Comparison of long-term clinical outcomes in multivessel coronary artery disease patients treated either with bioresoarbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent: 5-year results of the CENTURY II randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of a sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer (BP-SES; Ultimaster), in comparison to a benchmark everolimus-eluting, permanent polymer stent (PP-EES; Xience), in a prespecified subgroup of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) enrolled in the CENTURY II trial. BACKGROUND: The use of coronary stenting in high-risk subgroups, like MVD patients, is rising. The clinical evidence, including long-term comparative analysis of the efficacy and safety benefits of different new-generation drug eluting stents, however, remains insufficient. METHODS: Among 1,119 patients (intention-to-treat) enrolled in the CENTURY II prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter trial, a prespecified subgroup of 456 MVD patients were allocated by stratified randomization to treatment with BP-SES (n = 225) or PP-EES (n = 231). The previously reported primary endpoint of this study was freedom from target lesion failure (TLF: a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction [MI] and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization) at 9 months. RESULTS: In this MVD substudy, baseline patient, lesion and procedure characteristics were similar between the treatment arms. At 1 and 5 years, both BP-SES and PP-EES displayed low and comparable rates of TLF (5.3 vs. 7.8%; p = .29 and 10.2 vs. 13.4%; p = .29), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.4 vs. 1.3%; p = .33 and 0.9 vs. 1.7%; p = .43), respectively. Composite endpoint of cardiac death and MI, and patient-oriented composite endpoint of any death, MI, and coronary revascularizations were also similar. CONCLUSIONS: These results confirm good long-term safety and efficacy of the studied bioresorbable polymer stent in this high-risk patient population.

Design and rationale of the Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Standard DAPT Regimen (MASTER DAPT) Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in high-bleeding risk (HBR) patients with coronary artery disease treated with newer-generation drug-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stents remains unclear. DESIGN: MASTER DAPT (clinicaltrial.govNCT03023020) is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing an abbreviated versus a standard duration of antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable polymer-coated Ultimaster (TANSEI) sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in approximately 4,300 HBR patients recruited from ≥100 interventional cardiology centers globally. After a mandatory 30-day dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) run-in phase, patients are randomized to (a) a single antiplatelet regimen until study completion or up to 5 months in patients with clinically indicated oral anticoagulation (experimental 1-month DAPT group) or (b) continue DAPT for at least 5 months in patients without or 2 in patients with concomitant indication to oral anticoagulation, followed by a single antiplatelet regimen (standard antiplatelet regimen). With a final sample size of 4,300 patients, this study is powered to assess the noninferiority of the abbreviated antiplatelet regimen with respect to the net adverse clinical and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events composite end points and if satisfied for the superiority of abbreviated as compared to standard antiplatelet therapy duration in terms of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Study end points will be adjudicated by a blinded Clinical Events Committee. CONCLUSIONS: The MASTER DAPT study is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at ascertaining the optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients treated with sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stent implantation.

Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: No medium-term data are available on the random comparison between everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds and everolimus-eluting metallic stents. The study aims to demonstrate two mechanistic properties of the bioresorbable scaffold: increase in luminal dimensions as a result of recovered vasomotion of the scaffolded vessel. METHODS: The ABSORB II trial is a prospective, randomised, active-controlled, single-blind, parallel two-group, multicentre clinical trial. We enrolled eligible patients aged 18-85 years with evidence of myocardial ischaemia and one or two de-novo native lesions in different epicardial vessels. We randomly assigned patients (2:1) to receive treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) or treatment with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent (Xience; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetes status and number of planned target lesions. At 3 year follow-up, the primary endpoint was superiority of the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold versus the Xience metallic stent in angiographic vasomotor reactivity after administration of intracoronary nitrate. The co-primary endpoint is the non-inferiority of angiographic late luminal loss. For the endpoint of vasomotion, the comparison was tested using a two-sided t test. For the endpoint of late luminal loss, non-inferiority was tested using a one-sided asymptotic test, against a non-inferiority margin of 0·14 mm. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01425281. FINDINGS: Between Nov 28, 2011, and June 4, 2013, we enrolled 501 patients and randomly assigned them to the Absorb group (335 patients, 364 lesions) or the Xience group (166 patients, 182 lesions). The vasomotor reactivity at 3 years was not statistically different (Absorb group 0·047 mm [SD 0·109] vs Xience group 0·056 mm [0·117]; psuperiority=0·49), whereas the late luminal loss was larger in the Absorb group than in the Xience group (0·37 mm [0·45] vs 0·25 mm [0·25]; pnon-inferiority=0·78). This difference in luminal dimension was confirmed by intravascular ultrasound assessment of the minimum lumen area (4·32 mm2 [SD 1·48] vs 5·38 mm2 [1·51]; p<0·0001). The secondary endpoints of patient-oriented composite endpoint, Seattle Angina Questionnaire score, and exercise testing were not statistically different in both groups. However, a device-oriented composite endpoint was significantly different between the Absorb group and the Xience group (10% vs 5%, hazard ratio 2·17 [95% CI 1·01-4·70]; log-rank test p=0·0425), mainly driven by target vessel myocardial infarction (6% vs 1%; p=0·0108), including peri-procedural myocardial infarction (4% vs 1%; p=0·16). INTERPRETATION: The trial did not meet its co-primary endpoints of superior vasomotor reactivity and non-inferior late luminal loss for the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold with respect to the metallic stent, which was found to have significantly lower late luminal loss than the Absorb scaffold. A higher rate of device-oriented composite endpoint due to target vessel myocardial infarction, including peri-procedural myocardial infarction, was observed in the Absorb group. The patient-oriented composite endpoint, anginal status, and exercise testing, were not statistically different between both devices at 3 years. Future studies should investigate the clinical impact of accurate intravascular imaging in sizing the device and in optimising the scaffold implantation. The benefit and need for prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable scaffold implantation could also become a topic for future clinical research. FUNDING: Abbott Vascular.

A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1-year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite rapid dissemination of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold for treatment for coronary artery disease, no data from comparisons with its metallic stent counterpart are available. In a randomised controlled trial we aimed to compare an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent. Here we report secondary clinical and procedural outcomes after 1 year of follow-up. METHODS: In a single-blind, multicentre, randomised trial, we enrolled eligible patients aged 18-85 years with evidence of myocardial ischaemia and one or two de-novo native lesions in different epicardial vessels. We randomly assigned patients in a 2:1 ratio to receive treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (Absorb, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) or treatment with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent (Xience, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA). Randomisation was stratified by diabetes status and number of planned target lesions. The co-primary endpoints of this study are vasomotion (change in mean lumen diameter before and after nitrate administration at 3 years) and difference between minimum lumen diameter (after nitrate administration) after the index procedure and at 3 years. Secondary endpoints were procedural performance assessed by quantitative angiography and intravascular ultrasound; composite clinical endpoints based on death, myocardial infarction, and coronary revascularisation; device and procedural success; and angina status assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire and exercise testing at 6 and 12 months. Cumulative angina rate based on adverse event reporting was analysed post hoc. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01425281. FINDINGS: Between Nov 28, 2011, and June 4, 2013, we enrolled 501 patients and randomly assigned them to the bioresorbable scaffold group (335 patients, 364 lesions) or the metallic stent group (166 patients, 182 lesions). Dilatation pressure and balloon diameter at the highest pressure during implantation or postdilatation were higher and larger in the metallic stent group, whereas the acute recoil post implantation was similar (0.19 mm for both, p=0.85). Acute lumen gain was lower for the bioresorbable scaffold by quantitative coronary angiography (1.15 mm vs 1.46 mm, p<0.0001) and quantitative intravascular ultrasound (2.85 mm(2)vs 3.60 mm(2), p<0.0001), resulting in a smaller lumen diameter or area post procedure. At 1 year, however, cumulative rates of first new or worsening angina from adverse event reporting were lower (72 patients [22%] in the bioresorbable scaffold group vs 50 [30%] in the metallic stent group, p=0.04), whereas performance during maximum exercise and angina status by SAQ were similar. The 1-year composite device orientated endpoint was similar between the bioresorbable scaffold and metallic stent groups (16 patients [5%] vs five patients [3%], p=0.35). Three patients in the bioresorbable scaffold group had definite or probable scaffold thromboses (one definite acute, one definite sub-acute, and one probable late), compared with no patients in the metallic stent group. There were 17 (5%) major cardiac adverse events in the bioresorbable scaffold group compared with five (3%) events in the metallic stent group, with the most common adverse events being myocardial infarction (15 cases [4%] vs two cases [1%], respectively) and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularisation (four cases [1%] vs three cases [2%], respectively). INTERPRETATION: The everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold showed similar 1-year composite secondary clinical outcomes to the everolimus-eluting metallic stent. FUNDING: Abbott Vascular.

