Cardiology (all articles)
Summary of “Dialysis for Chronic Kidney Failure: A Review”
3 Oct, 2024 | 22:46h | UTCIn their comprehensive review published in JAMA on October 2, 2024, Dr. Jennifer E. Flythe and Dr. Suzanne Watnick discuss current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, diagnosis, and management of dialysis-dependent chronic kidney failure. The article emphasizes clinical considerations that directly impact patient care, particularly in the initiation and management of dialysis therapy.
Key Aspects Influencing Patient Care
- Initiation of Dialysis
- No Specific eGFR Threshold: There is no recommended estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for starting dialysis. Decisions should be individualized, focusing on persistent uremic symptoms (e.g., nausea, fatigue), volume overload (e.g., dyspnea, peripheral edema), worsening eGFR, metabolic acidosis, and hyperkalemia.
- Shared Decision-Making: The timing of dialysis initiation should involve a collaborative approach between clinicians and patients, considering symptoms, laboratory trends, and patient preferences.
- No Mortality Benefit from Early Initiation: A randomized clinical trial found no mortality advantage in starting dialysis at higher eGFR levels (10–14 mL/min/1.73 m²) compared to lower levels (5–7 mL/min/1.73 m²).
- Dialysis Modalities
- Hemodialysis vs. Peritoneal Dialysis: Observational data indicate no significant difference in 5-year mortality rates between the two modalities.
- Modality Selection Factors: Decisions should consider patient lifestyle, comorbid conditions, availability of home support, and resource accessibility.
- Common Complications
- Cardiovascular Risks: Cardiovascular complications, such as arrhythmias and cardiac arrest, are leading causes of death among dialysis patients.
- Infections:
- Hemodialysis: Catheter-related bloodstream infections occur at rates of 1.1 to 5.5 episodes per 1000 catheter-days.
- Peritoneal Dialysis: Peritonitis occurs at a rate of 0.26 episodes per patient-year.
- Systemic Complications: Anemia, hyperphosphatemia, hypocalcemia, and hypertension are prevalent and often require pharmacologic intervention.
- Dialysis-Related Issues: Hypotension during dialysis, muscle cramps, itching, and vascular access malfunction can hinder effective treatment.
- Management Strategies
- Anemia: Initiate intravenous iron and/or erythropoietin-stimulating agents when hemoglobin is below 10 g/dL, aiming to maintain levels between 10 and 11.5 g/dL.
- Mineral and Bone Disorders: Use dietary phosphorus restrictions and phosphorus binders; monitor and manage parathyroid hormone levels to mitigate fracture risk.
- Hypertension: Implement dietary salt restriction, adjust ultrafiltration, and prescribe antihypertensive medications, recognizing there’s no specific BP target in dialysis patients.
- Practical Considerations for Clinicians
- Medication Management: Avoid nephrotoxic agents like NSAIDs and iodinated contrast media in patients with residual kidney function. Adjust dosages for medications excreted renally.
- Symptom Control: Address common symptoms such as pruritus with appropriate therapies such as oral antihistamines and moisturizers. Difelikefalin is a new agent that can also be used.
- Patient Education: Counsel on dietary restrictions (salt, fluid, potassium) and ensure vaccinations are up to date, including hepatitis B, pneumococcal, COVID-19, and RSV vaccines.
Conclusion
For the over 540,000 patients in the U.S. receiving maintenance dialysis, individualized care plans that involve shared decision-making are crucial. Understanding when to initiate dialysis, selecting the appropriate modality, managing complications, and addressing patient-specific needs can significantly influence outcomes and quality of life.
Summary of the review “Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease”
23 Sep, 2024 | 21:22h | UTCSummary of the review “Lipoprotein(a) and Cardiovascular Disease“
By Prof Børge G Nordestgaard and Anne Langsted
Key Takeaways for Practicing Physicians:
- Significance of Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)]:
- Causal Risk Factor: Elevated Lp(a) is a genetically determined causal risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and aortic valve stenosis.
- Prevalence: Approximately 1 in 5 individuals globally have high Lp(a) levels, increasing their cardiovascular risk.
- Genetic Determinants and Ethnic Variations:
- Genetic Influence: Over 90% genetically determined with minimal lifestyle impact.
- Ethnic Differences:
- Lowest levels: East Asians, Europeans, Southeast Asians.
- Intermediate levels: South Asians, Middle Easterners, Latin Americans.
- Highest levels: Individuals of African descent.
- Sex Differences: Postmenopausal women have about 17% higher Lp(a) levels than men.
- Clinical Measurement and Interpretation:
- When to Measure:
- Once in a Lifetime: Recommended for all individuals to measure Lp(a) at least once.
- High-Risk Patients: Especially important in those with premature ASCVD, familial hypercholesterolaemia (FH), family history of elevated Lp(a) or early ASCVD.
- Stability of Levels: Lp(a) levels are stable after age two and are unaffected by most lifestyle factors.
- Interpreting Levels:
- Elevated Risk Thresholds:
- >30 mg/dL (≥62 nmol/L): Increased risk begins.
- >50 mg/dL (≥105 nmol/L): Clinically significant high risk.
- >90 mg/dL (≥190 nmol/L): Severe risk, comparable to FH.
- Elevated Risk Thresholds:
- Laboratory Considerations:
- Assay Selection: Use isoform-independent assays with standardized calibration.
- Reporting Units: Preferably in nmol/L; however, mg/dL is acceptable with appropriate conversion.
- When to Measure:
- Impact on Patient Care:
- Risk Stratification:
- Independent Risk Factor: High Lp(a) increases ASCVD risk independent of other lipids.
- Reclassification: Can reclassify patients into higher risk categories, influencing management decisions.
- Management Strategies:
- Current Limitations: No approved therapies specifically targeting Lp(a) reduction.
- Aggressive Risk Factor Control:
- LDL Cholesterol: Intensive lowering with high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors.
- PCSK9 Inhibitors: Lower Lp(a) by ~25% and reduce cardiovascular events.
- Lifestyle Modifications: Emphasize smoking cessation, healthy diet, physical activity, and weight management.
- Blood Pressure and Diabetes Management: Optimize control per guidelines.
- LDL Cholesterol: Intensive lowering with high-intensity statins, ezetimibe, and PCSK9 inhibitors.
- Avoid Unproven Therapies: Niacin is not recommended due to side effects and lack of cardiovascular benefit.
- Risk Stratification:
- Familial Hypercholesterolaemia (FH):
- Dual Risk: Elevated Lp(a) often coexists with FH, compounding cardiovascular risk.
- Screening: Measure Lp(a) in all patients with FH and consider cascade screening in families.
- Emerging Therapies:
- Gene-Silencing Drugs:
- Pelacarsen, Olpasiran, Lepodisiran: Lower Lp(a) levels by 80–98%.
- Administration: Subcutaneous injections, varying from monthly to quarterly.
- Small Molecule Inhibitors:
- Muvalaplin: Oral agent reducing Lp(a) by ~65%.
- Clinical Trials:
- Phase 3 Trials Ongoing: Evaluating cardiovascular outcomes with significant Lp(a) reduction.
- Potential Change in Practice: These therapies may soon provide effective options for patients with high Lp(a).
- Gene-Silencing Drugs:
- Practical Recommendations:
- Include Lp(a) in Lipid Panels: Encourage laboratories to add Lp(a) measurements to standard profiles.
- Patient Communication:
- Educate on Risks: Explain the significance of high Lp(a) and its genetic nature.
- Lifestyle Advice: Reinforce the importance of modifiable risk factor control.
- Family Screening: Consider evaluating first-degree relatives due to genetic inheritance patterns.
- Monitoring and Follow-Up:
- Re-measurement: Generally, one measurement suffices unless a significant event (e.g., menopause) occurs.
- Acute Phase Reactant Consideration: Be cautious interpreting levels during acute illness; recheck once stabilized.
Conclusion:
Elevated Lp(a) is a significant and prevalent cardiovascular risk factor that is largely genetic and stable throughout life. While direct treatments are on the horizon, current management focuses on aggressive modification of other cardiovascular risk factors. Measurement of Lp(a) should become a routine part of cardiovascular risk assessment, guiding more personalized and effective patient care.
Summary: Perioperative Management of Patients Taking Direct Oral Anticoagulants
19 Sep, 2024 | 21:12h | UTCDirect oral anticoagulants (DOACs)—including apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran—are increasingly used for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation and for treating venous thromboembolism. Effective perioperative management of DOACs is essential to minimize bleeding and thromboembolic risks during surgical and nonsurgical procedures. Below are practical recommendations focused on the perioperative management of patients taking DOACs, based on a recent JAMA review article.
Elective Surgical or Nonsurgical Procedures
Classify Bleeding Risk of Procedures:
- Minimal Risk:
- Minor dental procedures (e.g., cleaning, extractions)
- Minor dermatologic procedures (e.g., skin lesion removal)
- Cataract surgery
- Low to Moderate Risk:
- Endoscopic procedures without high-risk interventions
- Cholecystectomy
- Inguinal hernia repair
- High Risk:
- Major surgery (e.g., cancer surgery, joint replacement)
- Procedures involving neuraxial anesthesia
- Endoscopic procedures with high-risk interventions (e.g., large polyp removal)
DOAC Management Strategies:
- Minimal Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Option 1: Continue DOACs without interruption.
- Option 2: For added safety, withhold the morning dose on the day of the procedure (especially for twice-daily DOACs like apixaban and dabigatran).
- Low to Moderate Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 1 day before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 2 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 1 day after the procedure, ensuring adequate hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
- High Bleeding Risk Procedures:
- Preoperative:
- Discontinue DOACs 2 days before the procedure.
- This allows approximately 4-5 half-lives for drug clearance.
- Postoperative:
- Resume DOACs 2-3 days after the procedure, based on bleeding risk and hemostasis.
- Preoperative:
Evidence Supporting These Strategies:
- The PAUSE study demonstrated that standardized interruption protocols without heparin bridging result in low rates of:
- Thromboembolism: 0.2%–0.4%
- Major Bleeding: 1%–2%
Postoperative DOAC Resumption:
- Assess surgical-site hemostasis before resuming DOACs.
- Delay resumption if there is ongoing bleeding or concerns about hemostasis.
- For high bleeding risk procedures, consider a longer delay (2–3 days).
Perioperative Heparin Bridging:
- Not recommended for patients on DOACs.
- Bridging increases bleeding risk without reducing thromboembolism.
- DOACs have rapid offset and onset, making bridging unnecessary.
Special Considerations
Patients with Impaired Renal Function:
- For CrCl 30–50 mL/min:
- Dabigatran: Extend preoperative discontinuation by an additional day.
- For CrCl <30 mL/min:
- Dabigatran is contraindicated.
- For other DOACs, consider extending discontinuation to 3–4 days before surgery.
Patients Undergoing Neuraxial Anesthesia:
- Discontinue DOACs for 3 days (apixaban, edoxaban, rivaroxaban) or 4 days (dabigatran) before the procedure.
- Minimizes risk of spinal or epidural hematoma.
Dental Procedures:
- Generally safe to continue DOACs.
- For added safety:
- Omit or delay the dose on the day of the procedure.
- Employ local hemostatic measures (e.g., tranexamic acid mouthwash).
Endoscopic Procedures:
- Low-risk procedures (e.g., diagnostic endoscopy without biopsy):
- Follow standard DOAC interruption for low to moderate bleeding risk.
- High-risk procedures (e.g., polypectomy of large polyps):
- Extend DOAC discontinuation by an additional day pre- and post-procedure.
Patients Unable to Resume Oral Medications Postoperatively:
- Use prophylactic low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) until oral intake is possible.
- Avoid therapeutic-dose LMWH due to bleeding risk.
Emergent, Urgent, or Semiurgent Procedures
Risks:
- Higher bleeding risk: Up to 23%
- Thromboembolism risk: Up to 11%
Management Strategies:
- Assess Time Since Last DOAC Dose:
- If within 48 hours, consider that significant anticoagulant effect may persist.
- Laboratory Testing (if available):
- DOAC Level Testing:
- ≥50 ng/mL: Consider using reversal agents.
