Sex-based outcomes after PCI in highbleeding risk patients: Results from the onyx one clear trial

BACKGROUND: While dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) constitutes the cornerstone of post-PCI pharmacotherapy, duration of DAPT in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients has not been fully defined especially with regard to sex. The results from the Onyx ONE Clear trial demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy after PCI with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in HBR patients treated with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents (DES). We sought to evaluate impact of sex on clinical outcomes in this trial. METHODS: In this prespecified subgroup analysis from Onyx ONE Clear, patients were divided into 2 groups according to sex. Primary endpoint was cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) from 1 month to 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 487 female patients (32%) and 1019 males (68%) were free from major ischemic events 1-month after PCI and were transitioned to single antiplatelet therapy.Women were older (p<0.001), had more HBR criteria (p=0.02), and higher rates of moderate/severe calcific lesions (p=0.03) compared to men. Men had higher rates of previous MI (p=0.003), atrial fibrillation (p=0.001), and multivessel coronary artery disease (p<0.001). Clinical outcomes between 1 and 12 months are shown in (Figure) and were similar for males and females except for target vessel revascularization which was greater for males (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In HBR patients treated with Resolute Onyx DES and an abbreviated DAPT course of one month, rates of the primary endpoint of cardiac death or MI between 1 and 12 months were low and did not show any sex-based differences. These data support the use of an abbreviated DAPT regimen in men and women with HBR after PCI with Resolute Onyx DES.

Polymer-based or polymer-free stents in patients at high bleeding risk

BACKGROUND Polymer-free drug-coated stents provide superior clinical outcomes to bare-metal stents in patients at high bleeding risk who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. Data on the use of polymer-based drug-eluting stents, as compared with polymer-free drug-coated stents, in such patients are limited. METHODS In an international, randomized, single-blind trial, we compared polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents with polymer-free umirolimus­coated stents in patients at high bleeding risk. After PCI, patients were treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The primary outcome was a safety composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year. The principal secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, an effectiveness composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. Both outcomes were powered for noninferiority. RESULTS A total of 1996 patients at high bleeding risk were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents (1003 patients) or polymer-free drugcoated stents (993 patients). At 1 year, the primary outcome was observed in 169 of 988 patients (17.1%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 164 of 969 (16.9%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.1; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The principal secondary outcome was observed in 174 patients (17.6%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 169 (17.4%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.4; P=0.007 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS Among patients at high bleeding risk who received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI, use of polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to use of polymer-free drug-coated stents with regard to safety and effectiveness composite outcomes. (Funded by Medtronic; ONYX ONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344653.). (AU)

A 4-item PRECISE-DAPT score for dual antiplatelet therapy duration decision-making

The originally-proposed PRECISE-DAPT score is a 5-item risk score supporting decision-making for dual antiplatelet therapy1 duration after PCI. It is unknown if a simplified version of the score based on 4 factors (age, hemoglobin, creatinine clearance, prior bleeding), and lacking white-blood cell count, retains potential to guide DAPT duration. The 4-item PRECISE-DAPT was used to categorize 10,081 patients who were randomized to short (3-6 months) or long (12-24 months) DAPT regimen according to high (HBR defined by PRECISE-DAPT ≥25 points) or non-high bleeding risk (PRECISE-DAPT<25) status. Long treatment duration was associated with higher bleeding rates in HBR (ARD +2.22% [95% CI +0.53 to +3.90]) but not in non-HBR patients (ARD +0.25% [-0.14 to +0.64]; pint = 0.026), and associated with lower ischemic risks in non-HBR (ARD -1.44% [95% CI -2.56 to -0.31]), but not in HBR patients (ARD +1.16% [-1.91 to +4.22]; pint = 0.11). Only non-HBR patients experienced lower net clinical adverse events (NACE) with longer DAPT (pint = 0.043). A 4-item simplified version of the PRECISE-DAPT score retains the potential to categorize patients who benefit from prolonged DAPT without concomitant bleeding liability from those who do not. (AU)

First-in-human evaluation of a novel polymer-free drug-filled stent: angiographic, IVUS, OCT, and clinical outcomes from the RevElution study

OBJECTIVES:This study sought to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug-filled stent (DFS) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease.BACKGROUND:Polymer-free drug-eluting stents have the potential to improve clinical outcomes and facilitate shorter durations of dual antiplatelet therapy. The polymer-free DFS is made from a trilayered continuous wire with an outer cobalt chromium layer, a middle tantalum layer, and an inner lumen coated with sirolimus. Small laser-drilled holes on the abluminal stent surface control drug elution.METHODS:The RevElution trial enrolled 100 patients with de novo coronary lesions 2.25 to 3.50 mm in diameter and length ≤27 mm in 2 cohorts of 50 patients for angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical assessment at 9 or 24 months, with optical coherence tomography performed in a subset of 30 patients at each time period. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months compared with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (Medtronic) historical control data...

