2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI)

Antithrombotic therapy for long-term secondary prevention of acute coronary syndrome in high-risk patients

Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) represent a major clinical burden, because they tend to experience recurrent ischemic events. Acute management of patients with ACS includes combination antithrombotic therapy composed of a parenteral anticoagulant and dual-antiplatelet therapy. Dual-antiplatelet therapy is also recommended for long-term secondary prevention of ACS. Despite advances in the antithrombotic therapies available, clinical trials suggest that patients with ACS still faceã10% risk of another event within 12-15 months of the index event. Certain patient populations, such as elderly patients and those with renal impairment or heart failure, are at higher risk of recurrent ACS events, because these patients have more vascular ischemic and bleeding risk factors than most other patients. Evidence from the GRACE and CRUSADE registries suggests underuse of the guideline-recommended evidence-based therapies for the management of ACS in such patients. This review summarizes the current standard of care for patients with ACS, focusing on long-term secondary antithrombotic strategies. Registry data are used to identify high-risk patient populations; the recent antiplatelet and anticoagulant Phase III trial data are summarized to highlight any patient populations who receive greater or lesser benefit from specific long-term antithrombotic strategies. Guideline recommendations are discussed and suggestions are provided to help improve implementation of long-term secondary prevention strategies and patient prognosis after an ACS event.

Update on ischemic heart disease and intensive cardiac care

This article summarizes the main developments reported in 2014 on ischemic heart disease, together with the most important innovations in intensive cardiac care.

On-pump versus off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery in patients with preoperative anemia

OBJECTIVES

The study objective was to evaluate the effects on early outcome and midterm survival of performing coronary artery bypass grafting with the off-pump technique in comparison with cardiopulmonary bypass (on-pump) in patients with preoperative anemia.

METHODS

Consecutive adult anemic patients (preoperative hemoglobin <13.0 g/dL in men and <12.0 g/dL in women) resident in Puglia region who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass grafting between January 2011 and November 2013 were considered. Vital status was ascertained from the date of surgery to December 31, 2013. Odds ratio and hazard ratio (HR) were estimated. Propensity score methods were used to control for confounders.

RESULTS

Of 939 anemic patients (234 female, aged 71 ± 9 years), 361 underwent operation with the off-pump technique and 578 underwent operation with the on-pump technique. Patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass had a shorter intensive care unit length of stay, lower blood transfusion rate, and postoperative reduction in creatinine clearance. During a median follow-up of 18 months, 126 patients died: 46 in hospital (35 on-pump) and 80 after discharge (33 on-pump). In comparison with the off-pump technique, the on-pump technique had greater hospital mortality (odds ratio, 2.57; P = .028) and 30-day incidence of fatal events (HR, 2.67; P = .026). After a period without risk differences between groups (1-6 months; HR, 0.79; P = .618), a lower mortality in those undergoing the on-pump technique was detected (after 6 months HR, 0.35; P = .014). All results were confirmed in the 157 pairs of patients matched for propensity score, anemia grade, and surgery center.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with low levels of preoperative hemoglobin, off-pump coronary artery bypass was associated with lower early morbidity and mortality but a greater risk of mortality during follow-up compared with on-pump coronary artery bypass.

ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction – ideal scenario for bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation?

Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) represent a breakthrough technology for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this context, because of the unique properties of bioresorbable devices, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) may represent the ideal scenario for BVS implantation. Consistently, 57% of physicians declare they currently use BVS in this group of patients. However, continuous and growing evidence on the good performance of these devices has been actually shown only in small studies with short- and mid-term follow-up. For these reasons, we need data from sufficiently large observational studies, with long-term follow-up, to confirm that BVS can deliver the same results as 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents when using an appropriate implantation technique. In this review, we discuss the potential advantages of BVS implantation in STEMI patients, together with the most recent evidence from clinical studies, highlighting safety and procedural concerns.