- <50 ng/mL: May proceed without reversal agents.
- DOAC Level Testing:
- Use of Reversal Agents:
- For Dabigatran:
- Idarucizumab (5 g IV)
- For Factor Xa Inhibitors (apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban):
- Andexanet alfa (dosing based on last dose timing and amount)
- Prothrombin Complex Concentrates (PCCs): If andexanet alfa is unavailable or contraindicated.
- For Dabigatran:
- Proceeding Without Testing:
- If testing is unavailable and last DOAC dose was within 48 hours, consider reversal agents.
- If >48 hours since last dose, may proceed without reversal.
Considerations:
- Reversal agents are expensive and may carry thrombotic risks.
- Use should be judicious, weighing risks and benefits.
- Consult hematology or thrombosis experts when possible.
Key Takeaways
- Elective Procedures:
- Utilize standardized protocols based on procedural bleeding risk.
- Routine preoperative DOAC level testing is unnecessary.
- Avoid heparin bridging.
- Emergent/Urgent Procedures:
- Reversal agents may be appropriate when significant DOAC levels are present.
- Decision to use reversal agents should consider bleeding risk, time since last dose, and availability of DOAC level testing.
- Patient Communication:
- Ensure patients understand the plan for DOAC interruption and resumption.
- Provide clear instructions regarding timing and dosing.
- Interdisciplinary Coordination:
- Collaborate with surgical teams, anesthesiologists, and pharmacists.
- Use electronic medical records and clinical decision support tools to enhance communication.
Conclusion
By applying standardized perioperative management protocols, clinicians can effectively balance the risks of bleeding and thromboembolism in patients taking DOACs who require surgical or nonsurgical procedures. These strategies simplify decision-making, avoid unnecessary interventions like heparin bridging, and promote patient safety.
Meta-analysis: Perioperative Colchicine Reduced Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation After CABG
18 Sep, 2024 | 13:33h | UTCBackground: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains a leading cause of mortality worldwide. Inflammation is a key factor in the development and progression of CAD, and anti-inflammatory therapies have shown potential in improving cardiovascular outcomes. Colchicine, traditionally used to treat gout, has demonstrated efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events in patients with chronic CAD. Previous individual studies have suggested that perioperative colchicine may decrease the incidence of postoperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), but a comprehensive analysis is needed to confirm these findings.
Objective: To evaluate the effect of perioperative colchicine administration on the incidence of POAF in patients undergoing isolated CABG surgery through a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods: A systematic search was conducted across MEDLINE, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library to identify RCTs comparing perioperative colchicine administration with standard care in patients undergoing CABG. Inclusion criteria encompassed studies involving isolated CABG patients randomized to receive colchicine or standard care without colchicine. The primary outcome was the incidence of POAF during short-term follow-up.
Results: Five RCTs published between 2014 and 2022 met the inclusion criteria, including a total of 839 patients undergoing isolated CABG. Perioperative colchicine administration was associated with a significant reduction in POAF rates compared to standard care (relative risk [RR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40–0.73; p < 0.01). Other outcomes, such as graft patency, myocardial infarction, or long-term mortality, were not uniformly reported and, therefore, not analyzed.
Conclusions: Perioperative administration of colchicine is associated with a significant reduction in the incidence of POAF in patients undergoing CABG surgery.
Implications for Practice: Colchicine may be considered as a prophylactic strategy to reduce POAF in patients undergoing CABG, potentially improving both short- and long-term outcomes. Given the association of POAF with increased perioperative morbidity and long-term adverse events, implementing colchicine could have substantial clinical benefits in this high-risk population.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths of this meta-analysis include the exclusive inclusion of randomized controlled trials and the use of rigorous statistical methods, including sensitivity analysis, which confirmed the robustness of the results. Limitations involve the small number of studies (five RCTs), potential variability in colchicine dosing regimens, and the lack of data on other clinically relevant outcomes.
Future Research: Large-scale, multicenter RCTs are warranted to further assess the effects of colchicine on other important outcomes in CABG patients, such as graft patency, myocardial infarction rates, and long-term mortality. Future studies should also evaluate the risk-benefit profile of colchicine in this patient population to establish its full role in clinical practice.
Reference: Kirov H., Caldonazo T., Runkel A., et al. (2024). Colchicine in Patients with Coronary Disease Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery – A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. The American Journal of Cardiology. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjcard.2024.09.003
RCT: PCI Reduces Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Patients Undergoing TAVI with Significant Coronary Artery Disease
14 Sep, 2024 | 19:09h | UTCBackground:
Severe aortic stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist, particularly in the elderly population. Approximately 50% of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) have concurrent CAD. The optimal management of significant coronary lesions in patients undergoing TAVI remains uncertain, with guidelines providing no clear recommendations. Understanding whether percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) improves outcomes in this setting is crucial for guiding clinical practice.
Objective:
To evaluate whether routine PCI of physiologically significant coronary lesions improves clinical outcomes compared to conservative management in patients with stable CAD undergoing TAVI.
Methods:
- Design: International, multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial (NOTION-3).
- Participants: 455 patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis scheduled for TAVI and at least one significant coronary lesion (defined as fractional flow reserve [FFR] ≤0.80 or diameter stenosis ≥90%).
- Interventions:
- PCI Group (n=227): Underwent PCI of all eligible lesions followed by TAVI.
- Conservative Treatment Group (n=228): Received TAVI without prior PCI.
- Primary Endpoint: Major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction (MI), or urgent revascularization.
- Secondary Endpoints: Included individual components of the primary endpoint, bleeding events, stroke, hospital admissions for heart failure, and procedural complications.
- Follow-Up: Median of 2 years (interquartile range, 1 to 4 years).
Results:
- Baseline Characteristics: Median age was 82 years; 67% were men; median Society of Thoracic Surgeons–Procedural Risk of Mortality (STS-PROM) score was 3%.
- Primary Endpoint (MACE):
- Occurred in 26% of patients in the PCI group versus 36% in the conservative group.
- Hazard Ratio (HR): 0.71 (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.51 to 0.99; P=0.04), indicating a 29% relative risk reduction with PCI.
