Browsing by Author "Huber, Kurt (35376715600)"

In 2014, a joint consensus document dealing with the management of antithrombotic therapy in atrial fibrillation (AF) patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions was published, which represented an effort of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Thrombosis, European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA), European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI), and European Association of Acute Cardiac Care (ACCA) endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS). Since publication of this document, additional data from observational cohorts, randomized controlled trials, and percutaneous interventions as well as new guidelines have been published. Moreover, new drugs and devices/interventions are also available, with an increasing evidence base. The approach to managing AF has also evolved towards a more integrated or holistic approach. In recognizing these advances since the last consensus document, EHRA, WG Thrombosis, EAPCI, and ACCA, with additional contributions from HRS, APHRS, Latin America Heart Rhythm Society (LAHRS), and Cardiac Arrhythmia Society of Southern Africa (CASSA), proposed a focused update, to include the new data, with the remit of comprehensively reviewing the available evidence and publishing a focused update consensus document on the management of antithrombotic therapy in AF patients presenting with ACS and/or undergoing percutaneous coronary or valve interventions, and providing up-to-date consensus recommendations for use in clinical practice. European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions.

Acute heart failure (AHF) represents a broad spectrum of disease states, resulting from the interaction between an acute precipitant and a patient's underlying cardiac substrate and comorbidities. Valvular heart disease (VHD) is frequently associated with AHF. AHF may result from several precipitants that add an acute haemodynamic stress superimposed on a chronic valvular lesion or may occur as a consequence of a new significant valvular lesion. Regardless of the mechanism, clinical presentation may vary from acute decompensated heart failure to cardiogenic shock. Assessing the severity of VHD as well as the correlation between VHD severity and symptoms may be difficult in patients with AHF because of the rapid variation in loading conditions, concomitant destabilization of the associated comorbidities and the presence of combined valvular lesions. Evidence-based interventions targeting VHD in settings of AHF have yet to be identified, as patients with severe VHD are often excluded from randomized trials in AHF, so results from these trials do not generalize to those with VHD. Furthermore, there are not rigorously conducted randomized controlled trials in the setting of VHD and AHF, most of the data coming from observational studies. Thus, distinct to chronic settings, current guidelines are very elusive when patients with severe VHD present with AHF, and a clear-cut strategy could not be yet defined. Given the paucity of evidence in this subset of AHF patients, the aim of this scientific statement is to describe the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and overall treatment approach for patients with VHD who present with AHF. © 2023 European Society of Cardiology.

Background: The safety and efficacy of antithrombotic regimens may differ between patients with atrial fibrillation who have acute coronary syndromes (ACS), treated medically or with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and those undergoing elective PCI. Methods: Using a 2×2 factorial design, we compared apixaban with vitamin K antagonists and aspirin with placebo in patients with atrial fibrillation who had ACS or were undergoing PCI and were receiving a P2Y12 inhibitor. We explored bleeding, death and hospitalization, as well as death and ischemic events, by antithrombotic strategy in 3 prespecified subgroups: Patients with ACS treated medically, patients with ACS treated with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI. Results: Of 4614 patients enrolled, 1097 (23.9%) had ACS treated medically, 1714 (37.3%) had ACS treated with PCI, and 1784 (38.8%) had elective PCI. Apixaban compared with vitamin K antagonist reduced International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding in patients with ACS treated medically (hazard ratio [HR], 0.44 [95% CI, 0.28-0.68]), patients with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.68 [95% CI, 0.52-0.89]), and patients undergoing elective PCI (HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.64-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.052) and reduced death or hospitalization in the ACS treated medically (HR, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.54-0.92]), ACS treated with PCI (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.74-1.06]), and elective PCI (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.72-1.04]; Pinteraction=0.345) groups. Compared with vitamin K antagonists, apixaban resulted in a similar effect on death and ischemic events in the ACS treated medically, ACS treated with PCI, and elective PCI groups (Pinteraction=0.356). Aspirin had a higher rate of bleeding than did placebo in patients with ACS treated medically (HR, 1.49 [95% CI, 0.98-2.26]), those with ACS treated with PCI (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.53-2.67]), and those undergoing elective PCI (HR, 1.91 [95% CI, 1.48-2.47]; Pinteraction=0.479). For the same comparison, there was no difference in outcomes among the 3 groups for the composite of death or hospitalization (Pinteraction=0.787) and death and ischemic events (Pinteraction=0.710). Conclusions: An antithrombotic regimen consisting of apixaban and a P2Y12 inhibitor without aspirin provides superior safety and similar efficacy in patients with atrial fibrillation who have ACS, whether managed medically or with PCI, and those undergoing elective PCI compared with regimens that include vitamin K antagonists, aspirin, or both. © 2019 American Heart Association, Inc.

