Jing-Jing Xu

Association of PEAR1 genetic variants with platelet reactivity in response to dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel in the Chinese patient population after percutaneous coronary intervention

INTRODUCTION Platelet Endothelial Aggregation Receptor-1 (PEAR1) is a recently reported platelet transmembrane protein which plays an important role in platelet aggregation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether PEAR1 genetic variations were associated with platelet reactivity as assessed by adenosine diphosphate(ADP)-induced platelet aggregation in Chinese patients treated with aspirin and clopidogrel. METHODS Patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were enrolled in the study. All patients were on dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. ADP-induced platelet aggregation was measured by thromboelastography and defined as percent inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA). Patients (n=204) with IPA <30% were identified as high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR). Patients (n=201) with IPA >70% were identified as low on-treatment platelet reactivity (LPR). Sixteen single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of PEAR1 were determined by a method of improved multiple ligase detection reaction. RESULTS Among the 16 SNPs examined by univariate analysis, 5 SNPs were significantly associated with ADP-induced platelet aggregation. Minor allele C at rs11264580 (p=0.033), minor allele G at rs2644592 (p=0.048), minor allele T at rs3737224 (p=0.033) and minor allele T at rs41273215 (p=0.025) were strongly associated with HPR, whereas homozygous TT genotype at rs57731889 (p=0.009) was associated with LPR. Multivariate logistic regression analysis further revealed that the minor allele T at rs41273215 (p=0.038) was an independent predictor of HPR and the homozygous TT genotype at rs57731889 (p=0.003) was an independent predictor of LPR. CONCLUSIONS PEAR1 genetic variations were strongly associated with ADP-induced platelet aggregation in Chinese patients with CHD treated with aspirin and clopidogrel. These genetic variations may contribute to the variability in platelet function. The utility of PEAR1 genetic variants in the assessment and prediction of cardiovascular risk warrants further investigation.

Plasma big endothelin-1 and stent thrombosis: An observational study in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in China

INTRODUCTION Stent thrombosis (ST) is a rare but catastrophic complication of percutaneous coronary intervention, leading to poor prognosis. Endothelin-1 (ET-1) plays an important role in endothelial dysfunction and thrombogenesis. However, the impact of big ET-1 level on ST in patients with coronary stenting is unknown. We aimed to evaluate big ET-1 level as a potential predictor of ST in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS From January 2013 to December 2013, 8106 consecutive patients underwent successful coronary stent implantation and were prospectively enrolled in this study. Patients were stratified into three groups based on plasma big ET-1 level at admission. RESULTS The incidence of definite and probable ST at 2years postoperatively was 0.84%; ST incidence was lowest in the low big ET-1 group (0.56%), highest in the high big ET-1 group (1.48%), and intermediate in the medium big ET-1 group (0.74%, log-rank p=0.001). Compared with the low big ET-1 group, the multivariate-adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for ST in the high big ET-1 group was 2.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-3.73, p=0.017). In subgroup analyses, high big ET-1 level was independently associated with ST in patients with acute coronary syndrome (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.03-5.06, p=0.041), but not in those with stable coronary artery disease (p=0.331), and tended to be associated with older age. CONCLUSIONS Plasma big ET-1 level is a valuable independent predictor of ST in patients with coronary stents, especially in the acute coronary syndrome population.

Impact of Proton-pump Inhibitors on the Pharmacodynamic Effect and Clinical Outcomes in Patients Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: A Propensity Score Analysis

Background: Prior studies have reported controversial conclusions regarding the risk of adverse cardiovascular events in patients using proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) combined with clopidogrel therapy, causing much uncertainty in clinical practice. We sought to evaluate the safety of PPIs use among high-risk cardiovascular patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a long-term follow-up study. Methods: A total of 7868 consecutive patients who had undergone PCI and received dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) at a single center from January 2013 to December 2013 were enrolled. Adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation inhibition was measured by modified thromboelastography (mTEG) in 5042 patients. Propensity score matching (PSM) was applied to control differing baseline factors. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the 2-year major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs), as well as individual events, including all-cause death, myocardial infarction, unplanned target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, and stroke. Results: Among the whole cohort, 27.2% were prescribed PPIs. The ADP-induced platelet aggregation inhibition by mTEG was significantly lower in PPI users than that in non-PPI users (42.0 ± 30.9% vs. 46.4 ± 31.4%, t = 4.435, P < 0.001). Concomitant PPI use was not associated with increased MACCE through 2-year follow-up (12.7% vs. 12.5%, &khgr;2 = 0.086, P = 0.769). Other endpoints showed no significant differences after multivariate adjustment, regardless of PSM. Conclusion: In this large cohort of real-world patients, the combination of PPIs with DAPT was not associated with increased risk of MACCE in patients who underwent PCI at up to 2 years of follow-up.

Head to Head Comparison of Two Point-of-care Platelet Function Tests Used for Assessment of On-clopidogrel Platelet Reactivity in Chinese Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: Platelet function tests are widely used in clinical practice to guide personalized antiplatelet therapy. In China, the thromboelastography (TEG) test has been well accepted in clinics, whereas VerifyNow, mainly used for scientific research, has not been used in routine clinical practice. The aim of the current study was to compare these two point-of-care platelet function tests and to analyze the consistency between the two tests for evaluating on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity in Chinese acute myocardial infarction patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: A total of 184 patients admitted to Fuwai Hospital between August 2014 and May 2015 were enrolled in the study. On-clopidogrel platelet reactivity was assessed 3 days after PCI by TEG and VerifyNow using adenosine diphosphate as an agonist. Based on the previous reports, an inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) <30% for TEG or a P2Y12 reaction unit (PRU) >230 for VerifyNow was defined as high on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity (HPR). An IPA >70% or a PRU <178 was defined as low on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity (LPR). Correlation and agreement between the two methods were analyzed using the Spearman correlation coefficient (r) and kappa value (&kgr;), respectively. Results: Our results showed that VerifyNow and TEG had a moderate but significant correlation in evaluating platelet reactivity (r = −0.511). A significant although poor agreement (&kgr; = 0.225) in identifying HPR and a significantly moderate agreement in identifying LPR (&kgr; = 0.412) were observed between TEG and VerifyNow. By using TEG as the reference for comparison, the cutoff values of VerifyNow for the Chinese patients in this study were identified as PRU >205 for HPR and PRU <169 for LPR. Conclusions: By comparing VerifyNow to TEG which has been widely used in clinics, VerifyNow could be an attractive alternative to TEG for monitoring on-clopidogrel platelet reactivity in Chinese patients.

Effect of sex difference in clinical presentation (stable coronary artery disease vs unstable angina pectoris or non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction vs ST-elevation myocardial infarction) on 2-year outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

OBJECTIVE To determine whether there is a difference in 2-year prognosis among patients across the spectrum of coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS We analyzed all consecutive patients undergoing PCI at a single center from 1/1-12/31/2013. Clinical presentations were compared between sexes according to baseline clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics and 2-year (mean 730 ± 30-day) outcomes. RESULTS We grouped 10 724 consecutive patients based on sex and clinical presentation. Among patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), rates of all-cause death (6.7% vs 1.4%) and cardiac death (3.8% vs 1.1%) were significantly higher in women than in men (P < 0.05), but these rates did not differ between men and women with stable coronary artery disease (SCAD) and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome ((NSTE-ACS). Incidence of major bleeding was greater than in men only in those women presenting with ACS. After multivariable adjustment, female sex was not an independent predictor of outcomes in STEMI (hazard ratio [HR] for all-cause death: 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.52-3.38; P = 0.55; HR for cardiac death: 0.69, 95%CI: 0.23-2.09, P = 0.51], but was still an independent predictor of bleeding in STEMI (HR: 3.53, 95%CI: 1.26-9.91, P = 0.017). CONCLUSION Among STEMI patients, women had worse 2-year mortality after PCI therapy, but female sex was not an independent predictor of mortality after adjustment for baseline characteristics. In STEMI patients, women were at higher bleeding risk than men after PCI, even after multivariable adjustment.

Evaluation of CRUSADE and ACUITY-HORIZONS Scores for Predicting Long-term Out-of-Hospital Bleeding after Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

