Background: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In patients with a long... Show moreBackground: Left atrial appendage occlusion (LAAO) provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). In patients with a long-term or permanent contraindication for OAC ran-domized controlled trial (RCT) data is lacking. Study objectives: To assess the efficacy and safety of LAAO in AF patients who are ineligible to use OAC. The co-primary efficacy endpoint is (1) time to first occurrence of stroke (ischemic, hemorrhagic, or undetermined) and (2) time to first occurrence of the composite of stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), and systemic embolism (SE). The primary safety endpoint is the 30-day rate of peri-procedural complications. Study design: This is a multicenter, investigator-initiated, open-label, blinded endpoint (PROBE), superiority-driven RCT. Patients with AF, a CHA 2DS 2 -VASc score >= 2 for men and >= 3 for women and a long-term or permanent contraindica-tion for OAC will be randomized in a 2:1 fashion to the device- or control arm. Patients in the device arm will undergo percutaneous LAAO and will receive post-procedural dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) per protocol, while those in the control arm will continue their current treatment consisting of no antithrombotic therapy or (D)APT as deemed appropriate by the primary responsible physician. In this endpoint-driven trial design, assuming a 50% lower stroke risk of LAAO compared to conservative treatment, 609 patients will be followed for a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 5 years. Cost-effectiveness and budget impact analyses will be performed to allow decision-making on reimbursement of LAAO for the target population in the Netherlands. Summary: The COMPARE LAAO trial will investigate the clinical superiority in preventing thromboembolic events and cost-effectiveness of LAAO in AF patients with a high thromboembolic risk and a contraindication for OAC use. Show less
OBJECTIVES The aims of the present study were to investigate the applicability of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in patients with 3-vessel disease and to demonstrate the impact of functional SYNTAX ... Show moreOBJECTIVES The aims of the present study were to investigate the applicability of quantitative flow ratio (QFR) in patients with 3-vessel disease and to demonstrate the impact of functional SYNTAX (Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score derived from QFR (fSS(QFR)) on clinical outcomes.BACKGROUND The applicability of QFR in patients with 3-vessel disease and the feasibility of fSS(QFR) have not yet been investigated.METHODS All lesions interrogated using instantaneous wave-free ratio and/or fractional flow reserve in the SYNTAX II trial were retrospectively screened and analyzed for QFR. The diagnostic performance of QFR was investigated using hybrid wire-derived pressure assessment (instantaneous wave-free ratio and fractional flow reserve), used in the trial as a reference. Patients with analyzable QFR in 3 vessels were stratified according to fSS(QFR) to evaluate its clinical prognostic value on the basis of 2-year patient-oriented composite endpoint.RESULTS QFRs were analyzable in 71.0% of lesions (836 lesions). The diagnostic performance of QFR to predict binary wire-based ischemia was substantial (area under the curve 0.81, accuracy 73.8%), with a positive predictive value of 85.9%. Independent predictors of diagnostic discordance were lesions in side branches, involvement of bifurcation or trifurcation, and small vessel. According to the 2-year patient-oriented composite endpoint, fSS(QFR) reclassified 26.1% of the patients (36 of 138) in the high-to intermediate-risk group into the low-risk group appropriately (net reclassification improvement 0.32; p < 0.001). The area under the curve for fSS(QFR) to predict the 2-year patient-oriented composite endpoint was higher than that of the classic anatomic SYNTAX score (0.68 vs. 0.56; p = 0.002).CONCLUSIONS QFR demonstrated substantial applicability in patients with 3-vessel disease. The fSS(QFR) has the potential to further refine prognostic risk estimation compared with the classic anatomic SYNTAX score. (c) 2019 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation. Show less
Karanasos, A.; Tu, S.X.; Ditzhuijzen, N.S. van; Ligthart, J.M.R.; Witberg, K.; Mieghem, N. van; ... ; Regar, E. 2015
