Background In patients who have chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction, severe secondary mitral-valve regurgitation is associated with a poor prognosis. Whether percutaneous mitral-valve repair improves clinical outcomes in this patient population is unknown. Methods We randomly assigned patients who had severe secondary mitral regurgitation (defined as an effective regurgitant orifice area of >20 mm or a regurgitant volume of >30 ml per beat), a left ventricular ejection fraction between 15 and 40%, and symptomatic heart failure, in a 1:1 ratio, to undergo percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy (intervention group; 152 patients) or to receive medical therapy alone (control group; 152 patients). The primary efficacy outcome was a composite of death from any cause or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months. Results At 12 months, the rate of the primary outcome was 54.6% (83 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 51.3% (78 of 152 patients) in the control group (odds ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.84; P=0.53). The rate of death from any cause was 24.3% (37 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 22.4% (34 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.77). The rate of unplanned hospitalization for heart failure was 48.7% (74 of 152 patients) in the intervention group and 47.4% (72 of 152 patients) in the control group (hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.56). Conclusions Among patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, the rate of death or unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 1 year did not differ significantly between patients who underwent percutaneous mitral-valve repair in addition to receiving medical therapy and those who received medical therapy alone. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Research National Program and Abbott Vascular; MITRA-FR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01920698 .).
BACKGROUND Patients with peripheral artery disease have an increased risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Antiplatelet agents are widely used to reduce these complications. METHODS This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, intermittent claudication with objective evidence of peripheral artery disease), of the carotid arteries (previous carotid artery revascularisation or asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50%), or coronary artery disease with an ankle-brachial index of less than 0·90. After a 30-day run-in period, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive oral rivaroxaban (2·5 mg twice a day) plus aspirin (100 mg once a day), rivaroxaban twice a day (5 mg with aspirin placebo once a day), or to aspirin once a day (100 mg and rivaroxaban placebo twice a day). Randomisation was computer generated. Each treatment group was double dummy, and the patient, investigators, and central study staff were masked to treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke; the primary peripheral artery disease outcome was major adverse limb events including major amputation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01776424, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between March 12, 2013, and May 10, 2016, we ; HR 0·67, 95% CI 0·45-1·00, p=0·05). The median duration of treatment was 21 months. The use of the rivaroxaban plus aspirin combination increased major bleeding compared with the aspirin alone group (77 [3%] of 2492 vs 48 [2%] of 2504; HR 1·61, 95% CI 1·12-2·31, p=0·0089), which was mainly gastrointestinal. Similarly, major bleeding occurred in 79 (3%) of 2474 patients with rivaroxaban 5 mg, and in 48 (2%) of 2504 in the aspirin alone group (HR 1·68, 95% CI 1·17-2·40; p=0·0043). INTERPRETATION Low-dose rivaroxaban taken twice a day plus aspirin once a day reduced major adverse cardiovascular and limb events when compared with aspirin alone. Although major bleeding was increased, fatal or critical organ bleeding was not. This combination therapy represents an important advance in the management of patients with peripheral artery disease. Rivaroxaban alone did not significantly reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared with asprin alone, but reduced major adverse limb events and increased major bleeding. FUNDING Bayer AG. Methods This was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial for which patients were recruited at 602 hospitals, clinics, or community practices from 33 countries across six continents. Eligible patients had a history of peripheral artery disease of the lower extremities (previous peripheral bypass surgery or angioplasty, limb or foot amputation, i...
The FRANCE TAVI registry provided reassuring data regarding trends in TAVR performance in an all-comers population on a national scale. Nonetheless, given that TAVR indications are likely to expand to patients at lower surgical risk, concerns remain regarding potentially life-threatening complications and pacemaker implantation. (Registry of Aortic Valve Bioprostheses Established by Catheter [FRANCE TAVI]; NCT01777828).
AimThis open-label, randomized, and multicentre trial tested the hypothesis that, on a background of aspirin, continuing clopidogrel would be superior to stopping clopidogrel at 12 months following drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. Methods and resultsPatients (N ¼ 1799) who had undergone placement of ≥1 DES for stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome were included in 58 French sites (January 2009-January 2013. Patients (N ¼ 1385) free of major cardiovascular/cerebrovascular events or major bleeding and on aspirin and clopidogrel 12 months after stenting were eligible for randomization (1:1) between continuing clopidogrel 75 mg daily (extended-dual antiplatelet therapy, DAPT, group) or discontinuing clopidogrel (aspirin group). The primary outcome was net adverse clinical events defined as the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding. Follow-up was planned from a minimum of 6 to a maximum of 36 months after randomization. Owing to slow recruitment, the study was stopped after enrolment of 1385 of a planned 1966 patients. Median follow-up after stenting was 33.4 months. The primary outcome occurred in 40 patients (5.8%) in the extended-DAPT group and 52 in the aspirin group (7.5%; hazard ratio 0.75, 95% confidence interval 0.50 -1.28; P ¼ 0.17). Rates of death were 2.3% in the extended-DAPT group and 3.5% in the aspirin group (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.34 -1.22; P ¼ 0.18). Rates of major bleeding were identical (2.0%, P ¼ 0.95). ... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... ..... ..... .... ..... .. ConclusionsExtended DAPT did not achieve superiority in reducing net adverse clinical events compared to 12 months of DAPT after DES placement. The power of the OPTIDUAL trial was however low and reduced by premature termination of enrolment. ClinicalTrials.gov number
HE OPTIMAL INTERVENTION IN the treatment strategy of patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation (NSTE-ACS) has been debated for years. Numerous studies, randomized trials, and metaanalyses have investigated the potential benefits of invasive over conservative strategies, and most have suggested a prolonged advantage of an invasive approach for the prevention of death or myocardial infarction (MI), particularly among high-risk patients. 1-14 If an invasive strategy is generally accepted to be the best option and is currently recommended in high-risk patients, little information is available regarding the optimal timing of coronary angiography and intervention. 15,16 Only 2 randomized studies evaluated the timing of intervention (early vs late) with patients in the 2 study groups receiv-Author Affiliations are listed at the end of this article.
In our study, the effect of colchicine on inflammation in the context of STEMI could not be demonstrated. Further larger studies may clarify the impact of colchicine in acute myocardial infarction.
et al.. Percutaneous repair or medical treatment for secondary mitral regurgitation: outcomes at 2 years Methods and results. AimsThe MITRA-FR trial showed that among symptomatic patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation, percutaneous repair did not reduce the risk of death or hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months compared with guideline-directed medical treatment alone.At 37 centres, we randomly assigned 304 symptomatic heart failure patients with severe secondary mitral regurgitation (effective regurgitant orifice area >20 mm 2 or regurgitant volume >30 mL), and left ventricular ejection fraction between 15% and 40% to undergo percutaneous valve repair plus medical treatment (intervention group, n = 152) or medical treatment alone (control group, n = 152). The primary efficacy outcome was the composite of all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure at 12 months. At 24 months, all-cause death and unplanned hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 63.8% of patients (97/152) in the intervention group and 67.1% (102/152) in the control group [hazard ratio (HR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.77-1.34]. All-cause *Corresponding author. Hôpital Cardiovasculaire Louis Pradel, Chirurgie Cardio-Vasculaire et Transplantation Cardiaque, mortality occurred in 34.9% of patients (53/152) in the intervention group and 34.2% (52/152) in the control group (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.70-1.50). Unplanned hospitalization for heart failure occurred in 55.9% of patients (85/152) in the intervention group and 61.8% (94/152) in the control group (HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.72-1.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.