The value of coronary computed tomography and very early invasive coronary angiography compared to standard intervention in older patients after non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndromes

Background

The optimal management of patients with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS) remains a challenge. The merits of both computed tomography angiography (CTA) as a rule-out test for significant coronary artery disease and early invasive coronary angiography (ICA) are debated. Furthermore, there are limited data in older NSTEACS patients, who likely have more coronary artery calcification and are at higher risk of ACS-related complications.

Methods

This is a post hoc analysis of patients ≥75 years included in the Very Early Versus Standard Care Invasive Examination and Treatment of Patients with Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome Trial (VERDICT). The diagnostic accuracy of CTA was investigated in patients without previous coronary artery bypass grafting, renal dysfunction, or atrial fibrillation; the presence of a coronary artery stenosis ≥50% determined by ICA was used as reference. Patients were randomised to very early ICA within 12 hours of diagnosis or standard care (ICA within 48–72 hours of diagnosis) and followed for up to five years. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal recurrent MI, hospital admission for refractory myocardial ischaemia or hospital admission for heart failure.

Results

From November 2010 to June 2016, 2147 patients were included in the VERDICT trial. Of these, 452 (21%) patients were ≥75 years of age. Most older patients had a GRACE score >140 (n=388, 88.8%). At the time of admission, older patients had lower levels of haemoglobin, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and left ventricular ejection fraction, and more often displayed elevated troponins and electrocardiogram changes indicating new ischaemia, than those <75 years.

Of patients ≥75 years of age, 161 (35.6%) underwent CTA before ICA. Older patients had significantly higher calcium scores than younger patients (1187±1445 vs. 499±858 Agatston units, p<0.001). 19% of CTAs excluded significant coronary artery disease. The negative predictive value of the CTAs was 94 (95% CI 79–99)% and the sensitivity was 98 (95% CI 94–100)%, figure 1.

The primary endpoint was observed more frequently in patients ≥75 years as compared to younger patients (n=222, 49% vs. n=390, 23%, p<0.001), even after adjustment for allocated treatment (adjusted HR 2.65, 95% CI 2.25–3.13, p<0.001). Among older patients randomised to very early ICA, there were no differences in the cumulated number of primary endpoints compared to older patients randomised to standard ICA (log-rank p=0.36), figure 2.

Conclusion

Among patients ≥75 years old with NSTEACS, CTA showed a high diagnostic accuracy. A very early ICA within 12 hours of diagnosis did not improve long-term composite outcome in these older patients with NSTEACS.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): Rigshospitalets Research Foundation

Rehospitalizations, repeated aortic surgery, and death in initial survivors of surgery for Stanford type A aortic dissection and the significance of age – a nationwide registry-based cohort study

Background

All patients with type A aortic dissections, regardless of age, are recommended urgent aortic surgery. However, studies exploring long term outcomes in survivors are sparse, and especially, the significance of age on long-term outcomes remain unclear.

Purpose

We described and compared incidences across age groups of post-discharge readmission, repeated aortic surgery, and death in patients who survived surgery and hospitalization for type A aortic dissection.

Methods

Using data from Danish nationwide registries, we identified patients hospitalized with Stanford type A aortic dissections from 2006–2018. Survivors of hospitalization and surgery on the ascending aorta and/or aortic arch comprised the study population (Figure 1). Using cumulative incidence plots taking death into account as a competing risk and Cox regression analysis, we described long-term outcomes (rehospitalizations, repeated aortic surgery, and death) and compared different age groups. The diagnosis of type A aortic dissection in the registries used, was validated from 191 clinical records to have a positive predictive value of 94.8%.

Results

Of 606 initial survivors of surgery and hospitalization with type A aortic dissection, 236 (38.9%) were <60 years old (group I), 194 (32.0%) were 60–69 years old (group II), and 176 (29.1%) were >69 years old (group III). Figure 2 shows cumulative incidences of outcomes according to age. During the first year, 62.5% were re-hospitalized (median number of days hospitalized was 2 days (IQR 1–8 days) and 1.4% underwent repeated aortic surgery with no significant differences across age groups (P=0.68 and P=0.39, respectively). Further, 5.9% died (group I: 3.0%, group II: 8.3%, group III: 7.4%, P=0.04). After 10 years of follow up, 8.0% had undergone repeated aortic surgery (group I: 11.5%, group II: 8.5%, group III: 1.6%, P=0.04) and 10.2% (group I), 17.0% (group II), and 22.2% (group III) had died (P=0.01). In adjusted analyses, no age differences were found in one-year outcomes, while age >69 years (group III) compared with age <60 years (group I) was associated with a lower rate of repeated aortic surgery (hazard ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.04–0.78) and a higher rate of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio 2.44, 95% confidence interval 1.37–4.34) in the 10-years analysis.

Conclusion

Among survivors of type A aortic dissections, rehospitalizations the first year after discharge were common among all age groups, but survival was high. Repeated aortic surgery was rare, and significantly more common among younger than older patients. Evaluations of quality of life in survivors of type A aortic dissections are needed.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

Cardiac resynchronisation therapy and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator in non-ischaemic systolic heart failure: extended follow-up of the DANISH trial

Background

In the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators [ICDs] in Patients with Non-ischaemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial, ICD implantation did not provide an overall survival benefit in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure. A high proportion of patients in the DANISH trial received a cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) device, which improves the prognosis in patients with heart failure. Therefore, it is of interest to examine whether the effect of ICD implantation in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure is modified by CRT.

Purpose

Adding 4 years of additional follow-up to the DANISH trial, we examined the effect of ICD implantation according to status with respect to CRT implantation at baseline.