Introduction: Results of currently available trials have shown divergent outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Current guidelines do not recommend PCI in patients with diabetes and a SYNTAX score ≥ 23. Aim: To compare all-cause 4-year mortality after revascularization for complex coronary artery disease (CAD) in diabetics. Material and methods: The study group comprised consecutive patients with three-vessel CAD and/or unprotected left main CAD (≥ 50% diameter stenosis) without major hemodynamic instability, who were treated in two institutions with PCI or referred for CABG. Results: Out of 342 diabetics, 177 patients underwent PCI and 165 patients were referred for CABG. The incidence of all-cause death was different between diabetics treated with PCI or CABG at 4 years (16/177, 9.0% vs. 26/165, 15.8%, respectively, p = 0.03). The difference was not evident in non-diabetics (PCI: 41/450, 9.1% vs. CABG: 19/249, 7.6%, p = 0.173). In diabetics, there was a higher incidence of all-cause mortality in PCI patients with intermediate-high (≥ 23) SYNTAX scores compared with those with low (0–22) SYNTAX scores (10/56, 17.9% vs. 6/121, 5.0%, respectively, p < 0.01). On the other hand, diabetics who underwent CABG showed similar mortality rates irrespective of the SYNTAX scores (SYNTAX 0–22: 3/29, 10.3%; SYNTAX ≥ 23: 23/136, 11.9%, p = 0.46). In the subgroup analysis, there was no interaction according to presence or absence of left main CAD (p for interaction = 0.12) as well as according to diabetes status (p for interaction = 0.38), whereas gender and SYNTAX scores were differentiators between PCI and CABG with a p for interaction < 0.1. Conclusions: Our analysis supports recent evidence that diabetes is not a differentiator between PCI and CABG. © 2020 Termedia Publishing House Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Background/objectives The SYNTAX Score II (SSII) was proposed as a novel approach for objective individualized decision-making for optimal myocardial revascularization i.e. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery. We sought to investigate how many lives may be saved by SSII use. Methods A total number of 651 consecutive SSII-naive-patients with complex coronary artery disease who were treated with PCI (n = 409) or referred to other institutions for CABG (n = 242) were included. All-cause mortality was ascertained in 96% of patients. The SSII was calculated for each patient. Results Based on the SSII treatment recommendation, CABG would have been the treatment of choice in 257/651 (39.5%) patients, PCI in 7/651 (1.1%) patients and CABG or PCI in 387/651 (59.4%) patients. Out of 257 patients in whom the treatment recommendation by SSII was CABG, 113/257 (44.0%) patients had actually CABG, while the remaining 144/257 (56.0%) underwent PCI. It was shown that 144/257 patients with treatment recommendations in favour of CABG who were treated with PCI had significantly higher mortality at 4 years when compared with patients with SSII treatment recommendation for PCI or equally favouring CABG and PCI (12.5% vs. 0.0% vs. 6.9%, respectively, P = 0.04). Conclusion The intuitive decision-making for choosing the optimal myocardial revascularization method differed predominantly from the SSII recommendation for CABG. The discordance between the SSII recommended revascularization strategy and the clinical decision was associated with a higher 4-year mortality i.e. one life may be saved if SSII would be calculated and followed consequently in 18 patients. © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd

Whilst there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation (OAC) in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision to initiate and continue anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both the thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug–drug and food–drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static ‘one off’ assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by ageing, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this Consensus Document, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with the view to summarizing ‘best practice’ when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, review established bleeding risk factors, and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice. © 2022 Authors. All rights reserved.