- Components of MACE:
- Myocardial Infarction:
- Lower incidence in the PCI group.
- Urgent Revascularization:
- Reduced need in the PCI group.
- Myocardial Infarction:
- All-Cause Mortality:
- No significant difference between groups.
- Bleeding Events:
- Higher in the PCI group (28% vs. 20%; HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.03 to 2.22).
- Bleeding assessed according to Valve Academic Research Consortium–2 criteria.
- Procedural Complications:
- PCI-related complications occurred in 3% of patients in the PCI group.
- Safety Endpoints:
- Similar rates of stroke and stent thrombosis between groups.
- Acute kidney injury was less frequent in the PCI group (5% vs. 11%; HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.89).
Conclusions:
In patients with stable CAD and severe symptomatic aortic stenosis undergoing TAVI, performing PCI on significant coronary lesions resulted in a statistically significant reduction in MACE over a median follow-up of 2 years compared to conservative management. The benefit was primarily due to reductions in myocardial infarction and urgent revascularization rates. However, this advantage was accompanied by an increased risk of bleeding events.
Clinical Implications:
- Patient Selection: PCI should be considered in patients with physiologically significant coronary lesions (FFR ≤0.80 or diameter stenosis ≥90%) undergoing TAVI.
- Risk–Benefit Analysis: Clinicians should balance the reduction in MACE against the increased bleeding risk when deciding on PCI.
- Treatment Strategy: The findings support a strategy of routine revascularization in this patient population to improve cardiovascular outcomes.
- Future Considerations: Further research is needed to determine the optimal timing of PCI relative to TAVI and to identify which patient subgroups may derive the most benefit.
Recommendations:
- Guideline Update: The results may inform future guidelines to provide clearer recommendations on managing CAD in patients undergoing TAVI.
- Individualized Care: Decisions regarding PCI should be individualized, considering patient comorbidities, anatomical complexity, and bleeding risk.
- Antithrombotic Therapy: Attention to antiplatelet and anticoagulation strategies is important to mitigate bleeding risks.
Study Limitations:
- Exclusion of patients with recent acute coronary syndromes and left main coronary artery disease limits the generalizability.
- Changes in antithrombotic regimens over the study period reflect evolving clinical practice but may affect outcomes.
- Majority of patients had low to intermediate SYNTAX scores, so results may not apply to those with more complex CAD.
Final Note:
The NOTION-3 trial provides valuable evidence supporting the use of PCI in patients with significant CAD undergoing TAVI, emphasizing the importance of comprehensive cardiovascular care in this high-risk population.
Polled Analysis: Semaglutide Reduces Heart Failure Events in Obese Patients with HFpEF
12 Sep, 2024 | 13:39h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This post-hoc pooled analysis combined data from four randomized, placebo-controlled trials (SELECT, FLOW, STEP-HFpEF, and STEP-HFpEF DM) involving 3,743 participants with heart failure and preserved or mildly reduced ejection fraction (HFpEF). The participants had various comorbidities including obesity, diabetes, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. They were randomized to receive either semaglutide or placebo.
Main Findings: Semaglutide significantly reduced the risk of the composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure events compared to placebo (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53–0.89, p=0.0045). It also reduced worsening heart failure events alone (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.41–0.82, p=0.0019). However, no significant reduction in cardiovascular death alone was observed (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57–1.16, p=0.25). Semaglutide was generally well tolerated, with fewer serious adverse events compared to placebo.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest semaglutide may be an effective therapy to reduce heart failure-related events in obese patients with HFpEF. Although semaglutide did not reduce cardiovascular death, its ability to lower the risk of heart failure hospitalizations makes it a potential therapeutic option for managing HFpEF in this population, a condition with limited treatment choices.
RCT: 24-Hour Oxygen Therapy Does Not Reduce Hospitalization or Mortality Compared to 15-Hour Therapy in Severe Hypoxemia
12 Sep, 2024 | 13:21h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter, registry-based randomized controlled trial compared the effects of 24-hour versus 15-hour daily oxygen therapy in 241 patients with chronic, severe hypoxemia. Patients, recruited between 2018 and 2022, were assigned to either 24 hours (117 patients) or 15 hours (124 patients) of oxygen therapy daily. The study’s primary outcome was the composite of hospitalization or death from any cause within 1 year.
Main Findings: After 12 months, the results showed no significant difference between the two groups in the primary outcome. The event rates for hospitalization or death were similar in the 24-hour and 15-hour groups (124.7 vs. 124.5 events per 100 person-years, hazard ratio 0.99, 95% CI, 0.72-1.36). Secondary outcomes, including individual rates of hospitalization and mortality, also showed no meaningful differences, and adverse event rates were comparable between groups.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that increasing oxygen therapy from 15 to 24 hours per day does not reduce hospitalization or mortality in patients with severe hypoxemia. Therefore, the less burdensome 15-hour regimen may be preferable in clinical practice, as it is equally effective while reducing patient burden.
RCT: Transcatheter Repair Noninferior to Mitral-Valve Surgery for Secondary Mitral Regurgitation
12 Sep, 2024 | 12:13h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This noninferiority trial, conducted in Germany, enrolled 210 patients with heart failure and secondary mitral regurgitation who remained symptomatic despite medical therapy. Patients were randomized to undergo either transcatheter edge-to-edge repair or mitral-valve surgery, with outcomes assessed over a one-year period.
Main Findings: Transcatheter repair was found to be noninferior to mitral-valve surgery regarding the primary efficacy outcome—a composite of death, heart failure hospitalization, mitral-valve reintervention, assist device implantation, or stroke at one year (16.7% in the transcatheter group vs. 22.5% in the surgery group; mean difference, -6%; 95% CI, -17 to 6; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The transcatheter group experienced fewer major adverse events within 30 days (14.9% vs. 54.8%; mean difference, -40%; 95% CI, -51 to -27; P<0.001).
Implications for Practice: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair offers a similar efficacy to mitral-valve surgery at one year with a lower rate of short-term adverse events, suggesting it may be a suitable alternative, particularly for patients with higher surgical risk.
