Implementing methods in the ELEGANCE registry to increase diversity in clinical research.

OBJECTIVE: Women and underrepresented minorities (URMs) who are at an increased risk of presenting with severe peripheral artery disease (PAD) and have different responses to treatment compared with non-Hispanic White males yet are underrepresented in PAD research. METHODS: ELEGANCE is a global, prospective, multi-center, post-market registry of PAD patients treated with drug-eluting device that aims to enroll at least 40% women and 40% URMs. The study design incorporates strategies to increase enrollment of women and URMs. Inclusion criteria are age ≥18 years and treatment with any commercially available Boston Scientific Corporation drug-eluting device marketed for peripheral vasculature lesions; exclusion criterion is life expectancy <1 year. RESULTS: Of 750 patients currently enrolled (951 lesions) across 39 sites, 324 (43.2%) are female and 350 (47.3%) are URMs (21.6% Black, 11.2% Asian, 8.5% Hispanic/Latino, and 5.3% other). Rutherford classification is distributed differently between sexes (P = .019). Treatment indication differs among race/ethnicity groups (P = .003). Chronic limb-threatening ischemia was higher for Black (38.3%) and Hispanic/Latino (28.1%) patients compared with non-Hispanic White (21.8%) and Asian patients (21.4%). De-novo stenosis was higher in Asian patients (92.3%) compared with Black, non-Hispanic White, and Hispanic/Latino patients (72.2%, 68.7%, and 77.8%, respectively; P < .001). Mean lesion length was longest for Black patients (162.7 mm), then non-Hispanic White (135.2 mm), Asian (134.8 mm), and Hispanic/Latino patients (128.1 mm; P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: Analyses of data from the ELEGANCE registry show that differences exist in baseline disease characteristics by sex and race/ethnicity; these may be the result of other underlying factors, including time to diagnosis, burden of undermanaged comorbidities, and access to care.

Combined Assessment of Fractional Flow Reserve and Coronary Flow Velocity Reserve after Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation.

BACKGROUND: Coronary flow velocity reserve (CFVR) can be measured noninvasively using stress transthoracic Doppler echocardiography (S-TDE). The prognostic significance of S-TDE-derived CFVR after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the prognostic value of post-PCI CFVR and its additional efficacy to fractional flow reserve (FFR) in patients undergoing elective PCI. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted involving 187 consecutive patients with chronic coronary syndrome who underwent elective PCI guided by FFR for the left anterior descending coronary artery. Pre- and post-PCI wire-based FFR and CFVR assessments of the left anterior descending coronary artery using S-TDE were performed in all patients. The association between post-PCI clinical and physiologic parameters and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, heart failure, and unplanned remote target vessel revascularization, was evaluated. RESULTS: Three-quarters of patients exhibited CFVR increase after PCI, while all patients showed FFR improvement. During a median follow-up period of 1.5 years, MACE occurred in 21 patients (11.2%). Among clinical demographics, patients with MACE had higher levels of N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide compared with those without MACE (median, 615 pg/mL [interquartile range, 245-1,500 pg/mL] vs 180 pg/mL [interquartile range, 70-559 pg/mL]; P = .010). Post-PCI S-TDE-derived CFVR was lower in patients with MACE, while post-PCI FFR showed a nonsignificant tendency to be lower in patients with MACE. In a multivariable analysis, higher NT-proBNP (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% CI, 1.02-1.74; P = .038), post-PCI CFVR ≤ 2.0 (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.93; 95% CI, 1.16-7.40; P = .023), and post-PCI FFR ≤ 0.82 (adjusted hazard ratio, 3.93; 95% CI, 1.52-10.18; P = .005) were independently associated with MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with chronic coronary syndrome who underwent successful elective PCI for left anterior descending coronary artery, the combined assessment of S-TDE-derived post-PCI CFVR and post-PCI FFR provided a significant association with the occurrence of MACE.

Cost effectiveness analysis of drug coated balloon only angioplasty for de novo coronary artery disease.

AIMS: We aimed to perform a cost analysis of drug coated balloon (DCB)-only angioplasty versus drug eluting stent (DES), for de novo disease of all vessel sizes and all clinical indications. BACKGROUND: DCB angioplasty is an emergent technology for the treatment of coronary artery disease. There is lack of data regarding the cost-effectiveness of DCB-only angioplasty for treatment of de novo coronary artery disease as compared with second generation DES. METHODS: We compared total costs of patients treated with DCB or DES for first presentation of ST-elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction, or stable angina due to de novo disease between January 1, 2018 and November 15, 2019. We defined total cost as the sum of (1) procedural devices-cost, (2) procedural staff-cost, (3) post-percutaneous coronary intervention hospital stay cost, and (4) antiplatelet regime cost. A cost minimization analysis was performed to compare the costs of DCB and DES. RESULTS: We present 1952 all-comer, consecutive patients; 902 (1064 lesions) treated with DCB and 1050 (1236 lesions) treated with DES for de novo coronary artery disease. The cost per patient was estimated to be £9.02 more expensive in the DCB group (£3153.00 vs. £3143.98). However, the cost per lesion treated was calculated to be £15.51 cheaper in the DCB group (£3007.56 vs. £3023.07). The results were consistent irrespective of duration of long-term antiplatelet medications. CONCLUSION: We have compared the cost-effectiveness of DCB-only angioplasty to DES-angioplasty and showed that the per patient and per lesion results were not different and hence cost should not be implicated in the decision to choose DCB or DES.