Revascularization in complex multivessel coronary artery disease after FREEDOM. Is there an indication for PCI and drug-eluting stents?

Diabetes mellitus is a highly prevalent metabolic disorder frequently associated with the development of coronary atherosclerosis. Myocardial revascularization assumes a central role in the treatment of diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. Although coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is in principle the revascularization modality of choice in diabetic patients with complex, multivessel disease, percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) using new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) remain a valuable treatment option for properly selected diabetic patients. Defining the appropriate revascularization strategy is often a challenging task that requires tailored approaches, accounting for individual patient surgical risk, anatomical configurations, and the technical feasibility of each procedure in addition to careful judgment of the possible benefits and risks inherent to PCI and CABG. Evidence is building that advances in DES technology may mitigate at least in part some of the adverse vascular effects of diabetes; whether this may translate to PCI outcomes comparable with those achieved by CABG is under investigation in randomized trials currently underway. This review article summarizes the indications for myocardial revascularization across the spectrum of clinical presentations and critically discusses current evidence and future perspectives regarding the value of each revascularization mode (CABG vs. PCI) in patients with diabetes.

Coronary revascularization and TAVI: before, during, after or never?

Aortic valve stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist in elderly patients selected for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Therapeutic strategies to manage concomitant obstructive CAD are therefore an important consideration in the overall management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. Conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting is the treatment of choice for low and intermediate risk patients with symptomatic severe AS and concomitant obstructive CAD. However, TAVI and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are viable alternative options for high-risk or inoperable patients presenting with symptomatic severe AS. PCI has been shown to be feasible and safe in selected high-risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe AS. However, the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure has been a subject of debate. The most frequent approch is staged PCI typically performed a few weeks prior to TAVI. However, concomitant PCI has also been shown to be a feasible and safe approach, particularly in patients with a low level of CAD complexity and an absence of severe renal impairment. Conversely, staged PCI should be considered in patients with higher degrees of CAD complexity, particularly in the presence of severe renal impairment. The aim of the present review is to discuss the safety and feasibility of performing PCI in elderly patients with severe AS and the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure using the most up-to-date available evidence.

Long-term outcome of the unrestricted use of everolimus-eluting stents compared to sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents in diabetic patients: the Bern-Rotterdam diabetes cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Newer generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES) improve clinical outcome compared to early generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). We investigated whether the advantage in safety and efficacy also holds among the high-risk population of diabetic patients during long-term follow-up. METHODS: Between 2002 and 2009, a total of 1963 consecutive diabetic patients treated with the unrestricted use of EES (n=804), SES (n=612) and PES (n=547) were followed throughout three years for the occurrence of cardiac events at two academic institutions. The primary end point was the occurrence of definite stent thrombosis. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 1.0% of EES, 3.7% of SES and 3.8% of PES treated patients ([EES vs. SES] adjusted HR=0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.88; [EES vs. PES] adjusted HR=0.29, 95% CI 0.13-0.67). Similarly, patients treated with EES had a lower risk of target-lesion revascularization (TLR) compared to patients treated with SES and PES ([EES vs. SES], 5.6% vs. 11.5%, adjusted HR=0.68, 95% CI: 0.55-0.83; [EES vs. PES], 5.6% vs. 11.3%, adjusted HR=0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77). There were no differences in other safety end points, such as all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI) and MACE. CONCLUSION: In diabetic patients, the unrestricted use of EES appears to be associated with improved outcomes, specifically a significant decrease in the need for TLR and ST compared to early generation SES and PES throughout 3-year follow-up.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation: patient selection.

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is a disruptive technology as it satisfies a previously unmet need which is associated with a profound therapeutic benefit. In randomized clinical trials, TAVI has been shown to improve survival compared with medical treatment among patients considered not suitable candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), and to provide similar outcomes as SAVR in selected high-risk patients. Currently, TAVI is limited to selected elderly patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis. As this patient population frequently suffers from comorbid conditions, which may influence outcomes, the selection of patients to undergo TAVI underlies a complex decision process. Several clinical risk score algorithms are routinely used, although they fall short to fully appreciate the true risk among patients currently referred for TAVI. Beyond traditional risk scores, the clinical assessment by an interdisciplinary Heart Team as well as detailed imaging of the aortic valve, aortic root, descending and abdominal aorta as well as peripheral vasculature are important prerequisites to plan a successful procedure. This review will familiarize the reader with the concepts of the interdisciplinary Heart team, risk scores as well as the most important imaging algorithms suited to select appropriate TAVI patients.

Update on transcatheter aortic valve implantation registries and studies.

