Dean J. Kereiakes

BACKGROUND: Previous trials have shown that among high-risk patients with aortic stenosis, survival rates are similar with transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic-valve replacement. We evaluated the two procedures in a randomized trial involving intermediate-risk patients. METHODS: We randomly assigned 2032 intermediate-risk patients with severe aortic stenosis, at 57 centers, to undergo either TAVR or surgical replacement. The primary end point was death from any cause or disabling stroke at 2 years. The primary hypothesis was that TAVR would not be inferior to surgical replacement. Before randomization, patients were entered into one of two cohorts on the basis of clinical and imaging findings; 76.3% of the patients were included in the transfemoral-access cohort and 23.7% in the transthoracic-access cohort. RESULTS: The rate of death from any cause or disabling stroke was similar in the TAVR group and the surgery group (P=0.001 for noninferiority). At 2 years, the Kaplan-Meier event rates were 19.3% in the TAVR group and 21.1% in the surgery group (hazard ratio in the TAVR group, 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.09; P=0.25). In the transfemoral-access cohort, TAVR resulted in a lower rate of death or disabling stroke than surgery (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.62 to 1.00; P=0.05), whereas in the transthoracic-access cohort, outcomes were similar in the two groups. TAVR resulted in larger aortic-valve areas than did surgery and also resulted in lower rates of acute kidney injury, severe bleeding, and new-onset atrial fibrillation; surgery resulted in fewer major vascular complications and less paravalvular aortic regurgitation. CONCLUSIONS: In intermediate-risk patients, TAVR was similar to surgical aortic-valve replacement with respect to the primary end point of death or disabling stroke. (Funded by Edwards Lifesciences; PARTNER 2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01314313.).

I 1. The initial evaluation of the patient with suspected ACS should include a search for noncoronary causes that could explain the development of symptoms. (Level of Evidence: C)

BACKGROUND: Preliminary reports of studies involving simple coronary lesions indicate that a sirolimus-eluting stent significantly reduces the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary revascularization. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent in 1058 patients at 53 centers in the United States who had a newly diagnosed lesion in a native coronary artery. The coronary disease in these patients was complex because of the frequent presence of diabetes (in 26 percent of patients), the high percentage of patients with longer lesions (mean, 14.4 mm), and small vessels (mean, 2.80 mm). The primary end point was failure of the target vessel (a composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and repeated percutaneous or surgical revascularization of the target vessel) within 270 days. RESULTS: The rate of failure of the target vessel was reduced from 21.0 percent with a standard stent to 8.6 percent with a sirolimus-eluting stent (P<0.001)--a reduction that was driven largely by a decrease in the frequency of the need for revascularization of the target lesion (16.6 percent in the standard-stent group vs. 4.1 percent in the sirolimus-stent group, P<0.001). The frequency of neointimal hyperplasia within the stent was also decreased in the group that received sirolimus-eluting stents, as assessed by both angiography and intravascular ultrasonography. Subgroup analyses revealed a reduction in the rates of angiographic restenosis and target-lesion revascularization in all subgroups examined. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized clinical trial involving patients with complex coronary lesions, the use of a sirolimus-eluting stent had a consistent treatment effect, reducing the rates of restenosis and associated clinical events in all subgroups analyzed.

CONTEXT: The direct thrombin inhibitor bivalirudin has been associated with better efficacy and less bleeding than heparin during coronary balloon angioplasty but has not been widely tested during contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of bivalirudin, with glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (Gp IIb/IIIa) inhibition on a provisional basis for complications during PCI, compared with heparin plus planned Gp IIb/IIIa blockade with regard to protection from periprocedural ischemic and hemorrhagic complications. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Randomized Evaluation in PCI Linking Angiomax to Reduced Clinical Events (REPLACE)-2 trial, a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled trial conducted among 6010 patients undergoing urgent or elective PCI at 233 community or referral hospitals in 9 countries from October 2001 through August 2002. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive intravenous bivalirudin (0.75-mg/kg bolus plus 1.75 mg/kg per hour for the duration of PCI), with provisional Gp IIb/IIIa inhibition (n = 2999), or heparin (65-U/kg bolus) with planned Gp IIb/IIIa inhibition (abciximab or eptifibatide) (n = 3011). Both groups received daily aspirin and a thienopyridine for at least 30 days after PCI. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary composite end point was 30-day incidence of death, myocardial infarction, urgent repeat revascularization, or in-hospital major bleeding; the secondary composite end point was 30-day incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent repeat revascularization. RESULTS: Provisional Gp IIb/IIIa blockade was administered to 7.2% of patients in the bivalirudin group. By 30 days, the primary composite end point had occurred among 9.2% of patients in the bivalirudin group vs 10.0% of patients in the heparin-plus-Gp IIb/IIIa group (odds ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.09; P =.32). The secondary composite end point occurred in 7.6% of patients in the bivalirudin vs 7.1% of patients in the heparin-plus-Gp IIb/IIIa groups (odds ratio, 1.09; 95% confidence interval 0.90-1.32; P =.40). Prespecified statistical criteria for noninferiority to heparin plus Gp IIb/IIIa were satisfied for both end points. In-hospital major bleeding rates were significantly reduced by bivalirudin (2.4% vs 4.1%; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Bivalirudin with provisional Gp IIb/IIIa blockade is statistically not inferior to heparin plus planned Gp IIb/IIIa blockade during contemporary PCI with regard to suppression of acute ischemic end points and is associated with less bleeding.