Complete Versus Culprit-Only Lesion Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

Impact of Complete Revascularization for Acute Myocardial Infarction In Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The clinical benefits of complete revascularization (CR) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients are unclear. Moreover, the benefit of CR is unknown in AMI with diabetes mellitus (DM) patients. We sought to compare the prognosis of CR and incomplete revascularization (IR) in patients with AMI and multivessel disease, according to the presence of DM.

METHODS

A total of 2,150 AMI patients with multivessel coronary artery disease were analyzed. CR was defined based on the angiographic image. The primary endpoint of this study was the patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO) defined as a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, and any revascularization within 3 years.

RESULTS

Overall, 3-year POCO was significantly lower in patients receiving angiographic CR (985 patients, 45.8%) compared with IR (1,165 patients, 54.2%). When divided into subgroups according to the presence of DM, CR reduced 3-year clinical outcomes in the non-DM group but not in the DM group (POCO: 11.7% vs. 23.2%, p<0.001, any revascularization: 7.2% vs. 10.8%, p=0.024 in the non-DM group, POCO: 24.3% vs. 27.8%, p=0.295, any revascularization: 13.3% vs. 11.3%, p=0.448 in the DM group, for CR vs. IR). Multivariate analysis showed that CR significantly reduced 3-year POCO (hazard ratio, 0.52; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.75) only in the non-DM group.

CONCLUSIONS

In AMI patients with multivessel disease, CR may have less clinical benefit in DM patients than in non-DM patients.

Revascularization Strategy in Myocardial Infarction with Multivessel Disease

The proportion of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in individuals experiencing acute coronary syndrome (ACS) varies based on age and ACS subtype. In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) without cardiogenic shock, the prognostic benefit of complete revascularization has been demonstrated by several randomized trials and meta-analyses, leading to a strong guideline recommendation. However, similar data are lacking for ACS without ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS). Non-randomized data suggesting a benefit from complete revascularization in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) are prone to selection bias and should be interpreted with caution. A series of large randomized controlled trials have been initiated recently to address these open questions.

Timing of Complete Multivessel Revascularization in Patients Presenting With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD.

METHODS

This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year.

RESULTS

The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year.

Complete Revascularization Strategies in Women and Men With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease

This prespecified substudy of the randomized Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndromes and Multivessel Disease (BIOVASC) trial aimed to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, stratified by gender. The primary end point consisted of a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization, and cerebrovascular events at 1-year follow-up. The secondary end points included the individual components of the primary composite and major bleedings. We used Cox regression models to relate randomized treatment with study end points. We evaluated the multiplicative and additive interactions between gender and randomized treatment. The BIOVASC trial enrolled 338 women and 1,187 men. Women were older than men (median age 71.6 vs 63.7 years, p <0.001) and had a higher prevalence of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (10.1% vs 5.6%, p = 0.003), renal insufficiency (7.7% vs 4.4%, p = 0.015), and hypertension (60.4% vs 51.7%, p = 0.005). In women, the composite primary outcome occurred in 7.3% versus 12.9% (hazard ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 1.08) in patients randomly allocated to ICR and SCR, respectively, and in men in 7.7% versus 8.4% (hazard ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 1.34), with no evidence of a differential effect (interaction pmultiplicative = 0.20, padditive = 0.87). No evidence of heterogeneity between women and men was found when comparing ICR with SCR in terms of the secondary outcomes. In conclusion, no differential treatment effect was found when comparing ICR versus SCR in women or men presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease.

Updated Strategies in Non-Culprit Stenosis Management of Multivessel Coronary Disease-A Contemporary Review

The prevalence of multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients underscores the need for optimal revascularization strategies. The ongoing debate surrounding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), hybrid interventions, or medical-only management adds complexity to decision-making, particularly in specific angiographic scenarios. The article critically reviews existing literature, providing evidence-based perspectives on non-culprit lesion revascularization in ACS. Emphasis is placed on nuances such as the selection of revascularization methods, optimal timing for interventions, and the importance of achieving completeness in revascularization. The debate between culprit-only revascularization and complete revascularization is explored in detail, focusing on ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI), including patients with cardiogenic shock. Myocardial revascularization guidelines and recent clinical trials support complete revascularization strategies, either during the index primary PCI or within a short timeframe following the culprit lesion PCI (in both STEMI and NSTEMI). The article also addresses the complexities of decision-making in NSTEMI patients with multivessel CAD, advocating for immediate multivessel PCI unless complex coronary lesions require a staged revascularization approach. Finally, the article provided contemporary data on chronic total occlusion revascularization in ACS patients, highlighting the prognostic impact. In conclusion, the article addresses the evolving challenges of managing multivessel CAD in ACS patients, enhancing thoughtful integration into the clinical practice of recent data. We provided evidence-based, individualized approaches to optimize short- and long-term outcomes. The ongoing refinement of clinical and interventional strategies for non-culprit lesion management remains dynamic, necessitating careful consideration of patient characteristics, coronary stenosis complexity, and clinical context.

Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Treatment for Acute Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Disease: A Prespecified Analysis of the FRAME-AMI Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Complete revascularization by non-infarct-related artery (IRA) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction is standard practice to improve patient prognosis. However, it is unclear whether a fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided or angiography-guided treatment strategy for non-IRA PCI would be more cost-effective.

Objective

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of FFR-guided compared with angiography-guided PCI in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this prespecified cost-effectiveness analysis of the FRAME-AMI randomized clinical trial, patients were randomly allocated to either FFR-guided or angiography-guided PCI for non-IRA lesions between August 19, 2016, and December 24, 2020. Patients were aged 19 years or older, had ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI and underwent successful primary or urgent PCI, and had at least 1 non-IRA lesion (diameter stenosis >50% in a major epicardial coronary artery or major side branch with a vessel diameter of ≥2.0 mm). Data analysis was performed on August 27, 2023.

Intervention

Fractional flow reserve-guided vs angiography-guided PCI for non-IRA lesions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The model simulated death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization. Future medical costs and benefits were discounted by 4.5% per year. The main outcomes were quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), direct medical costs, incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), and incremental net monetary benefit (INB) of FFR-guided PCI compared with angiography-guided PCI. State-transition Markov models were applied to the Korean, US, and European health care systems using medical cost (presented in US dollars), utilities data, and transition probabilities from meta-analysis of previous trials.

Results

The FRAME-AMI trial randomized 562 patients, with a mean (SD) age of 63.3 (11.4) years. Most patients were men (474 [84.3%]). Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI increased QALYs by 0.06 compared with angiography-guided PCI. The total cumulative cost per patient was estimated as $1208 less for FFR-guided compared with angiography-guided PCI. The ICER was -$19 484 and the INB was $3378, indicating that FFR-guided PCI was more cost-effective for patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed consistent results and the likelihood iteration of cost-effectiveness in FFR-guided PCI was 97%. When transition probabilities from the pairwise meta-analysis of the FLOWER-MI and FRAME-AMI trials were used, FFR-guided PCI was more cost-effective than angiography-guided PCI in the Korean, US, and European health care systems, with an INB of $3910, $8557, and $2210, respectively. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the likelihood iteration of cost-effectiveness with FFR-guided PCI was 85%, 82%, and 31% for the Korean, US, and European health care systems, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cost-effectiveness analysis suggests that FFR-guided PCI for non-IRA lesions saved medical costs and increased quality of life better than angiography-guided PCI for patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI should be considered in determining the treatment strategy for non-IRA stenoses in these patients.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02715518.

