Evaluation of intracoronary hyperoxemic oxygen therapy in acute anterior myocardial infarction: The IC-HOT study.

BACKGROUND: In the randomized AMIHOT-II trial, supersaturated oxygen [SSO2 ] delivered into the left anterior descending (LAD) artery via an indwelling intracoronary infusion catheter following primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly reduced infarct size in patients with anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) but resulted in a numerically higher incidence of safety events. OBJECTIVES: The IC-HOT study evaluated the safety of SSO2 therapy selectively delivered to the left main coronary artery (LMCA) for 60 minutes after PCI in patients with anterior STEMI. METHODS: SSO2 therapy was administered to the LMCA after stent implantation in 100 patients with anterior STEMI and proximal or mid-LAD occlusion presenting within 6 hours of symptom onset. The primary endpoint was the 30-day composite rate of net adverse clinical events (NACE) (death, reinfarction, clinically driven target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, severe heart failure, or TIMI major/minor bleeding) compared against an objective performance goal of 10.7%. Cardiac magnetic resonance imaging was performed at 4 and 30 days to assess infarct size. RESULTS: SSO2 delivery was successful in 98% of patients. NACE at 30 days occurred 7.1% of patients (meeting the primary safety endpoint of the study); there were no deaths, only one stent thrombosis and one case of severe heart failure. Median [interquartile range] infarct size was 24.1% [14.4%, 31.6%] at 4 days and 19.4% [8.8%, 28.9%] at 30 days. CONCLUSION: Following primary PCI in acute anterior STEMI, infusion of SSO2 via the LMCA was feasible and was associated with a favorable early safety profile.

Randomized Comparison of Ridaforolimus- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: Primary Results From the BIONICS Trial (BioNIR Ridaforolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis).

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of a novel cobalt alloy-based coronary stent with a durable elastomeric polymer eluting the antiproliferative agent ridaforolimus for treatment of patients with coronary artery disease is undetermined. METHODS: A prospective, international 1:1 randomized trial was conducted to evaluate in a noninferiority design the relative safety and efficacy of ridaforolimus-eluting stents (RESs) and slow-release zotarolimus-eluting stents among 1919 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at 76 centers. Inclusion criteria allowed enrollment of patients with recent myocardial infarction, total occlusions, bifurcations lesions, and other complex conditions. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the groups. Overall, mean age was 63.4 years, 32.5% had diabetes mellitus, and 39.7% presented with acute coronary syndromes. At 12 months, the primary end point of target lesion failure (composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) was 5.4% for both devices (upper bound of 1-sided 95% confidence interval 1.8%, Pnoninferiority=0.001). Definite/probable stent thrombosis rates were low in both groups (0.4% RES versus 0.6% zotarolimus-eluting stent, P=0.75); 13-month angiographic in-stent late lumen loss was 0.22±0.41 mm and 0.23±0.39 mm (Pnoninferiority=0.004) for the RES and zotarolimus-eluting stent groups, respectively, and intravascular ultrasound percent neointimal hyperplasia was 8.10±5.81 and 8.85±7.77, respectively (Pnoninferiority=0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In the present trial, which allowed broad inclusion criteria, the novel RESs met the prespecified criteria for noninferiority compared with zotarolimus-eluting stents for the primary end point of target lesion failure at 12 months and had similar measures of late lumen loss. These findings support the safety and efficacy of RESs in patients who are representative of clinical practice. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01995487.

