Ethnic minorities treated with new-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in two European randomised clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Several ethnic minorities have an increased risk of cardiovascular events, but previous European trials that investigated clinical outcome after coronary stenting did not assess the patients' ethnic background. AIMS: To compare ethnic minority and Western European trial participants in terms of both cardiovascular risk profile and 1­year clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: In the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX randomised trials, which assessed new-generation drug-eluting stents, information on patients' self-reported ethnic background was prospectively collected. Pooled patient-level data of 5803 patients, enrolled in the Netherlands and Belgium, were analysed in this prespecified analysis. The main endpoint was target vessel failure after 1 year. RESULTS: Patients were classified as belonging to an ethnic minority (n = 293, 5%) or of Western European origin (n = 5510, 95%). Follow-up data were available in 5772 of 5803 (99.5%) patients. Ethnic minority patients were younger, less often female, more often current smokers, more often medically treated for diabetes, and more often had a positive family history of coronary artery disease. The main endpoint target vessel failure did not differ between ethnic minority and Western European patients (3.5% vs 4.9%, hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.33; p = 0.28). There was also no difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation rates. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the unfavourable cardiovascular risk profile of ethnic minority patients, short-term clinical outcome after treatment with contemporary drug-eluting stents was highly similar to that in Western European patients. Further efforts should be made to ensure the enrolment of more ethnic minority patients in future coronary stent trials.

Three contemporary thin-strut drug-eluting stents implanted in severely calcified coronary lesions of participants in a randomized all-comers trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the 2-year clinical performance of three drug-eluting stents in all-comer patients with severely calcified coronary lesions. BACKGROUND: Severe lesion calcification increases cardiovascular event risk after coronary stenting, but there is a lack of data on the clinical outcome of all-comers with severely calcified lesions who were treated with more recently introduced drug-eluting stents. METHODS: The BIO-RESORT trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01674803) randomly assigned 3,514 all-comer patients to biodegradable polymer Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES) or Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), versus durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). In a post hoc analysis, we assessed 783 patients (22.3%) with at least one severely calcified target lesion. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up (available in 99% of patients), the main composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 19/252 (7.6%) of the EES and in 33/265 (12.6%) of the ZES-treated patients (p = .07). Target vessel failure occurred in 24/266 (9.1%) of the SES-treated patients (vs. ZES: p = .21). There was a difference in target vessel revascularization, which was required in EES in 6/252 (2.4%) patients and in ZES in 20/265 (7.7%) patients (p = .01); the target vessel revascularization rate in SES was 9/266 (3.4%, vs. ZES: p = .04). Multivariate analysis showed that implantation of EES, but not SES, was independently associated with lower target vessel revascularization rates than in ZES. CONCLUSIONS: In BIO-RESORT participants with severely calcified target lesions, treatment with EES was associated with a lower 2-year target vessel revascularization rate than treatment with ZES.

High Bleeding Risk Patients Treated with Very Thin-Strut Biodegradable Polymer or Thin-Strut Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in the BIO-RESORT Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention also have an increased risk of ischemic events and represent an overall high-risk population. The coating of durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) may induce inflammation and delay arterial healing, which might be reduced by novel biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treating HBR patients with very thin-strut BP-DES versus thin-strut DP-DES. METHODS: Participants in BIO-RESORT (NCT01674803), an investigator-initiated multicenter, randomized all-comers trial, were treated with very thin-strut BP-DES (Synergy or Orsiro) or thin-strut DP-DES (Resolute Integrity). For the present analysis, patients were classified following HBR criteria based on previous trials. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure: a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: Of all 3514 patients, 1009 (28.7%) had HBR. HBR patients were older (p < 0.001) and had more co-morbidities than non-HBR patients (p < 0.001). At 1-year follow-up, HBR patients had significantly higher rates of target vessel failure (6.7 vs. 4.2%, p = 0.003), cardiac death (1.9 vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001), and major bleeding (3.3 vs. 1.5%, p = 0.001). Of all 1009 HBR patients, 673 (66.7%) received BP-DES and 336 (33.3%) had DP-DES. The primary endpoint was met by 43/673 (6.5%) patients treated with BP-DES and 24/336 (7.3%) treated with DP-DES (HR 0.88 [95%CI 0.54-1.46], p = 0.63). There were no significant between-group differences in the most global patient-oriented clinical endpoint (9.7 vs. 10.5%, HR 0.92 [95%CI 0.61-1.39], p = 0.69) and other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: At 1-year follow-up, very thin-strut BP-DES showed similar safety and efficacy for treating HBR patients as thin-strut DP-DES.

