Neoatherosclerosis and plaque rupture as triggers for very late stent thrombosis in a bare-metal stent

Very late stent thrombosis has been increasingly described in the drug eluting stent era. A 56-year-old male presented with anterior ST-elevation myocardial infarction, he received a bare-metal stent in the left anterior descending artery in 2010. We obtained an optical coherence tomography scan, showing ruptured neoatherosclerotic plaque with thrombus

Drug eluting stents are superior to bare metal stents to reduce clinical outcome and stent-related complications in CKD patients, a systematic review, meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.

AimsTo compare clinical outcome in Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients receiving coronary stents according to stent type BMS versus DES and 1st generation versus 2nd generation DES.Methods and ResultsPubMed, Cinhal, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science were searched for studies including CKD patients. CKD was defined as eGFR < 60 mL/min. We selected n = 35 articles leading to 376 169 patients, of which 76 557 CKD patients receiving BMS n = 35,807, 1st generation DES n = 37,650, or 2nd generation DES n = 3100. Patient receiving DES, compared to BMS, had a 18% lower all‐cause mortality (RR 0.82, 95%CI 0.71‐0.94). The composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI) was lower in DES patients (RR 0.78, 95%CI 0.67‐0.91), as was stent thrombosis (ST) (RR 0.57, 95%CI 0.34‐0.95), target vessel/lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR) (RR 0.69, 95%CI 0.57‐0.84) and death for cardiovascular cause (RR 0.43, 95%CI 0.25‐0.74). We also found a gradient between 1st and 2nd generation DES, through BMS. Second, compared to 1st generation DES, were associated with further relative risk (RR) reduction of −18% in of all‐cause death, and lower incidence of stent‐related clinical events: −39% RR of ST risk; −27 RR of TVR/TLR risk.ConclusionsDES in CKD patients undergoing PCI were superior to BMS in reducing major adverse clinical events. This was possibly explained, by a lower risk of stent‐related events as ST and TVR or TLR. Second, compared to 1st generation DES may furtherly reduce clinical events

Smoker's paradox in ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Role of inflammation and platelets.

n/

An Utstein-based model score to predict survival to hospital admission: The UB-ROSC Score

Abstract Aims To develop and validate a multi-parametric practical score to predict the probability of survival to hospital admission of an out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) victim by using Utstein Style-based variables. Methods All consecutive OHCA cases occurring from 2015 to 2017 in two regions, Pavia Province (Italy) and Canton Ticino (Switzerland) were included. We used random effect logistic regression to model survival to hospital admission after an OHCA. We computed the model area under the ROC curve (AUC ROC) for discrimination and we performed both internal and external validation by considering all OHCAs occurring in the aforementioned regions in 2018. The Utstein-Based ROSC (UB-ROSC) score was derived by using the coefficients estimated in the regression model. The score value was obtained adding the pertinent score components calculated for each variable. The score was then plotted against the probability of survival to hospital admission. Results 1962 OHCAs were included (62% male, mean age 73 ± 16 years). Age, aetiology, location, witnessed OHCA, bystander CPR, EMS arrival time and shockable rhythm were independently associated with survival to hospital admission. The model showed excellent discrimination (AUC 0.83, 95%CI 0.81–0.85) for predicting survival to hospital admission, also at internal cross-validation (AUC 0.82, 95%CI 0.80–0.84). The model maintained good discrimination after external validation by using the 2018 OHCA cohort (AUC 0.77, 95%CI 0.74–0.80). Conclusions UB-ROSC score is a novel score that predicts the probability of survival to hospital admission of an OHCA victim. UB-ROSC shall help in setting realistic expectations about sustained ROSC achievement during resuscitation manoeuvres

Clinical governance of patients with acute coronary syndromes

Aims Using the principles of clinical governance, a patient-centred approach intended to promote holistic quality improvement, we designed a prospective, multicentre study in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to verify and quantify consecutive inclusion and describe relative and absolute effects of indicators of quality for diagnosis and therapy. Methods and results Administrative codes for invasive coronary angiography and acute myocardial infarction were used to estimate the ACS universe. The ratio between the number of patients included and the estimated ACS universe was the consecutive index. Co-primary quality indicators were timely reperfusion in patients admitted with ST-elevation ACS and optimal medical therapy at discharge. Cox-proportional hazard models for 1-year death with admission and discharge-specific covariates quantified relative risk reductions and adjusted number needed to treat (NNT) absolute risk reductions. Hospital codes tested had a 99.5% sensitivity to identify ACS universe. We estimated that 7344 (95% CI: 6852-7867) ACS patients were admitted and 5107 were enrolled-i.e. a consecutive index of 69.6% (95% CI 64.9-74.5%), which varied from 30.7 to 79.2% across sites. Timely reperfusion was achieved in 22.4% (95% CI: 20.7-24.1%) of patients, was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for 1-year death of 0.60 (95% CI: 0.40-0.89) and an adjusted NNT of 65 (95% CI: 44-250). Corresponding values for optimal medical therapy were 70.1% (95% CI: 68.7-71.4%), HR of 0.50 (95% CI: 0.38-0.66), and NNT of 98 (95% CI: 79-145). Conclusion A comprehensive approach to quality for patients with ACS may promote equitable access of care and inform implementation of health care delivery. Registration ClinicalTrials.Gov ID NCT0425553

