Long-term outcomes after coronary intervention with biodegradable polymer stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) may have worse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention compared to patients without ACS. AIMS: To compare 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with and without ACS treated with biodegradable polymers, the ultrathin strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) or the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES). METHODS: The Scandinavian Organisation for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome VII is a randomized trial comparing O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer setting. Of 2525 patients, 1329 (53%) patients had ACS and 1196 (47%) patients were without ACS. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF) (a composite of cardiac death, target lesion myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) and definite stent thrombosis within 5 years. RESULTS: At 5-year follow-up, TLF did not differ significantly between patients with and without ACS (12.3% vs. 13.2%; rate ratio (RR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.44), whereas the risk of definite stent thrombosis was increased in patients with ACS (2.3% vs. 1.3; RR: 2.01 [95% CI: 1.01-3.98]). In patients with ACS, the rate of TLF was similar between O-SES and N-BES (12.4% vs. 12.3%; RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.74-1.40). The reduced risk of definite stent thrombosis in O-SES treated ACS patients within the first year (0.2% vs. 1.6%; RR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.02-0.93) was not maintained after 5 years (1.8% vs. 2.7%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.37-1.63). CONCLUSION: Patients with ACS had an increased risk of stent thrombosis regardless of the stent type used. Long-term outcomes were similar for ACS patients treated with O-SES or N-BES at 5 years.

Impact of diabetes on 1-year clinical outcome in patients undergoing revascularization with the BioFreedom stents or the Orsiro stents from the SORT OUT IX trial.

This sub-study of the SORT OUT IX trial sought to compare clinical outcomes between patients with diabetes randomized to implantation of either the polymer-free biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom stent (BF-BES) or the ultra-thin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES). Patients with diabetes have an increased risk of target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The impact of different stent types in patients with diabetes is still discussed. A total of 607 of the 3151 patients (19.3%) enrolled in the SORT OUT IX study had diabetes. Randomization was stratified by patients with/without diabetes; 304 received BF-BES and 303 O-SES. The primary endpoint was TLF, which was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than the index lesion) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 1 year. After 1 year, patients with diabetes had higher TLF (7.2% vs. 3.7%, incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.50), than patients without diabetes. TLF did not differ significantly between BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes (8.2% vs. 6.3%, IRR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.63-2.20). In patients with diabetes, cardiac death occurred in 2.3% of BF-BES and in 3.6% of O-SES (IRR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.23-1.45) and TLR occurred in 5.3% and 2.3% of BF-BES and O-SES, respectively (IRR: 2.12; 95% CI: 0.81-5.56). Definite stent thrombosis rates of 1.3% were found in both stent types. Patients with diabetes had higher 1-year TLF rate after PCI compared to patients without diabetes, whereas TLF did not differ significantly between the two stent types BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes.

Optimal lesion preparation before implantation of a Magmaris bioresorbable scaffold in patients with coronary artery stenosis: Rationale, design and methodology of the OPTIMIS study.

Introduction: Percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of a bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) provide the vessel support for a limited period allowing the vessel to restore normal vasomotion after degradation of the BRS, opposed to treatment with drug-eluting stents where the metal persist in the vessel wall. Late lumen loss and reduction in lumen area after implantation have been reported. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether intense pre-dilatation before BRS implantation resulted in less reduction of minimal lumen area at 6- and 12-month follow-up after implantation of a Magmaris BRS (MgBRS). Coronary imaging with optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was assessed to track changes in lumen and vessel dimensions. Methods: The prospective Optimal lesion PreparaTion before Implantation of the Magmaris bioresorbable scaffold In patients with coronary artery Stenosis (OPTIMIS) study randomly assigned eighty-two patients with chronic coronary syndrome to two pre-dilatation treatment strategies. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to pre-dilatation with either a non-compliant scoring balloon or a standard non-compliant balloon prior to implantation of a MgBRS. The treated segment was evaluated with OCT and IVUS at baseline, after 6 and 12 months to assess changes in lumen and vessel dimensions. The hypothesis was that more intense pre-dilatation with a non-compliant scoring balloon before MgBRS implantation can reduce the risk of late lumen reduction compared to standard pre-dilatation. The power calculation used expected MLA after 6 months (6.22 mm2 for the scoring balloon and 5.01 mm2 for the standard non-compliant balloon), power of 80 %, significance level of 0.05 and expected drop-out rate of 15 %, requiring 82 patients to be enrolled. Results: Eighty-two patients were included in the study. Enrollment was from December 2020 to September 2023. Conclusion: The hypothesis was that more intense pre-dilatation with a non-compliant scoring balloon before MgBRS implantation can reduce the risk of late lumen reduction compared to standard pre-dilatation.

