Factors associated with coronary angiography performed within 6 months of randomization to the conservative strategy in the ISCHEMIA Trial

BACKGROUND: ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) did not find an overall reduction in cardiovascular events with an initial invasive versus conservative management strategy in chronic coronary disease; however, there were conservative strategy participants who underwent invasive coronary angiography early postrandomization (within 6 months). Identifying factors associated with angiography in conservative strategy participants will inform clinical decision-making in patients with chronic coronary disease. METHODS: Factors independently associated with angiography performed within 6 months of randomization were identified using Fine and Gray proportional subdistribution hazard models, including demographics, region of randomization, medical history, risk factor control, symptoms, ischemia severity, coronary anatomy based on protocol-mandated coronary computed tomography angiography, and medication use. RESULTS: Among 2591 conservative strategy participants, angiography within 6 months of randomization occurred in 8.7% (4.7% for a suspected primary end point event, 1.6% for persistent symptoms, and 2.6% due to protocol nonadherence) and was associated with the following baseline characteristics: enrollment in Europe versus Asia (hazard ratio [HR], 1.81 [95% CI, 1.14­2.86]), daily and weekly versus no angina (HR, 5.97 [95% CI, 2.78­12.86] and 2.63 [95% CI, 1.51­4.58], respectively), poor to fair versus good to excellent health status (HR, 2.02 [95% CI, 1.23­3.32]) assessed with Seattle Angina Questionnaire, and new/more frequent angina prerandomization (HR, 1.80 [95% CI, 1.34­2.40]). Baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <70 mg/dL was associated with a lower risk of angiography (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.46­0.91) but not baseline ischemia severity nor the presence of multivessel or proximal left anterior descending artery stenosis >70% on coronary computed tomography angiography. CONCLUSIONS: Among ISCHEMIA participants randomized to the conservative strategy, angiography within 6 months of randomization was performed in <10% of patients. It was associated with frequent or increasing baseline angina and poor quality of life but not with objective markers of disease severity. Well-controlled baseline low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was associated with a reduced likelihood of angiography. These findings point to the importance of a comprehensive assessment of symptoms and a review of guideline-directed medical therapy goals when deciding the initial treatment strategy for chronic coronary disease.

Impact of complete revascularization in the IschemiaTrial

BACKGROUND: Anatomic complete revascularization (ACR) and functional complete revascularization (FCR) have been associated with reduced death and myocardial infarction (MI) in some prior studies. The impact of complete revascularization (CR) in patients undergoing an invasive (INV) compared with a conservative (CON) management strategy has not been reported. OBJECTIVES: Among patients with chronic coronary disease without prior coronary artery bypass grafting randomized to INV vs CON management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial, we examined the following: 1) the outcomes of ACR and FCR compared with incomplete revascularization; and 2) the potential impact of achieving CR in all INV patients compared with CON management. METHODS: ACR and FCR in the INV group were assessed at an independent core laboratory. Multivariable-adjusted outcomes of CR were examined in INV patients. Inverse probability weighted modeling was then performed to estimate the treatment effect had CR been achieved in all INV patients compared with CON management. RESULTS: ACR and FCR were achieved in 43.4% and 58.4% of 1,824 INV patients. ACR was associated with reduced 4-year rates of cardiovascular death or MI compared with incomplete revascularization. By inverse probability weighted modeling, ACR in all 2,296 INV patients compared with 2,498 CON patients was associated with a lower 4-year rate of cardiovascular death or MI (difference -3.5; 95% CI: -7.2% to 0.0%). In comparison, the event rate difference of cardiovascular death or MI for INV minus CON in the overall ISCHEMIA trial was -2.4%. Results were similar but less pronounced with FCR. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of an INV strategy may be improved if CR (especially ACR) is achieved. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

Health status and clinical outcomes in older adults with chronic coronary disease: the ISCHEMIA trial

