Thirty-days versus standard duration of dual antiplatelet treatment after percutaneous coronary interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background/Introduction

Abbreviation of duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (one or three months) has been recently proposed, especially for high-bleeding risk patients, after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES).

Purpose

The purpose of the specific systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare 30-days versus longer duration (≥3 months) of DAPT in patients undergoing PCI with DES, focusing on ischemic and bleeding events.

Methods

Three databases were screened for eligible randomized-control trials. The primary endpoint was the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACE), as they were defined in each trial. Secondary endpoints consisted of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infraction, stroke, stent-thrombosis, repeat revascularization and major bleeding.

Results

We included 4 RCTs with a total of 26,576 patients; 13,282 patients were grouped in 30-days DAPT, while the remaining 13,294 were allocated in longer period of DAPT. One-month of DAPT did not significantly reduce NACE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.87, 95% confidence intervals [Cl]: 0.74–1.03); however major bleedings were significantly reduced by 22% (OR: 0.78, 95% Cl: 0.65–0.94). Mortality or ischemic events (stroke, myocardial infraction, revascularization and stent thrombosis) were not affected.

Conclusions

Thirty-days DAPT did not significantly affect NACEs. However, odds of major bleedings were reduced significantly by 22%. Mortality and ischemic events did not differ between the two arms. Thus, 30-days DAPT could be considered as a safe and feasible after PCI with DES in selected patients, especially those in high-bleeding risk. Forthcoming RCTs could shed light on the optimal duration of DAPT.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

Global left ventricular myocardial work efficiency in left bundle branch pacing versus right ventricular septal pacing: preliminary results of a randomized trial

Background

Recently, the concept of left bundle branch pacing (LBBP) has emerged in clinical practice, in an attempt to prevent the deteriorating effects of right ventricular pacing (Vp).

Purpose

The aim of this study is to compare the effect of Vp on left ventricular (LV) dyssynchrony in patients with atrioventricular block (AVB) and preserved ejection fraction (EF), subjected to either LBBP or right ventricular septal pacing (RVSP).

Methods

Patients with AVB are randomized 1:1 to LBBP or RVSP. The effect of Vp is evaluated by echocardiographic indices of dyssynchrony, such as global myocardial work efficiency (GWE) and peak systolic dispersion (PSD). GWE represents the ratio of constructive work divided by the sum of constructive and wasted work [1]. Successful LBBP is defined by the presence of right bundle branch block paced QRS morphology in lead V1 and stim to LV activation time <75 msec [2]. No back-up right Vp lead was used in LBBP group.

Results

We conducted a preliminary analysis of the first 20 patients. Enrollment is still ongoing and total follow-up period is one year. We sought to investigate the acute effect of Vp on LV dyssynchrony 24 hours post procedure. Patients' baseline characteristics were similar in both groups and are presented in Table 1.

One crossover was noted from LBBP to RVSP group, due to high ventricular capture threshold during implant. Implantation time was increased in LBBP arm (130±17.4 min in LBBP versus 47.7±4.5 min in RVSP group, p=0.004). Left bundle branch potential was recorded in 3 out of 10 LBBP patients. No statistically significant difference was demonstrated in GWE between the two groups (91.3% in LBBP versus 87.4% in RVSP group, p=0.052). PSD was numerically shorter in LBBP (53.3 msec) versus in RVSP (63.6 msec), p=0.114. There were no complications during both the acute perioperative phase and the running period of the follow-up. Moreover, no acute ventricular threshold capture rise, or lead dislodgement has been observed in neither group.

The increased implantation time may be attributed to the more demanding technique, or the learning curve period required in the arm of LBBP. In the present analysis, a remarkable difference regarding GWE in favor of the LBBP group was demonstrated, although statistically not significant. However, even in this initial phase of the study, there is a trend of better LV synchrony and less wasted myocardial work in the LBBP group. The final difference of these indices will be assessed at the end of the one-year follow-up, when comparative results will be available.

Conclusion

LBBP is a novel, safe pacing method. Despite the longer procedural time and the risk of crossover, LBBP seems to offer better – without however statistical significance – LV synchrony even in the acute postoperative phase compared to RVSP. Longer follow-up studies are required to test whether LBBP compared to RVSP confers substantial clinical benefit.

Funding Acknowledgement

Type of funding sources: None.

Radial Artery and Ulnar Artery Occlusions Following Coronary Procedures and the Impact of Anticoagulation: ARTEMIS (Radial and Ulnar ARTEry Occlusion Meta-AnalysIS) Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Incidence of radial artery occclusions (RAO) and ulnar artery occclusions (UAO) in coronary procedures, factors predisposing to forearm arteries occlusion, and the benefit of anticoaggulation vary significantly in existing literature. We sought to determine the incidence of RAO/UAO and the impact of anticoagulation intensity.

Methods and Results

Meta‐analysis of 112 studies assessing RAO and/or UAO (N=46 631) were included. Overall, there was no difference between crude RAO and UAO rates (5.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.4–6.0 versus 4.0%; 95% CI, 2.8–5.8; P=0.171). The early occlusion rate (in‐hospital or within 7 days after procedure) was higher than the late occlusion rate. The detection rate of occlusion was higher with vascular ultrasonography compared with clinical evaluation only. Low‐dose heparin was associated with a significantly higher RAO rate compared with high‐dose heparin (7.2%; 95% CI, 5.5–9.4 versus 4.3%; 95% CI, 3.5–5.3; Q=8.81; P=0.003). Early occlusions in low‐dose heparin cohorts mounted at 8.0% (95% CI, 6.1–10.6). The RAO rate was higher after diagnostic angiographies compared with coronary interventions, presumably attributed to the higher intensity of anticoagulation in the latter group. Hemostatic techniques (patent versus nonpatent hemostasis), geography (US versus non‐US cohorts) and sheath size did not impact on vessel patency.

Conclusions

RAO and UAO occur with similar frequency and in the order of 7% to 8% when evaluated early by vascular ultrasonography following coronary procedures. More‐intensive anticoagulation is protective. Late recanalization occurs in a substantial minority of patients.

The more allergens an atopic patient is exposed to, the easier and quicker anaphylactic shock and Kounis syndrome appear: Clinical and therapeutic paradoxes

Kounis syndrome is a condition that combines allergic, hypersensitivity, anaphylactic or anaphylactoid reactions with acute coronary syndromes including vasospastic angina, acute myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis. This syndrome is a ubiquitous disease affecting patients of any age, involving numerous and continuously increasing causes, with broadening clinical manifestations and covering a wide spectrum of mast cell activation disorders. Drugs, environmental exposures and various conditions are the main offenders. Clinical and therapeutic paradoxes concerning Kounis syndrome therapy, pathophysiology, clinical course and causality have been encountered during its clinical course. Drugs that counteract allergy, such as H2-antihistamines, can induce allergy and Kounis syndrome. The more drugs an atopic patient is exposed to, the easier and quicker anaphylaxis and Kounis syndrome can occur. Every anesthetized patient is under the risk of multiple drugs and substances that can induce anaphylactic reaction and Kounis syndrome. The heart and the coronary arteries seem to be the primary target in severe anaphylaxis manifesting as Kounis syndrome. Commercially available adrenaline saves lives in anaphylaxis but it contains as preservative sodium metabisulfite and should be avoided in the sulfite allergic patients. Thus, careful patient past history and consideration for drug side effects and allergy should be taken into account before use. The decision to prescribe a drug where there is a history of previous adverse reactions requires careful assessment of the risks and potential benefits.