Cohort Study: Lower Risk of Cardiovascular Complications in Post–COVID-19 Vaccine Myocarditis Compared to Conventional Etiologies
7 Sep, 2024 | 20:36h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This French nationwide cohort study included 4,635 individuals aged 12-49 hospitalized for myocarditis between December 2020 and June 2022. The cohort was divided into three groups: 558 patients with post–COVID-19 mRNA vaccine myocarditis, 298 with post–COVID-19 infection myocarditis, and 3,779 with conventional myocarditis.
Main Findings: At 18 months of follow-up, the frequency of cardiovascular events was significantly lower in the postvaccine myocarditis group (5.7%) compared to conventional myocarditis (13.2%) with a weighted hazard ratio (wHR) of 0.55 (95% CI, 0.36-0.86). Hospital readmission for myopericarditis occurred in 3.2% of postvaccine cases, 4.0% of post–COVID-19 cases, and 5.8% of conventional cases. The all-cause mortality rate was 0.2% for postvaccine myocarditis, 1.3% for post–COVID-19 myocarditis, and 1.3% for conventional myocarditis.
Implications for Practice: Postvaccine myocarditis patients, primarily young males, experience fewer complications compared to conventional myocarditis, but long-term follow-up is still needed. These findings should guide future mRNA vaccine recommendations and clinical management for myocarditis patients.
Reference: Semenzato L. et al. (2024). Long-term Prognosis of Myocarditis Attributed to COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination, SARS-CoV-2, or Conventional Etiologies. JAMA, Online. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.16380
Link: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2822933
RCT: Pulmonary Vein Isolation Reduces Atrial Fibrillation Burden and Improves Quality of Life vs. Sham Procedure
7 Sep, 2024 | 17:24h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial (SHAM-PVI) compared pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) via cryoablation to a sham procedure in 126 patients with symptomatic paroxysmal or persistent atrial fibrillation (AF). The study, conducted in two UK tertiary centers, enrolled patients between January 2020 and March 2024. Major exclusions included long-standing persistent AF, prior left atrial ablation, and ejection fraction below 35%. Patients were monitored using implantable loop recorders.
Main Findings: At 6 months, the PVI group demonstrated a significant reduction in AF burden (60.31%) compared to the sham group (35.0%), with a geometric mean difference of 0.25 (95% CI, 0.15-0.42; P < .001). Quality-of-life scores also improved more in the PVI group, with an 18.39-point difference (95% CI, 11.48-25.30). Symptom improvement was also marked, with a reduction in the Mayo AF-Specific Symptom Inventory frequency score of −6.36 points (95% CI, −8.46 to −4.26).
Implications for Practice: PVI significantly reduces AF burden and improves both symptoms and quality of life in patients with symptomatic AF, compared to a sham procedure. These findings support the efficacy of PVI beyond a placebo effect, making it a compelling option for managing AF in patients not responsive to antiarrhythmic drugs.
Reference: Dulai, R., Sulke, N., Freemantle, N., Lambiase, P. D., Farwell, D., Srinivasan, N. T., et al. (2024). Pulmonary vein isolation vs sham intervention in symptomatic atrial fibrillation: The SHAM-PVI randomized clinical trial. JAMA. http://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.17921
Link: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2823283
RCT: Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT)-Guided PCI Lowers Adverse Cardiac Events Compared to Angiography in Complex Lesions
7 Sep, 2024 | 17:08h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter, randomized, open-label superiority trial (OCCUPI) compared optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with angiography-guided PCI in patients with complex coronary lesions. The trial was conducted across 20 hospitals in South Korea, enrolling 1,604 patients aged 19–85 years requiring drug-eluting stents. Participants were randomized into OCT-guided PCI (n=803) or angiography-guided PCI (n=801), with outcomes assessed over 1 year.
Main Findings: At 1 year, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization, occurred in 5% of patients in the OCT-guided group compared to 7% in the angiography-guided group. The reduction in events was mainly driven by lower rates of spontaneous myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization in the OCT group. Secondary outcomes, such as stroke or contrast-induced nephropathy, showed no significant differences between groups.
Implications for Practice: OCT-guided PCI was associated with a lower incidence of MACE in patients with complex coronary lesions. These findings suggest that OCT guidance may provide additional benefit in stent optimization compared to angiography alone.
Reference: Hong SJ et al. (2024). Optical coherence tomography-guided versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with complex lesions (OCCUPI): an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomised, open-label, superiority trial in South Korea. The Lancet. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01454-5
link: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(24)01454-5/fulltext
Meta-Analysis: Ticagrelor Monotherapy Reduces Bleeding Without Increasing Ischemic Risk in Coronary Stent Patients
7 Sep, 2024 | 15:06h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis pooled data from six randomized trials, comparing ticagrelor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with standard 12-month DAPT in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. The analysis included 23,256 patients in the per-protocol population and 24,407 in the intention-to-treat population, excluding those requiring long-term anticoagulants.
Main Findings: Ticagrelor monotherapy was found to be noninferior to 12-month DAPT for major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (MACCE), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 (95% CI 0.78-1.07). It also reduced the risk of major bleeding (HR 0.43, p<0.0001) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.76, p=0.034). Subgroup analyses suggested possible benefits in women for mortality and in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) for bleeding reduction.
Implications for Practice: Ticagrelor monotherapy may offer a safer alternative to prolonged DAPT by reducing bleeding risks without increasing ischemic events, particularly in ACS patients. Further research is needed to fully explore potential survival benefits, especially in women.
Reference: Valgimigli M, Hong S-J, Gragnano F, et al. (2024). De-escalation to ticagrelor monotherapy versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with and without acute coronary syndromes: a systematic review and individual patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01616-7
Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673624016167
RCT: Renal Denervation Reduces Blood Pressure in Chinese Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension
7 Sep, 2024 | 14:57h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized, sham-controlled trial investigating the efficacy and safety of catheter-based radiofrequency renal denervation (RDN) in Chinese patients with uncontrolled hypertension despite standardized triple antihypertensive therapy. A total of 217 patients (mean age 45.3 years, 21% female) were randomized 1:1 to receive RDN or a sham procedure.