Quantitative Flow Ratio to Predict Non-Target-Vessel Events Before Planned Staged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome

BACKGROUND

The optimal time point of staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) among patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains a matter of debate. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel noninvasive method to assess the hemodynamic significance of coronary stenoses. We aimed to investigate whether QFR could refine the timing of staged PCI of non-target vessels (non-TVs) on top of clinical judgment for patients with ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

For this cohort study, patients with ACS from Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, scheduled to undergo out-of-hospital non-TV staged PCI were eligible. The primary end point was the composite of non-TV myocardial infarction and urgent unplanned non-TV PCI before planned staged PCI. The association between lowest QFR per patient measured in the non-TV (from index angiogram) and the primary end point was assessed using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards regressions with QFR included as linear or penalized spline (nonlinear) term. QFR was measured in 1093 of 1432 patients with ACS scheduled to undergo non-TV staged PCI. Median time to staged PCI was 28 days. The primary end point occurred in 5% of the patients. In multivariable analysis (1018 patients), there was no independent association between non-TV QFR and the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.69-1.05] per 0.1 increase; P=0.125; nonlinear P=0.648).

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with ACS scheduled to undergo staged PCI at a median of 4 weeks after index PCI, QFR did not emerge as an independent predictor of non-TV events before planned staged PCI. Thus, this study does not provide conceptual evidence that QFR is helpful to refine the timing of staged PCI on top of clinical judgment.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02241291.

Immediate versus staged complete revascularization in acute coronary syndrome: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend a complete revascularization (CR) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD). However, its optimal timing is unclear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes following immediate versus staged CR in ACS.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were searched until March 2023 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing immediate versus staged CR. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) at the longest follow-up. Secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), any unplanned revascularization, target-vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis. Safety outcomes were major bleeding, contrast volume, procedure duration, and length of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs were included (3559 patients, weighted mean follow-up 12.5 months). There were no differences in the primary endpoint (OR 0.74, 95%CI: 0.54-1.01) and in the secondary endpoints of death, and stent thrombosis between the two CR strategies. Immediate CR was associated with a lower risk of recurrent MI (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.34-0.76), any unplanned revascularization (OR 0.59, 95%CI: 0.43-0.80), and TVR (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.84) compared to staged CR. Immediate CR was also associated with lower total contrast volume and shorter total procedure duration and hospitalization length compared to staged CR without differences in major bleedings.

CONCLUSION

No difference was found between immediate and staged CR regarding MACE, or deaths rates at one year. Immediate CR may be associated with a lower risk of recurrent MI and unplanned coronary revascularization than staged CR.

Complete revascularization in elderly patients with myocardial infarction-a safe, effective, and necessary strategy?

The FIRE trial compared culprit-only revascularization to physiology-guided complete revascularization strategy in elderly patients presenting with myocardial infarction. The study has shown that it is a safe approach and may confer additional prognostic benefit in patients with NSTEMI.

Fractional Flow Reserve-Negative High-Risk Plaques and Clinical Outcomes After Myocardial Infarction

Importance

Even after fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularization, patients with myocardial infarction (MI) have high rates of recurrent major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). These recurrences may be caused by FFR-negative high-risk nonculprit lesions.

Objective

To assess the association between optical coherence tomography (OCT)-identified high-risk plaques of FFR-negative nonculprit lesions and occurrence of MACE in patients with MI.

Design, Setting, and Participants

PECTUS-obs (Identification of Risk Factors for Acute Coronary Events by OCT After STEMI [ST-segment elevation MI] and NSTEMI [non-STEMI] in Patients With Residual Non-flow Limiting Lesions) is an international, multicenter, prospective, observational cohort study. In patients presenting with MI, OCT was performed on all FFR-negative (FFR > 0.80) nonculprit lesions. A high-risk plaque was defined containing at least 2 of the following prespecified criteria: (1) a lipid arc at least 90°, (2) a fibrous cap thickness less than 65 μm, and (3) either plaque rupture or thrombus presence. Patients were enrolled from December 14, 2018, to September 15, 2020. Data were analyzed from December 2, 2022, to June 28, 2023.

Main Outcome and Measure

The primary end point of MACE, a composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal MI, or unplanned revascularization, at 2-year follow-up was compared in patients with and without a high-risk plaque.

Results

A total of 438 patients were enrolled, and OCT findings were analyzable in 420. Among included patients, mean (SD) age was 63 (10) years, 340 (81.0) were men, and STEMI and non-STEMI were equally represented (217 [51.7%] and 203 [48.3%]). A mean (SD) of 1.17 (0.42) nonculprit lesions per patient was imaged. Analysis of OCT images revealed at least 1 high-risk plaque in 143 patients (34.0%). The primary end point occurred in 22 patients (15.4%) with a high-risk plaque and 23 of 277 patients (8.3%) without a high-risk plaque (hazard ratio, 1.93 [95% CI, 1.08-3.47]; P = .02), primarily driven by more unplanned revascularizations in patients with a high-risk plaque (14 of 143 [9.8%] vs 12 of 277 [4.3%]; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

Among patients with MI and FFR-negative nonculprit lesions, the presence of a high-risk plaque is associated with a worse clinical outcome, which is mainly driven by a higher number of unplanned revascularizations. In a population with a high recurrent event rate despite physiology-guided complete revascularization, these results call for research on additional pharmacological or focal treatment strategies in patients harboring high-risk plaques.

Complete Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization in Acute Coronary Syndromes With Multivessel Coronary Disease: A Systematic Review

Multivessel disease (MVD) affects approximately 50% of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and is significantly burdened by poor outcomes and high mortality. It represents a clinical challenge in patient management and decision making and subtends an evolving research area related to the pathophysiology of unstable plaques and local or systemic inflammation. The benefits of complete revascularization are established in hemodynamically stable ACS patients with MVD, and guidelines provide some reference points to inform clinical practice, based on an evidence level that is solid for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and less robust for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock. However, several areas of uncertainty remain, such as the optimal timing for complete revascularization or the best guiding strategy for intermediate stenoses. We performed a systematic review of current evidence in the field of percutaneous revascularization in ACS and MVD, also including future perspectives from ongoing trials that will directly compare different timing strategies and investigate the role of invasive and noninvasive guidance techniques. (Complete percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with acute myocardial infarction and multivessel disease; CRD42022383123).