BACKGROUND: Whether initial invasive management in older vs younger adults with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia improves health status or clinical outcomes is unknown. OBJECTIVES: The goal of this study was to examine the impact of age on health status and clinical outcomes with invasive vs conservative management in the ISCHEMIA (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial. METHODS: One-year angina-specific health status was assessed with the 7-item Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) (score range 0-100; higher scores indicate better health status). Cox proportional hazards models estimated the treatment effect of invasive vs conservative management as a function of age on the composite clinical outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for resuscitated cardiac arrest, unstable angina, or heart failure. RESULTS: Among 4,617 participants, 2,239 (48.5%) were aged <65 years, 1,713 (37.1%) were aged 65 to 74 years, and 665 (14.4%) were aged ≥75 years. Baseline SAQ summary scores were lower in participants aged <65 years. Fully adjusted differences in 1-year SAQ summary scores (invasive minus conservative) were 4.90 (95% CI: 3.56-6.24) at age 55 years, 3.48 (95% CI: 2.40-4.57) at age 65 years, and 2.13 (95% CI: 0.75-3.51) at age 75 years (Pinteraction = 0.008). Improvement in SAQ Angina Frequency was less dependent on age (Pinteraction = 0.08). There were no age differences between invasive vs conservative management on the composite clinical outcome (Pinteraction = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Older patients with chronic coronary disease and moderate or severe ischemia had consistent improvement in angina frequency but less improvement in angina-related health status with invasive management compared with younger patients. Invasive management was not associated with improved clinical outcomes in older or younger patients. (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches [ISCHEMIA]; NCT01471522).

Dual antiplatelet therapy duration after percutaneous coronary intervention in high bleeding risk: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIMS: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) is still debated. The current study, using the totality of existing evidence, evaluated the impact of an abbreviated DAPT regimen in HBR patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to search randomized clinical trials comparing abbreviated [i.e. very-short (1 month) or short (3 months)] with standard (≥6 months) DAPT in HBR patients without indication for oral anticoagulation. A total of 11 trials, including 9006 HBR patients, were included. Abbreviated DAPT reduced major or clinically relevant non-major bleeding [risk ratio (RR): 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.61-0.94; I2 = 28%], major bleeding (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.64-0.99, I2 = 0%), and cardiovascular mortality (RR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.65-0.95, I2 = 0%) compared with standard DAPT. No difference in all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was observed. Results were consistent, irrespective of HBR definition and clinical presentation. CONCLUSION: In HBR patients undergoing PCI, a 1- or 3-month abbreviated DAPT regimen was associated with lower bleeding and cardiovascular mortality, without increasing ischaemic events, compared with a ≥6-month DAPT regimen.

Risk-Benefit of 1-Year DAPT After DES Implantation in Patients Stratified by Bleeding and Ischemic Risk

BACKGROUND: Although a 1-year duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is used in many patients after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the evidence supporting this duration is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The authors investigated the risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT after DES using 2 novel scores to risk stratify bleeding and ischemic events. METHODS: Ischemic and bleeding risk scores were generated from ADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy with Drug-Eluting Stents), a multicenter, international, "all-comers" registry that enrolled 8,665 patients treated with DES. The risk-benefit profile of 1-year vs ≤6-month DAPT was then investigated across risk strata from an individual patient data pooled dataset of 7 randomized trials that enrolled 15,083 patients treated with DES. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, the ischemic score and the bleeding score had c-indexes of 0.76 and 0.66, respectively, and both were well calibrated. In the pooled dataset, no significant difference was apparent in any ischemic endpoint between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT, regardless of the risk strata. In the overall dataset, there was no significant difference in the risk of clinically relevant bleeding between 1-year and ≤6-month DAPT; however, among 2,508 patients at increased risk of bleeding, 1-year compared with ≤6-month DAPT was associated with greater bleeding (HR: 2.80; 95% CI: 1.12-7.13) without a reduced risk of ischemic events in any risk strata, including those with acute coronary syndromes. These results were consistent in a network meta-analysis. CONCLUSIONS: In the present large-scale study, compared with ≤6-month DAPT, a 1-year duration of DAPT was not associated with reduced adverse ischemic events in any risk strata (including acute coronary syndromes) but was associated with greater bleeding in patients at increased risk of bleeding.

