Risk Of Stent Thrombosis Research Articles

Abstract 4120966: Outcomes Following Balloon Angioplasty with Drug Coated Versus Uncoated Balloons in Patients with Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background <div> </div> <div>The development of in-stent restenosis (ISR) has emerged as a substantial barrier to interventional treatment for coronary heart disease. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an efficacious interventional technique for the management of ISR. This meta-analysis compares the efficacy of DCB in the treatment of ISR with that of an uncoated balloon (UCB).</div> <div> </div> <div>Methods</div> <div> </div> <div>We comprehensively searched literature on MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and clinicaltrials.gov using MeSH terms and relevant keywords for “Balloon Angioplasty” and “in-stent Restenosis” from inception to June 1, 2024, followed by a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess both strategies for treatment of ISR. Random effects model was used to aggregate the risk ratios (RR) for dichotomous and mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals (CI).</div> <div> </div> <div>Results</div> <div> </div> <div>The search strategy retrieved 2330 studies. Duplicates and irrelevant articles were removed and data from seven RCTs (1,408 patients) was extracted. The mean age ranged from 64 to 74 years. The mean clinical follow-up ranged from 1 to 10 years. DCB was found to be superior to UCB at latest follow up in terms of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.19-0.58; p 0.0001; I2 79%), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.73; p 0.003; I2 84%), late lumen loss (LLL) (MD -0.46 mm, 95% CI -0.64- -0.28]; p <0.00001; I2 64%), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29-0.70; p 0.0003; I2 67%). The two groups were comparable at latest follow up in terms of mortality (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.65-1.16; p 0.35; I2 0%), cardiac death (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.66-1.19; p 0.43; I2 0%), myocardial infarction (MI) (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.39-1.24; p 0.22; I2 28%) and stent thrombosis (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.04-1.10; p 0.06; I2 46%).</div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div> </div> <div>Conclusion</div> <div> </div> <div>DCB showed promising results in the treatment of patients with coronary ISR. DCB outperformed UCB in significantly reducing TLR, MACE, LLL and TVR risks. The risk of mortality, cardiac death, MI, and stent thrombosis was similar between DCB and UCB.</div> <div> </div> <div> </div>

Abstract 4121530: Comparison of Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the preferred revascularization strategy for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Drug-eluting stents (DES) are linked to higher risks of stent restenosis and stent thrombosis when implanted for AMI. Drug-coated balloons (DCB) provide a high concentration of anti-proliferative drugs over the target lesion without using the polymeric stent structures. The current literature comparing DCB to DES for AMI PCI is limited. Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on the major electronic databases for studies comparing DCB to DES for AMI PCI. Mean difference (MD) and odds ratio (OR) with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals were pooled using a random-effects model, and a p-value of <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 8 studies with 1401 AMI patients were included (545: DCB and 856: DES). The pooled analysis demonstrated that DCB was associated with significantly lower mean lumen diameter on follow-up [MD: -0.26; 95% CI: -0.47, -0.05; p=0.02] compared to DES. However, there was no statistically significant difference in mean in-stent late lumen loss [MD: 0.07; 95% CI: -0.03, 0.18], cardiovascular mortality [OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.35, 2.34], all-cause mortality [OR: 0.80; 95% CI: 0.25, 2.63], myocardial infarction [OR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.36, 2.45], major adverse cardiovascular events [OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.47, 2.00], target lesion revascularization [OR: 1.59; 95% CI: 0.52, 4.87], and stent thrombosis [OR: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.05, 4.94]. Conclusion: In patients with AMI, PCI using DCB leads to a significant reduction in the minimum lumen diameter on follow-up compared to DES. No statistically significant difference was noted in mean in-stent late lumen loss, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiovascular events, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis. Further trials are warranted to confirm these findings.