In vitro and in vivo assessment of a bilayered degradable rapamycin-eluting stent for ureteral stricture caused by holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy.

Ureteral stricture caused by holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy is one of the most challenging issues for urologists. Currently, evidence for rapamycin application in reducing ureterostenosis is not sufficient. This study aimed to assess the inhibition of ureteral stricture of rapamycin-eluting stents in vitro and in vivo. A bilayered drug-eluting ureteral stent consisted of drug blending with poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PU/drug stent), which was over-layered by polycaprolactone (PCL) by ultrasonic atomizing spraying. Stent morphology was observed by scanning electron microscope. A kidney-ureter-bladder model was established to simulate the stents-releasing condition, and high-performance liquid chromatography was used to measure the drug release rate. The inhibitory proliferation was detected by CCK-8. The bladder of rats was injured through electro tome, and stents were implanted for 7, 14, and 28 days. The effects of drug-eluting stents was investigated by hematoxylin-eosin staining, immunofluorescence staining, real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction and western blot. The bilayered stents could block the burst loss of the drug and maintained a sustained delivery period because of the 5.3 µm thickness of the PCL layer. The relative growth rates of cells plotted inhibitory effect on the proliferation of human urethral scar fibroblast cells. For in vivo results of 28 days, the bilayered stent maintained structural integrity and induced less deposition of crystals, thinner and less lamina propria connective tissues were formed, and α-SMA and TGF-ß1 were downregulated. Bilayered rapamycin-eluting stent is significantly effective in alleviating fibrosis in in vitro and in vivo models. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: The occurrence of ureteral stricture resulting from holmium: YAG laser lithotripsy presents a significant challenge for urologists. Traditional double J stents have not been proven to offer a shorter indwelling time or improved inhibition of tissue blocking. While drug-eluting stents containing rapamycin, paclitaxel, and other substances have been extensively used in treating artery stenosis, there is insufficient evidence supporting their application in reducing ureterostenosis. Consequently, a biodegradable polymer ureteric scaffold incorporating rapamycin was fabricated in this study, employing ultrasonic atomization spraying technology to optimize the bilayers composed of 75/25 poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) and polycaprolactone (PCL). The efficacy of the scaffold was subsequently confirmed through in vitro and in vivo experiments.

In-vivo assessment of vascular injury for the prediction of in-stent restenosis.

BACKGROUND: Despite optimizations of coronary stenting technology, a residual risk of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains. Vessel wall injury has important impact on the development of ISR. While injury can be assessed in histology, there is no injury score available to be used in clinical practice. METHODS: Seven rats underwent abdominal aorta stent implantation. At 4 weeks after implantation, animals were euthanized, and strut indentation, defined as the impression of the strut into the vessel wall, as well as neointimal growth were assessed. Established histological injury scores were assessed to confirm associations between indentation and vessel wall injury. In addition, stent strut indentation was assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) in an exemplary clinical case. RESULTS: Stent strut indentation was associated with vessel wall injury in histology. Furthermore, indentation was positively correlated with neointimal thickness, both in the per-strut analysis (r = 0.5579) and in the per-section analysis (r = 0.8620; both p ≤ 0.001). In a clinical case, indentation quantification in OCT was feasible, enabling assessment of injury in vivo. CONCLUSION: Assessing stent strut indentation enables periprocedural assessment of stent-induced damage in vivo and therefore allows for optimization of stent implantation. The assessment of stent strut indentation might become a valuable tool in clinical practice.

