European Heart Journal

doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae573pmid: 39217604

Background and AimsCurrent guidelines recommend 6 h of solid food and 2 h of clear liquid fasting for patients undergoing cardiac procedures with conscious sedation. There are no data to support this practice, and previous single-centre studies support the safety of removing fasting requirements. The objective of this study was to determine the non-inferiority of a no-fasting strategy to fasting prior to cardiac catheterization procedures which require conscious sedation.MethodsThis is a multicentre, investigator-initiated, non-inferiority, randomized trial conducted in Australia with a prospective open-label, blinded endpoint design. Patients referred for coronary angiography, percutaneous coronary intervention, or cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED)-related procedures were enrolled. Patients were randomized 1:1 to fasting as normal (6 h solid food and 2 h clear liquid) or no-fasting requirements (encouraged to have regular meals but not mandated to do so). Recruitment occurred from 2022 to 2023. The primary outcome was a composite of aspiration pneumonia, hypotension, hyperglycaemia, and hypoglycaemia assessed with a Bayesian approach. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction score, new ventilation requirement (non-invasive and invasive), new intensive care unit admission, 30-day readmission, 30-day mortality, 30-day pneumonia.ResultsA total of 716 patients were randomized with 358 in each group. Those in the fasting arm had significantly longer solid food fasting (13.2 vs. 3.0 h, Bayes factor >100, indicating extreme evidence of difference) and clear liquid fasting times (7.0 vs. 2.4 h, Bayes factor >100). The primary composite outcome occurred in 19.1% of patients in the fasting arm and 12.0% of patients in the no-fasting arm. The estimate of the mean posterior difference in proportions with credibility interval (CI) in the primary composite outcome was −5.2% (95% CI −9.6 to −.9), favouring no fasting. This result confirms the non-inferiority (posterior probability >99.5%) and superiority (posterior probability 99.1%) of no fasting for the primary composite outcome. The no-fasting arm had improved patient satisfaction scores with a posterior mean difference of 4.02 points (95% CI 3.36–4.67, Bayes factor >100). Secondary outcome events were observed to be similar.ConclusionsIn patients undergoing cardiac catheterization and CIED-related procedures, no fasting was non-inferior and superior to fasting for the primary composite outcome of aspiration pneumonia, hypotension, hyperglycaemia, and hypoglycaemia. Patient satisfaction scores were significantly better with no fasting. This supports removing fasting requirements for patients undergoing cardiac catheterization laboratory procedures that require conscious sedation.

doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae611pmid: 39215973

Background and AimsIn patients with atrial fibrillation (AF), recurrent AF and sinus rhythm during follow-up are determined by interactions between cardiovascular disease processes and rhythm control therapy. Predictors of attaining sinus rhythm at follow-up are not well known.MethodsTo quantify the interaction between cardiovascular disease processes and rhythm outcomes, 14 biomarkers reflecting AF-related cardiovascular disease processes in 1586 patients in the EAST-AFNET 4 biomolecule study (71 years old, 45% women) were quantified at baseline. Mixed logistic regression models including clinical features were constructed for each biomarker. Biomarkers were interrogated for interaction with early rhythm control. Outcome was sinus rhythm at 12 months. Results were validated at 24 months and in external datasets.ResultsHigher baseline concentrations of three biomarkers were independently associated with a lower chance of sinus rhythm at 12 months: angiopoietin 2 (ANGPT2) (odds ratio [OR] .76 [95% confidence interval .65–.89], P < .001), bone morphogenetic protein 10 (BMP10) (OR .83 [.71–.97], P = .017), and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (OR .73 [.60–.88], P < .001). Analysis of rhythm at 24 months confirmed the results. Early rhythm control interacted with the predictive potential of NT-proBNP (Pinteraction = .033). The predictive effect of NT-proBNP was reduced in patients randomized to early rhythm control (usual care: OR .64 [.51–.80], P < .001; early rhythm control: OR .90 [.69–1.18], P = .453). External validation confirmed that low concentrations of ANGPT2, BMP10, and NT-proBNP predict sinus rhythm during follow-up.ConclusionsLow concentrations of ANGPT2, BMP10, and NT-proBNP identify patients with AF who are likely to attain sinus rhythm during follow-up. The predictive ability of NT-proBNP is attenuated in patients receiving rhythm control.

doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae614pmid: 39221651

Background and AimsIn the AEGIS-II trial (NCT03473223), CSL112, a human apolipoprotein A1 derived from plasma that increases cholesterol efflux capacity, did not significantly reduce the risk of the primary endpoint through 90 days vs. placebo after acute myocardial infarction (MI). Nevertheless, given the well-established relationship between higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and plaque burden, as well as greater risk reductions seen with PCSK9 inhibitors in patients with baseline LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL on statin therapy, the efficacy of CSL112 may be influenced by baseline LDL-C.MethodsOverall, 18 219 patients with acute MI, multivessel coronary artery disease, and additional risk factors were randomized to either four weekly infusions of 6 g CSL112 or placebo. This exploratory post-hoc analysis evaluated cardiovascular outcomes by baseline LDL-C in patients prescribed guideline-directed statin therapy at the time of randomization (n = 15 731).ResultsAs baseline LDL-C increased, the risk of the primary endpoint at 90 days lowered in those treated with CSL112 compared with placebo. In patients with LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL at randomization, there was a significant risk reduction of cardiovascular death, MI, or stroke in the CSL112 vs. placebo group at 90, 180, and 365 days [hazard ratio .69 (.53–.90), .71 (.57–.88), and .78 (.65–.93)]. In contrast, there was no difference between treatment groups among those with LDL-C < 100 mg/dL at baseline.ConclusionsIn this population, treatment with CSL112 compared to placebo was associated with a significantly lower risk of recurrent cardiovascular events among patients with a baseline LDL-C ≥ 100 mg/dL. Further studies need to confirm that CSL112 efficacy is influenced by baseline LDL-C.

doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehae617pmid: 39215959

Background and AimsThere was no previous trial comparing aspirin monotherapy with a P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following short dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.MethodsIn the STOPDAPT-3, patients with acute coronary syndrome or high bleeding risk (HBR) were randomly assigned to either 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and prasugrel followed by aspirin monotherapy (aspirin group) or 1-month prasugrel monotherapy followed by clopidogrel monotherapy (clopidogrel group). This secondary analysis compared aspirin monotherapy with clopidogrel monotherapy by the 30-day landmark analysis. The co-primary endpoints were the cardiovascular endpoint defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or ischaemic stroke and the bleeding endpoint defined as Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5.ResultsOf the 6002 assigned patients, 5833 patients (aspirin group: N = 2920 and clopidogrel group: N = 2913) were included in the 30-day landmark analysis. Median age was 73 (interquartile range 64–80) years, women 23.4%, acute coronary syndrome 74.6%, and high bleeding risk 54.1%. The assigned monotherapy was continued at 1 year in 87.5% and 87.2% in the aspirin and clopidogrel groups, respectively. The incidence rates beyond 30 days and up to 1 year were similar between the aspirin and clopidogrel groups for both cardiovascular endpoint [4.5 and 4.5 per 100 person-year, hazard ratio 1.00 (95% confidence interval .77–1.30), P = .97], and bleeding endpoint [2.0 and 1.9, hazard ratio 1.02 (95% confidence interval .69–1.52), P = .92].ConclusionsAspirin monotherapy compared with clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with similar cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes beyond 1 month and up to 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (STOPDAPT-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04609111).