Editor's Choice
RCT: High-Intensity NPPV Reduced Criteria for Intubation in Acute COPD Exacerbations
16 Sep, 2024 | 16:50h | UTCBackground: Acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) often lead to hypercapnic respiratory failure requiring ventilatory support. Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NPPV) is standard care, commonly delivered at low intensity with lower inspiratory pressures. However, approximately 15% of patients still require endotracheal intubation despite low-intensity NPPV. High-intensity NPPV, using higher inspiratory pressures to achieve greater reductions in PaCO₂, has shown benefits in stable hypercapnic COPD patients, but its effect during acute exacerbations is unclear.
Objective: To determine whether high-intensity NPPV reduces the need for endotracheal intubation in patients with acute COPD exacerbations and persistent hypercapnia compared to low-intensity NPPV.
Methods: In a multicenter, randomized clinical trial conducted at 30 respiratory wards in China from January 2019 to January 2022, 300 patients with acute COPD exacerbations and PaCO₂ greater than 45 mm Hg after 6 hours of low-intensity NPPV were enrolled. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either high-intensity NPPV (inspiratory positive airway pressure [IPAP] adjusted to achieve tidal volumes of 10–15 mL/kg predicted body weight, typically IPAP 20–30 cm H₂O) or to continue low-intensity NPPV (IPAP adjusted for tidal volumes of 6–10 mL/kg, maximum IPAP 20 cm H₂O). Patients in the low-intensity group meeting prespecified criteria for intubation were allowed to crossover to high-intensity NPPV. The primary outcome was the need for endotracheal intubation during hospitalization, defined by prespecified clinical and gas exchange criteria. Secondary outcomes included actual endotracheal intubation rates, mortality, length of hospital stay, and adverse events.
Results: Of the 300 patients (mean age 73 years; 68% male), the primary outcome occurred in 4.8% of the high-intensity group versus 13.7% of the low-intensity group (absolute difference –9.0%; 95% CI, –15.4% to –2.5%; one-sided P = .004; adjusted risk ratio [RR], 0.35; 95% CI, 0.14–0.76). However, actual endotracheal intubation rates did not differ significantly between groups (3.4% vs 3.9%; absolute difference –0.5%; 95% CI, –4.8% to 3.7%; P = .81). The high-intensity group had greater reductions in PaCO₂ levels over 72 hours (mean PaCO₂ at 72 hours: 53 mm Hg vs 64 mm Hg; P < .001) and higher rates of achieving normocapnia (21.8% vs 4.6%; P < .001). Abdominal distension occurred more frequently in the high-intensity group (37.4% vs 25.5%; absolute difference 11.9%; 95% CI, 1.5%–22.4%; P = .03), but other adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between groups.
Conclusions: High-intensity NPPV reduced the proportion of patients meeting criteria for endotracheal intubation compared to low-intensity NPPV in patients with acute COPD exacerbations and persistent hypercapnia. However, actual intubation rates did not differ, possibly due to crossover from low- to high-intensity NPPV in patients meeting intubation criteria.
Implications for Practice: High-intensity NPPV may be considered for patients with acute COPD exacerbations who remain hypercapnic after initial low-intensity NPPV, as it may reduce progression to severe respiratory failure requiring intubation criteria. Clinicians should monitor for abdominal distension and potential alkalosis, although these did not significantly affect overall tolerance or safety.
Study Strengths and Limitations: Strengths include the multicenter randomized design, clear enrollment criteria, and standardized protocols. Limitations include early trial termination, unblinded interventions, potential bias due to allowed crossover, and lack of power to detect differences in mortality or actual intubation rates.
Future Research: Further large-scale trials are needed to confirm these findings, assess the impact on actual intubation rates and mortality, and explore the efficacy of high-intensity NPPV in different clinical settings and patient populations, including those without prior NPPV exposure or with more severe respiratory distress.
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.
RCT: Comparing Perioperative Chemotherapy Alone to Perioperative Chemotherapy Plus Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy in Resectable Gastric Cancer
14 Sep, 2024 | 18:23h | UTCBackground:
In the management of resectable gastric cancer, perioperative chemotherapy—chemotherapy administered both before (neoadjuvant) and after (adjuvant) surgery—is the standard of care in many Western countries. This approach is based on trials like MAGIC and FLOT4-AIO, which demonstrated improved survival with perioperative chemotherapy compared to surgery alone.