Background: There is scanty evidence concerning the ability of Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes with Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines (CRUSADE) and Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy and Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (ACUITY-HORIZONS) scores to predict out-of-hospital bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. We aimed to assess and compare the long-term prognostic value of these scores regarding out-of-hospital bleeding risk in such patients. Methods: We performed a prospective observational study of 10,724 patients undergoing PCI between January and December 2013 in Fuwai Hospital, China. All patients were followed up for 2 years and evaluated through the Fuwai Hospital Follow-up Center. Major bleeding was defined as Types 2, 3, and 5 according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium Definition criteria. Results: During a 2-year follow-up, 245 of 9782 patients (2.5%) had major bleeding (MB). CRUSADE (21.00 [12.00, 29.75] vs. 18.00 [11.00, 26.00], P < 0.001) and ACUITY-HORIZONS (9.00 [3.00, 14.00] vs. 6.00 [3.00, 12.00], P < 0.001) risk scores were both significantly higher in the MB than non-MB groups. Both scores showed a moderate predictive value for MB in the whole study cohort (area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve [AUROC], 0.565; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.529–0.601, P = 0.001; AUROC, 0.566; 95% CI, 0.529–0.603, P < 0.001, respectively) and in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) subgroup (AUROC: 0.579, 95% CI: 0.531–0.627, P = 0.001; AUROC, 0.591; 95% CI, 0.544–0.638, P < 0.001, respectively). However, neither score was a significant predictor in the non-ACS subgroup (P > 0.05). The value of CRUSADE and ACUITY-HORIZONS scores did not differ significantly (P > 0.05) in the whole cohort, ACS subgroup, or non-ACS subgroup. Conclusions: CRUSADE and ACUITY-HORIZONS scores showed statistically significant but relatively limited long-term prognostic value for out-of-hospital MB after PCI with DES in a cohort of Chinese patients. The value of CRUSADE and ACUITY-HORIZONS scores did not differ significantly (P > 0.05) in the whole cohort, ACS subgroup, or non-ACS subgroup.

Evaluation of the Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients Bleeding Score for Predicting the Long-term Out-of-hospital Bleeding Risk in Chinese Patients after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Background: The Patterns of Non-Adherence to Anti-Platelet Regimens in Stented Patients (PARIS) bleeding score is a novel score for predicting the out-of-hospital bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, whether this score has the same value in non-European and American populations is unclear. This study aimed to assess the PARIS bleeding scores predictive value of bleeding in patients after PCI in the Chinese population. Methods: We performed a prospective, observational study of 10,724 patients who underwent PCI from January to December 2013, in Fuwai Hospital, China. We defined the primary end point as major bleeding (MB) according to Bleeding Academic Research Consortium definition criteria including Type 2, 3, or 5. The predictive value of the PARIS bleeding score was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Results: Of 9782 patients, 245 (2.50%) MB events occurred during the 2 years of follow-up. The PARIS bleeding score was significantly higher in the MB group than that of non-MB group (4.00 [3.00, 5.00] vs. 3.00 [2.00, 5.00], Z = 3.71, P < 0.001). According to risk stratification of the PARIS bleeding score, the bleeding risk in the intermediate- and high-risk groups was 1.50 times (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.50; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.160–1.950; P = 0.002) and 2.27 times higher (HR: 2.27; 95% CI: 1.320–3.900; P = 0.003) than that in the low-risk group. The PARIS bleeding score showed a moderate predictive value for MB in the overall population (AUROC: 0.568, 95% CI: 0.532–0.605; P < 0.001) and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) subgroup (AUROC: 0.578, 95% CI: 0.530–0.626; P = 0.001) and tended to be predictive in the non-ACS subgroup (AUROC: 0.556, 95% CI: 0.501–0.611; P = 0.054). Conclusion: The PARIS bleeding score shows good clinical value for risk stratification and has a significant, but relatively limited, prognostic value for out-of-hospital bleeding in the Chinese population after PCI.

Impact of Residual SYNTAX Score and Its Derived Indexes on Clinical Outcomes after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Data from a Large Single Center

Background: Residual SYNTAX score (rSS) and its derived indexes including SYNTAX revascularization index (SRI) and clinical rSS had been developed to quantify and describe the extent of incomplete revascularization. This study was conducted to explore the utility of the three scores among real-world patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods: From January 2013 to December 2013, patients underwent PCI treatment at Fuwai Hospital were included. The primary endpoints were all-cause death and major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events. The secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction, revascularization, stroke, and stent thrombosis. Kaplan-Meier methodology was used to determine the outcomes. Cox multivariable regression was to test the associations between scores and all-cause mortality. Results: A total of 10,344 patients were finally analyzed in this study. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis indicated that greater residual coronary lesions quantified by rSS and its derived indexes were associated with increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events. However, after multivariate analysis, only clinical rSS was an independent predictor of 2-year all-cause death (hazard ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence interval: 1.01–1.03, P < 0.01). By receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, clinical rSS had superior predictability of 2-year all-cause death than rSS and SRI (area under ROC curve [AUC]: 0.59 vs. 0.56 vs. 0.56, all P < 0.01), whereas rSS was superior in predicting repeat revascularization than clinical rSS and SRI (AUC: 0.62 vs. 0.61 vs. 0.61; all P < 0.01). When comparing the predictive capability of rSS ≥8 with SRI <70%, their predictabilities were not significantly different. Conclusions: This study indicates that all three indexes (rSS, clinical rSS, and SRI) are able to risk-stratify patients and predict 2-year outcomes after PCI. However, their prognostic capabilities are different.

