Bindu Kalesan

BACKGROUND: The preferred initial treatment for patients with stable coronary artery disease is the best available medical therapy. We hypothesized that in patients with functionally significant stenoses, as determined by measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) plus the best available medical therapy would be superior to the best available medical therapy alone. METHODS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease for whom PCI was being considered, we assessed all stenoses by measuring FFR. Patients in whom at least one stenosis was functionally significant (FFR, ≤0.80) were randomly assigned to FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy (PCI group) or the best available medical therapy alone (medical-therapy group). Patients in whom all stenoses had an FFR of more than 0.80 were entered into a registry and received the best available medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization. RESULTS: Recruitment was halted prematurely after enrollment of 1220 patients (888 who underwent randomization and 332 enrolled in the registry) because of a significant between-group difference in the percentage of patients who had a primary end-point event: 4.3% in the PCI group and 12.7% in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio with PCI, 0.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.19 to 0.53; P<0.001). The difference was driven by a lower rate of urgent revascularization in the PCI group than in the medical-therapy group (1.6% vs. 11.1%; hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.30; P<0.001); in particular, in the PCI group, fewer urgent revascularizations were triggered by a myocardial infarction or evidence of ischemia on electrocardiography (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.04 to 0.43; P<0.001). Among patients in the registry, 3.0% had a primary end-point event. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable coronary artery disease and functionally significant stenoses, FFR-guided PCI plus the best available medical therapy, as compared with the best available medical therapy alone, decreased the need for urgent revascularization. In patients without ischemia, the outcome appeared to be favorable with the best available medical therapy alone. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01132495.).

Epidemiologic studies have shown that sleep duration is associated with overall mortality. We conducted a systematic review of the associations between sleep duration and all-cause and cause-specific mortality. PubMed was systematically searched up to January, 2008 to identify studies examining the association between sleep duration and mortality (both all-cause and cause-specific) among adults. Data were abstracted serially in a standardized manner by two reviewers and analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis. Twenty-three studies assessing the associations between sleep duration and mortality were identified. All examined sleep duration measured using participant self-report. Among the 16 studies which had similar reference categories and reported sufficient data on short sleep and mortality for meta-analyses, the pooled relative risk (RR) for all-cause mortality for short sleep duration was 1.10 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.06, 1.15]. For cardiovascular-related and cancer-related mortality, the RRs associated with short sleep were 1.06 (95% CI: 0.94, 1.18) and 0.99 (95% CI: 0.88, 1.13), respectively. Similarly, among the 17 studies reporting data on long sleep duration and mortality, the pooled RRs comparing the long sleepers with medium sleepers were 1.23 (95% CI: 1.17, 1.30) for all-cause mortality, 1.38 (95% CI: 1.13, 1.69) for cardiovascular-related mortality, and 1.21 (95% CI: 1.11, 1.32) for cancer-related mortality. Our findings indicate that both short sleepers and long sleepers are at increased risk of all-cause mortality. Further research using objective measures of sleep duration is needed to fully characterize these associations.

BACKGROUND: The options for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism in patients with patent foramen ovale are administration of antithrombotic medications or percutaneous closure of the patent foramen ovale. We investigated whether closure is superior to medical therapy. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, superiority trial in 29 centers in Europe, Canada, Brazil, and Australia in which the assessors of end points were unaware of the study-group assignments. Patients with a patent foramen ovale and ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack (TIA), or a peripheral thromboembolic event were randomly assigned to undergo closure of the patent foramen ovale with the Amplatzer PFO Occluder or to receive medical therapy. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal stroke, TIA, or peripheral embolism. Analysis was performed on data for the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: The mean duration of follow-up was 4.1 years in the closure group and 4.0 years in the medical-therapy group. The primary end point occurred in 7 of the 204 patients (3.4%) in the closure group and in 11 of the 210 patients (5.2%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio for closure vs. medical therapy, 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24 to 1.62; P=0.34). Nonfatal stroke occurred in 1 patient (0.5%) in the closure group and 5 patients (2.4%) in the medical-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.02 to 1.72; P=0.14), and TIA occurred in 5 patients (2.5%) and 7 patients (3.3%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.23 to 2.24; P=0.56). CONCLUSIONS: Closure of a patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of cryptogenic embolism did not result in a significant reduction in the risk of recurrent embolic events or death as compared with medical therapy. (Funded by St. Jude Medical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00166257.).

BACKGROUND: Early-generation drug-eluting stents releasing sirolimus (SES) or paclitaxel (PES) are associated with increased risk of very late stent thrombosis occurring >1 year after stent implantation. It is unknown whether the risk of very late stent thrombosis persists with newer-generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES). METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed the risk of stent thrombosis in a cohort of 12 339 patients with unrestricted use of drug-eluting stents (3819 SES, 4308 PES, 4212 EES). Results are incidence rates per 100 person-years after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for group differences. During follow-up of up to 4 years, the overall incidence rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower with EES (1.4 per 100 person-years) compared with SES (2.9; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.27-0.62; P<0.0001) and PES (4.4; hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.48; P<0.0001). The incidence rate per 100 person-years of early (0-30 days), late (31 days-1 year), and very late stent thrombosis amounted to 0.6, 0.1, and 0.6 among EES-treated patients; 1.0, 0.3, and 1.6 among SES-treated patients; and 1.3, 0.7, and 2.4 among PES-treated patients. Differences in favor of EES were most pronounced beyond 1 year, with a hazard ratio of 0.33 (EES versus SES; P=0.006) and 0.34 (EES versus PES; P<0.0001). There was a lower risk of cardiac death or myocardial with EES compared with PES (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-0.75; P<0.0001), which was directly related to the lower risk of stent thrombosis-associated events (EES versus PES: hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.57). CONCLUSION: Current treatment with EES is associated with a lower risk of very late stent thrombosis compared with early-generation drug-eluting stents.