Search

Introduction: Patients with small vessels who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with subsequent multiple implantation of drug‐eluting stents remain at a higher risk of unfavorable outcomes. In complex cases where maintaining flow to all side branches is part of contemporary practice, using two‐stent techniques may be appropriate. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of double‐kissing (DK) culotte technique in comparison to culotte technique in the context of small‐vessel therapy in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Methods: This substudy of the Lower Silesia culotte Bifurcation Registry retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent ACS‐PCI using DK culotte or culotte technique for bifurcation lesions in small vessels, defined as having at least one branch with a diameter of 2.75 mm or less. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1‐year follow‐up. The secondary endpoint included major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results: The DK culotte group (n = 49) and the culotte group (n = 52) were compared, with 12‐month follow‐up showing lower TLF in the DK culotte group (8.2% vs. 19.2%, p = 0.082). Similar results were observed for TLR (6.1% vs. 13.5%; p = 0.161), stent restenosis (4.1% vs. 9.6%; p = 0.203), and MACE (18.4% vs. 25%; p = 0.344). Conclusion: For bifurcation lesions with a small‐diameter artery, the DK culotte technique may reduce TLF and MACE compared to the culotte technique. However, given the limited sample size and the absence of statistical significance, these findings remain preliminary and require further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The aim of this study was to see if the CHA2DS2-VASc score (Cardiac failure or dysfunction, Hypertension, Age ≥ 75 [Doubled], Diabetes, Stroke [Doubled]—Vascular disease, Age 65–74 and Sex category [Female] score) could have potential clinical relevance in predicting the outcome of hospitalization time, need for ICU hospitalization, survival time, in-hospital mortality, and mortality at 3 and 6 months after discharge home. Materials: A retrospective analysis of 2183 patients with COVID-19 hospitalized at the COVID-19 Centre of the University Hospital in Wrocław, Poland, between February 2020 and June 2021, was performed. All medical records were collected as part of the COronavirus in LOwer Silesia—the COLOS registry project. The CHA2DS2-VASc score was applied for all subjects, and the patients were observed from admission to hospital until the day of discharge or death. Further information on patient deaths was prospectively collected following the 90 and 180 days after admission. The new risk stratification derived from differences in survival curves and long-term follow-up of our patients was obtained. Primary outcomes measured included in-hospital mortality and 3-month and 6-month all-cause mortality, whereas secondary outcomes included termination of hospitalization from causes other than death (home discharges/transfer to another facility or deterioration/referral to rehabilitation) and non-fatal adverse events during hospitalization. Results: It was shown that gender had no effect on mortality. Significantly shorter hospitalization time was observed in the group of patients with low CHA2DS2-VASc scores. Among secondary outcomes, CHA2DS2-VASc score revealed predictive value in both genders for cardiogenic (5.79% vs. 0.69%; p < 0.0001), stroke/TIA (0.48% vs. 9.92%; p < 0.0001), acute heart failure (0.97% vs. 18.18%; p < 0.0001), pneumonia (43% vs. 63.64%; p < 0.0001), and acute renal failure (7.04% vs. 23.97%; p < 0.0001). This study points at the usefulness of the CHA2DS2-VASc score in predicting the severity of the course of COVID-19. Conclusions: Routine use of this scale in clinical practice may suggest the legitimacy of extending its application to the assessment of not only the risk of thromboembolic events in the COVID-19 cohort. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Heart failure (HF) patients experience reduced functional fitness level (determining the performance of routine, daily activities) and diminished exercise capacity (linked to more effortful activities). Aim: The aim of the study is to assess this relationship using functional fitness tests compared to peak VO2 and VE/VCO2 slope in the context of exercise capacity and ventilatory response to exercise. Methods: A total of 382 men with stable HFrEF (age: 61 ± 10, NYHA class I/II/III/IV: 16/50/32/2%, LVEF: 30.5 ± 8.3%) underwent cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPX) and a Senior Fitness Test (SFT). Afterwards, the patients were divided according to the 2capacity with peak VO2 ≥ 18 mL/kg/min, those with higher or lower ventilatory responses (VE/VCO2 slope ≥ 35 vs. <35) to the exercise were compared. Results: Patients who covered shorter distances in the 6 min walking test showed worse results in the functional tests ('stand up and go', 'chair stand' and 'arm curl') and CPX (lower peak VO2, shorter exercise time and higher VE/VCO2 slope). Subjects classified into Class D demonstrated the worst results in all elements of SFT; those in Class A demonstrated the best results. Significant differences that were analogous occurred also between classes B and C. Among the participants who reached peak VO2 ≥ 18 mL/kg/min (n = 170), those with VE/VCO2 slope ≥ 35 were characterized by worse physical fitness as compared to those with VE/VCO2 < 35. Conclusion: Reduced exercise tolerance led to worsening physical function in patients with HFrEF. Moreover, limitations in physical fitness seem to be distinctive for those patients showing excessive ventilatory response to exercise slope VE/VCO2 (≥35). The Senior Fitness Test may be considered as a useful tool for assessing comprehensive functional and clinical status and risk stratification in patients with HFrEF, especially those with extremely low exercise capacity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) infected with SARS-CoV-2 indicate a higher risk of severe COVID-19 course, which is defined as the need for hospitalization in the intensive care unit, mechanical ventilation, or death. However, simple tools to stratify the risk in patients with COPD suffering from COVID-19 are lacking. The current study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of the C2HEST score in patients with COPD. A retrospective analysis of medical records from 2184 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 at the University Hospital in Wroclaw from February 2020 to June 2021, which was previously used in earlier studies, assessed outcomes such as mortality during hospitalization, all-cause mortality at 3 and 6 months, non-fatal discharge, as well as adverse clinical incidents. This re-analysis specifically examines the outcomes using a COPD split. In the COPD group, 42 deaths were recorded, including 18 