Ethnic minorities treated with new-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in two European randomised clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Several ethnic minorities have an increased risk of cardiovascular events, but previous European trials that investigated clinical outcome after coronary stenting did not assess the patients' ethnic background. AIMS: To compare ethnic minority and Western European trial participants in terms of both cardiovascular risk profile and 1­year clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX randomised trials, which assessed new-generation drug-eluting stents, information on patients' self-reported ethnic background was prospectively collected. Pooled patient-level data of 5803 patients, enrolled in the Netherlands and Belgium, were analysed in this prespecified analysis. The main endpoint was target vessel failure after 1 year. RESULTS: Patients were classified as belonging to an ethnic minority (n = 293, 5%) or of Western European origin (n = 5510, 95%). Follow-up data were available in 5772 of 5803 (99.5%) patients. Ethnic minority patients were younger, less often female, more often current smokers, more often medically treated for diabetes, and more often had a positive family history of coronary artery disease. The main endpoint target vessel failure did not differ between ethnic minority and Western European patients (3.5% vs 4.9%, hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.33; p = 0.28). There was also no difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the unfavourable cardiovascular risk profile of ethnic minority patients, short-term clinical outcome after treatment with contemporary drug-eluting stents was highly similar to that in Western European patients. Further efforts should be made to ensure the enrolment of more ethnic minority patients in future coronary stent trials.

Treatment of elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the nationwide POPular age registry.

OBJECTIVE: We describe the current treatment of elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) enrolled in a national registry. METHODS: The POPular AGE registry is a prospective, multicentre study of patients ≥ 75 years of age presenting with NSTEMI, performed in the Netherlands. Management was at the discretion of the treating physician. Cardiovascular events consisted of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke. Bleeding was classified according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) criteria. RESULTS: A total of 646 patients were enrolled between August 2016 and May 2018. Median age was 81 (IQR 77-84) years and 58% were male. Overall, 75% underwent coronary angiography, 40% percutaneous coronary intervention, and 11% coronary artery bypass grafting, while 49.8% received pharmacological therapy only. At discharge, dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitor) was prescribed to 56.7%, and 27.4% received oral anticoagulation plus at least one antiplatelet agent. At 1­year follow-up, cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction or stroke had occurred in 13.6% and major bleeding (BARC 3 and 5) in 3.9% of patients. The risk of both cardiovascular events and major bleeding was highest during the 1st month. However, cardiovascular risk was three times as high as bleeding risk in this elderly population, both after 1 month and after 1 year. CONCLUSIONS: In this national registry of elderly patients with NSTEMI, the majority are treated according to current European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Both the cardiovascular and bleeding risk are highest during the 1st month after NSTEMI. However, the cardiovascular risk was three times as high as the bleeding risk.

New-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in octogenarians: Patient-level pooled analysis from the TWENTE I-IV trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients aged ≥80 years are often treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), but data from randomized studies are scarce owing to underrepresentation in most trials. We assessed 1-year clinical outcome of octogenarians treated with new-generation DES versus younger patients. METHODS: We pooled patient-level data of 9,204 participants in the TWENTE, DUTCH PEERS, BIO-RESORT, and BIONYX (TWENTE I-IV) randomized trials. The main clinical end point was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: The 671 octogenarian trial participants had significantly more comorbidities. TVF was higher in octogenarians than in 8,533 patients <80 years (7.3% vs 5.3%, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.0-1.83, P = .04). The cardiac death rate was higher in octogenarians (3.9% vs 0.8%, P < .001). There was no significant between-group difference in target vessel MI (2.3% vs 2.3%, P = .88) and repeat target vessel revascularization (1.9% vs 2.8%, P = .16). In multivariate analyses, age ≥ 80 years showed no independent association with TVF (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.76-1.42), whereas the risk of cardiac death remained higher in octogenarians (adjusted HR: 3.38, 95% CI: 2.07-5.52, P < .001). In 6,002 trial participants, in whom data on major bleeding were recorded, octogenarians (n = 459) showed a higher major bleeding risk (5.9% vs 1.9%; HR: 3.08, 95% CI: 2.01-4.74, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarian participants in 4 large-scale randomized DES trials had more comorbidities and a higher incidence of the main end point TVF. Cardiac mortality was higher in octogenarians, whereas there was no increase in MI or target vessel revascularization rates. Treatment of octogenarian patients with new-generation DES appears to be safe and effective.

