Three-year clinical outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: Final results of the ABSORB EXTEND trial

BACKGROUND: There is still limited data on the very long term clinical outcomes after ABSORB BRS in daily practice. We sought to evaluate the 3 year-performance of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for the treatment of low/moderate complexity patients enrolled in the ABSORB EXTEND trial. METHODS: ABSORB EXTEND is a prospective, single-arm, open-label clinical study in which 812 patients were enrolled at 56 sites. This study allowed the treatment of lesions ≤28 mm in length and reference vessel diameter of 2.0-3.8 mm (as assessed by on-line QCA). To determine the independent predictors of MACE, a multivariable logistic regression model was built using a stepwise (forward/backward) procedure. RESULTS: Average population age was 61 years and 26.5% had diabetes. Most patients had single target lesion (92.4%). Adequate scaffold deployment (PSP) was achieved in 14.2% of the cases. At three years, the composite endpoints of MACE and ischemia-driven target vessel failure were 9.2% and 10.6%, respectively. The cumulative rate of ARC definite/probable thrombosis was 2.2%, with 1.2% of the cases occurring after the 1st year. Independent predictors of MACE were hypertension and the need for "bail out" stent. CONCLUSION: At three-year follow-up, the use of ABSORB in low/moderate complex PCI was associated with low and acceptable rates of major adverse clinical events, despite the infrequent use of the recommended contemporary scaffold deployment technique. However, scaffold thrombosis rate was higher than reported with current generation of metallic DES. (AU)

Two-year clinical outcomes of patients treated with overlapping absorb scaffolds: An analysis of the ABSORB EXTEND single-arm study

BACKGROUND: Preclinical data showed that overlapping (OVP) scaffolds might result in delayed healing and strut coverage compared to nonOVP scaffold segments. Furthermore, OVP in patients could result in increased periprocedure myocardial infarction (MI) rate secondary to side branch occlusion; however, little is known whether this may have an impact on long-term clinical outcomes. METHODS: ABSORB EXTEND is a prospective, single-arm, open-label clinical study in which 812 patients were enrolled at 56 sites. In this study, we compared the immediate and 2-year clinical outcomes of patients with OVP scaffolds (n = 115) to those of patients with nonOVP scaffolds (n = 697). The primary objective was the comparison of major adverse cardiac event (MACE) (cardiac death, MI and ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and scaffold thrombosis (ST) rates up to 2 years...

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...

One-year clinical outcomes of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents: a propensity score comparison of patients enrolled in the ABSORB EXTEND and SPIRIT trials

We sought to compare the outcomes of low/moderate complexity patients treated with the Absorb BVS from the ABSORB EXTEND trial with patients treated with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES), using propensity score (PS) matching of pooled data from the SPIRIT trials (SPIRIT II, SPIRIT III, SPIRIT IV) and the XIENCE V USA trial...

The ABSORB EXTEND study: preliminary report of the twelve-month clinical outcomes in the first 512 patients enrolled

Aims: The safety and performance of the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (Absorb BVS) system(Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) has been previously established in 131 patients from cohort A andcohort B of the first-in-man ABSORB trial. Following this trial, ABSORB EXTEND was initiated as a globalcontinued access study (outside of the USA) to expand experience with the Absorb BVS system to differentgeographies with broader inclusion criteria to include the treatment of longer lesions and multiple vessels.We report in this manuscript the twelve-month clinical outcomes of the first 512 patients in this population.Methods and results: ABSORB EXTEND is a prospective, single-arm, open-label clinical study whichwill enrol up to 800 patients at up to 100 sites. Included are patients with lesions ≤28 mm in length and referencevessel diameter of 2.0-3.8 mm (as assessed by on-line QCA or IVUS). Treatment of a maximum oftwo de novo native coronary artery lesions is permitted when each lesion is located in a different epicardialvessel. An independent clinical events committee adjudicates all endpoint-related events. At one year, for thefirst 512 patients enrolled in the study, the composite endpoints of ischaemia-driven MACE and ischaemiadriventarget vessel failure were 4.3% and 4.9%, respectively. The cumulative rate of ARC defined definiteand probable scaffold thrombosis for this population was 0.8% at one year.Conclusions: This interim analysis of the ABSORB EXTEND study shows low rates of MACE and scaffoldthrombosis. The study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (unique identifier NCT01023789).

