12 research outputs found

    Master Recital

    Full text link
    Program listing performers and works performe

    Master\u27s Recital

    Full text link
    List of performers and performances

    Two-year results from Onyx ONE clear in patients with high bleeding risk on one-month DAPT with and without intracoronary imaging.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) are often treated with abbreviated dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to reduce bleeding risk, however this strategy is associated with an increase in ischemic events, especially if the acute PCI result is suboptimal. We compared clinical outcomes among patients with HBR treated with 1-month DAPT who underwent intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- or optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided PCI versus those who underwent angiography-guided PCI without intravascular imaging. METHODS The Onyx ONE Clear study includes patients with HBR from the Onyx ONE US/Japan and Onyx ONE randomized studies who were treated with the Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death (CD) or myocardial infarction (MI) between 1 month and 2 years after PCI. Propensity-score adjustments and matching were performed for differences in baseline and procedural characteristics between groups. RESULTS Among the 1507 patients in Onyx ONE Clear, 271 (18.0 %) had IVUS or OCT used during PCI (Imaging-guided group) and 1236 (82.0 %) underwent Angiography-guided PCI (Angio-guided group). Imaging-guided patients were less likely to present with atrial fibrillation, acute coronary syndrome, and left ventricle ejection fraction ≤35 %. Conversely, Imaging-guided patients were more likely to have complex (ACC/AHA type B2/C), longer, and heavily calcified lesions. Between 1 month and 2 years, the composite rate of CD or MI was similar between Imaging-guided and Angio-guided patients (9.9 % vs. 12.4 %, P = 0.33). There was also no difference between groups after adjustment; (P = 0.56). However, CD was significantly lower among Imaging-guided patients (2.7 % vs. 6.1 %, P = 0.048). There were no between-group differences in MI or stent thrombosis. Propensity score matching results were similar. CONCLUSION Despite higher lesion complexity, using intravascular imaging guidance for PCI between 1-month and 2-years follow-up had comparable outcomes with angiographic guidance alone in patients with HBR treated with 1-month DAPT. (ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT03647475 and NCT03344653). NON-STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS BARC: Bleeding Academic Research Consortium; DAPT: dual antiplatelet therapy; DES: drug-eluting stent; HBR: high bleeding risk; IVUS: intravascular ultrasound; OCT: optical coherence tomography; SAPT: single antiplatelet therapy

    Two-year results from Onyx ONE clear in patients with high bleeding risk on one-month DAPT with and without intracoronary imaging.

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) are often treated with abbreviated dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to reduce bleeding risk, however this strategy is associated with an increase in ischemic events, especially if the acute PCI result is suboptimal. We compared clinical outcomes among patients with HBR treated with 1-month DAPT who underwent intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)- or optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided PCI versus those who underwent angiography-guided PCI without intravascular imaging. METHODS: The Onyx ONE Clear study includes patients with HBR from the Onyx ONE US/Japan and Onyx ONE randomized studies who were treated with the Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death (CD) or myocardial infarction (MI) between 1 month and 2 years after PCI. Propensity-score adjustments and matching were performed for differences in baseline and procedural characteristics between groups. RESULTS: Among the 1507 patients in Onyx ONE Clear, 271 (18.0 %) had IVUS or OCT used during PCI (Imaging-guided group) and 1236 (82.0 %) underwent Angiography-guided PCI (Angio-guided group). Imaging-guided patients were less likely to present with atrial fibrillation, acute coronary syndrome, and left ventricle ejection fraction ≤35 %. Conversely, Imaging-guided patients were more likely to have complex (ACC/AHA type B2/C), longer, and heavily calcified lesions. Between 1 month and 2 years, the composite rate of CD or MI was similar between Imaging-guided and Angio-guided patients (9.9 % vs. 12.4 %, P = 0.33). There was also no difference between groups after adjustment; (P = 0.56). However, CD was significantly lower among Imaging-guided patients (2.7 % vs. 6.1 %, P = 0.048). There were no between-group differences in MI or stent thrombosis. Propensity score matching results were similar. CONCLUSION: Despite higher lesion complexity, using intravascular imaging guidance for PCI between 1-month and 2-years follow-up had comparable outcomes with angiographic guidance alone in patients with HBR treated with 1-month DAPT. (ClinicalTrials.gov: Identifier: NCT03647475 and NCT03344653). NON-STANDARD ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS: BARC: Bleeding Academic Research Consortium; DAPT: dual antiplatelet therapy; DES: drug-eluting stent; HBR: high bleeding risk; IVUS: intravascular ultrasound; OCT: optical coherence tomography; SAPT: single antiplatelet therapy

    Prospective Assessment of the Diagnostic Accuracy of Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio to Assess Coronary Stenosis Relevance: Results of ADVISE II International, Multicenter Study (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II)

    Get PDF
    Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the diagnostic accuracy of the instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) to characterize, outside of a pre-specified range of values, stenosis severity, as defined by fractional flow reserve (FFR) ≤0.80, in a prospective, independent, controlled, core laboratory–based environment. Background: Studies with methodological heterogeneity have reported some discrepancies in the classification agreement between iFR and FFR. The ADVISE II (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II) study was designed to overcome limitations of previous iFR versus FFR comparisons. Methods: A total of 919 intermediate coronary stenoses were investigated during baseline and hyperemia. From these, 690 pressure recordings (n = 598 patients) met core laboratory physiology criteria and are included in this report. Results: The pre-specified iFR cut-off of 0.89 was optimal for the study and correctly classified 82.5% of the stenoses, with a sensitivity of 73.0% and specificity of 87.8% (C statistic: 0.90 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88 to 0.92, p < 0.001]). The proportion of stenoses properly classified by iFR outside of the pre-specified treatment (≤0.85) and deferral (≥0.94) values was 91.6% (95% CI: 88.8% to 93.9%). When combined with FFR use within these cut-offs, the percent of stenoses properly classified by such a pre-specified hybrid iFR-FFR approach was 94.2% (95% CI: 92.2% to 95.8%). The hybrid iFR-FFR approach obviated vasodilators from 65.1% (95% CI: 61.1% to 68.9%) of patients and 69.1% (95% CI: 65.5% to 72.6%) of stenoses. Conclusions: The ADVISE II study supports, on the basis rigorous methodology, the diagnostic value of iFR in establishing the functional significance of coronary stenoses, and highlights its complementariness with FFR when used in a hybrid iFR-FFR approach. (ADenosine Vasodilator Independent Stenosis Evaluation II–ADVISE II; NCT01740895

    Drotrecogin alfa (Activated) in adults with septic shock

    Get PDF
    There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock.In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 μg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization.At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81).DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.)
    corecore