Outcomes and regional differences in practice in a worldwide coronary stent registry.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to assess the performance of a new generation thin-strut sirolimus-eluting coronary stent with abluminal biodegradable polymer in an all comer population. The secondary objective was to detail differences in contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) practice worldwide. METHODS: e-Ultimaster was an all-comer, prospective, global registry (NCT02188355) with independent event adjudication enrolling patients undergoing PCI with the study stent. The primary outcome measure was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and clinically driven target lesion revascularisation. Data were stratified according to 4 geographical regions. RESULTS: A total of 37 198 patients were enrolled (Europe 69.2%, Asia 17.8%, Africa/Middle East 6.6% and South America/Mexico 6.5%) and 1-year follow-up was available for 35 389 patients (95.1%). One-year TLF occurred in 3.2% of the patients, ranging from 2% (Africa/Middle East) to 4.1% (South America/Mexico). In patients with acute coronary syndrome, potent P2Y12 inhibitors were prescribed in 48% of patients at discharge, while at 1 year 72% were on any dual antiplatelet therapy. Lipid-lowering treatment was administered in 80.9% and 75.5% of patients at discharge and 1 year, respectively. Regional differences in the profile of the treated patients as well as in PCI practice were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this investigation with worldwide representation, contemporary PCI using a new generation thin-strut sirolimus-eluting coronary stent with abluminal biodegradable polymer was associated with low 1-year TLF across clinical presentations and continents. Suboptimal adherence to current recommendations around antiplatelet and lipid lowering treatments was detected.

Impact of Medication Nonadherence in a Clinical Trial of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Nonadherence to antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is common, even in clinical trials. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of nonadherence to study protocol regimens in the MASTER DAPT (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen) trial. METHODS: At 1-month after PCI, 4,579 high bleeding risk patients were randomized to single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) for 11 months (or 5 months in patients on oral anticoagulation [OAC]) or dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for ≥2 months followed by SAPT. Coprimary outcomes included net adverse clinical events (NACE), major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACE), and major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding (MCB) at 335 days. Inverse probability-of-censoring weights were used to correct for nonadherence Academic Research Consortium type 2 or 3. RESULTS: In total, 464 (20.2%) patients in the abbreviated-treatment and 214 (9.4%) in the standard-treatment groups incurred nonadherence Academic Research Consortium type 2 or 3. At inverse probability-of-censoring weights analyses, NACE (HR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.88-1.27) or MACE (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.83-1.40) did not differ, and MCB was lower with abbreviated compared with standard treatment (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.60-0.73) consistently across OAC subgroups; among OAC patients, SAPT discontinuation 6 months after PCI was associated with similar MACE and lower MCB (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.22-0.99) compared with SAPT continuation. CONCLUSIONS: In the MASTER DAPT adherent population, 1-month compared with ≥3-month DAPT was associated with similar NACE or MACE and lower MCB. Among OAC patients, SAPT discontinuation after 6 months was associated with similar MACE and lower MCB than SAPT continuation (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen [MASTER DAPT]; NCT03023020).

