Search

larization), compared with 29% (23% revascularization) in the IC group. The primary outcome occurred in 43 patients (27.9%) in the EA group and 55 (34.6%) in the IC group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 to 1.19; p 0.26). The rates of mortality (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.49 to 1.56), myocardial infarction (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.36), and repeat hospital stay (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.46) did not differ between groups. The primary endpoint was significantly reduced in patients with elevated troponin on admission (HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.80), but not in those with normal troponin (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 0.75 to 3.70; p for interaction 0.03). Conclusions The present study does not allow a definite conclusion about the benefit of an EA approach when applied systematically among elderly patients with NSTEACS. The finding of a significant interaction for the treatment effect according to troponin status at baseline should be confirmed in a larger size trial. (Italian Elderly ACS Study; NCT00510185) (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2012;5: 906 –16) © 2012 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

This study sought to determine the risk versus benefit ratio of an early aggressive (EA) approach in elderly patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS).Elderly patients have been scarcely represented in trials comparing treatment strategies in NSTEACS.A total of 313 patients ≥ 75 years of age (mean 82 years) with NSTEACS within 48 h from qualifying symptoms were randomly allocated to an EA strategy (coronary angiography and, when indicated, revascularization within 72 h) or an initially conservative (IC) strategy (angiography and revascularization only for recurrent ischemia). The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, disabling stroke, and repeat hospital stay for cardiovascular causes or severe bleeding within 1 year.During admission, 88% of the patients in the EA group underwent angiography (55% revascularization), compared with 29% (23% revascularization) in the IC group. The primary outcome occurred in 43 patients (27.9%) in the EA group and 55 (34.6%) in the IC group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53 to 1.19; p = 0.26). The rates of mortality (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.49 to 1.56), myocardial infarction (HR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.33 to 1.36), and repeat hospital stay (HR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.46) did not differ between groups. The primary endpoint was significantly reduced in patients with elevated troponin on admission (HR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.23 to 0.80), but not in those with normal troponin (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 0.75 to 3.70; p for interaction = 0.03).The present study does not allow a definite conclusion about the benefit of an EA approach when applied systematically among elderly patients with NSTEACS. The finding of a significant interaction for the treatment effect according to troponin status at baseline should be confirmed in a larger size trial. (Italian Elderly ACS Study; NCT00510185).

We report some variants, anomalies and aneurysms of the coronary artery tree observed in patients referred to our radiology department for suspected or known coronary artery diseases. 265 patients, with heart rate70 beats per minute and stable clinical conditions, underwent 64-MSCT. They were intravenously given contrast medium followed by saline as a chaser. Images and data were reconstructed and evaluated by two radiologists. Seven out of these patients (5 males and two females) were found to have abnormalities (variants or anomalies) of coronary arteries or coronary aneurysms, with an incidence respectively of 1.88% and 0.75%. Two patients had an anomalous origin of the left coronary artery from the pulmonary artery, as previously described (Castorina S et al., 2008). As regards the other patients, one had separate origins of the anterior descendant and circumflex arteries from the left lateral sinus with two ostia, one had quadrifurcation of the left coronary trunk, one had agenesis of the left coronary ostium and trifurcation of the right coronary artery and two had coronary aneurysms. Images acquired by 64-MSCT, because of their spatial dislocation, permit anatomical study from different perspectives. Our data confirm the ability of MSCT to evaluate, in a few seconds, anomalies of coronary arteries offering additional information for a more complete diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: This is a multicentre, open label, prospective non-randomized registry, with 9-month angiographic follow-up, conducted to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) when used in high restenosis risk patients from the real world. METHODS: From June 2004 to February 2005, a total of 1622 consecutive patients were enrolled to the Sicilian DES Registry, according to specific inclusion criteria. Both paclitaxel-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents were used. The analysis was performed on 1472 patients because 150 patients were excluded from the study. The primary endpoint was to evaluate the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 9 months after DES implantation. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as cardiac death, non-Q-wave or Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The secondary endpoints were procedural success, angiographic binary restenosis and stent thrombosis within 9 months post-procedure. RESULTS: Patients were more frequently male; 472 (32.1%) were diabetics, of whom 130 (27.5%) were treated with insulin. Mean ejection fraction of the left ventricle was 51.5 ± 8.7%. Multivessel disease was found and treated in 627 patients (42.6%). A total of 2439 lesions were treated with DES. Final angiographic success was achieved in 2422 (99.3%) lesions. Procedural success was achieved in 1422 (96.6%) patients. The 9-month cumulative incidence of MACE was 7.3% with 0.8% of cardiac deaths, 0.8% non-fatal MI, 7.9% TVR. Binary restenosis was observed in 101 patients (8.3%). Stent thrombosis was documented in 11 patients (0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Drug-eluting stents appear to be safe and associated with a low incidence of MACE at 9-month follow-up, even in patients selected for their complexity. © 2008 Italian Federation of Cardiology.

The recent introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) has shown, in randomized controlled trials, to reduce the incidence of restenosis as compared to bare metal stents (BMS). Since their cost is considerably higher than that of BMS, the study assessed the economic impact of the adoption of this new therapy in the Sicilian clinical practice.An economic evaluation was carried out by means of a linear decision model developed in Excel that simulated and compared costs and clinical pathway, within 1 year of the intervention, of hypothetical groups of patients with de novo lesions undergoing angioplasty with DES or BMS. Clinical data were obtained from the available literature and adapted to the Sicilian reality, using data from an original survey conducted in 7 local cath labs. The survey collected information on the anatomical case-mix of the population treated, the average number of stents used in the various procedures and the methods of treatment for in-stent restenosis.Compared to BMS, DES allows to avoid, on average, 11.8 revascularizations out of 100 patients over a period of 1 year, but requires to bear an incremental net cost of Euro 931 for the annual treatment of each patient. The cost-benefit ratio is more favorable for those categories of patients/lesions in which the risk of in-stent restenosis is higher and, at the same time, the number of stents implanted per procedure is lower (single-vessel diabetics and small vessels).The results of the study show how, within the scope of a policy that has tended more and more to rationalize the use of available health resources, the use of the expensive DES is not justified from an economic point of view in groups of patients and types of lesions in which a BMS is also associated with a lower likelihood of revascularization. Therefore, the study provides a starting point for consideration by hospital centers, suggesting the use of a mixture of DES for the treatment of lesions/patients at the highest risk of restenosis and BMS for the treatment of lesions/patients at lower risk of re-intervention.