Long-term forecasting and comparison of mortality in the Evaluation of the Xience Everolimus Eluting Stent vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization (EXCEL) trial: prospective validation of the SYNTAX Score II

AIMS

To prospectively validate the SYNTAX Score II and forecast the outcomes of the randomized Evaluation of the Xience Everolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization (EXCEL) Trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Evaluation of the Xience Everolimus Eluting Stent vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization is a prospective, randomized multicenter trial designed to establish the efficacy and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the everolimus-eluting stent compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery in subjects with unprotected left-main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease and low-intermediate anatomical SYNTAX scores (<33). After completion of patient recruitment in EXCEL, the SYNTAX Score II was prospectively applied to predict 4-year mortality in the CABG and PCI arms. The 95% prediction intervals (PIs) for mortality were computed using simulation with bootstrap resampling (10 000 times). For the entire study cohort, the 4-year predicted mortalities were 8.5 and 10.5% in the PCI and CABG arms, respectively [odds ratios (OR) 0.79; 95% PI 0.43-1.50). In subjects with low (≤22) anatomical SYNTAX scores, the predicted OR was 0.69 (95% PI 0.34-1.45); in intermediate anatomical SYNTAX scores (23-32), the predicted OR was 0.93 (95% PI 0.53-1.62). Based on 4-year mortality predictions in EXCEL, clinical characteristics shifted long-term mortality predictions either in favour of PCI (older age, male gender and COPD) or CABG (younger age, lower creatinine clearance, female gender, reduced left ventricular ejection fraction).

CONCLUSION

The SYNTAX Score II indicates at least an equipoise for long-term mortality between CABG and PCI in subjects with ULMCA disease up to an intermediate anatomical complexity. Both anatomical and clinical characteristics had a clear impact on long-term mortality predictions and decision making between CABG and PCI.

Peri- and postinterventional antithrombotic therapy in TAVI. Do we need antiplatelet therapy?

Interventional treatment of aortic valve stenosis by transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) has become routine practice in elderly and high risk patients in recent years. Similar to other vascular interventional or surgical procedures TAVR carries thrombotic risks such as stroke, myocardial infarction or systemic embolism as well as peri-procedural bleeding risks. These risks comprise the access site, the type of prosthesis, and the individual risk profile of the patient. Not only during the peri-procedural period but also during longterm follow-up the current target population for TAVR procedures carries a high risk for thrombotic events in particular if atrial fibrillation is present. On the other hand side the bleeding risk is also increased in these patients. Thus, to provide the optimal strategy of antithrombotic therapy during and after TAVR remains a clinical challenge.

Opportunities for improvement in anti-thrombotic therapy and other strategies for the management of acute coronary syndromes: Insights from EPICOR, an international study of current practice patterns

AIMS

To describe international patterns and opportunities for improvement of pre- and in-hospital care of patients hospitalized for acute coronary syndromes (ACS), with special focus on anti-thrombotic therapy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

EPICOR (long-tErm follow-uP of anti-thrombotic management patterns In acute CORonary syndrome patients), an international, cohort study, which enrolled 10,568 consecutive ACS survivors from 555 hospitals in 20 countries across Europe and Latin America (September 2010 to March 2011), prospectively registered detailed information on pre- and in-hospital management. Globally, 4738 (44.8%) were attended before hospitalization, 4241 (40.1%) had an ECG, 2119 (20%) received anti-platelet therapy and 101 STEMI patients (2%) fibrinolysis. In-hospital, 7944 patients (75.2%) received dual anti-platelet therapy, most often with clopidogrel (69.7%), and less with prasugrel (5.4%); 1705 (16.1%) had triple anti-platelet therapy, and 849 (8%) single anti-platelet therapy. STEMI patients more often received pre-hospital anti-thrombotics, and prasugrel, GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors and UFH in-hospital (all p < 0.001). More NSTE-ACS patients received clopidogrel, single anti-platelet therapy, and fondaparinux (all p < 0.001). As many as 33% of ACS patients were medically managed. A significant decreasing gradient was found between Northern, Southern and Eastern Europe and Latin America in use of more potent patterns of anti-platelet therapy, reperfusion therapy and invasive strategy.