Three contemporary thin-strut drug-eluting stents implanted in severely calcified coronary lesions of participants in a randomized all-comers trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the 2-year clinical performance of three drug-eluting stents in all-comer patients with severely calcified coronary lesions. BACKGROUND: Severe lesion calcification increases cardiovascular event risk after coronary stenting, but there is a lack of data on the clinical outcome of all-comers with severely calcified lesions who were treated with more recently introduced drug-eluting stents. METHODS: The BIO-RESORT trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01674803) randomly assigned 3,514 all-comer patients to biodegradable polymer Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES) or Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), versus durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). In a post hoc analysis, we assessed 783 patients (22.3%) with at least one severely calcified target lesion. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up (available in 99% of patients), the main composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 19/252 (7.6%) of the EES and in 33/265 (12.6%) of the ZES-treated patients (p = .07). Target vessel failure occurred in 24/266 (9.1%) of the SES-treated patients (vs. ZES: p = .21). There was a difference in target vessel revascularization, which was required in EES in 6/252 (2.4%) patients and in ZES in 20/265 (7.7%) patients (p = .01); the target vessel revascularization rate in SES was 9/266 (3.4%, vs. ZES: p = .04). Multivariate analysis showed that implantation of EES, but not SES, was independently associated with lower target vessel revascularization rates than in ZES. CONCLUSIONS: In BIO-RESORT participants with severely calcified target lesions, treatment with EES was associated with a lower 2-year target vessel revascularization rate than treatment with ZES.

Three-year clinical outcome in all-comers with "silent" diabetes, prediabetes, or normoglycemia, treated with contemporary coronary drug-eluting stents: From the BIO-RESORT Silent Diabetes study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with coronary disease may have unknown diabetes or prediabetes. We evaluated 3-year outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with silent diabetes, prediabetes, and normoglycemia. METHODS: All BIO-RESORT trial (NCT01674803) participants without known diabetes, enrolled at our center, were invited for oral glucose tolerance testing (OGTT) and measurements of fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). RESULTS: OGTT detected silent diabetes in 68 (6.9%), prediabetes in 132 (13.4%), and normoglycemia in 788 (79.8%) of all 988 study participants. Follow-up was available in 986 (99.8%) patients. The main endpoint target vessel failure (TVF: cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization) differed between groups (14.8, 9.9, and 5.6%; p = .002), driven by MI during the first 48 hr and by cardiac death (p < .001; p = .026). Between 48 hr and 3-years, there was no significant between-group difference in TVF, target vessel MI, and target vessel revascularization. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that silent diabetes was independently associated with TVF (adjusted HR: 2.52, 95%-CI: 1.26-5.03). An alternative diagnostic approach-HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose-detected silent diabetes and prediabetes in 33 (3.3%) and 217 (22.0%) patients, and normoglycemia in 738 (74.7%); TVF rates were 12.1, 7.9, and 6.0% (p = .23). CONCLUSION: In patients without known diabetes, abnormal glucose metabolism by OGTT was independently associated with higher 3-year TVF rates after PCI with contemporary DES. This difference was driven by periprocedural MI and cardiac death. After the first 48 hr, the rates of TVF, target vessel MI, and target vessel revascularization were low and did not differ significantly between metabolic groups.