Propensity Matched Comparison of Clinical Outcome After Immediate Versus Staged Complete Revascularization in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease

Complete revascularization (CR) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) improves clinical outcomes compared with culprit-only revascularization, but the optimal timing for non-culprit lesions treatment remains unclear. This study evaluated patients presenting with ACS and MVD admitted between January 2015 and September 2021 at the Erasmus University Medical Center. Clinical outcomes were compared between immediate and staged CR in terms of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and any unplanned revascularization. A total of 1,400 patients presenting with ACS and MVD who underwent immediate or staged CR were included in this study. Using 1/many propensity score matching without replacement, 299 patients in the staged CR group were matched to 598 patients in the immediate CR group (mean 1:2 ratio), rendering a total of 897 patients for analysis. The median follow-up period was 648 days. MACCE rate was significantly higher in the staged CR group than in the immediate CR group (adjusted hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.60 [1.05 to 2.45], p = 0.03). Furthermore, number of stents, stent length, and contrast usage were significantly greater in the staged revascularization group. Immediate CR was associated with less risk of MACCE than was staged CR. Staged CR required overall more contrast and stent material.

Impact of Complete Revascularization on Development of Heart Failure in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease: A Subanalysis of the CORALYS Registry

Background The impact of complete revascularization (CR) on the development of heart failure (HF) in patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains to be elucidated. Methods and Results Consecutive patients with acute coronary syndrome with multivessel coronary artery disease from the CORALYS (Incidence and Predictors of Heart Failure After Acute Coronary Syndrome) registry were included. Incidence of first hospitalization for HF or cardiovascular death was the primary end point. Patients were stratified according to completeness of coronary revascularization. Of 14 699 patients in the CORALYS registry, 5054 presented with multivessel disease. One thousand four hundred seventy-three (29.2%) underwent CR, while 3581 (70.8%) did not. Over 5 years follow-up, CR was associated with a reduced incidence of the primary end point (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 [95% CI, 0.51-0.85]), first HF hospitalization (adjusted HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.49-0.90]) along with all-cause death and cardiovascular death alone (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.56-0.97] and HR, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.38-0.84], respectively). The results were consistent in the propensity-score matching population and in inverse probability treatment weighting analysis. The benefit of CR was consistent across acute coronary syndrome presentations (HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.39-0.89] for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.50-0.99] for non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome) and in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction >40% (HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.37-0.72]), while no benefit was observed in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40% (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.37-1.10], P for interaction 0.04). Conclusions CR after acute coronary syndrome reduced the risk of first hospitalization for HF and cardiovascular death, as well as first HF hospitalization, and cardiovascular and overall death both in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04895176.

Single-Session Versus Staged Multivessel Optimal IVUS-Guided PCI in Patients With CCS or NSTE-ACS

Background

There are no studies comparing single-session vs staged multivessel intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) or non-ST-segment-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS).

Objectives

The authors aimed to compare single-session vs staged multivessel IVUS-guided PCI in patients with CCS or NSTE-ACS.

Methods

The OPTIVUS-Complex PCI study multivessel cohort was a prospective multicenter single-arm trial enrolling 1,021 patients with CCS or NSTE-ACS undergoing multivessel PCI including left anterior descending coronary artery using IVUS aiming to meet the prespecified OPTIVUS criteria for optimal stent expansion. We compared single-session vs staged multivessel PCI. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or any coronary revascularization.

Results

There were 246 patients (24.1%) undergoing single-session multivessel PCI, and 775 patients (75.9%) undergoing staged multivessel PCI. There was a wide variation in the prevalence of single-session multivessel PCI across the participating centers. The staged multivessel PCI group more often had complex coronary anatomy such as 3-vessel disease, chronic total occlusion, and calcified lesions requiring an atherectomy device compared with the single-session multivessel PCI group. The rates of PCI success, procedural complications, and meeting OPTIVUS criteria were not different between groups. The cumulative 1-year incidence of the primary endpoint was not different between single-session and staged multivessel PCI groups (9.0% vs 10.8%, log-rank P = 0.42). After adjusting confounders, the effect of single-session multivessel PCI relative to staged multivessel PCI was not significant for the primary endpoint (HR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.58-1.55; P = 0.84).

Conclusions

Single-session and staged multivessel IVUS-guided PCI had similar 1-year outcomes.

Comparison of long-term outcomes of complete vs. incomplete revascularization in elderly patients (≥75 years) with acute coronary syndrome and multi-vessel disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

The optimal revascularization strategy for elderly patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains uncertain. We evaluated the impact of complete revascularization (CR) vs. incomplete revascularization (IR) in elderly ACS patients with multivessel disease (MVD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

Using registry data from 2011 to 2019, we conducted a propensity-score matched cohort study. Elderly patients (≥75 years) with ACS and MVD who underwent PCI were divided into CR and IR groups based on angiography during index hospitalization. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including all-cause mortality, recurrent non-fatal myocardial infarction, and any revascularization, were assessed at 3-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 1,018 enrolled patients, 496 (48.7%) underwent CR and 522 (51.3%) received IR. After 1:1 propensity-score matching, we analyzed 395 pairs. At 3-year follow-up, CR was significantly associated with lower MACE risk compared to IR (16.7% vs. 25.6%, HR = 0.65, 95% CI: 0.47-0.88, p = 0.006), driven by reduced all-cause mortality. This benefit was consistent across all pre-specified subgroups, particularly in ST segment elevation (STE)-ACS patients. In non-STE (NSTE)-ACS subgroup analysis, CR was also associated with a lower risk of cardiac mortality compared to IR (HR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.12-0.75, p = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

In elderly ACS patients with MVD undergoing PCI, CR demonstrates superior long-term outcomes compared to IR, irrespective of STE- or NSTE-ACS presentation.

Acute coronary syndromes and multivessel coronary artery disease

Patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and multivessel coronary artery disease are frequently encountered during clinical practice and those patients are at higher risk of subsequent acute cardiovascular events. In patients presenting with both ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes, complete revascularization is associated with decreased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events. Nevertheless, the optimal timing of the intervention and treatment modality are still in discussions. Furthermore, non-culprit lesions assessment based on stenosis severity, either on visual or on functional evaluation, may not provide information about vulnerable plaques prone to thrombosis. Therefore, insights from intracoronary imaging could further identify high-risk plaque and patients at higher risk of future adverse events. This article aims to provide an overview of current guideline recommendations, envisioning future perspectives for the treatment of patients with ACS and multivessel disease.

Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease, complete revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PCI for non-culprit lesions should be attempted during the index procedure or staged.

METHODS

This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial was done at 29 hospitals across Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. We included patients aged 18-85 years presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel (ie, two or more coronary arteries with a diameter of 2·5 mm or more and ≥70% stenosis based on visual estimation or positive coronary physiology testing) coronary artery disease with a clearly identifiable culprit lesion. A web-based randomisation module was used to randomly assign patients (1:1), with a random block size of four to eight, stratified by study centre, to undergo immediate complete revascularisation (PCI of the culprit lesion first, followed by other non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator during the index procedure) or staged complete revascularisation (PCI of only the culprit lesion during the index procedure and PCI of all non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator within 6 weeks after the index procedure). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 1 year after the index procedure. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients by intention to treat. Non-inferiority of immediate to staged complete revascularisation was considered to be met if the upper boundary of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not exceed 1·39. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03621501.

