Javed Suleman

Sinai Hospital, New York, New York, United States

Are you Javed Suleman?

Claim your profile

Publications (11)74.41 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives: To investigate if previously reported gender-based outcome disparities following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are applicable in a large and racially-diverse cohort in the drug eluting stent (DES) era. Background: It is generally believed that women suffer inferior outcomes compared to men after PCI. However, various strategies have evolved that may have mitigated this imbalance, including improved medical therapy, attention to risk-factors, and procedural advances of PCI including DES. Methods: We identified 13,752 patients (4,761 female, 34.6%) with complete follow-up data who underwent de novo lesion PCI from 04/2003 to 04/2009. Relevant data were extracted from an IRB-approved registry. Results: Compared to males, females were significantly older (69.0 vs. 64.8 years) and more frequently from a minority or non-Caucasian background. Females smoked less, but more were hypertensive and/or diabetic. Women had higher HDL, but also higher LDL cholesterol levels. More women presented with an unstable coronary syndrome and required left anterior descending artery PCI. While unadjusted post-PCI mortality rates were higher in females versus males (30 days, 1.3 vs. 0.8%, P = 0.009; 1 year, 6.1 vs. 4.8%, P = 0.001; 3 year, 10.4 vs. 8.4%, P < 0.0001), multivariable regression analyses failed to identify female gender as an independent predictor of mortality. Propensity-adjusted modeling confirmed that females were not at intrinsically higher risk for mortality after PCI. Conclusions: Females undergoing PCI exhibit more comorbidities and adverse prognostic factors than males. However, risk-adjusted analyses identified that gender is not an independent predictor of mortality after PCI in the DES era. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
    Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 10/2012; 80(4):514-21. DOI:10.1002/ccd.23338 · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study sought to evaluate the short-, intermediate-, and longer-term outcomes after endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA), including both AAA-related and all-cause mortality. Endovascular stent graft placement for AAA has gained broad acceptance as an alternative to open surgical repair due to a lower perioperative morbidity and mortality. The intermediate- and long-term all-cause and aneurysm-related mortality vary among studies. Thus, we sought to perform a meta-analysis of open versus endovascular repair for treating AAA. Electronic databases were queried for identification of prospective, randomized trials of open surgery versus endovascular stent graft repair of AAA. A total of 10 published papers reporting on 6 studies at different follow-up intervals were identified; they involved 2,899 patients with AAA repair procedures, of whom, 1,470 underwent endovascular stent graft AAA exclusion and 1,429 were treated by open AAA repair. At 30 days, the pooled relative risk of all-cause mortality was lower in the endovascular group (relative risk [RR]: 0.35, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.19 to 0.64) than in the open surgery group. At intermediate follow-up, the all-cause mortality had a nonsignificant difference (RR: 0.78, 95% CI: 0.57 to 1.08), the AAA-related mortality was significantly lower (RR: 0.46, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.74) and reintervention rates were higher (RR: 1.48, 95% CI: 1.06 to 2.08) in the endovascular group than in the open surgery group. At long-term follow-up, there was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (RR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.15) or AAA-related mortality (RR: 1.58, 95% CI: 0.20 to 12.74), whereas the significant difference in the rate of reinterventions persisted (RR: 2.54, 95% CI: 1.58 to 4.08). In patients randomized to open or endovascular AAA repair, all-cause perioperative mortality, as well as AAA-related mortality at short- and intermediate-term follow-up are lower in patients undergoing endovascular stent graft placement. This was associated with greater reintervention in the endovascular group noted at intermediate follow-up. Long-term survival appears to converge between the 2 groups.
    JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions 10/2012; 5(10):1071-80. DOI:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.06.015 · 7.