Thin composite wire strut, durable polymer-coated (Resolute Onyx) versus ultrathin cobalt-chromium strut, bioresorbable polymer-coated (Orsiro) drug-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIONYX): an international, single-blind, randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: During the past decade, many patients had zotarolimus-eluting stents implanted, which had circular shape cobalt-chromium struts with limited radiographic visibility. The Resolute Onyx stent was developed to improve visibility while reducing strut thickness, which was achieved by using a novel composite wire with a dense platinum-iridium core and an outer cobalt-chromium layer. We did the first randomised clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of this often-used stent compared with the Orsiro stent, which consists of ultrathin cobalt-chromium struts. METHODS: We did an investigator-initiated, assessor-blinded and patient-blinded, randomised non-inferiority trial in an allcomers population at seven independently monitored centres in Belgium, Israel, and the Netherlands. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and required percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. After guide wire passage with or without predilation, members of the catheterisation laboratory team used web-based computer-generated allocation sequences to randomly assign patients (1:1) to either the Resolute Onyx or the Orsiro stent. Randomisation was stratified by sex and diabetes status. Patients and assessors were masked to allocated stents, but treating clinicians were not. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure at 1 year, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation, and was assessed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin 2·5%) on the basis of outcomes adjudicated by an independent event committee. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02508714. FINDINGS: Between Oct 7, 2015, and Dec 23, 2016, 2516 patients were enrolled, 2488 of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (28 withdrawals or screening failures). 1243 participants were assigned to the Resolute Onyx group, and 1245 to the Orsiro group. Overall, 1765 (70·9%) participants presented with acute coronary syndromes and 1275 (51·2%) had myocardial infarctions. 1-year follow-up was available for 2478 (99·6%) patients. The primary endpoint was met by 55 (4·5%) patients in the Resolute Onyx group and 58 (4·7%) in the Orsiro group. Non-inferiority of Resolute Onyx to Orsiro was thus established (absolute risk difference -0·2% [95% CI -1·9 to 1·4]; upper limit of the one-sided 95% CI 1·1%; pnon-inferiority=0·0005). Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in one (0·1%) participant in the Resolute Onyx group and nine (0·7%) in the Orsiro group (hazard ratio 0·11 [95% CI 0·01-0·87]; p=0·0112). INTERPRETATION: The Resolute Onyx stent was non-inferior to Orsiro for a combined safety and efficacy endpoint at 1-year follow-up in allcomers. The low event rate in both groups suggests that both stents are safe, and the very low rate of stent thrombosis in the Resolute Onyx group warrants further clinical investigation. FUNDING: Biotronik and Medtronic.

Three-Year Clinical Outcome of Patients with Coronary Disease and Increased Event Risk Treated with Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents: From the Randomized DUTCH PEERS Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Limited data is available on the long-term outcome of patients with increased cardiovascular event risk, treated with newer-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: We therefore assessed 3-year follow-up data of high-risk versus low- to intermediate-risk patients of the randomized DUTCH PEERS trial (NCT01331707). In both risk groups we also compared patients treated with Resolute Integrity versus Promus Element DES. Patients were categorized as "high-risk" if they met ≥1 of the following criteria: (1) diabetes (17.9%); (2) previous myocardial infarction (21.9%); (3) previous coronary revascularization (25.8%); (4) chronic renal failure (3.5%); (5) left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30% (1.5%); and (6) age ≥75 years (17.3%). RESULTS: At the 3-year follow-up, the incidence of the composite endpoint target vessel failure (TVF) (13.2 vs. 7.5%; logrank p < 0.001) and 2 of its components - cardiac death (4.7 vs. 1.5%; logrank p < 0.001) and target vessel revascularization (7.3 vs. 4.7%; logrank p = 0.03) - was higher in high-risk (n = 957) versus low- to intermediate-risk patients (n = 854). Among high-risk patients, treatment with Resolute Integrity (n = 481) and Promus Element stents (n = 476) was similarly safe and efficacious (TVF: 13.3 vs. 13.1%; logrank p = 0.95; definite-or-probable stent thrombosis: 1.7 vs. 1.7%; logrank p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The newer-generation Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents showed similar results in terms of safety and efficacy for treating high-risk patients, who had significantly higher event rates than patients with low-to-intermediate risk.

