It is unknown whether safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan (an angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor [ARNI]) are affected by mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) in high-risk myocardial infarction (MI) patients. The aim of this study was to examine whether MRA modifies safety and clinical endpoints by use of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with a MI and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) and/or pulmonary congestion. Patients (n = 5661) included in the PARADISE MI trial (Prospective ARNI vs. ACE Inhibitor Trial to Determine Superiority in Reducing Heart Failure Events After MI) were stratified according to MRA. Primary outcomes in this substudy were worsening heart failure or cardiovascular death. Safety was defined as symptomatic hypotension, hyperkalaemia >5.5 mmol/L, or permanent drug discontinuation. A total of 2338 patients (41%) were treated with MRA. Safety of ARNI compared to ramipril was not altered significantly by ± MRA, and both groups had similar increase in symptomatic hypotension with ARNI. In patients taking MRA, the risk of hyperkalaemia or permanent drug discontinuation was not significantly altered by ARNI (p > 0.05 for all comparisons). The effect of ARNI compared with ramipril was similar in those who were and were not taking MRA (hazard ratio [HR]MRA 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77-1.19 and HRMRA- 0.87, 95% CI 0.71-1.05, for the primary endpoint; p = 0.51 for interaction [Clinical Endpoint Committee adjudicated]); similar findings were observed if investigator-reported endpoints were evaluated (p = 0.61 for interaction). Use of a MRA did not modify safety or clinical endpoints related to initiation of ARNI compared to ramipril in the post-MI setting in patients with LVSD and/or congestion.

The role of the beta-adrenergic signaling pathway in heart failure (HF) is pivotal. Early blockade of this pathway with beta-blocker (BB) therapy is recommended as the first-line medication for patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Conversely, in patients with severe acute HF (AHF), including those with resolved cardiogenic shock (CS), BB initiation can be hazardous. There are very few data on the management of BB in these situations. The present expert consensus aims to review all published data on the use of BB in patients with severe decompensated AHF, with or without hemodynamic compromise, and proposes an expert-recommended practical algorithm for the prescription and monitoring of BB therapy in critical settings.

Anterior acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is associated with an increased risk of left ventricular (LV) thrombus formation. We hypothesized that adding low-dose oral rivaroxaban to the usual antiplatelet regimen would reduce the risk of LV thrombus in patients with large AMI. APERITIF is an investigator-initiated, multicenter randomized open-label, blinded end-point (PROBE) trial, nested in the ongoing "FRENCHIE" registry, a French multicenter prospective observational study, in which all consecutive patients admitted within 48 hours of symptom onset in a cardiac Intensive Care Unit (ICU) for AMI are included (NCT04050956). Among them, patients with anterior ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (STEMI) or very high-risk non- ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients with involvement of the left anterior descending artery are randomized into 2 groups: Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) alone or DAPT plus rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily for 4 weeks, started as soon as possible after completion of the initial percutaneous coronary intervention/angiography procedure. The primary endpoint is the presence of LV thrombus at 1 month, as detected by contrast enhanced CMR (CE-CMR). Secondary endpoints include LV thrombus dimension (greatest diameter), the rate of major bleedings and major cardiovascular events at 1 month. Based on estimated event rates, a sample size of 560 patients is needed to show superiority of DAPT plus rivaroxaban therapy versus DAPT alone, with 80% power. The APERITIF trial will determine whether, in patients with large AMIs, the use of rivaroxaban 2.5mg twice daily in addition to DAPT reduces LV thrombus formation, compared with DAPT alone. gov Identifier: NCT05077683.