Abbreviated Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Stenting in Patients With Myocardial Infarction at High Bleeding Risk.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy (APT) after coronary stenting in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) presenting with an acute coronary syndrome remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of an abbreviated APT regimen after coronary stenting in an HBR population presenting with acute or recent myocardial infarction. METHODS: In the MASTER DAPT trial, 4,579 patients at HBR were randomized after 1 month of dual APT (DAPT) to abbreviated (DAPT stopped and 11 months single APT or 5 months in patients with oral anticoagulants) or nonabbreviated APT (DAPT for minimum 3 months) strategies. Randomization was stratified by acute or recent myocardial infarction at index procedure. Coprimary outcomes at 335 days after randomization were net adverse clinical outcomes events (NACE); major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE); and type 2, 3, or 5 Bleeding Academic Research Consortium bleeding. RESULTS: NACE and MACCE did not differ with abbreviated vs nonabbreviated APT regimens in patients with an acute or recent myocardial infarction (n = 1,780; HR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.61-1.12 and HR: 0.86; 95% CI: 0.62-1.19, respectively) or without an acute or recent myocardial infarction (n = 2,799; HR: 1.03; 95% CI: 0.77-1.38 and HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.80-1.59; Pinteraction = 0.31 and 0.25, respectively). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was significantly reduced in patients with or without an acute or recent myocardial infarction (HR: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.46-0.91 and HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.54-0.92; Pinteraction = 0.72) with abbreviated APT. CONCLUSIONS: A 1-month DAPT strategy in patients with HBR presenting with an acute or recent myocardial infarction results in similar NACE and MACCE rates and reduces bleedings compared with a nonabbreviated DAPT strategy. (Management of High Bleeding Risk Patients Post Bioresorbable Polymer Coated Stent Implantation With an Abbreviated Versus Prolonged DAPT Regimen [MASTER DAPT]; NCT03023020).

Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold for treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: six-month clinical and imaging outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The first generation of the bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold showed signs of shrinkage at 6 months, which largely contributed to late luminal loss. Nevertheless, late luminal loss was less than that observed with bare metal stents. To maintain the mechanical integrity of the device up to 6 months, the scaffold design and manufacturing process of its polymer were modified. METHODS AND RESULTS: Quantitative coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound with analysis of radiofrequency backscattering, and as an optional assessment, optical coherence tomography (OCT) were performed at baseline and at a 6-month follow-up. Forty-five patients successfully received a single bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold. One patient had postprocedural release of myocardial enzyme without Q-wave occurrence; 1 patient with OCT-diagnosed disruption of the scaffold caused by excessive postdilatation was treated 1 month later with a metallic drug-eluting stent. At follow-up, 3 patients declined recatheterization, 42 patients had quantitative coronary angiography, 37 had quantitative intravascular ultrasound, and 25 had OCT. Quantitative coronary angiography disclosed 1 edge restenosis (1 of 42; in-segment binary restenosis, 2.4%). At variance with the ultrasonic changes seen with the first generation of bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold at 6 months, the backscattering of the polymeric struts did not decrease over time, the scaffold area was reduced by only 2.0% with intravascular ultrasound, and no change was noted with OCT. On an intention-to-treat basis, the late lumen loss amounted to 0.19±0.18 mm with a limited relative decrease in minimal luminal area of 5.4% on intravascular ultrasound. OCT showed at follow-up that 96.8% of the struts were covered and that malapposition of at least 1 strut, initially observed in 12 scaffolds, was detected at follow-up in only 3 scaffolds. Mean neointimal growth measured by OCT between and on top of the polymeric struts equaled 1.25 mm(2), or 16.6% of the scaffold area. CONCLUSION: Modified manufacturing process of the polymer and geometric changes in the polymeric platform have substantially improved the medium-term performance of this new generation of drug-eluting scaffold to become comparable to those of current drug eluting stents. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00856856.