ZILVERPASS Study: ZILVER PTX Stent vs. Bypass Surgery in Femoropopliteal Lesions, 3 year results and economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: To report the 3-year safety and effectiveness results of a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the ZILVER PTX paclitaxel-eluting stent to surgical bypass and to conduct a health economic analysis up to 3-year follow-up of the two treatment modalities. METHODS: This is a study in symptomatic TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC) C and D femoropopliteal lesions comparing endovascular ZILVER PTX stenting vs. surgical bypass surgery using a prosthetic graft (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01952457). Between October 2013 and July 2017, 220 patients (mean age 68.6±10.5 years; 159 men) were enrolled and randomized to the ZILVER PTX treatment group (113, 51.40%) or the bypass treatment group (107, 48.60%). One of the secondary outcomes was primary patency at 3-year, defined as no evidence of binary restenosis or occlusion within the target lesion or bypass graft based on a duplex ultrasound peak systolic velocity ratio <2.4 and no clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in endovascular cases or reintervention to restore flow in the bypass. An economic analysis was conducted to analyze the cost differences between ZILVER PTX and bypass, which shows the perspective of the public authority/organization that pays for healthcare in the two countries (payor), Germany and USA. RESULTS: The 3-year primary patency rate was 53.30% (95% CI 61.40% to 45.20%) for the ZILVER PTX group vs. 58.20% (95% CI 67.10% to 49.30%) for the bypass arm (P=0.9721). Freedom from TLR at 3-year was 62.80% (95% CI 72.60% to 53%) for the ZILVER PTX group vs. 65.30% (95% CI 75.40% to 55.20%) for the bypass group (P=0.635). There was also no significant difference (P=0.358) in survival rate at 3-year between the ZILVER PTX group 78.50%, (95% CI to 87.70% to 69.30%) and the bypass group 87.40% (95% CI 97.6% to 77.2%). None of the deaths was categorized as related to the procedure or device. The economic analysis, taking into account procedural-, hospitalization- and reintervention costs, showed a clear cost-benefit for Zilver PTX in both investigated countries up to 3-year follow-up: Germany (Bypass €9446 per patient versus ZILVER PTX €5755) and USA (Bypass $26,373 per patient versus ZILVER PTX $19,186). CONCLUSIONS: The non-inferior safety and effectiveness results of the ZILVER PTX stent were associated with lower costs for the payer and confirmed that ZILVER PTX stent treatment can be considered as a valid alternative for bypass surgery in long and complex femoropopliteal lesions.

Real-World Assessment of an Ultrathin Strut, Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Submitted to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (INSTEMI Registry). / Avaliação no Mundo Real de um Stent Eluidor de Sirolimus de Hastes Ultrafinas em Pacientes com Infarto do Miocárdio com Supradesnivelamento do Segmento ST Submetidos à Intervenção Coronária Percutânea Primária (Registro INSTEMI).

BACKGROUND: The current gold standard of coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) consists of metal alloys with thinner struts and bioresorbable polymers. OBJECTIVES: Our aim was to compare an ultrathin strut, sirolimus-eluting stent (Inspiron®) with other third-generation DES platforms in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) submitted to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We analyzed data from a STEMI multicenter registry from reference centers in the South Region of Brazil. All patients were submitted to primary PCI, either with Inspiron® or other second- or third-generation DES. Propensity score matching (PSM) was computed to generate similar groups (Inspiron® versus other stents) in relation to clinical and procedural characteristics. All hypothesis tests had a two-sided significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: From January 2017 to January 2021, 1711 patients underwent primary PCI, and 1417 patients met our entry criteria (709 patients in the Inspiron® group and 708 patients in the other second- or third-generation DES group). After PSM, the study sample was comprised of 706 patients (353 patients in the Inspiron® group and 353 patients in the other the other second- or third-generation DES group). The rates of target vessel revascularization (OR 0.52, CI 0.21 - 1.34, p = 0.173), stent thrombosis (OR 1.00, CI 0.29 - 3.48, p = 1.000), mortality (HR 0.724, CI 0.41 - 1.27, p = 0.257), and major cardiovascular outcomes (OR 1.170, CI 0.77 - 1.77, p = 0.526) were similar between groups after a median follow-up of 17 months. CONCLUSION: Our findings show that Inspiron® was effective and safe when compared to other second- or third-generation DES in a contemporary cohort of real-world STEMI patients submitted to primary PCI.

FUNDAMENTO: O padrão-ouro atual dos stents farmacológicos (SF) coronários consiste em ligas metálicas com hastes mais finas e polímeros bioabsorvíveis. OBJETIVOS: Nosso objetivo foi comparar um stent eluidor de sirolimus de hastes ultrafinas (Inspiron®) com outras plataformas de SF de terceira geração em pacientes com infarto do miocárdio com supradesnivelamento do segmento ST (IAMCSST) submetidos à intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP) primária. MÉTODOS: Analisamos dados de um registro multicêntrico de IAMCSST de centros de referência da Região Sul do Brasil. Todos os pacientes foram submetidos à ICP primária, seja com Inspiron® ou outro SF de segunda ou terceira geração. Foi calculado pareamento por escore de propensão (PEP) para gerar grupos semelhantes (Inspiron® versus outros stents) em relação às características clínicas e do procedimento. Todos os testes de hipótese tiveram um nível de significância bilateral de 0,05. RESULTADOS: De janeiro de 2017 a janeiro de 2021, 1.711 pacientes foram submetidos à ICP primária, e 1.417 pacientes preencheram nossos critérios de inclusão (709 pacientes no grupo Inspiron® e 708 pacientes no grupo dos outros SF de segunda ou terceira geração). Após PEP, a amostra do estudo foi composta por 706 pacientes (353 pacientes no grupo Inspiron® e 353 pacientes no grupo dos demais SF de segunda ou terceira geração). As taxas de revascularização do vaso alvo (odds ratio [OR] 0,52; intervalo de confiança [IC] 0,21 a 1,34; p = 0,173), trombose de stent (OR 1,00; IC 0,29 a 3,48;p = 1,000), mortalidade (hazard ratio 0,724; IC 0,41 a 1,27; p = 0,257) e os desfechos cardiovasculares maiores (OR 1,170; IC 0,77 a 1,77; p = 0,526) foram semelhantes entre os grupos após um acompanhamento mediano de 17 meses. CONCLUSÃO: Nossos achados mostram que o stent Inspiron® foi eficaz e seguro quando comparado a outros SF de segunda ou terceira geração em uma coorte contemporânea do mundo real de pacientes com IAMCSST submetidos à ICP primária.