in-hospital deaths. In-hospital mortality rates at 3 and 6 months did not significantly differ among C2HEST strata, nor did their impact on subsequent treatment. However, a notable association between the C2HEST score and prognosis was observed in the non-COPD cohort comprising 2109 patients. The C2HEST score's predictive ability is notably lower in COPD patients compared to non-COPD subjects, with COPD itself indicating a high mortality risk. However, C2HEST effectively identifies patients at high risk of cardiac complications during COVID-19, especially in non-COPD cases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The acute coronary syndrome (ACS) continues to be a fundamental indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains a part of contemporary practice but permanent caging of the vascular structure with the metallic stent structure may increase the rate of device-related adverse clinical events. As an alternative to classic metallic DESs, the bioresorbable scaffolds (BRSs) have emerged as a temporary vascular support technology. We evaluated the mid-term outcomes of two generations of bioresorbable scaffolds—Absorb (Abbott-Vascular, Chicago, IL, USA) and Magmaris (Biotronik, Germany)—in patients with non-ST-elevation ACS. Methods: The study cohort consisted of 193 subjects after Magmaris implantation and 160 patients following Absorb implantation in large-vessel lesions. Results: At 2 years, a significantly lower rate of a primary outcome (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis) was observed with Magmaris (5.2% vs. 15%; p = 0.002). In addition, we observed a significantly lower rate of MI in the target vessel (2.6% vs. 9.4%; p = 0.009) and a lower rate of scaffold thrombosis (0% vs. 3.7%; p = 0.008). The TLF rate between the two groups was not significantly different. Conclusion: Magmaris demonstrated a good safety profile and more favorable clinical outcomes when compared to Absorb in patients with non-ST-elevation ACS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a well-known risk factor for adverse clinical outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Therefore, evaluation of coronary stents in this challenging clinical scenario can provide unique information on device safety and efficacy. Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were designed to overcome long-term complications related to permanent vessel caging with a permanent metallic drug-eluting stent (DES). Aim: We designed this study to evaluate the mid-term safety and efficiency of the Magmaris BRS in comparison to the leading new-generation ultrathin DES Ultimaster in the ACS population. Material and methods: We present a retrospective analysis of 2-year follow-up data. The primary outcomes consisted of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and in-stent thrombosis. The second main study endpoint was defined as target-lesion failure (TLF). Results: The study population consisted of two cohorts, the first of 193 patients treated with Magmaris implantation and the second of 169 patients treated with Ultimaster implantation. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in both study cohorts in terms of primary outcome (5.1% vs. 11%; p = 0.051), and TLF (5.6% vs. 8%, p = 0.41). Conclusions: Treatment with a second-generation BRS (Magmaris) versus a novel second-generation DES (Ultimaster) in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) was associated with similar rates of target lesion failure at 2-year follow-up. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We aimed to determine the influence of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic on blood pressure (BP) control assessed by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM)., Methods: Office BP and ABPM data from two visits conducted within a 9-15 months interval were collected from patients treated for hypertension. In the prepandemic group, both visits took place before, while in the pandemic group, Visit-1 was done before and Visit-2 during the pandemic period., Results: Of 1811 collected patients 191 were excluded because they did not meet the required ABPM time frames. Thus, the study comprised 704 patients from the pandemic and 916 from the prepandemic group. Groups did not differ in sex, age, duration of hypertension, frequency of first line antihypertensive drug use and mean 24 h BP on Visit-1. The prevalence of sustained uncontrolled hypertension was similar in both groups. On Visit-2 mean 24 h BP, daytime and nighttime systolic BP and diastolic BP were higher in the pandemic compared to the prepandemic group ( P  < 0.034). The prevalence of sustained uncontrolled hypertension on Visit-2 was higher in the pandemic than in the prepandemic group [0.29 (95% confidence interval (95% CI): 0.26-0.33) vs. 0.25 (95% CI: 0.22-0.28), P  < 0.037]. In multivariable adjusted analyses a significant difference in BP visit-to-visit change was observed, with a more profound decline in BP between visits in the prepandemic group., Conclusions: This study using ABPM indicates a negative impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on BP control. It emphasizes the need of developing strategies to maintain BP control during a pandemic such as the one induced by COVID-19., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is a well-known risk factor for adverse clinical outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Therefore, evaluation of coronary stents in this challenging clinical scenario can provide unique information on device safety and efficacy. Bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) were designed to overcome long-term complications related to permanent vessel caging with a permanent metallic drug-eluting stent (DES)., Aim: We designed this study to evaluate the mid-term safety and efficiency of the Magmaris BRS in comparison to the leading new-generation ultrathin DES Ultimaster in the ACS population., Material and Methods: We present a retrospective analysis of 2-year follow-up data. The primary outcomes consisted of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and in-stent thrombosis. The second main study endpoint was defined as target-lesion failure (TLF)., Results: The study population consisted of two cohorts, the first of 193 patients treated with Magmaris implantation and the second of 169 patients treated with Ultimaster implantation. At the 2-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in both study cohorts in terms of primary outcome (5.1% vs. 11%; p = 0.051), and TLF (5.6% vs. 8%, p = 0.41)., Conclusions: Treatment with a second-generation BRS (Magmaris) versus a novel second-generation DES (Ultimaster) in non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) was associated with similar rates of target lesion failure at 2-year follow-up., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright: © 2024 Termedia Sp. z o. o.)