Outcomes in the ISCHEMIA Trial Based on Coronary Artery Disease and Ischemia Severity

BACKGROUND: The ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches) postulated that patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) and moderate or severe ischemia would benefit from revascularization. We investigated the relationship between severity of CAD and ischemia and trial outcomes, overall and by management strategy. METHODS: In total, 5179 patients with moderate or severe ischemia were randomized to an initial invasive or conservative management strategy. Blinded, core laboratory­interpreted coronary computed tomographic angiography was used to assess anatomic eligibility for randomization. Extent and severity of CAD were classified with the modified Duke Prognostic Index (n=2475, 48%). Ischemia severity was interpreted by independent core laboratories (nuclear, echocardiography, magnetic resonance imaging, exercise tolerance testing, n=5105, 99%). We compared 4-year event rates across subgroups defined by severity of ischemia and CAD. The primary end point for this analysis was all-cause mortality. Secondary end points were myocardial infarction (MI), cardiovascular death or MI, and the trial primary end point (cardiovascular death, MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, or resuscitated cardiac arrest). RESULTS: Relative to mild/no ischemia, neither moderate ischemia nor severe ischemia was associated with increased mortality (moderate ischemia hazard ratio [HR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.61­1.30]; severe ischemia HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.57­1.21]; P=0.33). Nonfatal MI rates increased with worsening ischemia severity (HR for moderate ischemia, 1.20 [95% CI, 0.86­1.69] versus mild/no ischemia; HR for severe ischemia, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.98­1.91]; P=0.04 for trend, P=NS after adjustment for CAD). Increasing CAD severity was associated with death (HR, 2.72 [95% CI, 1.06­6.98]) and MI (HR, 3.78 [95% CI, 1.63­8.78]) for the most versus least severe CAD subgroup. Ischemia severity did not identify a subgroup with treatment benefit on mortality, MI, the trial primary end point, or cardiovascular death or MI. In the most severe CAD subgroup (n=659), the 4-year rate of cardiovascular death or MI was lower in the invasive strategy group (difference, 6.3% [95% CI, 0.2%­12.4%]), but 4-year all-cause mortality was similar. CONCLUSIONS: Ischemia severity was not associated with increased risk after adjustment for CAD severity. More severe CAD was associated with increased risk. Invasive management did not lower all-cause mortality at 4 years in any ischemia or CAD subgroup.

Initial invasive versus conservative management of stable ischemic heart disease patients with a history of heart failure or left ventricular dysfunction: Insights from the ISCHEMIA trial

Background: It is unknown whether an initial invasive strategy in patients with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia improves outcomes in patients with a history of heart failure (HF) or left ventricular dysfunction (LVD) when EF >35%, but <45%. Methods: Among 5179 participants randomized into the International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA), all of whom had LVEF >35%, we compared cardiovascular outcomes by treatment strategy in those with a history of HF or LV dysfunction (HF/LVD) at baseline versus those without HF/LVD. Median follow up was 3.2 years. Results: There were 398 (7.7%) participants with HF/LVD at baseline of whom 177 had HF/LVEF>45%, 28 had HF/LVEF 35-45% and 193 had LVEF 35-45% but no prior history of HF. HF/LVD was associated with more comorbidities at baseline, particularly prior myocardial infarction (MI), stroke and hypertension. Compared to those without HF/LVD, those with HF/LVD were more likely to experience a primary outcome composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, or hospitalization for unstable angina, HF, or resuscitated cardiac arrest; four-year cumulative incidence rate (22.7% vs. 13.8%), cardiovascular death or MI (19.7% vs. 12.3%), and all-cause death or HF (15.0% vs. 6.9%). Those with HF/LVD randomized to the invasive versus conservative strategy had a lower rate of the primary outcome (17.2% vs. 29.3%, difference in 4- year event rate -12.1%; 95% CI: -22.6, -1.6%), whereas those without HF/LVD did not (13.0% vs. 14.6%, difference in 4-year event rate -1.6%; 95% CI: -3.8%, 0.7%; p-interaction = 0.055). A similar differential effect was seen for the primary outcome, all-cause mortality, and CV mortality when invasive versus conservative strategy associated outcomes were analyzed with LVEF as a continuous variable for those with and without prior HF. Conclusions: ISCHEMIA trial participants with stable ischemic heart disease and at least moderate ischemia with a history of HF or LVD were at increased risk for the primary outcome. In the small, high-risk subgroup with HF and LVEF 35-45%, an initial invasive approach was associated with a better event-free survival. This result should be considered hypothesis generating.

