Multivessel stenting in patients with NSTE-ACS and multivessel disease using a clinical decision of treatment is associated with lower rate of MACE driven by lower repeat revascularization, compared with culprit-vessel stenting, without difference in rates of death or MI.

With conventional stenting, predilatation frequently induces dissections that require deploying stents longer than originally planned. To assess whether direct stenting is safe and may prevent dissections and reduce the length of stents implanted, we conducted a randomized study comparing direct (n = 73) and conventional (n = 78) stenting. Direct stenting was successful in 89% of cases, 11% crossed over to predilation without complications. Dissections occurred more frequently in conventional stenting group (10.3% vs. 1.4%; P = 0.034), but did not translate to a significant stent length difference (16.31 +/- 7.6 vs. 15.31 +/- 5.5; P = NS). Periprocedure creatine kinase elevation and number of balloons utilized were lower with direct stenting.

In elderly (75 years or older) patients living in Latin America with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis candidates for transfemoral approach, the panel suggests the use of transcatheter aortic valve implant (TAVI) over surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). This is a conditional recommendation, based on moderate certainty in the evidence (⨁⨁⨁Ο).This recommendation does not apply to patients in which there is a standard of care, like TAVI for patients at very high risk for cardiac surgery or inoperable patients, or SAVR for non-elderly patients (eg, under 65 years old) at low risk for cardiac surgery. The suggested age threshold of 75 years old is based on judgement of limited available literature and should be used as a guide rather than a determinant threshold.The conditional nature of this recommendation means that the majority of patients in this situation would want a transfemoral TAVI over SAVR, but some may prefer SAVR. For clinicians, this means that they must be familiar with the evidence supporting this recommendation and help each patient to arrive at a management decision integrating a multidisciplinary team discussion (Heart Team), patient’s values and preferences through shared decision-making, and available resources. Policymakers will require substantial debate and the involvement of various stakeholders to implement this recommendation.

Background: Thrombus formation in the left atrial appendage (LAA) is the main cause of thromboembolic events in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF). Oral anticoagulants are considered first-line therapy for stroke prevention in AF patients. Despite its proven efficacy, long-term oral anticoagulation is associated to innumerous limitations. Percutaneous LAA closure has emerged as a new strategy for stroke prevention in high risk AF patients who are not candidates for long term oral anticoagulation therapy. Methods: We report the initial experience with percutaneous occlusion of the LAA using the new Amplatzer TM Cardiac Plug (ACP -AGA Medical Corp., Golden Valley, USA) in patients with AF and CHADS2 score > 2 who were not eligible for anticoagulation therapy. Procedures were carried out under general anesthesia and 3D transesophageal echocardiography monitoring in real time. Results: Three male patients, mean age of 79 years and CHADS2 2, 3 and 5 scores had the device successfully implanted using a transeptal approach with no complications, resulting in immediate LAA occlusion and hospital discharge two days later. At the 50-day followup, all patients were clinically well with complete LAA occlusion and no complications at transthoracic echocardiography. Conclusions: Percutaneous LAA occlusion with the new ACP seems to be an attractive alternative to prevent thromboembolic events in patients with AF and contraindications or limitations for anticoagulation therapy.

No abstract