Role of continuous glucose monitoring in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk. an expert-based multidisciplinary delphi consensus

Background: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) shows in more detail the glycaemic pattern of diabetic subjects and provides several new parameters (“glucometrics”) to assess patients’ glycaemia and consensually guide treatment. A better control of glucose levels might result in improvement of clinical outcome and reduce disease complications. This study aimed to gather an expert consensus on the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk or with heart disease. Methods: A list of 22 statements concerning type of patients who can benefit from CGM, prognostic impact of CGM in diabetic patients with heart disease, CGM use during acute cardiovascular events and educational issues of CGM were developed. Using a two-round Delphi methodology, the survey was distributed online to 42 Italian experts (21 diabetologists and 21 cardiologists) who rated their level of agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as more than 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing with any given statement. Results: Forty experts (95%) answered the survey. Every statement achieved a positive consensus. In particular, the panel expressed the feeling that CGM can be prognostically relevant for every diabetic patient (70%) and that is clinically useful also in the management of those with type 2 diabetes not treated with insulin (87.5%). The assessment of time in range (TIR), glycaemic variability (GV) and hypoglycaemic/hyperglycaemic episodes were considered relevant in the management of diabetic patients with heart disease (92.5% for TIR, 95% for GV, 97.5% for time spent in hypoglycaemia) and can improve the prognosis of those with ischaemic heart disease (100% for hypoglycaemia, 90% for hyperglycaemia) or with heart failure (87.5% for hypoglycaemia, 85% for TIR, 87.5% for GV). The experts retained that CGM can be used and can impact the short- and long-term prognosis during an acute cardiovascular event. Lastly, CGM has a recognized educational role for diabetic subjects. Conclusions: According to this Delphi consensus, the clinical and prognostic use of CGM in diabetic patients at high cardiovascular risk is promising and deserves dedicated studies to confirm the experts’ feeling

Effect of aliskiren on post-discharge outcomes among diabetic and non-diabetic patients hospitalized for heart failure: insights from the ASTRONAUT trial

Aims The objective of the Aliskiren Trial on Acute Heart Failure Outcomes (ASTRONAUT) was to determine whether aliskiren, a direct renin inhibitor, would improve post-discharge outcomes in patients with hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) with reduced ejection fraction. Pre-specified subgroup analyses suggested potential heterogeneity in post-discharge outcomes with aliskiren in patients with and without baseline diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods and results ASTRONAUT included 953 patients without DM (aliskiren 489; placebo 464) and 662 patients with DM (aliskiren 319; placebo 343) (as reported by study investigators). Study endpoints included the first occurrence of cardiovascular death or HHF within 6 and 12 months, all-cause death within 6 and 12 months, and change from baseline in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) at 1, 6, and 12 months. Data regarding risk of hyperkalaemia, renal impairment, and hypotension, and changes in additional serum biomarkers were collected. The effect of aliskiren on cardiovascular death or HHF within 6 months (primary endpoint) did not significantly differ by baseline DM status (P = 0.08 for interaction), but reached statistical significance at 12 months (non-DM: HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.64-0.99; DM: HR: 1.16, 95% CI: 0.91-1.47; P = 0.03 for interaction). Risk of 12-month all-cause death with aliskiren significantly differed by the presence of baseline DM (non-DM: HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.50-0.94; DM: HR: 1.64, 95% CI: 1.15-2.33; P < 0.01 for interaction). Among non-diabetics, aliskiren significantly reduced NT-proBNP through 6 months and plasma troponin I and aldosterone through 12 months, as compared to placebo. Among diabetic patients, aliskiren reduced plasma troponin I and aldosterone relative to placebo through 1 month only. There was a trend towards differing risk of post-baseline potassium ≥6 mmol/L with aliskiren by underlying DM status (non-DM: HR: 1.17, 95% CI: 0.71-1.93; DM: HR: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.30-4.42; P = 0.07 for interaction). Conclusion This pre-specified subgroup analysis from the ASTRONAUT trial generates the hypothesis that the addition of aliskiren to standard HHF therapy in non-diabetic patients is generally well-tolerated and improves post-discharge outcomes and biomarker profiles. In contrast, diabetic patients receiving aliskiren appear to have worse post-discharge outcomes. Future prospective investigations are needed to confirm potential benefits of renin inhibition in a large cohort of HHF patients without D