Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stent vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results of the randomized ABSORB ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-TROFI II trial.

AIMS: Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) feature thrombus-rich lesions with large necrotic core, which are usually associated with delayed arterial healing and impaired stent-related outcomes. The use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (Absorb) has the potential to overcome these limitations owing to restoration of native vessel lumen and physiology at long term. The purpose of this randomized trial was to compare the arterial healing response at short term, as a surrogate for safety and efficacy, between the Absorb and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients with STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS: ABSORB-STEMI TROFI II was a multicentre, single-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated 1:1 to treatment with the Absorb or EES. The primary endpoint was the 6-month optical frequency domain imaging healing score (HS) based on the presence of uncovered and/or malapposed stent struts and intraluminal filling defects. Main secondary endpoint included the device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) according to the Academic Research Consortium definition. Between 06 January 2014 and 21 September 2014, 191 patients (Absorb [n = 95] or EES [n = 96]; mean age 58.6 years old; 17.8% females) were enrolled at eight centres. At 6 months, HS was lower in the Absorb arm when compared with EES arm [1.74 (2.39) vs. 2.80 (4.44); difference (90% CI) -1.06 (-1.96, -0.16); Pnon-inferiority < 0.001]. Device-oriented composite endpoint was also comparably low between groups (1.1% Absorb vs. 0% EES). One case of definite subacute stent thrombosis occurred in the Absorb arm (1.1% vs. 0% EES; P = ns). CONCLUSION: Stenting of culprit lesions with Absorb in the setting of STEMI resulted in a nearly complete arterial healing which was comparable with that of metallic EES at 6 months. These findings provide the basis for further exploration in clinically oriented outcome trials.

Thin- versus thick-strut polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents: the BioFreedom QCA randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The BioFreedom drug-coated stent with a stainless steel platform (BF-SS) has been demonstrated to be efficacious in patients at high bleeding risk and receiv-ing only one-month dual antiplatelet therapy. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the new BioFreedom Ultra drug-coated stent with a thin-strut cobalt-chromium platform (BF-CoCr) compared to the BF-SS in an all-comers population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: This was a prospective, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. The primary endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) as determined by quantitative coronary angiography at nine-month follow-up. Clinical evaluation was performed at one year. RESULTS: A total of 200 patients were randomised (1:1) to either the BF-CoCr or the BF-SS stent at eight centres in Spain and Denmark. Baseline clinical and lesion characteristics were similar between the groups. Mean age was 66 years and 23% were female. The mean number of stents implanted per patient was 1.5. At nine-month follow-up, mean in-stent LLL was 0.34±0.49 mm in the BF-CoCr group versus 0.29±0.37 mm in the BF-SS group, p=0.005 for non-inferiority. At one year, target lesion failure was similar between the groups (7.3% in BF-CoCr vs 9.3% in the BF-SS group; p=0.60). CONCLUSIONS: The BF-CoCr was non-inferior to the BF-SS in terms of in-stent LLL at nine months. Larger studies powered for clinical endpoints are warranted to compare the efficacy of this new platform with currently available DES.

Arterial healing following primary PCI using the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) versus the durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent (XIENCE) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the randomised TROFI II study.

AIMS: The Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) provides similar clinical outcomes compared with a durable polymer-based everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in stable coronary artery disease patients. ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) lesions have been associated with delayed arterial healing and impaired stent-related outcomes. The purpose of the present study is to compare directly the arterial healing response, angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes between the Absorb BVS and metallic EES. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 191 patients with acute STEMI were randomly allocated to treatment with the Absorb BVS or a metallic EES 1:1. The primary endpoint is the neointimal healing (NIH) score, which is calculated based on a score taking into consideration the presence of uncovered and malapposed stent struts, intraluminal filling defects and excessive neointimal proliferation, as detected by optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) six months after the index procedure. The study will provide 90% power to show non-inferiority of the Absorb BVS compared with the EES. CONCLUSIONS: This will be the first randomised study investigating the arterial healing response following implantation of the Absorb BVS compared with the EES. The healing response assessed by a novel NIH score in conjunction with results on angiographic efficacy parameters and device-oriented events will elucidate disease-specific applications of bioresorbable scaffolds.