Impact of post-dilation on the acute and one-year clinicaloutcomes of a large cohort of patients treated solely with theAbsorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold

Aims: We sought to determine the impact of post-dilation (PD) on clinical outcomes in a large cohort of patients treated only with the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (BVS).Methods and results: We evaluated all consecutive patients enrolled in the multicentre, single-arm ABSORB EXTEND study up to June 2013. The study allowed treatment of up to two coronaries (diameter 2.0 to 3.8 mm) and the use of overlapping (lesion length ²28 mm). Patients with severe lesion calcification/tortuosity were excluded. Aggressive lesion predilation (balloon to artery ratio of 0.9-1.0) was mandatory, and PD was left to the operator’s discretion. Patients were grouped according to whether PD was performed or not, and the one-year incidences of MACE and scaffold thrombosis were compared. A total of 768 patients were enrolled in the study; PD was performed in 526 (68.4%). There were no significant differences between the PD group and non-PD group in the majority of baseline characteristics, including the presence of mod-erate calcification and of B2/C lesions. Lesion length was similar (12.3±5.1 mm vs. 12.1±5.3 mm, p=0.6), as was RVD (2.6 mm for both groups, p=0.2). Residual in-scaffold stenosis (15.5±6.4% with PD, 15.0±6% without PD, p=0.3) and the need for bail-out scaffold/stent (4.2% with PD, 4.6% without PD, p=0.8) were comparable. Acute gain was higher in the non-PD group (1.14±0.3 mm vs. 1.21±0.4 mm, p=0.02). Clinical device success was 98.9% in both groups. At one year, there was no difference in MACE (5.4% in the PD group vs. 2.5% in the non-PD group, p=0.1). All individual components of TLR, death, and MI were similar as well as definite/probable scaffold thrombosis between the two groups...

Relation between bioresorbable scaffold sizing using QCA-Dmax and clinical outcomes at 1 year in 1,232 patients from 3 study cohorts (ABSORB Cohort B, ABSORB EXTEND, and ABSORB II)

BACKGROUND:Assessment of pre-procedural Dmax of proximal and distal sites has been used for Absorb scaffold size selection in the ABSORB studies.METHODS:A total of 1,248 patients received Absorb scaffolds in the ABSORB Cohort B (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B) study (N = 101), ABSORB EXTEND (ABSORB EXTEND Clinical Investigation) study (N = 812), and ABSORB II (ABSORB II Randomized Controlled Trial) trial (N = 335). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (a composite of cardiac death, any myocardial infarction [MI], and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) was analyzed according to the Dmax subclassification of scaffold oversize group versus scaffold nonoversize group...

Lessons learned from acute and late scaffold failures in the ABSORB EXTEND trial

Aims: Bioresorbable scaffolds are increasingly used in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneouscoronary interventions. ABSORB EXTEND is an ongoing study that will recruit 800 patients. Thisreport evaluates acute and late scaffold failure in the first 450 patients enrolled in ABSORB EXTEND whohave completed 12 months follow-up.Methods and results: Clinical event data from the first 450 patients enrolled in ABSORB EXTEND havedemonstrated low rates of ischaemia-driven MACE (4.2%) and target vessel failure (4.7%) at 12 months.There have been seven cases of device failure in this study: three cases of scaffold dislodgement (0.67%) andfour cases of subacute or late scaffold thrombosis (0.89%). All scaffold dislodgements occurred in the leftcircumflex (LCX), and in two cases dislodgement was observed after reinsertion of the same device. Twocases of subacute scaffold thrombosis and two late scaffold thromboses were observed. Two out of four casesof scaffold thrombosis seemed to be related to either premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy(DAPT) or resistance to clopidogrel.Conclusions: This is the first report specifically describing the incidence and the potential mechanisms ofscaffold dislodgement and scaffold thrombosis as seen in the ABSORB EXTEND trial.