Methods

In the DANISH trial, 556 patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure were randomised to receive an ICD and 560 to receive usual clinical care (control). Patients fulfilling indications for a CRT device received a CRT-defibrillator (if randomised to ICD arm) or CRT-pacemaker (if randomised to control arm). In the ICD group, 322 patients (57.9%) received a CRT device; in the control group, 323 patients (57.7%) received a CRT device. In this extended follow-up study, patients were followed until May 18, 2020. The primary outcome was death from any cause; secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death and sudden cardiovascular death.

Results

During a median follow-up of 9.5 years, the ICD group did not have significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89 [95% CI, 0.74–1.08]). The results were independent of whether the patient received a CRT device at randomisation (patients with a CRT device: HR 0.92 [95% CI, 0.72–1.18]; patients without a CRT device: HR 0.86 [95% CI, 0.64–1.14]; P for interaction, 0.72). Similarly, ICD implantation did not reduce rates of cardiovascular death overall (HR 0.87 [95% CI, 0.70–1.09]), and this association was not modified by CRT (patients with a CRT device: HR 0.89 [95% CI, 0.66–1.19]; patients without a CRT device: HR 0.85 [95% CI, 0.60–1.20]; P for interaction, 0.86). The ICD group had significantly lower rates of sudden cardiovascular death in the overall population (HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.40–0.92]), and this association was not modified by CRT (patients with a CRT device: HR 0.69 [95% CI, 0.40–1.21]; patients without a CRT device: HR 0.51 [95% CI, 0.26–0.97]; P for interaction, 0.47). See Figure 1 for all results.

Conclusions

In this extended follow-up study of the DANISH trial, the effect of ICD implantation in patients with non-ischaemic systolic heart failure was not modified by CRT.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: Foundation. Main funding source(s): The DANISH trial was supported by unrestricted grants from Medtronic, St Jude Medical, Tryg Fonden, and the Danish Heart Foundation. No further funding was obtained for this follow-up study.

P4533Duration of heart failure and effect of defibrillator implantation in patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure

Introduction

Patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure have increased risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD) and death from progressive pump failure. Whether the risk of SCD changes over time is unknown. We seek to investigate the relationship between duration of heart failure, mode of death, and effect of implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) implantation.

Methods

We examined the risk of all-cause death and SCD according to the duration of heart failure among patients with non-ischemic systolic heart failure enrolled in the Danish Study to Assess the Efficacy of ICDs in Patients with Non-ischemic Systolic Heart Failure on Mortality (DANISH) trial. Patients were divided according to quartiles of heart failure duration (Q1 ≤8 months, Q2 9 ≤18 months, Q3 19 ≤65 months, Q4 ≥66 months).

Results

A total number of 1116 patients were included. Patients with the longest duration of heart failure were older, more often men, had more comorbidity, and more often received cardiac resynchronizing therapy device. Doubling of heart failure duration was an independent predictor of both all-cause mortality (HR 1.26 95% CI 1.17–1.37, p<0.0001), and SCD (HR 1.29 95% CI 1.11–1.49, p=0.0009). The proportion of deaths caused by SCD was not different between heart failure quartiles (p=0.91), and the effect of ICD implantation on all-cause mortality was not modified by the duration of heart failure (p=0.59).

Duration of heart failure and death

Conclusions

Duration of heart failure predicted both all-cause mortality and risk of SCD independently of other risk indicators. However, the proportion of death caused by SCD did not change with longer duration of heart failure and the effect of ICD was not modified by the duration of heart failure.

Acknowledgement/Funding

The work was sponsored by The Danish Heart Foundation (Hjerteforeningen) and the Lundbeck Foundation (Lundbeckfonden). The DANISH trial was supported

P3096The cardioprotective effect of FFR-significant multivessel disease detected by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in patients following ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Results from DANAMI3

Background

In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), reperfusion injury accounts for a significant part of the final infarct size, which is directly related to patient prognosis. In animal studies brief periods of ischemia in non-infarct related coronary arteries protects the myocardium via remote ischemic perconditioning. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) measures functional significant coronary stenosis which may offer remote ischemic perconditioning of the myocardium. It has not previously been investigated if FFR-significant stenosis in non-culprit myocardium offers cardioprotection following STEMI.

Purpose

To investigate cardioprotective effect of FFR-significant multivessel disease (MVD) on final infarct size and myocardial salvage in a large contemporary cohort of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods and results

We included 509 patients with STEMI from the DANAMI-3 trial, divided into three groups: 388 (76%) patients had single vessel disease (SVD), 34 (7%) had non-FFR-significant MVD and 192 (17%) had FFR-significant MVD. CMR was performed at baseline and three months after primary PCI. There was no difference in final infarct size; mean infarct size (% left ventricular mass) SVD 9±3%; non-FFR-significant MVD 9±3%; and FFR-significant MVD 9±3%, p=0.95, or in myocardial salvage index (MSI) between groups, calculated as (area-at-risk – infarct size)/area-at-risk; mean index (%) SVD 67±23%; non-FFR-significant MVD 68±19%; and FFR-significant MVD 67±21%, p=0,99. In multivariable regression analyses FFR-significant MVD was not associated med larger MSI (p=0.84) or lower infarct size (p=0.60).

Figure 1. A. Late gadolinium (LGE) cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) image of a mid-ventricular short-axis slice. Hyperintense signals (arrow) shows contrast enhancement in the anterior-septal segments, indicating myocardial infarction (MI). B. Same patient. T2-weighted image of the same mid-ventricular short-axis slice. Hyperintense signals (arrows) shows edema in the anterior-septal segments.

Conclusions

FFR-significant functional MVD of non-culprit myocardium does not offer cardioprotection in patients following STEMI.