Imad Sheiban
University of Turin
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Imad Sheiban.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2012
Enrico Romagnoli; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Alessandro Sciahbasi; Luigi Politi; Stefano Rigattieri; Gianluca Pendenza; Francesco Summaria; Roberto Patrizi; Ambra Borghi; Cristian Di Russo; Claudio Moretti; Pierfrancesco Agostoni; Paolo Loschiavo; Ernesto Lioy; Imad Sheiban; Giuseppe Sangiorgi
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess whether transradial access for ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing early invasive treatment is associated with better outcome compared with conventional transfemoral access. BACKGROUND In patients with acute coronary syndrome, bleeding is a significant predictor of worse outcome. Access site complications represent a significant source of bleeding for those patients undergoing revascularization, especially when femoral access is used. METHODS The RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) was a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group study. Between January 2009 and July 2011, 1,001 acute ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing primary/rescue percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to the radial (500) or femoral (501) approach at 4 high-volume centers. The primary endpoint was the 30-day rate of net adverse clinical events (NACEs), defined as a composite of cardiac death, stroke, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and bleeding). Individual components of NACEs and length of hospital stay were secondary endpoints. RESULTS The primary endpoint of 30-day NACEs occurred in 68 patients (13.6%) in the radial arm and 105 patients (21.0%) in the femoral arm (p = 0.003). In particular, compared with femoral, radial access was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac mortality (5.2% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.020), bleeding (7.8% vs. 12.2%, p = 0.026), and shorter hospital stay (5 days first to third quartile range, 4 to 7 days] vs. 6 [range, 5 to 8 days]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Radial access in patients with ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome is associated with significant clinical benefits, in terms of both lower morbidity and cardiac mortality. Thus, it should become the recommended approach in these patients, provided adequate operator and center expertise is present. (Radial Versus Femoral Investigation in ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome [RIFLE-STEACS]; NCT01420614).
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2011
Elisa Romagnoli; Alessandro Sciahbasi; Gianluca Pendenza; Francesco Summaria; Roberto Patrizi; Ernesto Lioy; Gg Biondi-Zoccai; Luigi Politi; Alessandro Aprile; Maria Grazia Modena; Gm Sangiorgi; Claudio Moretti; Imad Sheiban; Stefano Rigattieri; C Di Russo; Paolo Loschiavo
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess whether transradial access for ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome undergoing early invasive treatment is associated with better outcome compared with conventional transfemoral access. BACKGROUND In patients with acute coronary syndrome, bleeding is a significant predictor of worse outcome. Access site complications represent a significant source of bleeding for those patients undergoing revascularization, especially when femoral access is used. METHODS The RIFLE-STEACS (Radial Versus Femoral Randomized Investigation in ST-Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome) was a multicenter, randomized, parallel-group study. Between January 2009 and July 2011, 1,001 acute ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing primary/rescue percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to the radial (500) or femoral (501) approach at 4 high-volume centers. The primary endpoint was the 30-day rate of net adverse clinical events (NACEs), defined as a composite of cardiac death, stroke, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and bleeding). Individual components of NACEs and length of hospital stay were secondary endpoints. RESULTS The primary endpoint of 30-day NACEs occurred in 68 patients (13.6%) in the radial arm and 105 patients (21.0%) in the femoral arm (p = 0.003). In particular, compared with femoral, radial access was associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac mortality (5.2% vs. 9.2%, p = 0.020), bleeding (7.8% vs. 12.2%, p = 0.026), and shorter hospital stay (5 days first to third quartile range, 4 to 7 days] vs. 6 [range, 5 to 8 days]; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS Radial access in patients with ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome is associated with significant clinical benefits, in terms of both lower morbidity and cardiac mortality. Thus, it should become the recommended approach in these patients, provided adequate operator and center expertise is present. (Radial Versus Femoral Investigation in ST Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome [RIFLE-STEACS]; NCT01420614).