The ABSORB EXTEND study: preliminary report of the twelvemonth clinical outcomes in the first 512 patients enrolled

Aims: The safety and performance of the Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold (Absorb BVS) system(Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) has been previously established in 131 patients from cohort A andcohort B of the first-in-man ABSORB trial. Following this trial, ABSORB EXTEND was initiated as a globalcontinued access study (outside of the USA) to expand experience with the Absorb BVS system to differentgeographies with broader inclusion criteria to include the treatment of longer lesions and multiple vessels. Wereport in this manuscript the twelve-month clinical outcomes of the first 512 patients in this population.Methods and results: ABSORB EXTEND is a prospective, single-arm, open-label clinical study whichwill enrol up to 800 patients at up to 100 sites. Included are patients with lesions ≤28 mm in length and referencevessel diameter of 2.0-3.8 mm (as assessed by on-line QCA or IVUS). Treatment of a maximum of twode novo native coronary artery lesions is permitted when each lesion is located in a different epicardial vessel.An independent clinical events committee adjudicates all endpoint-related events. At one year, for the first512 patients enrolled in the study, the composite endpoints of ischaemia-driven MACE and ischaemia-driventarget vessel failure were 4.3% and 4.9%, respectively. The cumulative rate of ARC defined definite andprobable scaffold thrombosis for this population was 0.8% at one year.Conclusions: This interim analysis of the ABSORB EXTEND study shows low rates of MACE and scaffoldthrombosis. The study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (unique identifier NCT01023789).

Proximal and distal maximal luminal diameters as a guide to appropriate deployment of the ABSORB everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a sub-study of the ABSORB Cohort B and the on-going ABSORB EXTEND single arm study

Objectives: Due to the limited distensibility of the everolimus-eluting bioresorbablevascular scaffold (ABSORB) compared to metallic platform stents, quantitative coronaryarteriography (QCA) is a mandatory requirement for ABSORB deployment in theon-going ABSORB EXTEND Single-Arm Study. Visual assessment of vessel size in theABSORB Cohort B study often lead to under and over-sizing of the 3 mm ABSORB incoronary vessels (recommended range of the vessel diameter 2.5 mm and 3.3 mm),with an increased risk of spontaneous incomplete scaffold apposition post ABSORBdeployment. We report whether mandatory QCA assessment of vessel size pre-implantation,utilizing the maximal luminal diameter (Dmax) and established interpolatedreference vessel diameter (RVD) measurements, has improved device/vessel sizing.Methods: Pre-implantation post-hoc QCA analyses of all 101 patients from ABSORBCohort B (102 lesions) and first consecutive 101 patients (108 lesions) from ABSORBEXTEND were undertaken by an independent core-laboratory; all patients had a 3 mmABSORB implanted. Comparative analyses were performed. Results: Within ABSORBCohort B, a greater number of over-sized vessels (>3.3 mm) were identified utilizingthe Dmax compared to the interpolated RVD (17 vessels, 16.7% vs. 3 vessels, 2.9%; P 50.002). Comparative analyses demonstrated a greater number of appropriate vessel-sizeselection (75 vessels, 69.4% vs. 48 vessels, 47.1%; P 5 0.001), a trend towards a reductionin implantation in small (3.3 mm) vessels(4 vessels, 3.7% vs. 17 vessels, 16.7%; P 5 0.002) in ABSORB EXTEND. Bland–Altmanplots suggested a good agreement between operator and core-laboratory calculatedDmax measurements. Conclusions: ...

Intravascular ultrasound comparison of small coronary lesions between novel guidewire-based sirolimus-eluting stents and conventional sirolimus-eluting stents

The Sparrow stent system (Biosensors International) consists of a self-expanding, ultra-thin nitinol stent mounted within a 0.014½ guidewire designed for small or tortuous coronary lesions. We compared the intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) findings between the novel self-expanding sirolimus-eluting stent (Sparrow-SES) and a conventional balloon-expandable sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher-SES) in patients with small coronary disease. Methods. We examined 14 lesions treated with the Sparrow-SES from CARE II, compared with 22 small vessel lesions treated with Cypher-SES. IVUS examination was performed post-procedure and 8 months later. Volumetric data were standardized by length as volume index (VI; mm3/mm). Results. While baseline stent VI trended smaller in Sparrow-SES, follow-up stent VI became similar between the 2 groups due to a significant increase of stent VI in self-expanding Sparrow-SES during the follow-up period. At 8 months, Sparrow-SES showed greater neointima than Cypher-SES (0.8 ± 0.6 mm3/mm vs 0.2 ± 0.2 mm3/mm; P<.001). However, the decrease in lumen VI was only 0.3 ± 0.7 mm3/mm in Sparrow-SES, as compared to 0.1 ± 0.3 mm3/mm in Cypher-SES (P=.259), since the late loss due to neointimal hyperplasia was partly counterbalanced by the chronic stent expansion in Sparrow-SES. Conclusion. While 8-month follow-up of Sparrow-SES revealed greater amounts of neointimal hyperplasia compared with conventional Cypher-SES, chronic stent expansion preserved the lumen by increasing stent volume. This novel, guidewire-based, self-expanding stent system designed to be delivered through complex anatomies may be useful to treat patients with small-caliber coronary lesions by offering sufficient lumen preservation at follow-up.

