-up.ResultsThe co-primary outcomes are feasibility (blinding) in this cohort and angina symptom score using an ordinal clinical outcome scale for angina. Secondary outcomes include changes in quality-of-life measures, Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ), peak VO2, and anaerobic threshold on the cardiopulmonary exercise test.ConclusionThe feasibility of a placebo-controlled CTO PCI study will lead to future studies assessing efficacy. The impact of CTO PCI on angina measured using a novel daily symptom app may provide improved fidelity in assessing symptoms in patients with CTO's.</p

Deferred versus performed revascularization for left main coronary disease with hemodynamic significance

Background: The majority of randomized controlled trials of revascularization decision-making excludes left main coronary artery disease (LMD). Therefore, contemporary clinical outcomes of patients with stable coronary artery disease and LMD with proven ischemia remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term clinical outcomes of physiologically significant LMD according to the treatment strategies of revascularization versus revascularization deferral. Methods: In this international multicenter registry of stable LMD interrogated with the instantaneous wave-free ratio, patients with physiologically significant ischemia (instantaneous wave-free ratio ≤0.89) were analyzed according to the coronary revascularization (n=151) versus revascularization deferral (n=74). Propensity score matching was performed to adjust for baseline clinical characteristics. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. The secondary end points were as follows: cardiac death or spontaneous LMD-related myocardial infarction; and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem. Results: At a median follow-up period of 2.8 years, the primary end point occurred in 11 patients (14.9%) in the revascularized group and 21 patients (28.4%) in the deferred group (hazard ratio, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.20–0.89]; P =0.023). For the secondary end points, cardiac death or LMD-related myocardial infarction occurred significantly less frequently in the revascularized group (0.0% versus 8.1%; P =0.004). The rate of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization of left main stem was also significantly lower in the revascularized group (5.4% versus 17.6%; hazard ratio, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.056–0.70]; P =0.012). Conclusions: In patients who underwent revascularization for stable coronary artery disease and physiologically significant LMD determined by instantaneous wave-free ratio, the long-term clinical outcomes were significantly improved as compared with those in whom revascularization was deferred

Comparison of bolus versus continuous thermodilution derived indices of microvascular dysfunction in revascularized coronary syndromes

Background: The assessment of coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) using invasive methods is a field of growing interest, however the preferred method remains debated. Bolus and continuous thermodilution are commonly used methods, but weak agreement has been observed in patients with angina with non-obstructive coronary arteries (ANOCA). This study examined their agreement in revascularized acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) patients. Objective: To compare bolus thermodilution and continuous thermodilution indices of CMD in revascularized ACS and CCS patients and assess their diagnostic agreement at pre-defined cut-off points.  Methods: Patients from two centers underwent paired bolus and continuous thermodilution assessments after revascularization. CMD indices were compared between the two methods and their agreements at binary cut-off points were assessed.  Results: Ninety-six patients and 116 vessels were included. The mean age was 64 ± 11 years, and 20 (21 %) were female. Overall, weak correlations were observed between the Index of Microcirculatory Resistance (IMR) and continuous thermodilution microvascular resistance (Rµ) (rho = 0.30p = 0.001). The median coronary flow reserve (CFR) from continuous thermodilution (CFRcont) and bolus thermodilution (CFRbolus) were 2.19 (1.76–2.67) and 2.55 (1.50–3.58), respectively (p Conclusions: There is a significant difference and weak agreement between bolus and continuous thermodilutionderived indices, which must be considered when diagnosing CMD in ACS and CCS patients.  </p

Sex differences in prevalence and outcomes of the different endotypes of chronic coronary syndrome in symptomatic patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography: Insights from the global ILIAS invasive coronary physiology registry

Background and aims: The management of chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) is informed by studies predominantly including men. This study investigated the relationship between patients sex and different endotypes of CCS, including sex-specific clinical outcomes. Methods: In patients with CCS undergoing coronary angiography, invasive Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) and Coronary Flow Reserve (CFR) were measured. Patients were stratified into groups: 1) obstructive coronary artery disease (oCAD) (FFR≤0.80, no revascularization), 2) undergoing revascularization, 3) non-obstructive coronary artery disease with coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD) (FFR>0.80, CFR≤2.5), and 4) non-obstructive coronary artery disease without CMD (FFR>0.80 and CFR>2.5). Results: 1836 patients (2335 vessels) were included, comprising 1359 (74.0%) men and 477 (26.0%) women. oCAD was present in 14.1% and was significantly less prevalent in women than in men (10.3% vs 15.5%, respectively p < 0.01). Revascularization was present in 30.9% and was similarly prevalent in women and men (28.2% vs. 31.9%, respectively p = 0.13). CMD was present in 24.2% and was significantly more prevalent in women than men (28.6% vs 22.6%, respectively p < 0.01). Normal invasive measurements were found in 564 patients (33.0% women vs 30.0% men, p = 0.23). Male sex was associated with an increased risk of target vessel failure compared to women (HR.1.89, 95% CI 1.12–3.18, p = 0.018), regardless of CCS-endotype. Conclusions: Sex differences exist in the prevalence and outcomes of different endotypes of CCS in symptomatic patients undergoing invasive coronary angiography. In particular, oCAD (and subsequent revascularization) were more prevalent in men. Conversely, CMD was more prevalent in women. Overall, men experienced a worse cardiovascular outcome compared to women, independent of any specific CCS endotype.  </p