Effect of Heart Failure on Long‐Term Clinical Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting in Patients With Severe Coronary Artery Disease

[Background] Heart failure might be an important determinant in choosing coronary revascularization modalities. There was no previous study evaluating the effect of heart failure on long‐term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) relative to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). [Methods and Results] Among 14 867 consecutive patients undergoing first coronary revascularization with PCI or isolated CABG between January 2011 and December 2013 in the CREDO‐Kyoto PCI/CABG registry Cohort‐3, we identified the current study population of 3380 patients with three‐vessel or left main coronary artery disease, and compared clinical outcomes between PCI and CABG stratified by the subgroup based on the status of heart failure. There were 827 patients with heart failure (PCI: N=511, and CABG: N=316), and 2553 patients without heart failure (PCI: N=1619, and CABG: N=934). In patients with heart failure, the PCI group compared with the CABG group more often had advanced age, severe frailty, acute and severe heart failure, and elevated inflammatory markers. During a median 5.9 years of follow‐up, there was a significant interaction between heart failure and the mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG (interaction P=0.009), with excess mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG in patients with heart failure (HR, 1.75; 95% CI, 1.28–2.42; P<0.001) and no excess mortality risk in patients without heart failure (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.80–1.34; P=0.77). [Conclusions] There was a significant interaction between heart failure and the mortality risk of PCI relative to CABG with excess risk in patients with heart failure and neutral risk in patients without heart failure

Memory Immune Responses against Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Influenza Virus Induced by a Whole Particle Vaccine in Cynomolgus Monkeys Carrying Mafa-A1*052∶02

We made an H1N1 vaccine candidate from a virus library consisting of 144 ( = 16 HA×9 NA) non-pathogenic influenza A viruses and examined its protective effects against a pandemic (2009) H1N1 strain using immunologically naïve cynomolgus macaques to exclude preexisting immunity and to employ a preclinical study since preexisting immunity in humans previously vaccinated or infected with influenza virus might make comparison of vaccine efficacy difficult. Furthermore, macaques carrying a major histocompatibility complex class I molecule, Mafa-A1*052∶02, were used to analyze peptide-specific CD8+ T cell responses. Sera of macaques immunized with an inactivated whole particle formulation without addition of an adjuvant showed higher neutralization titers against the vaccine strain A/Hokkaido/2/1981 (H1N1) than did sera of macaques immunized with a split formulation. Neutralization activities against the pandemic strain A/Narita/1/2009 (H1N1) in sera of macaques immunized twice with the split vaccine reached levels similar to those in sera of macaques immunized once with the whole particle vaccine. After inoculation with the pandemic virus, the virus was detected in nasal samples of unvaccinated macaques for 6 days after infection and for 2.67 days and 5.33 days on average in macaques vaccinated with the whole particle vaccine and the split vaccine, respectively. After the challenge infection, recall neutralizing antibody responses against the pandemic virus and CD8+ T cell responses specific for nucleoprotein peptide NP262-270 bound to Mafa-A1*052∶02 in macaques vaccinated with the whole particle vaccine were observed more promptly or more vigorously than those in macaques vaccinated with the split vaccine. These findings demonstrated that the vaccine derived from our virus library was effective for pandemic virus infection in macaques and that the whole particle vaccine conferred more effective memory and broader cross-reactive immune responses to macaques against pandemic influenza virus infection than did the split vaccine

Correctif à un article sur la mécanique statistique des macromolécules en chaînes dans un champ de vitesses

Pas de Résumé disponibl

Five-Year Clinical Outcome of Asymptomatic vs. Symptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis After Aortic Valve Replacement

Background:There is discordance regarding the effect of symptom status before aortic valve replacement (AVR) on long-term outcome after AVR in severe aortic stenosis (AS). Methods and Results:The CURRENT AS registry is a multicenter retrospective registry enrolling 3, 815 consecutive patients with severe AS. Among 1, 196 patients managed with the initial AVR strategy, long-term clinical outcomes were compared between the symptomatic patients (n=905), and asymptomatic patients (n=291). Median follow-up interval was 1337 days with a 91% follow-up rate at 2 years. AVR was performed in 886 patients (98%) in the symptomatic group and in 287 patients (99%) in the asymptomatic group. Symptomatic patients were older and more often had comorbidities than asymptomatic patients with similar echocardiographic AS severity. The cumulative 5-year incidences of all-cause death and heart failure (HF) hospitalization were significantly higher in symptomatic patients than in asymptomatic patients (25.6% vs. 15.4%, P=0.001, and 14.2% vs. 3.8%, P<0.001, respectively). On landmark analysis at 30 days after AVR, the differences in mortality and HF hospitalization between the 2 groups were mainly observed beyond 30 days. Conclusions:When managed with the initial AVR strategy, the long-term outcomes of symptomatic severe AS were worse than those of asymptomatic severe AS. Early AVR strategy might be recommended in some selected asymptomatic severe AS patients with reasonable operative risk