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.

Abstract

BACKGROUND The benefits and risks of blood transfusion in patients with acute myocardial infarction who are anemic or who experience bleeding are debated. We sought to study the association between blood transfusion and ischemic outcomes according to haemoglobin nadir and bleeding status in patients with NST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). METHODS The TAO trial randomized patients with NSTEMI and coronary angiogram scheduled within 72h to heparin plus eptifibatide versus otamixaban. After exclusion of patients who underwent coronary artery bypass surgery, patients were categorized according to transfusion status considering transfusion as a time-varying covariate. The primary ischemic outcome was the composite of all-cause death or MI within 180 days of randomization. Subgroup analyses were performed according to pre-transfusion hemoglobin nadir and bleeding status. RESULTS 12,547 patients were enrolled. Among these, blood transfusion was used in 489 (3.9%) patients. Patients who received transfusion had a higher rate of death or MI (29.9% vs. 8.1%, p<0.01). This excess risk persisted after adjustment on GRACE score and nadir of hemoglobin (HR 3.36 95%CI 2.63-4.29 p<0.01). Subgroup analyses showed that blood transfusion was associated with a higher risk in patients without overt bleeding (adjusted HR 6.25 vs. 2.85; p-interaction 0.001) as well as in those with hemoglobin nadir > 9.0 g/dl (HR 4.01; p-interaction<0.0001). CONCLUSION In patients with NSTEMI, blood transfusion was associated with an overall increased risk of ischaemic events. However, this was mainly driven by patients without overt bleeding and those hemoglobin nadir > 9.0g/dl. This suggests possible harm of transfusion in those groups.

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.

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.

Abstract

AIMS: The 6 French(Fr) Glidesheath Slender (GSS6Fr, Terumo, Japan) is a recently developed thin-walled radial sheath with an outer diameter (OD) that is smaller than the OD of standard 6Fr sheaths. The effect of this introducer sheath on radial artery occlusion (RAO) is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS We conducted a randomized, multicenter, non-inferiority trial comparing the GSS6Fr against the standard 5Fr Glidesheath (GS5Fr, Terumo, Japan) in patients undergoing TR coronary angiography and/or intervention. Patients in each group were subsequently randomized to undergo patent hemostasis or the institutional hemostasis protocol. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of RAO at discharge. A total of 1926 patients were randomized in 12 centers. The incidence of RAO was 3.47% with GSS6Fr compared with 1.74% with GS5Fr (risk difference 1.73%, 95% CI 0.51-2.95%; Pnon inferiority=0.150). Patients randomized to patent hemostasis had similar rate of RAO compared with institutional hemostasis (2.61% vs 2.61%, P=1). There was no difference with regard to all secondary end-points, including vascular access-site complication, local bleeding and spasm. CONCLUSIONS In this large multicenter randomized trial, the GSS6Fr was associated with a low event rate for the primary end-point (RAO) although non-inferiority to the GS5Fr was not met, due to a lower than expected rate of RAO in the GS5Fr group. As compared to institutional hemostasis, the use of patent hemostasis was not associated with a reduced rate of RAO.

Abstract

BACKGROUND Prior trials suggest it is safe to defer transfusion at hemoglobin levels above 7 to 8 g/dL in most patients. Patients with acute coronary syndrome may benefit from higher hemoglobin levels. METHODS We performed a pilot trial in 110 patients with acute coronary syndrome or stable angina undergoing cardiac catheterization and a hemoglobin <10 g/dL. Patients in the liberal transfusion strategy received one or more units of blood to raise the hemoglobin level >=10 g/dL. Patients in the restrictive transfusion strategy were permitted to receive blood for symptoms from anemia or for a hemoglobin <8 g/dL. The predefined primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or unscheduled revascularization 30 days post randomization. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were similar between groups except age (liberal, 67.3; restrictive, 74.3). The mean number of units transfused was 1.6 in the liberal group and 0.6 in the restrictive group. The primary outcome occurred in 6 patients (10.9%) in the liberal group and 14 (25.5%) in the restrictive group (risk difference = 15.0%; 95% confidence interval of difference 0.7% to 29.3%; P = .054 and adjusted for age P = .076). Death at 30 days was less frequent in liberal group (n = 1, 1.8%) compared to restrictive group (n = 7, 13.0%; P = .032). CONCLUSIONS The liberal transfusion strategy was associated with a trend for fewer major cardiac events and deaths than a more restrictive strategy. These results support the feasibility of and the need for a definitive trial. Copyright 2013 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Abstract