Preoperative chemoradiotherapy (the combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy before surgery) has shown benefits in other gastrointestinal cancers, such as esophageal cancer, by downstaging tumors and potentially improving surgical outcomes. However, its efficacy in gastric cancer, especially when added to perioperative chemotherapy, has not been well-established.
Objective:
To determine whether adding preoperative chemoradiotherapy to standard perioperative chemotherapy improves overall survival compared to perioperative chemotherapy alone in patients with resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.
Methods:
- Study Design: International, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (TOPGEAR).
- Participants: 574 patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction (Siewert type II or III), clinical stage T3 or T4, and considered suitable for curative surgery.
- Interventions:
1. Perioperative Chemotherapy Group (Control Group):
- Definition of Perioperative Chemotherapy: Chemotherapy administered both before (preoperative/neoadjuvant) and after (postoperative/adjuvant) surgery.
- Chemotherapy Regimens:
- Before 2017: Patients received three cycles before surgery and three cycles after surgery of either:
- ECF: Epirubicin, Cisplatin, and continuous-infusion Fluorouracil.
- ECX: Epirubicin, Cisplatin, and Capecitabine (an oral prodrug of fluorouracil).
- After 2017 Amendment: Patients received four cycles before surgery and four cycles after surgery of:
- FLOT: Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, and Docetaxel.
- Before 2017: Patients received three cycles before surgery and three cycles after surgery of either:
2. Perioperative Chemotherapy Plus Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Group (Experimental Group):
- Modifications to Chemotherapy:
- Received one less cycle of preoperative chemotherapy compared to the control group to accommodate the addition of radiotherapy.
- Postoperative chemotherapy was the same as in the control group.
- Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy:
- Chemoradiotherapy Definition: Concurrent administration of chemotherapy and radiotherapy before surgery.
- Radiotherapy Regimen:
- Total dose of 45 Gy, delivered in 25 fractions over 5 weeks (1.8 Gy per fraction, 5 days per week).
- Target Area: Entire stomach, any perigastric tumor extension, and regional lymph nodes.
- Concurrent Chemotherapy During Radiotherapy:
- Continuous infusion of Fluorouracil (200 mg/m² per day) 7 days a week during radiotherapy.
- Alternatively, Capecitabine (825 mg/m² twice daily on days 1–5 of each radiotherapy week) could be used.
- Surgical Procedure:
- Surgery was performed 4–6 weeks after completion of preoperative therapy.
- Recommended surgery included total gastrectomy, subtotal distal gastrectomy, or esophagogastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy (removal of additional lymph node stations beyond the immediate perigastric nodes).
Endpoints:
- Primary Endpoint: Overall survival (time from randomization to death from any cause).
- Secondary Endpoints: Progression-free survival, pathological complete response rate (no residual tumor in the resected specimen), treatment-related toxic effects, and quality of life.
Results:
- Pathological Findings:
- Pathological Complete Response Rate:
- Higher in the experimental group (preoperative chemoradiotherapy) at 17% compared to 8% in the control group.
- Tumor Downstaging:
- More patients in the experimental group had their tumors downstaged to a lower T category and had fewer involved lymph nodes.
- Pathological Complete Response Rate:
- Survival Outcomes:
- Overall Survival:
- Median Overall Survival:
- Experimental Group: 46 months.
- Control Group: 49 months.
- Hazard Ratio for Death: 1.05 (95% CI, 0.83–1.31), indicating no significant difference between the groups.
- Median Overall Survival:
- Progression-Free Survival:
- Median progression-free survival was similar between the groups (31 months vs. 32 months).
- Overall Survival:
- Treatment Adherence:
- Preoperative Therapy Completion:
- High completion rates in both groups for preoperative chemotherapy.
- Slightly lower in the experimental group due to the addition of radiotherapy.
- Postoperative Chemotherapy Completion:
- Lower completion rates overall, with fewer patients in the experimental group completing postoperative chemotherapy (48% vs. 59%).
