Transcatheter or Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement in Patients With Severe Aortic Stenosis and Small Aortic Annulus: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal treatment in patients with severe aortic stenosis and small aortic annulus (SAA) remains to be determined. This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic and clinical outcomes between transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) and surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) in patients with a SAA. METHODS: This prospective multicenter international randomized trial was performed in 15 university hospitals. Participants were 151 patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (mean diameter <23 mm) randomized (1:1) to TAVR (n=77) versus SAVR (n=74). The primary outcome was impaired valve hemodynamics (ie, severe prosthesis patient mismatch or moderate-severe aortic regurgitation) at 60 days as evaluated by Doppler echocardiography and analyzed in a central echocardiography core laboratory. Clinical events were secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The mean age of the participants was 75.5±5.1 years, with 140 (93%) women, a median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predicted risk of mortality of 2.50% (interquartile range, 1.67%-3.28%), and a median annulus diameter of 21.1 mm (interquartile range, 20.4-22.0 mm). There were no differences between groups in the rate of severe prosthesis patient mismatch (TAVR, 4 [5.6%]; SAVR, 7 [10.3%]; P=0.30) and moderate-severe aortic regurgitation (none in both groups). No differences were found between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 1 [1.3%]; SAVR, 1 [1.4%]; P=1.00) and stroke (TAVR, 0; SAVR, 2 [2.7%]; P=0.24) at 30 days. After a median follow-up of 2 (interquartile range, 1-4) years, there were no differences between groups in mortality rate (TAVR, 7 [9.1%]; SAVR, 6 [8.1%]; P=0.89), stroke (TAVR, 3 [3.9%]; SAVR, 3 [4.1%]; P=0.95), and cardiac hospitalization (TAVR, 15 [19.5%]; SAVR, 15 [20.3%]; P=0.80). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA (women in the majority), there was no evidence of superiority of contemporary TAVR versus SAVR in valve hemodynamic results. After a median follow-up of 2 years, there were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. These findings suggest that the 2 therapies represent a valid alternative for treating patients with severe aortic stenosis and SAA, and treatment selection should likely be individualized according to baseline characteristics, additional anatomical risk factors, and patient preference. However, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution because of the limited sample size leading to an underpowered study, and need to be confirmed in future larger studies. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03383445.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after PCI in Patients at High Bleeding Risk.

BACKGROUND: The appropriate duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients at high risk for bleeding after the implantation of a drug-eluting coronary stent remains unclear. METHODS: One month after they had undergone implantation of a biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent, we randomly assigned patients at high bleeding risk to discontinue dual antiplatelet therapy immediately (abbreviated therapy) or to continue it for at least 2 additional months (standard therapy). The three ranked primary outcomes were net adverse clinical events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding), major adverse cardiac or cerebral events (a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke), and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding; cumulative incidences were assessed at 335 days. The first two outcomes were assessed for noninferiority in the per-protocol population, and the third outcome for superiority in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Among the 4434 patients in the per-protocol population, net adverse clinical events occurred in 165 patients (7.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 172 (7.7%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -0.23 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.80 to 1.33; P<0.001 for noninferiority). A total of 133 patients (6.1%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and 132 patients (5.9%) in the standard-therapy group had a major adverse cardiac or cerebral event (difference, 0.11 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.29 to 1.51; P = 0.001 for noninferiority). Among the 4579 patients in the intention-to-treat population, major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding occurred in 148 patients (6.5%) in the abbreviated-therapy group and in 211 (9.4%) in the standard-therapy group (difference, -2.82 percentage points; 95% CI, -4.40 to -1.24; P<0.001 for superiority). CONCLUSIONS: One month of dual antiplatelet therapy was noninferior to the continuation of therapy for at least 2 additional months with regard to the occurrence of net adverse clinical events and major adverse cardiac or cerebral events; abbreviated therapy also resulted in a lower incidence of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. (Funded by Terumo; MASTER DAPT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03023020.).

Relationship between stent length and very long-term target lesion failure following percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction in the drug-eluting stents era: insights from the EXAMINATION-EXTEND study.