Very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIO-RESORT): a three-arm, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with coronary artery disease, treated with durable polymer-coated drug-eluting stents, the life-long presence of the polymer might delay arterial healing. Novel very thin strut biodegradable polymer stents, which leave only a bare metal stent after polymer resorption, might improve long-term outcome. We investigated in allcomers the safety and efficacy of three stents eluting either everolimus, sirolimus, or zotarolimus, often clinically used but never compared, of which the biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent was never before assessed in allcomers. METHODS: The large-scale, investigator-initiated, multicentre, assessor and patient blinded, three-arm, randomised, BIO-RESORT non-inferiority trial was done at four clinical sites in the Netherlands. All-comer patients were aged 18 years or older, capable of providing informed consent, and required a percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation according to clinical guidelines or the operators' judgment. Exclusion criteria were: participation in another randomised drug or device study before reaching the primary endpoint of that study; planned surgery necessitating interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy within the first 6 months; known intolerance to components of the investigational product or medication required; uncertainty about the adherence to follow-up procedures or an assumed life expectancy of less than 1 year; or known pregnancy. Web-based computer-generated allocation sequences randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to treatment with very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents (which differ substantially in type, amount, distribution, and resorption speed of their respective coating), or thin strut durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target vessel-related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) at 12 months of follow up with a very thin strut biodegradable polymer of either everolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents, compared with durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents, analysed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin 3·5%). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01674803. FINDINGS: From Dec 21, 2012, to Aug 24, 2015, 3514 patients were enrolled and analysed, of whom 2449 (70%) had acute coronary syndromes, which included 1073 (31%) ST-elevation myocardial infarctions. 12 month follow-up of 3490 (99%) patients (three lost to follow-up; 21 withdrawals) was available. The primary endpoint was met by 55 (5%) of 1172 patients assigned to everolimus-eluting stents, 55 (5%) of 1169 assigned to sirolimus-eluting stents and 63 (5%) of 1173 assigned to zotarolimus-eluting stents. Non-inferiority of the everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents compared with zotarolimus-eluting stents was confirmed (both -0·7% absolute risk difference, 95% CI -2·4 to 1·1; upper limit of one sided 95% CI 0·8%, pnon-inferiority<0·0001). Definite stent thrombosis (defined by the Academic Research Consortium) occurred in four (0·3%) of 1172 patients who were allocated to everolimus-eluting stents, four (0·3%) of 1169 patients who were allocated to sirolimus-eluting stents, and three (0·3%) of 1173 patients who were allocated to zotarolimus-eluting stents (log-rank p=0·70 for both comparisons with zotarolimus-eluting stents). INTERPRETATION: At 12 month follow-up, both very thin strut drug-eluting stents with dissimilar biodegradable polymer coatings (eluting either everolimus or sirolimus) were non-inferior to the durable polymer stent (eluting zotarolimus) in treating allcomers with a high proportion of patients with acute coronary syndromes. The absence of a loss of 1 year safety and efficacy with the use of these two biodegradable polymer-coated stents is a prerequisite before assessing their potential longer-term benefits. FUNDING: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic.

Comparison of 3 biodegradable polymer and durable polymer-based drug-eluting stents in all-comers (BIO-RESORT): rationale and study design of the randomized TWENTE III multicenter trial.

AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 novel drug-eluting stents (DES) with biodegradable polymer-based coatings versus a durable coating DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: BIO-RESORT is an investigator-initiated, prospective, patient-blinded, randomized multicenter trial in 3540 Dutch all-comers with various clinical syndromes, requiring percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with DES implantation. Randomization (stratified for diabetes mellitus) is being performed in a 1:1:1 ratio between ORSIRO sirolimus-eluting stent with circumferential biodegradable coating, SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stent with abluminal biodegradable coating, and RESOLUTE INTEGRITY zotarolimus-eluting stent with durable coating. The primary endpoint is the incidence of the composite endpoint target vessel failure at 1 year, consisting of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization. Power calculation assumes a target vessel failure rate of 8.5% with a 3.5% non-inferiority margin, giving the study a power of 85% (α level .025 adjusted for multiple testing). The impact of diabetes mellitus on post-PCI outcome will be evaluated. The first patient was enrolled on December 21, 2012. CONCLUSIONS: BIO-RESORT is a large, prospective, randomized, multicenter trial with three arms, comparing two DES with biodegradable coatings versus a reference DES with a durable coating in 3540 all-comers. The trial will provide novel insights into the clinical outcome of modern DES and will address the impact of known and so far undetected diabetes mellitus on post-PCI outcome.

Final 5-Year Report of the Randomized BIO-RESORT Trial Comparing 3 Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents in All-Comers.