Comparison of in vivo acute stent recoil between the bioresorbable everolimus-eluting coronary scaffolds (revision 1.0 and 1.1) and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent.

OBJECTIVES: The ABSORB cohort A trial using the bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold (BVS revision 1.0, Abbott Vascular) demonstrated a slightly higher acute recoil with BVS than with metallic stents. To reinforce the mechanical strength of the scaffold, the new BVS scaffold (revision 1.1) with modified strut design was developed and tested in the ABSORB cohort B trial. This study sought to evaluate and compare the in vivo acute scaffold recoil of the BVS revision 1.0 in ABSORB cohort A and the BVS revision 1.1 in ABSORB cohort B with the historical recoil of the XIENCE V® everolimus-eluting metal stent (EES, SPIRIT I and II). METHODS: In the ABSORB cohort B trial, 101 patients with one or two de-novo lesions were enrolled at 10 sites. In ABSORB cohort A, 27 patients treated with a BVS 1.0 were analyzed and compared with EES. Acute absolute recoil, assessed by quantitative coronary angiography, was defined as the difference between mean diameter of the last inflated balloon at the highest pressure (X) and mean lumen diameter of the stent immediately after the last balloon deflation (Y). Acute percent recoil was defined as (X - Y)/X and expressed as a percentage. RESULTS: Out of 101 patients enrolled in the ABSORB cohort B trial, 88 patients are available for complete analysis of acute recoil. Absolute recoil of BVS 1.1 (0.19 ± 0.18 mm) was numerically higher than metallic EES (vs. 0.13 ± 0.21 mm) and similar to BVS 1.0 (0.20 ± 0.21 mm) but the differences did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.40). The acute percent recoil demonstrated the same trend (EES: 4.3% ± 7.1%, BVS 1.0: 6.9% ± 7.0%, BVS 1.1: 6.7% ± 6.4%, P = 0.22). In the multivariate regression model, high balloon/artery ratio (>1.1) (OR 1.91 [1.34-2.71]) was the predictive for high absolute recoil (>0.27 mm) while (larger) preprocedural MLD was protective (OR 0.84 [0.72-0.99]). The stent/scaffold type was not a predictor of acute recoil. CONCLUSIONS: The average in vivo acute scaffold recoil of the BVS 1.1 is slightly higher than the metallic EES. However, the scaffold/stent type was not predictive of high acute recoil, while implantation in undersized vessels or usage of oversized devices might confound the results.

Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes With a Novel Radiopaque Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold.

Background A novel bioresorbable scaffold, the sirolimus-eluting Fantom, incorporates a radiopaque polymer, struts with a thickness of 125 µm, and a crossing profile of 1.35 mm. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 9-month angiographic and 12-month clinical outcomes of the FANTOM scaffold in a larger patient population. Methods and Results The FANTOM II study (Safety & Performance Study of the Fantom Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold - First Report on Initial 24 Month Outcomes) was a prospective, multicenter trial which enrolled 240 patients with single de novo coronary stenosis with reference vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.5 mm diameter and lesion length ≤20 mm. Major adverse cardiac events through 12-month follow-up were assessed. Angiographic follow-up was performed in consecutive patient cohorts at 6 months (n=117) and 9 months (n=123). Acute delivery success, acute technical success, acute procedural success, and clinical procedural success rates as defined in the clinical protocol were 97.9% (235/240), 95.8% (230/240), 99.1% (228/230), and 99.6% (227/228), respectively. The mean in-stent late lumen loss at 6 months and 9 months were 0.25±0.40 mm and 0.33±0.36 mm, respectively, and in-segment binary restenosis occurred in 2.0% and 7.6% of patients, respectively. Major adverse cardiac events and target lesion failure through 12 months occurred in 4.2% of 240 patients; scaffold thrombosis developed in only one patient (0.4%). Conclusions The Fantom sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable coronary scaffold demonstrated favorable safety and effectiveness performance at 12-month follow-up. Longer-term follow-up is ongoing to examine the late outcomes with this novel device. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02539966.