FINDINGS

Between June 26, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021, 764 patients (median age 65·7 years [IQR 57·2-72·9] and 598 [78·3%] males) were randomly assigned to the immediate complete revascularisation group and 761 patients (median age 65·3 years [58·6-72·9] and 589 [77·4%] males) were randomly assigned to the staged complete revascularisation group, and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 57 (7·6%) of 764 patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 71 (9·4%) of 761 patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, pnon-inferiority=0·0011). There was no difference in all-cause death between the immediate and staged complete revascularisation groups (14 [1·9%] vs nine [1·2%]; HR 1·56, 95% CI 0·68-3·61, p=0·30). Myocardial infarction occurred in 14 (1·9%) patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 34 (4·5%) patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·76, p=0·0045). More unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisations were performed in the staged complete revascularisation group than in the immediate complete revascularisation group (50 [6·7%] patients vs 31 [4·2%] patients; HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·39-0·95, p=0·030).

INTERPRETATION

In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, immediate complete revascularisation was non-inferior to staged complete revascularisation for the primary composite outcome and was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation.

FUNDING

Erasmus University Medical Center and Biotronik.

Predictors of Readmission after the First Acute Coronary Syndrome and the Risk of Recurrent Cardiovascular Events-Seven Years of Patient Follow-Up

Recurrent hospitalization after acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is common. Identifying risk factors associated with subsequent cardiovascular events and hospitalization is essential for the management of these patients. Our research consisted in observing the outcomes of subjects after they suffered an acute coronary event and identifying the factors that can predict rehospitalization in the first 12 months and the recurrence of another acute coronary episode. Data from 362 patients admitted with ACS during 2013 were studied. Recurrent hospitalizations were retrospectively reviewed from medical charts and electronic hospital archives over a period of seven years. The mean age of the studied population was 64.57 ± 11.79 years, 64.36% of them being males. The diagnosis of ACS without ST elevation was registered in 53.87% of the patients at index hospitalization. More than half had recurrent hospitalization in the first year after the first ACS episode. Patients with lower ejection fraction (39.20 ± 6.85 vs. 42.24 ± 6.26, p < 0.001), acute pulmonary edema during the first hospitalization (6.47% vs. 1.24%, p = 0.022), coexistent valvular heart disease (69.15% vs. 55.90%, p = 0.017), and three-vessel disease (18.90% vs. 7.45%, p = 0.002) were more frequently readmitted in the following twelve months after their first acute coronary event, while those with complete revascularization were less frequently admitted (24.87% vs. 34.78%, p = 0.005). In multiple regression, complete revascularization during the index event (HR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.35-0.95, p = 0.03) and a higher LVEF (left ventricular ejection fraction) (HR = 0.95, 95% CI 0.92-0.988, p = 0.009) remained independent predictors of fewer early readmissions. Complete revascularization of the coronary lesions at the time of the first event and a preserved LVEF were found to be the predictors of reduced hospitalizations in the first year after an acute coronary event.

Complete revascularization in acute myocardial infarction: a clinical review

In patients with ST segment elevation and non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI), multivessel (MV) coronary artery disease is found in approximately 50%, leading to worse clinical outcomes. Recent data have suggested that complete revascularization with MV percutaneous coronary intervention is associated with a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events as compared to culprit vessel-only revascularization. However, the optimal timing of MV intervention, appropriate non-culprit lesion assessment, and the best revascularization strategy in specific subsets such as cardiogenic shock remain to be established. This review article summarizes current evidence on revascularization strategies in patients with acute MI and MV disease.

Fractional flow reserve versus angiography-guided strategy in acute myocardial infarction with multivessel disease: a randomized trial

AIMS

In patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) and multivessel coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of non-infarct-related artery reduces death or MI. However, whether selective PCI guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is superior to routine PCI guided by angiography alone is unclear. The current trial sought to compare FFR-guided PCI with angiography-guided PCI for non-infarct-related artery lesions among patients with acute MI and multivessel disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients with acute MI and multivessel coronary artery disease who had undergone successful PCI of the infarct-related artery were randomly assigned to either FFR-guided PCI (FFR ≤0.80) or angiography-guided PCI (diameter stenosis of >50%) for non-infarct-related artery lesions. The primary end point was a composite of time to death, MI, or repeat revascularization. A total of 562 patients underwent randomization. Among them, 60.0% underwent immediate PCI for non-infarct-related artery lesions and 40.0% were treated by a staged procedure during the same hospitalization. PCI was performed for non-infarct-related artery in 64.1% in the FFR-guided PCI group and 97.1% in the angiography-guided PCI group, and resulted in significantly fewer stent used in the FFR-guided PCI group (2.2 ± 1.1 vs. 2.5 ± 0.9, P < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 3.5 years (interquartile range: 2.7-4.1 years), the primary end point occurred in 18 patients of 284 patients in the FFR-guided PCI group and in 40 of 278 patients in the angiography-guided PCI group (7.4% vs. 19.7%; hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.75; P = 0.003). The death occurred in five patients (2.1%) in the FFR-guided PCI group and in 16 patients (8.5%) in the angiography-guided PCI group; MI in seven (2.5%) and 21 (8.9%), respectively; and unplanned revascularization in 10 (4.3%) and 16 (9.0%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In patients with acute MI and multivessel coronary artery disease, a strategy of selective PCI using FFR-guided decision-making was superior to a strategy of routine PCI based on angiographic diameter stenosis for treatment of non-infarct-related artery lesions regarding the risk of death, MI, or repeat revascularization.

Optical coherence tomography and coronary revascularization: from indication to procedural optimization

Angiography alone is the most commonly used imaging modality for guidance of percutaneous coronary interventions. Angiography is limited, however, by several factors, including that it only portrays a low resolution, two-dimensional outline of the lumen and does not inform on plaque composition and functional stenosis severity. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an intracoronary imaging technique that has superior spatial resolution compared to all other imaging modalities. High-resolution imaging of the vascular wall enables precise measurement of vessel wall and luminal dimensions, more accurately informing about the anatomic severity of epicardial stenoses, and also provides input for computational models to assess functional severity. The very high-resolution images also permit plaque characterization that may be informative for prognostication. Moreover, periprocedural imaging provides valuable information to guide lesion preparation, stent implantation and to evaluate acute stent complications for which iterative treatment might reduce the occurrence of major adverse stent events. As such, OCT represent a potential future all-in-one tool that provides the data necessary to establish the indications, procedural planning and optimization, and final evaluation of percutaneous coronary revascularization.