BackgroundThere are dated and conflicting data about the optimal timing of initiation of P2Y12 inhibitors in elective percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Peri-PCI myocardial necrosis is associated with poor outcomes. We aimed to assess the impact of the P2Y12 inhibitor loading time on periprocedural myocardial necrosis in the population of the randomized Assessment of Loading With the P2Y12 Inhibitor Ticagrelor or Clopidogrel to Halt Ischemic Events in Patients Undergoing Elective Coronary Stenting (ALPHEUS) trial, which compared ticagrelor with clopidogrel in high-risk patients who received elective PCI. MethodsThe ALPHEUS trial divided 1809 patients into quartiles of loading time. The ALPHEUS primary outcome was used (type 4 [a or b] myocardial infarction or major myocardial injury) as well as the main secondary outcome (type 4 [a or b] myocardial infarction or any type of myocardial injury). ResultsPatients in the first quartile group (Q1) presented higher rates of the primary outcome (P = 0.01). When compared with Q1, incidences of the primary outcome decreased in patients with longer loading times (adjusted odds ratio [adjOR], 0.70 [0.52.-0.95]; P = 0.02 for Q2; adjOR 0.65 [0.48-0.88]; P < 0.01 for Q3; adjOR 0.66 [0.49-0.89]; P < 0.01 for Q4). Concordant results were found for the main secondary outcome. There was no interaction with the study drug allocated by randomization (clopidogrel or ticagrelor). Bleeding complications (any bleeding ranging between 4.9% and 7.3% and only 1 major bleeding at 48 hours) and clinical ischemic events were rare and did not differ among groups. ConclusionsIn elective PCI, administration of the oral P2Y12 inhibitor at the time of PCI could be associated with more frequent periprocedural myocardial necrosis than an earlier administration. The long-term clinical consequences remain unknown.

Based on the latest knowledge and technological advancements, it is still debatable whether amodern revascularisation approach in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), including complete revascularisation (in patients with significant non-culprit lesions) with newer-generation highly biocompatible drug-eluting stents, requires prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). TARGET-FIRST (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04753749) is aprospective, open-label, multicentre, randomised controlled study comparing short (one month) DAPT versus standard (12months) DAPT in apopulation of patients with non-ST/ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, completely revascularised at index or staged procedure (within 7 days), using Firehawk, an abluminal in-groove biodegradable polymer rapamycin-eluting stent. The study will be conducted at approximately 50 sites in Europe. After amandatory 30-40 days of DAPT with aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors (preferably potent P2Y12 inhibitors), patients are randomised (1:1) to 1) immediate discontinuation of DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (experimental arm), or 2) continued DAPT with the same regimen (control arm), up until 12months. With afinal sample size of 2,246 patients, the study is powered to evaluate the primary endpoint (non-inferiority of short antiplatelet therapy in completely revascularised patients) for net adverse clinical and cerebral events. If the primary endpoint is met, the study is powered to assess the main secondary endpoint (superiority of short DAPT in terms of major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding). TARGET-FIRST is the first randomised clinical trial to investigate the optimisation of antiplatelet therapy in patients with AMI after achieving complete revascularisation with an abluminal in-groove biodegradable polymer rapamycin-eluting stent implantation.

The globalization of clinical trials has highlighted geographic differences in patient characteristics, treatments, and outcomes. We examined these differences in PARADISE-MI. Overall, 23.0% were randomized in Eastern Europe/Russia, 17.5% in Western Europe, 12.2% in Southern Europe, 10.1% in Northern Europe, 12.0% in Latin America (LA), 9.3% in North America (NA), 10.0% in East/South-East Asia and 5.8% in South Asia (SA). Those from Asia, particularly SA, were different from patients enrolled in the other regions, being younger and thinner. They also differed in terms of comorbidities (high prevalence of diabetes and low prevalence of atrial fibrillation), type of myocardial infarction (more often ST-elevation myocardial infarction), and treatment (low rate of primary percutaneous coronary intervention). By contrast, patients from LA did not differ meaningfully from those randomized in Europe or NA. Use of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers (34.8%) and beta-blockers (65.5%) was low in SA, whereas mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist use was lowest in NA (22%) and highest in Eastern Europe/Russia (53%). Rates of the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or incident heart failure varied two-fold among regions, with the lowest rate in SA (4.6/100 person-years) and the highest in LA (9.2/100 person-years). Rates of incident heart failure varied almost six-fold among regions, with the lowest rate in SA (1.0/100 person-years) and the highest in Northern Europe (5.9/100 person-years). The effect of sacubitril/valsartan was not modified by region. In PARADISE-MI, there were substantial regional differences in patient characteristics, treatments and outcomes. Although the generalizability of these findings to a 'real-world' unselected population may be limited, these findings underscore the importance of considering both regional and within-region differences when designing global clinical trials.

