Background: Up to one in three of older patients who are hospitalised develop functional decline, which is associated with sustained disability, institutionalisation and death. This study developed and validated a clinical prediction model that identifies patients who are at risk for functional decline during hospitalisation. The predictive value of the model was compared against three models that were developed for patients admitted to a general medical ward. Methods: A prospective cohort study was performed on two cardiac care units between September 2016 and June 2017. Patients aged 75 years or older were recruited on admission if they were admitted for non-surgical treatment of an acute cardiovascular disease. Hospitalisation-associated functional decline was defined as any decrease on the Katz Index of Activities of Daily Living between hospital admission and discharge. Predictors were selected based on a review of the literature and a prediction score chart was developed based on a multivariate logistic regression model. Results: A total of 189 patients were recruited and 33% developed functional decline during hospitalisation. A score chart was developed with five predictors that were measured on hospital admission: mobility impairment = 9 points, cognitive impairment = 7 points, loss of appetite = 6 points, depressive symptoms = 5 points, use of physical restraints or having an indwelling urinary catheter = 5 points. The score chart of the developed model demonstrated good calibration and discriminated adequately (C-index = 0.75, 95% CI (0.68–0.83) and better between patients with and without functional decline (chi² = 12.8, p = 0.005) than the three previously developed models (range of C-index = 0.65–0.68). Conclusion: Functional decline is a prevalent complication and can be adequately predicted on hospital admission. A score chart can be used in clinical practice to identify patients who could benefit from preventive interventions. Independent external validation is needed.

OBJECTIVES Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) has been proposed as a treatment alternative for patients with aortic valve stenosis (AS) at high or prohibitive risk for surgical aortic valve replacement (AVR). We aimed to assess real-world outcomes after treatment according to the decisions of the multidisciplinary heart team. METHODS At a tertiary centre, all high-risk patients referred between 1 March 2008 and 31 October 2011 for symptomatic AS were screened and planned to undergo AVR, TAVI or medical treatment. We report clinical outcomes as defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium. RESULTS Of 163 high-risk patients, those selected for AVR had lower logistic EuroSCORE and STS scores when compared with TAVI or medical treatment (median [interquartile range] 18 [12–26]; 26 [17–36]; 21 [14–32]% (P = 0.015) and 6.5 [5.1–10.7]; 7.6 [5.8–10.5]; 7.6 [6.1–15.7]% (P = 0.056)). All-cause mortalities at 1 year in 35, 73 and 55 patients effectively undergoing AVR, TAVI and medical treatment were 20, 21 and 38%, respectively (P = 0.051). Cardiovascular death and major stroke occurred in 9, 8 and 33% (P < 0.001) and 6, 4 and 2% (P = 0.62), respectively. For patients undergoing valve implantation, device success was 91 and 92% for AVR and TAVI, respectively. The combined safety endpoint at 30 days was in favour of TAVI (29%) vs AVR (63%) (P = 0.001). In contrast, the combined efficacy endpoint at 1 year tended to be more favourable for AVR (10 vs 24% for TAVI, P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS Patients who are less suitable for AVR can be treated safely and effectively with TAVI with similar outcomes when compared with patients with a lower-risk profile undergoing AVR. Patients with TAVI or AVR have better survival than those undergoing medical treatment only.

Objective Patients with lymphoma, lung or breast neoplasia show significant improvement in their disease-specific survival after radiotherapy (RT), but these benefits may be offset by delayed effects of irradiation of the heart. We compared clinical outcome after coronary stenting in patients with neoplastic disease and previous thoracic RT with matched patients without previous RT. Design Single-centre retrospective case-control study. Patients and methods Each patient with former thoracic RT undergoing coronary stenting between June 1998 and June 2005 was matched to two control patients according to several known prognostic factors (gender, age, available follow-up, stented vessel, drug-eluting stent use, unstable coronary disease, renal insufficiency, diabetes, bifurcational disease, stent length and size and ejection fraction). Main outcome measures Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were defined as the composite of cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR) and were assessed at latest follow-up and compared using Cox regression analyses. Results 41 patients underwent coronary stenting at 6±4 years after RT. Clinical outcome at 5±2 years after stenting was compared with outcome in 82 matched patients. For all-cause mortality, the hazard ratio for RT versus no RT was 4.2 (95% CI 1.8 to 9.5; p=0.0006). For cardiac mortality, the estimated hazard ratio was 4.2 (95% CI 1.0 to 17.0; p=0.0451). No significant differences were detected in terms of AMI, TLR, MACE or stent thrombosis. Conclusions Our findings suggest an increased risk of all-cause and cardiac mortality in patients who underwent coronary stent implantation after previous thoracic RT. Verification in larger patient populations is warranted.

Clinical utility of platinum chromium bare-metal stents in coronary heart disease Claudia Jorge,1 Christophe Dubois1,2 1Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, University Hospitals Leuven, 2Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium Coronary stents represent a key development for the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease since the introduction of percutaneous coronary intervention. While drug-eluting stents gained wide acceptance in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention practice, further developments in bare-metal stents remain crucial for patients who are no candidates for drug-eluting stents, or to improve metallic platforms for drug elution. Initially, stent platforms used biologically inert stainless steel, restricting stent performance due to limitations in flexibility and strut thickness. Later, cobalt chromium stent alloys outperformed steel as the material of choice for stents, allowing latest generation stents to be designed with significantly thinner struts, while maintaining corrosion resistance and radial strength. Most recently, the introduction of the platinum chromium alloy refined stent architecture with thin struts, high radial strength, conformability, and improved radiopacity. This review will provide an overview of the novel platinum chromium bare-metal stent platforms available for coronary intervention. Mechanical properties, clinical utility, and device limitations will be summarized and put into perspective. Keywords: bare metal stent, coronary stent alloys, coronary artery disease

Peer reviewed article authored by (Bennett J, Dubois C). Read article or submit your manuscript for publishing.