For patients at increased surgical risk and those not suitable candidates for surgical aortic valve replacement, transcatheter aortic valve implantation has emerged as a promising less-invasive treatment option, with a growing body of evidence on safety and efficacy in this particular patient population. However, the enthusiasm we have been witnessing over the past decade is almost exclusively supported by registry data, with the first randomized trial published only recently. In this paper, we provide an overview on the current data set available on transcatheter aortic valve implantation using the commercially available devices, focusing on the latest publications reflecting the current opinion on this emerging technology.

Drug-eluting stents: limitations of early generation and progress with newer generation devices.

The success of first generation drug-eluting stents, namely by reducing restenosis and the need of repeat revascularization procedures is hampered by some limitations affecting device safety. Intense research efforts helped to identify these shortcomings and direct research to develop newer generation drug-eluting stents with the potential to circumvent these drawbacks. This review will discuss limitations of early generation drug-eluting stents, focus on solutions provided by newer generation devices, and shed light on unresolved issues and potential future solutions.

Revascularisation of coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Diabetes mellitus is becoming increasingly prevalent and magnifies the risk of cardiovascular complications. Endothelial dysfunction caused by oxidative stress is a hallmark of diabetes and is responsible for the ubiquitous manifestations of vascular disease in diabetics. Compared with non-diabetic patients, coronary artery disease is more severe and the clinical outcome impaired in diabetic patients undergoing revascularisation. Despite these limitations the benefit of revascularisation therapy is particularly pronounced in diabetics. The optimal revascularisation strategy (coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention) in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease depends on clinical and anatomical considerations.

Drug-eluting stent thrombosis.

Drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced the risk of repeat revascularization procedures by 50-70% compared with bare metal stents across a wide range of lesion and patients subsets. Stent thrombosis is a rare but devastating adverse event, which results in abrupt closure of the treated artery with the incumbent risk of sudden death or myocardial infarction. Although stent thrombosis has been recognized as a shortcoming of coronary artery stents since there inception, very late stent thrombosis occurring more than one year after stent implantation emerged as a new entity complicating the use of DES. The mechanisms leading to very late ST are complex and only incompletely understood. Delayed healing and incomplete re-endothelialization emerged as prevailing mechanism of thrombosis in autopsy studies. Various components of DES may give rise to very late stent thrombosis, notably the polymers used for controlled drug-release. Newer generation DES attempt to address these concerns by aiming at improved vascular healing while maintaining potent neointimal suppression.

Impact of drug-eluting stent selection on long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: the sirolimus vs paclitaxel drug-eluting stent for left main registry (SP-DELFT).

AIM: To compare the long-term relative efficacy and safety of SES and PES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease and to evaluate the role of lesion location and stenting technique in determining outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: From April 2002 to April 2004, 288 consecutive patients who underwent elective PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA have been retrospectively selected and analyzed in seven European and US tertiary care centers. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. SES was used in 152 patients while 136 received PES. Isolated ostial-shaft disease was present in 27% of patients. Distal LM disease (73%) was treated with single and double stent approach in 29.5% and 43.4% of patients respectively. After 3 years, rates of survival free from any of the events investigated, were independent from lesion location and stenting approach and did not differ significantly between SES and PES groups. Freedom from MACE (SES vs. PES) was 76.3% vs. 83.1% in the ostial/shaft group, 80.3% vs. 72.8% in the distal-single stent group and 67.1% vs. 66.2% in the distal-double stent group. Definite stent thrombosis occurred only in 1(0.3%) patient at 439 days. CONCLUSIONS: In elective patients who underwent PCI for de novo lesions in the ostium, shaft or distal ULMCA, long-term clinical outcomes with SES and PES use were similar independently of lesion location and stenting technique.

Long-term results after fluoroscopy-guided closure of patent foramen ovale for secondary prevention of paradoxical embolism.

OBJECTIVES: To carry out long-term follow-up after percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) in patients with cryptogenic stroke. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Single tertiary care centre. PARTICIPANTS: 525 consecutive patients (mean (SD) age 51 (12) years; 56% male). INTERVENTIONS: Percutaneous PFO closure without intraprocedural echocardiography. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Freedom from recurrent embolic events. RESULTS: A mean (SD) of 1.7 (1.0) clinically apparent embolic events occurred for each patient, and 186 patients (35%) had >1 event. An atrial septal aneurysm was associated with the PFO in 161 patients (31%). All patients were followed up prospectively for up to 11 years. The implantation procedure failed in two patients (0.4%). There were 13 procedural complications (2.5%) without any long-term sequelae. Contrast transoesophageal echocardiography at 6 months showed complete closure in 86% of patients, and a minimal, moderate or large residual shunt in 9%, 3% and 2%, respectively. Patients with small occluders (<30 mm; n = 429) had fewer residual shunts (small 11% vs large 27%; p<0.001). During a mean (SD) follow-up of 2.9 (2.2) years (median 2.3 years; total 1534 patient-years), six ischaemic strokes, nine transient ischaemic attacks (TIAs) and two peripheral emboli occurred. Freedom from recurrent stroke, TIA, or peripheral embolism was 98% at 1 year, 97% at 2 years and 96% at 5 and 10 years, respectively. A residual shunt (hazard ratio = 3.4; 95% CI 1.3 to 9.2) was a risk factor for recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: This study attests to the long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous PFO closure guided by fluoroscopy only for secondary prevention of paradoxical embolism in a large cohort of consecutive patients.

