1.
Impact on Mortality and Major Bleeding of Radial Versus Femoral Artery Access for Coronary Angiography or Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a Meta-analysis of Individual Patient Data from Seven Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trials
Gargiulo G, Giacoppo D, Jolly SS, Cairns J, Le May M, Bernat I, Romagnoli E, Rao SV, van Leeuwen MAH, Mehta SR, et al
Circulation. 2022
Abstract
BACKGROUND In some randomized controlled trials (RCTs), transradial (TRA) compared with transfemoral access (TFA) was associated with lower mortality in coronary artery disease patients undergoing invasive management. We analyzed the effects of TRA versus TFA across multicenter RCTs and whether these associations are modified by patient or operator characteristics. METHODS We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of multicenter RCTs comparing TRA versus TFA among patients undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (PROSPERO; CRD42018109664). The primary outcome was all-cause mortality and the co-primary outcome was major bleeding at 30 days. The primary analysis was conducted by one-stage mixed-effects models based on the intention-to-treat cohort. The impact of access-site on mortality and major bleeding was further assessed by multivariable analysis. The relationship among access-site, bleeding, and mortality was investigated by natural effect model mediation analysis with multivariable adjustment. RESULTS A total of 21,600 patients (TRA=10,775 vs. TFA=10,825) from 7 RCTs were included. Median age was 63.9 years, 31.9% were female, 95% presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and 75.2% underwent PCI. All-cause mortality (1.6% vs. 2.1%; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.63-0.95, p=0.012) and major bleeding (1.5% vs. 2.7%; OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45- 0.67, p<0.001) were lower with TRA. Subgroup analyses for mortality showed consistent results, except for baseline hemoglobin ((pinteraction)=0.033), indicating that the benefit of TRA was substantial in patients with significant anemia, while it was not significant in patients with milder or no baseline anemia. After adjustment, TRA remained associated with 24% and 51% relative risk reduction of all-cause mortality and major bleeding. A mediation analysis showed that the benefit of TRA on mortality was only partially driven by major bleeding prevention, and ancillary mechanisms are required to fully explain the causal association. CONCLUSIONS TRA is associated with lower all-cause mortality and major bleeding at 30 days, compared with TFA. The effect on mortality was driven by patients with anemia. The reduction in major bleeding only partially explains the mortality benefit.
2.
Drug-Coated Stents Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Academic Research Consortium-Defined High Bleeding Risk Patients
Marquis-Gravel G, Urban P, Copt S, Capodanno D, Pocock SJ, Sadozai Slama S, Stoll HP, Tanguay JF, Mehran R, Leon MB, et al
EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology. 2020
Abstract
AIMS: To model the safety and effectiveness of drug-coated stents (DCS) vs. bare-metal stents (BMS) in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients according to the Academic Research Criteria (ARC) criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS Participants from the LEADERS FREE (LF) and LEADERS FREE (LFII) studies were pooled into one dataset. Participants were treated with 30 days of DAPT. The primary safety (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) and effectiveness (target-lesion revascularization) endpoints were compared between DCS and BMS in the subgroup of patients satisfying the ARC-HBR definition using propensity-score modelling. From the 3,635 participants included in the combined LF & LFII dataset, 2,898 (79.7%) satisfied the ARC-HBR criteria (DCS: 1,923; BMS: 975). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 184 (9.8%) and in 132 (13.8%) participants in the DCS and BMS groups, respectively (adjusted HR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.57-0.91; p=0.006). The risk of the primary effectiveness endpoint was also significantly lower with DCS (6.2%) vs. BMS (8.8%) (adjusted HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.52-0.94; p=0.016). Safety and effectiveness of DCS vs. BMS were consistent according to ARC-HBR status (p interaction = 0.206 and 0.260, respectively). CONCLUSIONS DCS are safer and more effective than BMS in an ARC-defined HBR population.
3.
Comparison of Rates of Bleeding and Vascular Complications Before, During, and After Trial Enrollment in the SAFE-PCI Trial for Women
Rymer JA, Kaltenbach LA, Kochar A, Hess CN, Gilchrist IC, Messenger JC, Harrington RA, Jolly SS, Jacobs AK, Abbott JD, et al
Circulation. Cardiovascular interventions. 2019;12(5):e007086
Abstract
BACKGROUND SAFE-PCI for Women (Study of Access Site for Enhancement of PCI for Women), a randomized controlled trial comparing radial and femoral access in women undergoing cardiac catheterization or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), was terminated early for lower than expected event rates. Whether this was because of patient selection or better access site practice among trial patients is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS SAFE-PCI was conducted within the National Cardiovascular Data Registry CathPCI registry. Using the National Cardiovascular Research Infrastructure Identification, PCI date, and age, patients enrolled in SAFE-PCI were compared with trial-eligible female CathPCI registry patients 1 year before, during, and 1 year after SAFE-PCI enrollment. Patient and procedure characteristics, predicted bleeding and mortality, and post-PCI bleeding were compared between groups. Enrolled SAFE-PCI patients and registry patients from the 3 time periods were linked to Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services data to compare 30-day death and unplanned revascularization rates. At 54 SAFE-PCI sites, there were 496 SAFE-PCI trial patients with a PCI visit within the CathPCI registry. There were 24 958 registry patients from 1 year before and 1 year after SAFE-PCI enrollment and 15 904 trial-eligible registry patients during trial enrollment. Trial patients were younger, had lower predicted bleeding and mortality, and had lower rates of post-PCI bleeding within 72 hours compared with registry patients. Among 12 212 Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services-linked patients, there were no significant differences in 30-day death and unplanned revascularization among the 4 groups. CONCLUSIONS Lower predicted risk of bleeding and mortality among SAFE-PCI trial patients compared with registry patients suggests that lower-risk patients were selectively enrolled for the trial. These data demonstrate how registry-based randomized trials may offer methods for enrollment feedback to curb selection bias in recruitment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01406236.