Abstract 4137019: Paclitaxel-Coated Balloon vs Uncoated Balloon for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Despite the effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) in preventing restenosis, many patients still experience DES restenosis. Neointimal hyperplasia and neoatherosclerosis can develop within these stents, leading to recurrent coronary syndromes. Hypothesis: Repeated stenting with DES is limited by additional metal layers, the need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, and heightened risks of stent thrombosis. Locally acting drugs with sustained efficacy may prevent this progression. Paclitaxel delivery via contrast medium or drug-coated balloon catheters could exert antiproliferative effects, reducing neointimal proliferation. Aims: To synthesize existing evidence on the efficacy and safety of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons versus Uncoated Balloons in coronary in-stent restenosis. Methods: Following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, we searched five electronic databases (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Web of Science) to identify eligible studies reported up to March 23, 2024. Using R version 4.4.0, we reported outcomes as risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MD) and confidence intervals (CIs). This review has been registered and published in PROSPERO (CRD42024527412). Results: The meta-analysis included a total of six trials with 1,541 patients. PCB significantly reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction (RR 0.65, 95% CI [0.42, 1.00], p = 0.052), stent thrombosis (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.08, to 0.83], p = 0.023), major adverse cardiac events (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.25, to 0.42], P < 0.001), target lesion revascularization (RR 0.34, 95% CI [0.14, 0.84], p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between PCB and UCB regarding cardiac-related mortality, target vessel revascularization, percutaneous coronary intervention, all-cause death, Q wave and non-Q wave myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, and target vessel failure. Conclusion: PCB for ISR significantly reduced the incidence of myocardial infarction, MACE, and stent thrombosis compared to UCB.

Stent thrombosis in the setting of ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction in the contemporary practice: results from the TOTAL randomized trial.

The aim was to know the risk and predictive factors of stent thrombosis (ST) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the contemporary practice. The TOTAL [ThrOmbecTomy with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) versus PCI ALone] randomized trial, being the largest trial performed in the setting of STEMI with a general application of the recent recommendations, represents a unique opportunity to know the current real-world incidence of ST as well as its associated factors. A total of 10 064 patients that received ≥1 coronary stent in the TOTAL trial comprise the study population. The risk, predictive factors, and clinical implications of ST was studied. During 1-year follow-up, 155 patients (1.54%) suffered definitive or probable ST (59 acute, 67 subacute, and 29 late). Previous infarction, the number of stents, the previous use of clopidogrel, and the use of diuretics at discharge were independent predictors for ST, whereas the use of upfront glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, radial access, and treatment with statins at discharge were independent protective factors. The number of stents, stent diameter, upfront treatment with IIb/IIIa inhibitors, previous treatment with clopidogrel, and treatment with statins at discharge were independently associated with the risk of early ST. Only previous infarction was associated with the risk of late ST. In the contemporary practice, ST still constitutes a frequent complication of primary PCI for STEMI, occurring in 1.5% of patients. Independent predictors are different depending on the time of ST.

Stent strategies: Endothelial progenitor cell coated stents vs sirolimus eluting stents in a pairwise meta-analysis

BackgroundEndothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) capturing stents were developed to enhance endothelial repair and reduce the risk of stent thrombosis, addressing limitations of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents (SES). This study aims to compare the safety and efficacy of EPC stents versus SES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines in patients undergoing PCI treated with Sirolimus eluting stent (SES) vs the use of EPC stents and recognized 8 clinical trials with patients undergoing PCI and reporting outcomes such as Target Lesion Failure (TLF), stent thrombosis, and revascularisation. Relative risks were calculated using a random effects model and heterogeneity was assessed with I^2 statistics. ResultsThe EPC group showed higher incidence of TLF (RR ​= ​1.28), MI(RR ​= ​1.10), and cardiac death (RR ​= ​1.19) compared to SES, though these differences were not statistically significant. Revascularisation rates were significantly higher in EPC group with TVR (RR ​= ​1.60) and TLR(RR ​= ​2.20) while stent thrombosis was lower (RR ​= ​0.93). ConclusionThe results of this EPC study reveals that while EPC stents show promise in revascularisation and lowering stent thrombosis, they are also associated with higher incidence of adverse events. The utility of EPC, especially vast reendothelialization, may have niche applications but their full potential can be realized with more rigorous trials as a clear advantage over SES remains lacking.

