Andrejs Erglis

Renal sympathetic denervation in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension (The Symplicity HTN-2 Trial): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Activation of renal sympathetic nerves is key to pathogenesis of essential hypertension. We aimed to assess effectiveness and safety of catheter-based renal denervation for reduction of blood pressure in patients with treatment-resistant hypertension. METHODS In this multicentre, prospective, randomised trial, patients who had a baseline systolic blood pressure of 160 mm Hg or more (≥150 mm Hg for patients with type 2 diabetes), despite taking three or more antihypertensive drugs, were randomly allocated in a one-to-one ratio to undergo renal denervation with previous treatment or to maintain previous treatment alone (control group) at 24 participating centres. Randomisation was done with sealed envelopes. Data analysers were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary effectiveness endpoint was change in seated office-based measurement of systolic blood pressure at 6 months. Primary analysis included all patients remaining in follow-up at 6 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00888433. FINDINGS 106 (56%) of 190 patients screened for eligibility were randomly allocated to renal denervation (n=52) or control (n=54) groups between June 9, 2009, and Jan 15, 2010. 49 (94%) of 52 patients who underwent renal denervation and 51 (94%) of 54 controls were assessed for the primary endpoint at 6 months. Office-based blood pressure measurements in the renal denervation group reduced by 32/12 mm Hg (SD 23/11, baseline of 178/96 mm Hg, p<0·0001), whereas they did not differ from baseline in the control group (change of 1/0 mm Hg [21/10], baseline of 178/97 mm Hg, p=0·77 systolic and p=0·83 diastolic). Between-group differences in blood pressure at 6 months were 33/11 mm Hg (p<0·0001). At 6 months, 41 (84%) of 49 patients who underwent renal denervation had a reduction in systolic blood pressure of 10 mm Hg or more, compared with 18 (35%) of 51 controls (p<0·0001). We noted no serious procedure-related or device-related complications and occurrence of adverse events did not differ between groups; one patient who had renal denervation had possible progression of an underlying atherosclerotic lesion, but required no treatment. INTERPRETATION Catheter-based renal denervation can safely be used to substantially reduce blood pressure in treatment-resistant hypertensive patients. FUNDING Ardian.

Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Coronary Stenoses by Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve Computed From Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiograms : Results From the Prospective Multicenter DISCOVER-FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) Study

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of a new method for quantifying fractional flow reserve (FFR) with computational fluid dynamics (CFD) applied to coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) data in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND Measurement of FFR during invasive coronary angiography is the gold standard for identifying coronary artery lesions that cause ischemia and improves clinical decision-making for revascularization. Computation of FFR from CCTA data (FFR(CT)) provides a noninvasive method for identifying ischemia-causing stenosis; however, the diagnostic performance of this new method is unknown. METHODS Computation of FFR from CCTA data was performed on 159 vessels in 103 patients undergoing CCTA, invasive coronary angiography, and FFR. Independent core laboratories determined FFR(CT) and CAD stenosis severity by CCTA. Ischemia was defined by an FFR(CT) and FFR ≤0.80, and anatomically obstructive CAD was defined as a CCTA with stenosis ≥50%. Diagnostic performance of FFR(CT) and CCTA stenosis was assessed with invasive FFR as the reference standard. RESULTS Fifty-six percent of patients had ≥1 vessel with FFR ≤0.80. On a per-vessel basis, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were 84.3%, 87.9%, 82.2%, 73.9%, 92.2%, respectively, for FFR(CT) and were 58.5%, 91.4%, 39.6%, 46.5%, 88.9%, respectively, for CCTA stenosis. The area under the receiver-operator characteristics curve was 0.90 for FFR(CT) and 0.75 for CCTA (p = 0.001). The FFR(CT) and FFR were well correlated (r = 0.717, p < 0.001) with a slight underestimation by FFR(CT) (0.022 ± 0.116, p = 0.016). CONCLUSIONS Noninvasive FFR derived from CCTA is a novel method with high diagnostic performance for the detection and exclusion of coronary lesions that cause ischemia.