Small-vessel treatment with contemporary newer-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in all-comers: Insights from 2-year DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of lesions in small vessels was associated with worse clinical outcome, and various definitions of "small vessels" have been used. Data with novel drug-eluting stents are scarce. METHODS: To compare the outcome of patients with vs without small-vessel treatment, we assessed 2-year follow-up data of the DUTCH PEERS randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01331707), in which 1,811 all-comers were treated with contemporary zotarolimus-eluting (Resolute Integrity) or everolimus-eluting (Promus Element) stents. Primary end point was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: The rates of TLF (9.5% vs 5.4%; P log rank = .001) and 2 individual components thereof-target vessel myocardial infarction (3.1% vs 1.3%; P log rank = .006) and target lesion revascularization (4.8% vs 2.8%; P log rank = .02)-were higher among 798 (44.1%) patients treated in at least one small vessel (<2.50 mm by quantitative coronary angiography). Multivariate analysis with propensity score adjustment demonstrated that treatment of small-vessel lesions independently predicted TLF at 2-year follow-up (hazard ratio 1.60, 95% CI 1.09-2.34). Patients with the smallest target vessel being <2.25 mm had TLF rates similar to patients with smallest target vessels of 2.25 to <2.50 mm; however, patients treated in vessels no smaller than 2.50 to <3.00 mm and patients treated in vessels ≥3.00 mm had lower TLF rates (9.3%, 9.8%, 5.0%, and 5.8%, respectively; P log rank = .009). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with novel drug-eluting stents in small-vessel lesions had higher adverse event rates than did patients who had no small-vessel treatment. Our data suggest that with current stents, a vessel diameter <2.50 mm is a suitable threshold to identify small target vessels.

Impact of severe lesion calcification on clinical outcome of patients with stable angina, treated with newer generation permanent polymer-coated drug-eluting stents: A patient-level pooled analysis from TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II).

BACKGROUND: The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with newer generation permanent polymer-coated drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with severely calcified lesions is greatly unknown. We assessed the impact of severe lesion calcification on clinical outcome in patients with stable angina who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with newer generation DES. METHODS: TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS randomized trials enrolled 1423 patients with stable angina, who were categorized into patients with versus without severe target lesion calcification. A patient-level pooled analysis assessed clinical outcome, including target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS: Patients with severe calcification (n = 342) were older (66.6 ± 9.1 vs 64.2 ± 9.8 years, P < .001) and had more diabetes (25.7% vs 20.4%, P = .04) than other patients (n = 1081). Patients with calcified lesions had higher rates of TVF (16.4% vs 9.8%, pLogrank = .001), cardiac death (4.4% vs 1.5%, P = .03), target vessel myocardial infarction (7.6% vs 3.4%, P = .001), and definite stent thrombosis (1.8% vs 0.4%, P = .02). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that severe calcification was an independent risk factor of 2-year TVF (HR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.02-1.99, pLogrank = .04); landmark analysis showed that this was based on a difference during the first year (periprocedural: 5.8% vs. 3.1%, pLogrank = .02; first year: 7.5% vs. 3.8%, pLogrank = .007; second year: 4.1% vs. 3.3%, pLogrank = .54). CONCLUSION: In patients with stable angina, severe target lesion calcification is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events following treatment with newer generation permanent polymer-coated DES. This increase in risk is restricted to the first year of follow-up, which is an encouraging finding.

Coronary angiography after cardiac arrest: Rationale and design of the COACT trial.

BACKGROUND: Ischemic heart disease is a major cause of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest. The role of immediate coronary angiography (CAG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after restoration of spontaneous circulation following cardiac arrest in the absence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains debated. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesize that immediate CAG and PCI, if indicated, will improve 90-day survival in post-cardiac arrest patients without signs of STEMI. DESIGN: In a prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial, 552 post-cardiac arrest patients with restoration of spontaneous circulation and without signs of STEMI will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion to immediate CAG and PCI (within 2 hours) versus initial deferral with CAG and PCI after neurological recovery. The primary end point of the study is 90-day survival. The secondary end points will include 90-day survival with good cerebral performance or minor/moderate disability, myocardial injury, duration of inotropic support, occurrence of acute kidney injury, need for renal replacement therapy, time to targeted temperature control, neurological status at intensive care unit discharge, markers of shock, recurrence of ventricular tachycardia, duration of mechanical ventilation, and reasons for discontinuation of treatment. SUMMARY: The COACT trial is a multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical study that will evaluate the effect of an immediate invasive coronary strategy in post-cardiac arrest patients without STEMI on 90-day survival.

