Rationale and design of the PARTHENOPE trial: A two-by-two factorial comparison of polymer-free vs biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents and personalized vs standard duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in all-comers undergoing PCI.

BACKGROUND: Over the past few decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has undergone significant advancements as a result of the combination of device-based and drug-based therapies. These iterations have led to the development of polymer-free drug-eluting stents. However, there is a scarcity of data regarding their clinical performance. Furthermore, while various risk scores have been proposed to determine the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), none of them have undergone prospective validation within the context of randomized trials. DESIGN: The PARTHENOPE trial is a phase IV, prospective, randomized, multicenter, investigator-initiated, assessor-blind study being conducted at 14 centers in Italy (NCT04135989). It includes 2,107 all-comers patients with minimal exclusion criteria, randomly assigned in a 2-by-2 design to receive either the Cre8 amphilimus-eluting stent or the SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stent, along with either a personalized or standard duration of DAPT. Personalized DAPT duration is determined by the DAPT score, which accounts for both bleeding and ischemic risks. Patients with a DAPT score <2 (indicating higher bleeding than ischemic risk) receive DAPT for 3 or 6 months for chronic or acute coronary syndrome, respectively, while patients with a DAPT score ≥2 (indicating higher ischemic than bleeding risk) receive DAPT for 24 months. Patients in the standard DAPT group receive DAPT for 12 months. The trial aims to establish the noninferiority between stents with respect to a device-oriented composite end point of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization at 12 months after PCI. Additionally, the trial aims to demonstrate the superiority of personalized DAPT compared to a standard approach with respect to a net clinical composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, stroke, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or type 2 to 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 24-months after PCI. SUMMARY: The PARTHENOPE trial is the largest randomized trial investigating the efficacy and safety of a polymer-free DES with a reservoir technology for drug-release and the first trial evaluating a personalized duration of DAPT based on the DAPT score. The study results will provide novel insights into the optimizing the use of drug-eluting stents and DAPT in patients undergoing PCI.

Randomised evaluation of a novel biodegradable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the MASTER study.

AIMS: The MASTER study was designed to compare the performance of a new biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) with a bare metal stent (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The study was a prospective, randomised (3:1), controlled, single-blind multicentre trial that enrolled 500 STEMI patients within 24 hours of symptom onset during 2013-2015. Three hundred and seventy-five patients were treated with BP-SES and 125 with BMS. One hundred and four (104) randomised patients underwent angiographic follow-up at six months. The primary clinical endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), defined as cardiac death, MI not clearly attributable to a non-target vessel, or clinically driven target vessel revascularisation (TVR) at 12 months. The primary angiographic endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) at six months in the angiographic cohort. The major secondary endpoint for safety was a composite of all-cause death, recurrent MI, unplanned infarct-related artery revascularisation, stroke, definite stent thrombosis (ST) or major bleeding at one month. At 12 months, TVF had occurred in 6.1% of BP-SES and 14.4% of BMS patients (pnon-inferiority=0.0004), mainly driven by a higher rate of repeat revascularisation in BMS patients. The safety endpoint occurred in 3.5% of BP-SES and 7.2% of BMS patients (p=0.127). In-stent LLL demonstrated the superiority (p=0.0125) of BP-SES (0.09±0.43 mm) over BMS (0.79±0.67 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The study showed clinical non-inferiority and angiographic superiority of BP-SES versus a comparator BMS, suggesting that this novel DES may be a potential treatment option in STEMI.

Endothelial progenitor cell capture by stents coated with antibody against CD34: the HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate whether rapid endothelialization of stainless steel stents with a functional endothelium prevents stent thrombosis and reduces the restenotic process. BACKGROUND: A "pro-healing" approach for prevention of post-stenting restenosis is theoretically favored over the use of cytotoxic or cytostatic local pharmacologic therapies. It is believed that the central role of the vascular endothelium is to maintain quiescence of the underlying media and adventitia. METHODS: Sixteen patients with de novo coronary artery disease were successfully treated with implantation of endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) capture stents. RESULTS: Complete procedural and angiographic success was achieved in all 16 patients. The nine-month composite major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) rate was 6.3% as a result of a symptom-driven target vessel revascularization in a single patient. There were no other MACCE despite only one month of clopidogrel treatment. At six-month follow-up, mean angiographic late luminal loss was 0.63 +/- 0.52 mm, and percent stent volume obstruction by intravascular ultrasound analysis was 27.2 +/- 20.9%. CONCLUSIONS: This first human clinical investigation of this technology demonstrates that the EPC capture coronary stent is safe and feasible for the treatment of de novo coronary artery disease. Further developments in this technology are warranted to evaluate the efficacy of this device for the treatment of coronary artery disease.