Circulation | 2009
Antonio Colombo; Ezio Bramucci; S. Saccà; Roberto Violini; Corrado Lettieri; Roberto Zanini; Imad Sheiban; Leonardo Paloscia; Eberhard Grube; Joachim Schofer; Leonardo Bolognese; Mario Orlandi; Giampaolo Niccoli; Azeem Latib; Flavio Airoldi
Background— Sirolimus-eluting stents have been reported to be effective in the treatment of coronary bifurcations. Still, it has not been fully clarified which strategy would provide the best results with true bifurcation lesions. Methods and Results— The CACTUS trial (Coronary bifurcations: Application of the Crushing Technique Using Sirolimus-eluting stents) is a prospective, randomized, multicenter study comparing 2 different techniques of stenting, with mandatory final kissing-balloon inflation, in true bifurcations: (1) elective “crush” stenting and (2) stenting of only the main branch, with provisional side-branch T-stenting. From August 2004 to June 2007, 350 patients were enrolled in 12 European centers. The primary angiographic end point was the in-segment restenosis rate, and the primary clinical end point was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization) at 6 months. At 6 months, angiographic restenosis rates were not different between the crush group (4.6% and 13.2% in the main branch and side branch, respectively) and the provisional stenting group (6.7% and 14.7% in the main branch and side branch, respectively; P=NS). Additional stenting on the side branch in the provisional stenting group was required in 31% of lesions. Rates of major adverse cardiac events were also similar in the 2 groups (15.8% in the crush group versus 15% in the provisional stenting group, P=NS). Conclusions— In most bifurcations with a significant stenosis in both branches, a provisional strategy of stenting the main branch only is effective, with the need to implant a second stent on the side branch occurring in approximately one third of cases. The implantation of 2 stents does not appear to be associated with a higher incidence of adverse events at 6 months.
JAMA | 2008
Marco Valgimigli; Gianluca Campo; Gianfranco Percoco; Leonardo Bolognese; Corrado Vassanelli; Salvatore Colangelo; Nicoletta De Cesare; Alfredo E. Rodriguez; Maurizio Ferrario; Raúl Moreno; Tommaso Piva; Imad Sheiban; Giampaolo Pasquetto; Francesco Prati; Marco Stefano Nazzaro; Giovanni Parrinello; Roberto Ferrari
CONTEXT Abciximab infusion and uncoated-stent implantation is a complementary treatment strategy to reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients undergoing angioplasty for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). It is uncertain whether there may be similar benefits in replacing abciximab with high-dose bolus tirofiban. Similarly, the use of drug-eluting stents in this patient population is currently discouraged because of conflicting results on efficacy reported in randomized trials and safety concerns reported by registries. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of high-dose bolus tirofiban and of sirolimus-eluting stents as compared with abciximab infusion and uncoated-stent implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS An open-label, 2 x 2 factorial trial of 745 patients presenting with STEMI or new left bundle-branch block at 16 referral centers in Italy, Spain, and Argentina between October 2004 and April 2007. INTERVENTIONS High-dose bolus tirofiban vs abciximab infusion and sirolimus-eluting stent vs uncoated stent implantation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES For drug comparison, at least 50% ST-segment elevation resolution at 90 minutes postintervention with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 9% difference (relative risk, 0.89); for stent comparison, the rate of major adverse cardiac events, defined as the composite of death from any cause, reinfarction, and clinically driven target-vessel revascularization within 8 months. RESULTS ST-segment resolution occurred in 302 of 361 patients (83.6%) who had received abciximab infusion and 308 of 361 (85.3%) who had received tirofiban infusion (relative risk, 1.020; 97.5% confidence interval, 0.958-1.086; P < .001 for noninferiority). Ischemic and hemorrhagic outcomes were similar in the tirofiban and abciximab groups. At 8 months, major adverse cardiac events occurred in 54 patients (14.5%) with uncoated stents and 29 (7.8%) with sirolimus stents (P = .004), predominantly reflecting a reduction of revascularization rates (10.2% vs 3.2%). The incidence of stent thrombosis was similar in the 2 stent groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with STEMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, compared with abciximab, tirofiban therapy was associated with noninferior resolution of ST-segment elevation at 90 minutes following coronary intervention, whereas sirolimus-eluting stent implantation was associated with a significantly lower risk of major adverse cardiac events than uncoated stents within 8 months after intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00229515.
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions | 2008
Yves Louvard; Martyn Thomas; Vladimir Dzavik; David Hildick-Smith; Alfredo R. Galassi; Manuel Pan; Francisco Burzotta; Michael Zelizko; Darius Dudek; Peter Ludman; Imad Sheiban; Jens Flensted Lassen; Olivier Darremont; Adnan Kastrati; Josef Ludwig; Ioannis Iakovou; Philippe Brunel; Alexandra J. Lansky; David Meerkin; Victor Legrand; Alfonso Medina; Thierry Lefèvre
Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of coronary bifurcation lesions remains a subject of debate. Many studies have been published in this setting. They are often small scale and display methodological flaws and other shortcomings such as inaccurate designation of lesions, heterogeneity, and inadequate description of techniques implemented. Methods: The aim is to propose a consensus established by the European Bifurcation Club (EBC), on the definition and classification of bifurcation lesions and treatments implemented with the purpose of allowing comparisons between techniques in various anatomical and clinical settings. Results: A bifurcation lesion is a coronary artery narrowing occurring adjacent to, and/or involving, the origin of a significant side branch. The simple lesion classification proposed by Medina has been adopted. To analyze the outcomes of different techniques by intention to treat, it is necessary to clearly define which vessel is the distal main branch and which is (are) the side branche(s) and give each branch a distinct name. Each segment of the bifurcation has been named following the same pattern as the Medina classification. The classification of the techniques (MADS: Main, Across, Distal, Side) is based on the manner in which the first stent has been implanted. A visual presentation of PCI techniques and devices used should allow the development of a software describing quickly and accurately the procedure performed. Conclusion: The EBC proposes a new classification of bifurcation lesions and their treatments to permit accurate comparisons of well described techniques in homogeneous lesion groups.