Clinical impact of systemic inflammation across the spectrum of different high-sensitivity CRP values in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract Background Systemic inflammation enhances atherosclerosis progression and is a well-established determinant of cardiovascular risk. High-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), the most widely available biomarker of inflammation, has indeed been associated with the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, some heterogeneity exists in the threshold to define high hsCRP associated with increased cardiovascular risk, with the 2 and 3 mg/L cut-offs being used more commonly. Purpose We aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of systemic inflammation in patients undergoing PCI across the spectrum of baseline hsCRP values. Methods We retrospectively evaluated consecutive patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stent implantation from 2012 to 2022 at Mount Sinai Hospital (NY, USA). We excluded patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction or active cancer and those for whom baseline hsCRP was not available or was above 10 mg/L. Patients were stratified into three groups according to baseline hsCRP levels: <2.0, 2.0 to 3.0, and >3.0 mg/L. We estimated the risk of 12-month adverse events using the lowest hsCRP group (<2.0 mg/L) as reference. The primary endpoint was MACCE, defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Secondary endpoints were MACCE individual components, target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis and bleeding. Results A total of 10,811 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 6,210 (57.4%) had hsCRP <2.0 mg/L, 1,624 (15.0%) between 2 and 3 mg/L and 2,977 (27.6%) >3.0 mg/L. Incidence of anemia, diabetes mellitus, peripheral and cerebrovascular artery disease, atrial fibrillation and chronic kidney disease increased stepwise across hsCRP groups. Moreover, patients with higher hsCRP tended to present more frequently with unstable angina and higher baseline LDL cholesterol levels. As regards procedural variables, coronary artery disease severity and PCI complexity did not differ significantly across groups. When compared with patients with hsCRP < 2, hsCRP > 3 mg/L was associated with a greater adjusted risk of MACCE (4.9% vs 2.4%; HR 1.75 % CI 1.35 - 2.28), all-cause death (2.5% vs 0.9%, HR 2.34, 95%CI 1.57-3.47) and MI (2.5% vs 1.3%; HR 1.58 95%CI 1.11-2.26) (Figure 1). Risks of stroke, TVR, stent thrombosis and bleeding did not significantly differ across hsCRP groups (Table 1) Conclusions In patients undergoing PCI, elevated hsCRP values exceeding 3 mg/L exhibit a more robust association with the risk of MACCE and all-cause mortality, as compared with both hsCRP < 2.0 and between 2.0 and 3.0 mg/L. In this context, the use of hsCRP might improve the stratification of patients associated with higher inflammatory burden.

How to decide appropriate percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technique for managing heavy calcified coronary lesions: serial case-report

Background: Coronary artery calcification (CAC) is still challenging for interventional cardiologists. Their contribution to major adverse cardiac events occurs from the high risk of stent thrombosis or in-stent restenosis and target lesion revascularization. Optimal preparation, such as coronary plaque modification before stenting, is required to reduce the risk of periprocedural adverse events. This case presentation aimed to describe the appropriate management of heavy calcified coronary lesions. Case Presentation: Two cases of heavy calcified coronary lesions with different baselines as Acute Coronary Syndromes (ACS) and elective PCI were presented. In our ACS patients, the Primary PCI was done by coronary angioplasty without stenting because of the complexity of the heavily calcified lesion. A referral to tertiary health care was made for further PCI procedures using a combination of calcium-ablation and balloon-based techniques. A treatable complication occurred after the orbital atherectomy was performed with good results. The second case was an elective PCI patient with heavy calcified lesions findings from coronary angiography. The balloon-based technique was performed using non-compliant and scoring balloons without complication and showed good results. Conclusion: The challenging points in managing heavy calcified coronary lesions are procedure complexity and the higher stent failure rate. Many modifying coronary calcification algorithms using advanced modalities have been proposed, which could be used to select the appropriate technique as experienced and increase the success rate. Keyword: balloon-based technique, calcium-ablation technique, heavy calcified coronary lesion, orbital atherectomy