Randomized Study on Simple Versus Complex Stenting of Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions: The Nordic Bifurcation Study

Background— The optimal stenting strategy in coronary artery bifurcation lesions is unknown. In the present study, a strategy of stenting both the main vessel and the side branch (MV+SB) was compared with a strategy of stenting the main vessel only, with optional stenting of the side branch (MV), with sirolimus-eluting stents. Methods and Results— A total of 413 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized. The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months, there were no significant differences in rates of major adverse cardiac events between the groups (MV+SB 3.4%, MV 2.9%; P=NS). In the MV+SB group, there were significantly longer procedure and fluoroscopy times, higher contrast volumes, and higher rates of procedure-related increases in biomarkers of myocardial injury. A total of 307 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The combined angiographic end point of diameter stenosis >50% of main vessel and occlusion of the side branch after 8 months was found in 5.3% in the MV group and 5.1% in the MV+SB group (P=NS). Conclusions— Independent of stenting strategy, excellent clinical and angiographic results were obtained with percutaneous treatment of de novo coronary artery bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents. The simple stenting strategy used in the MV group was associated with reduced procedure and fluoroscopy times and lower rates of procedure-related biomarker elevation. Therefore, this strategy can be recommended as the routine bifurcation stenting technique.

Diagnostic Performance of Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: The NXT Trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps)

OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from standard acquired coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) datasets (FFR(CT)) for the diagnosis of myocardial ischemia in patients with suspected stable coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND FFR measured during invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the gold standard for lesion-specific coronary revascularization decisions in patients with stable CAD. The potential for FFR(CT) to noninvasively identify ischemia in patients with suspected CAD has not been sufficiently investigated. METHODS This prospective multicenter trial included 254 patients scheduled to undergo clinically indicated ICA for suspected CAD. Coronary CTA was performed before ICA. Evaluation of stenosis (>50% lumen reduction) in coronary CTA was performed by local investigators and in ICA by an independent core laboratory. FFR(CT) was calculated and interpreted in a blinded fashion by an independent core laboratory. Results were compared with invasively measured FFR, with ischemia defined as FFR(CT) or FFR ≤0.80. RESULTS The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for FFR(CT) was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87 to 0.94) versus 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76 to 0.87) for coronary CTA (p = 0.0008). Per-patient sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) to identify myocardial ischemia were 86% (95% CI: 77% to 92%) and 79% (95% CI: 72% to 84%) for FFR(CT) versus 94% (86 to 97) and 34% (95% CI: 27% to 41%) for coronary CTA, and 64% (95% CI: 53% to 74%) and 83% (95% CI: 77% to 88%) for ICA, respectively. In patients (n = 235) with intermediate stenosis (95% CI: 30% to 70%), the diagnostic accuracy of FFR(CT) remained high. CONCLUSIONS FFR(CT) provides high diagnostic accuracy and discrimination for the diagnosis of hemodynamically significant CAD with invasive FFR as the reference standard. When compared with anatomic testing by using coronary CTA, FFR(CT) led to a marked increase in specificity. (HeartFlowNXT-HeartFlow Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using Coronary CT Angiography [HFNXT]; NCT01757678).

Clinical ResearchClinical TrialsDiagnostic Performance of Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography in Suspected Coronary Artery Disease: The NXT Trial (Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using CT Angiography: Next Steps)

OBJECTIVES The goal of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) derived from standard acquired coronary computed tomography angiography (CTA) datasets (FFR(CT)) for the diagnosis of myocardial ischemia in patients with suspected stable coronary artery disease (CAD). BACKGROUND FFR measured during invasive coronary angiography (ICA) is the gold standard for lesion-specific coronary revascularization decisions in patients with stable CAD. The potential for FFR(CT) to noninvasively identify ischemia in patients with suspected CAD has not been sufficiently investigated. METHODS This prospective multicenter trial included 254 patients scheduled to undergo clinically indicated ICA for suspected CAD. Coronary CTA was performed before ICA. Evaluation of stenosis (>50% lumen reduction) in coronary CTA was performed by local investigators and in ICA by an independent core laboratory. FFR(CT) was calculated and interpreted in a blinded fashion by an independent core laboratory. Results were compared with invasively measured FFR, with ischemia defined as FFR(CT) or FFR ≤0.80. RESULTS The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve for FFR(CT) was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.87 to 0.94) versus 0.81 (95% CI: 0.76 to 0.87) for coronary CTA (p = 0.0008). Per-patient sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) to identify myocardial ischemia were 86% (95% CI: 77% to 92%) and 79% (95% CI: 72% to 84%) for FFR(CT) versus 94% (86 to 97) and 34% (95% CI: 27% to 41%) for coronary CTA, and 64% (95% CI: 53% to 74%) and 83% (95% CI: 77% to 88%) for ICA, respectively. In patients (n = 235) with intermediate stenosis (95% CI: 30% to 70%), the diagnostic accuracy of FFR(CT) remained high. CONCLUSIONS FFR(CT) provides high diagnostic accuracy and discrimination for the diagnosis of hemodynamically significant CAD with invasive FFR as the reference standard. When compared with anatomic testing by using coronary CTA, FFR(CT) led to a marked increase in specificity. (HeartFlowNXT-HeartFlow Analysis of Coronary Blood Flow Using Coronary CT Angiography [HFNXT]; NCT01757678).