BACKGROUND: Little data exist on the relationship between total stent length (TSL) and cardiovascular outcomes at very-long follow-up in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in the 2nd generation drug-eluting stents (DES) era. AIM: To analyze the relationship between TSL and 10-year target-lesion failure (TLF) in STEMI patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention enrolled in the EXAMINATION-EXTEND. METHODS: The EXAMINATION-EXTEND was an extended-follow-up study of the EXAMINATION trial, which randomized 1:1 STEMI patients to receive DES or bare metal stent (BMS). The primary endpoint was TLF, defined as a composite of target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). Relationship between stent length and TLF was evaluated in the whole study group in a multiple-adjusted Cox regression model with TSL as a quantitative variable. Subgroup analysis was also performed according to stent type, diameter, and overlap. RESULTS: A total of 1,489 patients with a median TSL of 23 mm (Q1-Q318-35 mm) were included. TSL was associated with TLF at 10 years (adjusted HR per 5 mm increase of 1.07; 95% CI, 1.01-1.14; P = .02). This effect was mainly driven by TLR and was consistent regardless of stent type, diameter, or overlap. There was no significant relationship between TSL and TV-MI or ST. CONCLUSIONS: In STEMI patients, there is a direct relationship between TSL implanted in the culprit vessel and the risk of TLF at 10 years, mainly driven by TLR. The use of DES did not modify this association.

Five-year outcomes after state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with de novo three-vessel disease: final results of the SYNTAX II study.

AIMS: The SYNTAX II study evaluated the impact of advances in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), integrated into a single revascularization strategy, on outcomes of patients with de novo three-vessel disease. The study employed decision-making utilizing the SYNTAX score II, use of coronary physiology, thin-strut biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents, intravascular ultrasound, enhanced treatments of chronic total occlusions, and optimized medical therapy. Patients treated with this approach were compared with predefined patients from the SYNTAX I trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: SYNTAX II was a multicentre, single-arm, open-label study of patients requiring revascularization who demonstrated clinical equipoise for treatment with either coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) or PCI, predicted by the SYNTAX score II. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), which included any revascularization. The comparators were a matched PCI cohort trial and a matched CABG cohort, both from the SYNTAX I trial. At 5 years, MACCE rate in SYNTAX II was significantly lower than in the SYNTAX I PCI cohort (21.5% vs. 36.4%, P < 0.001). This reflected lower rates of revascularization (13.8% vs. 23.8%, P < 0.001), and myocardial infarction (MI) (2.7% vs. 10.4%, P < 0.001), consisting of both procedural MI (0.2% vs. 3.8%, P < 0.001) and spontaneous MI (2.3% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.004). All-cause mortality was lower in SYNTAX II (8.1% vs. 13.8%, P = 0.013) reflecting a lower rate of cardiac death (2.8% vs. 8.4%, P < 0.001). Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events' outcomes at 5 years among patients in SYNTAX II and predefined patients in the SYNTAX I CABG cohort were similar (21.5% vs. 24.6%, P = 0.35). CONCLUSIONS: Use of the SYNTAX II PCI strategy in patients with de novo three-vessel disease led to improved and durable clinical results when compared to predefined patients treated with PCI in the original SYNTAX I trial. A predefined exploratory analysis found no significant difference in MACCE between SYNTAX II PCI and matched SYNTAX I CABG patients at 5-year follow-up.

