170 likes | 322 Views
ACC.09/i2 Summit Clinical Trial Summary Slides. Peak troponin-I: 2.1 vs. 1.7 ng/ml , p = 0.70 No difference in death/MI/urgent revascularization at 30 days Length of hospital stay: 55 vs. 77 hours, p < 0.01. ABOARD.
E N D
Peak troponin-I: 2.1 vs. 1.7 ng/ml, p = 0.70 No difference in death/MI/urgent revascularization at 30 days Length of hospital stay: 55 vs. 77 hours, p < 0.01 ABOARD Trial design: This study evaluated a strategy of immediate vs. next-day cardiac catheterization and revascularization in patients with NSTE ACS. Results (p = 0.70) 2.5 2.1 2 1.7 1.5 ng/ml Conclusions 1 • A strategy of immediate PCI does not impact the incidence of death or MI in NSTE ACS • Length of hospital stay was significantly reduced with an immediate PCI strategy 0.5 0 Peak troponin-I Immediate PCI (n = 175) Next-day PCI (n = 177) Presented by Dr. Gilles Montalescot at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
Stroke/MI/systemic embolus/vascular death: 6.8 vs.7.6% per year, p = 0.01 Stroke: 2.4% vs. 3.3% per year, p < 0.001 MI: 0.7% vs. 0.9% per year, p = 0.08 Major hemorrhage: 2.0% vs. 1.3% per year, p < 0.001 ACTIVE A Clopidogrel (n = 3,772) Placebo (n = 3,782) Trial design: This study evaluated treatment with a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel versus aspirin alone in patients with AF who were not candidates for warfarin therapy. Results (p < 0.001) (p = 0.08) 3.3 3.5 3 2.4 2.5 2 Percent per year Conclusions 1.5 • Clopidogrel in addition to aspirin may reduce the risk of stroke in patients with AF who are unsuitable candidates for warfarin therapy • The increased risk of major hemorrhage with aspirin + clopidogrel somewhat attenuates this benefit 0.9 1 0.7 0.5 0 Stroke MI ACTIVE Investigators. N Engl J Med 2009;Mar 31:[Epub]
30-day MACE: 3.4% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.04 CK-MB elevation: 13% vs. 23%, p = 0.02 Troponin-I elevation: 36% vs. 47%, p = 0.03 Peak CRP: 2.1 ± 6.7 vs. 3.0 ± 9.5, p = 0.12 ARMYDA-RECAPTURE Atorvastatin (n = 177) Placebo (n = 175) Trial design: This study evaluated the efficacy of an atorvastatin reloading strategy in patients on chronic statin therapy undergoing PCI for stable angina or NSTEMI. Results (p = 0.04) (p = 0.02) 25 23 20 15 13 Conclusions % Patients 9.1 10 • An 80 mg loading dose of atorvastatin followed by a 40 mg preprocedural dose may reduce the incidence of post-procedure MACE in patients on background statin therapy • These data support a strategy of routine atorvastatin reloading prior to PCI in patients on background statin therapy 3.4 5 0 MACE CK-MB Presented by Dr. Germano DiSciascio at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
Per 100 patient-years: CV death: 7.2 vs. 7.3, p = 0.97 Nonfatal MI: 2.1 vs. 2.5, p = 0.23 Nonfatal stroke: 1.2 vs. 1.1, p = 0.42 Composite endpoint: 9.2 vs. 9.5, p = 0.59 AURORA Rosuvastatin (n = 1,391) Placebo (n = 1,384) Trial design: This study evaluated treatment with 10 mg rosuvastatin compared with standard therapy in patients with end-stage renal disease receiving hemodialysis. Results (p = NS for all comparisons) 8 7.3 7.2 7 6 5 4 Events per 100 patient-years Conclusions 2.5 3 2.1 • Low-dose rosuvastatin therapy does not reduce the rate of cardiovascular events in patients with ESRD receiving hemodialysis 2 1.2 1.1 1 0 CV death MI Stroke Fellstrom B, et al. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1395-407
EARLY ACS Death, MI, revascularization, or thrombotic bailout at 96 hours: 9.3% with upstream eptifibatide vs. 10.0% with provisional eptifibatide (p = 0.23) Death or MI at 30 days: in 11.2% vs. 12.3% (p = 0.08), respectively TIMI major bleeding: 2.6% vs. 1.8% (p = 0.015), respectively Trial design: Patients with NSTE ACS were randomized to upstream eptifibatide and 18- to 24-hour infusion (n = 4,722) versus upstream placebo and provisional eptifibatide immediately prior to PCI (n = 4,684). Results (p = 0.23) (p = 0.015) 10.0 9.3 % 2.6 1.8 Conclusions • Among patients with NSTE ACS treated with aspirin, clopidogrel, and heparin, there was no benefit to upstream eptifibatide compared with provisional use immediately prior to PCI • Upstream use of eptifibatide increased major bleeding Death, MI, revascularization, or thrombotic bailout TIMI major bleeding Delayed provisional eptifibatide Upstream eptifibatide Giugliano RP, et al. N Engl J Med 2009;Mar 30:[Epub]