Culprit versus Complete Revascularization during the Initial Intervention in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome Using a Virtual Treatment Planning Tool: Results of a Single-Center Pilot Study

Background and Objectives: The revascularization strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with multivessel (MV) acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains controversial. Certain gaps in the evidence are related to the optimal timing of non-culprit lesion revascularization and the utility of instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) in the management of MV ACS intervention. The major benefits of iFR utilization in MV ACS patients in one-stage complete revascularization are: (1) the possibility to virtually plan the PCI, both the location and the extension of the necessary stenting to achieve the prespecified final hemodynamic result; (2) the opportunity to validate the final hemodynamic result of the PCI, both in culprit artery and all non-culprit arteries and (3) the value of obliviating the uncomfortable, costly, time consuming and sometimes deleterious effects from Adenosine, as there is no requirement for administration. Thus, iFR use fosters the achievement of physiologically appropriate complete revascularization in MV ACS patients during acute hospitalization. Materials and Methods: This pilot study was aimed to test the feasibility of a randomized trial research protocol as well as to assess patient safety signals of co-registration iFR-guided one-stage complete revascularization compared with that of standard staged angiography-guided PCI in de novo patients with MV ACS. This was a single-center, prospective, randomized, open-label clinical trial consecutively screening patients with ACS for MV disease. The intervention strategy of interest was iFR-guided physiologically complete one-stage revascularization, in which the virtual PCI planning of non-culprit lesions and the intervention itself were performed in one stage directly following treatment of the culprit lesion and other critical stenosis of more than ninety percent. Seventeen patients were recruited and completed the 3-month follow-up. Results: Index PCI duration was significantly longer while the volume of contrast media delivered in index PCI was significantly greater in the iFR-guided group than in the angiography-guided group (119.4 ± 40.7 vs. 47 ± 15.5 min, p = 0.004; and 360 ± 97.9 vs. 192.5 ± 52.8 mL, p = 0.003). There were no significant differences in PCI-related major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) between the groups during acute hospitalization and at 3-months follow-up. One-stage iFR-guided PCI requires fewer PCI attempts until complete revascularization than does angiography-guided staged PCI. Conclusions: Complete revascularization with the routine use of the virtual planning tool in one-stage iFR-guided PCI is a feasible practical strategy in an everyday Cath lab environment following the protocol designed for the study. No statistically significant safety signals were documented in the number of PCI related MACE during the 3-month follow-up.

IncidenCe and predictOrs of heaRt fAiLure after acute coronarY Syndrome: The CORALYS registry

BACKGROUND

Previous studies investigating predictors of Heart Failure (HF) after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) were mostly conducted during fibrinolytic era or restricted to baseline characteristics and diagnoses prior to admission. We assessed the incidence and predictors of HF hospitalizations among patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ACS.

METHODS AND RESULTS

CORALYS is a multicenter, retrospective, observational registry including consecutive patients treated with PCI for ACS. Patients with known history of HF or reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were excluded. Incidence of HF hospitalizations was the primary endpoint. The composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular and all-cause death were the secondary endpoints. Predictors of HF hospitalizations and the impact of HF hospitalization on cardiovascular and all-cause death were assessed by means of multivariable Cox proportional hazards model.14699 patients were included. After 2.9 ± 1.8 years, the incidence of HF hospitalizations was 12.7%. Multivariable analysis identified age, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, previous myocardial infarction, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary disease, GRACE risk-score ≥ 141, peripheral artery disease, cardiogenic shock at admission and LVEF ≤40% as independently associated with HF hospitalizations. Complete revascularization was associated with a lower risk of HF (HR 0.46,95%CI 0.39-0.55). HF hospitalization was associated with higher risk of CV and all-cause death (HR 1.89,95%CI 1.5-2.39 and HR 1.85,95%CI 1.6-2.14, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Incidence of HF hospitalizations among patients treated with PCI for ACS is not negligible and is associated with detrimental impact on patients' prognosis. Several variables may help to assess the risk of HF after ACS.

Characteristics of Wellens' Syndrome in the Current PCI Era: A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Objectives

The goal of this retrospective study was to reveal the prevalence, angiographic characteristics, clinical presentation, and long-term outcomes of non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients with Wellens' syndrome.

Background

Procedural results for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have improved in recent years. However, there is still a paucity of available clinical trial data for Wellens' syndrome even though it is a well-known high-risk ACS.

Methods

Among a total of 3528 patients with ACS who underwent angioplasty from 2017 to 2019 at the Cardiovascular Center of Beijing Friendship Hospital, 476 NSTEMI patients with culprit left anterior descending (LAD) vessels were enrolled in this study. According to electrocardiographic criteria of Wellens' syndrome, the patients were divided into a Wellens group (n = 138) and a non-Wellens group (n = 338). The primary endpoint was cardiac death; the secondary endpoints were main adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), a composite of all-cause death, cardiac death, heart failure, target lesion revascularization, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stroke. All of the medical and follow-up data were obtained from our institutional database.

Results

The incidence of Wellens' syndrome in all ACS patients was 5.7% (200 of 3528). Among the 200 patients with Wellens' syndrome, 138 had NSTEMI, for a proportion of 69%. There was a significant decrease in the percentage of preexisting coronary heart disease (CHD), prior myocardial infarction, and previous PCI (P < 0.05) in the Wellens group compared with the non-Wellens group. On coronary angiography, single-vessel lesions were more common in the Wellens group (11.6% vs. 5.3%, P=0.016), and almost all (97.1%) of these patients received drug-eluting stents. Notably, the Wellens group had a higher proportion of early PCI than the non-Wellens group (71% vs. 61.2%, P=0.044). At 24 months, there was no statistically significant difference in cardiac death (P=0.111) between the two groups, but the MACCEs were comparable (Wellens: 5.1% vs. non-Wellens: 13.3%, P=0.009). Age ≥65 years was the largest independent risk factor for adverse prognosis.

Conclusions

With early recognition and aggressive intervention, Wellens' syndrome is no longer a risk factor for adverse prognosis in patients with NSTEMI in the current PCI era.

What Promotes Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Myocardial Infarction and Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease-Contrast Media, Hydration Status or Something Else?

Multivessel coronary artery disease (MVCAD) is found in approximately 50% of patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Although we have data showing the benefits of revascularization of significant non-culprit coronary lesions in patients with AMI, the optimal timing of angioplasty remains unclear. The most common reason for postponing subsequent percutaneous treatment is the fear of contrast-induced acute kidney injury (CI-AKI). Acute kidney injury (AKI) is common in patients with AMI undergoing PCI, and its etiology appears to be complex and incompletely understood. In this review, we discuss the definition, pathophysiology and risk factors of AKI in patients with AMI undergoing PCI. We present the impact of AKI on the course of hospitalization and distant prognosis of patients with AMI. Special attention was paid to the phenomenon of AKI in patients undergoing multivessel revascularization. We analyze the correlation between increased exposure to contrast medium (CM) and the risk of AKI in patients with AMI to provide information useful in the decision-making process about the optimal timing of revascularization of non-culprit lesions. In addition, we present diagnostic tools in the form of new biomarkers of AKI and discuss ways to prevent and mitigate the course of AKI.

Culprit vessel vs. immediate multivessel vs. out-of-hospital staged intervention for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction and multivessel disease

Background and aims

The optimal interventional strategy remains undetermined in hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD. This study aimed to examine clinical prognosis among culprit vessel, immediate multivessel, and staged percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with NSTEMI and MVD.

Methods

This retrospective, observational, single-center study included 943 hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD who had undergone successful drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation from January 2014 to December 2019. Patients were categorized into culprit lesion-only PCI (CL-PCI), immediate multivessel PCI (MV-PCI), and out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI according to PCI strategy. The primary outcome was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or unplanned repeat revascularization. The secondary outcomes were all-cause death, cardiac death, MI, and unplanned repeat revascularization.