Optical coherence tomography compared with intravascular ultrasound and with angiography to guide coronary stent implantation (ILUMIEN III: OPTIMIZE PCI): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is most commonly guided by angiography alone. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance has been shown to reduce major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) after PCI, principally by resulting in a larger postprocedure lumen than with angiographic guidance. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) provides higher resolution imaging than does IVUS, although findings from some studies suggest that it might lead to smaller luminal diameters after stent implantation. We sought to establish whether or not a novel OCT-based stent sizing strategy would result in a minimum stent area similar to or better than that achieved with IVUS guidance and better than that achieved with angiography guidance alone. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older undergoing PCI from 29 hospitals in eight countries. Eligible patients had one or more target lesions located in a native coronary artery with a visually estimated reference vessel diameter of 2·25-3·50 mm and a length of less than 40 mm. We excluded patients with left main or ostial right coronary artery stenoses, bypass graft stenoses, chronic total occlusions, planned two-stent bifurcations, and in-stent restenosis. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1; with use of an interactive web-based system in block sizes of three, stratified by site) to OCT guidance, IVUS guidance, or angiography-guided stent implantation. We did OCT-guided PCI using a specific protocol to establish stent length, diameter, and expansion according to reference segment external elastic lamina measurements. All patients underwent final OCT imaging (operators in the IVUS and angiography groups were masked to the OCT images). The primary efficacy endpoint was post-PCI minimum stent area, measured by OCT at a masked independent core laboratory at completion of enrolment, in all randomly allocated participants who had primary outcome data. The primary safety endpoint was procedural MACE. We tested non-inferiority of OCT guidance to IVUS guidance (with a non-inferiority margin of 1·0 mm2), superiority of OCT guidance to angiography guidance, and superiority of OCT guidance to IVUS guidance, in a hierarchical manner. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02471586. FINDINGS: Between May 13, 2015, and April 5, 2016, we randomly allocated 450 patients (158 [35%] to OCT, 146 [32%] to IVUS, and 146 [32%] to angiography), with 415 final OCT acquisitions analysed for the primary endpoint (140 [34%] in the OCT group, 135 [33%] in the IVUS group, and 140 [34%] in the angiography group). The final median minimum stent area was 5·79 mm2 (IQR 4·54-7·34) with OCT guidance, 5·89 mm2 (4·67-7·80) with IVUS guidance, and 5·49 mm2 (4·39-6·59) with angiography guidance. OCT guidance was non-inferior to IVUS guidance (one-sided 97·5% lower CI -0·70 mm2; p=0·001), but not superior (p=0·42). OCT guidance was also not superior to angiography guidance (p=0·12). We noted procedural MACE in four (3%) of 158 patients in the OCT group, one (1%) of 146 in the IVUS group, and one (1%) of 146 in the angiography group (OCT vs IVUS p=0·37; OCT vs angiography p=0·37). INTERPRETATION: OCT-guided PCI using a specific reference segment external elastic lamina-based stent optimisation strategy was safe and resulted in similar minimum stent area to that of IVUS-guided PCI. These data warrant a large-scale randomised trial to establish whether or not OCT guidance results in superior clinical outcomes to angiography guidance. FUNDING: St Jude Medical.

Incidence and Predictors of Target Lesion Failure in Patients With Lesions in Small Vessels Undergoing PCI With Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents: Insights From the BIONICS Study.

Treatment of lesions in small coronary vessels is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing small-vessel PCI in the BIONICS trial and to identify predictors of stent failure. 1910 patients were randomized to treatment with the EluNIR™ ridaforolimus-eluting stent (RES) or Resolute™ zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES). Small vessels were defined as reference vessel diameters (RVD) ≤2.5 mm. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify predictors of target lesion failure (TLF) through 2 years. Patients undergoing small vessel disease PCI had a higher frequency of diabetes, prior myocardial infarction (MI), and prior PCI. 2 year TLF was higher among patients with small vessels (9.7% vs. 5.9%, HR 1.7 [95% CI 1.22-2.37], p < 0.01), driven by increased rates of target vessel-MI and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Stent thrombosis at 2 years was higher among patients with small vessel disease (1.4% vs. 0.3%, HR 5.25 [95% CI 1.47-18.8], p < 0.01). 2 year TLF rates were similar in the RES and ZES patient groups (Pinteraction 0.86). In conclusion, patients undergoing PCI in small vessels have significantly worse outcomes despite the use of contemporary stents.

Ridaforolimus eluting stent for the treatment of Japanese patients with coronary disease: 1 year outcomes of the JNIR study.

BACKGROUND: Japanese patients have shown improved outcomes after treatment with drug eluting stents compared with Western patients. Outcomes with the ridaforolimus-eluting EluNIR stent in Japanese patients are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a multi-center trial in Japanese patients undergoing PCI with the ridaforolimus eluting EluNIR stent. A propensity-score matched analysis was performed with the EluNIR arm of the BIONICS trial. The matched cohort was compared with the Japanese patients for the primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) in a non-inferiority study. 104 Japanese patients were compared with 410 matched patients from BIONICS. Baseline characteristics were similar except for more frequent multi-vessel disease in the BIONICS cohort. Post dilation was more likely in Japanese patients (90.4% vs. 64.6%, p < 0.001). TLF at 12 months was met by 2 patients (1.9%) in the JNIR study compared with 5.3% in the BIONICS group (Pnoninf = 0.0028). Rates of MI (0% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.03), target vessel MI (0% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.04), MACE (1.0% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.03) and TVF (1.0% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.02) were all significantly lower among Japanese patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment of Japanese patients with the EluNIR stent is associated with very low rates of adverse events, significantly fewer than seen in the BIONICS trial.