FIX-HF-5 Anaerobic threshold responder analysis: 17.6% with treatment vs. 11.7% with control (p = 0.093) Peak VO2 improved by 0.65 ml/kg/min with treatment (p = 0.024) Quality of life improved by -9.7 points with treatment (p < 0.0001) Trial design: Patients with NYHA III or IV heart failure and narrow QRS were randomized to cardiac contractility modulation plus optimal medical therapy (n = 215) vs. optimal medical therapy alone (n = 213). Results (p = 0.093) 17.6 % 11.7 Conclusions • Among patients with advanced heart failure, low ejection fraction, and narrow QRS, cardiac contractility modulation failed to improve the primary efficacy outcome, anaerobic threshold • Cardiac contractility modulation did improve peak VO2 and quality of life Anaerobic threshold responder analysis Cardiac contractility modulation Control Presented by Dr. William Abraham at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
GENIUS-STEMI MACE: 24% with endothelial progenitor cell stent vs. 10% with bare-metal stent (p = 0.03) TLR: 14% vs. 4% (p = 0.04), respectively Stent thrombosis: 6% vs. 0% (p = NS), respectively Trial design: Patients with STEMI were randomized to the endothelial progenitor cell capture stent (n = 50) vs. a cobalt-chromium BMS (n = 50). Follow-up was 6 months. Results (p = 0.03) (p = NS) 24 % Conclusions 10 6 • Among patients with STEMI, the endothelial progenitor cell capture stent was inferior to a cobalt-chromium bare-metal stent • This experimental stent resulted in increased MACE, TLR, and stent thrombosis 0 Stent thrombosis MACE Endothelial progenitor cell capture stent Placebo Presented by Dr. Pavel Cervinka at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
Index diagnosis was STEMI in 77% PTCA in 63%; no reperfusion in 25% All-cause mortality: 22.9% vs. 22.0%, p = 0.76 Significant reduction in sudden cardiac death and significant increase in nonsudden cardiac death with ICD implantation IRIS Trial design: This study evaluated ICD implantation early after MI in patients with low ejection fraction or other high-risk criteria. Results (p = 0.76) 40 35 30 22.9 25 22.0 20 Percent 15 Conclusions 10 • ICD implantation within 31 days after MI did not improve mortality over 3-year follow-up • Routine ICD implantation early after MI cannot be recommended at this time 5 0 All-cause mortality ICD (n = 445) No ICD (n = 453) Presented by Dr. Gerhard Steinbeck at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
NAPLES II CK-MB >3x ULN: 9.5% vs. 15.8%, p = 0.01 Troponin-I >3x ULN: 26.6% vs. 39.1%, p < 0.001 Reduction in MI was greatest in patients with high CRP No difference in death, unplanned revascularization, or stent thrombosis Atorvastatin (n = 338) Placebo (n = 330) Trial design: This study evaluated the effectiveness of an 80 mg loading dose of atorvastatin vs. placebo in reducing periprocedural MI in statin-naïve patients undergoing elective PCI. Results (p = 0.01) (p < 0.001) 45 39.1 40 35 30 26.6 25 % Patients 20 15.8 Conclusions 15 9.5 • Pretreatment with a loading dose of atorvastatin may reduce the incidence of postprocedure MI in statin-naïve patients undergoing PCI • Whether a single loading dose of atorvastatin is superior to a more extended course prior to PCI remains unclear 10 5 0 CK-MB Troponin-I Cardiac enzyme elevation >3x ULN Presented by Dr. Carlo Briguori at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
OMEGA Sudden cardiac death: 1.5% for omega-3 fatty acids vs. 1.5% for control (p = 0.84) All-cause mortality: 4.6% vs. 3.7%, respectively MI: 4.5% vs. 4.1%, respectively Arrhythmic events: 1.1% vs. 0.7%, respectively Trial design: Patients who were 3-14 days out from an NSTEMI or STEMI were randomized to omega-3 fatty acids and standard medical therapy (n = 1,940) vs. standard medical therapy alone. Follow-up was 1 year. Results (p = 0.84) 1.5 1.5 % Conclusions • Among patients with NSTEMI or STEMI, omega-3 fatty acids did not reduce the primary outcome, sudden cardiac death • Omega-3 fatty acids also did not appear to change any of the secondary outcomes Sudden cardiac death ω-3fatty acids Control Presented by Dr. Jochen Senges at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