Drug-coated balloon strategy following orbital atherectomy for calcified coronary artery compared with drug-eluting stent: One-year outcomes and optical coherence tomography assessment.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for calcified coronary artery remains challenging in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era. While recent studies reported the efficacy of orbital atherectomy (OA) combined with DES for calcified lesion, the effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) following OA has not been fully elucidated. METHODS: Between June 2018 and June 2021, 135 patients who received PCI for calcified de novo coronary lesions with OA were enrolled and divided into two groups; OA followed by DCB (n = 43) if the target lesion achieved acceptable preparation, or second- or third-generation DESs (n = 92) if the target lesion showed suboptimal preparation between June 2018 and June 2021. All patients underwent PCI with optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging. The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE), that was a composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: Mean age was 73 years and 82% was male. In OCT analysis, maximum calcium plaque was thicker (median: 1050 µm [interquartile range (IQR): 945-1175 µm] vs. 960 µm [808-1100 µm], p = 0.017), calcification arc tended to larger (median: 265° [IQR: 209-360°] vs. 222° [162-305°], p = 0.058) in patients with DCB than in DES, and the postprocedure minimum lumen area was smaller in DCB compared with minimum stent area in DES (median: 3.83 mm2 [IQR: 3.30-4.52 mm2 ] vs. 4.86 mm2 [4.05-5.82 mm2 ], p < 0.001). However, 1 year MACE free rate was not significantly different between 2 groups (90.3% in DCB vs. 96.6% in DES, log-rank p = 0.136). In the subgroup analysis of 14 patients who underwent follow-up OCT imaging, late lumen area loss was lower in patients with DCB than DES, despite lower lesion expansion rate in DCB than DES. CONCLUSIONS: In calcified coronary artery disease, DCB alone strategy (if acceptable lesion preparation was performed with OA) was feasible compared with DES following OA with respect to 1-year clinical outcomes. Our finding indicated using DCB with OA might be reduce late lumen area loss for severe calcified lesion.

Angiography-Based Superficial Wall Strain of De Novo Stenotic Coronary Arteries: Serial Assessment of Vessels Treated with Bioresorbable Scaffold or Drug-Eluting Stent.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to present an angiography-based computational model for serial assessment of superficial wall strain (SWS, dimensionless) of de-novo coronary stenoses treated with either bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) or drug-eluting stent (DES). BACKGROUND: A novel method for SWS allows the assessment of the mechanical status of arteries in-vivo, which may help for predicting cardiovascular outcomes. METHODS: Patients with arterial stenosis treated with BRS (n = 21) or DES (n = 21) were included from ABSORB Cohort B1 and AIDA trials. The SWS analyses were performed along with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at pre-PCI, post-PCI, and 5-year follow-up. Measurements of QCA and SWS parameters were quantified at the treated segment and adjacent 5-mm proximal and distal edges. RESULTS: Before PCI, the peak SWS on the 'to be treated' segment (0.79 ± 0.36) was significantly higher than at both virtual edges (0.44 ± 0.14 and 0.45 ± 0.21; both p < 0.001). The peak SWS in the treated segment significantly decreased by 0.44 ± 0.13 (p < 0.001). The surface area of high SWS decreased from 69.97mm2 to 40.08mm2 (p = 0.002). The peak SWS in BRS group decreased to a similar extent (p = 0.775) from 0.81 ± 0.36 to 0.41 ± 0.14 (p < 0.001), compared with DES group from 0.77 ± 0.39 to 0.47 ± 0.13 (p = 0.001). Relocation of high SWS to device edges was often observed in both groups after PCI (35 of 82 cases, 41.7 %). At follow-up of BRS, the peak SWS remained unchanged compared to post-PCI (0.40 ± 0.12 versus 0.36 ± 0.09, p = 0.319). CONCLUSION: Angiography-based SWS provided valuable information about the mechanical status of coronary arteries. Device implantation led to a significant decrease of SWS to a similar extent with either polymer-based scaffolds or permanent metallic stents.

Assessment of Paclitaxel Drug-Coated Balloon Only Angioplasty in STEMI.