While there is a clear clinical benefit of oral anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) in reducing the risks of thromboembolism, major bleeding events (especially intracranial bleeds) may still occur and be devastating. The decision for initiating and continuing anticoagulation is often based on a careful assessment of both thromboembolism and bleeding risk. The more common and validated bleeding risk factors have been used to formulate bleeding risk stratification scores, but thromboembolism and bleeding risk factors often overlap. Also, many factors that increase bleeding risk are transient and modifiable, such as variable international normalized ratio values, surgical procedures, vascular procedures, or drug-drug and food-drug interactions. Bleeding risk is also not a static one-off assessment based on baseline factors but is dynamic, being influenced by aging, incident comorbidities, and drug therapies. In this executive summary of a European and Asia-Pacific Expert Consensus Paper, we comprehensively review the published evidence and propose a consensus on bleeding risk assessments in patients with AF and VTE, with a view to summarizing best practice when approaching antithrombotic therapy in these patients. We address the epidemiology and size of the problem of bleeding risk in AF and VTE, and review established bleeding risk factors and summarize definitions of bleeding. Patient values and preferences, balancing the risk of bleeding against thromboembolism, are reviewed, and the prognostic implications of bleeding are discussed. We propose consensus statements that may help to define evidence gaps and assist in everyday clinical practice. © 2022 Georg Thieme Verlag. All rights reserved.

The cardiovascular system is significantly affected in coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). Microvascular injury, endothelial dysfunction, and thrombosis resulting from viral infection or indirectly related to the intense systemic inflammatory and immune responses are characteristic features of severe COVID-19. Pre-existing cardiovascular disease and viral load are linked to myocardial injury and worse outcomes. The vascular response to cytokine production and the interaction between severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 receptor may lead to a significant reduction in cardiac contractility and subsequent myocardial dysfunction. In addition, a considerable proportion of patients who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 do not fully recover and continue to experience a large number of symptoms and post-acute complications in the absence of a detectable viral infection. This conditions often referred to as 'post-acute COVID-19' may have multiple causes. Viral reservoirs or lingering fragments of viral RNA or proteins contribute to the condition. Systemic inflammatory response to COVID-19 has the potential to increase myocardial fibrosis which in turn may impair cardiac remodelling. Here, we summarize the current knowledge of cardiovascular injury and post-acute sequelae of COVID-19. As the pandemic continues and new variants emerge, we can advance our knowledge of the underlying mechanisms only by integrating our understanding of the pathophysiology with the corresponding clinical findings. Identification of new biomarkers of cardiovascular complications, and development of effective treatments for COVID-19 infection are of crucial importance. © 2021 Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