PRIMA Number of days alive outside the hospital: 685 with NT-proBNP management vs. 664 with control (p = 0.49) Total mortality: 26.5% vs. 33.0% (p = 0.20), respectively Trial design: Patients admitted for worsening HF and whose NT-proBNP decreased during admission were randomized to NT-proBNP guided HF management (n = 174) vs. clinically guided management (n = 171). Results (p = 0.49) 685 days 664 Conclusions • Among patients admitted with decompensated HF, NT-proBNP guided therapy did not reduce the number of days alive outside the hospital or total mortality compared with clinically guided management Days alive outside the hospital NT-proBNP management Clinical management Presented by Dr. Luc Eurlings at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
PROTECT-AF CV death, stroke, or systemic embolism: 3.4 events per 100 pt-yrs with closure vs. 5.0 events per 100 pt-yrs with control (p for non-inferiority < 0.05) Hemorrhagic stroke: 1 vs. 6 (p for superiority < 0.05), respectively Composite safety outcome: 8.7 events per 100 pt-yrs vs. 4.2 events per 100 pt-yrs (p for superiority < 0.05), respectively Trial design: Patients with nonvalvular AF were randomized to percutaneous LA appendage closure with the Watchman device followed by discontinuation of warfarin in 45 days (n = 463) vs. continued warfarin therapy (n = 244). Results (p for non- inferiority < 0.05) (p for superiority < 0.05) 5.0 8.7 Events per 100 pt-years 4.2 3.4 Conclusions • In patients with nonvalvular AF, use of Watchman for LA appendage closure is feasible • Device demonstrated noninferior composite efficacy, although worse composite safety due to pericardial effusion Composite efficacy Composite safety Watchman Warfarin therapy Presented by Dr. David Holmes at ACC09/i2, Orlando, FL
REVIVAL-3 LVEF at 6 months: 52% with erythropoietin vs. 52% with placebo (p = 0.91) Death: 1.5% vs. 2.9%, respectively MI: 2.9% vs. 1.4%, respectively Stroke 1.5% vs. 0%, respectively Stent thrombosis: 2.9% vs. 2.9%, respectively Trial design: After primary angioplasty, STEMI patients were randomized to intravenous erythropoietin (n = 68) vs. placebo (n = 70). Follow-up was 6 months. Results (p = 0.91) 52 52 % Conclusions • Among STEMI patients treated with primary PCI, the use of high-dose erythropoietin did not improve LVEF at 6 months • Adverse cardiac outcomes were similar between the two groups LVEF at 6 months High-dose erythropoietin Placebo Presented by Dr. Ilka Ott at ACC.09/i2, Orlando, FL
STICH Death or CV hospitalization: 58% vs. 59%, p = 0.90 No difference in quality of life, angina frequency, angina severity, or depression Increased cost with SVR + CABG ($70,717 vs. $56,122, p = 0.004) CABG + SVR (n = 501) CABG (n = 499) Trial design: This study evaluated CABG with and without SVR in patients with CAD and anterior-apical regional ventricular dysfunction. Results (p = 0.98) (p = 0.90) 70 59 58 60 50 40 % Patients 28 28 30 Conclusions 20 • Routine SVR in addition to CABG does not improve cardiovascular morbidity and mortality or quality of life compared to CABG alone 10 0 Death Death or CV hospitalization Presented by Drs. Robert Jones & Daniel Mark at ACC.09/i2
TIPS LDL lowering: -0.70 mmol/L Heart rate lowering: -7.0 bpm Urinary 11-dehydrothromboxane B2 reduction: -283.1 ng/mmol creatinine Blood pressure lowering: -7.4/5.6 mm Hg Polycap (n = 412) HCTZ, atenolol, ramipril (n = 204) Trial design: This study evaluated the efficacy of the Polycap in controlling cardiac risk factors in patients at risk for CV disease. Results Systolic BP Diastolic BP Conclusions • The Polycap was well-tolerated and non-inferior to its individual components regarding blood pressure and heart rate lowering • In terms of LDL cholesterol lowering and platelet inhibition, the Polycap did not achieve prespecified noninferiority criteria compared with simvastatin and aspirin alone (p < 0.0001 for noninferiority) TIPS Investigators. Lancet 2009;Mar 30:[Epub before print]
ZEST Death, MI, or TVR: 10.1% with ZES, 8.3% with SES, and 14.2% with PES (p = 0.25 for ZES vs. SES, p < 0.0003 for ZES vs. PES) TLR: 4.9% vs. 1.4% vs. 7.6% (p < 0.001 for ZES vs. SES, p = 0.005 for ZES vs. PES), respectively for ZES, SES, and PES Trial design: Patients with CAD undergoing PCI were randomized to ZES (n = 883), SES (n = 878), or PES (n = 884). Follow-up was 12 months. Results 14.2 % 10.1 8.3 7.6 4.9 Conclusions 1.4 • Among patients with CAD, including a lot of ACS, zotarolimus resulted in similar adverse cardiac events compared with sirolimus, although less events compared with paclitaxel • Lowest TLR observed with sirolimus intermediate with zotarolimus, and highest with paclitaxel Death, MI, or TVR TLR ZES SES PES Presented by Dr. Seung-Jung Park at ACC09/i2, Orlando, FL