Results

Over a median follow-up of 59 months, immediate MV-PCI was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death than CL-PCI (HR: 0.591, 95%CI: 0.364-0.960, P = 0.034). Out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI was associated with a reduced risk of MACE (HR: 0.448, 95%CI: 0.314-0.638, P < 0.001) and all-cause death (HR: 0.326, 95%CI: 0.183-0.584, P < 0.001) compared with CL-PCI. The above results were accordant after multivariate COX analysis and propensity score matching. MACE (HR: 0.560, 95%CI: 0.385-0.813, P = 0.002) and repeat revascularization (HR: 0.627, 95%CI: 0.400-0.982, P = 0.041) were significantly less likely to occur with out-of-hospital MV-PCI rather than immediate MV-PCI. However, the incidences of primary and secondary outcomes were comparable between immediate and staged PCI after confounder adjustment using multivariate regression and propensity score matching analysis. For subgroup analyses stratified by synergy between PCI with taxus and cardiac surgery score, staged MV-PCI was found to lower the risk of MACE compared with immediate MV-PCI in patients with more complex coronary disease.

Conclusion

Hemodynamically stable patients with NSTEMI and MVD benefited from the strategy of MV-PCI. Patients with complex coronary anatomy treated with out-of-hospital staged MV-PCI rather than immediate MV-PCI had lower risks of MACE. These need to be confirmed in the future randomized study.

The Role of Inflammation in Cardiovascular Disease

Atherosclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease, in which the immune system has a prominent role in its development and progression. Inflammation-induced endothelial dysfunction results in an increased permeability to lipoproteins and their subendothelial accumulation, leukocyte recruitment, and platelets activation. Recruited monocytes differentiate into macrophages which develop pro- or anti-inflammatory properties according to their microenvironment. Atheroma progression or healing is determined by the balance between these functional phenotypes. Macrophages and smooth muscle cells secrete inflammatory cytokines including interleukins IL-1β, IL-12, and IL-6. Within the arterial wall, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol undergoes an oxidation. Additionally, triglyceride-rich lipoproteins and remnant lipoproteins exert pro-inflammatory effects. Macrophages catabolize the oxidized lipoproteins and coalesce into a lipid-rich necrotic core, encapsulated by a collagen fibrous cap, leading to the formation of fibro-atheroma. In the conditions of chronic inflammation, macrophages exert a catabolic effect on the fibrous cap, resulting in a thin-cap fibro-atheroma which makes the plaque vulnerable. However, their morphology may change over time, shifting from high-risk lesions to more stable calcified plaques. In addition to conventional cardiovascular risk factors, an exposure to acute and chronic psychological stress may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease through inflammation mediated by an increased sympathetic output which results in the release of inflammatory cytokines. Inflammation is also the link between ageing and cardiovascular disease through increased clones of leukocytes in peripheral blood. Anti-inflammatory interventions specifically blocking the cytokine pathways reduce the risk of myocardial infarction and stroke, although they increase the risk of infections.

Multivessel versus Culprit-Only Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background: There is uncertainty whether multivessel (MV-PCI) or culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (CO-PCI) should be the treatment of choice in patients with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD). Aims: To evaluate clinical characteristics and outcomes in these patients undergoing MV-PCI or CO-PCI at the index procedure. Methods: Data were retrieved from the nationwide Netherlands Heart Registration. All NSTE-ACS patients with MVD undergoing PCI between 1 January 2017 and 1 October 2019 were grouped into a MV-PCI or CO-PCI group. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality at long-term follow-up (median 756 days (593−996)). Secondary endpoints were reinterventions, urgent CABG, myocardial infarction (MI) < 30 days, target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and mortality at 1 year. Propensity score matching analyses were performed. Results: In total, 10,507 NSTE-ACS patients with MVD were included into the MV-PCI (N = 4235) and CO-PCI group (N = 6272). Analysing crude data, mortality rates at long-term follow-up (10.7% vs. 10.2%; p = 0.383), mortality at 1 year (6.0% vs. 5.6%; p = 0.412) and MI <30 days (0.8% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.513) were similar between both groups. Reinterventions (11.1% vs. 20.0%; p < 0.001), urgent CABG (0.1% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.001) and TVR (5.2% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.003) occurred less often in the MV-PCI group. Survival analysis after multiple imputation and propensity score matching showed similar mortality rates at long-term follow-up (log-rank p = 0.289), but a significant reduction for reinterventions in the MV-PCI group (log-rank p < 0.001). Conclusion: NSTE-ACS patients with MVD undergoing MV-PCI have similar mortality rates at long-term follow-up compared to CO-PCI. However, improved event-free survival in terms of fewer coronary reinterventions was observed.

The Reduction of Left Ventricle Ejection Fraction after Multi-Vessel PCI during Acute Myocardial Infarction as a Predictor of Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Long-Term Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Revascularisation strategy in patients with multi-vessel coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains challenging. One of the potential treatment options is complete percutaneous revascularisation during index hospitalisation. This strategy could positively influence left ventricle ejection fraction (LVEF).

AIM

To investigate the long-term changes in LVEF and clinical outcome among patients with AMI after complete coronary revascularisation (CCR).

METHODS

Records of 171 patients with a diagnosis of AMI and multi-vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) on index angiography, in whom CCR was performed as a staged procedure during initial hospitalisation, were analysed. Clinical data were collected from in-hospital medical records and discharge letters. Cardiac ultrasound (CU), with particular assessment of LVEF, was performed one day before discharge. Follow-up (FU) CU was collected from the out-patient department at least six months ± one week after discharge. Follow-up data, including major adverse cardiac events (MACE), were collected during follow-up visits by telephone. Depending on the LVEF change during the follow-up period, patients were divided into two groups. Patients with a decrease in the LVEF (D-LVEF group) were compared with patients with no changes (preserved) or improvement regarding LVEF (P/I-LVEF).

RESULTS

The median duration of the follow-up was 19 months (14-24 months). The median change in LVEF during observation was -5.0p% (IQR (-7.0)-(-2.75p.%)) in the D-LVEF group and +4.0% (IQR 1.0-5.0p%) in the P/I-LVEF group. Among patients in the P/I-LVEF group, there was a sub-group of patients with no change in LVEF (28 patients), and one demonstrating improvement in LVEF (104 patients). In the subgroup of patients with improved LVEF, the median change in LVEF was 4.5p% (IQR 2-6.25p%). Among patients with decreasing LVEF, there was a significantly higher risk of MACE (15 vs. 2.3%, p = 0.031), especially non-fatal AMI (10 vs. 0%, p = 0.017). We found the following among predictors concerning increased risk of MACE occurrence: urgent PCI (p = 0.004), hospitalisations regardless of cause (p = 0.028), EF worsening (p = 0.025), fasting glucose serum concentration (p = 0.024) and fasting triglyceride serum concentration (p = 0.027).

CONCLUSIONS

Complete revascularisation (CR) at baseline (one stage) in patients with AMI and multi-vessel disease is associated with LVEF improvement and MACE rate reduction. Patients with worse LVEF have poor clinical outcome and a higher rate of MACE.

