Ricardo O. Escarcega

The impact of proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 serine protease inhibitors on lipid levels and outcomes in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia: a network meta-analysis.

AIMS We performed a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia to compare the impact of proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 serine protease (PCSK9) inhibitors with placebo and ezetimibe on lipid levels and outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for RCTs assessing PCSK9 inhibitors vs. other therapies in patients with primary hypercholesterolaemia. Network meta-analysis with both a frequentist approach and a Bayesian framework was performed to directly and indirectly compare PCSK9 inhibition on lipid levels with ezetimibe and placebo. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (OR [95% CIs]) were generated with random-effects models to compare outcomes. Our meta-analysis included 17 RCTs with 13 083 patients that were randomized to PCSK9 inhibitors (n = 8250), placebo (n = 3957), ezetimibe (n = 846), or PCSK9 inhibitors and ezetimibe (n = 30). The mean age was 59 ± 10, 52% were male, 34% had coronary artery disease, 51% had hypertension, 19% had diabetes mellitus, baseline LDL of 122 ± 36 mg/dL, total cholesterol of 199 ± 39 mg/dL, and HDL of 51 ± 14 mg/dL. inhibitors significantly reduced LDL cholesterol by 57% relative to placebo (P < 0.001) and 36.1% relative to ezetimibe (P < 0.001). Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 serine protease inhibitors reduced the incidence of all-cause mortality [OR 0.43 (95% CI 0.22-0.82), P = 0.01] but was associated with an increased incidence of neurocognitive adverse events [OR 2.34 (95% CI 1.11-4.93), I(2) = 4%, P = 0.02] when compared with placebo. CONCLUSION Proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 serine protease inhibition significantly improved lipid profiles and reduced the incidence of all-cause mortality compared with placebo but had a higher rate of neurocognitive adverse events. Thus, PCSK9 inhibitor therapy may serve as an alternative for patients with statin intolerance and for those who do not respond to other lipid reduction therapy.

Scaffold Thrombosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to determine the risk of scaffold thrombosis (ST) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with placement of an ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. BACKGROUND PCI with BVS placement holds great potential, but concern has recently been raised regarding the risk of ST. METHODS MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and meeting abstracts were searched for all studies that included outcomes data for patients after PCI with BVS placement. For studies comparing BVSs with drug-eluting stents (DES), pooled estimates of outcomes, presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were generated with random-effects models. RESULTS Our analysis included 10,510 patients (8,351 with a BVS and 2,159 with DES) with a follow-up of 6.4 ± 5.1 months and 60 ± 11 years of age; 78% were male, 36% had stable angina, and 59% had acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Among patients with a BVS, cardiovascular death occurred in 0.6%, myocardial infarction (MI) in 2.1%, target lesion revascularization in 2.0%, and definite/probable ST in 1.2% of patients. Of BVS patients, 0.27% had acute ST and 0.57% had subacute ST. Meta-analysis demonstrated that patients who received a BVS were at a higher risk of MI (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.31 to 3.22, p = 0.002) and definite/probable ST (OR: 2.06, 95% CI: 1.07 to 3.98, p = 0.03) compared with patients who received DES, whereas there was a trend toward decreased all-cause mortality with a BVS (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.15 to 1.06, p = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS Patients undergoing PCI with a BVS had increased definite/probable ST and MI during follow-up compared with DES. Further studies with long-term follow-up are needed to assess the risk of ST with a BVS.

Comparison of conventional and high-sensitivity troponin in patients with chest pain: A collaborative meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Multiple studies have evaluated the diagnostic and prognostic performance of conventional troponin (cTn) and high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn). We performed a collaborative meta-analysis comparing cTn and hs-cTn for diagnosis of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and assessment of prognosis in patients with chest pain. METHODS MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched for studies assessing both cTn and hs-cTn in patients with chest pain. Study authors were contacted and many provided previously unpublished data. RESULTS From 17 included studies, there were 8,644 patients. Compared with baseline cTn, baseline hs-cTn had significantly greater sensitivity (0.884 vs 0.749, P < .001) and negative predictive value (NPV; 0.964 vs 0.935, P < .001), whereas specificity (0.816 vs 0.938, P < .001) and positive predictive value (0.558 vs 0.759, P < .001) were significantly reduced. Based on summary receiver operating characteristic curves, test performance for the diagnosis of AMI was not significantly different between baseline cTn and hs-cTn (0.90 [95% CI 0.85-0.95] vs 0.92 [95% CI 0.90-0.94]). In a subanalysis of 6 studies that alternatively defined AMI based on hs-cTn, cTn had lower sensitivity (0.666, P < .001) and NPV (0.906, P < .001). Elevation of baseline hs-cTn, but negative baseline cTn, was associated with increased risk of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction during follow-up (P < .001) compared with both negative. CONCLUSION High-sensitivity troponin has significantly greater early sensitivity and NPV for the diagnosis of AMI at the cost of specificity and positive predictive value, which may enable early rule in/out of AMI in patients with chest pain. Baseline hs-cTn elevation in the setting of negative cTn is also associated with increased nonfatal myocardial infarction or death during follow-up.