Aspirin-free P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review

BackgroundA modified antiplatelet therapy approach after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), specifically reducing dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration and transitioning to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, may offer advantages in terms of bleeding risk reduction. However, the impact of initiating aspirin-free P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy immediately after PCI is not yet fully understood. MethodsWe systematically searched the PubMed and Embase databases until January 2024 for studies that examined the use of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy as a treatment approach without initial DAPT following PCI. ResultsFour single-arm pilot prospective studies and 1 randomized controlled trial were included. In acute coronary syndrome patients with P2Y12 monotherapy following aspirin withdrawal immediately after PCI, the occurrence rates of the primary ischemic and bleeding endpoint were 2.91 % (8 out of 275 patients) and 1.09 % (3 out of 275 patients) respectively, whereas both the incidence rates of the primary ischemic and bleeding endpoints were 0.25 % (1 out of 407 patients) in individuals with stable coronary artery disease. In the STOPDAPT-3 trial comparing the effect of aspirin-free prasugrel monotherapy with standard DAPT after PCI, no differences were found in the primary ischemic or bleeding endpoints and most secondary outcomes (death, stroke, and myocardial infarction). However, there was an increased risk of coronary revascularization and stent thrombosis in the no-aspirin group. ConclusionsSingle-arm studies suggest the safety and feasibility of aspirin-free P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy without initial DAPT after PCI in selected patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable coronary artery disease. However, the safety and efficacy of this aspirin-free approach compared with standard DAPT strategies following PCI still require further investigation.

Bivalirudin versus heparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes.

Data on outcomes between unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin anticoagulation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute coronary syndromes (ACS) remains inconclusive. We aimed to systematically analyze PCI outcomes comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. We systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, Ovid Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, and Web of Science from database inception in 1966 through January 2024 for studies evaluating PCI outcomes comparing unfractionated heparin and bivalirudin. Two investigators independently reviewed data. Conflicts were resolved through consensus. Random-effects meta-analyses were used. Ten prospective trials were identified that enrolled 42,253 individuals who presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Our analysis found that heparin when compared to bivalirudin was associated with an increased risk of trial-based definition of major bleeding (RR 1.68, 95% CI 1.29-2.20), non-access site complications (RR 4.6, 95% CI 1.75-12.09), TIMI major bleeding (RR 1.70, 95% CI 1.20-2.41), major bleeding risks (RR 1.87, 95% CI 1.49-2.36), cardiovascular disease death (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02-1.57), and thrombocytopenia (RR 1.67, 95% CI 1.07-2.62). There were no statistically significant differences between heparin and bivalirudin for all-cause mortality, MACE, stroke, reinfarction, target vessel revascularization, acute or stent thrombosis. The present meta-analysis demonstrates bivalirudin reduces major bleeding when used for anticoagulation during PCI in patients with acute coronary syndromes and is not associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis or MACE.

BIFURCATION: A CLINICAL CASE IN ACUTE CORONARY SYNDROME

Abstract Bifurcation A clinical case in acute coronary syndrome. Coronary bifurcation lesions are considered one of challenging entities in the field of coronary intervention due to the risk of side branch loss and higher risk of stent thrombosis. There are limited data on the preferred treatment strategy in ST–segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with bifurcation lesions as most dedicated study excluded patients with acute coronary syndrome. In all comers population a 10–20% of STEMI patients had bifurcation culprit lesion. In 2018 guideline suggested a provisional approach by stenting the main vessel and implanting a second stent only if necessary as a bailout strategy. This reccomandation was supported by a large series of study that uniquely documented the superiority of one versus two stent technique. The same message could also be exported in the context of acute patients, as our clinical case, thanks to registry like COBIS 2 including ST–segment elevation patient. But this precious advice cannot be applied in all clinical subsets. Especially when we manage with a relevant side–branch and when the risk of loosing the side branch is very high. In this subgroup of patient, bifurcation lesion may benefit from a 2 stent approach. Different technical option are available. Among these, DK–crush and inverted Main Branch stenting across Side Branch (Invertend Culotte or inverted T technique) could be the best choice. Our patient was a young lady presenting with a lateral STEMI (D1 and aVL). The culprit lesion was a Medina 1.1.1 bifurcation lesion involving left anterior descending and first–diagonal. Since our side branch had thrombus inside, the vessel was relevant by definition. Other anatomical characteristique to take into account: relevant size and covering a large myocardial territory. Planning the strategy to treat our LAD–D1 bifurcation we consider the angle and the difference in size between main and side branch. We decided to proceed with DK–crush and its recent evolution DK–nano crush. In conclusion “do it provisional” guideline message is not always possible, 2 stent technique seems to be the best choice in presence of a relevant side–branch / high risk to loose it. Our take home message is, if the clinical scenario allow it, don’t hesitate to perform a multistep two vessel strategy technique and to try to reconstruct perfect anatomical carina even in STEMI context.

