Background and Aim: Left atrial stiffness (LASt) is an important marker of cardiac function, especially in patients with heart failure (HF); it explains symptoms on the basis of pressure transfer to the pulmonary circulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the relationship between LASt and cardiac events (CE) in HF patients with reduced to mid-range ejection fraction. Methods: The study included 215 consecutive ambulatory HF patients with ejection fraction (EF) < 50% (162 HF reduced EF and 53 HF mid-range EF) of mean age 66 ± 11 years and 24.4% females. Peak LA strain (PALS) was measured by speckle tracking echocardiography and E/e’ recorded from the apical four-chamber view. Non-invasive LASt was calculated using the equation: LASt = E/e’ ratio/PALS. Documented cardiac events (CE) were HF hospitalization and cardiac death. Results: During a median follow up of 41 ± 34 months, 65 patients (30%) had CE. In multivariate analysis model, only raised LV filling pressure (E/e’) (OR = 0.292, (95% CI 0.099 to 0.859), p = 0.02), peak pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) (OR = 1.050 (1.009 to 1.094), p = 0.01), PALS (OR = 0.932 (0.873 to 0.994), p = 0.02) and LASt (OR = 3.781 (1.144 to 5.122), p = 0.001) independently predicted CE. LASt ≥ 0.76% was the most powerful predictor of CE, with 80% sensitivity and 73% specificity (AUC 0.82, CI = 0.73 to 0.87, p < 0.001) followed by PALS ≤ 16%, with 74% sensitivity and 72% specificity (AUC 0.77, CI = 0.71 to 0.84, p < 0.001). These results were consistent irrespective of EF (p < 0.05). Conclusion: In this cohort of ambulatory HFrEF and HFmrEF patients, LASt proved the most powerful predictor of clinical outcome.

Background and Aim: In patients undergoing diagnostic coronary angiography (CA) and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), the benefits associated with radial access compared with the femoral access approach remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the short-term evidence-based clinical outcome of the two approaches. Methods: The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing radial versus femoral access for CA and PCI. We identified 34 RCTs with 29,352 patients who underwent CA and/or PCI and compared 14,819 patients randomized for radial access with 14,533 who underwent procedures using femoral access. The follow-up period for clinical outcome was 30 days in all studies. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a fixed-effect or a random-effect model, as appropriate. Risk ratios (RRs) were used for efficacy and safety outcomes.Results: Compared with femoral access, the radial access was associated with significantly lower risk for all-cause mortality (RR: 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61 to 0.88; p = 0.001), major bleeding (RR: 0.53; 95% CI:0.43 to 0.65; p ˂ 0.00001), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)(RR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.74 to 0.91; p = 0.0002), and major vascular complications (RR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.29 to 0.48; p ˂ 0.00001). These results were consistent irrespective of the clinical presentation of ACS or STEMI. Conclusions: Radial access in patients undergoing CA with or without PCI is associated with lower mortality, MACE, major bleeding and vascular complications, irrespective of clinical presentation, ACS or STEMI, compared with femoral access.

Background and Aim: Arterial wall shear strain (WSS) has been proposed to impact the features of atherosclerotic plaques. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the impact of different types of WSS on plaque features in coronary artery disease (CAD). Methods: We systematically searched PubMed-Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Registry, from 1989 up to January 2020 and selected clinical trials and observational studies which assessed the relationship between WSS, measured by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and plaque morphology in patients with CAD. Results: In four studies, a total of 72 patients with 13,098 coronary artery segments were recruited, with mean age 57.5 ± 9.5 years. The pooled analysis showed that low WSS was associated with larger baseline lumen area (WMD 2.55 [1.34 to 3.76, p < 0.001]), smaller plaque area (WMD −1.16 [−1.84 to −0.49, p = 0.0007]), lower plaque burden (WMD −12.7 [−21.4 to −4.01, p = 0.04]), and lower necrotic core area (WMD −0.32 [−0.78 to 0.14, p = 0.04]). Low WSS also had smaller fibrous area (WMD −0.79 [−1.88 to 0.30, p = 0.02]) and smaller fibro-fatty area (WMD −0.22 [−0.57 to 0.13, p = 0.02]), compared with high WSS, but the dense calcium score was similar between the two groups (WMD −0.17 [−0.47 to 0.13, p = 0.26]). No differences were found between intermediate and high WSS. Conclusions: High WSS is associated with signs of plaque instability such as higher necrotic core, higher calcium score, and higher plaque burden compared with low WSS. These findings highlight the role of IVUS in assessing plaque vulnerability.

Background and Aim: Treatment of patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCA) with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the long-term clinical outcomes of patients with unprotected LMCA treated randomly by PCI or CABG. Methods: PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Google Scholar, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov database searches identified five randomized trials (RCTs) including 4499 patients with unprotected LMCA comparing PCI (n = 2249) vs. CABG (n = 2250), with a minimum clinical follow-up of five years. Random effect risk ratios were used for efficacy and safety outcomes. The study was registered in PROSPERO. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction or stroke. Results: Compared to CABG, patients assigned to PCI had a similar rate of MACE (risk ratio (RR): 1.13; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.36; p = 0.19), myocardial infarction (RR: 1.48; 95% CI: 0.97 to 2.25; p = 0.07) and stroke (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.62 to 1.23; p = 0.42). Additionally, all-cause mortality (RR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.28; p = 0.48) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality (RR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.43; p = 0.31) were not different. However, the risk of any repeat revascularization (RR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.34 to 2.15; p < 0.00001) was higher in patients assigned to PCI. Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis suggest that the long-term survival and MACE of patients who underwent PCI for unprotected LMCA stenosis were comparable to those receiving CABG, despite a higher rate of repeat revascularization.