PCI for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: What Happened in the Last Week?

Similar documents
Management of stable CAD FFR guided therapy: the new gold standard

The Case for PCI as the Preferred Therapy in Most Patients with Chronic Stable Angina

Benefit of Performing PCI Based on FFR

Left Main Intervention: Where are we in 2015?

3 Year Clinical Outcome and Cost-Effectiveness of FFR- Guided PCI in Stable Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: FAME 2 Trial

Relations of Interest

Fractional Flow Reserve: Review of the latest data

PCIs on Intermediate Lesions NCDR Cath-PCI Registry

Trial. International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches

Controversies in Coronary Revascularization. Atlanta CCU April 15, 2016

Cost-Effectiveness of Fractional Flow Reserve

Angor Stable: de COURAGE à FAME 2. Maladie coronaire stable et coronarographie en De COURAGE à FAME 2

Quality of Life After Everolimus- Eluting Stents or Bypass Surgery for Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease:

FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE: STANDARD OF CARE

FFR in Multivessel Disease

Left Main Intervention: Will it become standard of care?

How to approach non-infarct related artery disease in patients with STEMI in a limited resource setting

Treatment Options for Angina

Fractional Flow Reserve: Basics, FAME 1, FAME 2. William F. Fearon, MD Associate Professor Stanford University Medical Center

Advances in Cardiovascular Diagnosis and Therapy. No disclosure or conflicts. Outline

Better CABGs vs Better PCI Devices

Three-Year Clinical Outcomes with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds: Results from the Randomized ABSORB III Trial Stephen G.

Management of Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. Vinay Madan MD February 10, 2018

The top 5 trials in the last year: Ischemic Heart Disease

Debate Should we use FFR? I will say NO.

2/17/2010. Grace Lin, MD Assistant Professor of Medicine University of California, San Francisco

James M. Kirshenbaum, MD, FACC

Coronary Artery Disease: Revascularization (Teacher s Guide)

Medical Rx vs PCI vs CABG

ROLE OF CORONARY PRESSURE & FFR IN MULTIVESSEL DISEASE

Assessing Myocardium at Risk: Applying SYNTAX

Cindy L. Grines MD FACC FSCAI

STEMI AND MULTIVESSEL CORONARY DISEASE

Complex CAD (5) PVD-P Valv. CM. Sub-Clinical Arterial (2) DBD/Frailty (2) Health Political (1) Personal (3)

Culprit PCI vs MultiVessel PCI for Acute Myocardial Infarction

PCI reduces death/myocardial infarction in stable patients with silent ischemia

VCU Pauley Heart Center: A 2009 US News Top 50 Heart and Heart Surgery Hospital

Diabetic Patients: Current Evidence of Revascularization

FFR-Guided PCI. 4 th Imaging and Physiology Summit October 29 th, 2010 Seoul, Korea. Stanford

Can Angiographic Complete Revascularization Improve Outcomes for Patients with Decreased LV Function? NO!

ΑΓΓΕΙΟΠΛΑΣΤΙΚΗ ΣΤΟ ΔΙΑΒΗΤΙΚΟ ΑΣΘΕΝΗ

Quality of Life Outcomes: The Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy

Surgery Grand Rounds

Imaging ischemic heart disease: role of SPECT and PET. Focus on Patients with Known CAD

Mise à Jour sur le traitement du Pluritronculaire Philippe Généreux, MD

Reconciling the Results of the Randomized Trials

Guidelines/Appropriateness ARCH 2015 St Louis, Missouri April 9-11, 2015 Manish A. Parikh, MD, FACC,FSCAI

Approach to Multi Vessel disease with STEMI

Evaluating Clinical Risk and Guiding management with SPECT Imaging

FFR-CT Not Ready for Primetime

Coronary stenting: the appropriate use of FFR

FRACTIONAL FLOW RESERVE USE IN THE CATH LAB BECAUSE ANGIOGRAPHY ALONE IS NOT ENOUGH!!!!!!!!

Fractional Flow Reserve and the Results of the FAME Study

Practical Office Management of Stable Angina

The SYNTAX-LE MANS Study

FFR Incorporating & Expanding it s use in Clinical Practice

CABG vs PCI: What do the Guidelines Say?