Immediate Platelet Inhibition Strategy for Comatose Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest Survivors Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Mild Therapeutic Hypothermia.

Background: Comatose survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and target temperature management (TTM) are at increased risk of stent thrombosis (ST), partly due to delayed platelet inhibition even with more potent P2Y12 agents. We hypothesized that periprocedural cangrelor would induce immediate platelet inhibition, bridging the "P2Y12 inhibition gap". Methods: In our pilot study, we randomized 30 comatose OHCA patients undergoing PCI and TTM (32-34 °C) into cangrelor and control groups. Both groups received unfractioned heparin, acetylsalicylic acid, and ticagrelor via enteral tube. The cangrelor group also received an intravenous bolus of cangrelor followed by a 4 h infusion. Platelet inhibition was measured using VerifyNow® and Multiplate® ADP at baseline and 1, 3, 5, and 8 h post PCI. Results: Patient characteristics did not differ between groups. VerifyNow® showed significantly decreased platelet reactivity with cangrelor at 1 h (30 vs. 221 PRU; p < 0.001) and 3 h (24 vs. 180 PRU; p < 0.001), with differences at 5 and 8 h. Similarly, the proportion of patients with high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) in the cangrelor group was significantly lower at 1 h (0% vs. 67%; p < 0.001) and 3 h (0% vs. 47%; p = 0.007). Multiplate® ADP was also decreased at 1 h (14 vs. 48 U; p < 0.001) and 3 h (11 vs. 42 U; p = 0.001), with no difference at 5 and 8 h. The occurrence of bleeding events was similar in both groups. Conclusions: Cangrelor safely induced immediate and profound platelet inhibition. We observed no significant drug-drug interaction with ticagrelor.

Association of platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio levels with the risk of cardiac adverse events in people with type 2 diabetes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A large-scale prospective cohort study

BackgroundThe platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), a promising inflammatory biomarker, contributes to the development of atherosclerosis and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Therefore, this study aimed to elucidate the importance of PLR in predicting adverse events in people undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with T2D. MethodsWe consecutively enrolled 8831 people who underwent PCI and divided them into four groups according to PLR and glycemic metabolic status (PLR-Low/High without T2D, PLR-Low/High with T2D). The endpoints were major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and stent thrombosis. A multivariate Cox regression analysis was performed to determine this association. ResultsDuring the 2.4-year follow-up, 663 (7.5%) MACCE and 75 (0.85%) stent thromboses were recorded. The risk of MACCE (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.30, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10–1.53, P = 0.002) and stent thrombosis (HR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.38–3.90, P = 0.002) was significantly higher in people with high PLR levels than in those with low PLR. Among people with T2D, the PLR-High group showed a significantly higher risk of MACCE (HR: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.21–2.09, P = 0.001) and stent thrombosis (HR: 3.15, 95% CI: 1.32–7.52, P = 0.010). However, these associations were not significant in people without T2D. Conclusions:PLR has been originally documented as a significant predictor of poor prognosis and a high incidence of stent thrombosis in people undergoing PCI, especially in those with T2D.

Intravascular imaging-guided coronary drug-eluting stent implantation: an updated network meta-analysis

