Peggy Gao

Radial versus femoral access for coronary angiography and intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (RIVAL): a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND Small trials have suggested that radial access for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) reduces vascular complications and bleeding compared with femoral access. We aimed to assess whether radial access was superior to femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) who were undergoing coronary angiography with possible intervention. METHODS The RadIal Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention (RIVAL) trial was a randomised, parallel group, multicentre trial. Patients with ACS were randomly assigned (1:1) by a 24 h computerised central automated voice response system to radial or femoral artery access. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or non-coronary artery bypass graft (non-CABG)-related major bleeding at 30 days. Key secondary outcomes were death, myocardial infarction, or stroke; and non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days. A masked central committee adjudicated the primary outcome, components of the primary outcome, and stent thrombosis. All other outcomes were as reported by the investigators. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation. Analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01014273. FINDINGS Between June 6, 2006, and Nov 3, 2010, 7021 patients were enrolled from 158 hospitals in 32 countries. 3507 patients were randomly assigned to radial access and 3514 to femoral access. The primary outcome occurred in 128 (3·7%) of 3507 patients in the radial access group compared with 139 (4·0%) of 3514 in the femoral access group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·92, 95% CI 0·72-1·17; p=0·50). Of the six prespecified subgroups, there was a significant interaction for the primary outcome with benefit for radial access in highest tertile volume radial centres (HR 0·49, 95% CI 0·28-0·87; p=0·015) and in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (0·60, 0·38-0·94; p=0·026). The rate of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days was 112 (3·2%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 114 (3·2%) of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·76-1·28; p=0·90). The rate of non-CABG-related major bleeding at 30 days was 24 (0·7%) of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 33 (0·9%) of 3514 patients in the femoral group (HR 0·73, 95% CI 0·43-1·23; p=0·23). At 30 days, 42 of 3507 patients in the radial group had large haematoma compared with 106 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·40, 95% CI 0·28-0·57; p<0·0001). Pseudoaneurysm needing closure occurred in seven of 3507 patients in the radial group compared with 23 of 3514 in the femoral group (HR 0·30, 95% CI 0·13-0·71; p=0·006). INTERPRETATION Radial and femoral approaches are both safe and effective for PCI. However, the lower rate of local vascular complications may be a reason to use the radial approach. FUNDING Sanofi-Aventis, Population Health Research Institute, and Canadian Network for Trials Internationally (CANNeCTIN), an initiative of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

Double-dose versus standard-dose clopidogrel and high-dose versus low-dose aspirin in individuals undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes (CURRENT-OASIS 7): a randomised factorial trial

BACKGROUND Clopidogrel and aspirin are the most commonly used antiplatelet therapies for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We assessed the effect of various clopidogrel and aspirin regimens in prevention of major cardiovascular events and stent thrombosis in patients undergoing PCI. METHODS The CURRENT-OASIS 7 trial was undertaken in 597 centres in 39 countries. 25,086 individuals with acute coronary syndromes and intended early PCI were randomly assigned to double-dose (600 mg on day 1, 150 mg on days 2-7, then 75 mg daily) versus standard-dose (300 mg on day 1 then 75 mg daily) clopidogrel, and high-dose (300-325 mg daily) versus low-dose (75-100 mg daily) aspirin. Randomisation was done with a 24 h computerised central automated voice response system. The clopidogrel dose comparison was double-blind and the aspirin dose comparison was open label with blinded assessment of outcomes. This prespecified analysis is of the 17,263 individuals who underwent PCI. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke at 30 days. Analyses were by intention to treat, adjusted for propensity to undergo PCI. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00335452. FINDINGS 8560 patients were assigned to double-dose and 8703 to standard-dose clopidogrel (8558 and 8702 completed 30-day follow-up, respectively), and 8624 to high-dose and 8639 to low-dose aspirin (8622 and 8638 completed 30-day follow-up, respectively). Compared with the standard dose, double-dose clopidogrel reduced the rate of the primary outcome (330 events [3·9%] vs 392 events [4·5%]; adjusted hazard ratio 0·86, 95% CI 0·74-0·99, p=0·039) and definite stent thrombosis (58 [0·7%] vs 111 [1·3%]; 0·54 [0·39-0·74], p=0·0001). High-dose and low-dose aspirin did not differ for the primary outcome (356 [4·1%] vs 366 [4·2%]; 0·98, 0·84-1·13, p=0·76). Major bleeding was more common with double-dose than with standard-dose clopidogrel (139 [1·6%] vs 99 [1·1%]; 1·41, 1·09-1·83, p=0·009) and did not differ between high-dose and low-dose aspirin (128 [1·5%] vs 110 [1·3%]; 1·18, 0·92-1·53, p=0·20). INTERPRETATION In patients undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndromes, a 7-day double-dose clopidogrel regimen was associated with a reduction in cardiovascular events and stent thrombosis compared with the standard dose. Efficacy and safety did not differ between high-dose and low-dose aspirin. A double-dose clopidogrel regimen can be considered for all patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with an early invasive strategy and intended early PCI. FUNDING Sanofi-Aventis and Bristol-Myers Squibb.