One-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents in High-Bleeding-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment guidance endorsing shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients after drug-eluting stents, limited evidence exists to support these recommendations. The present study was designed to examine the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention with zotarolimus-eluting stents in HBR patients. METHODS: Onyx ONE Clear was a prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT followed by single antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents. The primary analysis of cardiac death or myocardial infarction between 1 month and 1 year was performed in the prespecified one-month clear population of patients pooled from the Onyx ONE US/Japan study and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial. One-month clear was defined as DAPT adherence and without major adverse events during the first month following percutaneous coronary intervention. RESULTS: Among patients enrolled in Onyx ONE US/Japan (n=752) and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial (n=1018), 1506 patients fulfilled one-month clear criteria. Mean HBR characteristics per patient was 1.6 with 44.7% having multiple risks. By 2 months and 1 year, respectively, 96.9% and 89.3% of patients were taking single antiplatelet therapy. Between 1 month and 1 year, the rate of the primary end point was 7.0%. The 1-sided upper 97.5% CI was 8.4%, less than the performance goal of 9.7% (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among HBR patients who were event free before DAPT discontinuation at 1 month, favorable safety and effectiveness through 1 year support treatment with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents as part of an individualized strategy for shortened DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention.

Rationale and design of the Onyx ONE global randomized trial: a randomized controlled trial of high-bleeding risk patients after stent placement with 1month of dual antiplatelet therapy

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: Polymer-free drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in combination with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has shown superior safety and efficacy outcomes compared with bare-metal stents among patients with high-bleeding risk (HBR) treated with 1-month DAPT. The safety and efficacy of the newer-generation durable-polymer DES Resolute Onyx compared with polymer-free DES among HBR patients treated with 1-month DAPT is unknown. TRIAL DESIGN: The Onyx ONE global randomized trial is an international, prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled study enrolling HBR patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The trial will randomize up to 2,000 patients in a 1:1 fashion to receive either the durable-polymer Resolute Onyx DES or the polymer-free Biosensors BioFreedom DES. After index procedure, patients in both arms will be treated with 1month of DAPT (aspirin and oral P2Y12 inhibitor), followed by single antiplatelet therapy thereafter. The primary end end point of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1-year follow-up. The powered secondary end point is target lesion failure (defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization) at 1year. Patient follow-up is planned for 1, 2, and 6months and 1 and 2years after the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The Onyx ONE global randomized trial is the first study to directly compare the safety and efficacy of a durable polymer DES (Resolute Onyx) with a polymer-free DES (BioFreedom) in HBR patients treated with 1month of DAPT.

Standardized classification and framework for reporting, interpreting, and analysing medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC)

Non-adherence has been well recognized for years to be a common issue that significantly impacts clinical outcomes and health care costs. Medication adherence is remarkably low even in the controlled environment of clinical trials where it has potentially complex major implications. Collection of non-adherence data diverge markedly among cardiovascular randomized trials and, even where collected, is rarely incorporated in the statistical analysis to test the consistency of the primary endpoint(s). The imprecision introduced by the inconsistent assessment of non-adherence in clinical trials might confound the estimate of the calculated efficacy of the study drug. Hence, clinical trials may not accurately answer the scientific question posed by regulators, who seek an accurate estimate of the true efficacy and safety of treatment, or the question posed by payers, who want a reliable estimate of the effectiveness of treatment in the marketplace after approval. The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration among leading academic research organizations, representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and physician-scientists from the USA and Europe. One in-person meeting was held in Madrid, Spain, culminating in a document describing consensus recommendations for reporting, collecting, and analysing adherence endpoints across clinical trials. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation of investigational drugs from early development to post-marketing approval studies. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.(AU)

Clinical and angiographic outcomes with a novel radiopaque sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold

BACKGROUND A novel bioresorbable scaffold, the sirolimus-eluting Fantom, incorporates a radiopaque polymer, struts with a thickness of 125 microm, and a crossing profile of 1.35 mm. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 9-month angiographic and 12-month clinical outcomes of the FANTOM scaffold in a larger patient population. METHODS and RESULTS The FANTOM II study (Safety & Performance Study of the Fantom Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold - First Report on Initial 24 Month Outcomes) was a prospective, multicenter trial which enrolled 240 patients with single de novo coronary stenosis with reference vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.5 mm diameter and lesion length

Dual antiplatelet therapy duration based on ischemic and bleeding risks after coronary stenting

Background Complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with higher ischemic risk, which can be mitigated by long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, concomitant high bleeding risk (HBR) may be present, making it unclear whether short- or long-term DAPT should be prioritized. Objectives This study investigated the effects of ischemic (by PCI complexity) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT [PRE dicting bleeding Complications in patients undergoing stent Implantation and Sub sequent Dual Anti Platelet Therapy] score) risks on clinical outcomes and on the impact of DAPT duration after coronary stenting. Methods Complex PCI was defined as ≥3 stents implanted and/or ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation stenting and/or stent length >60 mm, and/or chronic total occlusion revascularization. Ischemic and bleeding outcomes in high (≥25) or non-high (<25) PRECISE-DAPT strata were evaluated based on randomly allocated duration of DAPT. Results Among 14,963 patients from 8 randomized trials, 3,118 underwent complex PCI and experienced a higher rate of ischemic, but not bleeding, events. Long-term DAPT in non-HBR patients reduced ischemic events in both complex (absolute risk difference: −3.86%; 95% confidence interval: −7.71 to +0.06) and noncomplex PCI strata (absolute risk difference: −1.14%; 95% confidence interval: −2.26 to −0.02), but not among HBR patients, regardless of complex PCI features. The bleeding risk according to the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction scale was increased by long-term DAPT only in HBR patients, regardless of PCI complexity. Conclusions Patients who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of ischemic events, but benefitted from long-term DAPT only if HBR features were not present. These data suggested that when concordant, bleeding, more than ischemic risk, should inform decision-making on the duration of DAPT. (AU)

Racial Differences in Ischaemia/Bleeding Risk Trade-Off during Anti-Platelet Therapy: Individual Patient Level Landmark Meta-Analysis from Seven RCTs

BACKGROUND: Prolonged dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) is intended to reduce ischemic events, at the cost of an increased bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In this study, we evaluated whether race influences the ischemia/bleeding risk trade-off. METHODS: We searched for randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing DAPT duration after PCI. To compare the benefit or harm between DAPT duration by race, individual patient-level landmark meta-analysis was performed after discontinuation of the shorter duration DAPT group in each RCT. The primary ischemic endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and the primary bleeding endpoint was major bleeding events (clinicaltrials.gov NCT03338335). RESULTS: Seven RCTs including 16,518 patients (8,605 East Asians, 7,913 non-East Asians) were pooled. MACE occurred more frequently in non-East Asians (0.8% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.001), while major bleeding events occurred more frequently in East Asians (0.6% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.001). In Cox proportional hazards model, prolonged DAPT significantly increased the risk of major bleeding in East Asians (hazard ratio [HR], 2.843, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.474-5.152, p = 0.002), but not in non-East Asians (HR, 1.375, 95% CI, 0.523-3.616, p = 0.523). East Asians had a higher median probability risk ratio of bleeding to ischemia (0.66 vs. 0.15), and the proportion of patients with higher probability of bleeding than ischemia was significantly higher in East Asians (32.3% vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: We suggest that the ischemia/bleeding trade-off may be different between East Asians and non-East Asians. In East Asians, prolonged DAPT may have no effect in reducing the ischemic risk, while significantly increases the bleeding risk. (AU)

Imaging-guided pre-dilatation, stenting, postdilatation (iPSP): a protocolized approach highlighting the importance of intravascular imaging for implantation of bioresorbable scaffolds