Outcomes and performance of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in clinical practice: one-yearresults of the ACURATE neo2 PMCF Study.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an effective treatment for patients with aortic stenosis; however, complications related to paravalvular leakage (PVL) persist, including increased risk of mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and rehospitalisation. AIMS: We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes and valve performance at 1 year in patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the ACURATE neo2 valve in a post-market clinical setting. METHODS: Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 safety events were assessed up to 1 year. Independent core laboratories evaluated echocardiographic measures of valve performance and hypoattenuated leaflet thickening (HALT; as measured by four-dimensional computed tomography). RESULTS: The study enrolled 250 patients (64% female; mean age: 81 years; baseline Society of Thoracic Surgeons risk score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 patients were implanted with ACURATE neo2. All-cause mortality was 0.8% at 30 days and 5.1% at 1 year. The 1-year rates for stroke and disabling stroke were 3.0% and 1.3%, respectively. Overall, HALT of >50% leaflet involvement of at least one leaflet was present in 9% of patients at 30 days and in 12% of patients at 1 year. No association was observed between the presence of HALT and 1-year clinical or haemodynamic outcomes. Early haemodynamic improvements were maintained up to 1 year (mean aortic valve gradient: 47.6±14.5 mmHg at baseline, 7.6±3.2 mmHg at 1 year; mean aortic valve area: 0.7±0.2 cm2 at baseline, 1.7±0.4 cm2 at 1 year). At 1 year, 99% of patients had mild or no/trace PVL (<1% had moderate PVL; no patient had severe PVL). CONCLUSIONS: The study outcomes confirm favourable performance and safety up to 1 year in patients treated with ACURATE neo2 in routine clinical practice. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04655248).

The Influence of Microcirculatory Dysfunction on the Resting Full Cycle Ratio Compared to Fractional Flow Reserve.

BACKGROUND: The relation between the resting full cycle ratio (RFR) and fractional flow reserve (FFR) is not fully understood. This study aims to investigate the influence of coronary microvascular dysfunction, assessed by the index of microvascular resistance (IMR), on RFR compared to FFR in patients undergoing functional assessment for coronary stenosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two-hundred patients with borderline stenosis underwent functional assessment of RFR, FFR, coronary flow reserve (CFR) and IMR. Retriever operator curve analysis was performed to assess the diagnostic value of RFR in patients with (IMR ≥ 24) and (IMR < 24). RESULTS: Median RFR did not differ significantly in patients with IMR ≥ 24 compared to patients with IMR < 24: 0.89 (interquartile range (IQR) 0.84, 0.95) vs. 0.90 (IQR 0.84, 0.92), p = 0.29). FFR was significantly higher in patients with IMR ≥ 24 compared to patients with IMR < 24: median FFR 0.85 (IQR (0.76, 0.92)) vs. 0.82 (IQR 0.73, 0.86), p = 0.009, and median CFR was significantly lower 1.80 (IQR 1.40, 2.55) vs. 2.70 (IQR 1.80, 3.95), p < 0.001. The diagnostic value of RFR was high (Area under the curve (AUC) 0.89 95 % Confidence Interval: [0.85, 0.93]) and AUC did not differ between patients with IMR ≥ 24 compared to patients with IMR < 24: 0.89 vs. 0.90, p = 0.89. An overall optimal cut off of 0.88 was identified. The cut off did not differ significantly between patients with IMR ≥ 24 compared to patients with IMR < 24: 0.88 vs. 0.90, p = 0.397. CONCLUSION: In patients with coronary borderline stenosis, the coronary microvascular function did not influence on the cut off values or AUC of RFR compared to FFR.

Five-Year Clinical Outcome of the Biodegradable Polymer Ultrathin Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Compared to the Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: From the SORT OUT VII Trial.

BACKGROUND: Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents were developed to improve safety and efficacy outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, few long-term follow-up efficacy studies are available. The study sought to investigate 5-year results from the SORT OUT VII trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome) comparing the biodegradable polymer ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) versus the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES). METHODS: This registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, noninferiority trial compared O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer population. The composite primary end point, target lesion failure, consisted of cardiac death, myocardial infarction related to the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year. Follow-up was extended to 5 years. RESULTS: Five-year follow-up was completed for 2521 patients (99.8%). Five-year target lesion failure did not differ between O-SES (12.4%) and N-BES (13.1%; rate ratio [RR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.18]). Cardiac death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.67-1.34]), target myocardial infarction (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.76-1.71]), target lesion revascularization (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.67-1.21]), and definite stent thrombosis rates (RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.41-1.33]) did not differ significantly between the 2 stents. Within the first year, definite ST was significantly lower for O-SES (0.4%) compared to N-BES (1.2%; RR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12-0.92]), but no difference was from 1 through 5 years: O-SES 1.2% and N-BES 0.9% (RR, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.58-2.82]). CONCLUSIONS: Five years after treatment with biodegradable polymer stents, target lesion failure did not differ among O-SES and N-BES. Definite stent thrombosis was less often seen within the first year in the O-SES but the difference was not maintained after 5 years. REGISTRATION: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01879358.