Prevalence and Impact of Pulmonary Hypertension on Patients With Aortic Stenosis Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement

Limited amount of data suggest that patients with aortic stenosis and pulmonary hypertension (PH) who undergo transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) experience decrease in PH postprocedure. Inconsistent use of systolic pulmonary artery pressure cut-off values in previous studies limits our ability to draw meaningful conclusions regarding the prognostic role of PH in assessment of TAVR candidates. A total of 415 consecutive patients who underwent TAVR were included in the present study. Two groups were compared based on receiver-operating characteristics curve analysis for the best SPAP value to predict outcome, yielding 2 study groups of no/mild PH (≤50 mm Hg; n = 172, 41%) versus moderate/severe PH (>50 mm Hg; n = 243, 59%). Demographics and co-morbidities were comparable between the 2 groups; however, right-sided cardiac failure (35% vs 19.8%, p = 0.02) and mitral regurgitation (18.4% vs 8.6%, p = 0.007) were more frequent in patients with moderate/severe PH. Procedural characteristics and complications were comparable between the groups. Although there was an early overall decrease in SPAP postprocedure, only 26% of moderate/severe patients with PH experienced a significant decrease in SPAP (>10 mm Hg). The 30-day (14.5% vs 7.4%, p = 0.02) and 1-year mortality (30.8% vs 21%, p = 0.02) was higher in moderate/severe patients with PH. In multivariate analysis, systolic pulmonary artery pressure and chronic lung disease were identified as independent predictors for mortality at 1 year. PH is a frequent co-morbidity in patients with severe aortic stenosis who underwent TAVR. Significantly elevated pulmonary artery pressures at baseline may serve as a poor prognostic factor when performing preprocedural assessment of the patients.

Meta-analysis of direct and indirect comparison of ticagrelor and prasugrel effects on platelet reactivity.

Studies have linked on-treatment platelet reactivity (PR) to adverse clinical outcomes. Because new P2Y12 inhibitors (prasugrel and ticagrelor) have been predominantly tested against clopidogrel, data on pharmacodynamic comparisons between these 2 drugs are scarce. We compared ticagrelor with prasugrel in a network meta-analysis. PubMed, Cochrane, and EMBASE were searched for studies assessing PR in patients with coronary artery disease treated with ticagrelor or prasugrel. All studies using prasugrel and/or ticagrelor providing platelet function measurement data using VerifyNow P2Y12 reaction units (PRUs), platelet reactivity index (PRI) vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein phosphorylation, or maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) by light transmission aggregometry were considered eligible. Mixed treatment comparison models directly compared ticagrelor and prasugrel and indirectly compared them using clopidogrel as a comparator with data presented as mean difference (95% confidence interval). Data were extracted from 29 studies, including 5,395 patients. Compared with clopidogrel 75 mg, both prasugrel 10 mg and ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily were associated with lower PRU (mean difference -117 [-134.1, -100.5] and -159.7 [-182.6, -136.6], respectively), a lower PRI (-24.2 [-28.2, -20.3] and -33.6 [-39.9, -27.6], respectively), and lower MPA (-11.8 [-17, -6.3] and -20.7 [-28.5, -12.8], respectively). Similar results were obtained with clopidogrel 150 mg. Ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily was associated with lower PRU (-42.5 [-62.9, -21.9]), lower PRI (-9.3 [-15.6, -3.5]), and lower MPA (-8.9 [-16.4, -1.2]) compared with prasugrel 10 mg. In conclusion, our meta-analysis suggests that ticagrelor achieved significantly lower on-treatment PR compared with prasugrel, with both being superior to clopidogrel standard or high dose.

Clinical Presentation and Outcomes of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis Across 3-Stent Generations

Background—Clinical presentation of bare metal stent in-stent restenosis (ISR) in patients undergoing target lesion revascularization is well characterized and negatively affects on outcomes, whereas the presentation and outcomes of first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) remains under-reported. Methods and Results—The study included 909 patients (1077 ISR lesions) distributed as follows: bare metal stent (n=388), first-generation DES (n=425), and second-generation DES (n=96), categorized into acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or non-ACS presentation mode at the time of first target lesion revascularization. ACS was further classified as myocardial infarction (MI) and unstable angina. For bare metal stent, first-generation DES and second-generation DES, ACS was the clinical presentation in 67.8%, 71.0%, and 66.7% of patients, respectively (P=0.470), whereas MI occurred in 10.6%, 10.1%, and 5.2% of patients, respectively (P=0.273). The correlates for MI as ISR presentation were current smokers (odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.78–5.13; P<0.001), and chronic renal failure (odds ratio, 2.73; 95% CI, 1.60–4.70; P<0.001), with a protective trend for the second-generation DES ISR (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.12–1.03; P=0.060). ACS presentations had an independent effect on major adverse cardiac events (death, MI, and re-target lesion revascularization) at 6 months (MI versus non-ACS: adjusted hazard ratio, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.84–8.94; P<0.001; unstable angina versus non-ACS: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.01–3.87; P=0.046). Conclusions—ISR clinical presentation is similar irrespective of stent type. MI as ISR presentation seems to be associated with patient and not device-related factors. ACS as ISR presentation has an independent effect on major adverse cardiac events, suggesting that ISR remains a hazard and should be minimized.