Serial Angiography and Intravascular Ultrasound: Results of the SISC Registry(Stents In Small Coronaries)

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the novel CardioMind Sparrow (CMS) stent (CardioMind, Inc., Sunnyvale, California) against the Multi-Link Pixel (MLP) stent (Guidant Corp., Santa Clara, California) for small vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Background The CMS consists of a guidewire-based, self-expandable, ultra-thin nitinol stent with smaller profile and improved flexibility and deliverability. The performance of this novel device against a standard balloon-expandable stent for small vessel PCI has not been determined. Methods Twenty-one patients were treated with the CMS and compared with 30 patients treated with MLP. Only single de novo lesions 14 mm in length, in native vessels of 2.0 to 2.5 mm wereincluded. The primary goal was the comparison of quantitative coronary angiography lumen loss and intravascular ultrasound intimal hyperplasia (IH) formation between groups at 6 months. Results Clinical characteristics were similar between groups. The CMS cohort had smaller vessels (2.20 0.20 mm vs. 2.43 0.16 mm, p 0.0001) and shorter lesions (10.86 3.19 mm vs. 13.12 2.79 mm, p 0.0091). Six-month late loss was significantly lower among CMS cohort (0.73 0.57 mm vs. 1.11 0.72 mm, p 0.038). By intravascular ultrasound, 6-month IH volume was similar between groups (1.45 0.46 mm3/mm vs. 1.65 1.02 mm3/mm, p 0.50). However, CMS presenteda mean 13.39% expansion of its volumes, resulting in a significantly lower percentage of IH volumetric obstruction (31.94 8.19% vs. 39.90 4.72%, p 0.0005). Conclusions Despite producing similar amounts of IH volume, the self-expanding CMS stent presented chronic expansion of its volumes, better accommodating the neoformed tissue and resultingin significantly lower late loss and percent of IH volumetric obstruction in comparison with the MLPstent.

Stents auto-expansíveis versus balão-expansível para tratamento de lesões em vasos de fino calibre: estudo com ultra-som intracoronário tridimensional / Self-expanding versus balloon-expandable stents for the treatment of small coronary vessels: a three-dimensional intracoronary ultrasound study

Introdução: Intervenção coronária pecutânea em vasos de fino calibre (VF) está associada a piores resultados imediatos e tardios, com elevadas taxas de reestenose. Estudos prévios têm sugerido que stents auto-expansíveis causam menos injúria vascular no momento do implante, com expansão de seus volumes com o tempo, gerando maiores áreas luminais que stents balão-expansíveis. A influência desses fenômenos em VF ainda é desconhecida. Objetivos: Avaliar as propriedades mecânicas e a eficácia do novo stent CardioMind no tratamento de lesões em VF em comparação ao stent balão-expansível Multi-link Pixel (Pixel). Método: Treze pacientes portadores de lesões únicas primárias < 14 mm de extensão, em artérias coronárias nativas < 2,5 mm de diâmetro, foram tratados com o stent CardioMind e comparados a uma corte histórica de 25 pacientes, com os mesmos critérios de inclusão, tratados com o stent Pixel. Ultrasom intracoronário (USIC) seriado foi realizado pós-procedimento e aos 7,3 +/- 1,0 meses. Resultados: A média das idades foi de 58,1 +/- 9,9 anos, com 60,5 por cento do sexo masculino e 39,4 por cento diabéticos. Ambos os stents produziram volumes de hiperplasia neo-intimal (HNI) smelhantes...