Previous meta-analyses have shown reduced risks of composite adverse events with intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) compared with angiography guidance alone. However, these studies have been insufficiently powered to show whether all-cause death or all myocardial infarction are reduced with intravascular imaging guidance, and most previous intravascular imaging studies were done with intravascular ultrasound rather than optical coherence tomography (OCT), a newer imaging modality. We aimed to assess the comparative performance of intravascular imaging-guided PCI and angiography-guided PCI with drug-eluting stents. For this systematic review and updated meta-analysis, we searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to Aug 30, 2023, for studies that randomly assigned patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents either to intravascular ultrasound or OCT, or both, or to angiography alone to guide the intervention. The searches were done and study-level data were extracted independently by two investigators. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or target lesion revascularisation, assessed in patients randomly assigned to intravascular imaging guidance (intravascular ultrasound or OCT) versus angiography guidance. We did a standard frequentist meta-analysis to generate direct data, and a network meta-analysis to generate indirect data and overall treatment effects. Outcomes were expressed as relative risks (RRs) with 95% CIs at the longest reported follow-up duration. This study was registered with the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO, number CRD42023455662). 22 trials were identified in which 15 964 patients were randomised and followed for a weighted mean duration of 24·7 months (longest duration of follow-up in each study ranging from 6 to 60 months). Compared with angiography-guided PCI, intravascular imaging-guided PCI resulted in a decreased risk of target lesion failure (RR 0·71 [95% CI 0·63-0·80]; p<0·0001), driven by reductions in the risks of cardiac death (RR 0·55 [95% CI 0·41-0·75]; p=0·0001), TV-MI (RR 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98]; p=0·030), and target lesion revascularisation (RR 0·72 [95% CI 0·60-0·86]; p=0·0002). Intravascular imaging guidance also reduced the risks of stent thrombosis (RR 0·52 [95% CI 0·34-0·81]; p=0·0036), all myocardial infarction (RR 0·83 [95% CI 0·71-0·99]; p=0·033), and all-cause death (RR 0·75 [95% CI 0·60-0·93]; p=0·0091). Outcomes were similar for OCT-guided and intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI. Compared with angiography guidance, intravascular imaging guidance of coronary stent implantation with OCT or intravascular ultrasound enhances both the safety and effectiveness of PCI, reducing the risks of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularisation, and stent thrombosis. Abbott.

The Comparison of the Initial TIMI Flow Grade in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Patients Receiving Ticagrelor vs. Clopidogrel before Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Prospective Cohort Study.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is the best treatment for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Evidence is in favor of ticagrelor over clopidegrel in STEMI patients regarding the reduction of stent thrombosis risk during and after PCI. We compared initial thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) flow in STEMI patients on ticagrelor vs. clopidogrel. This prospective cohort recruited 160 patients with acute STEMI, referred to the emergency department of Farshchian Heart Center, during March 2018-2019. Before angiography, the patients received clopidogrel (600 mg) or ticagrelor (180 mg) on top of aspirin. Initial TIMI flow was compared between the two groups as the primary outcome. A logistic regression was performed to calculate the predictors of initial TIMI flow. Analyses were performed using R, version 4.2.1. In ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups, the mean ± standard deviation age of the patients was 59.46 ± 13.11 and 61.34 ± 11.08 years (p value = 0.33), respectively. In the ticagrelor and clopidogrel groups, initial TIMI flow grades were as follows: 0 : 50% and 71.2%, I: 26.2% and 16.2%, II: 12.5% and 10%, and III: 12.9% and 2.5%, respectively (p value = 0.005). Final TIMI flow grades were as follows: I: 26.2% and 16.2%, II: 7.5% and 13.8%, and III: 66.3% and 70%, respectively (p value = 0.41). Ticagrelor was associated with significantly higher initial TIMI flow grade compared to the clopidogrel group (adjusted odds ratio: 2.90 (95% CI: 1.51-5.72)). In STEMI patients who were candidates for primary PCI, ticagrelor administration led to a better initial TIMI flow grade compared to clopidogrel.

Association of Periprocedural Inflammatory Activation With Increased Risk for Early Coronary Stent Thrombosis.

Stent thrombosis is a rare but deleterious event. Routine coronary angiography with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is often deferred in the presence of laboratory markers of acute inflammation to prevent complications. The aim of this study was to investigate whether an acute inflammatory state is associated with an increased risk of early stent thrombosis. Within a prospective single-center registry, the association between preprocedural acute inflammatory activation, defined as C-reactive protein plasma levels >50 mg/L or a leukocyte count >12 g/L, and occurrence of early (≤30 days) stent thrombosis was evaluated. In total, 11 327 patients underwent PCI and of those, 6880 patients had laboratory results available. 49.6% of the study population received PCI for an acute coronary syndrome and 50.4% for stable ischemic heart disease. In patients with signs of acute inflammatory activation (24.9%), PCI was associated with a significantly increased risk for stent thrombosis (hazard ratio, 2.89; P<0.00001), independent of age, sex, kidney function, number and type of stents, presence of multivessel disease, choice of P2Y12 inhibitor, and clinical presentation. Elevated laboratory markers of acute inflammation were associated with the occurrence of stent thrombosis in both patients with acute coronary syndrome (hazard ratio, 2.63; P<0.001) and in patients with stable ischemic heart disease (hazard ratio, 3.57; P<0.001). An acute inflammatory state at the time of PCI was associated with a significantly increased risk of early stent thrombosis. Evidence of acute inflammation should result in deferred PCI in elective patients, while future studies are needed for patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Intravascular Imaging-Guided Versus Angiography-Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.