Outcomes of Patients With Coronary Arterial Bifurcation Narrowings Undergoing Provisional 1-Stent Treatment (from the BIONICS Trial).

Treatment of bifurcation lesions is technically challenging and has been associated with an increased risk of adverse events. We sought to evaluate the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients who underwent bifurcation lesion provisional treatment in the BioNIR Ridaforolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis trial. A prospective, multicenter, 1:1 randomized trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ridaforolimus-eluting stents (RES) versus zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). Enrollment of bifurcation lesions treated with a provisional 1-stent technique was allowed. Bifurcation lesions were analyzed by an angiographic core laboratory. Outcomes were analyzed according to the presence of a bifurcation lesion treatment. Study population included 686 (35.8%) patients with and 1,228 (64.2%) patients without bifurcation lesion treatment. Procedural success was high and similar between groups. In 2 years, there was no difference in the rate of target lesion failure between the bifurcation and nonbifurcation groups (7.6% vs 7.3%, respectively, p = 0.81) regardless of the presence of side branch stenosis ≥50%. In 159 patients with angiographic follow-up, there was no difference in the rate of binary restenosis between groups (9.0% vs 9.2%, p = 0.96). Rates of target lesion failure at 1-year were similar with ZES and RES, and consistent in patients with and without bifurcation lesions (pinteraction = 0.61). In conclusion, patients with bifurcation lesions treated and a provisional strategy experienced similar outcomes as those with nonbifurcation lesions. RES performed as well as ZES in bifurcation and nonbifurcation lesions.

Randomized Comparison of Ridaforolimus-Eluting and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents: 2-Year Clinical Outcomes From the BIONICS and NIREUS Trials.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine clinical outcomes between treatment groups over long-term follow-up. BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of a ridaforolimus-eluting stent (RES) was evaluated in the BIONICS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis) and NIREUS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [BioNIR] European Angiography Study) trials, demonstrating noninferiority of RES in comparison with a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) regarding 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) and 6-month angiographic late lumen loss, respectively. METHODS: Patient-level data from the BIONICS (N = 1,919) and NIREUS (N = 302) randomized trials were pooled, and outcomes in patients implanted with RES and ZES compared. Broad inclusion criteria allowed enrollment of patients with acute coronary syndromes and complex lesions. The primary endpoint was the 2-year rate of TLF or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: A total of 2,221 patients (age 63.2 ± 10.3 years; 79.7% men) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES (n = 1,159) or ZES (n = 1,062) were included. Clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups. At 2 years, the primary endpoint of TLF was similar among patients implanted with RES and ZES (7.0% vs. 7.2%; p = 0.94). Rates of target lesion revascularization (4.8% RES vs. 4.1% ZES; p = 0.41) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (3.1% RES vs. 3.8% ZES; p = 0.52) did not differ between groups. The overall rate of stent thrombosis was also similar (0.5% RES vs. 0.9% ZES; p = 0.39). CONCLUSIONS: In a pooled analysis of 2 randomized trials, 2-year clinical outcomes were similar between patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES and ZES. These results support the long-term safety and efficacy of RES for the treatment of a broad population of patients with coronary artery disease.

Outcomes Among Diabetic Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents: Analysis From the BIONICS Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to investigate the impact of diabetes mellitus (DM) on outcomes following contemporary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in the BIONICS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis) trial. BACKGROUND: Patients with DM are at increased risk for adverse events following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, 1:1 randomized trial was conducted to evaluate in a noninferiority design the safety and efficacy of ridaforolimus-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents among 1,919 patients undergoing PCI. Randomization was stratified to the presence of medically treated DM, and a pre-specified analysis compared outcomes according to the presence or absence of DM up to 2 years. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of DM was 29.1% (559 of 1,919). DM patients had higher body mass index, greater prevalence of hyperlipidemia and hypertension, and smaller reference vessel diameter. One-year target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) was significantly higher among diabetic patients (7.8% vs. 4.2%; p = 0.002), mainly due to higher target lesion revascularization (4.5% vs. 2.0%; p = 0.002). Rates of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis did not statistically vary. Among 158 patients undergoing 13-month angiographic follow-up, restenosis rates were 3 times higher in diabetic patients compared with nondiabetic patients (15.2% vs. 4.7%; p = 0.01). Clinical and angiographic outcomes were similar between ridaforolimus-eluting stent- and zotarolimus-eluting stent-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in interventional therapies, and the implementation of new-generation DES, diabetic patients still have worse angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with nondiabetic patients undergoing PCI.