Petr Tousek

Randomized Comparison of Renal Denervation Versus Intensified Pharmacotherapy Including Spironolactone in True-Resistant Hypertension Six-Month Results From the Prague-15 Study

This prospective, randomized, open-label multicenter trial evaluated the efficacy of catheter-based renal denervation (Symplicity, Medtronic) versus intensified pharmacological treatment including spironolactone (if tolerated) in patients with true-resistant hypertension. This was confirmed by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring after excluding secondary hypertension and confirmation of adherence to therapy by measurement of plasma antihypertensive drug levels before enrollment. One-hundred six patients were randomized to renal denervation (n=52), or intensified pharmacological treatment (n=54) with baseline systolic blood pressure of 159±17 and 155±17 mm Hg and average number of drugs 5.1 and 5.4, respectively. A significant reduction in 24-hour average systolic blood pressure after 6 months (−8.6 [95% cofidence interval: −11.8, −5.3] mm Hg; P<0.001 in renal denervation versus −8.1 [95% cofidence interval: −12.7, −3.4] mm Hg; P=0.001 in pharmacological group) was observed, which was comparable in both groups. Similarly, a significant reduction in systolic office blood pressure (−12.4 [95% cofidence interval: −17.0, −7.8] mm Hg; P<0.001 in renal denervation versus −14.3 [95% cofidence interval: −19.7, −8.9] mm Hg; P<0.001 in pharmacological group) was present. Between-group differences in change were not significant. The average number of antihypertensive drugs used after 6 months was significantly higher in the pharmacological group (+0.3 drugs; P<0.001). A significant increase in serum creatinine and a parallel decrease of creatinine clearance were observed in the pharmacological group; between-group difference were borderline significant. The 6-month results of this study confirmed the safety of renal denervation. In conclusion, renal denervation achieved reduction of blood pressure comparable with intensified pharmacotherapy.

Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold Versus Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: 1-Year Results of a Propensity Score Matching Comparison: The BVS-EXAMINATION Study (Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold-A Clinical Evaluation of Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stents in the Treatment of Patients With ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction)

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to compare the 1-year outcome between bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. BACKGROUND The Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) is a polymeric scaffold approved for treatment of stable coronary lesions. Limited and not randomized data are available on its use in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. METHODS This study included 290 consecutive STEMI patients treated by BVS, compared with either 290 STEMI patients treated with EES or 290 STEMI patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMS) from the EXAMINATION (A Clinical Evaluation of Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stents in the Treatment of Patients With ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial, by applying propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented endpoint (DOCE), including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization, at 1-year follow-up. Device thrombosis, according to the Academic Research Consortium criteria, was also evaluated. RESULTS The cumulative incidence of DOCE did not differ between the BVS and EES or BMS groups either at 30 days (3.1% vs. 2.4%, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48 to 3.52], p = 0.593; vs. 2.8%, HR: 1.15 [95% CI: 0.44 to 2.30], p = 0.776, respectively) or at 1 year (4.1% vs. 4.1%, HR: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.23 to 4.32], p = 0.994; vs. 5.9%, HR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.13 to 1.88], p = 0.306, respectively). Definite/probable BVS thrombosis rate was numerically higher either at 30 days (2.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.059; vs. 1.0%, p = 0.324, respectively) or at 1 year (2.4% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.948; vs. 1.7%, p = 0.825, respectively), as compared with EES or BMS. CONCLUSIONS At 1-year follow-up, STEMI patients treated with BVS showed similar rates of DOCE compared with STEMI patients treated with EES or BMS, although rate of scaffolds thrombosis, mostly clustered in the early phase, was not negligible. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a prospective multicentre study ‘Prague 19’

Aims Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVSs) have been studied in chronic coronary artery disease, but not in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). This prospective multicentre study analysed the feasibility and safety of BVS implantation during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (p-PCI) in STEMI. Methods and results Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation became the default strategy for all consecutive STEMI patients between 15 December 2012 and 30 August 2013. A total of 142 patients underwent p-PCI; 41 of them (28.9%) fulfilled the inclusion/exclusion criteria for BVS implantation. The BVS device success was 98%, thrombolysis in myocardial infarction 3 flow was restored in 95% of patients, and acute scaffold recoil was 9.7%. An optical coherence tomography (OCT) substudy (21 patients) demonstrated excellent procedural results with only a 1.1% rate of scaffold strut malapposition. Edge dissections were present in a 38% of patients, but were small and clinically silent. Reference vessel diameter measured by quantitative coronary angiography was significantly lower than that measured by OCT by 0.29 (±0.56) mm, P = 0.028. Clinical outcomes were compared between BVS group and Control group; the latter was formed by patients who had implanted metallic stent and were in Killip Class I or II. Combined clinical endpoint was defined as death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Event-free survival was the same in both groups; 95% for BVS and 93% for Control group, P = 0.674. Conclusion Bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in acute STEMI is feasible and safe. The procedural results evaluated by angiography and OCT are excellent. The early clinical results are encouraging.

Role of Adding Spironolactone and Renal Denervation in True Resistant Hypertension: One-Year Outcomes of Randomized PRAGUE-15 Study.

This randomized, multicenter study compared the relative efficacy of renal denervation (RDN) versus pharmacotherapy alone in patients with true resistant hypertension and assessed the effect of spironolactone addition. We present here the 12-month data. A total of 106 patients with true resistant hypertension were enrolled in this study: 52 patients were randomized to RDN and 54 patients to the spironolactone addition, with baseline systolic blood pressure of 159±17 and 155±17 mm Hg and average number of drugs 5.1 and 5.4, respectively. Twelve-month results are available in 101 patients. The intention-to-treat analysis found a comparable mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure decline of 6.4 mm Hg, P=0.001 in RDN versus 8.2 mm Hg, P=0.002 in the pharmacotherapy group. Per-protocol analysis revealed a significant difference of 24-hour systolic blood pressure decline between complete RDN (6.3 mm Hg, P=0.004) and the subgroup where spironolactone was added, and this continued within the 12 months (15 mm Hg, P= 0.003). Renal artery computed tomography angiograms before and after 1 year post-RDN did not reveal any relevant changes. This study shows that over a period of 12 months, RDN is safe, with no serious side effects and no major changes in the renal arteries. RDN in the settings of true resistant hypertension with confirmed compliance is not superior to intensified pharmacological treatment. Spironolactone addition (if tolerated) seems to be more effective in blood pressure reduction.

Use, patient selection and outcomes of P2Y12 receptor inhibitor treatment in patients with STEMI based on contemporary European registries

AIMS Among acute coronary syndromes (ACS), ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has the most severe early clinical course. We aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety of P2Y12 receptor inhibitors in patients with STEMI based on the data from contemporary European ACS registries. METHODS AND RESULTS Twelve registries provided data in a systematic manner on outcomes in STEMI patients overall, and seven of these also provided data for P2Y12 receptor inhibitor-based dual antiplatelet therapy. The registries were heterogeneous in terms of site, patient, and treatment selection, as well as in definition of endpoints (e.g. bleeding events). All-cause death rates based on the data from 84 299 patients (9612 patients on prasugrel, 11 492 on ticagrelor, and 27 824 on clopidogrel) ranged between 0.49 and 6.68% in-hospital, between 3.07 and 7.95% at 30 days (reported in 6 registries), between 8.15 and 9.13% at 180 days, and between 2.41 and 9.58% at 1 year (5 registries). Major bleeding rates were 0.09-3.55% in-hospital (8 registries), 0.09-1.65% at 30 days, and 1.96% at 1 year (only 1 registry). Fatal/life-threatening bleeding was rare occurring between 0.08 and 0.13% in-hospital (4 registries) and 1.96% at 1 year (1 registry). CONCLUSIONS Real-world evidence from European contemporary registries shows that death, ischaemic events, and bleeding rates are lower than those reported in Phase III studies of P2Y12 inhibitors. Regarding individual P2Y12 inhibitors, patients on prasugrel, and, to a lesser degree, ticagrelor, had fewer ischaemic and bleeding events at all time points than clopidogrel-treated patients. These findings are partly related to the fact that the newer agents are used in younger and less ill patients.

Importance of thorough investigation of resistant hypertension before renal denervation: should compliance to treatment be evaluated systematically?

Catheter-based renal denervation (RD) has been introduced recently as a potentially effective invasive treatment of refractory hypertension. The proportion of patients with severe hypertension suitable for RD is not clear. The aim of this study was to identify what percentage of patients has truly resistant essential hypertension and are thus potentially eligible for RD. We investigated 205 consecutive patients referred to a university hypertension center for severe hypertension within 12 months. Ambulatory 24-h blood pressure (BP) monitoring (24 h ABPM), secondary hypertension screening and compliance to treatment testing (by use of plasma drug level measurements) were performed in all patients. Fifty-seven patients (27.8%) did not have truly resistant hypertension (RH) based on clinical BP. Among the remaining 122 patients (59.5%) with RH confirmed by 24 h ABPM, 50 patients (24.4% of the original cohort) had a secondary cause of hypertension and in 27 (13.2%) non-compliance to treatment was confirmed. Thus, only 45 patients (22%) had truly resistant essential hypertension and were considered for RD. Only one-third (n=15, 7.3% of the original cohort) was, however, finally referred for RD (14 were excluded due to contraindications for RD and 16 refused the invasive treatment). In conclusion, thorough examination of severe hypertension including 24 h ABPM, secondary hypertension exclusion and drug compliance testing before considering RD reveals that majority of these patients are not suitable for RD. Specifically, compliance to treatment testing should be mandatory in order to identify eligible candidates for RD.

Prognostic value of TNF-related apoptosis inducing ligand (TRAIL) in acute coronary syndrome patients.