Michael Mack, M.D. Baylor Healthcare System Heart Hospital Baylor Plano Dallas, TX

Do stents deserve the bad press? Mark A. Tulli MD, FACC

Management of cardiovascular disease - coronary interventions -

CLINICAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE

Left Main PCI. Integrated Use of IVUS and FFR. Seung-Jung Park, MD, PhD

Blinded Physiological Assessment of Residual Ischemia after Successful Angiographic PCI Allen Jeremias, MD, MSc

Disclosures. Speaker s bureau: Research grant: Advisory Board: Servier International, Bayer, Merck Serono, Novartis, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lupin

CHIP Complex Higher-risk (and indicated) PCI

COMMENT DEFINIR UN PLURITRONCULAIRE. Didier Carrié CHU Toulouse Rangueil

David A. Orsinelli, MD, FACC, FASE Professor, Internal Medicine The Ohio State University Division of Cardiovascular Medicine Columbus, Ohio

Background. After PCI for MI, angina has important implications on quality of life and healthcare utilization

Δημήτριος Αγγοσράς, FETCS

Complete Revascularization: The Future Mode of Revascularization in STEMI

Coronary interventions

Management of High-Risk CAD : Surgeons Perspective

EXCEL vs. NOBLE: How to Treat Left Main Disease in 2017 AATS International Cardiovascular Symposium December 8-9, 2017

Master Class in Preventive Cardiology Focus on Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Geneva April

Revascularization In HFrEF: Are We Close To The Truth. Ali Almasood

Health Status after Transcatheter Mitral- Valve Repair in Patients with Heart Failure and Secondary Mitral Regurgitation: Results from the COAPT Trial

FAME STUDY: 2-year Follow-Up & CLINICAL SUBGROUP ANALYSIS

PCI vs. CABG From BARI to Syntax, Is The Game Over?

CMR stress Perfusion: what's new?

Controversies in Cardiac Surgery

CARDIOLOGY GRAND ROUNDS

What do the guidelines say?

Fractional Flow Reserve and instantaneous wave -free Ratio. Λάμπρος Κ. Μόσιαλος Επεμβατικός Καρδιολόγος ΓΝ Παπαγεωργίου

Implications of the New ESC/EACTS Guidelines for Myocardial Revascularization in 2011

Dave Kettles, St Dominics Hospital East London.

Southern Thoracic Surgical Association CABG in 2012: Implications of the New ESC/EACTS Guidelines

Management of High-Risk Coronary Artery Disease

Clinical Seminar. Which Diabetic Patient is a Candidate for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention - European Perspective

Michael Mack, M.D. Baylor Healthcare System Heart Hospital Baylor Plano Dallas, TX

The Future of Coronary Physiology

New Insight about FFR and IVUS MLA

Can Angioplasty Improve Quality of Life for CAD Patients?

Cardiogenic Shock. Carlos Cafri,, MD

What oral antiplatelet therapy would you choose? a) ASA alone b) ASA + Clopidogrel c) ASA + Prasugrel d) ASA + Ticagrelor

Σεμινάριο Ομάδων Εργασίας Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Σε ποιούς ασθενείς; ΔΗΜΗΤΡΗΣ ΑΥΖΩΤΗΣ Επιστ. υπεύθυνος Αιμοδυναμικού Τμήματος, Βιοκλινική

Instantaneous Wave-Free Ratio

Perioperative Cardiology Consultations for Noncardiac Surgery Ischemic Heart Disease

Patrick W. Serruys MD. PhD. 1 Bernard Chevalier MD. 2 Yoshinobu Onuma MD. PhD. 3 on behalf of ABSORB II investigators

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Update

Intervention: How and to which extent is technology helping us?

Transcription:

PCI for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease: What Happened in the Last Week? Ajay J. Kirtane, MD, SM Center for Interventional Vascular Therapy Columbia University Medical Center / NewYork Presbyterian Hospital @ajaykirtane

Disclosure Statement of Financial Interest Ajay J. Kirtane Institutional grants to Columbia University and/or Cardiovascular Research Foundation from Medtronic, Boston Scientific, Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, CSI, CathWorks, Siemens, Philips, ReCor Medical

Last Thursday Morning (at TCT)

Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation with optimal medical Therapy of Angioplasty in stable angina (ORBITA) Rasha Al-Lamee, MA (Oxon) MB BS MRCP Imperial College London

Inclusion criteria Stable angina One or more 70% stenosis in a single vessel Suitable for PCI

Randomization Trial design Enrolment assessment CCS SAQ EQ-5D-5L MEDICAL OPTIMIZATION PHASE Prerandomization assessment CCS SAQ EQ-5D-5L Exercise test Stress echo Blinded procedure Research angiogram: ifr, FFR Sedation PCI BLINDED FOLLOW UP PHASE Follow-up Assessment CCS SAQ EQ-5D-5L Exercise test Stress echo Placebo Six weeks Six weeks

ORBITA trial 230 enrolled Dec 2013 - Jul 2017 in 5 UK sites Medical optimization phase 30 patients exited 200 patients randomized PCI (n=105) Placebo (n=95) Blinded follow-up phase 4 patients did not complete follow-up Follow-up (n=105) Follow-up (n=91)

Number of antianginal drugs Medical therapy optimization PCI Placebo 0 30.45% 1.90% 12.40% 13.30% 24.80% 22.90% 31.60% 2.10% 23.20% 4.20% 5.30% 18.90% 1 50.45% 38.90% 2 60.90% 63.80% 74.70% 71.60% 24.20% 3 18.10% 1.00% Enrolment Pre-randomization Follow-up 5.30% Enrolment Pre-randomization Follow-up

Stenosis severity Area stenosis by QCA (%) Area stenosis by QCA (%) PCI PCI n = 105 105 84.6 (SD 84.6 10.2) (SD 10.2) Placebo Placebo n = 95 95 84.2 (SD 84.2 10.3) (SD 10.3) P 0.78 0.78 FFR FFR 0.69 0.69 (SD 0.16) (SD 0.16) 0.69 0.69 (SD 0.16) (SD 0.16) 0.77 0.77 ifr ifr 0.76 0.76 (SD 0.22) (SD 0.22) 0.76 0.76 (SD 0.21) (SD 0.21) 0.75 0.75

Change in exercise time (seconds) Primary endpoint result Change in total exercise time 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 28.4 (SD 86.3) p=0.001 PCI 11.8 (SD 93.3) p=0.235 Placebo Error bars are standard errors of the mean

Change in exercise time (seconds) Primary endpoint result Change in total exercise time 40 35 30 25 20 15 28.4 (SD 86.3) p=0.001 +16.6 sec (-8.9 to 42.0) p=0.200 10 5 0 PCI 11.8 (SD 93.3) p=0.235 Placebo Error bars are standard errors of the mean

Secondary endpoint results Blinded evaluation of ischaemia reduction Peak stress wall motion index score PCI n = 80 Placebo n = 57 Pre-randomization 1.11 (0.18) 1.11 (0.18) Follow-up Δ (Pre-randomization to follow-up) Difference in Δ between arms 1.03 (0.06) -0.08 (0.17) p<0.0001 1.13 (0.19) 0.02 (0.16) p=0.433-0.09 (-0.15 to -0.04) p=0.0011

Secondary endpoint results: Quality of Life Scores PCI Placebo Baseline 6 weeks Baseline 6 weeks SAQ Physical Limitation SAQ Anginal Frequency 71.3 78.6 69.1 74.1 79.0 93.0 75.0 84.6 SAQ Angina Stability 64.7 60.5 68.5 63.5 Bold values represent significant changes from baseline No between-group differences between arms were detected

Secondary endpoint results CCS class improved in both groups CCS class at enrolment CCS class at prerandomization CCS class at followup CCS IV 37% 40% 24% 33% 0% 1% 12% 16% CCS III 35% 34% CCS II CCS I CCS 0 61% 57% 2% 3% PCI Placebo 53% 14% 9% PCI 43% 11% 14% Placebo 13% 39% PCI 20% 29% Placebo

ORBITA Results Summary PCI relieved hemodynamic significance of stenoses by physiologic criteria and relieved ischemia by DSE (placebo did not) Exercise time increased by +28 seconds in PCI arm (but not significantly in placebo arm: +12 seconds) Difference between arms (16 seconds) was not significant Most QoL Measures were no different between arms but improved in both (slightly greater with PCI)

The implications of ORBITA are profound and farreaching. First and foremost, the results of ORBITA show unequivocally that there are no benefits for PCI compared with medical therapy for stable angina, even when angina is refractory to medical therapy. Based upon these data, all cardiology guidelines should be revised to downgrade the recommendation for PCI in patients with angina despite medical therapy.

Two Goals of Therapy in Patients with Stable CAD 1. Improve Symptoms and Quality of Life Measured by soft endpoints (i.e. angina/qol scales) 2. Improve Prognosis Measured by hard endpoints (i.e. death, MI)

Appropriateness of Revascularization and Outcomes in the UK Studies using [the RAND] method have shown that overuse of invasive techniques in the management of coronary disease is uncommon, and attention has turned to the issue of underuse Angina at 1 year Hemingway et al. NEJM 2001

COURAGE: Effect of Medical Therapy SAQ Freedom From Angina PCI + OMT OMT p Baseline 21% 23% NS 3 Months 53% 42% <0.001 1 Year 57% 50% 0.005 2 Years 59% 53% 0.010 3 Years 59% 56% NS Minimal DES Use and 32% of Medically Treated Patients in the Trial Crossed Over to PCI Weintraub et al, NEJM 2008

Freedom from Anti-anginal Meds Despite 32% XO to PCI in the OMT group PCI + OMT compared to OMT resulted in: Significantly less use of nitrates at: - 1 year (53% vs. 67%) - 3 years (47% vs. 61%) - 5 years (40% vs. 57%) Significantly less use of Ca +2 channel blockers at: - 1 year (40% vs. 49%) - 3 years (43% vs. 50%) - 5 years (42% vs. 52%) Boden WE et al. NEJM 2007;356:1503-16

