Lansky, Alexandra J.

Abstract Background Patients with ischemia and nonobstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) suffer from a broad range of anginal symptoms that may differ depending on the biologic sex of the patient, the underlying coronary vasomotor disorder, or the type of presentation. Purpose We sought to characterize the symptom description and angina classification of patients referred for invasive coronary function testing (CFT) in the DISCOVER INOCA multicenter registry, stratified by type of presentation (stable vs unstable), biologic sex, and underlying diagnosis, including coronary microvascular dysfunction (CMD), vasospastic angina (VSA), or other disorders such as symptomatic myocardial bridging. Methods DISCOVER INOCA is a prospective, multicenter registry in the United States that includes patients who are referred for clinically indicated coronary angiography and found to have INOCA. All patients underwent protocol-guided angiography, acetylcholine provocation, coronary thermodilution, and intravascular imaging. Symptom characteristics were compared between groups. Results From September 2022 until February 2024, 104 patients were enrolled, 78% were female, and mean age was 57 ± 11 years. The post-procedure diagnosis was CMD in 19%, VSA in 41%, a mixed syndrome in 15%, or other diagnosis in 26%. The average coronary flow reserve (CFR) was 2.9 ± 1.1 in the CMD group and 5.3 ± 3.0 in the VSA group, (p < 0.001). 53% of patients presented with stable angina and 47% with unstable or progressive symptoms. Symptoms included chest pain (89%), chest tightness (42%), chest pressure (39%), shortness of breath (53%), and fatigue (16%), and no significant differences were reported when stratified by diagnostic phenotype. Female patients were more likely to report arm/neck/back/jaw pain (25% vs 5% in men, p = 0.038). Symptom triggers included exertion/activity in 73%, emotional stress in 12%, and resting symptoms in 58%. In female patients 4% reported catamenial symptoms. Of patients with stable angina, the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Angina Classification was Grade I in 25%, Grade II in 52%, Grade III in 21%, and Grade IV in 2%. In patients with unstable angina, the Braunwald Angina Classification was Class I in 9%, Class II in 73%, and Class III in 18%. Conclusions Patients with INOCA referred for clinically indicated coronary angiography and CFT were predominantly female and most commonly reported chest pain as a presenting symptom. Female patients were more likely to report arm/neck/back/jaw pain than male patients. Over half of patients reported resting symptoms with no differences between the diagnostic phenotypes (CMD, VSA, or other). The CCS and Braunwald angina classification indicated that most patients had moderate intensity symptoms. Patient-reported outcome measures will be used to systematically categorize the symptom burden in these patients.

BACKGROUND: Following regulatory approval, medical devices may be used “off-label.” Patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure is indicated to reduce recurrent stroke but has been proposed for other indications, including migraine, transient ischemic attack, and diving decompression illness. We sought to evaluate PFO closure rates and indications relative to the timing of regulatory approval and publication of key randomized trials. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the OptumLabs Data Warehouse of US commercial insurance enrollees from 2006 to 2019. We quantified PFO closure among individuals with ≥2 years of preprocedure coverage to establish indications, classified hierarchically as stroke/systemic embolism, migraine, transient ischemia attack, or other. RESULTS: We identified 5315 patients undergoing PFO closure (51.8% female, 29.2%≥60 years old), which increased from 4.75 per 100 000 person-years in 2006 to 6.60 per 100 000 person-years in 2019. Patients aged ≥60 years accounted for 29.2% of closures. Procedure volumes corresponded weakly with supportive clinical publications and device approval. Among patients with PFO closure, 58.6% underwent closure for stroke/systemic embolism, 10.2% for transient ischemia attack, 8.8% for migraine, and 22.4% for other indications; 17.6% of patients had atrial fibrillation at baseline; and 11.9% developed atrial fibrillation postprocedure. Those aged ≥60 years and male were less likely to undergo closure for migraine than stroke/systemic embolism. CONCLUSIONS: From 2006 to 2019, PFO closure use was consistently low and corresponded weakly with clinical trial publications and regulatory status. Nearly half of patients underwent PFO closure for indications unapproved by the Food and Drug Administration. Regulators and payers should coordinate mechanisms to promote utilization for approved indications to ensure patient safety and should facilitate clinical trials for other possible indications.

Background: In the ACUITY Trial, patients (pts) with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) had significantly higher rates of ischemic events and major bleeding compared to pts without CRI at 30 days. Bivalirudin (Biv) monotherapy provided similar protection from ischemic events but with significantly less bleeding compared to heparin + a GPIIb/IIIa inhibitor (Hep+GPI). The impact of a Biv alone strategy on one year mortality is unknown. Methods: Pts with moderate and high risk acute coronary syndromes (ACS) were randomized to Hep + GPI, Biv + GPI, or Biv monotherapy. CRI was defined as baseline creatinine clearance (CrCl) <60 mL/min. We evaluated the impact of CRI and antithrombotic strategy on composite ischemia (death, MI, or revascularization) and mortality at one year. Results: Of the pts enrolled, 12,933 had baseline CrCl data: 2468 (19.1%) pts had CrCl ≥60 mL/min and 10,465 (80.9%) pts had CrCl <60 mL/min. Rates of major bleeding at 30 days in pts with CRI were significantly lower with Biv alone vs Hep+GPI (6.2% vs 9.8%, p<0.01). Pts with CRI had higher mortality at one year compared to those without CRI (8.7% vs 3.0%, p<0.001). There was no difference in composite ischemia for pts who received Biv monotherapy vs Hep + GPI (23.0% vs 21.4%, p=0.10). One year mortality by antithrombin strategy is shown in the Figure . Conclusions: CRI in pts with ACS is associated with higher rates of one year mortality. In these high risk pts, Biv monotherapy improved early clinical outcomes compared to Hep + GPI by reducing major bleeding, and resulted in similar rates of one year mortality. Cumulative Mortality at One Year, Patients with CRI