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention in small vessels (SV) is associated with poor short- and long-term outcomes, with high rates of restenosis. Previous studies have suggested that self-expanding stents can cause less vessel injury at implantation, expanding their volumes over time, and leading to larger luminal areas than those of balloon-expandable stents. The influence of these phenomena on SV remains unknown. Objectives: To assess the mechanical properties and efficacy of the novel CardioMind™ stent in comparison with the balloon-expandable Multi-Link Pixel™ (Pixel) stent in the treatment of SV. Methods: Thirteen patients with single, de novo, < 14 mm length lesions in native coronary arteries < 2.5 mm in diameter were treated with the CardioMind™ stent and compared with a historical cohort of 25 patients, with the same inclusion criteria, treated with the Pixel™ stent. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was performed serially after the procedure and at 7.3 ± 1.0 months of follow-up. Results: Mean age was 58.1 ± 9.9 years; 60.5% were male and 39.4% were diabetic. Both stents produced similar neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) volumes (indexed NIH volume: 1.45 ± 0.46 mm³/mm for CardioMind™ versus 1.66 ± 1.02 mm³/mm for Pixel™; p = 0.48). However, the CardioMind™ stentpresented a 12% expansion of its volume, leading to a...

Actinomycin-eluting stent for coronary revascularization: a randomized / feasibility and safety study: the ACTION trial

OBJECTIVES: We sought to demonstrate the safety and formance of the actinomycin D-coated Multilink-Tetra stent(Guidant Corp., Santa Clara,California) in the treatment of patients with single de novo native coronary lesions. BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) releasing sirolimus or paclitaxel dramatically reduce restenosis. The anti-proliferative drug, actinomycin D, which is highly effective in reducing neointimal proliferation in preclinical studies, was selected for clinical evaluation. METHODS: The multi-center, single-blind,three-arm ACTinomycin-eluting stent Improves Outcomes by reducing Neointimal hyperplasia (ACTION) trial randomized 360 patients to receive a DES (2.5 or 10 microg/cm(2) of actinomycin D) or metallic stent (MS). The primary end points were major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 30days, diameter stenosis by angiography, tissue effects, and neointimal volume by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) at six months. When early monitoring revealed an increased rate of repeat revascularization, the protocol was amended to allow for additional follow-up for DES patients. Angiographic control of MS patients was no longer mandatory. RESULTS: The biased selection of DES patients undergoing IVUS follow-up invalidated the interpretation of the IVUS findings. The in-stent late lumen loss and that at the proximal and distal edges were higher in both DES groups than in the MS group and resulted in higher six-month and one-year MACE (34.8% and 43.1% vs. 13.5%), driven exclusively by target vessel revascularization without excess death or myocardial infarction...

Adequacy of intracoronary versus intravenous adenosine-induced maximal coronary hyperemiafor fractional flow reserve measurements

Fractional flow reserve (FFR) is a measure of coronary stenosis severity that is based on pressure measurements obtained at maximal hyperemia. The most widely used pharmacologic stimulus for maximal coronary hyperemia is adenosine, administered either as a continuous intravenous (IV) infusion or intracoronary (IC) bolus. IV adenosine has more side effects and is more costly than IC adenosine but has a more stable and prolonged hyperemic effect.Methods We compared the efficacy of IC and IV adenosine administration for the measurement of FFR in a multicentertrial. Fifty-two patients with 60 lesions underwent determination of FFR with both IV and IC adenosine. IV adenosine was administered as a continuous infusion at a rate of 140 μg/kg per minute until a steady state hyperemia was achieved. IC adenosine boluses were administered at a dose of 15 to 20 μg in the right and 18 to 24 μg in the left coronary artery. FFR was calculated as the ratio of the distal coronary pressure (from pressure guide wire) to the aortic pressure (guide catheter)at maximal hyperemia.Results A total of 26 left anterior descending, 23 right, 9 left circumflex, and 3 left main coronary arteries were evaluated. Mean percent stenosis for both groups was 55.8% ± 23.6% (range 0% to 95%), and mean FFR was 0.78 ± 0.15 (range 0.41 to 0.98). There was a strong and linear correlation between FFR measurements with IV and IC adenosine (R =0.978, y = 0.032 + 0.964x, P < .001). The agreement between the 2 sets of measurements was also high, with a mean differencein FFR of –0.004 ± 0.03. However, a small random scatter in both directions of FFR measurements was noted with5 lesions (8.3%) where FFR with IC adenosine was higher by 0.05 or more compared with IV infusions, suggesting a suboptimal hyperemic response in these patients...