Aims The European Society of Cardiology (ESC) EURObservational Research Programme (EORP) Non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) Registry aims to identify international patterns in NSTEMI management in clinical practice and outcomes against the 2015 ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without ST-segment-elevation. Methods and results Consecutively hospitalised adult NSTEMI patients (n = 3620) were enrolled between 11 March 2019 and 6 March 2021, and individual patient data prospectively collected at 287 centres in 59 participating countries during a two-week enrolment period per centre. The registry collected data relating to baseline characteristics, major outcomes (inhospital death, acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, bleeding, stroke/transient ischaemic attack, and 30-day mortality) and guideline-recommended NSTEMI care interventions: electrocardiogram pre- or in-hospital, prehospitalization receipt of aspirin, echocardiography, coronary angiography, referral to cardiac rehabilitation, smoking cessation advice, dietary advice, and prescription on discharge of aspirin, P2Y12 inhibition, angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), beta-blocker, and statin. Conclusion The EORP NSTEMI Registry is an international, prospective registry of care and outcomes of patients treated for NSTEMI, which will provide unique insights into the contemporary management of hospitalised NSTEMI patients, compliance with ESC 2015 NSTEMI Guidelines, and identify potential barriers to optimal management of this common clinical presentation associated with significant morbidity and mortality. © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND: It is not known whether prehospital fibrinolysis, coupled with timely coronary angiography, provides a clinical outcome similar to that with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) early after acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS: Among 1892 patients with STEMI who presented within 3 hours after symptom onset and who were unable to undergo primary PCI within 1 hour, patients were randomly assigned to undergo either primary PCI or fibrinolytic therapy with bolus tenecteplase (amended to half dose in patients ≥75 years of age), clopi;dogrel, and enoxaparin before transport to a PCI-capable hospital. Emergency coronary angiography was performed if fibrinolysis failed; otherwise, angiography was performed 6 to 24 hours after randomization. The primary end point was a composite of death, shock, congestive heart failure, or reinfarction up to 30 days. Results The primary end point occurred in 116 of 939 patients (12.4%) in the fibrinolysis group and in 135 of 943 patients (14.3%) in the primary PCI group (relative risk in the fibrinolysis group, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.09; P = 0.21). Emergency angiography was required in 36.3% of patients in the fibrinolysis group, whereas the remainder of patients underwent angiography at a median of 17 hours after randomization. More intracranial hemorrhages occurred in the fibrinolysis group than in the primary PCI group (1.0% vs. 0.2%, P = 0.04; after protocol amendment, 0.5% vs. 0.3%, P = 0.45). The rates of nonintracranial bleeding were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prehospital fibrinolysis with timely coronary angiography resulted in effective reperfusion in patients with early STEMI who could not undergo primary PCI within 1 hour after the first medical contact. However, fibrinolysis was associated with a slightly increased risk of intracranial bleeding. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00623623.) Copyright © 2013 Massachusetts Medical Society.

Objectives Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (P-PCI) is the preferred reperfusion option in ST-elevation myocardial infarction, but its benefits become attenuated as time to its potential delivery becomes prolonged. Based on the STrategic Reperfusion Early After Myocardial Infarction trial, we assessed the impact of increasing time delay on outcomes in patients randomised to a pharmacoinvasive strategy (PI) or P-PCI. Methods Thirty-day clinical outcomes were examined according to PCI-related delay (P-RD). Data from hospitals that enrolled >10 randomised patients were used and P-RD categorised as ≤55 min, >55-97 min and >97 min. Results Composite of death/congestive heart failure/ cardiogenic shock/myocardial infarction in PI and P-PCI arms occurred in 10.6% versus 10.3% (≤55 min, p=0.910); 13.9% versus 17.9% (>55-97 min, p=0.148) and 13.5% versus 16.2% (>97 min, p=0.470), respectively. While there was no worsening of outcomes for PI across the P-RD spectrum, this occurred in the P-PCI arm ( p(trend)=0.038). For P-RD ≤55 min, fewer events tended to occur with P-PCI than PI. Conversely, as P-RD increased to >55 min, PI-assigned patients had better outcomes than P-PCI, suggesting an event-free advantage with PI as P-RD increased (p (interaction)=0.094). Analysing P-RD continuously showed that for every 10-min increment there was an increasing trend towards bene fit among PI-assigned patients ( p(interaction)=0.073). Conclusions As P-RD increased, PI outcomes became superior to P-PCI when P-RD is prolonged and exceeds guideline-mandated times. In such circumstances, a PI strategy may provide an alternative reperfusion option. Adverse time delays for delivery of P-PCI should be considered when evaluating reperfusion strategies.