Aims: Establishing epicardial flow with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is necessary but not sufficient to ensure nutritive myocardial reperfusion. We evaluated whether adding myocardial blush grade (MBG) and quantitative reperfusion ventricular arrhythmia “bursts” (VABs) surrogates provide a more informative biosignature of optimal reperfusion in patients with Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 3 flow and ST-segment recovery (STR). Methods and results: Anterior STEMI patients with final TIMI 3 flow had protocol-blinded analyses of simultaneous MBG, continuous 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG) STR, Holter VABs, and day 5–14 SPECT imaging infarct size (IS) assessments. Over 20 million cardiac cycles from >4500 h of continuous ECG monitoring in subjects with STR were obtained. IS and clinical outcomes were examined in patients stratified by MBG and VABs. VABs occurred in 51% (79/154) of subjects. Microcirculation (MBG 2/3) was restored in 75% (115/154) of subjects, of whom 53% (61/115) had VABs. No VABs were observed in subjects without microvascular flow (MBG of 0). Of 115 patients with TIMI 3 flow, STR, and MBG 2/3, those with VABs had significantly larger IS (median: 23.0% vs 6.0%, p=0.001). Multivariable analysis identified reperfusion VABs as a factor significantly associated with larger IS ( p=0.015). Conclusions: Despite restoration of normal epicardial flow, open microcirculation, and STR, concomitant VABs are associated with larger myocardial IS, possibly reflecting myocellular injury in reperfusion settings. Combining angiographic and ECG parameters of epicardial, microvascular, and cellular response to STEMI intervention provides a more predictive “biosignature” of optimal reperfusion than do single surrogate markers.

Background— The clinical significance of incomplete coronary revascularization (ICR) after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes is unknown. Methods and Results— We performed quantitative angiography of the entire coronary tree in 2954 patients with acute coronary syndromes in the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial. ICR was variably defined if any lesion with diameter stenosis (DS) cutoffs ranging from ≥30% to ≥70% with reference vessel diameter ≥2.0 mm remained after percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome was 1-year composite rate of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven unplanned revascularization). With the use of DS cutoffs ≥30%, ≥40%, ≥50%, ≥60%, and ≥70%, the prevalence of ICR after percutaneous coronary intervention was 75%, 55%, 37%, 25%, and 17%, respectively. The 1-year major adverse cardiac event rate was increased among patients with ICR using all of the DS cutoffs. ICR (≥50% DS) was associated with higher 1-year rates of myocardial infarction (12.0% versus 8.2%; hazard ratio, 1.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.18–1.89; P =0.0007) and ischemia-driven unplanned revascularization (15.7% versus 10.2%; hazard ratio, 1.58; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–1.96; P <0.0001), with a trend toward increased mortality (3.1% versus 2.2%; hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.90–2.27; P =0.13). By multivariable analysis, ICR (≥50% DS) was an independent predictor of 1-year major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio, 1.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.12–1.64; P =0.002). The impact of ICR on major adverse cardiac events was similar regardless of chronic total occlusion presence, but it was more pronounced with a greater number of nonrevascularized lesions. Conclusions— Depending on the threshold of percent DS, ICR was present in 17% to 75% of patients with acute coronary syndromes after percutaneous coronary intervention. Regardless of the threshold, ICR was strongly associated with 1-year myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven unplanned revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00093158.

Background— Although 192 Ir intracoronary brachytherapy has been demonstrated to dramatically reduce the recurrence of in-stent restenosis, up to 24% of these patients will still require repeat target-vessel revascularization. The short- and long-term outcomes of repeat percutaneous intervention in this population have not been characterized. Methods and Results— Analysis was performed of all patients enrolled in the GAMMA-I and GAMMA-II brachytherapy trials who underwent repeat percutaneous target lesion revascularization (TLR) because of restenosis. Subjects were divided into 2 cohorts: those who had received 192 Ir brachytherapy and those randomized to placebo. Forty-five (17.6%) of a total of 256 patients whose index treatment was intracoronary radiation therapy and 36 (29.8%) of 121 patients whose index treatment was placebo required repeat percutaneous TLR. The mean time to this first TLR was 295±206 days in the irradiated group and 202±167 days in the placebo group ( P =0.03). Acute procedural success occurred in 100% of irradiated patients and 94% of placebo controls ( P =0.19). After the first TLR, a subsequent TLR was required in 15 (33.3%) of 45 brachytherapy patients versus 17 (47.2%) of 36 placebo failure patients ( P =0.26). There was no significant difference in time to second TLR between the 2 groups. Other long-term major adverse event rates in both groups were comparable to those of other contemporary angioplasty/stenting series. Conclusions— In those patients who “fail” 192 Ir intracoronary brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis, treatment with 192 Ir delays the time to first TLR. Additionally, repeat percutaneous intervention in these patients is safe and efficacious in the short term, with acceptable long-term results.