BACKGROUND: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) has emerged as the standard of care, but stent-related events have persisted. Drug-coated balloon (DCB)-only angioplasty is an emerging technology, although it is not fully evaluated compared with DES in the context of pPCI. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the safety of DCB-only angioplasty compared with second-generation DES in pPCI. METHODS: All-cause mortality and net adverse cardiac events (cardiovascular mortality, acute coronary syndrome, ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack, major bleeding, and unplanned target lesion revascularization [TLR]) were compared among all patients treated with DCBs only or with second-generation DES only for first presentation of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) due to de novo disease between January 1, 2016, and November 15, 2019. Patients treated with both DCBs and DES were excluded. Data were analyzed using Cox regression models, Kaplan-Meier estimator plots and propensity score matching. RESULTS: Among 1,139 patients with STEMI due to de novo disease, 452 were treated with DCBs and 687 with DES. After a median follow-up period of >3 years, all-cause mortality was 49 of 452 and 62 of 687 in the DCB and DES groups, respectively (P = 0.18). On multivariable Cox regression analysis, there was no difference in mortality between DCBs and DES in the full and propensity score-matched cohorts. Age, frailty risk, history of heart failure, and family history of ischemic heart disease remained significant independent predictors of mortality. There was no difference in any of the secondary endpoints, including unplanned TLR. CONCLUSIONS: DCB-only angioplasty appears safe compared with DES for STEMI in terms of all-cause mortality and all net adverse cardiac events, including unplanned TLR. DCB may be an efficacious and safe alternative to DES in selected patient groups. (Drug Coated Balloon Only vs Drug Eluting Stent Angioplasty; NCT04482972).

Drug-Coated Balloon and Drug-Eluting Stent Safety in Patients With Femoropopliteal and Severe Chronic Kidney Disease.

Background Patients with severe-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD) were excluded from femoropopliteal disease trials evaluating drug-coated balloons (DCBs) and drug-eluting stents (DESs) versus plain balloon angioplasty (POBA) and bare metal stents (BMSs). We examined the interaction between CKD status and device type for the association with 24-month all-cause mortality and major amputation risk. Methods and Results We studied patients undergoing femoropopliteal interventions (September 2016-December 2018) from Medicare-linked VQI (Vascular Quality Initiative) registry data. We compared outcomes for: (1) early-stage CKD (stages 1-3) receiving DCB/DES, (2) early-stage CKD receiving POBA/BMS, (3) severe-stage (4 and 5) CKD receiving DCB/DES, and (4) severe-stage CKD receiving POBA/BMS. We studied 8799 patients (early-stage CKD: 94%; severe-stage: 6%). DCB/DES use was 57% versus 51% in patients with early-stage versus severe-stage CKD. Twenty-four-month mortality risk for patients with early-stage CKD receiving DCB/DES (reference) was 21% versus 28% (hazard ratio [HR], 1.47 [95% CI, 1.31-1.65]) for those receiving POBA/BMS; patients with severe-stage CKD: those receiving DCB/DES had a 49% (HR, 2.61 [95% CI, 2.06-3.31]) mortality risk versus 52% (HR, 3.64 [95% CI, 2.91-4.55]) for those receiving POBA/BMS (interaction P<0.001). Adjusted analyses attenuated these results. For severe-stage CKD, DCB/DES versus POBA/BMS mortality risk was not significant at 24 months (post hoc comparison P=0.06) but was higher for the POBA/BMS group at 18 months (post hoc P<0.05). Patients with early-stage CKD receiving DCB/DES had the lowest 24-month amputation risk (6%), followed by 11% for early-stage CKD-POBA/BMS, 15% for severe-stage CKD-DCB/DES, and 16% for severe-stage CKD-POBA/BMS (interaction P<0.001). DCB/DES versus POBA/BMS amputation rates in patients with severe-stage CKD did not differ (post hoc P=0.820). Conclusions DCB/DES versus POBA/BMS use in patients with severe-stage CKD was associated with lower mortality and no difference in amputation outcomes.

Animal model assessment of a new design for a coated mitomycin-eluting biodegradable ureteral stent for intracavitary instillation as an adjuvant therapy in upper urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A major limitation in the treatment of upper urinary tract urothelial carcinoma is the limited use of adjuvant therapy due to the drawbacks of current techniques for intracavitary instillation. The aim was to assess, in a large animal model, a biodegradable ureteral stent coated with silk fibroin for mitomycin release, i.e. BraidStent-SF-MMC. METHODS: A total of 14 female pigs with a solitary kidney underwent initial urinalysis, blood chemistry, nephrosonographic, and contrast fluoroscopy assessment of the urinary tract. Later, the BraidStent-SF-MMC was placed retrogradely to assess the mitomycin urine concentration from 0-48 hours. Follow-up was performed weekly until complete stent degradation to assess the macroscopic and microscopic changes in the urinary tract, stent complications. RESULTS: The drug eluting stent released mitomycin for the first 12 h. The main complication was the release of obstructive ureteral coating fragments during the first to third week in 28.5 and 7.1% of animals, respectively, related to urinary pH<7.0, which destabilized the stent coating. Another complication was ureteral strictures between the fourth and sixth week in 21%. The stents were completely degraded by 6-7 weeks. There were no stent-related systemic toxic effects. The success rate was 67.5% and the complication rate was 25.7%. CONCLUSIONS: For the first time, we have shown that a biodegradable anti-cancer drug eluting stent, BraidStent-SF-MMC, provides controlled and well-tolerated release of mitomycin into the upper urinary tract in an animal model. Mitomycin release from a silk fibroin coating could be a compelling approach for adjuvant chemotherapy instillation in upper tract urothelial carcinoma management.