Main Findings: At 6 months, patients who underwent RDN showed a significantly greater reduction in 24-hour ambulatory systolic blood pressure (−13.0 mm Hg) compared to the sham group (−3.0 mm Hg), with a baseline-adjusted difference of −9.4 mm Hg (P<0.001). Significant reductions were also observed in 24-hour diastolic BP and office systolic and diastolic BP. One access site complication occurred in the RDN group but resolved without further issues.
Implications for Practice: This trial demonstrates that RDN is an effective and safe option for reducing blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension, offering a potential adjunct to antihypertensive therapy in this population. Further research may solidify its role in managing resistant hypertension.
Reference: Jiang X et al. (2024). Efficacy and Safety of Catheter-Based Radiofrequency Renal Denervation in Chinese Patients With Uncontrolled Hypertension: The Randomized, Sham-Controlled, Multi-Center Iberis-HTN Trial. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069215
Link: https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.124.069215
RCT: Invasive Strategy Does Not Significantly Improve Cardiovascular Outcomes Over Conservative Management in Older Adults with NSTEMI
7 Sep, 2024 | 13:25h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This was a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial conducted across 48 sites in the UK, enrolling 1,518 patients aged 75 years or older with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Patients were randomly assigned to receive either the best available medical therapy alone (conservative strategy) or in combination with invasive treatment (coronary angiography and revascularization). The population included individuals who were frail or had high comorbidities, with a mean age of 82 years.
Main Findings: Over a median follow-up of 4.1 years, the primary outcome (a composite of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction) occurred in 25.6% of the invasive-strategy group and 26.3% of the conservative-strategy group (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.77–1.14; P=0.53), showing no significant difference. Cardiovascular death rates were similar between the two groups, but nonfatal myocardial infarction was lower in the invasive group (11.7% vs. 15.0%; HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.57–0.99). Procedural complications were rare, affecting less than 1% of patients.
Implications for Practice: This trial suggests that in older adults with NSTEMI, an invasive strategy does not significantly reduce the risk of cardiovascular death or nonfatal myocardial infarction compared to a conservative approach. The findings support the consideration of conservative management in frail elderly patients or those with significant comorbidities, given the minimal additional benefit of invasive treatment.
Reference: Kunadian, V., Mossop, H., Shields, C., Bardgett, M., Watts, P., Teare, M. D., Pritchard, J., et al. (2024). Invasive treatment strategy for older patients with myocardial infarction. New England Journal of Medicine. http://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407791
Link: https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2407791
RCT: Edoxaban Monotherapy Reduces Bleeding Events in Atrial Fibrillation with Stable CAD Compared to Dual Therapy
7 Sep, 2024 | 13:03h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter, open-label, adjudicator-masked randomized trial enrolled 1,040 patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD) across 18 sites in South Korea. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either edoxaban monotherapy (n=524) or dual antithrombotic therapy (edoxaban plus a single antiplatelet agent; n=516). The mean age was 72.1 years, with a mean CHA2DS2-VASc score of 4.3, reflecting a moderate to high stroke risk.
Main Findings: At 12 months, the primary composite outcome occurred in fewer patients in the edoxaban monotherapy group (6.8%) than in the dual therapy group (16.2%) (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.30–0.65; P<0.001). The reduction was largely driven by a significantly lower incidence of major bleeding or clinically relevant non-major bleeding (4.7% vs. 14.2%; HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.22–0.53). In contrast, the incidence of major ischemic events was similar between the two groups.
Implications for Practice: Edoxaban monotherapy provides a safer antithrombotic option for patients with AF and stable CAD by significantly reducing bleeding without increasing ischemic events compared to dual therapy. These findings suggest that monotherapy could be a preferable long-term treatment strategy in this population.
RCT: Interruption of Oral Anticoagulation during TAVI Reduces Bleeding Without Increasing Thromboembolic Events
7 Sep, 2024 | 12:43h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This international, open-label, randomized noninferiority trial examined 858 patients undergoing transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) who had an indication for oral anticoagulation due to concomitant diseases. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either continue or interrupt their oral anticoagulation during the procedure, with the primary outcome being a composite of cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications, or major bleeding within 30 days.
Main Findings: Primary outcome events occurred in 16.5% of the continuation group and 14.8% of the interruption group, showing a non-significant risk difference of 1.7 percentage points (95% CI, -3.1 to 6.6). Thromboembolic events were similar between groups (8.8% in continuation vs. 8.2% in interruption). However, bleeding events were significantly higher in the continuation group (31.1% vs. 21.3%; risk difference, 9.8 percentage points; 95% CI, 3.9 to 15.6).
Implications for Practice: Interrupting oral anticoagulation during TAVI significantly reduces bleeding without increasing thromboembolic risks, suggesting it may be a safer strategy for patients undergoing TAVI. These findings could influence clinical decision-making regarding anticoagulation management in this population.
Reference: van Ginkel, D.J. et al. (2024). Continuation versus Interruption of Oral Anticoagulation during TAVI. The New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2407794
RCT: Continuing Aspirin vs. Antiplatelet Cessation Before Surgery Did Not Reduce Ischemic Events in Patients With Coronary Stents Over 1 Year Post-Implantation
7 Sep, 2024 | 12:29h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This randomized controlled trial (ASSURE-DES) investigated the perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy in 926 patients with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) undergoing low-to-intermediate-risk noncardiac surgery. The patients, at least one year post-stent implantation, were randomized to continue aspirin monotherapy or stop all antiplatelet therapy five days prior to surgery.
Main Findings: The study found no significant difference in the primary composite outcome (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or stroke) between the aspirin monotherapy group (0.6%) and the no antiplatelet group (0.9%). However, minor bleeding was more frequent in the aspirin group (14.9% vs 10.1%, P=0.027), with no difference in major bleeding.
Implications for Practice: These results suggest that for stable patients with DES undergoing noncardiac surgery, temporarily discontinuing aspirin may be a safe option, as continuing aspirin did not reduce ischemic events but did increase minor bleeding risk. Further research is needed to assess outcomes in higher-risk surgical settings.
