Background— Although most clinical trials of coronary stents have measured nominally identical safety and effectiveness end points, differences in definitions and timing of assessment have created confusion in interpretation. Methods and Results— The Academic Research Consortium is an informal collaboration between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe. Two meetings, in Washington, DC, in January 2006 and in Dublin, Ireland, in June 2006, sponsored by the Academic Research Consortium and including representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and all device manufacturers who were working with the Food and Drug Administration on drug-eluting stent clinical trial programs, were focused on consensus end point definitions for drug-eluting stent evaluations. The effort was pursued with the objective to establish consistency among end point definitions and provide consensus recommendations. On the basis of considerations from historical legacy to key pathophysiological mechani...

Clinical End Points in Coronary Stent Trials A Case for Standardized Definitions

http://cardiologia.publicacionmedica.com/contenido/images/stemi_aha_2013.pdf

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Background In patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), coronary angiography is the standard method for guiding the placement of the stent. It is unclear whether routine measurement of fractional flow reserve (FFR; the ratio of maximal blood flow in a stenotic artery to normal maximal flow), in addition to angiography, improves outcomes. Methods In 20 medical centers in the United States and Europe, we randomly assigned 1005 patients with multivessel coronary artery disease to undergo PCI with implantation of drug-eluting stents guided by angiography alone or guided by FFR measurements in addition to angiography. Before randomization, lesions requiring PCI were identified on the basis of their angiographic appearance. Patients assigned to angiography-guided PCI underwent stenting of all indicated lesions, whereas those assigned to FFR-guided PCI underwent stenting of indicated lesions only if the FFR was 0.80 or less. The primary end point was the rate of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. Results The mean (±SD) number of indicated lesions per patient was 2.7±0.9 in the angiography group and 2.8±1.0 in the FFR group (P = 0.34). The number of stents used per patient was 2.7±1.2 and 1.9±1.3, respectively (P<0.001). The 1-year event rate was 18.3% (91 patients) in the angiography group and 13.2% (67 patients) in the FFR group (P = 0.02). Seventy-eight percent of the patients in the angiography group were free from angina at 1 year, as compared with 81% of patients in the FFR group (P = 0.20). Conclusions Routine measurement of FFR in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease who are undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents significantly reduces the rate of the composite end point of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00267774.)

/pdf/fractional-flow-reserve-versus-angiography-for-guiding-22b64o9rk8.pdf

Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention

Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction : ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable ISSN: 1524-4539 Copyright © 2007 American Heart Association. All rights reserved. Print ISSN: 0009-7322. Online 72514 Circulation is published by the American Heart Association. 7272 Greenville Avenue, Dallas, TX doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.18194

https://cdr.lib.unc.edu/downloads/vd66w2108

ACC/AHA 2007 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction. A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines (Writing Committee to Revise the 2002 Guidelines for the Management of Patients With Unstable Angina/Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction)...

s in PubMed), and more liberal use of summary recommendation tables (with references that support LOE) to serve as a quick reference. In April 2011, the Institute of Medicine released 2 reports: Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews and Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust.2,3 It is noteworthy that the IOM cited ACCF/AHA practice guidelines as being compliant with many of the proposed standards. A thorough review of these reports and of our current methodology is under way, with further enhancements anticipated. The recommendations in this guideline are considered current until they are superseded by a focused update or the fulltext guideline is revised. The reader is encouraged to consult the full-text guideline for additional guidance and details about the care of the patient with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), because the Executive Summary contains only the recommendations. Guidelines are official policy of both the ACCF and AHA. Jeffrey L. Anderson, MD, FACC, FAHA Chair, ACCF/AHA Task Force on Practice Guidelines O’Gara et al 2013 ACCF/AHA STEMI Guideline Executive Summary 533

2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Executive Summary

Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: an observational study of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents.

Basket-Late Investigators

Papers

Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: an observational study of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents.