RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) may have worse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention compared to patients without ACS. AIMS: To compare 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with and without ACS treated with biodegradable polymers, the ultrathin strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) or the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES). METHODS: The Scandinavian Organisation for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome VII is a randomized trial comparing O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer setting. Of 2525 patients, 1329 (53%) patients had ACS and 1196 (47%) patients were without ACS. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF) (a composite of cardiac death, target lesion myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) and definite stent thrombosis within 5 years. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, TLF did not differ significantly between patients with and without ACS (12.3% vs. 13.2%; rate ratio (RR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.44), whereas the risk of definite stent thrombosis was increased in patients with ACS (2.3% vs. 1.3; RR: 2.01 [95% CI: 1.01-3.98]). In patients with ACS, the rate of TLF was similar between O-SES and N-BES (12.4% vs. 12.3%; RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.74-1.40). The reduced risk of definite stent thrombosis in O-SES treated ACS patients within the first year (0.2% vs. 1.6%; RR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.02-0.93) was not maintained after 5 years (1.8% vs. 2.7%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.37-1.63). CONCLUSION: Patients with ACS had an increased risk of stent thrombosis regardless of the stent type used. Long-term outcomes were similar for ACS patients treated with O-SES or N-BES at 5 years.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Ácidos Alcanesulfónicos , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Trombosis Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/complicaciones , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Implantes Absorbibles , Diseño de Prótesis , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Trombosis Coronaria/etiología , Stents/efectos adversos , Polímeros , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of the dual-therapy CD34 antibody-covered sirolimus-eluting Combo stent (DTS) and the sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) in patients with and without acute coronary syndrome (ACS) included in the SORT OUT X study. BACKGROUND: The incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) after treatment with modern drug-eluting stents has been reported to be significantly higher in patients with ACS when compared to patients without ACS. Whether the results from the SORT OUT X study apply to patients with and without ACS remains unknown. METHODS: In total, 3146 patients were randomized to stent implantation with DTS (n = 1578; ACS: n = 856) or O-SES (n = 1568; ACS: n = 854). The primary end point, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 1 year. RESULTS: At 1 year, the rate of TLF was higher in the DTS group compared to the O-SES group, both among patients with ACS (6.7% vs. 4.1%; incidence rate ratio: 1.65 [95% confidence interval, CI: 1.08-2.52]) and without ACS (6.0% vs. 3.2%; incidence rate ratio: 1.88 [95% CI: 1.13-3.14]). The differences were mainly explained by higher rates of TLR, whereas rates of cardiac death and target lesion MI did not differ significantly between the two stent groups in patients with or without ACS CONCLUSION: Compared to the O-SES, the DTS was associated with a higher risk of TLF at 12 months in patients with and without ACS. The differences were mainly explained by higher rates of TLR.
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo , Fármacos Cardiovasculares , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/complicaciones , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Implantes Absorbibles , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Diseño de Prótesis , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Target lesion failure remains an issue with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Thus, the dual-therapy sirolimus-eluting and CD34+ antibody-coated Combo stent (DTS) was designed to further improve early healing. This study aimed to investigate whether the DTS is noninferior to the sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (SES) in an all-comers patient population. METHODS: The SORT OUT X (Combo Stent Versus Orsiro Stent) trial, was a large-scale, randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial with registry-based follow-up. The primary end point target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization within 12 months, analyzed using intention-to-treat. The trial was powered for assessing target lesion failure noninferiority of the DTS compared with the SES with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 0.021. RESULTS: A total of 3146 patients were randomized to treatment with the DTS (1578 patients; 2008 lesions) or SES (1568 patients; 1982 lesions). At 12 months, intention-to-treat analysis showed that 100 patients (6.3%) assigned the DTS and 58 patients (3.7%) assigned the SES met the primary end point (absolute risk difference, 2.6% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI, 4.1%]; P (noninferiority)=0.76). The SES was superior to the DTS (incidence rate ratios for target lesion failure, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.26-2.41]; P=0.00086). The difference was explained mainly by a higher incidence of target lesion revascularization in the DTS group compared with the SES group (53 [3.4%] vs. 24 [1.5%]; incidence rate ratio, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.37-3.61]; P=0.0012). CONCLUSIONS: The DTS did not confirm noninferiority to the SES for target lesion failure at 12 months in an all-comer population. The SES was superior to the DTS mainly because the DTS was associated with an increased risk of target lesion revascularization. However, rates of death, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction at 12 months did not differ significantly between the 2 stent groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03216733.
Asunto(s)
Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Antígenos CD34/metabolismo , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/normas , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Sirolimus/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Antibacterianos/farmacología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Sirolimus/farmacología , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
This sub-study of the SORT OUT IX trial sought to compare clinical outcomes between patients with diabetes randomized to implantation of either the polymer-free biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom stent (BF-BES) or the ultra-thin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES). Patients with diabetes have an increased risk of target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The impact of different stent types in patients with diabetes is still discussed. A total of 607 of the 3151 patients (19.3%) enrolled in the SORT OUT IX study had diabetes. Randomization was stratified by patients with/without diabetes; 304 received BF-BES and 303 O-SES. The primary endpoint was TLF, which was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than the index lesion) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 1 year. After 1 year, patients with diabetes had higher TLF (7.2% vs. 3.7%, incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.50), than patients without diabetes. TLF did not differ significantly between BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes (8.2% vs. 6.3%, IRR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.63-2.20). In patients with diabetes, cardiac death occurred in 2.3% of BF-BES and in 3.6% of O-SES (IRR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.23-1.45) and TLR occurred in 5.3% and 2.3% of BF-BES and O-SES, respectively (IRR: 2.12; 95% CI: 0.81-5.56). Definite stent thrombosis rates of 1.3% were found in both stent types. Patients with diabetes had higher 1-year TLF rate after PCI compared to patients without diabetes, whereas TLF did not differ significantly between the two stent types BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Implantes Absorbibles , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/etiología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Muerte , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Humanos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Polímeros , Diseño de Prótesis , Stents , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of the dual therapy CD34 antibody-covered sirolimus-eluting Combo stent (DTS) and the sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (SES) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) included in the Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) X study. BACKGROUND: The incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) after treatment with modern drug-eluting stents has been reported to be significantly higher in patients with DM when compared to patients without DM. Thus, whether the results from the SORT OUT X study apply to patients with and without DM remains unknown. METHODS: In total 3146 patients were randomized to stent implantation with DTS (n = 1578; DM: n = 279) or SES (n = 1568; DM: n = 271). The primary end point, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 1 year. RESULTS: At 1 year, the rate of TLF was increased in the DTS group compared to the SES group, both among patients with DM (9.3% vs. 4.8%; risk difference: 4.5%; incidence rate ratio: 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.02-3.90) and without DM (5.7% vs. 3.5%; incidence rate ratio: 1.67, 95% CI: 1.15-2.42). The differences were mainly explained by higher rates of TLR. CONCLUSION: Compared to the SES, the DTS was associated with an increased risk of TLF at 12 months in patients with and without DM. The differences were mainly explained by higher rates of TLR, whereas rates of cardiac death and target lesion MI did not differ significantly between the two stent groups in patients with or without DM.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Diabetes Mellitus , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Implantes Absorbibles , Antígenos CD34/inmunología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/tratamiento farmacológico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Muerte , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Humanos , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Diseño de Prótesis , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Stents , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
AIMS: The aim of this study was to determine the contemporary use of reperfusion therapy in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) member and affiliated countries and adherence to ESC clinical practice guidelines in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective cohort (EURObservational Research Programme STEMI Registry) of hospitalized STEMI patients with symptom onset <24 h in 196 centres across 29 countries. A total of 11 462 patients were enrolled, for whom primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (total cohort frequency: 72.2%, country frequency range 0-100%), fibrinolysis (18.8%; 0-100%), and no reperfusion therapy (9.0%; 0-75%) were performed. Corresponding in-hospital mortality rates from any cause were 3.1%, 4.4%, and 14.1% and overall mortality was 4.4% (country range 2.5-5.9%). Achievement of quality indicators for reperfusion was reported for 92.7% (region range 84.8-97.5%) for the performance of reperfusion therapy of all patients with STEMI <12 h and 54.4% (region range 37.1-70.1%) for timely reperfusion. CONCLUSIONS: The use of reperfusion therapy for STEMI in the ESC member and affiliated countries was high. Primary PCI was the most frequently used treatment and associated total in-hospital mortality was below 5%. However, there was geographic variation in the use of primary PCI, which was associated with differences in in-hospital mortality.
Asunto(s)
Cardiología , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST , Europa (Continente)/epidemiología , Hospitales , Humanos , Reperfusión Miocárdica , Estudios Prospectivos , Sistema de Registros , Infarto del Miocardio con Elevación del ST/terapia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with increased bleeding risk, the biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom stent, a stainless steel drug-coated stent free from polymer, has shown superiority compared with a bare-metal stent. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the BioFreedom stent is noninferior to a modern ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers patient population treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: The SORT OUT IX trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IX), was a large-scale, registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial. The primary end point, major adverse cardiovascular events, was defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction not related to any segment other than the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year, analyzed by intention-to-treat. The trial was powered to assess noninferiority for major adverse cardiovascular events of the BioFreedom stent compared with the Orsiro stent with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 0.021. RESULTS: Between December 14, 2015 and April 21, 2017, 3151 patients were assigned to treatment with the BioFreedom stent (1572 patients, 1966 lesions) or to the Orsiro stent (1579 patients, 1985 lesions). Five patients were lost to follow-up because of emigration (99.9% follow-up rate). Mean age was 66.3±10.9, diabetes mellitus was seen in 19.3% of patients, and 53% of the patients had acute coronary syndromes. At 1 year, intention-to-treat analysis showed that 79 (5.0%) patients, who were assigned the BioFreedom stent, and 59 (3.7%), who were assigned the Orsiro stent, met the primary end point (absolute risk difference 1.29% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2.50%]; Pnoninferiority=0.14). Significantly more patients in the BioFreedom stent group had target lesion revascularization than those in the Orsiro stent group (55 [3.5%] vs 20 [1.3%], rate ratio 2.77 [95% CI, 1.66-4.62]; P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom polymer-free stent did not meet criteria for noninferiority for major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months when compared with the ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers population Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02623140.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Antiinflamatorios , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Polímeros , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Anciano , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/etiología , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: It was recently shown that new-onset diabetes patients without previous cardiovascular disease have experienced a markedly reduced risk of adverse cardiovascular events from 1996 to 2011. However, it remains unknown if similar improvements are present following the diagnosis of chronic coronary syndrome. The purpose of this study was to examine the change in cardiovascular risk among diabetes patients with chronic coronary syndrome from 2004 to 2016. METHODS: We included patients with documentation of coronary artery disease by coronary angiography between 2004 and 2016 in Western Denmark. Patients were stratified by year of index coronary angiography (2004-2006, 2007-2009, 2010-2012, and 2013-2016) and followed for two years. The main outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) defined as myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or death. Analyses were performed separately in patients with and without diabetes. We estimated two-year risk of each outcome and adjusted incidence rate ratios (aIRR) using patients examined in 2004-2006 as reference. RESULTS: Among 5931 patients with diabetes, two-year MACE risks were 8.4% in 2004-2006, 8.5% in 2007-2009, and then decreased to 6.2% in 2010-2012 and 6.7% in 2013-2016 (2013-2016 vs 2004-2006: aIRR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53-0.93). In comparison, 23,540 patients without diabetes had event rates of 6.3%, 5.2%, 4.2%, and 3.9% for the study intervals (2013-2016 vs 2004-2006: aIRR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48-0.68). CONCLUSIONS: Between 2004 and 2016, the two-year relative risk of MACE decreased by 30% in patients with diabetes and chronic coronary syndrome, but slightly larger absolute and relative reductions were observed in patients without diabetes.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiología , Anciano , Enfermedad Crónica , Angiografía Coronaria , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Dinamarca/epidemiología , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/terapia , Femenino , Factores de Riesgo de Enfermedad Cardiaca , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Sistema de Registros , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In patients with increased bleeding risk during dual antiplatelet therapy, the biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom, a stainless steel drug-coated stent devoid of polymer, has shown superiority compared to a bare-metal stent. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the polymer-free biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom is noninferior to a modern thin-strut biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers patient population treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: The multicenter SORT OUT IX trial (NCT02623140) randomly assigned all-comers patients to treatment with the BioFreedom drug-coated stent or the biodegradable polymer Orsiro stent in 4 Danish University Hospitals. The primary end point target lesion failure is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 12â¯months. Clinically driven event detection based on Danish registries will be used and continue through 5 years. Assuming an event rate of 4.2% in each stent group, 1,563 patients in each treatment arm will provide 90% power to detect noninferiority of the drug-coated BioFreedom stent with a noninferiority margin of 2.1%. RESULTS: A total of 3,150 patients have been randomized and enrolled in the study. CONCLUSIONS: The SORT OUT IX trial will determine whether the drug-coated BioFreedom stent is noninferior to a modern biodegradable polymer Orsiro stent.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Estenosis Coronaria/terapia , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Inmunosupresores/administración & dosificación , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Causas de Muerte , Aleaciones de Cromo , Estenosis Coronaria/mortalidad , Estenosis Coronaria/patología , Dinamarca , Diseño de Equipo , Humanos , Infarto del Miocardio , Polímeros/efectos adversos , Polímeros/metabolismo , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: In this substudy of the SORT OUT VII trial, the clinical outcomes among patient with diabetes mellitus treated with Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES; Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) or Nobori biolimus-eluting stent (N-BES; Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) were compared. BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with increased risk of target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In total, 2525 patients were randomized to stent implantation with O-SES (n = 1261, diabetes: n = 236) or N-BES (n = 1264, diabetes: n = 235). The primary endpoint, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 2 years. RESULTS: At 2 year, TLF did not differ between O-SES vs N-BES in diabetic (9.3% vs 9.4%; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.54-1.78) patients. The individual components of the primary endpoint did not differ among stent type. In diabetics, cardiac death occurred in 3% of O-SES-treated and in 3.8% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.29-2.08), MI occurred in 3.0% of O-SES-treated and in 3.8% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.28-2.06) and TLR occurred in 5,5% of O-SES-treated and in 6.0% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.43-1.95). CONCLUSION: TLF did not differ between O-SES- and N-BES-treated diabetic patients.
Asunto(s)
Implantes Absorbibles , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administración & dosificación , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/instrumentación , Polímeros , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/diagnóstico por imagen , Síndrome Coronario Agudo/mortalidad , Anciano , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus/mortalidad , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/mortalidad , Diseño de Prótesis , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The Combo stent (OrbusNeich, Hoevelaken, the Netherlands) combining an abluminal, bioabsorbable polymer eluting sirolimus with a luminal CD34+ antibody to capture endothelial progenitor cells has been developed to further improve safety and efficacy of coronary interventions. We have designed a large-scale registry-based randomized clinical trial to compare the Combo stent to the Orsiro stent (Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: The SORT OUT X study will randomly assign 3,140 patients to treatment with Combo or Orsiro stents at 3 sites in Western Denmark. Patients are eligible if they are ≥18 years old, have chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and have ≥1 coronary lesion with >50% diameter stenosis requiring treatment with a drug-eluting stent. The primary end point target lesion failure is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Clinically driven event detection will be derived from validated Danish registries. An event rate of 4.2% is assumed in each stent group. With a sample size of 1,570 patients in each treatment arm, a 2-group large-sample normal approximation test of proportions with a 1-sided 5% significance level will have 90% power to detect noninferiority of the Combo stent compared with the Orsiro stent with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 2.1%. CONCLUSION: The SORT OUT X trial will determine whether the dual-therapy Combo stent is noninferior to the Orsiro stent with respect to clinically driven events (ClinicalTrials.govNCT03216733).
Asunto(s)
Síndrome Coronario Agudo/terapia , Antígenos CD34/inmunología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anticuerpos , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Diseño de Prótesis , Sistema de Registros , Proyectos de Investigación , Método Simple CiegoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite successful treatment of the culprit artery lesion by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation, thrombotic embolisation occurs in some cases, which impairs the prognosis of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of deferred stent implantation versus standard PCI in patients with STEMI. METHODS: We did this open-label, randomised controlled trial at four primary PCI centres in Denmark. Eligible patients (aged >18 years) had acute onset symptoms lasting 12 h or less, and ST-segment elevation of 0·1 mV or more in at least two or more contiguous electrocardiographic leads or newly developed left bundle branch block. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), via an electronic web-based system with permuted block sizes of two to six, to receive either standard primary PCI with immediate stent implantation or deferred stent implantation 48 h after the index procedure if a stabilised flow could be obtained in the infarct-related artery. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, hospital admission for heart failure, recurrent infarction, and any unplanned revascularisation of the target vessel within 2 years' follow-up. Patients, investigators, and treating clinicians were not masked to treatment allocation. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01435408. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2011, and Feb 28, 2014, we randomly assigned 1215 patients to receive either standard PCI (n=612) or deferred stent implantation (n=603). Median follow-up time was 42 months (IQR 33-49). Events comprising the primary endpoint occurred in 109 (18%) patients who had standard PCI and in 105 (17%) patients who had deferred stent implantation (hazard ratio 0·99, 95% CI 0·76-1·29; p=0·92). Procedure-related myocardial infarction, bleeding requiring transfusion or surgery, contrast-induced nephopathy, or stroke occurred in 28 (5%) patients in the conventional PCI group versus 27 (4%) patients in the deferred stent implantation group, with no significant differences between groups. INTERPRETATION: In patients with STEMI, routine deferred stent implantation did not reduce the occurrence of death, heart failure, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularisation compared with conventional PCI. Results from ongoing randomised trials might shed further light on the concept of deferred stenting in this patient population. FUNDING: Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation, and Danish Council for Strategic Research.
Asunto(s)
Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Antagonistas Adrenérgicos beta/administración & dosificación , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Bloqueadores de los Canales de Calcio/administración & dosificación , Femenino , Humanos , Inhibidores de Hidroximetilglutaril-CoA Reductasas/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Inhibidores de Agregación Plaquetaria/administración & dosificaciónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with acute myocardial infarction are at increased risk of ischaemic stroke. Previous myocardial infarction is an important part of risk assessment for ischaemic stroke. However, there is a lack of information regarding the association between the severity and extent of coronary artery disease and long-term risk of ischaemic stroke. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort study of coronary angiographies performed in western Denmark from 1 January 2003 to 31 December 2012. Patients were stratified according to the number of vessels affected by obstructive coronary artery disease (lumen narrowing ≥50%) at the time of angiography: zero-, one-, two- or three-vessel disease and diffuse vessel disease. We followed patients for a maximum of 7 years. Endpoints were all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction and ischaemic stroke. Cumulative risks and crude and adjusted rate ratios were estimated. RESULTS: The study population included 78 195 patients. Of these, 32 061 (41·0%) had zero-vessel disease, 6205 (7·9%) had diffuse vessel disease, 20 202 (25·8%) had one-vessel disease, 10 675 (13·7%) had two-vessel disease, and 9038 (11·6%) had three-vessel disease. Median follow-up was 3·6 years (interquartile range 1·7-6·0 years). Increasing severity of obstructive coronary artery disease was associated with an increasing risk of all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and ischaemic stroke during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The presence and extent of coronary artery disease was associated with an incremental risk of not only death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, but also ischaemic stroke over a 7-year period.
Asunto(s)
Isquemia Encefálica/etiología , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/complicaciones , Accidente Cerebrovascular/etiología , Anciano , Isquemia Encefálica/mortalidad , Causas de Muerte , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/mortalidad , Muerte Súbita Cardíaca/epidemiología , Dinamarca/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/mortalidad , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Accidente Cerebrovascular/mortalidadRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To describe the clinical and procedural coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) treatment results in a Nordic PCI centre during the implementation of a CTO treatment program. DESIGN: In a retrospective registry study, we assessed; (1) indication for the procedure, (2) Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina pectoris score (CCS)/New York Heart Association (NYHA) heart failure score, (3) lesion complexity and (4) adverse events during hospital stay and three months following the index procedure. RESULTS: The study cohort included 503 patients (594 lesions). From 2010 to 2013 96% of procedures were performed with antegrade wire-escalation technique and 4% performed using retrograde techniques, from 2013-2016 the corresponding numbers were 83% and 17.0%. The procedural success rate was 69%, increasing from 64% before to 72% (p = .06) after routinely using the retrograde approach. No individual patient characteristic, lesion variable or score was strongly associated with procedural success or failure. There were 4% serious procedure related complications. In patients with PCI of a CTO lesion only, 87% were in CCS or NYHA functional class ≥2 before the index procedure vs. 22% at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of retrograde techniques tended to increase the procedural success rate. Clinical results after three months were acceptable, but the complication rate was higher than for non-CTO PCI. Individual patient and lesion characteristics had a low predictability for procedural success. Therefore, clinical symptoms, objective signs of myocardial ischemia and procedural risk should be focus points in coronary chronic total occlusion treatment strategies.
Asunto(s)
Oclusión Coronaria/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Anciano , Enfermedad Crónica , Oclusión Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Dinamarca , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Sistema de Registros , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel coronary disease have a worse prognosis compared with individuals with single-vessel disease. We aimed to study the clinical outcome of patients with STEMI treated with fractional flow reserve (FFR)-guided complete revascularisation versus treatment of the infarct-related artery only. METHODS: We undertook an open-label, randomised controlled trial at two university hospitals in Denmark. Patients presenting with STEMI who had one or more clinically significant coronary stenosis in addition to the lesion in the infarct-related artery were included. After successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the infarct-related artery, patients were randomly allocated (in a 1:1 ratio) either no further invasive treatment or complete FFR-guided revascularisation before discharge. Randomisation was done electronically via a web-based system in permuted blocks of varying size by the clinician who did the primary PCI. All patients received best medical treatment. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal reinfarction, and ischaemia-driven revascularization of lesions in non-infarct-related arteries and was assessed when the last enrolled patient had been followed up for 1 year. Analysis was on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01960933. FINDINGS: From March, 2011, to February, 2014, we enrolled 627 patients to the trial; 313 were allocated no further invasive treatment after primary PCI of the infarct-related artery only and 314 were assigned complete revascularization guided by FFR values. Median follow-up was 27 months (range 1244 months). Events comprising the primary endpoint were recorded in 68 (22%) patients who had PCI of the infarct-related artery only and in 40 (13%) patients who had complete revascularisation (hazard ratio 0â56, 95% CI 0â380â83; p=0â004). INTERPRETATION: In patients with STEMI and multivessel disease, complete revascularisation guided by FFR measurements significantly reduces the risk of future events compared with no further invasive intervention after primary PCI. This effect is driven by significantly fewer repeat revascularisations, because all-cause mortality and non-fatal reinfarction did not differ between groups. Thus, to avoid repeat revascularisation, patients can safely have all their lesions treated during the index admission. Future studies should clarify whether complete revascularization should be done acutely during the index procedure or at later time and whether it has an effect on hard endpoints. FUNDING: Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation and Danish Council for Strategic Research.
Asunto(s)
Infarto del Miocardio/cirugía , Revascularización Miocárdica/métodos , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estenosis Coronaria/fisiopatología , Estenosis Coronaria/cirugía , Femenino , Fibrinolíticos/uso terapéutico , Reserva del Flujo Fraccional Miocárdico/fisiología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Infarto del Miocardio/fisiopatología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Reoperación , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: New-generation drug-eluting coronary stents have reduced the risk of coronary events, especially in patients with complex disease or lesions. To what extent different stent platforms, polymers, and antiproliferative drugs affect outcomes, however, is unclear. We investigated the safety and efficacy of a third-generation stent by comparing a highly biocompatible durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent. METHODS: This open-label, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was done at three sites across western Denmark. All patients who presented with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes and at least one coronary artery lesion (more than 50% stenosis) from March, 2011, to August, 2012, were assessed for eligibility. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent or the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target lesion) and efficacy (target-lesion revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat. The trial was powered to assess non-inferiority of durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent compared with the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent with a predetermined non-inferiority margin of 0·025. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01956448. FINDINGS: Of 7103 screened, 1502 patients with 1883 lesions were assigned to receive the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1497 patients with 1791 lesions to receive the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. 79 (5·3%) and 75 (5·0%) patients, respectively, met the primary endpoint (absolute risk difference 0·0025, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 0·016%; p=0·004). The individual components of the primary endpoint did not differ significantly between stent types at 12 months. INTERPRETATION: The durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients. FUNDING: Medtronic Cardiovascular and Biosensors Interventional Technologies.
Asunto(s)
Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Inmunosupresores/administración & dosificación , Isquemia Miocárdica/terapia , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Sirolimus/análogos & derivados , Implantes Absorbibles , Anciano , Materiales Biocompatibles Revestidos , Dinamarca , Diseño de Equipo , Femenino , Humanos , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Isquemia Miocárdica/etiología , Isquemia Miocárdica/mortalidad , Polímeros , Sirolimus/administración & dosificación , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO) occur in up to 50 % of patients with coronary artery disease by angiography. In CTO-patients, clinically significant arrhythmia is potentially important and insufficiently investigated. Therefore, the purpose of the CTO-ARRHYTHMIA study was to investigate the incidence of loop recorder detected clinically significant arrhythmias and the effect on arrhythmias of revascularization by CTO-PCI. The study is an independent sub-study of the NOrdic-Baltic Randomized Registry Study for Evaluation of PCI in Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion (NOBLE-CTO); ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03392415. NOBLE-CTO prospectively collects procedural data, quality of life measures, echocardiographic and cardiac MRI findings before and after treatment as well as clinical outcomes in all CTO patients that may be treated by PCI.
Asunto(s)
Oclusión Coronaria , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Arritmias Cardíacas/diagnóstico , Arritmias Cardíacas/epidemiología , Arritmias Cardíacas/terapia , Enfermedad Crónica , Angiografía Coronaria , Oclusión Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Oclusión Coronaria/terapia , Oclusión Coronaria/epidemiología , Preparaciones Farmacéuticas , Calidad de Vida , Sistema de Registros , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents were developed to improve safety and efficacy outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, few long-term follow-up efficacy studies are available. The study sought to investigate 5-year results from the SORT OUT VII trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome) comparing the biodegradable polymer ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) versus the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES). METHODS: This registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, noninferiority trial compared O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer population. The composite primary end point, target lesion failure, consisted of cardiac death, myocardial infarction related to the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year. Follow-up was extended to 5 years. RESULTS: Five-year follow-up was completed for 2521 patients (99.8%). Five-year target lesion failure did not differ between O-SES (12.4%) and N-BES (13.1%; rate ratio [RR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.18]). Cardiac death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.67-1.34]), target myocardial infarction (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.76-1.71]), target lesion revascularization (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.67-1.21]), and definite stent thrombosis rates (RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.41-1.33]) did not differ significantly between the 2 stents. Within the first year, definite ST was significantly lower for O-SES (0.4%) compared to N-BES (1.2%; RR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12-0.92]), but no difference was from 1 through 5 years: O-SES 1.2% and N-BES 0.9% (RR, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.58-2.82]). CONCLUSIONS: Five years after treatment with biodegradable polymer stents, target lesion failure did not differ among O-SES and N-BES. Definite stent thrombosis was less often seen within the first year in the O-SES but the difference was not maintained after 5 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01879358.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria , Stents Liberadores de Fármacos , Infarto del Miocardio , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea , Humanos , Sirolimus/efectos adversos , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de la Arteria Coronaria/terapia , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Implantes Absorbibles , Infarto del Miocardio/etiología , Polímeros , Intervención Coronaria Percutánea/efectos adversos , Diseño de PrótesisRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Target lesion failure (TLF) remains an issue with contemporary drug-eluting stents. The dual-therapy sirolimus-eluting and CD34 antibody-coated COMBO stent (DTS) was designed to improve early healing. AIMS: We aimed to compare the 3-year outcomes of the DTS and the sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (SES) in all-comer patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: The SORT OUT X trial is a prospective multicentre randomised clinical trial with a registry-based follow-up comparing DTS and SES. The primary endpoint, TLF, is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularisation (TLR). RESULTS: A total of 3,146 patients were randomised to treatment with the DTS (1,578 patients) or the SES (1,568 patients). At 3 years, an intention-to-treat analysis showed that 155 patients (9.8%) who were assigned the DTS and 118 patients (7.5%) who were assigned the SES met the primary endpoint (incidence rate ratio for TLF=1.33, 95% confidence interval: 1.04-1.70; p=0.02). This difference was caused by a significantly higher TLF rate in the DTS group compared to the SES group within the first year, which was mainly explained by a higher incidence of TLR in the DTS group compared to the SES group. Of note, the TLF rates were almost identical from 1 year to 3 years in both stent groups. CONCLUSIONS: At 3 years, the SES was superior to the DTS, mainly because the DTS was associated with an increased risk of TLF within the first year but not from 1 to 3 years. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT03216733.
RESUMEN
AIMS: To use quality indicators to study the management of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in different regions. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective cohort study of STEMI within 24 h of symptom onset (11 462 patients, 196 centres, 26 European Society of Cardiology members, and 3 affiliated countries). The median delay between arrival at a percutaneous cardiovascular intervention (PCI) centre and primary PCI was 40 min (interquartile range 20-74) with 65.8% receiving PCI within guideline recommendation of 60 min. A third of patients (33.2%) required transfer from their initial hospital to one that could perform emergency PCI for whom only 27.2% were treated within the quality indicator recommendation of 120 min. Radial access was used in 56.6% of all primary PCI, but with large geographic variation, from 76.4 to 9.1%. Statins were prescribed at discharge to 98.7% of patients, with little geographic variation. Of patients with a history of heart failure or a documented left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%, 84.0% were discharged on an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker and 88.7% were discharged on beta-blockers. CONCLUSION: Care for STEMI shows wide geographic variation in the receipt of timely primary PCI, and is in contrast with the more uniform delivery of guideline-recommended pharmacotherapies at time of hospital discharge.