CONCLUSION

This large international study shows room for improvement in use of anti-thrombotic drugs and other strategies for optimal management of ACS, including pre-hospital ECG and anti-thrombotic therapy. Regional practice differences not based on evidence or conditioned by economic constraints should be reduced.

Managing the Antithrombotic Therapy After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients on Oral Anticoagulation

In patients on chronic oral anticoagulation (OAC) who are undergoing a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and a P2Y12 inhibitor) is required. However, combining dual antiplatelet therapy with OAC increases the risk of bleeding. Newer and stronger P2Y12 inhibitors also add more complexity to the regimen, as these antiplatelet agents are currently recommended as standard treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). It remains unclear whether these ACS patients on chronic OAC undergoing PCI should be treated with these new P2Y12 inhibitors as part of the antiplatelet therapy. Another issue to address is that new non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants have emerged as possible alternatives for stroke prevention in patients with AF. Thus, the anticoagulated patient undergoing PCI faces a treatment dilemma. Based on a real-life case, we will discuss the optimal anticoagulant and antiplatelet treatment with a review of the literature.

Contemporary Antiplatelet Strategies in the Treatment of STEMI using Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Reperfusion therapy for patients presenting with an acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) involves primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) and concomitant oral antiplatelet and intravenous antithrombotic pharmacotherapy. There is a conflict between the desire to reduce the time between first medical contact and coronary re-canalisation and achieving effective platelet inhibition with oral antiplatelet agents. This review outlines the currently available antiplatelet treatments, and their place within the therapeutic timeline of a patient presenting with STEMI. Additionally, we focus on current challenges associated with effective antiplatelet treatment, including acute stent thrombosis (AST), the effect of morphine, platelet function assessment and concomitant anticoagulant therapy.

The Role of Percutaneous Haemodynamic Support in High-risk Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Cardiogenic Shock

The experience and usage of percutaneous cardiac assist devices in cardiogenic shock as well as high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention have increased over the years. Nonetheless, there is still little evidence of clinical benefit of these devices other than immediate haemodynamic improvement. Despite the fact that these devices are used to treat a rather complex patient population, clinical testing remains important in order to evaluate their true impact on clinical outcome before being adopted into clinical practice. Therefore, this review shows an overview of the current experience and evidence of the available percutaneous cardiac assist devices.

Percutaneous Mechanical Ventricular Support in Acute Cardiac Care: A UK Quaternary Centre Experience Using 2.5L, 3.8L and 5.0L Impella Catheters

Aims

The Impella is a percutaneous ventricular assist device. The majority of published data describes the 2.5L and 5.0L devices, and little data is available for the newer 3.8L device. We examined the indications and outcomes from our single-centre “real-world” registry at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Birmingham, UK, using all three pump sizes.

Methods and Results

Records from all patients who underwent attempted Impella-assisted procedures at our centre were examined retrospectively. Impella implantation was attempted in 49 patients (mean age 72 ± 13 years; 80% male) and was successful in 48 (98%). 45 patients underwent high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), one patient underwent balloon aortic valvuloplasty and 3 patients had Impella as a bridge to cardiac transplantation. The 2.5L and 3.8L devices were used in 36 (75%) and 11 (23%) patients, respectively, while one patient (2%) had the 5L device. Vascular complications occurred in only one patient (2%) and stroke and peri-procedural myocardial infarction occurred in one patient (2%), while in-hospital mortality was 20% (10/49).

Conclusions

In this large real-world registry, we have demonstrated the safety and feasibility of the Impella device for a wide range of indications. This includes the first series of the 3.8L device which provides superior support with no increase in vascular complications.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40119-014-0033-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Percutaneous coronary intervention in stable coronary artery disease]

Percutaneous coronary intervention is a well-established symptomatic therapy of stable coronary artery disease. Using a literature search with special emphasis on the newly-published FAME 2 trial data, the author wanted to explore why percutaneous coronary intervention fails to reduce mortality and myocardial infarction in stable coronary artery disease, as opposed to surgical revascularisation. In the FAME 2 trial, fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention with second generation drug eluting stents showed a significant reduction in the primary composite endpoint of 2-year mortality, myocardial infarction and unplanned hospitalization with urgent revascularisation as compared to medical therapy alone. In addition, landmark analysis showed that after 8 days, mortality and myocardial infarction were significantly reduced. The author concludes that percutaneous coronary intervention involving fractional flow reserve guidance and modern stents offers symptomatic, as well as prognostic benefit.

Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents

BACKGROUND

Dual antiplatelet therapy is recommended after coronary stenting to prevent thrombotic complications, yet the benefits and risks of treatment beyond 1 year are uncertain.

METHODS

Patients were enrolled after they had undergone a coronary stent procedure in which a drug-eluting stent was placed. After 12 months of treatment with a thienopyridine drug (clopidogrel or prasugrel) and aspirin, patients were randomly assigned to continue receiving thienopyridine treatment or to receive placebo for another 18 months; all patients continued receiving aspirin. The coprimary efficacy end points were stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) during the period from 12 to 30 months. The primary safety end point was moderate or severe bleeding.

RESULTS

A total of 9961 patients were randomly assigned to continue thienopyridine treatment or to receive placebo. Continued treatment with thienopyridine, as compared with placebo, reduced the rates of stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 1.4%; hazard ratio, 0.29 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.17 to 0.48]; P<0.001) and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (4.3% vs. 5.9%; hazard ratio, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.59 to 0.85]; P<0.001). The rate of myocardial infarction was lower with thienopyridine treatment than with placebo (2.1% vs. 4.1%; hazard ratio, 0.47; P<0.001). The rate of death from any cause was 2.0% in the group that continued thienopyridine therapy and 1.5% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.00 to 1.85]; P=0.05). The rate of moderate or severe bleeding was increased with continued thienopyridine treatment (2.5% vs. 1.6%, P=0.001). An elevated risk of stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction was observed in both groups during the 3 months after discontinuation of thienopyridine treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual antiplatelet therapy beyond 1 year after placement of a drug-eluting stent, as compared with aspirin therapy alone, significantly reduced the risks of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events but was associated with an increased risk of bleeding. (Funded by a consortium of eight device and drug manufacturers and others; DAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00977938.).

Revascularization Decisions in Patients With Stable Angina and Intermediate Lesions

Background—

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement of intermediate coronary stenoses is recommended by guidelines when demonstration of ischemia by noninvasive testing is unavailable. The study aims to evaluate the penetration of this recommendation into current thinking about revascularization strategies for stable coronary artery disease.

Methods and Results—

International Survey on Interventional Strategy was conducted via a web-based platform. First, participants’ experiences in interventional cardiology were queried. Second, 5 complete angiograms were provided, presenting only focal intermediate stenoses. FFR and quantitative coronary angiography values were known; however, remained undisclosed. Determination of stenosis significance was asked for each lesion. In cases of uncertainty, the most appropriate adjunctive invasive diagnostic method among quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, or FFR needed to be selected. International Survey on Interventional Strategy was taken by 495 participants who provided 4421 lesion evaluations. In 3158 (71%) decisions, participants relied solely on angiographic appearance that was discordant in 47% with the known FFR, using 0.80 as cutoff value. The use of FFR and imaging modalities was requested in 21% and 8%, respectively. Comparing 4 groups of participants according to the experience in FFR, angiogram-based decisions were less frequent with increasing experience (77% versus 72% versus 69% versus 67%, respectively; P <0.001). As a result, requests for FFR were more frequent (14% versus 19% versus 24% versus 28%, respectively; P <0.001) and rates of discordant decisions decreased (51% versus 49% versus 47% versus 43%, respectively; P <0.022).

Conclusions—

The findings confirm that, even when all potential external constraints are virtually eliminated, visual estimation continues to dominate the treatment decisions for intermediate stenoses, indicative of a worrisome disconnect between recommendations and current practice.