Efficacy of drug eluting stents in patients with and without diabetes mellitus: indirect comparison of controlled trials.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether polymer based coronary stents eluting sirolimus or paclitaxel are equally effective in patients with and without diabetes. METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis by indirect comparison of randomised controlled trials comparing stents eluting sirolimus or paclitaxel with conventional bare metal stents. The overall study population and patients with and without diabetes were analysed separately by using the ratio of incidence rate ratios (RIRR). RESULTS: The analysis was based on 10 trials (six with sirolimus, four with paclitaxel), 4513 patients (1146 patients with diabetes), 5755 years of follow up, and 2464 events. In patients without diabetes sirolimus eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel eluting stents with respect to in-stent (RIRR 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.10 to 0.48, p < 0.001) and in-segment restenosis (RIRR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.92, p = 0.027), target lesion revascularisation (RIRR 0.54, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.99, p = 0.045), and major adverse cardiac events (RIRR 0.46, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83, p = 0.010). In patients with diabetes the two drug eluting stents did not differ significantly in any of these end points. Meta-regression analysis showed a significant difference between patients with and without diabetes (tests for interaction for in-stent and in-segment restenosis, p = 0.036 and p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Indirect evidence indicates that sirolimus eluting stents are superior to paclitaxel eluting stents in patients without diabetes but not in patients with diabetes.

Prevalence and size of directly detected patent foramen ovale in migraine with aura.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial contrast Doppler studies have shown an increased prevalence of right-to-left shunts in patients with migraine with aura compared with controls. The anatomy and size of these right-to-left shunts have never been directly assessed. METHODS: In a cross-sectional case-control study, the authors performed transesophageal contrast echocardiography in 93 consecutive patients with migraine with aura and 93 healthy controls. RESULTS: A patent foramen ovale was present in 44 (47% [95% CI 37 to 58%]) patients with migraine with aura and 16 (17% [95% CI 10 to 26%]) control subjects (OR 4.56 [95% CI 1.97 to 10.57]; p < 0.001). A small shunt was equally prevalent in migraineurs (10% [95% CI 5 to 18%]) and controls (10% [95% CI 5 to 18%]), but a moderate-sized or large shunt was found more often in the migraine group (38% [95% CI 28 to 48%] vs 8% [95% CI 2 to 13%] in controls; p < 0.001). The presence of more than a small shunt increased the odds of having migraine with aura 7.78-fold (95% CI 2.53 to 29.30; p < 0.001). Besides patent foramen ovale prevalence and shunt size, no other echocardiographic differences were found between the study groups. Headache and baseline characteristics did not differ in migraine patients with and without shunt. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of all patients with migraine with aura have a right-to-left shunt due to a patent foramen ovale. Shunt size is larger in migraineurs than controls. The clinical presentation of migraine is identical in patients with and without a patent foramen ovale.

Influence of diabetes mellitus on coronary collateral flow: an answer to an old controversy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the influence of diabetes mellitus on coronary collateral flow by accurate means of collateral flow measurement in a large population with variable degrees of coronary artery disease. METHODS: 200 patients (mean (SD) age 64 (9) years; 100 diabetic and 100 non-diabetic) were enrolled in the study. Coronary collateral flow was assessed in 174 stenotic and in 26 angiographically normal vessels with a pressure guidewire (n = 131), Doppler guidewire (n = 36), or both (n = 33) to calculate pressure or flow velocity derived collateral flow index (CFI). Diabetic patients were perfectly matched with a non-diabetic control group for clinical, haemodynamic, and angiographic parameters. RESULTS: CFI did not differ between the diabetic and the non-diabetic patients (0.21 (0.12) v 0.19 (0.13), not significant). Likewise, CFI did not differ when only angiographically normal vessels (0.20 (0.09) v 0.15 (0.08), not significant) or chronic total coronary occlusions (0.30 (0.14) v 0.30 (0.17), not significant) were compared. Fewer patients in the diabetic group tended to have angina pectoris during the one minute vessel occlusion (60 diabetic v 69 non-diabetic patients, p = 0.15). CONCLUSION: Quantitatively measured coronary CFI did not differ between diabetic and non-diabetic patients with stable coronary artery disease.