Citations

Background: Prior studies have reported conflicting results of persistent iatrogenic atrial septal defect (iASD) and its impact following a transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) procedure. This study aims to evaluate the incidence of iASD and its clinical and hemodynamic impact after a TEER. Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent a TEER procedure from June 2014 to September 2020 at the Mayo Clinic were identified. The presence of iASD was retrospectively identified on post-procedure transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) to group patients into an iASD+ group and an iASD− group for comparison of prognosis and cardiac function. Results: A total of 316 patients were included; the mean age was 79.1 ± 9.1 years, and 67.7% were male. Persistent iASD was diagnosed in 108 (34.2%) patients. There was no difference concerning all-cause mortality, heart failure hospitalization, and stroke/TIA between groups at follow-up (median follow-up of 9 months). Post-procedure TTE demonstrated no differences regarding right ventricle (RV) and left ventricle (LV) dimensions and function, including TAPSE (15.2 ± 4.6 vs. 15.4 ± 5.5 mm, p = 0.875), and LV ejection fraction (51.1 ± 14.0% vs. 51.3 ± 13.9%, p = 0.933). However, patients with iASD had higher RV systolic pressure (48.7 ± 14.4 vs. 45.5 ± 14.5 mmHg, p = 0.042) compared with patients without iASD. Conclusion: Notwithstanding higher RV pressures, patients with persistent iASD had no hemodynamic compromise and an equal prognosis compared with those without a residual atrial defect after a TEER procedure. These findings support the mid-term safety of procedures in which an interatrial defect needs to be created and would argue against the need for interventional closure.

AbstractBackgroundThe functional lumen imaging probe (FLIP) evaluates esophagogastric junction (EGJ) opening and esophageal contractility. Both post hoc and real‐time analyses are possible, but reproducibility and reliability of analysis remain undefined. This study assesses inter‐ and intra‐rater agreement of normative FLIP measurements among novice and experienced users.MethodsEight motility experts from different institutions independently evaluated de‐identified video recordings from 27 asymptomatic healthy subjects using FLIP. Interpretation methods simulating a post‐procedure and a live procedure setting were tested. Novice FLIP users (n = 3) received training prior to post‐procedure interpretation. Experienced FLIP users (n = 5) interpreted using both methods. Users recorded maximum EGJ and distal esophageal body diameter, distensive pressure, and EGJ distensibility index (EGJ‐DI), at balloon fill volumes of 50‐, 60‐, and 70 ml, as well as repetitive antegrade contractions (RACs). Inter‐ and intra‐rater agreements of diameters, distensive pressure and EGJ‐DI were assessed by intra‐class correlation coefficient (ICC) and Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC). Percentage agreement evaluated inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability for RACs.Key ResultsNovice and experienced users acquired normative FLIP metrics. Good‐to‐excellent inter‐ and intra‐rater reliability were achieved for all variables at 60 ml balloon fill volumes. Median parameters at 60 ml balloon fill volume were as follows: EGJ‐DI 5.5 mm2/mmHg, maximum EGJ diameter 18.6 mm, distensive pressure at maximum EGJ diameter 48.1 mmHg, and distal esophageal body diameter 19.5 mm.Conclusions and InferencesNormative FLIP parameters can be reliably extracted from FLIP videos using both real‐time and post hoc analyses, with high reliability between experienced and novice users.

INTRODUCTION: The periprocedural management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) using a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) undergoing elective gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopic procedure remains uncertain. We investigated the safety of a standardized periprocedural DOAC management strategy. METHODS: The Periprocedural Anticoagulation Use for Surgery Evaluation cohort study enrolled adult patients receiving a DOAC (apixaban, rivaroxaban, or dabigatran) for AF scheduled for an elective procedure or surgery. This analysis addresses patients undergoing digestive endoscopy. Standardized periprocedural management consisted of DOAC interruption 1 day preendoscopy with resumption 1 day after procedure at low-moderate risk of bleeding or 2 days in case of a high bleeding risk. Thirty-day outcomes included GI bleeding, thromboembolic events, and mortality. RESULTS: Of 556 patients on a DOAC (mean [SD] age of 72.5 [8.6] years; 37.4% female; mean CHADS 2 score 1.7 [1.0]), 8.6% were also on American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) and 0.7% on clopidogrel. Most of the patients underwent colonoscopies (63.3%) or gastroscopies (14.0%), with 18.9% having both on the same procedural day. The mean total duration of DOAC interruption was 3.9 ± 1.6 days. Four patients experienced an arterial thromboembolic event (0.7%, 0.3%–1.8%) within 24.2 ± 5.9 days of DOAC interruption. GI bleeding events occurred in 2.5% (1.4%–4.2%) within 11.1 ± 8.1 days (range: 0.6; 25.5 days) of endoscopy, with major GI bleeding in 0.9% (0.4%–2.1%). Three patients died (0.5%; 0.2%–1.6%) 15.6–22.3 days after the endoscopy. DISCUSSION: After a contemporary standardized periprocedural management strategy, patients with AF undergoing DOAC therapy interruption for elective digestive endoscopy experienced low rates of arterial thromboembolism and major bleeding.