INTRODUCTION: The advent of the fully bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) is the latest step in a series of advancements in the design of intracoronary stents over the past few decades. The novelty of this technology is in providing temporary vessel scaffolding and local antiproliferative therapy to prevent neointimal hyperplasia after percutaneous coronary intervention followed by gradual resorption of the scaffold to restore the native vessel anatomy and physiology­a process termed vascular reparative therapy. Areas covered: The first generation of BVS has not been able to fully match the high benchmark in safety and efficacy set by contemporary metallic drug-eluting stents. These shortcomings of BVS may be due to factors related to the device itself, the complexity of the underlying lesion, or the implantation technique. Expert commentary: Here, how intravascular imaging may be used to minimize these shortcomings is described and moreover, an imaging-guided step-by-step approach for BVS implantation that integrates the recently described pre-dilatation, stenting, post-dilatation (PSP) strategy is explained.

Clinical, Angiographic, and Procedural Correlates of Very Late Absorb Scaffold Thrombosis: Multistudy Registry Results

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to identify independent correlates of very late scaffold thrombosis (VLST) from an analysis of consecutively treated patients from 15 multicenter studies. BACKGROUND: Recent analyses suggest an increased risk for VLST with the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold compared with drug-eluting stents, but insights as to correlates of risk are limited. METHODS: A total of 55 patients were identified with scaffold thrombosis. They were matched 2:1 with control subjects selected randomly from patients without thrombosis from the same study. Quantitative coronary angiography was available for 96.4% of patients. Multiple logistic and Cox regression analysis were used to identify significant independent outcome correlates from 6 pre-specified characteristics. RESULTS: Patients had scaffold thrombosis at a median of 20 months (interquartile range: 17 to 27 months). Control subjects were followed for 36 months (interquartile range: 24 to 38 months). For the combined groups, reference vessel diameter (RVD) was 2.84 0.50 mm, scaffold length was 26 16 mm, and post-dilatation was performed in56%. Univariate correlates of thrombosis were smaller nominal scaffold/RVD ratio (linear p»0.001; ratio<1.18:1; odds ratio: 7.5; p»0.002) and larger RVD (linear p»0.001;>2.72 mm; odds ratio: 3.4; p»0.001). Post-dilatation at$16 atm, post-dilatation balloon/scaffold ratio, final percentage stenosis, and dual antiplatelet therapy were not correlated with VLST. Only scaffold/RVD ratio remained a significant independent correlate of VLST (p»0.001), as smaller ratio was correlated with RVD (p<0.001). Post hoc analysis of 8 other potential covariates revealed no other correlates of outcome. CONCLUSIONS: In the present analysis, the largest to date of its type, relative scaffold undersizing was the strongest determinant of VLST. Given current understanding of "scaffold dismantling," this finding likely has ramifications for all bioresorbable scaffolds.

Short-Term Versus Long-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Elderly Patients A Meta-Analysis of Individual Participant Data From 6 Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after the implantation of a drug-eluting stent (DES) in elderly patients. BACKGROUND Qualified studies to evaluate the optimal duration of DAPT in elderly patients have been very limited. METHODS: Using 6 randomized trials that compared short-term (#6 months) and long-term (12 months) DAPT, individual participant data meta-analysis was performed in elderly patients ($65 years of age). The primary study outcome was the 12-month risk of a composite of myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis, or stroke. The major secondary outcome was the 12-month risk of major bleeding. RESULTS: The primary outcome risk did not significantly differ between patients receiving short-term and long-term DAPT (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88 to 1.43; p»0.3581) in the overall group of study participants. In subgroup analysis, a significant interaction between age and DAPT duration was observed for primary outcome risk (p for interaction»0.0384). In the subset of younger patients (<65 years of age, n»6,152), short-term DAPT was associated with higher risk of primary outcome (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.14 to 2.44; p»0.0082). In elderly patients(n»5,319), however, the risk of primary outcome did not significantly differ between patients receiving short-term and long-term DAPT (HR: 0.84; 95% CI: 0.60 to 1.16; p»0.2856). Short-term DAPT was associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding compared with long-term DAPT (HR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.30 to 0.84; p»0.0081) in the overall group, and particularly in elderly patients (HR: 0.46; 95% CI: 0.24-0.88; p»0.0196). CONCLUSIONS: Short-term DAPT after new-generation DES implantation may be more beneficial in elderly patients than in younger patients.