Serial Assessment of Coronary Artery Healing of a Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent at 1, 2, and 3 Months by Optical Coherence Tomography (OCT)-The REPAIR Trial.

BACKGROUND: Although first-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) devices have effectively achieved their main goal of reducing restenosis, their safety has been limited by suboptimal polymer biocompatibility, delayed stent endothelialization, and local drug toxicity, which ultimately prompted the development of new-generation DES options carrying biocompatible or even biodegradable polymers. AIMS: We sought to assess the vessel-healing pattern of the novel sirolimus-eluting Inspiron DES (Scitech Medical) using serial optical coherence tomography (OCT) and assuming the hypothesis that this thin-strut (75-µm), biodegradable-polymer DES promotes a faster healing, with very early strut coverage. METHODS: This is a prospective, multicenter, open-label, single-arm study enrolling 68 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention guided by OCT. These patients were consecutively assigned into 3 groups. The first group had its OCT imaging follow-up performed at 3 months, the second group at 2 months, and the third group at 1 month. RESULTS: Mean age was 59.5 years, 70.6% were male, 41.2% had type 2 diabetes, and 29.4% presented with acute coronary syndrome. A total of 72 lesions were treated and 1.06 stents were implanted per patient. OCT assessment of the stents at 1, 2, and 3 months showed a strut coverage of 90.41%, 93.96%, and 97.21%, respectively (P=.04). CONCLUSION: The Inspiron DES showed an early strut healing pattern, with >90% of the struts covered by neointima within the first month and with almost all struts covered by the third month.

Dynamic assessment of the left main-left circumflex bending angle: Implications for ostial left circumflex artery in-stent restenosis after successful two-stent PCI.

BACKGROUND: Two-stent techniques for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) on left main (LM) bifurcation (LMB) lesions are associated with an increased risk of in-stent restenosis (ISR) at left circumflex artery (LCx) ostium but the underlying mechanisms are incompletely understood. This study sought to investigate the association between cyclic change of LM-LCx bending angle (BALM-LCx) and the risk of ostial LCx ISR following two-stent techniques. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of patients undergoing two-stent PCI for LMB lesions, BALM-LCx and distal bifurcation angle (DBA) were computed with 3-dimensional angiographic reconstruction. The analysis was performed both at end-diastole and end-systole, and the angulation change throughout the cardiac cycle was defined as the cardiac motion-induced angulation change (∆CAngle). RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were included. The mean pre-procedural BALM-LCx was 66.8 ± 16.1° at end-diastole and 54.1 ± 13.3° at end-systole with a range of 13.0 ± 7.7°. Pre-procedural ∆CBALM-LCx > 16.4° was the most relevant predictor of ostial LCx ISR (adjusted OR 11.58, 95% CI 4.04-33.19; p < 0.001). Post-procedural ∆CBALM-LCx > 9.8° and stent-induced diastolic BALM-LCx change > 11.6° were also related with ostial LCx ISR. DBA was positively correlated with BALM-LCx and showed a weaker association of pre-procedural ∆CDBA > 14.5° with ostial LCx ISR (adjusted OR 6.87, 95% CI 2.57-18.37; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional angiographic bending angle is a feasible and reproducible novel method for LMB angulation measurement. A large pre-procedural cyclic change of BALM-LCx was associated with an increased risk of ostial LCx ISR following two-stent techniques.

Prevalence, Management and Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Coronary In-Stent Restenosis: Insights From the France PCI Registry.

BACKGROUND: Despite the evolution of stent technology, there is a non-negligible risk of in-stent restenosis (ISR) after Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Large-scale registry data on the prevalence and clinical management of ISR is lacking. METHODS: The aim was to describe the epidemiology and management of patients with ≥1 ISR lesions treated with PCI (ISR PCI). Data on characteristics, management and clinical outcomes were analyzed for patients undergoing ISR PCI in the France-PCI all-comers registry. RESULTS: Between January 2014 and December 2018, 31,892 lesions were treated in 22,592 patients, 7.3 % of whom underwent ISR PCI. Patients undergoing ISR PCI were older (68.5 vs 67.8; p < 0.001), and more likely to have diabetes (32.7 % vs 25.4 %, p < 0.001), chronic coronary syndrome or multivessel disease. ISR PCI concerned drug eluting stents (DES) ISR in 48.8 % of cases. Patients with ISR lesions were more frequently treated with DES than drug eluting balloon or balloon angioplasty (74.2 %, 11.6 % and 12.9 %, respectively). Intravascular imaging was rarely used. At 1 year, patients with ISR had higher target lesion revascularization rates (4.3 % vs. 1.6 %; HR 2.24 [1.64-3.06]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a large all-comers registry, ISR PCI was not infrequent and associated with worse prognosis than non-ISR PCI. Further studies and technical improvements are warranted to improve the outcomes of ISR PCI.