Despite the initial evidence supporting the utility of intravascular imaging to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), adoption remains low. Recent new trial data have become available. An updated study-level meta-analysis comparing intravascular imaging to angiography to guide PCI was performed. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of intravascular imaging-guided PCI compared with angiography-guided PCI. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed on the basis of the intention-to-treat principle. The primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac events, cardiac death, and all-cause death. Mixed-effects meta-regression was performed to investigate the impact of complex PCI on the primary outcomes. A total of 16 trials with 7814 patients were included. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 28.8 months. Intravascular imaging led to a lower risk of major adverse cardiac events (relative risk [RR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.55-0.82]; P<0.001), cardiac death (RR, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.34-0.71]; P<0.001), stent thrombosis (RR, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.40-0.99]; P=0.046), target-lesion revascularization (RR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.91]; P=0.01), and target-vessel revascularization (RR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.45-0.80]; P<0.001). In complex lesion subsets, the point estimate for imaging-guided PCI compared with angiography-guided PCI for all-cause death was a RR of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.55-1.02; P=0.07). In patients undergoing PCI, intravascular imaging is associated with reductions in major adverse cardiac events, cardiac death, stent thrombosis, target-lesion revascularization, and target-vessel revascularization. The magnitude of benefit is large and consistent across all included studies. There may also be benefits in all-cause death, particularly in complex lesion subsets. These results support the use of intravascular imaging as standard of care and updates of clinical guidelines.

Effects of exenatide on coronary stent’s endothelialization in subjects with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. The Rebuild study

BackgroundSubjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) have a higher risk of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. The activation of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) has been suggested to induce several effects on the vasculature that may reduce the risk of stent failure following an angioplasty. The aim of this study is to evaluate the effect of the GLP-1R agonist exenatide on endothelialization of a modern drug-eluting stent (DES) in subjects with T2D.Methods38 subjects with T2D who were eligible for revascularization with implantation of DES were randomized to treatment with exenatide (once weekly) plus standard treatment, or to standard treatment alone. After 12 weeks, a new coronary angiography was performed to evaluate the percentage of strut coverage (primary endpoint) and the presence of neo-atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography. This study was approved by the Stockholm’s Ethical Review Board.ResultsThe two groups were well balanced regarding baseline clinical characteristics. Strut coverage was 95% (88.7–98.5%) in the exenatide group and 91.4% (88.8–98.5%) in the control group (p = 0.692). There were no significant differences between groups neither in the thickness of neo-intima (0.2 mm in both groups, p = 0.471), nor the maximal in-stent obstruction by neo-intima (15.5% in exenatide group vs 14.7% in control group, p = 0.801). No significant differences were detected in the rate of target lesion revascularization between groups (p = 0.224).ConclusionTwelve weeks treatment with exenatide did not lead to a significantly better stent coverage in people with T2D. No significant differences in the occurrence of neo-atherosclerosis were detected between groups.Trial registration: The study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov (Rebuild Study, NCT02621489).