Abstract Objective To determine COVID-19 vaccine-related adverse events (AEs) in the seven-day post-vaccination period in patients with SLE vs autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HC). Methods Data were captured through the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) questionnaire (March–December 2021). Multivariable regression models accounted for age, gender, ethnicity, vaccine type and background treatment. Results Among 9462 complete respondents, 583 (6.2%) were SLE patients (mean age: 40.1 years; 94.5% females; 40.5% Asian; 42.9% Pfizer-recipients). Minor AEs were reported by 83.0% of SLE patients, major by 2.6%, hospitalization by 0.2%. AE and hospitalization frequencies were similar between patients with active and inactive SLE. Rashes were more frequent in SLE patients vs HC (OR; 95% CI: 1.2; 1.0, 1.5), chills less frequent in SLE vs AIRDs (0.6; 0.4, 0.8) and nrAIDs (0.5; 0.3, 0.8), and fatigue less frequent in SLE vs nrAIDs (0.6; 0.4, 0.9). Pfizer-recipients reported higher overall AE (2.2; 1.1, 4.2) and injection site pain (2.9; 1.6, 5.0) frequencies than recipients of other vaccines, Oxford/AstraZeneca-recipients more body ache, fever, chills (OR: 2.5, 3.0), Moderna-recipients more body ache, fever, chills, rashes (OR: 2.6, 4.3). Hospitalization frequencies were similar across vaccine types. AE frequencies were similar across treatment groups, although chills were less frequent in antimalarial users vs non-users (0.5; 0.3, 0.9). Conclusion While COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs were reported by four-fifths of SLE patients, those were mostly minor and comparable to AEs reported by healthy individuals, providing reassurance regarding COVID-19 vaccination safety in SLE.

Abstract INTRODUCTION Immunotherapies targeting PD-1 in recurrent glioblastoma (rGBM) have shown limited activity. We hypothesize combining therapies targeting immunosuppressive pathways with cytotoxic and antiangiogenic therapies will improve survival. This nonrandomized, noncomparative Phase II study examines safety and efficacy of an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody (retifanlimab), hypofractionated radiotherapy (HFRT), and bevacizumab, with or without an IDO1 inhibitor (epacadostat), in patients with rGBM. METHODS This is an open-label Phase II study of two regimens. Regimen A examines retifanlimab (500mg IV Q4W) + bevacizumab (10mg/kg IV Q2W) + HFRT (3.5Gy/day x 10) in patients with IDH1/2-WT rGBM. Regimen B adds epacadostat. Key inclusions include dexamethasone ≤ 4 mg/day and reirradiation candidacy. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) probability at 9 months (OS-9). An increase of OS-9 from 38% (bevacizumab alone) to 60% was considered clinically relevant and required 24 efficacy evaluable patients. RESULTS Regimen A accrual is complete; interim results are as follows: 26 rGBM enrolled, with 24 evaluable [median age 64.2 years (42.1-81.8); 29% female; 29% MGMT promotor methylated; 33.3% with multi-focal disease; median KPS 90 (70-100); median baseline dexamethasone 0 mg (0-4) and ALC 1,000 cells/µl (300-3,700)]. Patients received a median of 6 cycles as of May 2022 (2-24). Median follow-up is 16.0 months. Interim median PFS is 7.0 months (95%CI: 4.5~11.1) and median OS is 12.2 months (95%CI 7.1~18.0). Regimen A met primary endpoint with OS-9 of 67% (95%CI: 44~82%). Overall response rate is currently 58% (95%CI: 36.94~77.2%). There were five possible immune-related grade 3+ toxicities to date (n = 1 each colitis, vomiting, and seizure; n = 2 diarrhea). Regimen B is enrolling. CONCLUSIONS Interim analysis suggests combination retifanlimab, HFRT, and bevacizumab in rGBM is generally well-tolerated, with encouraging OS and PFS at the time of submission. Correlative analysis is ongoing and will be presented at the meeting.

Abstract Objectives The COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) study aimed to assess short-term COVID-19 vaccination-related adverse events (AEs) in RA patients. Methods An online self-reported questionnaire (March–December 2021) was used to capture data related to COVID-19 vaccination-related AEs in RA, other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) (excluding RA and inflammatory myositis), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs). Descriptive and multivariable regression analyses were performed. Results Of the 9462 complete respondents, 14.2% (n = 1347) had been diagnosed with RA; they had a mean (s.d.) age of 50.7 (13.7) years, 74.2% were women and 49.3% were Caucasian. In total, 76.9% and 4.2% of patients with RA reported minor and major AEs, respectively. Patients with active and inactive RA had similar AE and hospitalization frequencies. Overall, AEs were reported more frequently by BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 recipients and less frequently by BBV152 recipients compared with the rest. Major AE and hospitalization frequencies were similar across recipients of different vaccines. Patients receiving methotrexate and hydroxychloroquine reported fewer minor AEs than those patients not on them. Compared with HCs and patients with other AIRDs, patients with RA reported similar total AEs, overall minor AEs, and hospitalizations. Compared with nrAIDs, patients with RA reported lower frequencies of overall AEs, minor AEs (both odds ratio [OR] = 0.7; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.9), and injection site pain (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8) with similar major AE and hospitalization frequencies. Conclusion Despite the differences in AE frequency across different COVID-19 vaccines, all were well tolerated in patients with RA and were comparable to HCs, providing reassurance as to the safety of COVID-19 vaccination.