Prevalence and real-world management of NSTEMI with multivessel disease

BACKGROUND

Non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) has higher post-discharge mortality than ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Prognosis worsens in those with multivessel coronary disease (MVD). However, information about the prevalence and extent of MVD in NSTEMI is limited, in turn limiting insights into optimal treatment strategies. This study aimed to define the prevalence and extent of MVD, preferred treatment strategies and the predictors of MVD in a real-world NSTEMI population.

METHODS

The Coronary Angiogram Database of South Australia (CADOSA) was used to identify consecutive patients presenting to major teaching hospitals with NSTEMI between 2012 and 2016. Obtaining clinical and angiographic details, patients were stratified by the number of significantly diseased vessels (0,1,2,3-VD), defined by a stenosis of ≥70%, or ≥50% in the left main coronary artery. Data was analysed retrospectively.

RESULTS

The prevalence of MVD (2- or 3-VD) was 42% amongst 3,722 NSTEMI presentations. Multivariate logistic regression modelling showed age, male gender, diabetes, dyslipidaemia and prior myocardial infarction predicted MVD over 1-VD or 0-VD. Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was performed in 42% of patients with MVD. This comprised 61% of 2-VD patients and only 22% of 3-VD patients, with 24% and 66% of each group referred for coronary bypass grafting, respectively. Among MVD patients treated with PCI, 76% had their culprit lesion treated alone in the index admission.

CONCLUSIONS

In this NSTEMI cohort, over 40% had MVD. Notably, a minority of patients with MVD undergoing PCI received multivessel revascularisation. This real-world practice emphasises that further evaluation is required to determine whether complete revascularisation is beneficial in NSTEMI, as reported for STEMI.

CVIT expert consensus document on primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) update 2022

Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has significantly contributed to reducing the mortality of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) even in cardiogenic shock and is now the standard of care in most of Japanese institutions. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Interventional and Therapeutics (CVIT) society proposed an expert consensus document for the management of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2018. Updated guidelines for the management of AMI were published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in 2017 and 2020. Major changes in the guidelines for STEMI patients included: (1) radial access and drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare-metal stents (BMS) were recommended as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization before hospital discharge (either immediate or staged) is now considered as Class IIa recommendation. In 2020, updated guidelines for Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction (NSTEMI) patients, the followings were changed: (1) an early invasive strategy within 24 h is recommended in patients with NSTEMI as a Class I indication, (2) complete revascularization in NSTEMI patients without cardiogenic shock is considered as Class IIa recommendation, and (3) in patients with atrial fibrillation following a short period of triple antithrombotic therapy, dual antithrombotic therapy (e.g., DOAC and single oral antiplatelet agent preferably clopidogrel) is recommended, with discontinuation of the antiplatelet agent after 6 to 12 months. Furthermore, an aspirin-free strategy after PCI has been investigated in several trials those have started to show the safety and efficacy. The Task Force on Primary PCI of the CVIT group has now proposed the updated expert consensus document for the management of AMI focusing on procedural aspects of primary PCI in 2022 version.

Complete revascularization optimizes patient outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease: Data from the e-Ultimaster registry

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this analysis was to assess the effect of the coronary revascularization strategy during index admission on clinical outcomes among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD).

BACKGROUND

The value of complete revascularization (CR) over incomplete revascularization (IR) in MVD patients is not fully established.

METHODS

Patients with MVD defined as ≥2 major epicardial vessels with ≥50% stenosis were selected from the observational all-comer e-Ultimaster registry. Patients were treated with a sirolimus-eluting thin-strut coronary stent. Completeness of revascularization was physician assessed at the index procedure or an eventually staged procedure during the index hospitalization. Outcomes measures at 1 year were target lesion failure (TLF) (composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction [MI], and clinically driven target lesion revascularization [TLR]), and patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) (all-cause mortality, MI, or revascularization). The inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTW) methodology was used to perform a matched analysis.

RESULTS

The registry recruited 37,198 patients of whom 15,441 (41.5%) had MVD. CR on hospital discharge was achieved in 7413 (48.0%) patients and IR in 8028 (52.0%) patients. Mean age was 64.6 ± 11.1 versus 65.7 ± 11.0 years (p < 0.01), male gender 77.9% and 77.3% (p = 0.41) and diabetes 31.3% versus 33.4% (p = 0.01) for CR and IR, respectively. Chronic stable angina patients more commonly underwent CR (47.6% vs. 36.8%, p < 0.01). After propensity weighted analysis, 90.5% of CR patients were angina-free at 1 year compared with 87.5% of IR patients (p < 0.01). TLF (3.3% vs. 4.4%; p < 0.01), POCE (6.8% vs. 10.8%; p < .01), and all-cause mortality (2.3% vs. 3.1%; p < .01) were all lower in CR patients.

CONCLUSIONS

A physician-directed use of a CR strategy utilizing sirolimus-eluting thin-strut stent results in optimized clinical outcomes and less angina in an all-comer population. Our findings suggest that a CR should be aimed for.

Effect of Timing of Staged Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes

Background

Complete revascularization reduces cardiovascular events in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACSs) and multivessel disease. The optimal time point of non–target‐vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains a matter of debate. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of early (<4 weeks) versus late (≥4 weeks) staged PCI of non–target‐vessels in patients with ACS scheduled for staged PCI after hospital discharge.

Methods and Results

All patients with ACS undergoing planned staged PCI from 2009 to 2017 at Bern University Hospital, Switzerland, were analyzed. Patients with cardiogenic shock, in‐hospital staged PCI, staged cardiac surgery, and multiple staged PCIs were excluded. The primary end point was all‐cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction and urgent premature non–target‐vessel PCI. Of 8657 patients with ACS, staged revascularization was planned in 1764 patients, of whom 1432 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria. At 1 year, there were no significant differences in the crude or adjusted rates of the primary end point (7.8% early versus 10.8% late, hazard ratio [HR], 0.72 [95% CI, 0.47–1.10], P=0.129; adjusted HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.50–1.28], P=0.346) and its individual components (all‐cause death: 1.5% versus 2.9%, HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.20–1.33], P=0.170; adjusted HR, 0.62 [95% CI, 0.23–1.67], P=0.343; recurrent myocardial infarction: 4.2% versus 4.4%, HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.475–1.10], P=0.924; adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.53–2.01], P=0.935; non–target‐vessel PCI, 3.9% versus 5.7%, HR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.53–1.80], P=0.928; adjusted HR, 1.19 [95% CI, 0.61–2.34], P=0.609).

Conclusions

In this single‐center cohort study of patients with ACS scheduled to undergo staged PCI after hospital discharge, early (<4 weeks) versus late (≥4 weeks) staged PCI was associated with a similar rate of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year follow‐up.

Registration

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02241291.

Differences in the 2020 ESC Versus 2015 ESC and 2014 ACC/AHA Guidelines on the Management of Acute Coronary Syndromes in Patients Presenting Without Persistent ST-Segment Elevation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We assessed the differences in the 2020 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) versus 2015 ESC and 2014 American College of Cardiology (ACC) guidelines on the management of non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS).