“Ischemia in Upstream Neighborhood” After Plaque Modification with Intravascular Lithotripsy

Coronary artery calcification impacts outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions owing to stent under expansion causing increased risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis. Therefore, adequate calcium modification before stent placement is the key to get desired outcomes in the patients with coronary artery calcification. Many devices are available for calcium modification, which includes orbital or rotational atherectomy, cutting balloon, scoring balloon, and intravascular lithotripsy. All these techniques have inherent risks of complications, such as coronary dissection, perforation, and slow or no reflow. We report a case of intravascular lithotripsy in calcified proximal left circumflex artery (LCX) lesion in a 63-year-old female leading to the left anterior descending artery (LAD) with no flow and ischemic ventricular tachycardia requiring DC cardioversion. Intravascular ultrasound from LAD revealed subintimal hematoma from ostium to mid LAD with intimal flap continuation into ostio-proximal LCX. The intimal flap in LAD has not showed any entry or exit tears which might increase the possibility of intramural hematoma shift to adjacent areas and branches leading to no reflow. Hence, cutting balloon fenestration of the intimal flap, followed by left main coronary artery bifurcation stenting was done to get a good result with flowing distal branches.

Patient-Related Factors Predicting Stent Thrombosis in Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Over the past four decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) safety and efficacy have significantly improved, particularly with the advent of the drug-eluting stent (DES). First-generation DESs reduced in-stent restenosis rates and targeted lesion revascularization; however, safety issues emerged, due to high incidences of stent thrombosis (ST) linked to death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. Second-generation DESs were developed to overcome these issues, reducing late-thrombotic-event risk while maintaining anti-restenosis efficacy. Nevertheless, ST still occurs with second-generation DES use. Stent thrombosis etiology is multifaceted, encompassing lesion-, patient-, procedural-, and stent-related factors. Overall, most early-stent-thrombosis cases are linked to procedural and patient-related aspects. Factors like premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy, resistance to clopidogrel, smoking, diabetes mellitus, malignancy, reduced ejection fraction or undertaking coronary angioplasty for an acute coronary syndrome can increase the risk of stent thrombosis. The aim of this study is to assess patient-related factors that potentially heighten the risk of stent thrombosis, with the objective of pinpointing and addressing modifiable contributors to this risk. By focusing on both patient- and procedure-related factors, a multifaceted approach to coronary revascularization can help minimize complications and maximize long-term benefits in managing ST.

Association of inflammatory activation with acute stent thrombosis

Abstract Background Acute stent thrombosis (ST) is a rare but deleterious event. Acute infection and inflammation may lead to activation of the coagulation system and of platelets. Coronary angiography with stent implantation is often deferred because of increased inflammatory markers. Purpose The aim of this study was to investigate whether an acute inflammatory state is associated with increased risk of early stent thrombosis. Methods Within a prospective single-center registry, the association between pre-procedural acute inflammatory activation, defined as C-reactive protein (CRP) plasma levels &amp;gt;5mg/dL or leukocytes &amp;gt;12 G/L, and occurrence of early stent thrombosis within 30 days after PCI was evaluated. Results We included 11327 patients that underwent coronary stenting. 3964 (35%) were treated for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and 7363 (65%) had chronic coronary artery disease. The number of definite early ST within 30 days was 91 (0.8 %). Leukocyte count and plasma levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) were available in 6880 patients (87 patients with ST). 1715 patients showed signs of an acute inflammatory state as defined by a leukocyte count &amp;gt; 12 G/L or plasma levels of CRP &amp;gt; 5mg/dL. Stent implantation in patients with acute inflammation was associated with significant increased risk for ST (HR 3.01; p&amp;lt;0.0000001) independent of age, gender, kidney function, number and type of stents, presence of multivessel disease, choice of P2Y12 inhibitor and clinical presentation. This was the case in patients with (HR 2.48; p&amp;lt;0.001) and without acute coronary syndromes (HR 3.59; p&amp;lt;0.001). The incidence of ST in patients with ACS with and without signs of inflammation was 2.7% vs. 1.1% (p&amp;lt;0.001) and in patients with chronic coronary artery disease with and without inflammation was 2.3% vs 0.7% (p&amp;lt;0.001) Conclusions An acute inflammatory state as defined by a leukocyte count &amp;gt; 12 G/L or plasma levels of CRP &amp;gt; 5mg/dL at time of stent implantation was associated with a significant increased risk of acute ST. In particular in patients with chronic coronary artery disease acute inflammatory activation should lead to a deferral of elective interventions. In patients with ACS and increased inflammatory parameters, in which acute PCI is mandatory, future studies are needed, whether more intensive therapy could reduce risk of early ST in this particular high-risk cohort.