- Preoperative Therapy Completion:
- Adverse Events:
- Similar rates of grade 3 or higher toxic effects in both groups.
- No significant differences in surgical complications or postoperative mortality.
Conclusion:
Adding preoperative chemoradiotherapy to standard perioperative chemotherapy did not improve overall survival or progression-free survival in patients with resectable gastric and gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma, despite achieving higher pathological complete response rates and increased tumor downstaging. These findings suggest that the routine addition of preoperative chemoradiotherapy to perioperative chemotherapy does not confer additional survival benefits and should not change the current standard of care.
Clinical Implications:
- Standard Treatment Remains Perioperative Chemotherapy:
- Perioperative chemotherapy alone continues to be the standard approach for resectable gastric cancer.
- Regimens like FLOT are preferred due to their demonstrated efficacy.
- Role of Radiotherapy:
- Routine use of preoperative radiotherapy in addition to chemotherapy is not supported by this trial’s findings.
- Radiotherapy may still have a role in specific clinical scenarios, but not as a standard addition to perioperative chemotherapy.
- Future Directions:
- Further research may focus on identifying subgroups of patients who might benefit from chemoradiotherapy.
- Biomarker-driven approaches and personalized treatment strategies could optimize outcomes.
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: 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: 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.
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.
RCT: Beta-Blocker Interruption Post-Myocardial Infarction Increases Cardiovascular Events Without Improving Quality of Life – N Engl J Med
31 Aug, 2024 | 19:04h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This multicenter, open-label, randomized, noninferiority trial included 3,698 patients across 49 sites in France. Participants had a history of myocardial infarction, a left ventricular ejection fraction of at least 40%, and had not experienced a cardiovascular event in the past six months. The study compared outcomes between patients who either interrupted or continued long-term beta-blocker therapy, with a minimum follow-up of one year.
Main Findings: Interruption of beta-blocker treatment resulted in a higher incidence of adverse cardiovascular events (23.8%) compared to continuation (21.1%), with a hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% CI, 1.01 to 1.33). The difference did not meet the criteria for noninferiority (P=0.44). Additionally, there was no significant improvement in quality of life among patients who discontinued beta-blockers.
Implications for Practice: The findings suggest that in patients with a history of myocardial infarction and stable cardiovascular health, continuing beta-blocker therapy is preferable to interruption. Discontinuation may increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular outcomes without offering quality of life benefits, supporting the ongoing use of beta-blockers in this population.
Cluster-Randomized Trial: Twice-Yearly Azithromycin Reduces Mortality in Children Aged 1 to 59 Months in Niger – New England Journal of Medicine
24 Aug, 2024 | 19:44h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This adaptive cluster-randomized trial evaluated the impact of twice-yearly azithromycin distribution on childhood mortality in rural communities in Niger. A total of 1273 communities were assigned to three groups: children aged 1 to 59 months receiving azithromycin, infants aged 1 to 11 months receiving azithromycin and placebo for older children, and a placebo group. The study included 382,586 children and followed mortality over 419,440 person-years.
Main Findings: The study found a significant 14% reduction in mortality among children aged 1 to 59 months in the azithromycin group compared to placebo (11.9 vs. 13.9 deaths per 1000 person-years; P<0.001). However, azithromycin did not significantly reduce mortality in infants aged 1 to 11 months when compared to placebo (22.3 vs. 23.9 deaths per 1000 person-years).
Implications for Practice: Azithromycin distribution to children aged 1 to 59 months effectively reduces mortality in rural sub-Saharan Africa. However, targeting only infants may not yield significant benefits. Continuous monitoring for antimicrobial resistance is essential.
Non-Inferiority Trial: Burr-Hole Drainage Without Irrigation Results in Higher Reoperation Rate in Chronic Subdural Hematoma – The Lancet
18 Aug, 2024 | 18:17h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This Finnish, nationwide, multicentre, randomised, controlled non-inferiority trial (FINISH) evaluated whether subdural irrigation during burr-hole drainage for chronic subdural haematoma could be omitted without compromising outcomes. The trial enrolled 589 adults (165 women, 424 men) requiring burr-hole drainage, randomly assigned to receive drainage with or without irrigation.
