Incidence and predictors of target lesion failure in patients undergoing contemporary DES implantation-Individual patient data pooled analysis from 6 randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have improved clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, adverse events related to previously treated lesion still occur. We sought to evaluate the incidence and predictors of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing contemporary DES implantation. METHODS: Patient-level data from 6 prospective, randomized trials were pooled, and DES treatment outcomes were analyzed at up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF (cardiac death, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel myocardial infarction). Cox proportional-hazards model was used to identify predictors of TLF. RESULTS: Overall, 10,072 patients were included in the analysis. TLF rate was 1.7%, 4.3%, and 11.9% at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years, respectively. The only independent predictor of TLF at 30 days was stent length (hazard ratio [HR] 1.017, 95% CI 1.011-1.024, P < .0001). Moderate/severe calcification, stent length and post procedural diameter sthenosis were predictors between 30 days to 1 year but not at 1 to 5 years. Reference vessel diameter was the only lesion-related predictor at 5 years (P = .003). Clinical predictors of TLF between 30 days and 1 year were diabetes and hypertension (P < .01 for both), and between 1 and 5 years, diabetes (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.13-1.73, P = .002), prior coronary artery bypass grafting (HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.92-3.30, P < .0001), and prior PCI (HR 1.29, 95% CI 1.02-1.64, P = .04) predicted TLF. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of TLF vary in the early, late, and very late postprocedural periods. Reference vessel diameter was the only lesion-related predictor of long-term TLF; clinical predictors were diabetes, prior coronary artery bypass grafting, and prior PCI.

Outcomes of the Tryton-dedicated bifurcation stent for the treatment of true coronary bifurcations: Individual-patient-data pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the dedicated Tryton side branch (SB) stent for the treatment of true bifurcations involving large SBs. BACKGROUND: Bifurcation lesions are associated with lower procedural success and a higher risk of adverse cardiac events. Provisional stenting (PS) is currently the default approach for the treatment of bifurcation lesions. The Tryton stent is a dedicated bifurcation stent system for the treatment of true bifurcation lesions. METHODS: We performed an individual-patient-data pooled post-hoc analysis of the Tryton Pivotal randomized controlled trial and post-approval Confirmatory Study. Only patients with true bifurcations involving a SB ≥ 2.25 mm in diameter were included. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of Tryton compared with PS for target vessel failure (TVF) at 1 year. RESULTS: Of the 411 patients meeting the criteria for enrolment, 287 patients were treated with the Tryton stent and 124 with PS. Procedural success was higher in the Tryton group (95.4 versus 82.3%, P < 0.0001). TVF at 1 year was 8.1% in the Tryton group and 9.7% in the PS group, meeting the pre-specified criteria for non-inferiority established for the randomized controlled trail (pnon-inferiority = 0.02). At 9-month angiographic follow-up, SB diameter stenosis was significantly lower in the Tryton group (29.3 ± 21.9 versus 41.1 ± 17.5, P = 0.0008) and in-segment binary restenosis (diameter stenosis ≥ 50%) was higher in the PS group (19.0 versus 34.2%, respectively, P = 0.052). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with true bifurcations involving a large SB, treatment with the Tryton SD Stent was clinically non-inferior to PS and showed favorable angiographic outcomes.

Suprasternal Versus Transfemoral Access for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insights From a Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

Background Suprasternal access is an alternative access strategy for transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) where the innominate artery is cannulated from an incision above the sternal notch. To date, suprasternal access has never been compared with transfemoral TAVR. Thus, we sought to assess safety, feasibility, and early clinical outcomes between suprasternal and transfemoral access for patients undergoing TAVR. Methods and Results We evaluated patients from 2 institutional prospective, observational registries containing 1348 patients. Patients were selected in a 2:1 ratio (transfemoral:suprasternal) on the basis of propensity score matching. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and secondary outcomes included the incidence of ischemic stroke, major bleeding, vascular injury, left bundle-branch block, and permanent pacemaker implantation at 30-day follow-up. Propensity score matching identified 89 patients undergoing suprasternal TAVR and 159 patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR suitable for analysis. There was no significant difference between suprasternal TAVR and transfemoral TAVR with respect to in-hospital mortality (1.1% versus 0.6%; odds ratio [OR], 1.80; 95% CI, 0.11-29.06; P=0.680). No patients in either cohort suffered an ischemic stroke. The incidence of major bleeding (2.2% versus 2.5%; OR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.16-4.96; P=0.895) and vascular injury (1.1% versus 1.9%; OR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.06-5.77; P=0.651) did not differ significantly. The frequency of left bundle-branch block (9.4% versus 15.8%; OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.24-1.30; P=0.177) and permanent pacemaker implantation (11.2% versus 5.9%; OR, 2.01; 95% CI, 0.75-5.45; P=0.169) were not statistically significantly different. Conclusions Suprasternal TAVR was safe and achieved promising short-term clinical outcomes when compared with transfemoral TAVR. Future studies seeking to identify the optimal alternative access site should evaluate suprasternal TAVR access alongside other substitutes for transfemoral TAVR.

Zero-Contrast Multivessel Revascularization for Acute Coronary Syndrome in a Patient With Chronic Kidney Disease.

Patients with chronic kidney disease are at elevated risk for adverse events after traditional coronary angiography and percutaneous intervention with contrast media. The case presented in this report highlights the potential benefits of zero-contrast multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention in a patient presenting with a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner.).

Ultra-low-contrast angiography in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease and previous coronary artery bypass surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to describe a technique for ultra-low-contrast angiography (ULCA) in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) and previous coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced CKD and previous CABG are at high risk of developing contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN) because of the additional contrast often required to identify bypass grafts. Apart from hydration, reduced contrast administration is the only established method to minimize the risk of CIN. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ten patients underwent ULCA, whereby an intracoronary injection of saline and coronary guidewires were used instead of test injections of contrast for engagement of bypass grafts with catheters. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) before and 30 days following angiography were recorded as was the need for renal replacement therapy 1 year after the procedure. RESULTS: All patients completed a diagnostic angiogram without complications. The median volume of contrast delivered was 13.5 ml (interquartile range: 10.5-17.8). The median eGFR was 18.3 ml/min/1.73 m (interquartile range: 16.5-28.2). There was no statistically significant difference in eGFR before the procedure and 30 days after the procedure (P=0.79). No patient required dialysis 30 days after the procedure. Two patients required initiation of dialysis at 1 year after the procedure. CONCLUSION: In patients with advanced CKD and previous CABG, ULCA may be performed with high procedural success and without complications, minimizing the risk of CIN in these high-risk patients.

Algorithmic Approach for Optical Coherence Tomography-Guided Stent Implantation During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Intravascular imaging plays a key role in optimizing outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Optical coherence tomography (OCT) utilizes a user-friendly interface and provides high-resolution images. OCT can be used as part of daily practice in all stages of a coronary intervention: baseline lesion assessment, stent selection, and stent optimization. Incorporating a standardized, algorithmic approach when using OCT allows for precision PCI.