Third-generation zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents in all-comer patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (DUTCH PEERS): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation, permanent-polymer-based drug-eluting stents with novel, flexible designs might be more easily delivered than previous generations of stents in complex coronary lesions, but might be less longitudinally stable. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy in all-comer patients of two third-generation stents that are often used clinically, but that have not yet been compared, and one of which has not previously been assessed in a randomised trial. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomised, two-arm, non-inferiority trial, patients aged 18 years and older who required a percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of a drug-eluting stent were recruited from four study sites in the Netherlands. We randomly assigned patients by independently managed computer-generated allocation sequences in a 1:1 ratio to receive either cobalt-chromium-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (Resolute Integrity, Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) or platinum-chromium-based everolimus-eluting stents (Promus Element, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA). Patients and analysts were masked to the allocated stent, but treating clinicians were not. The primary endpoint of target-vessel failure was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target-vessel-related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (target-vessel revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat (with a non-inferiority margin of 3·6%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01331707. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2010, and May 24, 2012, 1811 eligible all-comer patients, with 2371 target lesions, were enrolled in the study. 370 (20%) patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and 447 (25%) with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. 906 patients were assigned to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents and 905 to receive everolimus-eluting stents. Ease of stent delivery was shown by very low numbers of patients requiring treatment other than their assigned study treatment (six [1%] in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group vs five [1%] in the everolimus-eluting stent group; p=0·22). 12-month follow-up results were available for 1810 patients (one patient in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group withdrew consent). The primary endpoint was met by 55 (6%) of 905 patients in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and 47 (5%) of 905 in the everolimus-eluting stent group. The zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the everolimus-eluting stent (absolute risk difference 0·88%, 95% CI -1·24% to 3·01%; upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2·69%; non-inferiority p=0·006). We noted no significant between-group differences in individual components of the primary endpoint. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in three (0·3%) patients in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and six (0·7%) patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group (p=0·34). Longitudinal stent deformation was seen only in the everolimus-eluting stent group (nine [1·0%] of 905 vs 0 of 906, p=0·002; nine of 1591 [0·6%] everolimus-eluting stents implanted became deformed), but was not associated with any adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Both stents were similarly efficacious and safe, and provided excellent clinical outcomes, especially in view of the large number of patients who presented with acute myocardial infarctions. FUNDING: Boston Scientific, Medtronic.

Clinical outcome of patients with implantation of second-generation drug-eluting stents in the right coronary ostium: insights from 2-year follow-up of the TWENTE trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to assess the impact on clinical outcome of right coronary artery (RCA) ostial coverage with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: Treatment of the aorta-ostial (AO) region of the RCA with bare metal stents and first-generation DES has been associated with a higher risk of target-lesion revascularization (TLR). METHODS: Of the 1,391 patients of the prospective TWENTE trial, we identified 321 (23%) with single-vessel RCA treatment, who were categorized into stenting with AO stent coverage (AOC) versus stenting without AOC. The AO region was defined as 3 mm from the aortic orifice. RESULTS: The 67 (20.9%) patients with AOC showed more severe lesion calcifications than the 254 patients without AOC (31.3% vs. 12.6%; P < 0.01). In the AOC group, there was a higher prevalence of hypercholesterolemia and family history of coronary disease (75.4% vs. 61.6%, and 68.7% vs. 53.5%, respectively; P = 0.03). During 2-year follow-up, patients in the AOC group had a higher incidence of TLR (7.5% vs. 1.6%; P = 0.02). Following adjustment for confounders, AOC independently predicted TLR with an adjusted hazard ratio of 4.1 (95% CI: 1.17-14.39; P = 0.03). CONCLUSION: AO treatment of the RCA with second-generation DES is feasible, but our data suggest that stent coverage of the right AO segment remains a predictor of TLR.