Urinary Sodium and Potassium Excretion and Risk of Cardiovascular Events

CONTEXT The precise relationship between sodium and potassium intake and cardiovascular (CV) risk remains uncertain, especially in patients with CV disease. OBJECTIVE To determine the association between estimated urinary sodium and potassium excretion (surrogates for intake) and CV events in patients with established CV disease or diabetes mellitus. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Observational analyses of 2 cohorts (N = 28,880) included in the ONTARGET and TRANSCEND trials (November 2001-March 2008 from initial recruitment to final follow-up). We estimated 24-hour urinary sodium and potassium excretion from a morning fasting urine sample (Kawasaki formula). We used restricted cubic spline plots to describe the association between sodium and potassium excretion and CV events and mortality, and to identify reference categories for sodium and potassium excretion. We used Cox proportional hazards multivariable models to determine the association of urinary sodium and potassium with CV events and mortality. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES CV death, myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and hospitalization for congestive heart failure (CHF). RESULTS At baseline, the mean (SD) estimated 24-hour excretion for sodium was 4.77 g (1.61); and for potassium was 2.19 g (0.57). After a median follow-up of 56 months, the composite outcome occurred in 4729 (16.4%) participants, including 2057 CV deaths, 1412 with MI, 1282 with stroke, and 1213 with hospitalization for CHF. Compared with the reference group with estimated baseline sodium excretion of 4 to 5.99 g per day (n = 14,156; 6.3% participants with CV death, 4.6% with MI, 4.2% with stroke, and 3.8% admitted to hospital with CHF), higher baseline sodium excretion was associated with an increased risk of CV death (9.7% for 7-8 g/day; hazard ratio [HR], 1.53; 95% CI, 1.26-1.86; and 11.2% for >8 g/day; HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.31-2.10), MI (6.8%; HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.11-1.98 for >8 g/day), stroke (6.6%; HR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.09-2.01 for >8 g/day), and hospitalization for CHF (6.5%; HR, 1.51; 1.12-2.05 for >8 g/day). Lower sodium excretion was associated with an increased risk of CV death (8.6%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02-1.39 for 2-2.99 g/day; 10.6%; HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 1.09-1.73 for <2 g/day), and hospitalization for CHF (5.2%; HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01-1.49 for 2-2.99 g/day) on multivariable analysis. Compared with an estimated potassium excretion of less than 1.5 g per day (n = 2194; 6.2% with stroke), higher potassium excretion was associated with a reduced risk of stroke (4.7% [HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.63-0.94] for 1.5-1.99 g/day; 4.3% [HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.59-0.90] for 2-2.49 g/day; 3.9% [HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56-0.91] for 2.5-3 g/day; and 3.5% [HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.49-0.92] for >3 g/day) on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS The association between estimated sodium excretion and CV events was J-shaped. Compared with baseline sodium excretion of 4 to 5.99 g per day, sodium excretion of greater than 7 g per day was associated with an increased risk of all CV events, and a sodium excretion of less than 3 g per day was associated with increased risk of CV mortality and hospitalization for CHF. Higher estimated potassium excretion was associated with a reduced risk of stroke.

Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery

BACKGROUND There is substantial variability in the perioperative administration of aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, both among patients who are already on an aspirin regimen and among those who are not. METHODS Using a 2-by-2 factorial trial design, we randomly assigned 10,010 patients who were preparing to undergo noncardiac surgery and were at risk for vascular complications to receive aspirin or placebo and clonidine or placebo. The results of the aspirin trial are reported here. The patients were stratified according to whether they had not been taking aspirin before the study (initiation stratum, with 5628 patients) or they were already on an aspirin regimen (continuation stratum, with 4382 patients). Patients started taking aspirin (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo just before surgery and continued it daily (at a dose of 100 mg) for 30 days in the initiation stratum and for 7 days in the continuation stratum, after which patients resumed their regular aspirin regimen. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30 days. RESULTS The primary outcome occurred in 351 of 4998 patients (7.0%) in the aspirin group and in 355 of 5012 patients (7.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the aspirin group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 1.15; P=0.92). Major bleeding was more common in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (230 patients [4.6%] vs. 188 patients [3.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01, to 1.49; P=0.04). The primary and secondary outcome results were similar in the two aspirin strata. CONCLUSIONS Administration of aspirin before surgery and throughout the early postsurgical period had no significant effect on the rate of a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction but increased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01082874.).

Prognostic value of blood pressure in patients with high vascular risk in the Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial study

Background Hypertension guidelines advise aggressive blood pressure (BP) lowering in patients with diabetes or high cardiovascular risk, but supporting evidence is limited. We analysed the impact of BP on cardiovascular events in well treated high-risk patients enrolled in a large clinical trial (Ongoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial). Methods Twenty-five thousand five hundred and eighty-eight patients with atherosclerotic disease or diabetes with organ damage, tolerant to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, were randomized to ramipril, telmisartan or both. We related the primary composite outcome and its components to: baseline SBP; SBP changes from baseline to event; and average in-trial SBP. Results The risk of myocardial infarction did not increase with baseline SBP and was unaffected by subsequent SBP change. In contrast, stroke risk progressively increased with baseline SBP (P for trend <0.0001) and decreased with reduction. In patients with baseline SBP less than 130 mmHg, adjusted for several covariates, cardiovascular mortality increased with further SBP reduction (P < 0.0001). A J-curve (nadir around 130 mmHg) occurred in the relationship between in-treatment SBP and all outcomes except stroke. Conclusion In high-risk patients, the benefits from SBP lowering below 130 mmHg are driven mostly by a reduction of stroke; myocardial infarction is unaffected and cardiovascular mortality is unchanged or increased. Future trials should be designed to test the value of SBP lowering in high-risk patients with SBP in the range of 130–150 mmHg.

Effects of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes With or Without ST-Segment Elevation

