BackgroundThe independent prognostic impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) and prediabetes mellitus (pre‐DM) on survival outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure has been investigated in observational registries and randomized, clinical trials, but the results have been often inconclusive or conflicting. We examined the independent prognostic impact of DM and pre‐DM on survival outcomes in the GISSI‐HF (Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio della Sopravvivenza nella Insufficienza Cardiaca‐Heart Failure) trial.Methods and ResultsWe assessed the risk of all‐cause death and the composite of all‐cause death or cardiovascular hospitalization over a median follow‐up period of 3.9 years among the 6935 chronic heart failure participants of the GISSI‐HF trial, who were stratified by presence of DM (n=2852), pre‐DM (n=2013), and non‐DM (n=2070) at baseline. Compared with non‐DM patients, those with DM had remarkably higher incidence rates of all‐cause death (34.5% versus 24.6%) and the composite end point (63.6% versus 54.7%). Conversely, both event rates were similar between non‐DM patients and those with pre‐DM. Cox regression analysis showed that DM, but not pre‐DM, was associated with an increased risk of all‐cause death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.28–1.60) and of the composite end point (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.13–1.32), independently of established risk factors. In the DM subgroup, higher hemoglobin A1c was also independently associated with increased risk of both study outcomes (all‐cause death: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.02–1.43; and composite end point: adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.01–1.29, respectively).ConclusionsPresence of DM was independently associated with poor long‐term survival outcomes in patients with chronic heart failure.Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00336336.

Background— We investigated the association between 9 polymorphisms of genes encoding hemostasis factors and myocardial infarction in a large sample of young patients chosen because they have less coronary atherosclerosis than older patients, and thus their disease is more likely to be related to a genetic predisposition to a prothrombotic state. Methods and Results— This nationwide case-control study involved 1210 patients who had survived a first myocardial infarction at an age of <45 years who underwent coronary arteriography in 125 coronary care units and 1210 healthy subjects matched for age, sex, and geographical origin. None of the 9 polymorphisms of genes encoding proteins involved in coagulation (G-455A β-fibrinogen: OR, 1.0; CI, 0.8 to 1.2; G1691A factor V: OR, 1.1; CI, 0.6 to 2.1; G20210A factor II: OR, 1.0; CI, 0.5 to 1.9; and G10976A factor VII: OR, 1.0; CI, 0.8 to 1.3), platelet function (C807T glycoprotein Ia: OR, 1.1; CI, 0.9 to 1.3; and C1565T glycoprotein IIIa: OR, 0.9; CI, 0.8 to 1.2), fibrinolysis (G185T factor XIII: OR, 1.2; CI, 0.9 to 1.6; and 4G/5G plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1: OR, 0.9; CI, 0.7 to 1.2), or homocysteine metabolism (C677T methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase: OR, 0.9; CI, 0.8 to 1.1) were associated with an increased or decreased risk of myocardial infarction. Conclusions— This study provides no evidence supporting an association between 9 polymorphisms of genes encoding proteins involved in hemostasis and the occurrence of premature myocardial infarction or protection against it.

Background There is a lack of evidence regarding the benefits of β-blocker treatment after invasively managed acute myocardial infarction (MI) without reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Methods and results TREatment with Beta-blockers after myOcardial infarction withOut reduced ejection fraction (REBOOT) trial is a pragmatic, controlled, prospective, randomized, open-label blinded endpoint (PROBE design) clinical trial testing the benefits of β-blocker maintenance therapy in patients discharged after MI with or without ST-segment elevation. Patients eligible for participation are those managed invasively during index hospitalization (coronary angiography), with LVEF &gt;40%, and no history of heart failure (HF). At discharge, patients will be randomized 1:1 to β-blocker therapy (agent and dose according to treating physician) or no β-blocker therapy. The primary endpoint is a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal reinfarction, or HF hospitalization over a median follow-up period of 2.75 years (minimum 2 years, maximum 3 years). Key secondary endpoints include the incidence of the individual components of the primary composite endpoint, the incidence of cardiac death, and incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias or resuscitated cardiac arrest. The primary endpoint will be analyzed according to the intention-to-treat principle. Conclusion The REBOOT trial will provide robust evidence to guide the prescription of β-blockers to patients discharged after MI without reduced LVEF.

Background Recently, the COMPASS trial demonstrated that dual therapy reduced cardiovascular outcomes compared with aspirin alone in patients with stable atherosclerotic disease. Methods and Results We sought to assess the proportion of patients eligible for the COMPASS trial and to compare the epidemiology and outcome of these patients with those without COMPASS inclusion or with any exclusion criteria in a contemporary, nationwide cohort of patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Among the 4068 patients with detailed information allowing evaluation of eligibility, 1416 (34.8%) did not fulfill the inclusion criteria (COMPASS-Not-Included), 841 (20.7%) had exclusion criteria (COMPASS-Excluded) and the remaining 1811 (44.5%) were classified as COMPASS-Like. At 1 year, the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), a composite of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke, was 0.9% in the COMPASS-Not-Included and 2.0% in the COMPASS-Like (p = 0.01), and 5.0% in the COMPASS-Excluded group (p &lt; 0.0001 for all comparisons). Among the COMPASS-Like population, patients with multiple COMPASS enrichment criteria presented a significant increase in the risk of MACE (from 1.0% to 3.3% in those with 1 and ≥3 criteria, respectively; p = 0.012), and a modest absolute increase in major bleeding risk (from 0.2% to 0.4%, respectively; p = 0.46). Conclusions In a contemporary real-world cohort registry of stable CAD, most patients resulted as eligible for the COMPASS. These patients presented a considerable annual risk of MACE that consistently increases in the presence of multiple risk factors.

The incidence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has significantly decreased. Conversely, the rate of non-STEMI (NSTEMI) has increased. Patients with NSTEMI have lower short-term mortality compared to patients with STEMI, whereas at long-term follow-up, the mortality becomes comparable. This might be due to the differences in baseline characteristics, including older age and a greater prevalence of comorbidities in the NSTEMI population. Although antithrombotic strategies used in patients with NSTEMI have been well studied in clinical trials and updated guidelines are available, patterns of use and outcomes in clinical practice are less well described. Thus, a panel of Italian cardiology experts assembled under the auspices of the "Campania NSTEMI Study Group" for comprehensive discussion and consensus development to provide practical recommendations, for both clinical and interventional cardiologists, regarding optimal management of antithrombotic therapy in patients with NSTEMI. This position article presents and discusses various clinical scenarios in patients with NSTEMI or unstable angina, including special subsets (eg, patients aged ≥85 years, patients with chronic renal disease or previous cerebrovascular events, and patients requiring triple therapy or long-term antithrombotic therapy), with the panel recommendations being provided for each scenario.