Japan-United States of America Harmonized Assessment by Randomized Multicentre Study of OrbusNEich's Combo StEnt (Japan-USA HARMONEE) study: primary results of the pivotal registration study of combined endothelial progenitor cell capture and drug-eluting stent in patients with ischaemic coronary disease and non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome.

Aims: Harmonized Assessment by Randomized Multicentre Study of OrbusNEich's Combo StEnt (HARMONEE) (NCT02073565) was a randomized pivotal registration trial of the Combo stent, which combined sirolimus and an abluminal bioabsorbable polymer with a novel endoluminal anti-CD34+ antibody coating designed to capture endothelial progenitor cells (EPC) and promote percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) site healing. Methods and results: Clinically stabilized PCI subjects were randomized 1:1 to receive Combo or everolimus-eluting stents (EES). Between February 2014 and June 2016, 572 subjects with 675 coronary lesions underwent 1-year angiography and fractional flow reserve, with optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the first 140 patients. The primary clinical endpoint was non-inferior 1-year target vessel failure (TVF). The primary mechanistic endpoint of EPC capture activity was superior strut coverage by OCT. Target vessel failure occurred in 7.0% Combo (20/287) vs. 4.2% EES (12/285), a 2.8% [95% confidence interval (95% CI) -1.0%, 6.5%] difference, meeting the non-inferiority hypothesis (P = 0.02). There were no cardiac deaths, with one stent thrombosis observed in the EES group. Quantitative coronary angiography late loss with Combo was equivalent to EES. Optical coherence tomography strut coverage at 1 year was superior with Combo vs. EES [91.3% (95% CI 88.7%, 93.8%) vs. 74.8% (95% CI 70.0%, 79.6%), P < 0.001], with homogeneous tissue in 81.2% vs. 68.8%, respectively. Conclusion: Combo stent demonstrated non-inferior 1-year TVF and late loss in a randomized comparison to EES, with superior strut-based tissue coverage by OCT as a surrogate of EPC capture technology activity.

The State of the Absorb Bioresorbable Scaffold: Consensus From an Expert Panel.

Significant progress has been made in the percutaneous coronary intervention technique from the days of balloon angioplasty to modern-day metallic drug-eluting stents (DES). Although metallic stents solve a temporary problem of acute recoil following balloon angioplasty, they leave behind a permanent problem implicated in very late events (in addition to neoatherosclerosis). BRS were developed as a potential solution to this permanent problem, but the promise of these devices has been tempered by clinical trials showing increased risk of safety outcomes, both early and late. This is not too dissimilar to the challenges seen with first-generation DES in which refinement of deployment technique, prolongation of dual antiplatelet therapy, and technical iteration mitigated excess risk of very late stent thrombosis, making DES the treatment of choice for coronary artery disease. This white paper discusses the factors potentially implicated in the excess risks, including the scaffold consideration and deployment technique, and outlines patient and lesion selection, implantation technique, and dual antiplatelet therapy considerations to potentially mitigate this excess risk with the first-generation thick strut Absorb scaffold (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois). It remains to be seen whether these considerations together with technical iterations will ultimately close the gap between scaffolds and metal stents for short-term events while at the same time preserving options for future revascularization once the scaffold bioresorbs.

Pivotal trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the orbital atherectomy system in treating de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions (ORBIT II).

OBJECTIVES: The ORBIT II (Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of OAS in Treating Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the coronary Orbital Atherectomy System (OAS) to prepare de novo, severely calcified coronary lesions for stent placement. BACKGROUND: Despite advances in interventional techniques, treatment of calcified coronary lesions remains a challenge. Stent placement in these lesions may result in stent underexpansion, malapposition, and procedural complications. METHODS: ORBIT II is a prospective, multicenter, nonblinded clinical trial that enrolled 443 consecutive patients with severely calcified coronary lesions at 49 U.S. sites from May 25, 2010, to November 26, 2012. Investigators used the centrifugal action of the OAS diamond-coated crown to modify calcified lesions prior to stent placement. RESULTS: The pre-procedure mean minimal lumen diameter of 0.5 mm increased to 2.9 mm after the procedure. The primary safety endpoint was 89.6% freedom from 30-day major adverse cardiac events compared with the performance goal of 83%. The primary efficacy endpoint (residual stenosis <50% post-stent without in-hospital major adverse cardiac events) was 88.9% compared with the performance goal of 82%. Stent delivery occurred successfully in 97.7% of cases with <50% stenosis in 98.6% of subjects. Low rates of in-hospital Q-wave myocardial infarction (0.7%), cardiac death (0.2%), and target vessel revascularization (0.7%) were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The ORBIT II coronary OAS trial met both the primary safety and efficacy endpoints by significant margins. Preparation of severely calcified plaque with the OAS not only helped facilitate stent delivery, but improved both acute and 30-day clinical outcomes compared with the outcomes of historic control subjects in this difficult-to-treat patient population. (Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of OAS in Treating Severely Calcified Coronary Lesions [ORBIT II]; NCT01092416).