Three-year clinical outcome after treatment of chronic total occlusions with second-generation drug-eluting stents in the TWENTE trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare long-term outcome of patients treated for chronic total occlusion (CTO) lesions versus patients treated for non-CTO lesions only. BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) for CTO lesions generally have a higher adverse event risk than PCI for non-CTO lesions. However, long-term outcome data from prospective studies with second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) use in CTO lesions is scarce. METHODS: We analyzed in this substudy of the TWENTE trial the data of 674 patients, who had stable angina and were electively treated with second-generation DES (Resolute zotarolimus-eluting or Xience V everolimus-eluting stents). Main outcome parameter was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: Patients with CTO lesions (n = 59, 8.8%) were more often treated for lesions in small vessels (94.9% vs. 63.1%, P < 0.001), long lesions (52.5% vs. 17.7%, P < 0.001) and multiple vessels (42.4% vs. 22.4%, P < 0.001), and were less often males (62.7% vs. 74.6%, P < 0.05) than patients with non-CTO lesions (n = 615, 91.2%). J-CTO scores ≥2 were present in 56% of CTO lesions. Despite significant differences in characteristics of patients, lesions, and interventional procedures, the TLF rate at 3-year follow-up was similar for both groups (13.6% vs. 12.9%, P = 0.89). In addition, a patient-oriented composite endpoint (any death, MI or revascularization) did not differ between groups (18.6% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.97). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with second-generation DES for CTO lesions showed at 3-year follow-up an incidence of adverse clinical events that was low and similar to patients with non-CTO lesions only.

Complex patients treated with zotarolimus-eluting resolute and everolimus-eluting Xience V stents in the randomized TWENTE trial: comparison of 2-year clinical outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the differences in clinical outcome between complex patients treated with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) versus Xience V everolimus-eluting stents (EES). BACKGROUND: Nowadays, many complex patients with coronary disease are treated with percutaneous coronary interventions, using drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: We analyzed 2-year outcome data of 1,033 complex patients of the TWENTE trial, treated with second-generation Resolute ZES or Xience V EES. Complex patients had at least one of the following characteristics: renal insufficiency (creatinine ≥ 140 µmol/l); ejection fraction < 30%; acute myocardial infarction (MI) within previous 72 hrs; >1 lesion/vessel; >2 vessels treated; lesion length > 27 mm; bifurcation; saphenous vein graft lesion; arterial bypass graft lesion; in-stent restenosis; unprotected left main lesion; lesion with thrombus; or lesion with total occlusion. Target vessel failure (TVF), the primary composite endpoint of the trial, was defined as cardiac death, target vessel-related MI, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Among the 1,033 complex patients, 529 (51%) were treated with Resolute ZES and 504 (49%) with Xience V EES. Patient- and procedure-related characteristics were similar between DES groups. After 2-year follow-up, outcome was also similar between DES groups. TVF occurred in 12.1% of patients treated with Resolute ZES and 12.3% of patients treated with Xience V EES. In addition, DES groups did not differ significantly in cardiac death, MI, or target vessel revascularization-the individual components of TVF. CONCLUSION: Complex patients treated with Resolute ZES and Xience V EES showed similar safety and efficacy during 2-year follow-up. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Ten-year mortality after treating obstructive coronary atherosclerosis with contemporary stents in patients with or without concomitant peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous studies in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients showed a higher 3-year adverse event risk, including all-cause mortality, in those with concomitant peripheral arterial disease (PADs). Ten-year data of mortality and causes of death are scarce. This analysis assessed PCI patients, treated with contemporary drug-eluting stents, the impact of concomitant PADs on very long-term mortality, and causes of death. METHODS: We assessed PCI all-comers from our center who participated in the TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS trials (clinicaltrials.gov:NCT01066650, NCT01331707), comparing patients with versus without PADs. Life status was checked in the Dutch Personal Records Database; causes of death were obtained from medical records. RESULTS: Of 2705 study patients, 668 (24.7%) died during follow-up: 88/212 (41.5%) patients with PADs and 580/2493 (23.1%) without PADs. In PADs patients, the 10-year rate of all-cause mortality was about twice as high as in patients without PADs (41.5% vs.23.1%, HR: 2.05, 95%-CI: 1.64-2.57, p<0.001). For both groups, the rates of patients dying from various causes of death were: cardiac (14.1% vs.6.8%), vascular (2.8% vs. 1.1%), non-cardiovascular (17.4% vs. 9.8%), and unclear causes (7.1% vs. 5.3%), without a statistically significant between-group difference. When multivariate analysis was adjusted for between-group differences in cardiovascular risk profile, PADs remained predictor of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 1.38, 95%-CI: 1.08-1.75, p=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The 10-year all-cause mortality rate in PCI patients with concomitant PADs was almost twice as high as in those without PADs. Age and other traditional cardiovascular risk factors were higher in patients with PADs, but after correction for these confounders PADs still accounted for almost 40% increase in mortality.