Risk and timing of clinical events according to diabetic status of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting stent: 2-year results from a propensity score matched comparison of ABSORB EXTEND and SPIRIT trials

OBJECTIVES: to compare the occurrence of clinical events in diabetics treated with the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) versus everolimus-eluting metal stents (EES; XIENCE V; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) BACKGROUND: There are limited data dedicated to clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treated with bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) at 2-year horizon. METHODS:The present study included 812 patients in the ABSORB EXTEND study in which a total of 215 diabetic patients were treated with Absorb BVS. In addition, 882 diabetic patients treated with EES in pooled data from the SPIRIT clinical program (SPIRIT II, SPIRIT III and SPIRIT IV trials) were used for comparison by applying propensity score matching using 29 different variables. The primary endpoint was ischemia driven major adverse cardiac events (ID-MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR). RESULTS: After 2 years, the ID-MACE rate was 6.5% in the Absorb BVS vs. 8.9% in the Xience group (P = 0.40). There was no difference for MACE components or definite/probable device thrombosis (HR: 1.43 [0.24,8.58]; P = 0.69). The occurrence of MACE was not different for both diabetic status (insulin- and non-insulin-requiring diabetes) in all time points up to the 2-year follow-up for the Absorb and Xience groups...

Three, six, or twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after DES Implantation in patients with or without acute coronary syndromes: anindividual patient data pairwise and network meta-analysis of six randomized trials and 11 473 patients

AIM: We sought to determine whether the optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration after drug-eluting stent (DES) placement varies according to clinical presentation.METHODS AND RESULTS:We performed an individual patient data pairwise and network meta-analysis comparing short-term (≤6-months) versus long-term (1-year) DAPT as well as 3-month vs. 6-month vs 1-year DAPT. The primary study outcome was the 1-year composite risk of myocardial infarction (MI) or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). Six trials were included in which DAPT after DES consisted of aspirin and clopidogrel. Among 11 473 randomized patients 6714 (58.5%) had stable CAD and 4758 (41.5%) presented with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the majority of whom (67.0%) had unstable angina. In ACS patients, ≤6-month DAPT was associated with non-significantly higher 1-year rates of MI or ST compared with 1-year DAPT (Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.48, 95% Confidence interval (CI) 0.98-2.22; P = 0.059), whereas in stable patients rates of MI and ST were similar between the two DAPT strategies (HR 0.93, 95%CI 0.65-1.35; P = 0.71; Pinteraction = 0.09). By network meta-analysis, 3-month DAPT, but not 6-month DAPT, was associated with higher rates of MI or ST in ACS, whereas no significant differences were apparent in stable patients. Short DAPT was associated with lower rates of major bleeding compared with 1-year DAPT, irrespective of clinical presentation. All-cause mortality was not significantly different with short vs. long DAPT in both patients with stable CAD and ACS.

Derivation and validation of the predicting bleeding complications in patients undergoing stent implantation and subsequent dual antiplatelet therapy (PRECISE-DAPT) score: a pooled analysis of individual-patient datasets from clinical trials

Background: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with aspirin plus a P2Y12 inhibitor prevents ischaemic events after coronary stenting, but increases bleeding. Guidelines support weighting bleeding risk before the selection of treatment duration, but no standardised tool exists for this purpose. Methods: A total of 14 963 patients treated with DAPT after coronary stenting—largely consisting of aspirin and clopidogrel and without indication to oral anticoagulation—were pooled at a single-patient level from eight multicentre randomised clinical trials with independent adjudication of events. Using Cox proportional hazards regression, we identified predictors of out-of-hospital Thrombosis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding stratified by trial, and developed a numerical bleeding risk score. The predictive performance of the novel score was assessed in the derivation cohort and validated in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention from the PLATelet inhibition and patient Outcomes (PLATO) trial (n=8595) and BernPCI registry (n=6172). The novel score was assessed within patients randomised to different DAPT durations (n=10 081) to identify the effect on bleeding and ischaemia of a long (12–24 months) or short (3–6 months) treatment in relation to baseline bleeding risk...