Angiography-derived physiology guidance vs usual care in an All-comers PCI population treated with the healing-targeted supreme stent and Ticagrelor monotherapy: PIONEER IV trial design

Frequency of periprocedural myocardial injury and infarction stratified by cardiac troponin I and cardiac troponin T

BACKGROUND

There are different definitions of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PPMI) both in terms of thresholds for cardiac biomarkers and the ancillary criteria for myocardial ischemia. Cardiac Troponin I (cTnI) and cardiac Troponin T (cTnT) are used interchangeably to diagnose PPMI.

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the frequency of periprocedural myocardial injury and infarction as defined by the Society of Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions (SCAI), the Academic Research Consortium-2 (ARC-2), and the 4th Universal definition of MI (4UDMI) stratified using cTnT versus cTnI, among patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) and unstable angina.

RESULTS

Among 830 patients, PPMI rates according to the SCAI, ARC2 and 4UDMI criteria were 4.34 %, 2.05 %, and 4.94 % respectively, with higher rates seen for all definitions when using cTnI versus cTnT (SCAI: 9.84 % vs. 1.91 %, p < 0.001; ARC 2: 3.15 % vs. 1.56 %, p = 0.136; and 4UDMI 5.91 % vs. 4.51 %, p = 0.391). Minor and major periprocedural myocardial injury was respectively observed in 58.31 % and 27.10 % of patients, with rates of both significantly higher when using cTnI versus cTnT (Minor: 69.29 % vs. 53.47 %, p < 0.001, Major: 49.21 % vs. 17.36 %, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with CCS and unstable angina, PPMIs defined by SCAI occurred more frequently when using cTnI as opposed to cTnT, whereas the type of troponin had no impact on the incidence of PPMIs according to the ARC-2 and 4UDMI.

Comparison Among Ultra-Thin Coronary Stents: A Network Meta-Analysis

Ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) have been related to potential improvement in stent-related outcomes compared with thicker-struts DES. However, comparisons among different ultrathin devices are lacking. All randomized controlled trials comparing ultrathin (struts thickness <70 µm) and thicker-struts DESs in an all-comers population were included. Target lesion failure (TLF), as defined by included trials, at 1-year follow-up was the primary end point. Overall mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. Arms of included trials were compared using network meta-analysis. Nine studies encompassing 20,081 patients were included, of which 9,509 patients had an ultrathin DES: Orsiro (evaluated in 7 arms with 8,086 patients), MiStent (1 arm with 703 patients), or Supraflex (1 arm with 720 patients). At 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were noted for TLF among these ultrathin DES. In particular, Orsiro was associated with a similar risk of TLF compared with Supraflex (risk rate 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.78) and showed the highest probability of performing best in terms of TLF, myocardial infarction, and TLR. Ultrathin DES are all associated with a comparable risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut DES. In terms of TLR and TLF risk, Orsiro was the one with the highest probability of best performances, either compared with other ultrathin DES or to devices with thicker struts.