Women treated with second-generation zotarolimus-eluting resolute stents and everolimus-eluting xience V stents: insights from the gender-stratified, randomized, controlled TWENTE trial.

BACKGROUND: Women are underrepresented in clinical research, and few data are available from randomized head-to-head comparisons of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in female patients. Aim of this study was to assess safety and efficacy of two second-generation DES in women. In TWENTE-a prospective, randomized, comparative DES trial-"real-world" patients were stratified for gender before randomization for Resolute or Xience V stents. METHODS: Target vessel failure (TVF; cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target vessel revascularization) after 1 year was the predefined endpoint. RESULTS: Among 1,391 patients, 382 (27.5%) women were randomized to Resolute (n = 192) and Xience V (n = 190). Baseline and procedural characteristics were similar for females in both study arms, except for smaller vessel and stent diameters in Resolute-treated lesions. After 1 year, TVF (8.9 vs. 8.4%; adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.41-2.20, P = 0.91) and a patient-oriented composite endpoint (13.0 vs. 12.1%, P = 0.79) did not differ significantly between women in both arms. Women were older than men (P < 0.01) and had more often diabetes mellitus (26.4 vs. 19.8%, P = 0.01) and hypertension (63.6 vs. 52.5%, P < 0.01), but there was no significant gender difference in TVF (adjusted OR: 1.18, 95% CI: 0.73-1.92, P = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: This gender-stratified TWENTE trial analysis resulted in no significant difference in safety and efficacy outcomes between Resolute- and Xience V-treated females.

Risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention and its impact on further adverse events in clinical trial participants with comorbid peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Both patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and patients with peripheral arterial disease (PADs) have an increased bleeding risk. Information is scarce on bleeding in CAD patients, treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), who have comorbid PADs. We assessed whether PCI patients with PADs have a higher bleeding risk than PCI patients without PADs. Furthermore, in PCI patients with PADs we evaluated the extent by which bleeding increased the risk of further adverse events. METHODS: Three-year pooled patient-level data of two randomized PCI trials (BIO-RESORT, BIONYX) with drug-eluting stents were analyzed to assess mortality and the composite endpoint major adverse cardiac events (MACE: all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, emergent coronary artery bypass surgery, or target lesion revascularization). RESULTS: Among 5989 all-comer patients, followed for 3 years, bleeding occurred in 7.7% (34/440) with comorbid PADs and 5.0% (279/5549) without PADs (HR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.11-2.23, p = 0.010). Of all PADs patients, those with a bleeding had significantly higher rates of all-cause mortality (HR: 4.70, 95%CI: 2.37-9.33, p < 0.001) and MACE (HR: 2.39, 95%CI: 1.23-4.31, p = 0.003). Furthermore, PADs patients with a bleeding were older (74.4 ± 6.9 vs. 67.4 ± 9.5, p < 0.001). After correction for age and other potential confounders, bleeding remained independently associated with all-cause mortality (adj.HR: 2.97, 95%CI: 1.37-6.43, p = 0.006) while the relation of bleeding with MACE became borderline non-significant (adj.HR: 1.85, 95%CI: 0.97-3.55, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: PCI patients with PADs had a higher bleeding risk than PCI patients without PADs. In PADs patients, bleeding was associated with all-cause mortality, even after adjustment for potential confounders.

Conservative versus Invasive Strategy in Elderly Patients with Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Insights from the International POPular Age Registry.