EUROASPIRE IV : a European Society of Cardiology survey on the lifestyle, risk factor and therapeutic management of coronary patients from 24 European countries

Aims To determine whether the Joint European Societies guidelines on cardiovascular prevention are being followed in everyday clinical practice of secondary prevention and to describe the lifestyle, risk factor and therapeutic management of coronary patients across Europe. Methods and results EUROASPIRE IV was a cross-sectional study undertaken at 78 centres from 24 European countries. Patients <80 years with coronary disease who had coronary artery bypass graft, percutaneous coronary intervention or an acute coronary syndrome were identified from hospital records and interviewed and examined ≥ 6 months later. A total of 16,426 medical records were reviewed and 7998 patients (24.4% females) interviewed. At interview, 16.0% of patients smoked cigarettes, and 48.6% of those smoking at the time of the event were persistent smokers. Little or no physical activity was reported by 59.9%; 37.6% were obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2) and 58.2% centrally obese (waist circumference ≥ 102 cm in men or ≥88 cm in women); 42.7% had blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mmHg (≥140/80 in people with diabetes); 80.5% had low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 1.8 mmol/l and 26.8% reported having diabetes. Cardioprotective medication was: anti-platelets 93.8%; beta-blockers 82.6%; angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers 75.1%; and statins 85.7%. Of the patients 50.7% were advised to participate in a cardiac rehabilitation programme and 81.3% of those advised attended at least one-half of the sessions. Conclusion A large majority of coronary patients do not achieve the guideline standards for secondary prevention with high prevalences of persistent smoking, unhealthy diets, physical inactivity and consequently most patients are overweight or obese with a high prevalence of diabetes. Risk factor control is inadequate despite high reported use of medications and there are large variations in secondary prevention practice between centres. Less than one-half of the coronary patients access cardiac prevention and rehabilitation programmes. All coronary and vascular patients require a modern preventive cardiology programme, appropriately adapted to medical and cultural settings in each country, to achieve healthier lifestyles, better risk factor control and adherence with cardioprotective medications.

Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibition Compared With Enalapril on the Risk of Clinical Progression in Surviving Patients With Heart Failure

Background— Clinical trials in heart failure have focused on the improvement in symptoms or decreases in the risk of death and other cardiovascular events. Little is known about the effect of drugs on the risk of clinical deterioration in surviving patients. Methods and Results— We compared the angiotensin-neprilysin inhibitor LCZ696 (400 mg daily) with the angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor enalapril (20 mg daily) in 8399 patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction in a double-blind trial. The analyses focused on prespecified measures of nonfatal clinical deterioration. In comparison with the enalapril group, fewer LCZ696-treated patients required intensification of medical treatment for heart failure (520 versus 604; hazard ratio, 0.84; 95% confidence interval, 0.74–0.94; P=0.003) or an emergency department visit for worsening heart failure (hazard ratio, 0.66; 95% confidence interval, 0.52–0.85; P=0.001). The patients in the LCZ696 group had 23% fewer hospitalizations for worsening heart failure (851 versus 1079; P<0.001) and were less likely to require intensive care (768 versus 879; 18% rate reduction, P=0.005), to receive intravenous positive inotropic agents (31% risk reduction, P<0.001), and to have implantation of a heart failure device or cardiac transplantation (22% risk reduction, P=0.07). The reduction in heart failure hospitalization with LCZ696 was evident within the first 30 days after randomization. Worsening of symptom scores in surviving patients was consistently more common in the enalapril group. LCZ696 led to an early and sustained reduction in biomarkers of myocardial wall stress and injury (N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide and troponin) versus enalapril. Conclusions— Angiotensin-neprilysin inhibition prevents the clinical progression of surviving patients with heart failure more effectively than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibition. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01035255.

