JACC. Cardiovascular interventions
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · May 2020
Multicenter Study Comparative Study Observational StudyMultivessel Versus Culprit-Vessel Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Cardiogenic Shock.
This study sought to compare outcomes of patients enrolled in the NCSI (National Cardiogenic Shock Initiative) trial who were treated using a revascularization strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of multivessel PCI (MV-PCI) versus culprit-vessel PCI (CV-PCI). ⋯ In patients with MVCAD presenting with AMICS treated with early MCS, revascularization of nonculprit lesions was associated with similar hospital survival and acute kidney injury when compared with culprit-only PCI. Selective nonculprit PCI can be safety performed in AMICS in patients supported with mechanical circulatory support.
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · May 2020
Comparative Study Observational StudyClinical Characteristics and Outcomes of STEMI Patients With Cardiogenic Shock and Cardiac Arrest.
This study sought to compare the clinical characteristics and long-term outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) with and without cardiogenic shock (CS) or cardiac arrest (CA) before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). ⋯ The combination of CS and CA significantly increases short-term mortality in patients with STEMI. After 5 years of follow-up, CS patients remained at high risk of fatal events, whereas the prognosis of CA patients was determined by initial rhythm at presentation.
-
JACC Cardiovasc Interv · May 2020
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study5-Year Outcomes After TAVR With Balloon-Expandable Versus Self-Expanding Valves: Results From the CHOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical and echocardiographic outcome data of the CHOICE (Randomized Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients with Severe Aortic Stenosis: Medtronic CoreValve Versus Edwards SAPIEN XT) trial at 5 years. ⋯ Five-year follow-up of patients in the CHOICE trial revealed clinical outcomes after transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement with early-generation BE and SE valves that were not statistically significantly different, with limited statistical power. Forward flow hemodynamics were significantly better with the SE valve. Moderate or severe structural valve deterioration was uncommon but occurred more frequently with the BE valve. (A Comparison of Transcatheter Heart Valves in High Risk Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis: The CHOICE Trial [CHOICE]; NCT01645202).