Main Findings: The study found a 6.0 percentage point higher reoperation rate within 6 months in the non-irrigation group (18.3%) compared to the irrigation group (12.6%). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes, including the proportion of patients with an unfavorable functional outcome (13.1% vs. 12.6%) or mortality (6.1% vs. 7.1%). Adverse events were comparable between the groups.
Implications for Practice: The trial results suggest that omitting subdural irrigation during burr-hole drainage increases the risk of reoperation, without improving functional outcomes or reducing mortality. The findings support the continued use of subdural irrigation in this procedure.
Cohort Study: Prenatal Exposure to Buprenorphine with Naloxone Appears Safe and More Effective than Buprenorphine Alone for Neonates and Mothers – JAMA
18 Aug, 2024 | 18:06h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This population-based cohort study used healthcare data from Medicaid-insured pregnancies in the US between 2000 and 2018. The study included 8,695 pregnant individuals linked to their liveborn infants. Participants were exposed to either buprenorphine combined with naloxone or buprenorphine alone during the first trimester.
Main Findings: The study found that prenatal exposure to buprenorphine with naloxone was associated with a lower risk of neonatal abstinence syndrome (37.4% vs 55.8%) and modest reductions in neonatal intensive care unit admission (30.6% vs 34.9%) and small for gestational age (10.0% vs 12.4%) compared to buprenorphine alone. No significant differences were observed for congenital malformations, low birth weight, preterm birth, respiratory symptoms, or cesarean delivery.
Implications for Practice: These findings suggest that buprenorphine combined with naloxone is a safe and potentially preferable option for treating opioid use disorder during pregnancy, providing more flexibility in treatment choices for pregnant individuals.
RCT: Twice-Yearly Lenacapavir Prevents HIV Infections More Effectively Than Daily F/TAF in Women – N Engl J Med
18 Aug, 2024 | 13:56h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This phase 3, double-blind, randomized controlled trial included 5,338 adolescent girls and young women in South Africa and Uganda. Participants were assigned to receive either twice-yearly subcutaneous lenacapavir, daily oral emtricitabine–tenofovir alafenamide (F/TAF), or daily oral emtricitabine–tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (F/TDF) as an active control, with corresponding placebos.
Main Findings: Lenacapavir demonstrated superior efficacy in HIV prevention, with zero infections observed among its recipients. In contrast, the F/TAF group experienced 39 HIV infections (2.02 per 100 person-years), while the F/TDF group had 16 infections (1.69 per 100 person-years). HIV incidence was significantly lower with lenacapavir compared to background incidence and F/TDF, while no significant difference was observed between F/TAF and F/TDF.
Implications for Practice: Twice-yearly lenacapavir could be a more effective and potentially easier-to-adopt HIV prevention strategy than daily oral F/TAF in cisgender women, though considerations of injection-site reactions are necessary. This approach could improve adherence and outcomes in populations with low persistence in daily PrEP use.
CDC Updates Contraceptive Guidelines for 2024 – Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
18 Aug, 2024 | 13:51h | UTCIntroduction: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has released updated recommendations in the “U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024” and “U.S. Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2024.” These guidelines provide healthcare providers with the latest evidence-based recommendations to support patient-centered contraceptive care, aiming to remove unnecessary barriers and ensure equitable access to contraception.
Key Points:
1 – Intrauterine Device (IUD) Placement:
– Routine use of misoprostol is not recommended for IUD placement, except in selected cases. Lidocaine (topical or paracervical block) is newly recommended to reduce patient pain during IUD placement.
2 – Bleeding Irregularities with Implants:
– Hormonal treatments and antifibrinolytic agents may improve bleeding irregularities associated with implant use, although bleeding often recurs after stopping treatment. NSAIDs and selective estrogen-receptor modulators may also be effective, with benefits persisting post-treatment.
3 – Testosterone Use and Pregnancy Risk:
– Testosterone therapy may not prevent pregnancy in transgender, gender-diverse, and nonbinary individuals with a uterus. Contraceptive counseling and services should be offered to those at risk of pregnancy who do not desire it.
4 – Self-Administration of Injectable Contraceptives:
– Subcutaneous depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA-SC) should be available for self-administration, providing an additional option for those seeking injectable contraception.