News Release: SCOFF Trial Confirms Fasting Not Necessary Before Cardiac Catheterisation Procedures
7 Sep, 2024 | 10:10h | UTC1 September 2024 – London, United Kingdom – New findings from the SCOFF trial, presented at ESC Congress 2024, suggest that fasting prior to minimally invasive cardiac catheterisation procedures under conscious sedation does not increase the risk of complications. The trial supports reconsidering current guidelines on pre-procedural fasting.
Key Points for Physicians:
– No increased complications: The SCOFF trial found no significant difference in adverse outcomes, such as aspiration pneumonia or hypoglycemia, between patients who fasted and those who ate normally before cardiac catheterisation.
– Improved patient satisfaction: Patients who did not fast reported higher satisfaction, with fewer complaints of discomfort and hunger.
– Potential guideline change: These findings, in line with previous studies like CHOW-NOW and TONIC, challenge the necessity of fasting before such procedures.
The trial’s lead investigator, Dr. David Ferreira (John Hunter Hospital, Australia), emphasized that avoiding fasting may improve patient experience without increasing risks, making it time to reconsider fasting guidelines for these procedures.
Study Overview:
– Trial design: Prospective, randomized, open-label, with blinded endpoint assessment.
– Participants: 716 patients undergoing coronary angiography, coronary intervention, or cardiac implantable electronic device procedures.
– Primary endpoint: Composite of hypotension, aspiration pneumonia, hyperglycemia, and hypoglycemia, showing a lower event rate in the non-fasting group (12.0%) compared to the fasting group (19.1%).
These results are likely to influence future clinical practice, providing greater flexibility for both patients and healthcare systems.
RCT: AF Screening Does Not Reduce Stroke Hospitalizations in Elderly Patients
6 Sep, 2024 | 22:18h | UTCStudy Design and Population: The GUARD-AF trial was a prospective, randomized controlled trial conducted across 149 primary care sites in the U.S. It enrolled 11,905 participants aged 70 and older, with a median age of 75 years, 56.6% of whom were female. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either screening for atrial fibrillation (AF) using a 14-day continuous electrocardiographic patch monitor or usual care. The primary outcome was all-cause stroke hospitalization, with bleeding as a key safety outcome.
Main Findings: After a median follow-up of 15.3 months, AF diagnosis was higher in the screening group (5%) compared to the usual care group (3.3%), and anticoagulation initiation was also more frequent (4.2% vs. 2.8%). However, the risk of stroke hospitalization was not significantly different between the screening and usual care groups (0.7% vs. 0.6%; HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.69-1.75). Similarly, there was no significant difference in bleeding risk (1.0% vs. 1.1%; HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.60-1.26).
Implications for Practice: The findings suggest that screening for AF using continuous electrocardiographic monitoring in elderly patients does not reduce stroke hospitalizations despite an increased detection of AF. Given the low event rates and premature termination of enrollment due to COVID-19, further studies are needed to confirm these results and explore alternative strategies for stroke prevention in this population.
RCT: Finerenone Reduces Worsening Heart Failure Events in Patients with Mildly Reduced or Preserved Ejection Fraction
6 Sep, 2024 | 22:03h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This international, double-blind, randomized clinical trial included 6,001 patients with heart failure and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 40% or greater. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either finerenone (20 mg or 40 mg daily) or placebo in addition to standard therapy, with a median follow-up period of 32 months.
Main Findings: The finerenone group experienced a 16% reduction in the composite primary outcome of worsening heart failure events and death from cardiovascular causes compared to placebo (rate ratio, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.95; P=0.007). Specifically, total worsening heart failure events were lower in the finerenone group (rate ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.94; P=0.006), but cardiovascular mortality did not significantly differ between the groups (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.11). Finerenone was linked to an increased risk of hyperkalemia.
Implications for Practice: Finerenone reduces worsening heart failure events in patients with mildly reduced or preserved ejection fraction, making it a viable addition to standard heart failure therapy. However, clinicians should monitor for hyperkalemia, a known side effect, and the lack of significant mortality benefit highlights the need for further investigation into long-term cardiovascular outcomes.
RCT: Vutrisiran Reduces Mortality and Cardiovascular Events in Patients with Transthyretin Amyloidosis Cardiomyopathy
6 Sep, 2024 | 21:57h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This double-blind, randomized clinical trial evaluated the efficacy of vutrisiran in 655 patients with transthyretin amyloidosis with cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM). Participants were randomly assigned to receive either vutrisiran (25 mg) or placebo every 12 weeks for up to 36 months. The study population included patients both with and without baseline tafamidis treatment.
Main Findings: Vutrisiran treatment significantly reduced the risk of death from any cause and recurrent cardiovascular events compared to placebo (HR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.56–0.93, p=0.01). In monotherapy patients (no tafamidis), the hazard ratio was 0.67 (95% CI: 0.49–0.93, p=0.02). Vutrisiran also preserved physical function, showing less decline in the 6-minute walk test distance (mean difference: 26.5 meters, p<0.001) and quality of life (mean KCCQ-OS difference: 5.8 points, p<0.001). Adverse events were comparable between groups.
Implications for Practice: Vutrisiran offers a promising treatment option for reducing mortality, cardiovascular events, and functional decline in ATTR-CM patients. Its favorable safety profile supports its potential use in long-term management.
2024 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Chronic Coronary Syndromes
1 Sep, 2024 | 18:49h | UTCIntroduction: The 2024 guidelines were developed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) with the endorsement of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS). These guidelines provide updated recommendations for the management of chronic coronary syndromes (CCS), focusing on the diagnosis, treatment, and long-term care of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD).
Key Points:
1 – History and Risk Assessment:
– Detailed assessment of cardiovascular risk factors, medical history, and symptom characteristics is essential in patients with suspected CCS.
– Symptoms like chest pain triggered by emotional stress, dyspnea on exertion, or fatigue should be considered potential angina equivalents.
2 – Diagnostic Testing:
– Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA): Recommended as a first-line diagnostic tool for patients with low to moderate pre-test likelihood of obstructive CAD.
– Stress Imaging: Stress echocardiography, SPECT, PET, or cardiac MRI is recommended for those with moderate to high pre-test likelihood to diagnose myocardial ischemia and estimate the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE).