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine the consistency of the effects of radial artery access in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and in those with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTEACS). BACKGROUND The safety associated with radial access may translate into mortality benefit in higher-risk patients, such as those with STEMI. METHODS We compared efficacy and bleeding outcomes in patients randomized to radial versus femoral access in RIVAL (RadIal Vs femorAL access for coronary intervention trial) (N = 7,021) separately in those with STEMI (n = 1,958) and NSTEACS (n = 5,063). Interaction tests between access site and acute coronary syndrome type were performed. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were well matched between radial and femoral groups. There were significant interactions for the primary outcome of death/myocardial infarction/stroke/non-coronary artery bypass graft-related major bleeding (p = 0.025), the secondary outcome of death/myocardial infarction/stroke (p = 0.011) and mortality (p = 0.001). In STEMI patients, radial access reduced the primary outcome compared with femoral access (3.1% vs. 5.2%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.60; p = 0.026). For NSTEACS, the rates were 3.8% and 3.5%, respectively (p = 0.49). In STEMI patients, death/myocardial infarction/stroke were also reduced with radial access (2.7% vs. 4.6%; HR 0.59; p = 0.031), as was all-cause mortality (1.3% vs. 3.2%; HR: 0.39; p = 0.006), with no difference in NSTEACS patients. Operator radial experience was greater in STEMI versus NSTEACS patients (400 vs. 326 cases/year, p < 0.0001). In primary PCI, mortality was reduced with radial access (1.4% vs. 3.1%; HR: 0.46; p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS In patients with STEMI, radial artery access reduced the primary outcome and mortality. No such benefit was observed in patients with NSTEACS. The radial approach may be preferred in STEMI patients when the operator has considerable radial experience. (A Trial of Trans-radial Versus Trans-femoral Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) Access Site Approach in Patients With Unstable Angina or Myocardial Infarction Managed With an Invasive Strategy [RIVAL]; NCT01014273).

Randomized Trial of Primary PCI with or without Routine Manual Thrombectomy

BACKGROUND During primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), manual thrombectomy may reduce distal embolization and thus improve microvascular perfusion. Small trials have suggested that thrombectomy improves surrogate and clinical outcomes, but a larger trial has reported conflicting results. METHODS We randomly assigned 10,732 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI to a strategy of routine upfront manual thrombectomy versus PCI alone. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or New York Heart Association (NYHA) class IV heart failure within 180 days. The key safety outcome was stroke within 30 days. RESULTS The primary outcome occurred in 347 of 5033 patients (6.9%) in the thrombectomy group versus 351 of 5030 patients (7.0%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio in the thrombectomy group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.15; P=0.86). The rates of cardiovascular death (3.1% with thrombectomy vs. 3.5% with PCI alone; hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.12; P=0.34) and the primary outcome plus stent thrombosis or target-vessel revascularization (9.9% vs. 9.8%; hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.14; P=0.95) were also similar. Stroke within 30 days occurred in 33 patients (0.7%) in the thrombectomy group versus 16 patients (0.3%) in the PCI-alone group (hazard ratio, 2.06; 95% CI, 1.13 to 3.75; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS In patients with STEMI who were undergoing primary PCI, routine manual thrombectomy, as compared with PCI alone, did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular death, recurrent myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or NYHA class IV heart failure within 180 days but was associated with an increased rate of stroke within 30 days. (Funded by Medtronic and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; TOTAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01149044.).

Cholesterol Lowering in Intermediate-Risk Persons without Cardiovascular Disease.

BACKGROUND Previous trials have shown that the use of statins to lower cholesterol reduces the risk of cardiovascular events among persons without cardiovascular disease. Those trials have involved persons with elevated lipid levels or inflammatory markers and involved mainly white persons. It is unclear whether the benefits of statins can be extended to an intermediate-risk, ethnically diverse population without cardiovascular disease. METHODS In one comparison from a 2-by-2 factorial trial, we randomly assigned 12,705 participants in 21 countries who did not have cardiovascular disease and were at intermediate risk to receive rosuvastatin at a dose of 10 mg per day or placebo. The first coprimary outcome was the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, and the second coprimary outcome additionally included revascularization, heart failure, and resuscitated cardiac arrest. The median follow-up was 5.6 years. RESULTS The overall mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 26.5% lower in the rosuvastatin group than in the placebo group. The first coprimary outcome occurred in 235 participants (3.7%) in the rosuvastatin group and in 304 participants (4.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.64 to 0.91; P=0.002). The results for the second coprimary outcome were consistent with the results for the first (occurring in 277 participants [4.4%] in the rosuvastatin group and in 363 participants [5.7%] in the placebo group; hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P<0.001). The results were also consistent in subgroups defined according to cardiovascular risk at baseline, lipid level, C-reactive protein level, blood pressure, and race or ethnic group. In the rosuvastatin group, there was no excess of diabetes or cancers, but there was an excess of cataract surgery (in 3.8% of the participants, vs. 3.1% in the placebo group; P=0.02) and muscle symptoms (in 5.8% of the participants, vs. 4.7% in the placebo group; P=0.005). CONCLUSIONS Treatment with rosuvastatin at a dose of 10 mg per day resulted in a significantly lower risk of cardiovascular events than placebo in an intermediate-risk, ethnically diverse population without cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and AstraZeneca; HOPE-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00468923.).

Changes in Albuminuria Predict Mortality and Morbidity in Patients with Vascular Disease

The degree of albuminuria predicts cardiovascular and renal outcomes, but it is not known whether changes in albuminuria also predict similar outcomes. In two multicenter, multinational, prospective observational studies, a central laboratory measured albuminuria in 23,480 patients with vascular disease or high-risk diabetes. We quantified the association between a greater than or equal to twofold change in albuminuria in spot urine from baseline to 2 years and the incidence of cardiovascular and renal outcomes and all-cause mortality during the subsequent 32 months. A greater than or equal to twofold increase in albuminuria from baseline to 2 years, observed in 28%, associated with nearly 50% higher mortality (HR 1.48; 95% CI 1.32 to 1.66), and a greater than or equal to twofold decrease in albuminuria, observed in 21%, associated with 15% lower mortality (HR 0.85; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.98) compared with those with lesser changes in albuminuria, after adjustment for baseline albuminuria, BP, and other potential confounders. Increases in albuminuria also significantly associated with cardiovascular death, composite cardiovascular outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure), and renal outcomes including dialysis or doubling of serum creatinine (adjusted HR 1.40; 95% CI 1.11 to 1.78). In conclusion, in patients with vascular disease, changes in albuminuria predict mortality and cardiovascular and renal outcomes, independent of baseline albuminuria. This suggests that monitoring albuminuria is a useful strategy to help predict cardiovascular risk.

Erectile Dysfunction Predicts Cardiovascular Events in High-Risk Patients Receiving Telmisartan, Ramipril, or Both The ONgoing Telmisartan Alone and in combination with Ramipril Global Endpoint Trial/Telmisartan Randomized AssessmeNt Study in ACE iNtolerant subjects with cardiovascular Disease (ONTARGET/TRANSCEND) Trials

Background— Although erectile dysfunction (ED) is associated with cardiovascular risk factors and atherosclerosis, it is not known whether the presence of ED is predictive of future events in individuals with cardiovascular disease. We evaluated whether ED is predictive of mortality and cardiovascular outcomes, and because inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system in high-risk patients reduces cardiovascular events, we also tested the effects on ED of randomized treatments with telmisartan, ramipril, and the combination of the 2 drugs (ONTARGET), as well as with telmisartan or placebo in patients who were intolerant of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (TRANSCEND). Methods and Results— In a prespecified substudy, 1549 patients underwent double-blind randomization, with 400 participants assigned to receive ramipril, 395 telmisartan, and 381 the combination thereof (ONTARGET), as well as 171 participants assigned to receive telmisartan and 202 placebo (TRANSCEND). ED was evaluated at baseline, at 2-year follow-up, and at the penultimate visit before closeout. ED was predictive of all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 1.84, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.21 to 2.81, P=0.005) and the composite primary outcome (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.94, P=0.029), which consisted of cardiovascular death (HR 1.93, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.29, P=0.016), myocardial infarction (HR 2.02, 95% CI 1.13 to 3.58, P=0.017), hospitalization for heart failure (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.26, P=0.563), and stroke (HR 1.1, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.9, P=0.742). The study medications did not influence the course or development of ED. Conclusions— ED is a potent predictor of all-cause death and the composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure in men with cardiovascular disease. Trial treatment did not significantly improve or worsen ED. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT 00153101.