Impact of Clopidogrel Pretreatment on Ischemic Complications of PCI among Bivalirudin-Treated Patients: Results from the EVENT Registry

Computational Infrastructure and Informatics Poster SessionBackground: Although clopidogrel (CLO) pretreatment benefits PCI patients with acute coronary syndromes, these benefits are less well-established among elective PCI patients—particularly when treated with the direct thrombin inhibitor (DTI), bivalirudin. The effect of timing of CLO pretreatment on ischemic complications in these patients is also unknown. Methods: We used data from the multicenter EVENT registry to assess the association of clopidogrel pretreatment (600 mg 2 hr pre-PCI, 300 mg 6 hrs pre-PCI, or 75 mg/d for 1 week) with PCI-related complications in patients undergoing elective PCI with a DTI as planned antithrombotic. The primary endpoint was the composite of in-hospital death or MI (peak CKMB > 3 x ULN). Results: Between 01/05 and 12/07, 3568 pts underwent elective PCI and 1913 (54%) received DTI as planned anticoagulant (37% diabetics, age 65±10 y). Clopidogrel pre-treatment was used in 923 (48%). There were no differences in in-hospital or 1 year ischemic or bleeding events in relation to clopidogrel pretreatment in both unadjusted and adjusted analyses (see Table). There was a trend toward lower rates of death or MI with earlier pretreatment, however [Odds ratios vs. no pretreatment: >1 week 0.48 (95% CI 0.08 - 2.73); > 6 h OR 0.69 (95% CI 0.11 - 4.45) and 2-6 h OR 0.77 (95% CI 0.18 - 3.31)]. Conclusion: Among unselected patients undergoing elective PCI with DTI as the planned anticoagulant, clopidogrel pretreatment was common, but was not associated with a reduced risk of ischemic complications

Evidence for Prevention of Death and Myocardial Infarction With Platelet Membrane Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Receptor Blockade by Abciximab (c7E3 Fab) Among Patients With Unstable Angina Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization fn1fn1This study was supported by Centocor, Inc., Malvern, Pennsylvania.

AbstractObjectives. We sought to evaluate whether patients with unstable angina undergoing coronary intervention derive particular clinical benefit from potent platelet inhibition.Background. Plaque rupture and platelet aggregation are pathogenetic processes common to unstable angina and ischemic complications of percutaneous coronary intervention.Methods. Of the 2,099 patients undergoing a coronary intervention in the Evaluation of 7E3 in Preventing Ischemic Complications (EPIC) trial, 489 were enrolled with the diagnosis of unstable angina and randomized to receive placebo, an abciximab (c7E3) bolus immediately before the intervention or an abciximab bolus followed by a 12-h infusion. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or urgent repeat revascularization within 30 days of randomization. The occurrence of death, MI or any revascularization within 6 months was also assessed.Results. Compared with placebo, the bolus and infusion of abciximab resulted in a 62% reduction in the rate of the primary end point (12.8% vs. 4.8%, p = 0.012) among patients with unstable angina, due primarily to a reduction in the incidences of death (3.2% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.164) and MI (9% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.004). By 6 months, cumulative death and MI were further reduced by abciximab (6.6% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.018 and 11.1% vs. 2.4%, p = 0.002, respectively). The magnitude of the risk reduction with abciximab was greater among the patients with unstable angina than among other patients in the EPIC trial without unstable angina for the end points of death (interaction: p = 0.008 at 30 days, p = 0.002 at 6 months) and MI (interaction: p = 0.004 at 30 days, p = 0.003 at 6 months).Conclusions. The syndrome of unstable angina identifies patients who will experience particularly marked reductions in the risk of death and MI with abciximab during coronary intervention.(J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:149–56

Transcatheter and Doppler waveform correlation in transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become the preferred therapy for treatment of severe aortic stenosis in patients at intermediate to high risk of perioperative mortality following surgical aortic valve replacement. Haemodynamic assessment is an integral part of the procedure, and it is crucial for the operator to have an in-depth understanding of the haemodynamic alterations that occur during balloon aortic valvuloplasty and transcatheter valve deployment. Comprehension of the haemodynamic tracings is also pivotal for early recognition of periprocedural complications. With expanding indications for TAVR, it is imperative for members of the structural heart team to have an in-depth, nuanced understanding of transcatheter haemodynamic waveforms and their correlation with echocardiographic Doppler waveforms that are obtained periprocedurally during TAVR. This review provides a collection of transcatheter haemodynamic tracings and their corresponding Doppler echocardiography correlates that are demonstrative of physiological alterations and pathological lesions (complications) that occur during TAVR

Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic: An ACC /SCAI Consensus Statement

The COVID-19 pandemic has strained health care resources around the world causing many institutions to curtail or stop elective procedures. This has resulted in the inability to care for patients valvular and structural heart disease (SHD) in a timely fashion potentially placing these patients at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular complications including congestive heart failure and death. The effective triage of these patients has become challenging in the current environment as clinicians have had to weigh the risk of bringing susceptible patients into the hospital environment during the COVID-19 pandemic versus the risk of delaying a needed procedure. In this document, we suggest guidelines as to how to triage patients in need of SHD interventions and provide a framework of how to decide when it may be appropriate to proceed with intervention despite the ongoing pandemic. In particular, we address the triage of patients in need of trans-catheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous mitral valve repair. We also address procedural issues and considerations for the function of structural heart disease teams during the COVID-19 pandemic

Triage Considerations for Patients Referred for Structural Heart Disease Intervention During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An ACC/SCAI Position Statement

The coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has strained health care resources around the world, causing many institutions to curtail or stop elective procedures. This has resulted in an inability to care for patients with valvular and structural heart disease in a timely fashion, potentially placing these patients at increased risk for adverse cardiovascular complications, including CHF and death. The effective triage of these patients has become challenging in the current environment as clinicians have had to weigh the risk of bringing susceptible patients into the hospital environment during the COVID-19 pandemic against the risk of delaying a needed procedure. In this document, the authors suggest guidelines for how to triage patients in need of structural heart disease interventions and provide a framework for how to decide when it may be appropriate to proceed with intervention despite the ongoing pandemic. In particular, the authors address the triage of patients in need of transcatheter aortic valve replacement and percutaneous mitral valve repair. The authors also address procedural issues and considerations for the function of structural heart disease teams during the COVID-19 pandemic

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