Drug eluting and bare metal stents in people with and without diabetes: collaborative network meta-analysis

Objective To compare the effectiveness and safety of three types of stents (sirolimus eluting, paclitaxel eluting, and bare metal) in people with and without diabetes mellitus. Design Collaborative network meta-analysis. Data sources Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), relevant websites, reference lists, conference abstracts, reviews, book chapters, and proceedings of advisory panels for the US Food and Drug Administration. Manufacturers and trialists provided additional data. Review methods Network meta-analysis with a mixed treatment comparison method to combine direct within trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Overall mortality was the primary safety end point, target lesion revascularisation the effectiveness end point. Results 35 trials in 3852 people with diabetes and 10 947 people without diabetes contributed to the analyses. Inconsistency of the network was substantial for overall mortality in people with diabetes and seemed to be related to the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (P value for interaction 0.02). Restricting the analysis to trials with a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more, inconsistency was reduced considerably and hazard ratios for overall mortality were near one for all comparisons in people with diabetes: sirolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.88 (95% credibility interval 0.55 to 1.30), paclitaxel eluting stents compared with bare metal stents 0.91 (0.60 to 1.38), and sirolimus eluting stents compared with paclitaxel eluting stents 0.95 (0.63 to 1.43). In people without diabetes, hazard ratios were unaffected by the restriction. Both drug eluting stents were associated with a decrease in revascularisation rates compared with bare metal stents in people both with and without diabetes. Conclusion In trials that specified a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of six months or more after stent implantation, drug eluting stents seemed safe and effective in people both with and without diabetes.

Novel Baroreflex Activation Therapy in Resistant Hypertension Results of a European Multi-Center Feasibility Study

OBJECTIVES This study assessed the safety and efficacy of a novel implantable device therapy in resistant hypertension patients. BACKGROUND Despite the availability of potent antihypertensive drugs, a substantial proportion of patients remain hypertensive. A new implantable device (Rheos system, CVRx, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota) that activates the carotid baroreflex may help these patients. METHODS Forty-five subjects with systolic blood pressure ≥160 mm Hg or diastolic ≥90 mm Hg despite at least 3 antihypertensive drugs were enrolled in a prospective, nonrandomized feasibility study to assess whether Rheos therapy could safely lower blood pressure. Subjects were followed up for as long as 2 years. An external programmer was used to optimize and individualize efficacy. RESULTS Baseline mean blood pressure was 179/105 mm Hg and heart rate was 80 beats/min, with a median of 5 antihypertensive drugs. After 3 months of device therapy, mean blood pressure was reduced by 21/12 mm Hg. This result was sustained in 17 subjects who completed 2 years of follow-up, with a mean reduction of 33/22 mm Hg. The device exhibited a favorable safety profile. CONCLUSIONS The Rheos device sustainably reduces blood pressure in resistant hypertensive subjects with multiple comorbidities receiving numerous medications. This unique therapy offers a safe individualized treatment option for these high-risk subjects. This novel approach holds promise for patients with resistant hypertension and is currently under evaluation in a prospective, placebo-controlled clinical trial.

Expert review document part 2: methodology, terminology and clinical applications of optical coherence tomography for the assessment of interventional procedures.

This document is complementary to an Expert Review Document on Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT) for the study of coronary arteries and atherosclerosis.1 The goal of this companion manuscript is to provide a practical guide framework for the appropriate use and reporting of the novel frequency domain (FD) OCT imaging to guide interventional procedures, with a particular interest on the comparison with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS).1–4 In the OCT Expert Review Document on Atherosclerosis, a comprehensive description of the physical principles for OCT imaging and time domain (TD) catheters (St Jude Medical, Westford, MA, USA) was provided.1 The main advantage of FD-OCT is that the technology enables rapid imaging of the coronary artery, using a non-occlusive acquisition modality. The FD-OCT catheter (DragonflyTM; St Jude Medical) employs a single-mode optical fibre, enclosed in a hollow metal torque wire that rotates at a speed of 100 r.p.s. It is compatible with a conventional 0.014″ angioplasty guide wire, inserted into a short monorail lumen at the tip. The frequency domain optical coherence tomography lateral resolution is improved in comparison with TD-OCT, while the axial resolution did not change. These features, together with reduced motion artefacts and an increased maximum field of view up to 11 mm, have significantly improved both the quality and ease of use of OCT in the catheterization laboratory.3,4 However, the imaging depth of the FD-OCT is still limited to 0.5–2.0 mm.5 The main obstacle to the adoption of TD-OCT imaging in clinical practice is that OCT cannot image through a blood field, and therefore requires clearing or flushing of blood from the lumen.1 The 6 Fr compatible DragonflyTM FD-OCT catheter is so far the only one in the market, as two other systems from Volcano and Terumo, which …