6-Month Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes of a Novel Radiopaque Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold: The FANTOM II Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the novel Fantom coronary bioresorbable scaffold at 6 months. BACKGROUND: The Fantom sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold incorporates a unique proprietary iodinated, polycarbonate copolymer of tyrosine analogs that is radiopaque, with thin struts (125 µm) that facilitate device delivery and precise target lesion treatment. METHODS: The 6-month outcomes and performance of the Fantom scaffold were evaluated in 117 patients with single de novo native coronary artery lesions of length ≤20 mm and reference vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.5 mm. The primary angiographic endpoint was mean late lumen loss at 6 months measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Procedural outcomes were categorized as short-term technical success, short-term procedural success, and clinical procedural success. The primary clinical endpoint was major adverse cardiac events at 6 months, the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: Short-term technical success, short-term procedural success, and clinical procedural success were achieved in 96.6%, 99.1%, and 99.1% of patients, respectively. Mean 6-month in-stent late lumen loss was 0.25 ± 0.40 mm (n = 100). Binary restenosis was present in 2 patients (2.0%). Major adverse cardiac events within 6 months occurred in 3 patients (2.6%), including no deaths, 2 MIs, and 2 TLRs (1 patient had both an MI and TLR). Scaffold thrombosis occurred in 1 patient (0.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical results from 117 patients enrolled in cohort A of the multicenter FANTOM II (Safety & Performance Study of the FANTOM Sirolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Coronary Scaffold) study demonstrate favorable 6-month outcomes of this novel device in the treatment of noncomplex coronary artery disease.

Serial Assessment of Strut Coverage of Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent at 1, 2, and 3 Months After Stent Implantation by Optical Frequency Domain Imaging: The DISCOVERY 1TO3 Study (Evaluation With OFDI of Strut Coverage of Terumo New Drug Eluting Stent With Biodegradable Polymer at 1, 2, and 3 Months).

BACKGROUND: To assess the vessel-healing pattern of Ultimaster drug-eluting stent using optical frequency domain imaging. Our hypothesis is that biodegradable polymer-based drug-eluting technology allows complete very early strut coverage. METHODS AND RESULTS: The DISCOVERY 1TO3 study (Evaluation With OFDI of Strut Coverage of Terumo New Drug Eluting Stent With Biodegradable Polymer at 1, 2, and 3 Months) is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study. A total of 60 patients with multivessel disease requiring staged procedure at 1 month were treated with Ultimaster. Optical frequency domain imaging was acquired at baseline, 1, 2, and 3 months. The primary end point is optical frequency domain imaging-assessed strut coverage at 3 months. Mean age of patients was 67.2±9.9 years, and 73.3% were male, and 36.7% presented with acute coronary syndrome. A total of 132 lesions were treated, with average 1.4 lesions per patient treated at baseline and 1.1 lesions treated at 1 month. Strut coverage at 3 months of single implanted stents (n=71, primary end point) was 95.2±5.2% and of combined single and overlapped stents was 95.4±4.9%. Strut coverage of combined single and overlapped stents at 1 (n=49) and 2 months (n=38) was 85.1±12.7% and 87.9±10.8%, respectively. The median neointimal hyperplasia thickness was 0.04, 0.05, and 0.06 mm, whereas mean neointimal hyperplasia obstruction was 4.5±2.4%, 5.2±3.4%, and 6.6±3.3% at 1, 2, and 3 months, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly complete strut coverage was observed in this complex population very early after implantation of Ultimaster drug-eluting stent. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01844843.

