Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention or after acute coronary syndrome

To prevent recurrent ischaemic events, dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is the standard of care after percutaneous coronary intervention and in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome. Recent evidence supports an adjusted DAPT duration in selected patients. The current paper aims to encourage cardiologists to actively search for patients benefiting from either shorter or prolonged duration DAPT and proposes an algorithm to identify patients who are likely to benefit from such an alternative strategy. Individualised DAPT duration should be considered in high-risk anatomic and/or clinical subgroups or in patients at increased haemorrhagic risk with low ischaemic risk. Both thrombotic and haemorrhagic risk should be assessed in all patients. In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the interventional cardiologist could advise on the minimal duration of DAPT. However, in contrast to the minimum duration of DAPT for stent thrombosis prevention, longer duration DAPT is aimed at prevention of spontaneous myocardial infarction, and not at stent thrombos

Науково-інформаційні ресурси порталу бібліотеки: формування, використання

Визначено шляхи вдосконалення процесів формування та використання електронних ресурсів порталу національної бібліотеки як базової компоненти єдиного науково-інформаційного простору держави.Определены пути усовершенствования процессов формирования и использования электронных ресурсов портала национальной библиотеки как базовой компоненты единого научно-информационного пространства государства.The ways of improvement of formation and usage processes of the electronic resources of the national library portal as a base component of unified scientific information space of the state are determined

Angiography-based superficial wall strain of de novo stenotic coronary arteries:serial assessment of vessels treated with bioresorbable scaffold or drug-eluting stent

Objectives: This study sought to present an angiography-based computational model for serial assessment of superficial wall strain (SWS, dimensionless) of de-novo coronary stenoses treated with either bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) or drug-eluting stent (DES). Background: A novel method for SWS allows the assessment of the mechanical status of arteries in-vivo, which may help for predicting cardiovascular outcomes. Methods: Patients with arterial stenosis treated with BRS (n = 21) or DES (n = 21) were included from ABSORB Cohort B1 and AIDA trials. The SWS analyses were performed along with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at pre-PCI, post-PCI, and 5-year follow-up. Measurements of QCA and SWS parameters were quantified at the treated segment and adjacent 5-mm proximal and distal edges. Results: Before PCI, the peak SWS on the ‘to be treated’ segment (0.79 ± 0.36) was significantly higher than at both virtual edges (0.44 ± 0.14 and 0.45 ± 0.21; both p &lt; 0.001). The peak SWS in the treated segment significantly decreased by 0.44 ± 0.13 (p &lt; 0.001). The surface area of high SWS decreased from 69.97mm2 to 40.08mm2 (p = 0.002). The peak SWS in BRS group decreased to a similar extent (p = 0.775) from 0.81 ± 0.36 to 0.41 ± 0.14 (p &lt; 0.001), compared with DES group from 0.77 ± 0.39 to 0.47 ± 0.13 (p = 0.001). Relocation of high SWS to device edges was often observed in both groups after PCI (35 of 82 cases, 41.7 %). At follow-up of BRS, the peak SWS remained unchanged compared to post-PCI (0.40 ± 0.12 versus 0.36 ± 0.09, p = 0.319). Conclusion: Angiography-based SWS provided valuable information about the mechanical status of coronary arteries. Device implantation led to a significant decrease of SWS to a similar extent with either polymer-based scaffolds or permanent metallic stents.</p

Late thrombotic events after bioresorbable scaffold implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

To compare the long-term safety and efficacy of bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) with everolimus-eluting stent (EES) after percutaneous coronary interventions.Methods and Results: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials comparing clinical outcomes of patients treated with BVS and EES with at least 24 months follow-up was performed. Adjusted random-effect model by the Knapp–Hartung method was used to compute odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary safety outcome of interest was the risk of definite/probable device thrombosis (DT). The primary efficacy outcome of interest was the risk of target lesion failure (TLF). Five randomized clinical trials (n = 1730) were included. Patients treated with Absorb BVS had a higher risk of definite/probable DT compared with patients treated with EES (OR 2.93, 95%CI 1.37–6.26, P = 0.01). Very late DT (VLDT) occurred in 13 patients [12/996 (1.4%, 95%CI: 0.08–2.5) Absorb BVS vs. 1/701 (0.5%, 95%CI: 0.2–1.6) EES; OR 3.04; 95%CI 1.2–7.68, P = 0.03], 92% of the VLDT in the BVS group occurred in the absence of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Patients treated with Absorb BVS had a trend towards higher risk of TLF (OR 1.48, 95%CI 0.90–2.42, P = 0.09), driven by a higher risk of target vessel myocardial infarction and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization. No difference was found in the risk of cardiac death.Conclusion: Compared with EES, the use of Absorb BVS was associated with a higher rate of DT and a trend towards higher risk of TLF. VLDT occurred in 1.4% of the patients, the majority of these events occurred in the absence of DAPT