Abbreviated Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Bleeding Risk With or Without Oral Anticoagulant Therapy After Coronary Stenting: An Open-Label, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients at high bleeding risk with or without oral anticoagulation (OAC) after coronary stenting remains unclear. METHODS: In the investigator-initiated, randomize, open-label MASTER DAPT trial (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Standard DAPT Regimen), 4579 patients at high bleeding risk were randomized after 1-month dual APT to abbreviated or nonabbreviated APT strategies. Randomization was stratified by concomitant OAC indication. In this subgroup analysis, we report outcomes of populations with or without an OAC indication. In the population with an OAC indication, patients changed immediately to single APT for 5 months (abbreviated regimen) or continued ≥2 months of dual APT and single APT thereafter (nonabbreviated regimen). Patients without an OAC indication changed to single APT for 11 months (abbreviated regimen) or continued ≥5 months of dual APT and single APT thereafter (nonabbreviated regimen). Coprimary outcomes at 335 days after randomization were net adverse clinical outcomes (composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding events); major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and stroke); and type 2, 3, or 5 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding. RESULTS: Net adverse clinical outcomes or major adverse cardiac and cerebral events did not differ with abbreviated versus nonabbreviated APT regimens in patients with OAC indication (n=1666; hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.60-1.15]; and HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.60-1.30], respectively) or without OAC indication (n=2913; HR, 1.01 [95% CI, 0.77-1.33]; or HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.79-1.44]; Pinteraction=0.35 and 0.45, respectively). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding did not significantly differ in patients with OAC indication (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.62-1.12]) but was lower with abbreviated APT in patients without OAC indication (HR, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.41-0.74]; Pinteraction=0.057). The difference in bleeding in patients without OAC indication was driven mainly by a reduction in Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2 bleedings (HR, 0.48 [95% CI, 0.33-0.69]; Pinteraction=0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Rates of net adverse clinical outcomes and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events did not differ with abbreviated APT in patients with high bleeding risk with or without an OAC indication and resulted in lower bleeding rates in patients without an OAC indication. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03023020.

Angiography-derived physiology guidance vs usual care in an All-comers PCI population treated with the healing-targeted supreme stent and Ticagrelor monotherapy: PIONEER IV trial design.

BACKGROUND: Current ESC guidelines recommend the use of intra-coronary pressure guidewires for functional assessment of intermediate-grade coronary stenoses. Angiography-derived quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel method of assessing these stenoses, and guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS/DESIGN: The PIONEER IV trial is a prospective, all-comers, multi-center trial, which will randomize 2,540 patients in a 1:1 ratio to PCI guided by angiography-derived physiology or usual care, with unrestricted use in both arms of the Healing-Targeted Supreme sirolimus-eluting stent (HT Supreme). The stent's fast, biologically healthy, and robust endothelial coverage allows for short dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT); hence the antiplatelet regimen of choice is 1-month DAPT, followed by ticagrelor monotherapy. In the angiography-derived physiology guided arm, lesions will be functionally assessed using on-line QFR, with stenting indicated in lesions with a QFR ≤0.80. Post-stenting, QFR will be repeated in the stented vessel(s), with post-dilatation or additional stenting recommended if the QFR<0.91 distal to the stent, or if the delta QFR (across the stent) is >0.05. Usual care PCI is performed according to standard clinical practice. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, or any clinically, and physiologically driven revascularization with a non-inferiority risk-difference margin of 3.2%, at 1-year post-procedure. Clinical follow-up will be up to 3 years. SUMMARY: The PIONEER IV trial aims to demonstrate non-inferiority of QFR-guided PCI to usual care PCI with respect to POCE at 1-year in patients treated with HT Supreme stents and ticagrelor monotherapy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov UNIQUE IDENTIFIER: NCT04923191 CLASSIFICATIONS: Interventional Cardiology.

The Allegra transcatheter heart valve: Short term results from a multicenter registry.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of the Allegra transcatheter heart valve (THV) for the treatment of severe aortic valve stenosis in a large patient population treated under real-world conditions. BACKGROUND: The Allegra is a novel self-expanding THV with supra-annular bovine leaflets. The valve is available in three different sizes (23, 27, and 31 mm), all are delivered through an 18F sheath. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing TAVR with the Allegra THV were enrolled in a multicenter-registry. Data were collected throughout initial hospital-stay and at 30-day follow-up. Clinical endpoints were defined according to the updated definitions of the Valve-Academic-Research-Consortium. RESULTS: This registry included 255 patients (mean age 83 ± 6 years, 48% women) from four European centers. Median European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score (EuroSCORE II) was 3.3% (IQR 1.9-5.8%). Acute device success was 95.7%. The remaining 11 patients had either moderate paravalvular regurgitation immediately after the procedure (7 patients) or the device could not be optimal positioned requiring implantation of a second THV (4 patients). Major vascular complications and major/life-threatening bleedings occurred in 10 (3.9%) and 12 (4.7%) patients, respectively. At 30 day follow-up, mean effective orifice area was 2.2 ± 0.5 cm2 , mean gradient was 6.9 ± 3.8 mmHg, 7 (3.3%) patients had more than mild paravalvular leakage, 3 patients (1.2%) had died, 6 patients (2.4%) had a stroke and 30 (12.8%) patients had required implantation of a new permanent pacemaker. CONCLUSIONS: Transfemoral implantation of the Allegra THV resulted in favorable clinical and echocardiographic outcomes during hospitalization and short-term follow up.