This registry assessed the impact of conservative and invasive strategies on major adverse clinical events (MACE) in elderly patients with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). Patients aged ≥75 years with NSTEMI were prospectively registered from European centers and followed up for one year. Outcomes were compared between conservative and invasive groups in the overall population and a propensity score-matched (PSM) cohort. MACE included cardiovascular death, acute coronary syndrome, and stroke. The study included 1190 patients (median age 80 years, 43% female). CAG was performed in 67% (N = 798), with two-thirds undergoing revascularization. Conservatively treated patients had higher baseline risk. After propensity score matching, 319 patient pairs were successfully matched. MACE occurred more frequently in the conservative group (total population 20% vs. 12%, adjHR 0.53, 95% CI 0.37-0.77, p = 0.001), remaining significant in the PSM cohort (18% vs. 12%, adjHR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31-0.81, p = 0.004). In conclusion, an early invasive strategy was associated with benefits over conservative management in elderly patients with NSTEMI. Risk factors associated with ischemia and bleeding should guide strategy selection rather than solely relying on age.

Incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction following stent implantation: comparison between first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND: First- and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) differ in coating materials, which may influence the incidence of periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI). OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of PMI between first- and second-generation DES, using the current Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition of PMI. METHODS: We assessed 800 patients treated with first- (Taxus Liberté or Endeavor) or second-generation DES (Xience V or Resolute). Each DES group consisted of 200 consecutive patients, who were treated during the transition from first- to second-generation DES. Routine peri-interventional assessment of cardiac biomarkers was performed to compare the incidence of PMI between DES groups according to the updated definition by the ARC: 2x upper reference limit of creatine kinase (CK), confirmed by CK-MB elevation. RESULTS: In 800 patients, a total of 1,522 DES (363 Taxus; 385 Endeavor; 382 Xience V; 392 Resolute) were implanted to treat 1,232 lesions. Patient characteristics did not differ between groups. In patients receiving second-generation DES, more multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions were performed (P = 0.01). The overall incidence of PMI was 4.75%. Between first- and second-generation DES, there was no significant difference in PMI (5.5% vs. 4.0%; P = 0.29). In a multivariate analysis, only the total number of stents implanted (P < 0.001) and presentation with acute coronary syndrome (P = 0.02) were independent predictors of PMI. CONCLUSION: Using the revised ARC definition, we found no significant difference in PMI between first- and second-generation DES. Overall, PMI occurred in 4.75%, which is 58% lower than with use of the historical PMI definition.

Outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary stents in patients with concomitant peripheral arterial disease: A patient-level pooled analysis of four randomized trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A considerable number of patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) also have peripheral arterial disease (PAD) - a signal of more advanced atherosclerosis. After bare metal and early-generation drug-eluting coronary stent implantation, PAD patients showed inferior outcome. As stents and medical treatment were further improved, we aimed to assess the impact of PAD on outcome of PCI with contemporary new-generation stents. METHODS: We analyzed 3-year pooled patient-level data from 4 large-scale randomized new-generation stent trials to compare all-comer patients with and without (core lab-verified) history of symptomatic PAD, defined as obstructive lesions in peripheral locations including lower and upper extremities, carotid, vertebral, mesenteric and renal arteries. Main endpoint was target vessel failure: cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Of all 9204 patients, 695 (7.6%) had a history of symptomatic PAD. They were older and had more often diabetes, renal failure, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and prior stroke. PAD was an independent risk factor for target vessel failure (adjusted-HR:1.42, 95%-CI:1.12-1.73, p = 0.001). Target vessel revascularization (adjusted-HR:1.37, 95%-CI:1.04-1.80, p = 0.026), death (adjusted-HR:1.52, 95%-CI:1.17-1.99, p = 0.002), and major adverse cardiovascular event risks (adjusted-HR:1.36, 95%-CI:1.13-1.64, p = 0.001) were also substantially higher. CONCLUSIONS: A history of symptomatic PAD still allows to simply identify patients with increased risk of unfavorable clinical outcome after PCI, including a higher risk of repeated coronary revascularization, despite using contemporary stents. In clinical practice, this knowledge about higher event risks of PAD patients is helpful both during Heart Team discussions and when informing patients about the procedural risk.