Search

Objective: Dysglycemia, in this survey defined as impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) or type 2 diabetes, is common in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and associated with an unfavorable prognosis. This European survey investigated dysglycemia screening and risk factor management of patients with CAD in relation to standards of European guidelines for cardiovascular subjects.Research Design and Methods: The European Society of Cardiology's European Observational Research Programme (ESC EORP) European Action on Secondary and Primary Prevention by Intervention to Reduce Events (EUROASPIRE) V (2016-2017) included 8,261 CAD patients, aged 18-80 years, from 27 countries. If the glycemic state was unknown, patients underwent an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and measurement of glycated hemoglobin A1c. Lifestyle, risk factors, and pharmacological management were investigated.Results: A total of 2,452 patients (29.7%) had known diabetes. OGTT was performed in 4,440 patients with unknown glycemic state, of whom 41.1% were dysglycemic. Without the OGTT, 30% of patients with type 2 diabetes and 70% of those with IGT would not have been detected. The presence of dysglycemia almost doubled from that self-reported to the true proportion after screening. Only approximately one-third of all coronary patients had completely normal glucose metabolism. Of patients with known diabetes, 31% had been advised to attend a diabetes clinic, and only 24% attended. Only 58% of dysglycemic patients were prescribed all cardioprotective drugs, and use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (3%) or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (1%) was small.Conclusions: Urgent action is required for both screening and management of patients with CAD and dysglycemia, in the expectation of a substantial reduction in risk of further cardiovascular events and in complications of diabetes, as well as longer life expectancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Measuring fractional flow reserve (FFR) with a pressure wire remains underutilized because of the invasiveness of guide wire placement or the need for a hyperemic stimulus. FFR derived from routine coronary angiography (FFRangio) eliminates both of these requirements and displays FFR values of the entire coronary tree. The FFRangio Accuracy versus Standard FFR (FAST-FFR) study is a prospective, multicenter, international trial with the primary goal of determining the accuracy of FFRangio.Methods: Coronary angiography was performed in a routine fashion in patients with suspected coronary artery disease. FFR was measured in vessels with coronary lesions of varying severity using a coronary pressure wire and hyperemic stimulus. Based on angiograms of the respective arteries acquired in ≥2 different projections, on-site operators blinded to FFR then calculated FFRangio using proprietary software. Coprimary end points were the sensitivity and specificity of the dichotomously scored FFRangio for predicting pressure wire-derived FFR using a cutoff value of 0.80. The study was powered to meet prespecified performance goals for sensitivity and specificity.Results: Ten centers in the United States, Europe, and Israel enrolled a total of 301 subjects and 319 vessels meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria which were included in the final analysis. The mean FFR was 0.81 and 43% of vessels had an FFR≤0.80. The per-vessel sensitivity and specificity were 94% (95% CI, 88% to 97%) and 91% (86% to 95%), respectively, both of which exceeded the prespecified performance goals. The diagnostic accuracy of FFRangio was 92% overall and remained high when only considering FFR values between 0.75 to 0.85 (87%). FFRangio values correlated well with FFR measurements ( r=0.80, P<0.001) and the Bland-Altman 95% confidence limits were between -0.14 and 0.12. The device success rate for FFRangio was 99%.Conclusions: FFRangio measured from the coronary angiogram alone has a high sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy compared with pressure wire-derived FFR. FFRangio has the promise to substantially increase physiological coronary lesion assessment in the catheterization laboratory, thereby potentially leading to improved patient outcomes.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT03226262. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Long-term benefits of coronary stenosis treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold are unknown.Objectives: This study sought to evaluate clinical and imaging outcomes 5 years after bioresorbable scaffold implantation.Methods: In the ABSORB multicenter, single-arm trial, 45 (B1) and 56 patients (B2) underwent coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) at different times. At 5 years, 53 patients without target lesion revascularization underwent final imaging.Results: Between 6 months/1 year and 5 years, angiographic luminal late loss remained unchanged (B1: 0.14 ± 19 mm vs. 0.13 ± 0.33 mm; p = 0.7953; B2: 0.23 ± 0.28 mm vs. 0.18 ± 0.32 mm; p = 0.5685). When patients with a target lesion revascularization were included, luminal late loss was 0.15 ± 0.20 mm versus 0.15 ± 0.24 mm (p = 0.8275) for B1 and 0.30 ± 0.37 mm versus 0.32 ± 0.48 mm (p = 0.8204) for B2. At 5 years, in-scaffold and -segment binary restenosis was 7.8% (5 of 64) and 12.5% (8 of 64). On IVUS, the minimum lumen area of B1 decreased from 5.23 ± 0.97 mm(2) at 6 months to 4.89 ± 1.81 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.04), but remained unchanged in B2 (4.95 ± 0.91 mm(2) at 1 year to 4.84 ± 1.28 mm(2) at 5 years; p = 0.5). At 5 years, struts were no longer discernable by OCT and IVUS. On OCT, the minimum lumen area in B1 decreased from 4.51 ± 1.28 mm(2) at 6 months to 3.65 ± 1.39 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.01), but remained unchanged in B2, 4.35 ± 1.09 mm(2) at 1 year and 4.12 ± 1.38 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.24). Overall, the 5-year major adverse cardiac event rate was 11.0%, without any scaffold thrombosis.Conclusions: At 5 years, bioresorbable scaffold implantation in a simple stenotic lesion resulted in stable lumen dimensions and low restenosis and major adverse cardiac event rates. (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B [ABSORB B]; NCT00856856). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]