Thirty-day incidence and six-month clinical outcome of thrombotic stent occlusion after bare-metal, sirolimus, or paclitaxel stent implantation.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the real-world incidence of angiographically confirmed and possible stent thrombosis (ST) in an unrestricted population during the first 30 days after bare-metal stent (BMS), sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation. BACKGROUND: Current data on ST in drug-eluting stents (DES) have come from randomized trials with strict entry criteria, which limits their generalizability to daily practice. METHODS: The study population comprised three sequential cohorts of 506 consecutive patients with BMS, 1,017 consecutive patients with SES, and 989 consecutive patients treated with PES. RESULTS: In the first 30 days after stent implantation, 6 BMS (1.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5% to 2.6%; p = 0.9), 10 SES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.5% to 1.8%), and 10 PES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.9%) patients developed angiographically proven ST. Multiple potential risk factors were identified in most patients with ST. Bifurcation stenting in the setting of acute myocardial infarction was an independent risk factor for angiographic ST in the entire population (odds ratio [OR] 12.9, 95% CI 4.7 to 35.8, p < 0.001). In patients with DES who had angiographic ST, 30-day mortality was 15%, whereas another 60% suffered a nonfatal myocardial infarction; no further deaths occurred during six months of follow-up. Including possible cases, 7 BMS (1.4%, 95% CI 0.7% to 2.8%), 15 SES (1.5%, 95% CI 0.9% to 2.4%), and 16 PES (1.6%, 95% CI 1.0% to 2.6%) patients had ST. CONCLUSIONS: The unrestricted use of SES or PES is associated with ST rates in the range expected for BMS. Stent thrombosis was associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Bifurcation stenting, when performed in patients with acute myocardial infarction, was associated with an increased risk of ST.

One-year clinical outcome after coronary stenting of very small vessels using 2.25 mm sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents: a comparison between the RESEARCH and T-SEARCH registries.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) remains unknown. We evaluated the clinical outcomes after implantation of 2.25 mm diameter SES and PES. METHODS AND RESULTS: PES have been used as the stent of choice for all percutaneous coronary interventions as part of the prospective Taxus-Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (T-SEARCH) Registry. Ninety consecutive patients received at least one 2.25 mm PES (PES group), and were compared with 107 patients who received at least one 2.25 mm SES as part of the RESEARCH registry. The overall population presented high-risk characteristics commonly excluded from most studies. Populations were well-matched. There were 2 (2.2%) incidents of subacute stent thrombosis in the PES group (in a 2.25 mm stent), and none in the SES group. At one year, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 5.6% in the SES group, and 17.8% in the PES group (p = 0.007). After adjustments for other significant univariate variables, presentation with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (adjusted OR 5.2 [95% CI 1.8-15.0], p = 0.002) and PES utilization (adjusted OR 3.7 [95% CI 1.3-10.5], p = 0.013) were found to be significant independent predictors of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). CONCLUSIONS: In an unselected population treated for very small vessel disease, SES were associated with better 12-month clinical outcomes and the use of PES was identified as an independent predictor of adverse events.

Sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of atherosclerotic ostial lesions.