Five-year clinical performance of a biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term follow-up of the unrestricted use of a biodegradable polymer-coated drug-eluting stent in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: The Nobori 2 study was a prospective, multicentre, observational registry evaluating the safety and the efficacy of the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BP-BES) among 3067 patients recruited at 125 international sites. The primary combined endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularisation (TLR). RESULTS: Five-year follow-up was available in 2738 (89.3%) patients. The combined endpoint occurred in 268 patients (10%, 95% CIs 8.9% to 11.3%) at 5 years, with 3.9% of events during the first year and 6.2% during years 1-5 of follow-up. Cumulative rates of TLR and definite/probable stent thrombosis were 5.3% (95% CI 4.5% to 6.3%) and 1.1% (95% CI 0.8% to 1.6%), respectively. Between 1 and 5 years, TLR and very late stent thrombosis rates were 3.5% (95% CI 2.8% to 4.4%) and 0.6% (95% CI 0.3% to 1.1%), respectively. Previous PCI (HR, 2.05, 95% CI 1.68 to 2.50), moderate-to-severe renal disease (HR, 1.89, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.74) and peripheral vascular disease (HR, 1.86, 95% CI 1.38 to 2.52) were the three most powerful independent predictors of the combined endpoint at 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: The final 5-year follow-up of the Nobori 2 registry demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of the BP-BES in an unselected, broadly inclusive cohort of PCI patients, highlighting the excellent performance of this coronary stent technology after polymer biodegradation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN81649913; Results.

Efficacy and Safety of the Absorb Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold for Treatment of Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: Results of the Absorb Diabetic Substudy.

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois) in patients with diabetes mellitus. BACKGROUND: Randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention with either Absorb BVS or metallic Xience everolimus-eluting stent. However, these trials lack power required to provide reliable treatment effect estimates in this high-risk population. METHODS: In a pre-specified, powered analysis, patients with diabetes who received ≥1 Absorb were pooled from the ABSORB II, III, and JAPAN randomized trials and from the single arm ABSORB EXTEND registry. The study composite primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year following Absorb BVS compared with a performance goal of 12.7%. RESULTS: Among 754 diabetic patients included in analysis (27.3% insulin treated), the 1-year TLF rate was 8.3% (upper 1-sided 95% confidence limit: 10.1%; p = 0.0001 vs. performance goal). Scaffold thrombosis (definite or probable) was observed in 2.3% of patients. Multivariable regression identified older age, insulin treatment, and smaller pre-procedure reference vessel diameter as significant independent predictors of 1-year TLF. CONCLUSIONS: The Absorb diabetic substudy suggests efficacy and safety of the Absorb BVS for treatment of patients with diabetes mellitus.

Contemporary Approach to Coronary Bifurcation Lesion Treatment.

Coronary bifurcations are frequent and account for approximately 20% of all percutaneous coronary interventions. Nonetheless, they remain one of the most challenging lesion subsets in interventional cardiology in terms of a lower procedural success rate and increased rates of long-term adverse cardiac events. Provisional side branch stenting should be the default approach in the majority of cases and we propose easily applicable and reproducible stepwise techniques associated with low risk of failure and complications.