Crossover Rate COURAGE: Cross-Overs from OMT Arm 50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% daily weekly monthly none 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Baseline SAQ Angina Frequency Score In a matched analysis, MT with 1 st yr x-over was not associated with death, MI, or SAQ but was associated with worse health status and unstable angina admissions (OR 2.78, 95% CI [1.1,7.5], p=0.04) J. Spertus et al, TCT 2010 and Circ CV Qual Outcomes 2013

Cumulative Incidence of Worsening Angina: BARI 2D Additionally, among patients with angina at baseline, freedom from angina after randomization was higher among revascularized patients compared to medical therapy Dagenais et al, Circulation 2011

FAME-2: Stable CAD patients scheduled for 1, 2 or 3 vessel DES-PCI N = 1220 Randomized Trial FFR in all target lesions Registry At least 1 stenosis with FFR 0.80 (n=888) When all FFR > 0.80 (n=332) Randomization 1:1 PCI + MT 73% MT 27% MT 50% randomly assigned to FU Follow-up after 1, 6 months, 1, 2, 3 and 5 years

% with CCS II-IV Angina FAME-2: Quality of Life % of Patients with Class II-IV Angina at each Time Point

FAME-2: Quality of Life Mean Number of Antianginal Medications/Patient at each Time Point

Results: Clinical Outcome Three Year Rate of Death, MI, or Urgent Revascularization

Results: Clinical Outcome Three Year Rate of Death, MI, or Urgent Revascularization *P value compares PCI + MT patients with MT patients

FAME-2: Costs

Key Characteristics of the ORBITA Population Single vessel disease ~30% FFR negative But angiographically legitimate (real-world practice) Intense medical therapy prior to randomization At randomization, patients symptoms were well-controlled as assessed by SAQ Approximately monthly angina Good exercise tolerance by VO2Max Minimal ischemia by DSE and DTS

Algorithm for GDMT for SIHD

SYNTAX: Generic QOL and Utilities 55 SF - 36 Physical Component Summary SF - 36 Mental Component Summary 50 50 45 40 40 35 P<0.001 P=0.50 P=0.07 P<0.001 P=0.23 P=0.43 30 Baseline 1 month 6 months 12 months 30 Baseline 1 month 6 months 12 months 1 EQ - 5D Utilities (US) PCI 0.9 CABG 0.8 0.7 0.6 P<0.001 P=0.16 P=0.99 Quality Adjusted Life Years D = 0.02 (P<0.01) 0.5 Baseline 1 month 6 months 12 months SYNTAX 3VD 5-year Outcomes TCT 2012 Mohr 23 October 2012 Slide 60 Cohen DJ et al. NEJM 2011;364:1016-26.

Quality of Life Angina frequency, physical limitations, and quality-of-life domains of the SAQ assessed at baseline, at 1, 6, and 12 months, and annually thereafter. SAQ Angina Frequency SAQ Physical Limitations SAQ Quality of Life Adjusted: * P<0.05 favoring PCI *P<0.05 favoring CABG Abdallah MS et al. JAMA 2013;on-line

SAQ-Angina Frequency 100 PCI CABG 90 80 70 60 Δ = 1.5 p = 0.03 Δ = -0.3 p = 0.63 0 1 12 24 36-2 12 26 40 Months Δ = -0.8 p = 0.21 Baron et al, JACC 2017

1: n=5 2: n=5 3: n=13 4: n=8 5: n=8 6: n=7 7: n=5 8: n=14 9: n=7 10: n=6 11: n=8 12: n=5 13: n=5 14: n=15 15: n=18 16: n=21 17: n=8 18: n=6 19: n=9 20: n=5 21: n=15 22: n=6 23: n=15 24: n=6 25: n=6 26: n=7 Rates of Under-recognition APPEAR: Under-recognition of Angina Individual Physician Reporting compared with SAQ 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Physicians in APPEAR: Number of Patients Seen Arnold, S. et al. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2016; 9:00-00

How Do Our Patients with Real Symptoms Actually Feel After Revascularization?

GDMT vs. Revasc for Stable Ischemic Heart Disease Factors favoring GDMT Factors favoring Revasc + GDMT Symptoms: Exercise capacity: Ischemia/Risk: Anti-anginal drug tolerance: Revasc. risk (pt factors, cor anat): DAPT compliance: None to mild Normal None to mild Good High Poor Moderate to severe Reduced Moderate to severe Poor Low Good Adapted from G. Stone

An It Unnecessary wasn t their Procedure? LAD! * This is really American medicine at its worst - Steven Nissen He is the poster child for the inappropriate use of stenting - David Brown *G. W. Bush, CRT 2014