| 1. |
- Estévez-Loureiro, Rodrigo, et al.
(författare)
-
Cross-Validation of Risk Scores for Patients Undergoing Transcatheter Edge-to-Edge Repair for Mitral Regurgitation
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. - 2772-9303. ; 3:2
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Risk scores may identify patients with mitral regurgitation (MR) who are at risk for adverse events, but who may still benefit from transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER). We sought to cross-validate the MitraScore and COAPT risk score to predict adverse events in patients undergoing TEER. Methods: MitraScore validation was carried out in the COAPT population which included 614 patients with FMR who were randomized 1:1 to guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) with or without TEER and were followed for 2 years. Validation of the COAPT risk score was carried out in 1007 patients from the MIVNUT registry of TEER-treated patients with both FMR and degenerative MR who were followed for a mean of 2.1 years. The predictive value was assessed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) plots. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Results: The MitraScore had fair to good predictive accuracy for mortality in the overall COAPT trial population (AUC, 0.67); its accuracy was higher in patients treated with TEER (AUC, 0.74) than GDMT alone (AUC, 0.65). The COAPT risk score had fair predictive accuracy for death in the overall MitraScore cohort (AUC, 0.64), which was similar in patients with FMR and degenerative MR (AUC, 0.64 and 0.66, respectively). There was a consistent benefit of treatment with TEER plus GDMT compared with GDMT alone in the COAPT trial population across all MitraScore risk strata. Conclusions: The COAPT risk score and MitraScore are simple tools that are useful for the prediction of 2-year mortality in patients eligible for or undergoing treatment with TEER.
|
|
| 2. |
- Tirziu, Daniela, et al.
(författare)
-
Impact and Implications of Neurocognitive Dysfunction in the Management of Ischemic Heart Failure
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. - 2772-9303. ; 2:6
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Neurocognitive dysfunction is common in heart failure (HF), with 30% to 80% of patients experiencing some degree of deficits in one or more cognitive domains, including memory, attention, learning ability, executive function, and psychomotor speed. Although the mechanism is not fully understood, reduced cardiac output, comorbidities, chronic cerebral hypoperfusion, and cardioembolic brain injury leading to cerebral hypoxia and brain damage seem to trigger the neurocognitive dysfunction in HF. Cognitive impairment is independently associated with worse outcomes including mortality, rehospitalization, and reduced quality of life. Patients with poorer cognitive function are at an increased risk of severe disease as they tend to have greater difficulty complying with treatment requirements. Coronary revascularization in patients with ischemic HF has the potential to improve cardiovascular outcomes but risks worsening neurocognitive dysfunction even further. Revascularization by coronary artery bypass grafting carries inherent risks for delirium, cognitive impairment, neurologic injury, and stroke, which are known to exacerbate the risk of neurocognitive dysfunction. Alternatively, percutaneous coronary intervention, as a less-invasive approach, has the potential to minimize the risk of cognitive impairment but has not yet been evaluated as an alternative to coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with ischemic HF. Therefore, it is paramount to raise awareness of the neurocognitive consequences in ischemic HF and devise strategies for recognition and prevention as an important target of patient management and personalized decision making that contributes to patient outcomes.
|
|
| 3. |
- von Koch, Sacharias, et al.
(författare)
-
Intracoronary Imaging of Proximal Coronary Artery Lesions – A Nationwide Lesion-Level Analysis From SCAAR
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions. - : Elsevier. - 2772-9303. ; 2:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Current evidence suggests that use of intracoronary imaging during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the left main coronary artery (LMCA) reduces mortality. However, there is a scarcity of data on the overall role of intracoronary imaging, particularly in other non-LMCA proximal coronary artery lesions. We aimed to investigate the association of use of intracoronary imaging on outcome in proximal lesions treated with PCI.Methods: The Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry was used to identify all proximal coronary artery lesions treated with stent implantation between June 11, 2013, and January 16, 2021. Proximal coronary artery lesions (LMCA, proximal left anterior descending artery, left circumflex artery, and right coronary artery) assessed by intracoronary imaging before and/or after stent implantation were matched to control lesions treated based on angiography alone using propensity score matching. The primary end point was target lesion revascularization with PCI, and secondary end points included all-cause mortality and definite stent thrombosis within 3 years.Results: Among the 3623 matched pairs, intracoronary imaging was associated with significantly lower risk of target lesion revascularization, 3.7% vs 4.7%; hazard ratio (HR), 0.77; 95% CI, 0.61-0.97; P = .025, and all-cause mortality, 9.1% vs 12.8%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.61-0.81; P < .001, with no difference in definite stent thrombosis.Conclusions: The use of intracoronary imaging in proximal coronary artery lesions is associated with lower rates of repeat revascularization and better survival. The results appear to be primarily driven by improved outcome of LMCA lesions. These results reinforce the role of intracoronary imaging in assessing and treating proximal coronary lesions.
|
|
| 4. |
- Yndigegn, Troels, et al.
(författare)
-
Long-term Safety of Revascularization Deferral Based on Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio or Fractional Flow Reserve
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & Interventions. - : Elsevier. - 2772-9303. ; 2:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Deferral of coronary revascularization is safe whether guided by instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) or by fractional flow reserve (FFR). We aimed to assess long-term outcomes in patients deferred from revascularization based on iFR or FFR in a large real-world population.Methods: From 2013 through 2017, 201,933 coronary angiographies were registered in the Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART). We included all patients (n = 11,324) with at least 1 coronary lesion deferred from PCI during an index procedure using iFR (>0.89; n = 1998) or FFR (>0.80; n = 9326). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned revascularization. A multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model was used, with analysis for interaction of prespecified subgroups.Results: Patients presented with stable angina pectoris (iFR 46.9% vs FFR 48.6%), unstable angina or non–ST-elevation myocardial infarction (iFR 37.7% vs FFR 33.1%), ST-elevation myocardial infarction (iFR 1.9% vs FFR 1.6%), and other indications (iFR 12.5% vs FFR 15.7%). The median follow-up was 2 years for both iFR and FFR groups. At the conclusion of the study, the cumulative MACE risks were 26.7 for the iFR group and 25.9% for FFR group. In the adjusted analysis, no difference was found between the 2 groups (adjusted hazard ratio: iFR vs FFR, 0.947; 95% CI, 0.84-1.08; P = 39). Consistent with the overall findings, the prespecified subgroups showed no interaction with the FFR/iFR results.Conclusions: Deferral of revascularization showed similar long-term safety whether based on iFR or on FFR.
|
|