Final five-year results of the REMEDEE Registry: Real-world experience with the dual-therapy COMBO stent.

OBJECTIVES: This final report from the REMEDEE Registry assessed the long-term safety and efficacy of the dual-therapy COMBO stent in a large unselected patient population. BACKGROUND: The bio-engineered COMBO stent (OrbusNeich Medical BV, The Netherlands) is a dual-therapy pro-healing stent. Data of long-term safety and efficacy of the this stent is lacking. METHODS: The prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated REMEDEE Registry evaluated clinical outcomes after COMBO stent implantation in daily clinical practice. One thousand patients were enrolled between June 2013 and March 2014. RESULTS: Five-year follow-up data were obtained in 97.2% of patients. At 5-years, target lesion failure (TLF) (composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) was present in 145 patients (14.8%). Definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 0.9%, with no additional case beyond 3-years of follow-up. In males, 5-year TLF-rate was 15.6 versus 12.6% in females (p = .22). Patients without diabetes mellitus (DM) had TLF-rate of 11.4%, noninsulin-treated DM 22.7% (p = .001) and insulin-treated DM 41.2% (p < .001). Patients presenting with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) had higher incidence of TLF compared to non-ACS (20.4 vs. 13.3%; p = .008), while incidence with STE-ACS was comparable to non-ACS (10.7 vs. 13.3%; p = .43). CONCLUSION: Percutaneous coronary intervention with the dual-therapy COMBO stent in unselected patient population shows low rates of TLF and ST to 5 years. Remarkably, no case of ST was noted beyond 3 years.

Sex differences in 1-year clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with COMBO stents: From the COMBO collaboration.

BACKGROUND: The COMBO drug eluting stent is a novel device with luminal endothelial progenitor cell capture technology for rapid homogeneous endothelialization. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined for sex differences in 1-year outcomes after COMBO stenting from the COMBO collaboration, a pooled patient-level dataset from the MASCOT and REMEDEE multicenter registries. The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). Adjusted outcomes were assessed using Cox regression methods. The study included 861 (23.8%) women and 2,753 (76.2%) men. Women were older with higher prevalence of several comorbidities including diabetes mellitus. Risk of 1-year TLF was similar in both sexes (3.8% vs. 3.9%, HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.59-1.42, p = .70), without sex differences in the incidence of cardiac death (1.6% vs. 1.5%, p = .78), TV-MI (1.5% vs. 1.1%, p = .32), or CD-TLR (2.0% vs. 2.2%, p = .67). Definite or probable ST occurred in 0.4% women and 1.0% men (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.06-1.11, p = .069). CONCLUSIONS: Despite greater clinical risks at baseline, women treated with COMBO stents had similarly low 1-year TLF and other ischemic outcomes compared to men.

One-Year COMBO Stent Outcomes in Acute Coronary Syndrome: from the COMBO Collaboration.

PURPOSE: The COMBO biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent includes endothelial progenitor cell capture (EPC) technology for rapid endothelialization, which may offer advantage in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We sought to analyze the performance of the COMBO stent by ACS status and ACS subtype. METHODS: The COMBO collaboration (n = 3614) is a patient-level pooled dataset from the MASCOT and REMEDEE registries. We evaluated outcomes by ACS status, and ACS subtype in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) versus unstable angina (UA). The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: We compared 1965 (54%) ACS and 1649 (46.0%) non-ACS patients. ACS presentations included 40% (n = 789) STEMI, 31% (n = 600) NSTEMI, and 29% (n = 576) UA patients. Risk of 1-year TLF was greater in ACS patients (4.5% vs. 3.3%, HR 1.51 95% CI 1.01-2.25, p = 0.045) without significant differences in definite/probable ST (1.1% vs 0.5%, HR 2.40, 95% CI 0.91-6.31, p = 0.08). One-year TLF was similar in STEMI, NSTEMI, and UA (4.8% vs 4.8% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.60), but definite/probable ST was higher in STEMI patients (1.9% vs 0.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.03). Adjusted outcomes were not different in MI versus UA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the novel EPC capture technology, COMBO stent PCI was associated with somewhat greater risk of 1-year TLF in ACS than in non-ACS patients, without significant differences in stent thrombosis. No differences were observed in 1-year TLF among ACS subtypes.

