Timing of Complete Multivessel Revascularization in Patients Presenting With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD. METHODS: This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year. RESULTS: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year.

Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease, complete revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PCI for non-culprit lesions should be attempted during the index procedure or staged. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial was done at 29 hospitals across Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. We included patients aged 18-85 years presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel (ie, two or more coronary arteries with a diameter of 2·5 mm or more and ≥70% stenosis based on visual estimation or positive coronary physiology testing) coronary artery disease with a clearly identifiable culprit lesion. A web-based randomisation module was used to randomly assign patients (1:1), with a random block size of four to eight, stratified by study centre, to undergo immediate complete revascularisation (PCI of the culprit lesion first, followed by other non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator during the index procedure) or staged complete revascularisation (PCI of only the culprit lesion during the index procedure and PCI of all non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator within 6 weeks after the index procedure). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 1 year after the index procedure. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients by intention to treat. Non-inferiority of immediate to staged complete revascularisation was considered to be met if the upper boundary of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not exceed 1·39. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03621501. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021, 764 patients (median age 65·7 years [IQR 57·2-72·9] and 598 [78·3%] males) were randomly assigned to the immediate complete revascularisation group and 761 patients (median age 65·3 years [58·6-72·9] and 589 [77·4%] males) were randomly assigned to the staged complete revascularisation group, and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 57 (7·6%) of 764 patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 71 (9·4%) of 761 patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, pnon-inferiority=0·0011). There was no difference in all-cause death between the immediate and staged complete revascularisation groups (14 [1·9%] vs nine [1·2%]; HR 1·56, 95% CI 0·68-3·61, p=0·30). Myocardial infarction occurred in 14 (1·9%) patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 34 (4·5%) patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·76, p=0·0045). More unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisations were performed in the staged complete revascularisation group than in the immediate complete revascularisation group (50 [6·7%] patients vs 31 [4·2%] patients; HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·39-0·95, p=0·030). INTERPRETATION: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, immediate complete revascularisation was non-inferior to staged complete revascularisation for the primary composite outcome and was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation. FUNDING: Erasmus University Medical Center and Biotronik.

Mid- to Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Patients Treated With the Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold: The BVS Expand Registry.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to report on clinical outcomes beyond 1 year of the BVS Expand registry. BACKGROUND: Multiple studies have proven feasibility and safety of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California). However, data on medium- to long-term outcomes are limited and available only for simpler lesions. METHODS: This is an investigator-initiated, prospective, single-center, single-arm study evaluating performance of the BVS in a lesion subset representative of daily clinical practice, including calcified lesions, total occlusions, long lesions, and small vessels. Inclusion criteria were patients presenting with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, stable/unstable angina, or silent ischemia caused by a de novo stenotic lesion in a native previously untreated coronary artery. Procedural and medium- to long-term clinical outcomes were assessed. Primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: From September 2012 to January 2015, 249 patients with 335 lesions were enrolled. Mean number of scaffolds per patient was 1.79 ± 1.15. Invasive imaging was used in 39%. In 38.1% there were American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification type B2/C lesions. Mean lesion length was 22.16 ± 13.79 mm. Post-procedural acute lumen gain was 1.39 ± 0.59 mm. Median follow-up period was 622 (interquartile range: 376 to 734) days. Using Kaplan-Meier methods, the MACE rate at 18 months was 6.8%. Rates of cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 18 months were 1.8%, 5.2%, and 4.0%, respectively. Definite scaffold thrombosis rate was 1.9%. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, BVS implantation in a complex patient and lesion subset was associated with an acceptable rate of adverse events in the longer term, whereas no cases of early thrombosis were observed.

Rapid exchange ultra-thin microcatheter using fibre-optic sensing technology for measurement of intracoronary fractional flow reserve.

AIMS: The present report describes a novel coronary fractional flow reserve (FFR) system which allows FFR assessment using a rapid exchange microcatheter (RXi). METHODS AND RESULTS: The RXi microcatheter is compatible with standard 0.014" coronary guidewires facilitating lesion negotiation and FFR assessment in a wide range of coronary anatomies. In case of serial lesions, a microcatheter would have the important advantage of allowing multiple pullbacks while maintaining wire access to the vessel. The RXi is a fibre-optic sensor technology-based device. This technology might allow reduction in signal drift. The RXi microcatheter's fibre-optic sensor is located 5 mm from the distal tip. The microcatheter profile at the sensor site is 0.027"0.036". The segment of the catheter which is intended to reside within the target lesion is proximal to the sensor and has dimensions decreased to 0.020"0.025"; these dimensions are comparable to a 0.022" circular-shaped wire. CONCLUSIONS: The RXi microcatheter FFR system represents a novel technology that could allow easier lesion negotiation, maintaining guidewire position, facilitating pullbacks for assessment of serial lesions and simplifying the obtainment of post-intervention FFR measurements. The optical sensing technology could additionally result in less signal drift. Further investigations are required to evaluate the clinical value of this technology fully.