Tanguay, Jean‐François

Introduction . The addition of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to the treatment options for patients with atherothrombotic (AT) coronary heart disease (CHD) has resulted in considerable debate regarding its overall clinical benefit. Although rates of “hard” clinical endpoints have been used as measures of both clinical outcome and disease burden, a comprehensive, clinically relevant measure of disease burden in the general population of patients undergoing PCI is lacking. Hypothesis . A comprehensive measure of AT clinical burden in patients undergoing PCI can be used to detect the qualitative and quantitative impact of PCI over time. Methods . Four distinct cohorts (Waves) of ~ 2,000 patients each participating in the NHLBI Dynamic Registry beginning in 1997 (Wave 1) and terminating in 2005 (Wave 4) and surviving to hospital discharge comprise the study population (n= 7,750). A composite clincally relevant measure of AT disease burden over the year following PCI was defined as: any death, myocardial infarction (MI), hospitalization for recurrent angina (A) or congestive heart failure (HF), stroke, any repeat PCI or coronary bypass surgery. Cumulative event rates, expressed as the presence of any of the above-cited components by one year, were calculated using Kaplan-Meier statistics. Comparison of rates across Waves was accomplished using Cochran- Mantel-Haenszel method. Results. see Table Exclusion of patients requiring PCI for restenosis did not substantially change the overall AT burden. Conclusion. There was a statistically significant decrease in AT disease burden over the time studied. However, the burden of disease in patients undergoing PCI remains substantial for 25% of patients. This measure of AT burden may be of clinical value in assessing the contribution of PCI to patient outcomes and strongly supports more comprehensive treatment strategies for patients following PCI. Component and composite rates at one year

A growing number of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation also have atrial fibrillation. This poses challenges for their optimal antithrombotic management because patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI require oral anticoagulation for the prevention of cardiac thromboembolism and dual antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of coronary thrombotic complications. The combination of oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy substantially increases the risk of bleeding. Over the last decade, a series of North American Consensus Statements on the Management of Antithrombotic Therapy in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention have been reported. Since the last update in 2018, several pivotal clinical trials in the field have been published. This document provides a focused updated of the 2018 recommendations. The group recommends that in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing PCI, a non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant is the oral anticoagulation of choice. Dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and a P2Y 12 inhibitor should be given to all patients during the peri-PCI period (during inpatient stay, until time of discharge, up to 1 week after PCI, at the discretion of the treating physician), after which the default strategy is to stop aspirin and continue treatment with a P2Y 12 inhibitor, preferably clopidogrel, in combination with a non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant (ie, double therapy). In patients at increased thrombotic risk who have an acceptable risk of bleeding, it is reasonable to continue aspirin (ie, triple therapy) for up to 1 month. Double therapy should be given for 6 to 12 months with the actual duration depending on the ischemic and bleeding risk profile of the patient, after which patients should discontinue antiplatelet therapy and receive oral anticoagulation alone.

The optimal antithrombotic treatment regimen for patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation represents a challenge in clinical practice. In 2016, an updated opinion of selected experts from the United States and Canada on the treatment of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention was reported. After the 2016 North American consensus statement on the management of antithrombotic therapy in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, results of pivotal clinical trials assessing the type of oral anticoagulant agent and the duration of antiplatelet treatment have been published. On the basis of these results, this focused update on the antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention recommends that a non–vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulant be preferred over a vitamin K antagonist as the oral anticoagulant of choice. Moreover, a double-therapy regimen (oral anticoagulant plus single antiplatelet therapy with a P2Y 12 inhibitor) by the time of hospital discharge should be considered for most patients, whereas extending the use of aspirin beyond hospital discharge (ie, triple therapy) should be considered only for selected patients at high ischemic/thrombotic and low bleeding risks and for a limited period of time. The present document provides a focused updated on the rationale for the new expert consensus–derived recommendations on the antithrombotic management of patients with atrial fibrillation treated with oral anticoagulation undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background The Effects of the P‐Selectin Antagonist Inclacumab on Myocardial Damage After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Non‐ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction ( SELECT ‐ ACS ) trial suggested beneficial effects of inclacumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against P‐selectin, on periprocedural myocardial damage. This study evaluated the effect of inclacumab on myocardial damage according to varying time intervals between study drug infusion and percutaneous coronary intervention ( PCI ). Methods and Results Patients (n=544) enrolled in the SELECT ‐ ACS trial and randomized to receive 1 infusion of placebo or inclacumab (5 or 20 mg/kg, administered between 1 and 24 hours before PCI ) were divided according to the time interval between study drug infusion and PCI . The primary end point was the change in troponin I from baseline at 16 and 24 hours after PCI . In patients receiving inclacumab 20 mg/kg with a short (less than median) time interval between infusion and PCI , placebo‐adjusted geometric mean percent changes in troponin I, creatine kinase–myocardial band, and peak troponin I at 24 hours were −45.6% ( P =0.005), −30.7% ( P =0.01), and −37.3% ( P =0.02), respectively. No significant changes were observed in patients with a long (greater than median) time interval between infusion and PCI . Placebo‐adjusted geometric mean percent changes in troponin I and creatine kinase–myocardial band were −43.5% ( P =0.02) and −26.0% ( P =0.07), respectively, when inclacumab 20 mg/kg was administered between 1 and 3 hours before PCI , whereas the drug had no effect with longer intervals. Conclusions Inclacumab 20 mg/kg significantly reduces myocardial damage after PCI in patients with non– ST ‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, and benefits are larger when the infusion is administered <3 hours before PCI . Clinical Trial Registration URL : http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT 01327183.