Search

Abstract Aims To describe the contemporary management by cardiologists of patients after an episode of myocardial infarction (MI). Methods The EYESHOT Post-MI was a prospective, observational, nationwide study aimed to evaluate the management of patients referring to cardiologists 1 to 3 years from the last MI event. Results Over a 3-month period, 1633 consecutive patients [median 22 (IQR 15–28) months from MI] were enrolled: 1028 (63.0%) at the second and 605 (37.0%) at the third year from MI. During the 12 months prior to enrolment, the majority of patients received a transthoracic echocardiogram (60% and 54%), followed by coronary angiography (24% and 16%, in the second and third year from MI groups, respectively). At the time of enrolment, the majority of patients were prescribed on statins (93%) and beta-blockers (82%), without significant differences between the 2 groups. A dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was used more frequently among patients presenting during the second compared to the third year from MI (40% vs 24%; p < 0.0001). At multivariable analysis, the time interval from last MI (2 vs 3 years: OR 2.27; 95% CI 1.79–2.88; p < 0.0001) and a previous percutaneous coronary intervention with multiple stents (OR 3.46; 95% CI 2.19–5.47; p < 0.0001) resulted as the major independent predictors of DAPT persistence at the time of enrolment. Conclusions This contemporary registry provides unique insights into the current management of post-MI patients and represents an opportunity to further improve the long-term treatment of this high-risk population. Highlights • The EYESHOT Post-MI evaluated the management of patients referring to cardiologists 1 to 3 years from the last MI event. • Over a 3-month period, 1633 patients were enrolled: 1028 (63.0%) at the second and 605 (37.0%) at the third year from MI. • During the 12 months prior to enrolment, the majority of patients received a transthoracic echocardiogram, followed by coronary angiography. • A dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was used more frequently among patients presenting during the second compared to the third year from MI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Drug eluting balloons (DEB) have been developed to overcome the limitations of drug eluting stents (DES), but clinic results of various DEB studies are still not consistent. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis to compare outcomes of DEB and DES for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: Medline/Web databases were searched for studies comparing DEB and DES for obstructive CAD, reporting late lumen loss (LLL) and rates for overall mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST) and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: 8 studies (1462 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with DES, DEB treated patients showed non-significantly higher LLL (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] −0.15 to 0.78, P=0.18) and non-significantly higher rate of binary restenosis (odds ratio [OR] 1.40 [0.68–2.48], P=0.36). Mortality (OR 1.13[0.54–2.37], P=0.74), MI (OR 0.95, [0.50–1.80], P=0.87), ST (OR 1.12, [0.34–4.19], P=0.77) and TLR rates (OR 1.19[0.60–2.38], P=0.61) were similar between the 2 treatments. A pre-specified meta-regression analysis showed that LLL WMD and TLR OR were inversely correlated to the prevalence of diabetes (P<0.0001) and directly correlated to reference coronary diameters (P<0.001). Conclusions: The present meta-analysis showed that compared to DES, DEB use resulted in similar clinical efficacy and safety. Thus DEB could be considered a reasonable alternative to DES for the treatment of CAD in selected clinical settings (Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01760200). [Copyright &y& Elsevier]