3 – Revascularization Indications:
– Symptom Relief: Revascularization is recommended for patients with obstructive CAD who have significant symptoms despite optimal medical therapy.
– Prognostic Benefit: Indicated in patients with left main coronary artery disease, severe three-vessel disease, or two-vessel disease including proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis, particularly if associated with reduced left ventricular function.
– High-Risk Anatomical Features: Revascularization is advised when significant stenosis is present in patients with high-risk anatomical features identified by imaging, especially if non-invasive testing shows a large area of ischemia.
4 – Lifestyle and Risk Management:
– A comprehensive approach to cardiovascular risk reduction, including lifestyle changes (e.g., smoking cessation, diet, and physical activity) and guideline-directed medical therapy, is strongly recommended.
– Home-based cardiac rehabilitation and digital health interventions are suggested to improve long-term adherence to healthy behaviors.
5 – Antianginal and Antithrombotic Therapy:
– Tailoring antianginal therapy based on individual patient characteristics, comorbidities, and local drug availability is recommended.
– Long-term antithrombotic therapy with aspirin or clopidogrel is recommended for patients with prior myocardial infarction or revascularization.
Conclusion: The 2024 ESC guidelines emphasize a patient-centered approach, integrating advanced diagnostic tools and personalized therapeutic strategies to optimize outcomes for patients with chronic coronary syndromes. The guidelines highlight the importance of detailed risk assessment, appropriate use of diagnostic imaging, clear criteria for revascularization, and a strong focus on lifestyle interventions alongside pharmacological management.
Updated ESC Hypertension Guidelines 2024: Intensified Blood Pressure Targets and New Categories – Eur Heart J
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:54h | UTCIntroduction:
The 2024 ESC Guidelines for managing elevated blood pressure (BP) and hypertension were developed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and endorsed by the European Society of Endocrinology (ESE) and the European Stroke Organisation (ESO). These guidelines introduce significant updates to BP management, including more intensive treatment targets and the introduction of a new category for “Elevated BP.”
Key Points:
1 – New Intensive BP Target: For most patients receiving BP-lowering medication, the guidelines now recommend a systolic BP treatment target range of 120-129 mmHg. This marks a significant shift from previous guidelines, which suggested a less aggressive initial target.
2 – New ‘Elevated BP’ Category: The guidelines introduce a new category, “Elevated BP,” defined as a systolic BP of 120-139 mmHg and/or diastolic BP of 70-89 mmHg. This aims to identify more patients at risk of cardiovascular events, such as heart attacks and strokes, before they meet the traditional threshold for hypertension.
3 – Pragmatic BP Management: For patients who cannot tolerate the intensive BP target, the guidelines recommend aiming for a BP that is “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA), particularly in frail or older individuals.
4 – Lifestyle Modifications: The guidelines emphasize lifestyle interventions, including dietary changes like potassium supplementation and new exercise recommendations, as first-line strategies for managing BP.
5 – Renal Denervation: For the first time, the guidelines include recommendations on the use of renal denervation—a procedure for patients with resistant hypertension that has not responded to standard treatments. This is not recommended as a first-line treatment but may be considered in specific high-risk cases.
Conclusion:
These new guidelines represent a major update in the management of hypertension, particularly in promoting more aggressive BP targets to reduce cardiovascular risks. The inclusion of a new BP category and recommendations for renal denervation highlight the guidelines’ focus on early intervention and advanced treatment options.
2024 ESC Guidelines for the Management of Atrial Fibrillation – Eur Heart J
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:34h | UTCIntroduction: The 2024 guidelines for the management of atrial fibrillation (AF) were developed by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in collaboration with the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS) and other specialized associations. These guidelines aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment, and management of AF, with a focus on improving patient outcomes through a multidisciplinary approach.
Key Points:
1 – Patient-Centered Care and Education:
– Education directed at patients, caregivers, and healthcare professionals is essential for optimizing shared decision-making. This approach ensures that treatment options are discussed openly, considering both the benefits and risks.
2 – Comorbidity and Risk Factor Management:
– Diuretics are recommended for patients with AF, heart failure (HF), and congestion to alleviate symptoms and improve AF management.
– Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2 inhibitors) are recommended for patients with AF and HF, regardless of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), to reduce the risk of hospitalization and cardiovascular death.
3 – Stroke Prevention and Anticoagulation:
– Oral anticoagulation is recommended for all patients with clinical AF and elevated thromboembolic risk, particularly those with a CHA2DS2-VA score of 2 or more.
– Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preferred over vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in eligible patients undergoing cardioversion.
4 – Rate and Rhythm Control:
– Beta-blockers, diltiazem, verapamil, or digoxin are recommended as first-choice drugs for heart rate control in patients with AF and LVEF >40%.
– Catheter ablation is recommended as a first-line treatment option in patients with paroxysmal AF to reduce symptoms and prevent AF progression.
Conclusion: The 2024 ESC guidelines emphasize a patient-centered, multidisciplinary approach to AF management, with a strong focus on the early identification and management of comorbidities and risk factors. The guidelines also advocate for the use of DOACs in stroke prevention and recommend specific strategies for rate and rhythm control to enhance patient outcomes.
RCT: No Difference in Postoperative Complications Between Continuation and Discontinuation of Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors Before Major Surgery – JAMA
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:12h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter randomized clinical trial included 2,222 patients who had been treated with renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASIs) for at least 3 months and were scheduled for major noncardiac surgery at 40 hospitals in France between January 2018 and April 2023. The participants were randomly assigned to either continue RASIs until the day of surgery or to discontinue them 48 hours before surgery.
Main Findings: The trial found no significant difference in the primary outcome—a composite of all-cause mortality and major postoperative complications within 28 days—between the continuation and discontinuation groups (22% in both groups, RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.87-1.19). However, the continuation group experienced a higher incidence of intraoperative hypotension (54% vs. 41%, RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.19-1.44).
Implications for Practice: Continuation of RASIs before major noncardiac surgery does not increase the risk of postoperative mortality or major complications, but it does elevate the risk of intraoperative hypotension. Clinicians should weigh these risks when deciding whether to continue or discontinue RASIs before surgery.