Volumetric analysis of LAD-diagonal and LCX-obtuse marginal coronary bifurcations: An intravascular ultrasound study

Fecha errónea en el original

Relationship Between Atheroma Regression and Change in Lumen Size After Infusion of Apolipoprotein A-I Milano

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the relationship between atheroma regression and arterial wall remodeling.BackgroundInfusion of reconstituted high-density lipoprotein (rHDL) containing recombinant apolipoprotein A-I Milano (AIM) has been reported to promote rapid regression of coronary atherosclerosis. The current study analyzed intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to define the changes that take place in the arterial wall that accompanied atheroma regression in this study.MethodsForty-seven patients, ages 30 to 75 years, after an acute coronary syndrome were randomized to receive five weekly infusions of placebo or rHDL containing either low- or high-dose AIM. External elastic membrane (EEM) and lumen volumes were compared between coronary IVUS studies at baseline and follow-up.ResultsIn comparison with baseline, infusion of rHDL was associated with a 4.6% reduction in EEM volume. Lumen volume did not change. In 10-mm arterial subsegments with the greatest plaque burden at baseline, atheroma volume regressed by 10.9% with a similar reduction in EEM volume but with no change in lumen size. In contrast, EEM and atheroma volume did not change in the 10-mm segments containing the least plaque burden. The reduction in EEM in the most diseased segments was only apparent in subjects who underwent plaque regression. Reduction in EEM volume correlated with the decreased atheroma volume (r = 0.62), but there was no correlation between change in lumen size and change in plaque volume.ConclusionsRemodeling of the arterial wall is a focal and heterogeneous process. After infusion of rHDL containing AIM, regression of coronary atherosclerosis is accompanied by reverse remodeling of the EEM, resulting in no change in luminal dimensions

A comprehensive review of the PARTNER trial

ObjectivePercutaneous transcatheter aortic valve replacement was introduced in 2002, but its effectiveness remained to be assessed.MethodsA prospective, randomized trial (the Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves, or PARTNER) was designed with 2 arms: PARTNER A (n = 699) for high-risk surgical patients (Society of Thoracic Surgeons score >10%, surgeon assessed risk of mortality >15%) and PARTNER B (n = 358, patients inoperable by assessment of 2 surgeons). PARTNER A patients were divided into femoral artery access transcatheter aortic valve replacement or none (n = 207), and then randomized to open aortic valve replacement (n = 351) or device (n = 348). Inclusion criteria included valve area <0.8 cm2, gradient >40 mm Hg or peak >64 mm Hg, and survival >1 year. The end point of the study was 1-year mortality.ResultsThirty-day mortality for PARTNER A was 3.4% for transcatheter aortic valve replacement and 6.5% for aortic valve replacement; 1-year mortality was 24.2% and 26.8%, respectively (P = .001 for noninferiority). The respective prevalence of stroke was 3.8% and 2.1% (P = .2), although for all neurologic events, the difference between transcatheter aortic valve replacement and aortic valve replacement was significant (P = .04), including 4.6% for femoral artery access transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus 1.4% for open aortic valve replacement (P = .05). For PARTNER B—transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus medical treatment—30-day mortality was 5.0% versus 2.8% (P = .41), and at 1 year, mortality was 30.7% versus 50.7% (P < .001), respectively. Hospitalization cost of transcatheter aortic valve replacement for PARTNER B was $78,542, or$50,200 per year of life gained. Analysis of PARTNER A strokes showed that hazard with transcatheter aortic valve replacement peaked early, but thereafter remained constant in relation to aortic valve replacement. Two-year PARTNER A data showed paravalvular regurgitation was associated with increased mortality, even when mild (P < .001). Continued access to transapical transcatheter aortic valve replacement (n = 853) showed a mortality of 8.2% and decline in strokes to 2.0%. Of the 1801 Cleveland Clinic patients reviewed to December 2010, 214 (12%) underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement with a mortality of 1%; in 2011, 105 underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement: 34 transapical aortic valve replacement, with no deaths, and 71 femoral artery access aortic valve replacement with 1 death.ConclusionsThe PARTNER A and B trials showed that survival has been remarkably good, but stroke and perivalvular leakage require further device development

Improvement in diastolic suction in patients with hypertrophic obstructive cardiomyopathy after septal ablation

Background: The ESMO Magnitude of Clinical Benefit Scale (ESMO-MCBS) version 1.0 (v1.0) was published in May 2015 and was the first version of a validated and reproducible tool to assess the magnitude of clinical benefit from new cancer therapies. The ESMO-MCBS was designed to be a dynamic tool with planned revisions and updates based upon recognition of expanding needs and shortcomings identified since the last review. Methods: The revision process for the ESMO-MCBS incorporates a nine-step process: Careful review of critiques and suggestions, and identification of problems in the application of v1.0; Identification of shortcomings for revision in the upcoming version; Proposal and evaluation of solutions to address identified shortcomings; Field testing of solutions; Preparation of a near-final revised version for peer review for reasonableness by members of the ESMO Faculty and Guidelines Committee; Amendments based on peer review for reasonableness; Near-final review by members of the ESMO-MCBS Working Group and the ESMO Executive Board; Final amendments; Final review and approval by members of the ESMO-MCBS Working Group and the ESMO Executive Board. Results: Twelve issues for revision or amendment were proposed for consideration; proposed amendments were formulated for eight identified shortcomings. The proposed amendments are classified as either structural, technical, immunotherapy triggered or nuanced. All amendments were field tested in a wide range of studies comparing scores generated with ESMO-MCBS v1.0 and version 1.1 (v1.1). Conclusions: ESMO-MCBS v1.1 incorporates 10 revisions and will allow for scoring of single-arm studies. Scoring remains very stable; revisions in v1.1 alter the scores of only 12 out of 118 comparative studies and facilitate scoring for single-arm studies