BACKGROUND: Ostial atherosclerotic lesions are distinct from other lesion sites in terms of outcomes following percutaneous interventions. Despite aggressive lesion modification strategies, long-term outcome is hampered by restenosis. Various stent designs have failed to show significant improvement in target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates. The present study evaluates the clinical outcomes following sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for ostial lesions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) was the device of choice at our institute for all coronary interventions from April 2002 to March 2003. This study population is comprised of 50 patients who received drug-eluting stents for atherosclerotic ostial lesions during this period. Sixty-eight percent of the patients were male and 24 patients (48%) had a history of previous revascularization. Indication for intervention were as follows: acute myocardial infarction, 7 patients (14%), stable angina, 23 patients (46%), unstable angina, 20 patients (40%). Angioplasty and stent implantations were done according to the standard protocol. All patients were prospectively followed up for major adverse cardiac events. The event-free survival was 90% at one year. There were 5 (10%) target vessel revascularization, 3 (6%) myocardial infarctions and 1 (2%) death during a mean follow-up of 414.5 +/- 54.5 days. TLR was required in 4 (8%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: SES implantation is feasible in ostial locations and is associated with low subsequent revascularization.

Zotarolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents in uncertain drug-eluting stent candidates.

BACKGROUND: The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients at high risk of bleeding or thrombosis has not been prospectively studied; limited data are available in patients who have a low restenosis risk. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare a hydrophilic polymer-based, second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with a unique drug fast-release profile versus bare-metal stents (BMS) under similar durations of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). METHODS: We randomly assigned 1,606 patients with stable or unstable symptoms, and who on the basis of thrombotic bleeding or restenosis risk criteria, qualified as uncertain candidates for DES, to receive ZES or BMS. DAPT duration was on the basis of patient characteristics, rather than stent characteristics, and allowed for a personalized 1-month dual antiplatelet regimen. The primary endpoint was the risk of 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which included death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS: Median DAPT duration was 32 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 30 to 180 days) and did not differ between the groups. In the ZES group, 140 patients (17.5%) reached the primary endpoint, compared with 178 patients (22.1%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio: 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.61 to 0.95; p = 0.011) as a result of lower MI (2.9% vs. 8.1%; p < 0.001) and TVR rates (5.9% vs.10.7%; p = 0.001) in the ZES group. Definite or probable stent thrombosis was also significantly reduced in ZES recipients (2.0% vs. 4.1%; p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BMS, DES implantation using a stent with a biocompatible polymer and fast drug-eluting characteristics, combined with an abbreviated, tailored DAPT regimen, resulted in a lower risk of 1-year MACE in uncertain candidates for DES implantation. (Zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates [ZEUS] Study; NCT01385319).

Effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of coronary artery disease in octogenarians.

Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation has been shown to reduce repeat revascularization in various randomized trials. The present study evaluated the outcomes after SES implantation in 46 octogenarian patients. SES implantation in octogenarians appears to be feasible and is associated with very small subsequent need for repeat target vessel revascularization at 1 year.

Effectiveness of the sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients with a prior history of coronary artery bypass graft surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with a history of previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with an increased rate of subsequent adverse events compared to those without prior CABG. We evaluated the impact of utilizing the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in this high-risk population. METHODS: Since April 2002, SES implantation was utilized as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital. Consecutive patients with a history of previous CABG and de novo lesions (n=47) treated exclusively with SES, were compared to 66 patients who received bare stents in the 6-month period just before SES introduction. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups (SES and bare stent) with respect to baseline clinical or lesion characteristics. The only difference between the groups related to the nominal diameter of stent utilized, which was smaller in the SES group than the bare stent group. (The maximum diameter of SES available was 3.0 mm). At 1 year, the cumulative incidence of major adverse events (defined as death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was significantly lower in the SES group than the bare stent group [8.5 versus 30.3%, hazard ratio 0.37 (95% confidence interval 0.15-0.91); P=0.03]. CONCLUSIONS: The utilization of the sirolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous intervention in a high-risk population with a history of previous CABG surgery is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year.

Treatment and prevention of infective endocarditis.