Magnesium-Based Resorbable Scaffold Versus Permanent Metallic Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The MAGSTEMI Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The use of poly-l-lactide acid-based bioresorbable scaffolds is limited in daily clinical practice because of safety concerns and lack of physiological benefit. Magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold (MgBRS) presents a short resorption period (<1 year) and have the potential of being thromboresistant and exhibiting early restoration of vasomotor function. To date, however, no randomized clinical trial has investigated the performance of MgBRS. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the in-stent/scaffold vasomotion between MgBRS and permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) at 12-month follow-up in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients. METHODS: This investigator-driven, multicenter, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial randomized ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients 1:1 to SES or MgBRS at 11 academic centers. The primary end point was the rate of increase (≥3%) after nitroglycerin in mean lumen diameter of the in-stent/scaffold segment at 12 months with superiority of MgBRS over SES in the as-treated population. The main secondary end points included angiographic parameters of restenosis, device-oriented composite end point, their individual components, and device thrombosis rate. Besides, endothelial-dependent vasomotor response to acetylcholine (ie, endothelial function) was also assessed in a subgroup of patients (n=69). RESULTS: Between June 2017 and June 2018, 150 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were randomized (MgBRS, n=74; SES, n=76). At 1 year, the primary end point was significantly higher in the MgBRS arm (56.5% versus 33.8%; P=0.010). Conversely, late lumen loss was significantly lower in the SES group (in-segment: 0.39±0.49mm versus 0.02±0.27mm, P<0.001; in-device: 0.61±0.55mm versus 0.06±0.21mm; P<0.001). The device-oriented composite end point was higher in the MgBRS arm driven by an increase in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate (12[16.2%] versus 4[5.2%], P=0.030). Definite thrombosis rate was similar between groups (1[1.4%] in the MgBRS arm versus 2[2.6%] in the SES group; P=1.0). Endothelial function assessment at device segment evidenced a more pronounced vasoconstrictive response to maximal dose of acetylcholine in the MgBRS arm (-8.3±3.5% versus -2.4±1.3% in the SES group, P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: When compared to SES, MgBRS demonstrated a higher capacity of vasomotor response to pharmacological agents (either endothelium-independent or endothelium-dependent) at 1 year. However, MgBRS was associated with a lower angiographic efficacy, a higher rate of target lesion revascularization, without thrombotic safety concerns. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03234348.

Safety and efficacy of a sirolimus-eluting coronary stent with ultra-thin strut for treatment of atherosclerotic lesions (TALENT): a prospective multicentre randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Supraflex is a sirolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer coating and ultra-thin struts. We aimed to compare Supraflex with the standard of care, Xience, an everolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer coating, regarding clinical outcomes with a randomised trial in an all-comer population. METHODS: We did a prospective, randomised, single-blind, multicentre study (TALENT) across 23 centres in Europe (the Netherlands, Poland, the UK, Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Italy). Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had one or more coronary artery stenosis of 50% or greater in a native coronary artery, saphenous venous graft, or arterial bypass conduit, and had a reference vessel diameter of 2·25-4·50 mm. Patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in an all-comer manner. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to implantation of either a sirolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer coating and ultra-thin struts (Supraflex) or an everolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer coating (Xience). Randomisation was done by local investigators by use of a web-based software with random blocks according to centre. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of a device-oriented composite endpoint-cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation-between groups at 12 months after the procedure, assessed in an intention-to-treat population. On assumption of 1-year composite endpoint prevalence of 8·3%, a margin of 4·0% was defined for non-inferiority of the Supraflex group compared with the Xience group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02870140. FINDINGS: Between Oct 21, 2016, and July 3, 2017, 1435 patients with 1046 lesions were randomly assigned to Supraflex, of whom 720 received the index procedure, and 715 patients with 1030 lesions were assigned to Xience, all receiving the index procedure. At 12 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in 35 patients (4·9 %) in the Supraflex group and in 37 patients (5·3%) in the Xience group (absolute difference -0·3% [one-sided 95% upper confidence bound 1·6%], pnon-inferiority<0·0001). Definite or probable stent thrombosis prevalence, a safety indicator, was low in both groups and did not differ between them. INTERPRETATION: The Supraflex stent was non-inferior to the Xience stent for a device-oriented composite clinical endpoint at 12 months in an all-comer population. Supraflex seems a safe and effective alternative drug-eluting stent to other stents in clinical practice. FUNDING: European Cardiovascular Research Institute.

Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease patients treated either with bioresoarbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent: 5-year results of the CENTURY II randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of a sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer (BP-SES; Ultimaster), in comparison to a benchmark everolimus-eluting, permanent polymer stent (PP-EES; Xience), in a prespecified subgroup of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) enrolled in the CENTURY II trial. BACKGROUND: The use of coronary stenting in high-risk subgroups, like MVD patients, is rising. The clinical evidence, including long-term comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety benefits of different new-generation drug eluting stents, however, remains insufficient. METHODS: Among 1,119 patients (intention-to-treat) enrolled in the CENTURY II prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter trial, a prespecified subgroup of 456 MVD patients were allocated by stratified randomization to treatment with BP-SES (n = 225) or PP-EES (n = 231). The previously reported primary endpoint of this study was freedom from target lesion failure (TLF: a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction [MI] and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization) at 9 months. RESULTS: In this MVD substudy, baseline patient, lesion and procedure characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. At 1 and 5 years, both BP-SES and PP-EES displayed low and comparable rates of TLF (5.3 vs. 7.8%; p = .29 and 10.2 vs. 13.4%; p = .29), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.4 vs. 1.3%; p = .33 and 0.9 vs. 1.7%; p = .43), respectively. Composite endpoint of cardiac death and MI, and patient-oriented composite endpoint of any death, MI, and coronary revascularizations were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm good long-term safety and efficacy of the studied bioresorbable polymer stent in this high-risk patient population.

Design and rationale of the Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Standard DAPT Regimen (MASTER DAPT) Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in high-bleeding risk (HBR) patients with coronary artery disease treated with newer-generation drug-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stents remains unclear. DESIGN: MASTER DAPT (clinicaltrial.govNCT03023020) is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing an abbreviated versus a standard duration of antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable polymer-coated Ultimaster (TANSEI) sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in approximately 4,300 HBR patients recruited from ≥100 interventional cardiology centers globally. After a mandatory 30-day dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) run-in phase, patients are randomized to (a) a single antiplatelet regimen until study completion or up to 5 months in patients with clinically indicated oral anticoagulation (experimental 1-month DAPT group) or (b) continue DAPT for at least 5 months in patients without or 2 in patients with concomitant indication to oral anticoagulation, followed by a single antiplatelet regimen (standard antiplatelet regimen). With a final sample size of 4,300 patients, this study is powered to assess the noninferiority of the abbreviated antiplatelet regimen with respect to the net adverse clinical and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events composite end points and if satisfied for the superiority of abbreviated as compared to standard antiplatelet therapy duration in terms of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Study end points will be adjudicated by a blinded Clinical Events Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The MASTER DAPT study is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at ascertaining the optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients treated with sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stent implantation.

MAGnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold and vasomotor function in patients with acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: The MAGSTEMI trial: Rationale and design.