RECENT FINDINGS

The recent publication of the 2020 ESC has provided a comprehensive series of recommendations on diagnosis and management of patients presenting with NSTE-ACS. However, there are discrepancies between the 2020 ESC versus 2015 ESC and 2014 ACC guidelines, creating uncertainty among clinicians in routine practices. Our investigation provides insights into several domains, including diagnosis, risk stratification, pharmacological treatments, invasive treatment, and special populations. Overall, it seems that the 2020 version of the ESC guideline for the management of NSTE-ACS provides the most evidence-based recommendations for clinicians; although due to the lack of validated investigation across some of the proposed recommendations, further longitudinal multicenter studies are warranted to address the current questions. Diagnostic algorithm in NSTE-ACS.

ABBREVIATIONS

ACC = American College of Cardiology; CABG = coronary artery bypass grafting; CCTA = coronary computed tomography angiography; CMR = cardiac magnetic resonance; CS = cardiogenic shock; ECG = electrocardiography; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; ESC = European Society of Cardiology; GRACE = Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events; HF = heart failure; LVEF = left ventricular ejection fraction; MPI = myocardial perfusion imaging; MR = mitral regurgitation; NSTE-ACS = non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes; PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention; TIMI = thrombolysis in myocardial infarction.

Multivessel versus IRA-only PCI in patients with NSTEMI and severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction

Background

A substantial number of patients presenting with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) have severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction (LVSD) (left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) less than 35%). But data are lacking regarding optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for these patients. The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of IRA (infarct-related artery)-only and multivessel PCI in patients with NSTEMI and MVD complicated by severe LVSD.

Methods

Among 13,104 patients enrolled in the PCI registry from November 2011 to December 2015, patients with NSTEMI and MVD with severe LVSD who underwent successful PCI were screened. The primary outcome was 3-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, stroke, and any revascularization.

Results

Overall, 228 patients were treated with IRA-only PCI (n = 104) or MV-PCI (n = 124). The MACE risk was significantly lower in the MV-PCI group than in the IRA-only PCI group (35.5% vs. 54.8%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.561; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.378–0.832; p = 0.04). This result was mainly driven by a significantly lower risk of all-cause death (23.4% vs. 41.4%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.503; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.314–0.806; p = 0.004). The results were consistent after multivariate regression, propensity-score matching, and inverse probability weighting to adjust for baseline differences.

Conclusions

Among patients with NSTEMI and MVD complicated with severe LVSD, multivessel PCI was associated with a significantly lower MACE risk. The findings may provide valuable information to physicians who are involved in decision-making for these patients.

Outcomes of Different Reperfusion Strategies of Multivessel Disease Undergoing Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Chronic Kidney Disease

Because available data are limited, we compared the 2-year clinical outcomes among different reperfusion strategies (culprit-only percutaneous coronary intervention (C-PCI), multivessel PCI (M-PCI), complete revascularization (CR) and incomplete revascularization (IR)) of multivessel disease (MVD) undergoing newer-generation drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). In this nonrandomized, multicenter, retrospective cohort study, a total of 1042 patients (C-PCI, n = 470; M-PCI, n = 572; CR, n = 432; IR, n = 140) were recruited from the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR) and evaluated. The primary outcome was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events, defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction and any repeat coronary revascularization. The secondary outcome was probable or definite stent thrombosis. During the 2-year follow-up period, the cumulative incidences of the primary (C-PCI vs. M-PCI, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR), 1.020; p = 0.924; CR vs. IR, aHR, 1.012; p = 0.967; C-PCI vs. CR, aHR, 1.042; p = 0.863; or C-PCI vs. IR, aHR, 1.060; p = 0.844) and secondary outcomes were statistically insignificant in the four comparison groups. In the contemporary newer-generation DES era, C-PCI may be a better reperfusion option for patients with NSTEMI with MVD and CKD rather than M-PCI, including CR and IR, with regard to the procedure time and the risk of contrast-induced nephropathy. However, further well-designed, large-scale randomized studies are warranted to confirm these results.

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) identifies functional relevance of non-culprit lesions in coronary angiographies of patients with acute myocardial infarction

INTRODUCTION

In patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and multivessel coronary disease, revascularization of non-culprit lesions guided by proof of ischemia usually requires staged ischemia testing. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) has been shown to be effective in assessing the hemodynamic relevance of lesions in stable coronary disease. However, its suitability in AMI patients is unknown. In this study, we tested the diagnostic value of QFR based on acute angiograms (aQFR) during AMI to assess the hemodynamic relevance of non-culprit lesions.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed the diagnostic efficiency of aQFR in 280 vessels from 220 patients, comparing it with staged ischemia testing using elective coronary angiography with FFR (n = 47), stress cardiac MRI (n = 200) or SPECT (n = 33).

RESULTS

aQFR showed a very good diagnostic efficiency (AUC = 0.887, 95% CI 0.832-0.943, p < 0.001) in predicting ischemia of non-culprit lesions, significantly superior to coronary lesion's geometry as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography. The optimal cut-off for aQFR to predict ischemia was 0.80 (sensitivity = 83.7%, specificity = 86.1%). Maintaining a predefined level of 95% sensitivity and specificity, we created a decision model based on aQFR: lesions with aQFR ≤ 0.75 should be treated, lesions with aQFR ≥ 0.92 do not yield any hemodynamic relevance, and lesions in the "grey zone" (aQFR 0.75-0.92) benefit from further ischemia testings. This model would allow to reduce staged ischemia tests by 46.8% without a relevant loss in diagnostic efficiency.

CONCLUSION

Our data demonstrate that aQFR allows an effective assessment of hemodynamic relevance of non-culprit lesions in AMI and may guide interventions of non-culprit coronary lesions.

Identification of anatomic risk factors for acute coronary events by optical coherence tomography in patients with myocardial infarction and residual nonflow limiting lesions: rationale and design of the PECTUS-obs study

INTRODUCTION

In patients with myocardial infarction, the decision to treat a nonculprit lesion is generally based on its physiological significance. However, deferral of revascularisation based on nonischaemic fractional flow reserve (FFR) values in these patients results in less favourable outcomes compared with patients with stable coronary artery disease, potentially caused by vulnerable nonculprit lesions. Intravascular optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging allows for in vivo morphological assessment of plaque 'vulnerability' and might aid in the detection of FFR-negative lesions at high risk for recurrent events.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The PECTUS-obs study is an international multicentre prospective observational study that aims to relate OCT-derived vulnerable plaque characteristics of nonflow limiting, nonculprit lesions to clinical outcome in patients with myocardial infarction. A total of 438 patients presenting with myocardial infarction (ST-elevation myocardial infarction and non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction) will undergo OCT-imaging of any FFR-negative nonculprit lesion for detection of plaque vulnerability. The primary study endpoint is a composite of major adverse cardiovascular events (all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction or unplanned revascularisation) at 2-year follow-up. Secondary endpoints will be the same composite at 1-year and 5-year follow-up, target vessel failure, target vessel revascularisation, target lesion failure and target lesion revascularisation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of the region Arnhem-Nijmegen. The results of this study will be disseminated in a main paper and additional papers with subgroup analyses.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03857971.