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) has been associated with bleeding. However, there is a lack of prospective assessment of bleeding events and their clinical significance in a large population of outpatients with variable degree of AS severity. To assess the incidence, source, determinants, and prognostic impact of major bleeding in patients with variable degree of AS severity. Between May 2016 and December 2017, consecutive outpatients were included. Major bleeding was defined as type ≥3 bleed using the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition. Cumulative incidence was calculated with death as the competing event. Data was censored at time of aortic valve replacement. Among 2,830 patients, 46 major bleeding events occurred (0.7%/year) during a median follow-up of 2.1 years (interquartile range: 1.4-2.7). Most frequent sites of bleeding were gastrointestinal (50%) and intracranial (30.4%). Major bleeding was significantly associated with all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 5.93 (95% confidence interval 3.64-9.65); P < .001). AS severity was associated with major bleedings (P=.041). By multivariable analysis, severe AS was an independent determinant of major bleeding (hazard ratio vs mild AS: 3.59 [95% confidence interval 1.56-8.29]; P=.003). The increased risk of bleeding associated with severe AS was significantly exacerbated in patients using oral anticoagulation. In AS patients, major bleeding is rare but a strong independent predictor of death. AS severity is a determinant of bleeding events. Severe AS and oral anticoagulation should be identified as an association at very high risk of major bleeding.

BackgroundBiodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) may be associated with better outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared to other current-generation limus-eluting stents (LES). AimsTo compare BP-BES with other current-generation LES in ACS patients undergoing PCI. MethodsWe pooled individual data of Non-ST-segment elevation (NSTE)-ACS patients from two large randomized controlled trials (GLASSY and TWILIGHT). The BP-BES groups consisted mostly of GLASSY patients, while the control group (other current-generation LES) included exclusively TWILIGHT patients. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis; the key secondary outcome was target-vessel failure (TVF). To account for trial design differences, outcomes were assessed at 3 months (short-term) and between 3 and 12 months (long-term) after PCI and subsequently pooled to estimate the 12-month hazards. ResultsOf 7107 and 6053 NSTE-ACS patients included in the short- and long-term analysis, 32.7% and 36.5% received a BP-BES, respectively. Risk of MACE associated with BP-BES versus other LES was similar at short-term (1.1% vs 1.3%, adjusted HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.53–1.38), lower at long-term (1.7% vs 3.1%, adjusted HR 0.49, 95%CI 0.34–0.72), and lower in the entire 12-month period (pooled adjusted HR 0.61, 95%CI 0.45–0.82). The cumulative 12-month risk of TVF was reduced with BP-BES (adjusted HR 0.52, 95%CI 0.38–0.70). ConclusionBP-BES was associated with lower 12-month risks of MACE and TVF compared to other current generation LES among NSTE-ACS patients treated with abbreviated or standard ticagrelor-based DAPT. These non-randomized findings are hypothesis-generating. Condensed abstractDifferences in clinical outcomes may exist between biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and other current-generation limus-eluting stent (LES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We pooled individual data of about 7000 Non-ST-segment elevation ACS patients undergoing PCI and treated with ticagrelor with or without aspirin from two large randomized controlled trials (GLASSY and TWILIGHT). BP-BES patients derived very largely from GLASSY and other LES patients from TWILIGHT. In this population, BP-BES compared to other current generation LES, were associated with a lower 12-month risk of major adverse cardiovascular events and target-vessel failure.

As the antithrombotic regimen that may best prevent ischaemic complications along with the lowest bleeding risk offset following transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) remains unclear, we aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens in patients without having an indication for chronic oral anticoagulation. We conducted a PROSPERO-registered (CRD42021247924) systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials evaluating post-TAVI antithrombotic regimens up to April 2022. We estimated the relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) using a random-effects model in a frequentist pairwise and network metanalytic approach. We included seven studies comprising 4006 patients with a mean weighted follow-up of 12.9 months. Risk of all-cause death was significantly reduced with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compared with low-dose rivaroxaban+3-month single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.41-0.88), while no significant reduction was observed with SAPT vs. DAPT (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.67-1.58) and SAPT and DAPT compared with apixaban or edoxaban (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.32-1.14 and RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34-1.02, respectively). SAPT was associated with a significant reduction of life-threatening, disabling, or major bleeding compared with DAPT (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.70), apixaban or edoxaban alone (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25-0.79), and low-dose rivaroxaban+3-month SAPT (RR 0.30, 95% CI 0.16-0.57). There were no differences between the various regimens with respect to myocardial infarction, stroke, or systemic embolism. Following TAVI in patients without an indication for chronic oral anticoagulant, SAPT more than halved the risk of bleeding compared with DAPT and direct oral anticoagulant-based regimens without significant ischaemic offset.