AIM: Use of a Bioresorbable Scaffolds (BRS) either in clinical practice or in the setting of an acute myocardial infarction (MI) is controversial. Despite an overall high rate of thrombosis, vascular healing response following BRS implantation tend to superiority as compared to metallic drug-eluting stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. We sought to compare the in-stent/scaffold vasomotion between metallic BRS and sirolimus eluting stent (SES) at 12-month angiographic follow-up in the setting of patients with STEMI treated by primary PCI. STUDY DESIGN: This is an investigator-driven, prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind, two-arm, controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03234348). This trial will randomize ~148 patients 1:1 to SES or BRS. Primary end-point is the in-stent/scaffold change in mean lumen diameter after nitroglycerin administration at 12-month angiographic follow-up. Besides, patient-oriented combined endpoint of all-cause death, any MI, and any revascularization, together with scaffold/stent thrombosis rate and device-oriented endpoint of cardiac death, target vessel (TV)-MI and TVR at 1 year will be also evaluated. Clinical follow-up will be scheduled yearly up to 5 years. CONCLUSION: This trial will shed light on the vascular vasomotion following BRS implantation in the complex scenario of STEMI.

Long-term impact of diabetes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Insights from the EXAMINATION randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of diabetic patients suffering from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent have been scarcely evaluated. The aim of this posthoc subanalysis of the EXAMINATION trial was to compare 5-year outcomes according to the presence of diabetes mellitus. METHODS: From a total of 1,497 patients included in the trial, 258 were diabetics (n = 137, received everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and n = 121 bare-metal stent (BMS); whereas 1,239 were nondiabetics (n = 613 treated with EES and n = 626 with BMS). Patient-oriented combined endpoint (POCE) defined as all-cause death, any MI or any revascularization, and other clinical parameters were collected up to 5-years. All results were adjusted for various potential confounders. RESULTS: At 5-years, patients with diabetes showed similar rates of POCE between diabetics treated with EES and those treated with BMS (32.8% vs. 32.2%; p = 0.88). However, rates of TLR were significantly lower in the EES group (4.4% vs. 9.9%; HR 0.52 (0.29-0.94); P = 0.03). In non-diabetics, the use of EES was associated with a significant improvement in all-clinical parameters except for MI rate: POCE: [10.0% vs. 12.6%; HR 0.78(0.62-0.98); P = 0.038], all cause death: [7.0% vs. 12.1%; HR 0.62(0.42-0.90); P = 0.014], and [TLR: 4.2 vs. 6.7; HR 0.60 (0.37-0.98); P = 0.04]. Overall, diabetics showed higher rate of POCE at 5-years (32.6% vs. 21.5% in nondiabetics HR1.45[1.03-2.04];p = 0.03) driven by increased rates of MI and the need for revascularization that occurred in coronary segments remote from target lesions [2.7% vs. 1.1%; HR: 2.27 (1.12-5.23); P = 0.02 and 14% vs. 6.2%; HR: 2.11 (1.38-3.22); P = 0.001, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetics had worse clinical outcomes than nondiabetics after STEMI mainly due to atherosclerosis progression. At 5-years, the treatment with EES did not reduce the rate of POCE in diabetics but reduced the need for revascularization compared with BMS.

Three-year clinical outcomes after dual-therapy COMBO stent placement: Insights from the REMEDEE registry.

BACKGROUND: The bio-engineered COMBO stent (OrbusNeich Medical BV, The Netherlands) is a dual-therapy pro-healing stent. This novel technology may allow a shorter duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stenting. We present the first 3 year clinical outcomes of patients treated with COMBO stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: The prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated, all-comers REMEDEE Registry evaluates clinical outcomes after COMBO stent treatment. A 1,000 patients were enrolled between June 2013 and March 2014. Patients had a mean of 65 years ±11, 26% of the patients were females and 18% diabetics. More than 50% of patients presented with acute coronary syndrome, 60% of treated lesions were AHA/ACC lesion type B2 or C. Target lesion failure (TLF) at 3 year follow-up occurred in 10.7% of patients (N = 105). The separate components cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization occurred in 4.1%, 2.0%, and 7.1%, respectively of patients. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) was observed in 0.7% of all patients. At 3-year follow-up there were only 73 patients taking DAPT. CONCLUSIONS: At 3-year follow-up, patients treated with COMBO stent in the present large prospective all-comers cohort, continue to show good clinical outcomes. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01874002. CONDENSED ABSTRACT: The COMBO stent is a sirolimus-eluting stent with a luminal anti-CD34-antibody layer, that binds endothelial progenitor cells. These cells can differentiate to endothelial cells and stimulate early endothelialization of the stent. The REMEDEE Registry is the first large, multicenter, prospective, cohort study evaluating the clinical outcomes of 1,000 all-comers patients treated with COMBO stent. Target lesion failure at 3 year follow-up was 10.7% and the rate of definite ST was 0.7%.