Circulation | 2007
Alaide Chieffo; Seung Jung Park; Marco Valgimigli; Young H. Kim; Joost Daemen; Imad Sheiban; Alessandra Truffa; Matteo Montorfano; Flavio Airoldi; Giuseppe Sangiorgi; Mauro Carlino; Iassen Michev; Cheol Whan Lee; Myeong Ki Hong; Seong Wook Park; Claudio Moretti; Erminio Bonizzoni; Renata Rogacka; Patrick W. Serruys; Antonio Colombo
Background— The presence of a lumen narrowing at the ostium and the body of an unprotected left main coronary artery but does not require bifurcation treatment is a class I indication of surgical revascularization. Methods and Results— A total of 147 consecutive patients who had a stenosis in the ostium and/or the midshaft of an unprotected left main coronary artery (treatment of the bifurcation not required) and were electively treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and sirolimus-eluting stents (n=107) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (n=40) in 5 centres were included in this registry. In 72 patients (almost 50%), intravascular ultrasound guidance was performed. Procedural success was achieved in 99% of the patients; in 1 patient with stenosis in the left main coronary artery ostium, a >30% residual stenosis persisted at the end of the procedure, and the patient was referred for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. During hospitalization, no patients experienced a Q-wave myocardial infarction or died. One patient died 19 days after the procedure because of pulmonary infection. At long-term clinical follow-up (886±308 days), 5 patients had died; 7 patients had target vessel revascularization (5 repeat percutaneous coronary interventions and 2 coronary artery bypass graft surgeries), and of these only 1 patient had a target lesion revascularization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 106 patients (72%) with a late loss of −0.01 mm. Restenosis in the left main trunk occurred only in 1 patient (0.9%). Conclusions— Percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents implantation in nonbifurcation left main coronary artery lesions appears safe with a long-term major adverse clinical event rate of 7.4% and a restenosis rate of 0.9%.
American Heart Journal | 2008
Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Marzia Lotrionte; Claudio Moretti; Emanuele Meliga; Pierfrancesco Agostoni; Marco Valgimigli; Angela Migliorini; David Antoniucci; Didier Carrié; Giuseppe Sangiorgi; Alaide Chieffo; Antonio Colombo; Matthew J. Price; Paul S. Teirstein; Evald H. Christiansen; Antonio Abbate; Luca Testa; Julian Gunn; Francesco Burzotta; Antonio Laudito; Gian Paolo Trevi; Imad Sheiban
BACKGROUND Cardiac surgery is the standard treatment for unprotected left main disease (ULM). Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation has been recently reported in patients with ULM but with unclear results. We systematically reviewed outcomes of percutaneous DES implantation in ULM. METHODS Several databases were searched for clinical studies reporting on > or = 20 patients and > or = 6-month follow-up. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs; ie, death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization [TVR]) at the longest follow-up. Incidence and adjusted risk estimates were pooled with generic inverse variance random-effect methods (95% CIs). RESULTS From 823 initial citations, 16 studies were included (1278 patients, median follow-up 10 months). Eight were uncontrolled registries, 5 nonrandomized comparisons between DES and bare-metal stents and 3 nonrandomized comparisons between DES and CABG, with no properly randomized trial. Meta-analysis for DES-based PCI showed, at the longest follow-up, rates of 16.5% (11.7%-21.3%) MACE, 5.5% (3.4%-7.7%) death, and 6.5% (3.7%-9.2%) TVR. Comparison of DES versus bare-metal stent disclosed adjusted odds ratios for MACE of 0.34 (0.16-0.71), and DES versus CABG showed adjusted odds ratios for MACE plus stroke of 0.46 (0.24-0.90). Meta-regression showed that disease location predicted MACE (P = .001) and TVR (P = .020), whereas high-risk features predicted death (P = .027). CONCLUSIONS Clinical studies report apparently favorable early and midterm results in selected patients with ULM. However, given their limitations in validity and the inherent risk for DES thrombosis, results from randomized trials are still needed to definitely establish the role of DES implantation instead of the reference treatment, surgery.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | 2008
Emanuele Meliga; Hector M. Garcia-Garcia; Marco Valgimigli; Alaide Chieffo; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Andrew O. Maree; Stephen L. Cook; Lindsay Reardon; Claudio Moretti; Stefano De Servi; Igor F. Palacios; S Windecker; Antonio Colombo; Ron T. van Domburg; Imad Sheiban; Patrick W. Serruys
OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. BACKGROUND Long-term clinical outcomes after DES implantation for ULMCA disease have not yet been ascertained. METHODS From April 2002 to April 2004, 358 consecutive patients who underwent PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA were retrospectively selected and analyzed in 7 European and U.S. tertiary care centers. No patients were excluded from the analysis, and all patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. RESULTS Technical success rate was 100%. Procedural success rate was 89.6%. After 3 years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival in the whole population was 73.5%. According to the Academic Research Consortium definitions, cardiac death occurred in 9.2% of patients, and reinfarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 8.6%, 5.8%, and 14.2% of patients, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (specifically at 0 and 439 days). In elective patients, the 3-year MACE-free survival was 74.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 6.2%, 8.3%, 6.6%, and 16%, respectively. In the emergent group the 3-year MACE-free survival was 68.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 21.4%, 10%, 2.8%, and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Routine DES implantation in ULMCA disease seems encouraging, with favorable long-term clinical results.
Circulation | 1999
Mauro Carlino; Joseph De Gregorio; Carlo Di Mario; Angelo Anzuini; Flavio Airoldi; Remo Albiero; Carlo Briguori; Aniruddha Dharmadhikari; Imad Sheiban; Antonio Colombo
BACKGROUND Repeat coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) is associated with a high morbidity and mortality, rendering percutaneous treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions an attractive alternative. However, percutaneous interventions of degenerated SVGs carries high risk of distal embolization. METHODS AND RESULTS This study reports our initial experience with the PercuSurge GuardWire, a new device developed to prevent embolization during treatment of degenerated SVG. This device consists of a 190-cm-long, hollow 0.014-in guidewire with a central lumen connected to a distal occlusion balloon. A dedicated inflation device (the MicroSeal Adapter) was used to inflate the distal balloon and maintain complete lumen occlusion during balloon dilatation and stent implantation. A monorail aspiration catheter, connected to a vacuum syringe, was used to evacuate atherosclerotic and thrombotic debris. Angioplasty with stent implantation was performed in 15 degenerated SVGs (18 lesions). Procedural success was achieved in all patients with normal postprocedure flow (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction grade 3). No distal embolization was observed. There were no major in-hospital adverse clinical events, including Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, emergency CABG, or death. All patients were asymptomatic at discharge. CONCLUSIONS This preliminary series supports the feasible use of the PercuSurge GuardWire for retrieval of plaque debris and prevention of embolization in degenerated SVGs. The good tolerance of temporary occlusions without angiographic or clinical evidence of distal embolization represents encouraging early findings.
Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia | 2008
Giovanni Landoni; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Giovanni Marino; Tiziana Bove; Oliviero Fochi; Giulia Maj; Maria Grazia Calabrò; Imad Sheiban; James A. Tumlin; Marco Ranucci; Alberto Zangrillo
OBJECTIVE Acute renal failure is a common and threatening complication in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery. To determine the efficacy of fenoldopam in the prevention of acute renal failure, the authors performed a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and propensity-matched studies in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery. DESIGN Meta-analysis. SETTING Hospitals. PARTICIPANTS A total of 1,059 patients from 13 randomized and case-matched studies were included in the analysis. INTERVENTIONS None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS Google Scholar, PubMed, and scientific sessions were searched (updated November 2006). Authors and external experts were contacted. Four unblinded reviewers selected controlled trials that used fenoldopam in the prevention or treatment of acute renal failure in cardiovascular surgery. Four reviewers independently abstracted patient data, treatment characteristics, and outcomes. Pooled estimates showed that fenoldopam consistently and significantly reduced the need for renal replacement therapy (odds ratio = 0.37 [0.23-0.59], p < 0.001) and in-hospital death (odds ratio = 0.46 [0.29-0.75], p = 0.01). These benefits were associated with shorter intensive care unit stay (weighted mean difference [WMD] = -0.93 days [-1.27; -0.58], p = 0.002). Sensitivity analyses, tests for small study bias, and heterogeneity assessment further confirmed the main analysis. CONCLUSIONS This meta-analysis provides evidence that fenoldopam may confer significant benefits in preventing renal replacement therapy and reducing mortality in patients undergoing cardiovascular surgery.