5 – Updates in Medical Eligibility Criteria:
– The 2024 guidelines include revised recommendations for patients with chronic kidney disease, updates for those who are breastfeeding, postpartum, or post-abortion, and considerations for individuals with obesity, cardiovascular conditions, and other comorbidities.
6 – Patient-Centered Counseling:
– The guidelines emphasize the importance of providing contraceptive care in a noncoercive manner, supporting the individual’s values, goals, and reproductive autonomy. Healthcare providers are encouraged to recognize and address structural inequities and avoid discrimination in contraceptive counseling.
Conclusion: These updated guidelines from the CDC are designed to support healthcare providers in delivering equitable, patient-centered contraceptive care. By removing unnecessary barriers and providing clear guidance on managing complex contraceptive issues, the recommendations aim to improve access to contraception and support informed, autonomous decision-making among patients.
Guideline Reference: Curtis, K. M., Nguyen, A. T., Tepper, N. K., et al. (2024). U.S. Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use, 2024. MMWR Recommendations and Reports, 73(3).
Review: Prevention and Management of Device-Associated Complications in the Intensive Care Unit – The BMJ
17 Aug, 2024 | 20:04h | UTCIntroduction:
This review article, published by experts from the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, focuses on the complications associated with invasive devices commonly used in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU). While these devices are essential for managing critically ill patients, they also pose significant risks, necessitating a thorough understanding of their potential complications and strategies for prevention and management.
Key Points:
1 – Central Venous Catheters (CVCs):
– CVCs are widely used in ICU patients but carry risks like vascular injury, pneumothorax, thrombosis, and infection.
– Use of real-time ultrasound guidance and careful operator technique are crucial for minimizing these risks.
– Prompt removal of unnecessary CVCs is essential to reduce the risk of complications.
2 – Arterial Catheters:
– Commonly used for hemodynamic monitoring, these catheters can lead to complications such as vascular occlusion, nerve injury, and infection.
– Ultrasound guidance is recommended to reduce the risk of complications, and catheters should be discontinued as soon as clinically feasible.
3 – Airway Devices (Endotracheal Tubes and Tracheostomies):
– Complications include laryngeal injury, tracheal stenosis, and tracheomalacia.
– Strategies to reduce these risks include minimizing intubation attempts, ensuring proper tube placement, and managing cuff pressures carefully.
4 – Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO):
– ECMO is associated with significant complications, including bleeding, thromboembolic events, and neurologic injuries.
– Proper cannulation technique and vigilant monitoring are essential to mitigate these risks.
5 – Infection Control:
– Strict adherence to aseptic techniques and the use of chlorhexidine-impregnated dressings are recommended to prevent device-associated infections.
Conclusion:
This review underscores the importance of judicious use and timely removal of invasive devices in the ICU to minimize complications. Healthcare professionals must remain vigilant and employ best practices to prevent and manage these complications effectively.
RCT: Hypothermic Oxygenated Perfusion Trends Toward Lower Primary Graft Dysfunction in Heart Transplantation – The Lancet
17 Aug, 2024 | 19:38h | UTCStudy Design and Population: This randomized, controlled, open-label, multicenter clinical trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE) compared to static cold storage (SCS) in preserving donor hearts for transplantation. Conducted across 15 transplant centers in eight European countries, the study enrolled 229 adult heart transplant candidates between November 2020 and May 2023. The trial included 204 patients who received a transplant and met the study’s inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Main Findings: The primary composite endpoint, including cardiac-related death, graft dysfunction, and rejection within 30 days post-transplant, occurred in 19% of patients in the HOPE group compared to 30% in the SCS group, reflecting a 44% risk reduction (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.99, p=0.059). Notably, primary graft dysfunction was significantly lower in the HOPE group (11% vs. 28%, RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.20–0.73). The incidence of major adverse cardiac transplant events was also reduced with HOPE (18% vs. 32%, RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34–0.92).
Implications for Practice: HOPE showed a potential clinical benefit by reducing the incidence of primary graft dysfunction and major adverse cardiac events after heart transplantation. Although the primary endpoint was not statistically significant, the observed risk reductions suggest that HOPE could improve outcomes in heart transplantation. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and optimize donor heart preservation strategies.