Prospective, single-centre evaluation of the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions following a decision tree proposing a no-stent strategy in stable patients with coronary artery disease (SCRAP study).

AIM: We evaluated a decision algorithm for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) based on a no-stent strategy, corresponding to a combination of scoring balloon angioplasty (SCBA) and drug-coated balloon (DCB), as a first line approach. Stents were used only in unstable patients, or in case of mandatory bailout stenting (BO-stent). METHODS: From April 2019 to March 2020, 984 consecutive patients, including 1922 lesions, underwent PCI. The 12-month primary end-point was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and target lesion revascularization. Patients were classified into conventional or no-stent strategy groups according to the PCI strategy. In the no-stent strategy group, they were further classified into BO-stent or DCB-only groups. Their metal index was calculated by stent length divided by the total lesion length. RESULTS: The no-stent strategy was applied in 85% of the patients, and it was successful for 65% of them. MACE occurred in 7.1% of the study population, including 4.2% of all-cause death. Target lesion revascularization was required in 1.4%, 3.6%, and 1.5% of patients in the conventional DES, BO-stent, and DCB-only groups, respectively. MACE occurred more often in the elderly and in those treated with at least one stent (metal index greater than 0). CONCLUSIONS: The no-stent strategy, i.e., revascularization of coronary lesions by SCBA followed by DCB and with DES bailout stenting, was effective and safe at 1 year. This PCI approach was applicable on a daily practice in our cath lab. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03893396, first posted on March 28, 2019). Feasibility, safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions following a decision tree proposing a no-stent strategy in stable patients with coronary artery disease. DES: drug eluting stent; SCBA: scoring balloon angioplasty; BO-stent: at least one stent; DCB: drug coated balloon; BMS: bare metal stent; Bailout (dash lines); MACE: major adverse cardiac event.

Cost-Effectiveness of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Bypass Surgery for Patients With Left Main Disease: Results From the EXCEL Trial.

BACKGROUND: The EXCEL trial (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) demonstrated in patients with left main coronary artery disease, no significant difference between coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with everolimus-eluting stents for the composite end point of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction at 5 years. However, all-cause mortality at 5 years was higher with PCI. Long-term cost-effectiveness of these 2 strategies has heretofore not been evaluated. METHODS: From 2010 to 2014, 1905 patients with left main coronary artery disease were randomized to CABG (n=957) or PCI (n=948). Costs ($2019) were assessed over 5 years using resource-based costing and Medicare reimbursement rates. Health utilities were assessed using the EuroQOL 5-dimension questionnaire. Five-year EXCEL data in combination with US lifetables were used to develop a Markov model to evaluate lifetime cost-effectiveness. An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio <$50 000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained was considered highly cost-effective. RESULTS: Index revascularization procedure costs were $4,850/patient higher with CABG, and total costs for the index hospitalization were $17 610/patient higher with CABG ($32 297 versus $19 687, P<0.001). Cumulative 5-year costs were $20 449/patient higher with CABG. CABG was projected to increase lifetime costs by $21 551 while increasing quality-adjusted life expectancy by 0.49 QALYs, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $44 235/QALY. In a post hoc sensitivity analysis using mortality hazard ratios from a meta-analysis of all randomized CABG versus PCI in left main disease trials, the gain associated with CABG was 0.08 to 0.14 QALYs, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $139 775 to $232 710/QALY gained. CONCLUSIONS: Based on data from the EXCEL trial, CABG is an economically attractive revascularization strategy compared with PCI over a lifetime horizon for patients with significant left main coronary artery disease. However, this conclusion is sensitive to the long-term mortality rates with the 2 strategies, and CABG is no longer highly cost-effective when substituting the pooled treatment effect from the 4 major PCI versus CABG trials for left main disease. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifier: NCT01205776.

Patient-level and external factors in the use of drug-coated balloons and drug-eluting stents in femoropopliteal endovascular interventions.