Comparison of Watchman device with new oral anti-coagulants in patients with atrial fibrillation: A network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND New oral anticoagulants (NOAC) and the Watchman device represent an alternative to warfarin for stroke prophylaxis in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients. However, no studies compare these new treatments. We performed a network meta-analysis to indirectly compare Watchman and NOACs among AF patients. METHODS We performed a MEDLINE search for studies comparing warfarin with NOACs (dabigatran, rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban) or Watchman in AF patients with reported clinical outcomes. Mixed treatment comparison model generation was performed to directly and indirectly compare NOACs, warfarin and Watchman. RESULTS 14 studies with 246,005 patients were included in the analysis, among which 124,823 were treated with warfarin, 120,450 were treated with NOACs and 732 had Watchman implanted. Mean age was 72 ± 9 years, 53% were male, and mean CHADS2 score was 2.1 ± 1.6. Both NOACs and Watchman were superior to warfarin in hemorrhagic stroke prevention (OR = 0.46 [0.30-0.82] and OR = 0.21 [0.05-0.99], respectively). NOACs significantly reduced total stroke (OR = 0.78 [0.58-0.96]) and major bleeding (OR = 0.78 [0.65-0.91]) compared with warfarin. Indirect comparison between NOAC and Watchman revealed no significant differences in outcomes, though there was a trend toward higher rates of ischemic stroke with Watchman compared with NOAC (OR 2.60 [0.60-13.96]) with the opposite findings with hemorrhagic stroke (OR = 0.44 [0.09-2.14]). CONCLUSIONS NOAC therapy was superior to warfarin for multiple outcomes while Watchman reduced hemorrhagic stroke. Further studies are needed to assess Watchman versus NOAC to optimize therapy for stroke prevention in AF patients.

Body mass index association with survival in severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Conflicting results have been reported regarding impact of body mass index (BMI) on outcome of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients. This study evaluates the impact of BMI on 1 year mortality in patients undergoing TAVR via the transfemoral (TF) access.

Accelerated atherosclerosis in systemic lupus erythematosus: perspectives towards decreasing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality

Autoimmune diseases are associated with higher rates of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, primarily secondary to accelerated atherosclerosis. This phenomenon can be attributed to traditional risk factors for atherosclerosis and the use of specific drugs, such as corticosteroids, but also might be the result of other inflammatory mechanisms that are aggravated in autoimmune diseases. 1 Mounting evidence from a growing body of epidemiological studies demonstrate that patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) are at increased risk for the development of premature cardiovascular disease (CVD). Atherosclerosis is the most common cardiac abnormality. Although lesions of the valves, myocardium and pericarditis may all occur, cardiac manifestations are often mild and asymptomatic, and they can frequently be recognized by echocardiography and other noninvasive tests. 2 Coronary artery disease (CAD) is described in SLE patients with a prevalence ranging from 6 to 10%, and the risk of developing this manifestation is four to eight times higher than normal. 3 Moreover, acute myocardial infarction is the cause of death in 3–25% of SLE patients in different reports. 4

Bivalirudin versus heparin for percutaneous coronary intervention: an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS Given controversy over anticoagulation regimens for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), we performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to compare bivalirudin versus heparin. METHODS AND RESULTS Medline/Pubmed and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched for all RCTs comparing bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (GPI) use versus heparin with provisional or routine GPI use for PCI. Pooled estimates of 30day outcomes, presented as risk ratios (RR) [95% confidence intervals], were generated with random-effect models. Our analysis included 14 studies with 30,446 patients that were randomized to bivalirudin with provisional GPI use (n=14,869) versus heparin with provisional (n=6451) or routine GPI use (n=9126). There was no significant difference between anticoagulation with bivalirudin compared with heparin for death (RR 0.95 [0.78-1.14]) or myocardial infarction (RR 1.10 [0.97-1.25]). Early stent thrombosis was significantly greater with bivalirudin compared with heparin (RR 1.61 [1.18-2.20], p=0.003), especially in patients undergoing primary PCI (2.15 [1.15-4.03], p=0.02). However, bivalirudin reduced the risk of major bleeding (RR 0.59 [0.51-0.70], p<0.0001) and TIMI major bleeding (RR 0.59 [0.48-0.72], p<0.0001) compared with heparin. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated that bleeding risk with use of heparin significantly increases with increasing GPI use (p=0.02). CONCLUSION Meta-analysis of 14 RCTs with 30,446 patients demonstrated that bivalirudin is associated with higher risk of stent thrombosis but lower risk of major bleeding compared with heparin.