A Polylactide Bioresorbable Scaffold Eluting Everolimus for Treatment of Coronary Stenosis: 5-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Long-term benefits of coronary stenosis treatment with an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold are unknown. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate clinical and imaging outcomes 5 years after bioresorbable scaffold implantation. METHODS: In the ABSORB multicenter, single-arm trial, 45 (B1) and 56 patients (B2) underwent coronary angiography, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and optical coherence tomography (OCT) at different times. At 5 years, 53 patients without target lesion revascularization underwent final imaging. RESULTS: Between 6 months/1 year and 5 years, angiographic luminal late loss remained unchanged (B1: 0.14 ± 19 mm vs. 0.13 ± 0.33 mm; p = 0.7953; B2: 0.23 ± 0.28 mm vs. 0.18 ± 0.32 mm; p = 0.5685). When patients with a target lesion revascularization were included, luminal late loss was 0.15 ± 0.20 mm versus 0.15 ± 0.24 mm (p = 0.8275) for B1 and 0.30 ± 0.37 mm versus 0.32 ± 0.48 mm (p = 0.8204) for B2. At 5 years, in-scaffold and -segment binary restenosis was 7.8% (5 of 64) and 12.5% (8 of 64). On IVUS, the minimum lumen area of B1 decreased from 5.23 ± 0.97 mm(2) at 6 months to 4.89 ± 1.81 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.04), but remained unchanged in B2 (4.95 ± 0.91 mm(2) at 1 year to 4.84 ± 1.28 mm(2) at 5 years; p = 0.5). At 5 years, struts were no longer discernable by OCT and IVUS. On OCT, the minimum lumen area in B1 decreased from 4.51 ± 1.28 mm(2) at 6 months to 3.65 ± 1.39 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.01), but remained unchanged in B2, 4.35 ± 1.09 mm(2) at 1 year and 4.12 ± 1.38 mm(2) at 5 years (p = 0.24). Overall, the 5-year major adverse cardiac event rate was 11.0%, without any scaffold thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS: At 5 years, bioresorbable scaffold implantation in a simple stenotic lesion resulted in stable lumen dimensions and low restenosis and major adverse cardiac event rates. (ABSORB Clinical Investigation, Cohort B [ABSORB B]; NCT00856856).

Embolic protection with filtering or occlusion balloons during saphenous vein graft stenting retrieves identical volumes and sizes of particulate debris.

BACKGROUND: Distal embolization of plaque particulate liberated during stenting may cause periprocedural complications. The number, size, and volume of debris released during stenting, however, have not been quantified, rendering embolic protection approaches empiric. We used a novel method of microparticle size assessment to measure volume and characterize individual sizes of particles captured by the PercuSurge GuardWire balloon or a vascular filter during saphenous vein graft stenting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Braided nitinol filters (average distal pore size 100 microns) were used in 47 saphenous vein grafts in 44 patients. The PercuSurge GuardWire was used in 17 saphenous vein grafts in 16 patients. Particulate debris was subjected to microparticle size analysis (RapidVue, Beckman Coulter). All samples contained particulate debris. For both filter and GuardWire populations, most particles were <100 microm in longest dimension (87% and 90% of particles, respectively), and the distribution of particle sizes was identical. Total embolic load per lesion for both filters and GuardWire aspirates was also similar: median embolic load per filter was 16 mm3 (range 2 to 84 mm3). Median embolic load per GuardWire was also 16 mm3 (range 7 to 42 mm3). Histopathologic analysis demonstrated that most samples contained plaque elements and platelet-rich thrombus. CONCLUSIONS: During saphenous vein graft interventions, particulate retrieved with a vascular filtering device or an occlusion balloon was similar in amount and character. This supports the notion that unless soluble mediators play an important role in adverse acute clinical events after stenting, the clinical efficacy of filtering devices may be equal to that of occlusion devices.

Comparison of neointimal formation in polymer-free paclitaxel stents versus stainless stents (from the ASPECT and ELUTES randomized clinical trials).

The investigators examined 326 pairs of angiograms from 2 randomized dose-finding (0.2 to 3.1 microg paclitaxel/mm(2) of stent surface area) clinical trials of polymer-free paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo lesions (the ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting stent Clinical Trial [ASPECT] and the European evaLUation of Taxol Eluting Stent [ELUTES]). A dose-dependent effect was observed: the largest dose of paclitaxel in the 2 trials resulted in a significantly larger proportion of lesions at follow-up with <10% diameter stenosis (54% vs 16%, p = 0.00012 in ASPECT; 53% vs 21%, p = 0.013 in ELUTES) and with minimal luminal diameter located outside the stent compared with control stents (62% vs 20% in ASPECT, 48% vs 18% in ELUTES; p <0.05). Also, significantly shorter lesion lengths at 6-month follow-up were observed for the doses of 0.7 to 3.1 microg/mm(2) (p <0.03) relative to their respective lengths before the procedure compared with control stents.