Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion provides an alternative to oral anticoagulation (OAC) for thromboembolic risk reduction in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF). Since regulatory approval in 2015, the WATCHMAN device has been the only LAA closure device available for clinical use in the United States. The PINNACLE FLX study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of the next-generation WATCHMAN FLX LAA closure device in patients with NVAF in whom OAC is indicated, but who have an appropriate rationale to seek a non-pharmaceutical alternative. Methods: This was a prospective, non-randomized, multi-center FDA study. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of one of the following events within 7 days post-procedure or by hospital discharge, whichever was later: death, ischemic stroke, systemic embolism, or device- or procedure-related events requiring cardiac surgery. The primary effectiveness endpoint was the incidence of effective LAA closure (peri-device flow ≤5mm), as assessed by the echocardiography core laboratory at 12-month follow-up. Results: A total of 400 patients were enrolled. The mean age was 73.8{plus minus}8.6 years and the mean CHA2DS2-VASc score was 4.2{plus minus}1.5. The incidence of the primary safety endpoint was 0.5% with a one-sided 95% upper confidence interval (CI) of 1.6%, meeting the performance goal (PG) of 4.2% (P<0.0001). The incidence of the primary effectiveness endpoint was 100%, with a onesided 95% lower CI of 99.1%, again meeting the PG of 97.0% (P<0.0001). Device-related thrombus was reported in 7 patients, no patients experienced pericardial effusion requiring open cardiac surgery, and there were no device embolizations. Conclusions: LAA closure with this next generation LAA closure device was associated with a low incidence of adverse events and a high incidence of anatomic closure. Clinical Trial Registration: URL https://clinicaltrials.gov Unique Identifier NCT02702271

Background-Drug eluting stents with durable polymers may be associated with hypersensitivity, delayed healing, and incomplete endothelialization, which may contribute to late/very late stent thrombosis and the need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy. Bioabsorbable polymers may facilitate stent healing, thus enhancing clinical safety. The SYNERGY stent is a thin-strut, platinum chromium metal alloy platform with an ultrathin bioabsorbable Poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) abluminal everolimus-eluting polymer. We performed a multicenter, randomized controlled trial for regulatory approval to determine noninferiority of the SYNERGY stent to the durable polymer PROMUS Element Plus everolimus-eluting stent. Methods and Results-Patients (n=1684) scheduled to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention for non-ST-segmentelevation acute coronary syndrome or stable coronary artery disease were randomized to receive either the SYNERGY stent or the PROMUS Element Plus stent. The primary end point of 12-month target lesion failure was observed in 6.7% of SYNERGY and 6.5% PROMUS Element Plus treated subjects by intention-to-treat (P=0.83 for difference; P=0.0005 for noninferiority), and 6.4% in both the groups by per-protocol analysis (P=0.0003 for noninferiority). Clinically indicated revascularization of the target lesion or definite/probable stent thrombosis were observed in 2.6% versus 1.7% (P=0.21) and 0.4% versus 0.6% (P=0.50) of SYNERGY versus PROMUS Element Plus-treated subjects, respectively. Conclusions-In this randomized trial, the SYNERGY bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stent was noninferior to the PROMUS Element Plus everolimus-eluting stent with respect to 1-year target lesion failure. These data support the relative safety and efficacy of SYNERGY in a broad range of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01665053.(Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015;8:e002372.

Background: It is thought that genes with similar patterns of mRNA expression and genes with similar functions are likely to be regulated via the same mechanisms. It has been difficult to quantitatively test these hypotheses on a large scale because there has been no general way of determining whether genes share a common regulatory mechanism. Here we use data from a recent genome wide binding analysis in combination with mRNA expression data and existing functional annotations to quantify the likelihood that genes with varying degrees of similarity in mRNA expression profile or function will be bound by a common transcription factor.