Background Apoptosis plays an important role in the development of heart failure. The aim of the prospectively designed study was to assess whether the concentration of apoptotic markers apoptosis-stimulating fragment (Fas, CD95/APO-1) and tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis inducing ligand (TRAIL) can predict prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Methods The concentrations of soluble Fas and TRAIL were determined in 295 patients with acute coronary syndromes. The status of all patients was evaluated at 6 months. The primary goal was a composite end-point of death and hospitalization for heart failure. The secondary end-points were re-MI, death alone and stroke alone. Results During the median follow-up of 6 months, 26 patients experienced the composite end-point. Using multivariate logistic regression, the concentration of TRAIL was the strongest significant and independent predictor of composite end-point (OR 0.11 (95% CI 0.03–0.45), p = 0.002). Low concentration was associated with poor prognosis of patients. Other significant predictors of composite end-point were serum creatinine (OR 7.7 (95% CI 1.1–54.5, p = 0.041) and complete revascularization (OR 0.19 (95% CI 0.05–0.78, p = 0.02). Independent significant predictors of death in the multivariate analysis were the concentration of TRAIL (OR 0.053 (95% CI 0.004–0.744), p = 0.029), older age (OR 1.20 (95% CI 1.02–1.41, p = 0.026) and serum creatinine (OR 15.1 (95% CI 1.56–145.2), p = 0.0193). Re-MI or stroke could not be predicted by any combination of obtained parameters. Conclusions Low concentrations of soluble TRAIL represent a strong predictor of a poor prognosis in patients with acute coronary syndrome. The predictive value of TRAIL concentration is independent of age, ejection fraction, index peak troponin level, concentration of BNP or serum creatinine.

The incidence and outcomes of acute coronary syndromes in a central European country: Results of the CZECH-2 registry

BACKGROUND The incidence and treatment strategies of acute coronary syndrome (ACS) vary by region. Additionally, the clinical spectrum of ACS is changing and outcomes are improving. AIM We assessed the incidence, treatment strategies, and outcomes of ACS for a well-defined population within a well-established network of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) centers and non-PCI centers. METHODS The CZECH-2 registry included 1221 consecutive patients (mean age: 68 ± 13 years; 63.4% males) admitted for suspected ACS to 32 hospitals (including 4 PCI centers) within four Czech counties (total population: 2,370,841 inhabitants) during a 2-month period. RESULTS The estimated incidence of confirmed ACS was 2,149 cases/million/year. In 374 (31%) patients, ACS was ruled out during the hospital stay. Coronary angiography (CAG) was performed in 60% of the patients overall and PCI was performed in 59% of the confirmed ACS patients. Killip classifications II-IV on admission were more common in patients with final diagnosis of non ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) than ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (37.1% vs. 22.8%; p<0.001). The 30-day mortality rate was 5.7% for the whole study group, 7.3% for STEMI patients, 8.4% for NSTEMI patients, and 1.6% for patients with unstable angina pectoris (UAP), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Almost one-third of the patients admitted for suspected ACS had a different final diagnosis. Among those with confirmed ACS, the use of CAG, PCI, CABG, and effective medications is rational. Outcome in NSTEMI patients was equivalent to those in STEMI patients, mainly due to the high-risk population in this group.

Long-term follow-up of percutaneous coronary intervention of unprotected left main lesions with drug eluting stents: predictors of clinical outcome.

AIMS To evaluate the long-term follow-up of drug-eluting stents (DES) in the treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA). METHODS AND RESULTS One hundred and forty-eight patients (mean age 71 +/- 10 years) with ULMCA stenoses underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with DES. Mean ejection fraction (EF) was 63 +/- 13% and distal ULMCA was involved in 63.5% of cases. In-hospital outcome showed one intra-procedural death, no stent thrombosis and 2% non Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI). Clinical follow-up was available in all patients (874 +/- 382 days): 10.1% of them had died, 8.8% had target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and 4.1% experienced MI. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) occurred in 20.3%. Mortality predictors were EF < or = 55% (OR 3.6, 95%-C.I. 1.3-10.1, p = 0.016) and EuroSCORE > or = 6 (OR 3.9, 95%-CI 1.1-14.1, p = 0.037). TLR predictors were distal lesion (OR 8.5, 95%-CI 1.1-15, p = 0.041) and age < 64 years (OR 3.1, 95%-CI 1-9, p = 0.042). MACE predictor was EF < or = 55% (OR 2.4, 95%-CI 1.1-5.2, p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS ULMCA stenting with DES is safe, with favourable in-hospital outcome. Long-term results are acceptable with a mortality rate of 10%, a TLR rate of 9%, and a MACE rate of 20%. Low EF and high EuroSCORE predict mortality, while younger age and distal lesions predict TLR. Low EF also predicts MACE.

ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold vs. everolimus-eluting metallic stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (BVS EXAMINATION study): 2-Year results from a propensity score matched comparison

Please cite this article as: Brugaletta Salvatore, Gori Tommaso, Low Adrian F., Tousek Petr, Pinar Eduardo, Gomez-Lara Josep, Ortega-Paz Luis, Schulz Eberhard, Chan Mark Y., Kocka Viktor, Hurtado Jose, Gomez-Hospital Joan Antoni, Giacchi Giuseppe, Münzel Thomas, Lee Chi-Hang, Cequier Angel, Valdés Mariano, Widimsky Petr, Serruys Patrick W., Sabaté Manel, ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold vs. everolimuseluting metallic stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (BVS EXAMINATION study): 2-Year results from a propensity score matched comparison, International Journal of Cardiology (2016), doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2016.04.016