Comparison of Long-term Outcomes in Patients with Premature Triple-vessel Coronary Disease Undergoing Three Different Treatment Strategies: A Prospective Cohort Study

Background: Patients with premature triple-vessel disease (PTVD) have a higher risk of recurrent coronary events and repeat revascularization; however, the long-term outcome of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and medical therapy (MT) alone for PTVD patients is controversial. The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term outcome of PTVD patients among these three treatment strategies, to find out the most appropriate treatment methods for these patients. Methods: One thousand seven hundred and ninety-two patients with PTVD (age: men ⩽50 years and women ⩽60 years) were enrolled between 2004 and 2011. The primary end point was all-cause death. The secondary end points were cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or repeat revascularization. Results: PCI, CABG, and MT alone were performed in 933 (52.1%), 459 (25.6%), and 400 (22.3%) patients. Both PCI and CABG were associated with lower all-cause death (4.6% vs. 4.1% vs. 15.5%, respectively, P < 0.01) and cardiac death (2.8% vs. 2.0% vs. 9.8%, respectively, P < 0.01) versus MT alone. The rate of repeat revascularization in the CABG group was significantly lower than those in the PCI and MT groups. After adjusting for baseline factors, PCI and CABG were still associated with similar lower risk of all-cause death and cardiac death versus MT alone (all-cause death: hazard ratio [HR]: 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23–0.53, P < 0.01 and HR: 0.35, 95% CI: 0.18–0.70, P = 0.003, respectively, and cardiac death: HR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19–0.54, P < 0.01 and HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.14–0.93, P = 0.03, respectively). Conclusions: PCI and CABG provided equal long-term benefits for all-cause death and cardiac death for PTVD patients. Patients undergoing MT alone had the worst long-term clinical outcomes. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov; Identifier: NCT02634086. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT02634086?term=NCT02634086&rank=1

Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between First- and Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome

Background: It remains undetermined whether second-generation drug-eluting stents (G2-DESs) outperform first-generation DESs (G1-DESs) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of G1-DES and G2-DES in ACS patients in a high-volume cardiovascular center. Methods: In 2013, 10,724 consecutive patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in our institution. We included 4037 patients with ACS who underwent exclusively G1-DES or G2-DES implantation (n = 364 and n = 3673, respectively). We used propensity score matching to minimize the imbalance between the G1-DES and G2-DES groups and followed patients for 2 years. The efficacy endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and its components including target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), target vessel revascularization/target lesion revascularization (TVR/TLR), and cardiac death. The safety endpoint was stent thrombosis. Continuous variables were compared by Mann-Whitney U-test, and categorical variables were compared using Pearsons Chi-square or Fishers exact test. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to compare the event-free survival rates, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to assess whether stent type was an independent risk factor for the efficacy and safety endpoints. Results: At the 2-year follow-up, the results for MACE and it components, as well as stent thrombosis, were similar for G1-DES and G2-DES (MACE, 5.2% vs. 4.3%, &khgr;2 = 0.514, P = 0.474; TV-MI, 0.8% vs. 0.4%, P = 0.407; TVR, 4.9% vs. 3.7%, &khgr;2 = 0.939, P = 0.333; TLR, 3.8% vs. 2.5%, &khgr;2 = 1.610, P = 0.205; cardiac death, 0.3% vs. 0.5%, P = 0.670; and stent thrombosis, 0.5% vs. 0.4%, P > 0.999). Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated similar event-free survival rates between G1-DES and G2-DES after propensity score matching (all: log-rank P > 0.05). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that stent type was not an independent risk factor for the efficacy and safety endpoints (MACE, hazard ratio [HR] = 0.805, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.455–1.424, P = 0.456; TV-MI, HR = 0.500, 95% CI: 0.101–2.475, P = 0.395; TVR, HR = 0.732, 95% CI: 0.403–1.330, P = 0.306; TLR, HR = 0.629, 95% CI: 0.313–1.264, P = 0.193; cardiac death, HR = 1.991, 95% CI: 0.223–17.814, P = 0.538; and stent thrombosis, HR = 0.746, 95% CI: 0.125–4.467, P = 0.749). Conclusion: G1-DES and G2-DES have similar efficacy and safety profiles in ACS patients at the 2-year follow-up.