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.

Polymer-free Drug-Coated Coronary Stents in Patients at High Bleeding Risk.

BACKGROUND: Patients at high risk for bleeding who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) often receive bare-metal stents followed by 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. We studied a polymer-free and carrier-free drug-coated stent that transfers umirolimus (also known as biolimus A9), a highly lipophilic sirolimus analogue, into the vessel wall over a period of 1 month. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind trial, we compared the drug-coated stent with a very similar bare-metal stent in patients with a high risk of bleeding who underwent PCI. All patients received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. The primary safety end point, tested for both noninferiority and superiority, was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. The primary efficacy end point was clinically driven target-lesion revascularization. RESULTS: We enrolled 2466 patients. At 390 days, the primary safety end point had occurred in 112 patients (9.4%) in the drug-coated-stent group and in 154 patients (12.9%) in the bare-metal-stent group (risk difference, -3.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.1 to -1.0; hazard ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.91; P<0.001 for noninferiority and P=0.005 for superiority). During the same time period, clinically driven target-lesion revascularization was needed in 59 patients (5.1%) in the drug-coated-stent group and in 113 patients (9.8%) in the bare-metal-stent group (risk difference, -4.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -6.9 to -2.6; hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.69; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients at high risk for bleeding who underwent PCI, a polymer-free umirolimus-coated stent was superior to a bare-metal stent with respect to the primary safety and efficacy end points when used with a 1-month course of dual antiplatelet therapy. (Funded by Biosensors Europe; LEADERS FREE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01623180.).

Clinical outcomes of state-of-the-art percutaneous coronary revascularization in patients with de novo three vessel disease: 1-year results of the SYNTAX II study.

Aims: To investigate if recent technical and procedural developments in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) significantly influence outcomes in appropriately selected patients with three-vessel (3VD) coronary artery disease. Methods and results: The SYNTAX II study is a multicenter, all-comers, open-label, single arm study that investigated the impact of a contemporary PCI strategy on clinical outcomes in patients with 3VD in 22 centres from four European countries. The SYNTAX-II strategy includes: heart team decision-making utilizing the SYNTAX Score II (a clinical tool combining anatomical and clinical factors), coronary physiology guided revascularisation, implantation of thin strut bioresorbable-polymer drug-eluting stents, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guided stent implantation, contemporary chronic total occlusion revascularisation techniques and guideline-directed medical therapy. The rate of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE [composite of all-cause death, cerebrovascular event, any myocardial infarction and any revascularisation]) at one year was compared to a predefined PCI cohort from the original SYNTAX-I trial selected on the basis of equipoise 4-year mortality between CABG and PCI. As an exploratory endpoint, comparisons were made with the historical CABG cohort of the original SYNTAX-I trial. Overall 708 patients were screened and discussed within the heart team; 454 patients were deemed appropriate to undergo PCI. At one year, the SYNTAX-II strategy was superior to the equipoise-derived SYNTAX-I PCI cohort (MACCE SYNTAX-II 10.6% vs. SYNTAX-I 17.4%; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.85, P = 0.006). This difference was driven by a significant reduction in the incidence of MI (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.11-0.70, P = 0.007) and revascularisation (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.37-0.9, P = 0.015). Rates of all-cause death (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27-1.73, P = 0.43) and stroke (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.10-4.89, P = 0.71) were similar. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was significantly lower in SYNTAX-II (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.07-0.97, P = 0.045). Conclusion: At one year, clinical outcomes with the SYNTAX-II strategy were associated with improved clinical results compared to the PCI performed in comparable patients from the original SYNTAX-I trial. Longer term follow-up is awaited and a randomized clinical trial with contemporary CABG is warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02015832.