Description: Although approximately 85 million units of red blood cells (RBCs) are transfused annually worldwide, transfusion practices vary widely. The AABB (formerly, the American Association of Blood Banks) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations about hemoglobin concentration thresholds and other clinical variables that trigger RBC transfusions in hemodynamically stable adults and children. Methods: These guidelines are based on a systematic review of randomized clinical trials evaluating transfusion thresholds. We performed a literature search from 1950 to February 2011 with no language restrictions. We examined the proportion of patients who received any RBC transfusion and the number of RBC units transfused to describe the effect of restrictive transfusion strategies on RBC use. To determine the clinical consequences of restrictive transfusion strategies, we examined overall mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, cardiac events, pulmonary edema, stroke, thromboembolism, renal failure, infection, hemorrhage, mental confusion, functional recovery, and length of hospital stay. Recommendation 1: The AABB recommends adhering to a restrictive transfusion strategy (7 to 8 g/dL) in hospitalized, stable patients (Grade: strong recommendation; high-quality evidence). Recommendation 2: The AABB suggests adhering to a restrictive strategy in hospitalized patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease and considering transfusion for patients with symptoms or a hemoglobin level of 8 g/dL or less (Grade: weak recommendation; moderate-quality evidence). Recommendation 3: The AABB cannot recommend for or against a liberal or restrictive transfusion threshold for hospitalized, hemodynamically stable patients with the acute coronary syndrome (Grade: uncertain recommendation; very low-quality evidence). Recommendation 4: The AABB suggests that transfusion decisions be influenced by symptoms as well as hemoglobin concentration (Grade: weak recommendation; low-quality evidence). 2012 American College of Physicians.

Abstract

Red blood cell transfusion is common in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). However, observational data suggest that this practice may be associated with worse clinical outcomes and data from clinical trials are lacking in this population. We conducted a prospective multicenter randomized pilot trial in which 45 patients with AMI and a hematocrit level <=30% were randomized to a liberal (transfuse when hematocrit <30% to maintain 30% to 33%) or a conservative (transfuse when hematocrit <24% to maintain 24% to 27%) transfusion strategy. Baseline hematocrit was similar in those in the liberal and conservative arms (26.9% vs 27.5%, p = 0.4). Average daily hematocrits were 30.6% in the liberal arm and 27.9% in the conservative arm, a difference of 2.7% (p <0.001). More patients in the liberal arm than in the conservative arm were transfused (100% vs 54%, p <0.001) and the average number of units transfused per patient tended to be higher in the liberal arm than in the conservative arm (2.5 vs 1.6, p = 0.07). The primary clinical safety measurement of in-hospital death, recurrent MI, or new or worsening congestive heart failure occurred in 8 patients in the liberal arm and 3 in the conservative arm (38% vs 13%, p = 0.046). In conclusion, compared to a conservative transfusion strategy, treating anemic patients with AMI according to a liberal transfusion strategy results in more patients receiving transfusions and higher hematocrit levels. However, this may be associated with worse clinical outcomes. A large-scale definitive trial addressing this issue is urgently required.

Abstract

CONTEXT Acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. In experimental models of MI, erythropoietin reduces infarct size and improves left ventricular (LV) function. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and efficacy of a single intravenous bolus of epoetin alfa in patients with STEMI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a dose-escalation safety phase and a single dose (60,000 U of epoetin alfa) efficacy phase; the Reduction of Infarct Expansion and Ventricular Remodeling With Erythropoietin After Large Myocardial Infarction (REVEAL) trial was conducted at 28 US sites between October 2006 and February 2010, and included 222 patients with STEMI who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) as a primary or rescue reperfusion strategy. INTERVENTION Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with intravenous epoetin alfa or matching saline placebo administered within 4 hours of reperfusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE Infarct size, expressed as percentage of LV mass, assessed by cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging performed 2 to 6 days after study medication administration (first CMR) and again 12 ± 2 weeks later (second CMR). RESULTS In the efficacy cohort, the infarct size did not differ between groups on either the first CMR scan (n = 136; 15.8% LV mass [95% confidence interval {CI}, 13.3-18.2% LV mass] for the epoetin alfa group vs 15.0% LV mass [95% CI, 12.6-17.3% LV mass] for the placebo group; P = .67) or on the second CMR scan (n = 124; 10.6% LV mass [95% CI, 8.4-12.8% LV mass] vs 10.4% LV mass [95% CI, 8.5-12.3% LV mass], respectively; P = .89). In a prespecified analysis of patients aged 70 years or older (n = 21), the mean infarct size within the first week (first CMR) was larger in the epoetin alfa group (19.9% LV mass; 95% CI, 14.0-25.7% LV mass) than in the placebo group (11.7% LV mass; 95% CI, 7.2-16.1% LV mass) (P = .03). In the safety cohort, of the 125 patients who received epoetin alfa, the composite outcome of death, MI, stroke, or stent thrombosis occurred in 5 (4.0%; 95% CI, 1.31%-9.09%) but in none of the 97 who received placebo (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS In patients with STEMI who had successful reperfusion with primary or rescue PCI, a single intravenous bolus of epoetin alfa within 4 hours of PCI did not reduce infarct size and was associated with higher rates of adverse cardiovascular events. Subgroup analyses raised concerns about an increase in infarct size among older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00378352.