OBJECTIVE: Drug-coated balloons (DCB) and drug-eluting stents (DES) have been rapidly adopted for femoropopliteal endovascular interventions due to their favorable patency rates. It is unclear whether choice of using drug coated devices versus bare metal stents (BMS) or plain balloon angioplasty (POBA) as primary treatment in femoropopliteal disease is mostly associated with patient-level factors, safety concerns, or by operator preferences. This study sought to evaluate factors associated with their use in a contemporary dataset. METHODS: All femoropopliteal lesions treated with endovascular interventions between 2016 and 2019 from the Vascular Quality Initiative registry were included. For each procedure, a primary treatment was identified based on the following hierarchy: DES > DCB > BMS > POBA. A hierarchical logistic regression model predicting DCB or DES use included patient-level characteristics, key events (period after Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement change, January 2018 [vs before] and period after Katsanos meta-analysis December 2018 [vs before]), and random effects for site and operator. Operator-level variability for DCB and DES use was summarized with an adjusted median odds ratio (MOR). RESULTS: A total of 57,753 femoropopliteal endovascular procedures were included. Poor functional status (odds ratio [OR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.94), prior anticoagulant use (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97), higher Rutherford classification (OR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.84-0.88), chronic kidney disease stage 4 or 5 (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.86-0.98), and the period after the Katsanos meta-analysis publication (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.29-0.32) were associated with a lower odds of DCB or DES use; whereas female sex (OR, 1.12; 95% CI,1.08-1.17), prior lesion treatment (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.11-1.22), diabetes (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 1.02-1.12), Trans-Atlantic Inter-Society Consensus class B (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.09-1.24) and C (OR, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.12-1.28), and the period after the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services reimbursement change (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 1.03-1.14) were associated with a higher odds of DCB or DES use. Significant variability in use was found across operators (adjusted MOR, 2.70; 95% CI, 2.55-2.85) and centers (adjusted MOR, 2.89; 95% CI, 2.50-3.27). CONCLUSIONS: DCB or DES use in femoropopliteal disease demonstrates wide variability across operators and is linked strongly with external factors, followed by anatomic lesion characteristics and a history of previous interventions. Future work needs to focus on tailoring DCB or DES use to patient and lesion characteristics and to develop appropriate use guidelines integrating these factors.

Cost-effectiveness of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (Eluvia) compared to Zilver PTX for endovascular femoropopliteal intervention.

OBJECTIVES: Antiproliferative therapies based on paclitaxel have been developed to extend the durability of endovascular interventions for lower-extremity atherosclerotic peripheral artery disease, resulting in improved primary vessel patency and fewer target lesion revascularizations. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the sustained-release, paclitaxel-eluting Eluvia stent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) versus the paclitaxel-coated Zilver PTX stent (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) for endovascular intervention in the superficial femoral or proximal popliteal artery. DESIGN: A microsimulation model was constructed from a United States Medicare perspective with a 24-month time horizon. Patients entering the model were assigned to initial endovascular intervention with either Eluvia or Zilver PTX. Each month patients were exposed to the risks of primary vessel patency loss, target lesion revascularization, amputation, and death. Clinical input parameters were taken from a randomized trial (IMPERIAL) comparing the two interventions at 24-months follow-up. Cost parameters were obtained from analyses of Medicare administrative and claims data. Cost-effectiveness analysis entailed sampling a complete set of clinical and cost parameters from their respective distributions, and then running cohorts of 10,000 patients through each intervention arm of the model. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: In the base case microsimulation, at 24 months, the modeled target lesion revascularization was 11.6% for Eluvia and 19.0% for Zilver PTX, and the mean total direct costs were $20,010 and $21,356, respectively (Eluvia average savings=$1,346). In probabilistic sensitivity analyses, Eluvia was cost-effective in 87.8% of all simulations at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $10,000 per target lesion revascularization prevented. Eluvia was more effective and less costly (dominant) than Zilver PTX in 73.6% of simulations. CONCLUSIONS: In this comparison of a paclitaxel-eluting to a paclitaxel-coated stent for endovascular femoropopliteal intervention, Eluvia was more effective and less costly (dominant) than Zilver PTX from a US Medicare perspective. These findings should be considered when formulating reimbursement policy and clinical practice guidelines.

Paclitaxel is a drug used in the treatment of peripheral artery disease (PAD) to help maintain primary vessel patency and reduce the need for revascularization procedures. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of the paclitaxel-eluting Eluvia stent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA) versus the paclitaxel-coated Zilver PTX stent (Cook Medical, Bloomington, IN) in Medicare patients with PAD. Cost-effectiveness is defined as the degree to which a particular treatment option is effective relative to its costs. Therefore, this study compared both the effectiveness, in terms of target lesion revascularization rates, and the costs of Eluvia versus Zilver PTX over 24 months.A microsimulation model was developed from a United States Medicare perspective with a 24-month time horizon. Simulated patients entered the model and were assigned to receive either Eluvia or Zilver PTX. Monthly, patients were exposed to the risks of primary vessel patency loss, target lesion revascularization (TLR), amputation, and death. These risks were taken from a randomized controlled trial that compared Eluvia and Zilver PTX over 24 months. Patients also accrued costs over time. The costs used in the model were obtained from Medicare administrative and claims data analyses.In health economics, a treatment is considered to be the dominant treatment option if it is both more effective and less costly than the alternative treatment. In this case, Eluvia was found to be dominant over Zilver PTX because it was associated with lower TLR rates and lower costs. These findings should be considered when formulating reimbursement policy and clinical practice guidelines.