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives:  To define the incidence of stent thrombosis (ST) and/or AMI (ST/AMI) associated with temporary or permanent suspension of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in "real-world" patients, and additional factors influencing these events. Background:  Adherence to DAPT is critical for avoiding ST following DES implantation. However, the outcomes of patients undergoing antiplatelet therapy withdrawal following DES implantation remain to be clearly described. Methods:  Patients receiving DES from 05/01/2003 to 05/01/2008 were identified from a single-center registry. Complete follow-up data were available for 5,681 patients (67% male, age 66 ± 11 years, duration 1,108 ±446 days) who were included in this analysis. Results:  Uninterrupted DAPT was maintained in 4,070/5,681 (71.6%) patients, with an annual ST/AMI rate of 0.43%. Antiplatelet therapy was commonly ceased for gastrointestinal-related issues, dental procedures or noncardiac/nongastrointestinal surgery. Temporary DAPT suspension occurred in 593/5,681 (10.4%) patients for 17.6 ± 74.1 days, with 6/593 (1.0%) experiencing ST/AMI during this period. Of patients permanently ceasing aspirin (n = 187, mean 338 ± 411 days poststenting), clopidogrel (n = 713, mean 614 ± 375 days) or both agents (n = 118, mean 459 ± 408 days), ST/AMI was uncommon with an annual rate of 0.1-0.2%. Overall, independent predictors of ST/AMI were unstable initial presentation, uninterrupted DAPT and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. Factors predicting uninterrupted DAPT included diabetes, unstable presentation, prior MI, left main coronary PCI, and multivessel coronary disease. Conclusions:  In real-world practice, rates of ST/AMI following DES implantation are low, but not insignificant, following aspirin and/or clopidogrel cessation. Use of uninterrupted DAPT appears more common in high-risk patients. (J Interven Cardiol 2012;25:482-492).
    Journal of Interventional Cardiology 06/2012; 25(5):482-92. DOI:10.1111/j.1540-8183.2012.00746.x · 1.32 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives We evaluated the impact of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) on the frequency of stent thrombosis (ST), target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), and cardiac death in randomized controlled trials comparing the EES to non–everolimus-eluting drug-eluting stents (EE-DES). Background Whether or not the unique properties of the EES translate into reductions in ST remains unknown. Methods We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, and Internet sources for articles comparing outcomes between EES and non–EE-DES without language or date restriction. Randomized controlled trials reporting the frequency of ST were included. Variables relating to patient and study characteristics and clinical endpoints were extracted. Results We identified 13 randomized trials (n = 17,101) with a weighted mean follow-up of 21.7 months. Compared with non–EE-DES, the EES significantly reduced ST (relative risk [RR]: 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.38 to 0.78; p = 0.001), TVR (RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.92; p = 0.004), and MI (RR: 0.78; 95% CI: 0.64 to 0.96; p = 0.02). There was no difference in cardiac mortality between the groups (RR: 0.92; 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.16; p = 0.38). The treatment effect was consistent by different follow-up times and duration of clopidogrel use. The treatment effects increased with higher baseline risks of the respective control groups with the strongest correlation observed for ST (R2 = 0.89, p < 0.001). Conclusions Intracoronary implantation of the EES is associated with highly significant reductions in ST with concordant reductions in TVR and MI compared to non–EE-DES. Whether these effects apply to different patient subgroups and DES types merits further investigation.
    Journal of the American College of Cardiology 10/2011; 58(15):1569–1577. DOI:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.049 · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The occurrence of contrast induced nephropathy (CIN) is associated with increased mortality after percutaneous revascularization procedures. However, the exact correlation between various levels of creatinine elevation relative to the baseline and subsequent mortality in patients with chronic renal insufficiency (CRI) is not well established. In addition, the relationship between elevated postprocedural creatinine and ensuing mortality in patients with normal baseline renal function needs to be investigated. METHODS: All percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients (n = 12,997) were analyzed for any rise in serum creatinine (SCr): CRI group (BSC > or = 1.5 mg/dl) (n = 1,853) and normal baseline renal function (NBR BSC < 1.5 mg/dl) group (n = 11,144). Patients in each group were analyzed for any elevation in SCr postprocedure and subdivided based on the SCr ratio [peak SCr/Baseline creatinine (BSC)] of <1.25, 1.25-1.5, and >1.5. The overall incidence of CIN (defined as an increment of 25% over baseline creatinine) was 5.9%: 11.3% in the CRI group versus 5.1% in normal BSC group (P < 0.01). Recursive partitioning and Cox hazard modeling were used to assess significant variables associated with mortality within 1 year. Only serum creatinine ratio (SCrR) > 1.5 correlated with increased mortality in both CRI group as well as normal BSC group. CONCLUSIONS: SCrR > 1.5 predicts mortality at 1 year after PCI. The association between SCrR > 1.5 and increased mortality at follow-up is observed in patients with CRI as well as normal baseline renal function. SCrR may thus serve as a useful clinical tool for risk stratification and prognostication of patients after PCI.
    Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 07/2009; 74(1):49-55. DOI:10.1002/ccd.21946 · 2.40 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The present study was done to analyze if glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI) bolus-only will reduce vascular/bleeding complications and cost with similar major adverse cardiac events (MACE) when compared with GPI bolus + infusion. Evidence-based therapy of GPI inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) incorporates intravenous bolus followed by 12 to 18 hours of infusion. However, GPI bolus + infusion may increase vascular/bleeding complications and may not reduce MACE when compared with GPI bolus-only. From January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2004, 2,629 consecutive patients received GPI during PCI at a single center. Of these, 1,064 patients received GPI bolus + infusion in 2003 and were compared with 1,565 patients that received GPI bolus-only in 2004. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Patients receiving GPI bolus-only had reduced vascular/bleeding complications when compared with bolus + infusion (4.9% vs 7%, P < .05, odds ratio 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.45-0.89). Furthermore, ischemic complications were similar in both groups, including periprocedural creatine kinase-MB enzyme release (12.8% vs 15.3%, P = NS), MACE at 30 days (3.2% vs 3%, P = NS), and death and myocardial infarction at 1 year (7.1% vs 7.8%, P = NS). In addition, GPI bolus-only reduced cost in US dollars ($323 vs $706, P < .001) and increased ambulatory PCI (13.1% vs 3.2%, P < .01), with reduced length of stay (1.1 vs 1.6 days, P < .01), when compared with GPI bolus + infusion. Glycoprotein inhibitor bolus-only reduces vascular/bleeding complications with similar MACE and reduced cost when compared with GPI bolus + infusion. In addition, GPI bolus-only improved ambulatory PCI and reduced length of stay. These results are consistent with a safer and cost-effective strategy for bolus-only when GPI therapy is considered during PCI.
    American heart journal 10/2008; 156(3):513-9. DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2008.04.019 · 4.56 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Coronary stenting of nonaorto ostial coronary lesions is challenging because of plaque shift into the main vessel, triggering the use of additional stents. Furthermore, inappropriate coverage of the ostium of the side branch increases the risk of restenosis and target vessel revascularization (TVR). To improve the treatment of nonaorto ostial coronary lesions with a novel interventional technique, we tested the hypothesis that inflating a balloon in the main vessel before stenting the side branch (stent pull-back technique) will limit plaque shifting and reduce the use of additional stents. In addition, proper coverage of the side branch ostium may also reduce 8-month TVR. A case-control design with 100 consecutive patients who underwent drug-eluting stent placement was performed; 55 patients were treated with the stent pull-back technique and 45 patients with a conventional stent technique. Procedural success was 100% for the 2 techniques. The use of additional stents was reduced in the stent pull-back group compared with the conventional stent group (2% vs 18%, p = 0.007). A tendency toward lower ostial miss was also observed in the stent pull-back group (4% vs 13%, p = 0.11). The incidence of in-hospital and 30-day cardiac events was similar between the 2 groups. TVR was lower in the stent pull-back group compared with the conventional group (5% vs 20%; p = 0.03). In conclusion, the stent pull-back technique improves the percutaneous treatment of nonaorto ostial coronary lesions. The technique is associated with a lower use of additional stents and improved clinical outcome, reducing TVR at 8 months of follow-up.
    The American Journal of Cardiology 11/2005; 96(8):1123-8. DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2005.06.043 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology 03/2004; 43(5). DOI:10.1016/S0735-1097(04)90214-8 · 15.34 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This is a randomized head-to-head comparison of the 3 glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during high-risk percutaneous coronary intervention. The study showed that in the setting of >90% platelet inhibition, achieved by an additional half bolus in 48% of patients, similar periprocedural enzyme release and 30-day major adverse cardiac events can be accomplished regardless of the type of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor used.
    The American Journal of Cardiology 10/2002; 90(5):526-9. DOI:10.1016/S0002-9149(02)02528-6 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    The American Journal of Cardiology 05/2002; 89(8):999-1002. DOI:10.1016/S0002-9149(02)02259-2 · 3.43 Impact Factor
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology 03/2002; 39:73-73. DOI:10.1016/S0735-1097(02)80315-1 · 15.34 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

199 Citations
74.41 Total Impact Points


  • 2012
    • Sinai Hospital
      New York, New York, United States
  • 2008–2012
    • Mount Sinai Medical Center
      New York City, New York, United States
  • 2002–2012
    • Mount Sinai Hospital
      New York City, New York, United States
  • 2002–2004
    • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
      Borough of Manhattan, New York, United States