Case report: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement in a large bicuspid anatomy using the XL-Myval 32 mm.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is a recommended intervention for selected population with severe aortic stenosis (AS). Bicuspid aortic valve (BAV) anatomy has been categorized as an unfavorable anatomy for TAVR due to multiple considerations as exclusion from randomized trials in addition to the challenging and unpredictable anatomy. The anatomical constraints of BAV include the large anatomy of the annulus, sinus of Valsalva, and aorta (aortopathy), in addition to significant calcifications of the device landing zone. Most commercial transcatheter heart valves (THV) have upper dimension limits of the annulus and area in which the device can be implanted safely without significant oversizing. Myval-XL THVs (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., India) are balloon-expandable valves (BEV) that have been developed with two new sizes, 30.5 and 32 mm, aiming to treat patients with large annulus dimensions and that exceed the upper limit of an ordinary device's sizing matrix. This case series report describes TAVR using the XL-Myval 32 mm THV in three European patients with symptomatic severe bicuspid aortic stenosis with significant calcifications and large annular dimensions exceeding the limits of the other THVs.

Polymer-free biolimus-coated stents versus ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents: two-year outcomes of the randomised SORT OUT IX trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with high bleeding risk, the BioFreedom stent is safer and more effective than a bare metal stent. However, at the one-year follow-up of the SORT OUT IX trial, the BioFreedom stent did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority for target lesion failure (TLF) when compared with the Orsiro stent and had a higher incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR). AIMS: The aim of the study was to compare the two-year outcomes following coronary implantation of the BioFreedom or the Orsiro stents in all-comer patients. METHODS: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) IX trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised clinical trial comparing the BioFreedom and the Orsiro stents. The primary endpoint, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI; not related to other lesions) and TLR. RESULTS: A total of 1,572 patients were randomised to treatment with the BioFreedom stent and 1,579 patients with the Orsiro stent. At two-year follow-up, TLF was 7.8% in the BioFreedom and 6.3% in the Orsiro stent groups (rate ratio [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.61). Risks of cardiac death, MI and definite stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the groups, whereas more patients in the BioFreedom group had TLR (5.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.26-2.89) attributable to a higher risk of TLR within the first year (3.5% vs 1.3%; RR 2.77, 95% CI: 1.66-4.62). CONCLUSIONS: At two years, there were no significant differences between the BioFreedom and Orsiro stents for TLF. TLR was significantly higher with the BioFreedom stent due to higher risk of TLR within the first year.

Clinical outcomes of the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve: a prospective, multicenter, observational, post-market surveillance study.

BACKGROUND: The next-generation ACURATE neo2 transcatheter aortic valve was designed for simplified implantation and to mitigate the risk of paravalvular leak (PVL) compared to the earlier device. AIMS: To collect clinical outcomes and device performance data, including echocardiography and 4-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT) data, with the ACURATE neo2 transcatheter heart valve in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: ACURATE neo2 PMCF is a single-arm, multicentre study of patients with severe AS treated in routine clinical practice. The primary safety endpoint was all-cause mortality at 30-days. The primary imaging endpoint was hypo-attenuated leaflet thickening (HALT), measured by core laboratory-adjudicated 4D-CT at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included VARC safety endpoints, procedural success, and evaluation of valve performance via core laboratory-adjudicated echocardiography. RESULTS: The study enrolled 250 patients at 18 European centres (mean age: 80.8 years; 63.6% female; mean STS score: 2.9±2.0%); 246 (98.4%) were successfully treated with ACURATE neo2. The 30-day rates for mortality and disabling stroke were 0.8% and 0%, respectively. The new permanent pacemaker implantation rate was 6.5%. HALT >50% was present in 9.3% of patients at 30 days. Valve haemodynamics improved from baseline to 30 days (mean aortic valve gradient: from 47.6±14.5 mmHg to 8.6±3.9 mmHg; mean aortic valve area: from 0.7±0.2 cm2 to 1.6±0.4 cm2). At 30 days, PVL was evaluated as none/trace in 79.2% of patients, mild in 18.9%, moderate in 1.9%, and severe in 0%. CONCLUSIONS: The study results support the safety and efficacy of TAVI with ACURATE neo2 in patients in routine clinical practice.