The paper presents the most recent recommendations for the treatment and prevention of infective endocarditis (IE). The treatment of IE is complex and requires close collaboration among specialists in infectious diseases, cardiology, cardiac surgery and microbiology. The mainstay of medical treatment is antibiotic therapy. Theoretical considerations regarding vegetations and antibiotics have practical consequences on the route and modalities of administration of antibiotics and on the techniques used to monitor treatment. The choice of antibiotics depends on the microorganism (streptococci, enterococci, staphylococci, HACEK group [Haemophilus sp., Actinobacillus sp., Cardiobacterium sp., Eikenella sp. and Kingella sp.], Coxiella, Brucella, Legionella, Bartonella, fungi) and on whether IE occurs on native or prosthetic valves. Treatment of IE with negative blood cultures is particularly difficult. Cardiac surgery is often needed during the bacteriologically active period (in ~50% of patients). The decision to intervene and the optimal timing of the intervention requires careful consideration of multiple potential risks: the haemodynamic risk, the infectious risk, the risk due to cardiac lesions, the risk due to extracardiac complications and the risk due to the location of infective endocarditis. Even though the efficacy of antibiotic prophylaxis of IE is not completely proven, it is recommended for selected patients who undergo an at-risk procedure. Lists of cardiac conditions and of medical procedures at risk are presented; specific antibiotic prophylactic regimens for dental and upper respiratory tract procedures in out-patients, procedures under general anaesthesia and urological and GI procedures are outlined.

Classification and current treatment options of in-stent restenosis. Present status and future perspectives.

Coronary stent implantation is currently performed in > 80% of percutaneous coronary interventions. Its main late complication is the development of in-stent restenosis (ISR), occurring in 10-80% of lesions treated in daily practice. The classification by Mehran et al. is most commonly used. Current therapeutic options to treat ISR include repeat balloon angioplasty, repeat stenting, cutting balloon angioplasty, directional coronary atherectomy, rotational coronary atherectomy, brachytherapy, and drug-eluting stents (DES). DES have been effective in reducing binary restenosis in de novo lesions in randomized controlled trials. The novel use of DES to treat ISR has been shown to be safe and effective in multiple studies involving sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. As DES implantation becomes more widespread, ISR in DES is emerging as a new problem. The use of debulking techniques to treat ISR in DES is to be cautioned against. In this new era, the optimal treatment of this new problem is currently unknown. We await further data to see whether repeat DES implantation may help solve this vexing clinical problem.

Clinical and angiographic outcomes after overdilatation of undersized sirolimus-eluting stents with largely oversized balloons: an observational study.

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) postdilatation with largely oversized balloons. We evaluated the clinical outcome of 68 consecutive patients enrolled in the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with SES implantation and further postdilatation with balloons > 1 mm larger than the stent nominal size. Angiographic follow-up was either scheduled for selected subgroups or clinically driven. Overall, 75 lesions were treated. The procedure was successful in 98.5% of the cases. One patient (1.5%) underwent emergency coronary bypass surgery for acute vessel occlusion. During 10.1 +/- 1.7 months of follow-up, three patients (4.5%) died, one (1.5%) had acute myocardial infarction, and four (6%) had target vessel revascularization. At angiographic follow-up, loss index was 0.13 +/- 0.34 and restenosis rate was 7.7%. Although not routinely recommended in every patient, SES postdilatation with largely oversized balloons appears a safe and effective strategy for selected patients.

Elective sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for multivessel disease involving significant LAD stenosis: one-year clinical outcomes of 99 consecutive patients--the Rotterdam experience.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for patients with multivessel disease, which included left anterior descending artery (LAD) treatment. Since April 2002, SES has been utilized as the device of choice for all interventions in our institution as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. In the first 6 months of enrollment, 99 consecutive patients (17.6% of the total population) were treated for multivessel disease involving the LAD. The impact of SES implantation on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was evaluated. All the patients received SES in the LAD. Additional stent implantation in the right coronary artery, the left circumflex, or in all three major vessels was attempted successfully in 32 (32%), 51 (52%), and 16 (16%) of the treated patients respectively. During a mean follow-up of 360 +/- 59 days (range, 297-472 days), we had one death, one non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, and eight patients required subsequent intervention. The event-free survival of MACE at 1 year was 85.6%. SES implantation for multivessel disease in a consecutive series of patients is associated with low incidence of adverse events. The reported results are related predominantly to the reduction in repeat revascularization.