Long-term benefit of the TAXUS Liberté stent in small vessels and long lesions. TAXUS ATLAS program.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of treating de novo coronary lesions in native vessels and challenging small vessel and long lesion subsets with TAXUS Liberté stents is unknown. This report examines the 3-year efficacy and safety from the TAXUS ATLAS program. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAXUS ATLAS WH, Small Vessel, and Long Lesion are non-randomized studies comparing TAXUS Liberté (n = 871), TAXUS Liberté 2.25 mm (n = 261), and TAXUS Liberté 38 mm (n = 150) stents, respectively, to case-matched TAXUS Express historical controls. TAXUS Liberté demonstrated comparable 3-year rates of major adverse cardiac events (19.0% vs. 20.2%, P = 0.51) in de novo lesions, reduced target lesion revascularization (TLR, 10.0% vs. 22.1%, P = 0.008) in small vessels, and reduced myocardial infarction (MI, 2.9% vs. 10.4%; P = 0.01) and stent thrombosis (ST, 0.0% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.03) in long lesions vs. TAXUS Express. After propensity score adjustment, no statistically significant effect of TAXUS Liberté on TLR (9.7% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.12) in small vessels or MI (2.9% vs. 7.9%, P = 0.05) in long lesions was noted, although reduced ST (0.0% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.02) remained in long lesions. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that TAXUS Liberté treatment significantly reduced TLR by 66% in small vessels, and MI by 75% in long lesions, vs. TAXUS Express. CONCLUSIONS: TAXUS Liberté suggests durable 3-year effectiveness in reducing restenosis and improved clinical outcomes in small vessels and long lesions compared with TAXUS Express.

Precautions for use and adverse effects of vesnarinone: potential mechanisms and future therapies.

This article reviews the precautions and adverse effects associated with vesnarinone use, and the potential mechanisms responsible for these complications as well as suggested treatment strategies. Vesnarinone, a quinolinone derivative, improves the haemodynamics and quality of life in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF); however, it is associated with the adverse effects of increased sudden cardiac death and neutropenia. These adverse effects have limited the application of vesnarinone to the general population but perhaps with continued research into vesnarinone-induced neutropenia and advances in arrhythmia management, the risk/ benefit ratio of vesnarinone may become favourable. For now, the use of vesnarinone should be limited to patients with CHF who have demonstrated a poor response to other cardiac medications and devices. These patients should be closely monitored for both cardiac and non-cardiac adverse effects.

Use of clopidogrel loading, enoxaparin, and double-bolus eptifibatide in the setting of early percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes.

This study sought to evaluate the safety and feasibility of using the combination of aspirin, front-loaded clopidogrel, enoxaparin, and eptifibatide in patients with acute coronary syndromes immediately prior to percutaneous coronary intervention. One hundred ninety-eight patients (39 with acute myocardial infarction) received aspirin 325 mg orally, clopidogrel 300 mg orally, enoxaparin 0.5 mg/kg intravenous (IV), and eptifibatide using the ESPIRIT dosing (180 g/kg bolus IV, immediately followed by a 2 g/kg/minute continuous IV infusion, and then a second 180 g/kg bolus IV ten minutes after the first bolus). A total of 363 lesions were intervened; two were determined unsuccessful. Arterial sheaths were removed using manual compression after 3 hours. In the immediate follow-up, one patient developed rigors thought to be related to the eptifibatide therapy and a second patient experienced rebleeding at the access site. No other major bleeding or access-site hematomas were noted, and no patient developed thrombocytopenia. Over the subsequent 30 days, no episodes of acute vessel/stent thromboses were recognized. There were no deaths. Repeat coronary intervention was required in one patient at a previously untreated site. Clopidogrel was discontinued early in 5 patients due to rash. In conclusion, this pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of administering aspirin, clopidogrel, enoxaparin, and eptifibatide in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndromes. These agents can be administered moments before the coronary intervention with no apparent compromise in patient safety.