| 1. |
- Byrne, Robert A, et al.
(författare)
-
Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention : executive summary
- 2018
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 39:18, s. 1591-1601
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device-the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold-has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.
|
|
| 2. |
- Byrne, Robert A., et al.
(författare)
-
Report of an ESC-EAPCI Task Force on the evaluation and use of bioresorbable scaffolds for percutaneous coronary intervention : executive summary
- 2018
-
Ingår i: EuroIntervention. - : EUROPA EDITION. - 1774-024X .- 1969-6213. ; 13:13, s. 1574-1586
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- A previous Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) provided a report on recommendations for the non-clinical and clinical evaluation of coronary stents. Following dialogue with the European Commission, the Task Force was asked to prepare an additional report on the class of devices known as bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS). Five BRS have CE-mark approval for use in Europe. Only one device - the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold - has published randomized clinical trial data and this data show inferior outcomes to conventional drug-eluting stents (DES) at 2-3 years. For this reason, at present BRS should not be preferred to conventional DES in clinical practice. The Task Force recommends that new BRS devices should undergo systematic non-clinical testing according to standardized criteria prior to evaluation in clinical studies. A clinical evaluation plan should include data from a medium sized, randomized trial against DES powered for a surrogate end point of clinical efficacy. Manufacturers of successful devices receive CE-mark approval for use and must have an approved plan for a large-scale randomized clinical trial with planned long-term follow-up.
|
|
| 3. |
- Capodanno, Davide, et al.
(författare)
-
Trial Design Principles for Patients a High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI JACC Scientific Expert Panel
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Journal of the American College of Cardiology. - : ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC. - 0735-1097 .- 1558-3597. ; 76:12, s. 1468-1483
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting. (C) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.
|
|
| 4. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention : A Consensus Document From the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Circulation. - : LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS. - 0009-7322 .- 1524-4539. ; 140:3, s. 240-261
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
| 5. |
- Urban, Philip, et al.
(författare)
-
Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention : a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk
- 2019
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 40:31, s. 2632-2653
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention-related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.
|
|
| 6. |
|
|
| 7. |
- Lauten, Alexander, et al.
(författare)
-
Percutaneous Left-Ventricular Support With the Impella-2.5-Assist Device in Acute Cardiogenic Shock Results of the Impella-EUROSHOCK-Registry
- 2013
-
Ingår i: Circulation Heart Failure. - 1941-3289 .- 1941-3297. ; 6:1, s. 23-30
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background-Acute cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction is associated with high in-hospital mortality attributable to persisting low-cardiac output. The Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry evaluates the safety and efficacy of the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. Methods and Results-This multicenter registry retrospectively included 120 patients (63.6 +/- 12.2 years; 81.7% male) with cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction receiving temporary circulatory support with the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device. The primary end point evaluated mortality at 30 days. The secondary end point analyzed the change of plasma lactate after the institution of hemodynamic support, and the rate of early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as well as long-term survival. Thirty-day mortality was 64.2% in the study population. After Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device implantation, lactate levels decreased from 5.8 +/- 5.0 mmol/L to 4.7 +/- 5.4 mmol/L (P=0.28) and 2.5 +/- 2.6 mmol/L (P=0.023) at 24 and 48 hours, respectively. Early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were reported in 18 (15%) patients. Major bleeding at the vascular access site, hemolysis, and pericardial tamponade occurred in 34 (28.6%), 9 (7.5%), and 2 (1.7%) patients, respectively. The parameters of age >65 and lactate level >3.8 mmol/L at admission were identified as predictors of 30-day mortality. After 317 +/- 526 days of follow-up, survival was 28.3%. Conclusions-In patients with acute cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction, Impella 2.5-treatment is feasible and results in a reduction of lactate levels, suggesting improved organ perfusion. However, 30-day mortality remains high in these patients. This likely reflects the last-resort character of Impella-2.5-application in selected patients with a poor hemodynamic profile and a greater imminent risk of death. Carefully conducted randomized controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of Impella-2.5-support in this high-risk patient group.
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Lip, Gregory Y.H., et al.
(författare)
-
2018 Joint European consensus document on the management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and/or undergoing percutaneous cardiovascular interventions : a joint consensus document of the European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS), Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS), Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA)
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Europace. - : Oxford University Press (OUP). - 1099-5129 .- 1532-2092. ; 21:2, s. 192-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In 2014, a joint consensus document dealing with the management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions was published, which represented an effort of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS). Since publication of this document, additional data from observational cohorts, randomized controlled trials, and percutaneous interventions as well as new guidelines have been published. Moreover, new drugs and devices/interventions are also available, with an increasing evidence base. The approach to managing AF has also evolved towards a more integrated or holistic approach. In recognizing these advances since the last consensus document, EHRA, WG Thrombosis, EAPCI, and ACCA, with additional contributions from HRS, APHRS, Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), proposed a focused update, to include the new data, with the remit of comprehensively reviewing the available evidence and publishing a focused update consensus document on the management of antithrombotic therapy in AF patients presenting with ACS and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions, and providing up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice.
|
|