Background In a previous trial, higher 5-year mortality was observed following treatment with biodegradable polymer Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). We assessed 5-year safety and efficacy of all-comers as well as patients with diabetes treated with SES or Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). Methods and Results The randomized BIO-RESORT (Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population) trial enrolled 3514 all-comer patients at 4 Dutch cardiac centers. Patients aged ≥18 years who required percutaneous coronary intervention were eligible. Participants were stratified for diabetes and randomized to treatment with SES, EES, or ZES (1:1:1). The main end point was target vessel failure (cardiac mortality, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization). Five-year follow-up was available in 3183 of 3514 (90.6%) patients. The main end point target vessel failure occurred in 142 of 1169 (12.7%) patients treated with SES, 130 of 1172 (11.6%) treated with EES, versus 157 of 1173 (14.1%) treated with ZES (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71-1.12], Plog-rank=0.31; and HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.65-1.04], Plog-rank=0.10, respectively). Individual components of target vessel failure showed no significant between-stent difference. Very late definite stent thrombosis rates were low and similar (SES, 1.1%; EES, 0.6%; ZES, 0.9%). In patients with diabetes, target vessel failure did not differ significantly between stent-groups (SES, 19.8%; EES, 19.2%; versus ZES, 21.1% [Plog-rank=0.69 and Plog-rank=0.63]). Conclusions Orsiro SES, Synergy EES, and Resolute Integrity ZES showed similar 5-year outcomes of safety and efficacy, including mortality. A prespecified stent comparison in patients with diabetes also revealed no significant differences in 5-year clinical outcomes. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01674803.

Coronary bifurcations treated with thin-strut drug-eluting stents: a prespecified analysis of the randomized BIO-RESORT trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of a coronary bifurcation lesion is often required in routine clinical practice, but data on the performance of very thin-strut biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents are scarce. METHODS: Comparison of biodegradable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents in an all comers population (BIO-RESORT) is a prospective, multicenter randomized clinical trial that included 3514 all-comer patients, who were randomized to very thin-strut biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus- or everolimus-eluting stents, versus thin-strut durable polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stents. The approach of bifurcation stenting was left at the operator's discretion, and provisional stenting was generally preferred. This prespecified analysis assessed 3-year clinical outcome of all patients in whom treatment involved at least one bifurcation with a side-branch diameter ≥1.5 mm. RESULTS: Of all BIO-RESORT trial participants, 1236 patients were treated in bifurcation lesions and analyzed. Single- and two-stent techniques were used in 85.8% and 14.2%, respectively. 'True' bifurcation lesions (main vessel and side-branch obstructed) were treated in 31.1%. Three-year follow-up was available in 1200/1236 (97.1%) patients. The main endpoint target vessel failure (composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) occurred in sirolimus-eluting stents in 42/412 (10.3%) and in zotarolimus-eluting stents in 49/409 (12.1%) patients (P-logrank = 0.40). In everolimus-eluting stents, target vessel failure occurred in 40/415 (9.8%) patients (vs. zotarolimus-eluting stents: P-logrank = 0.26). There was no between-stent difference in individual components of target vessel failure. Findings were consistent in patients with single-vessel treatment and patients treated with a single-stent technique. CONCLUSIONS: Three years after stenting all-comers with bifurcation lesions, clinical outcome was similar with the sirolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents versus the zotarolimus-eluting stent.

Treating diabetic all-comers with contemporary drug-eluting stents: Prespecified comparisons from the BIO-RESORT and the BIONYX randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diabetes have more extensive coronary disease, resulting in higher risks of adverse clinical events following stenting. In all-comer patients, contemporary DES have shown excellent safety and efficacy, but data on diabetic patients are scarce. Separately for the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX trials, we assessed the 2-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients, treated with various contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: We performed two prespecified secondary analyses of two randomized DES trials, which both stratified for diabetes. The main endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Follow-up was finished before the COVID-19 pandemic. RESULTS: In BIO-RESORT, 624/3514 (17.8%) had diabetes: 211 received Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), 203 Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES), and 210 Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (RI-ZES). TVF did not differ between SES (10.2%) and EES (10.0%) versus RI-ZES (12.7%) (SES vs. RI-ZES HR:0.78, 95%-CI [0.44-1.40]; p = 0.40, EES vs. RI-ZES HR:0.79, 95%-CI [0.44-1.40]; p = 0.42). In BIONYX, 510/2488 (20.5%) patients had diabetes: 250 received SES and 260 Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stents (RO-ZES). There was no difference in TVF between SES (10.7%) versus RO-ZES (12.2%) (HR:0.88, 95%-CI [0.52-1.48]; p = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in 2-year clinical outcome among patients with diabetes, who were treated with SES, or EES, versus RI-ZES. In addition there was no difference in clinical outcome in diabetic patients, who were treated with SES versus RO-ZES. These findings may be considered as a signal of safety and efficacy of the studied DES in patients with diabetes.

Outcomes in Patients Treated With Thin-Strut, Very Thin-Strut, or Ultrathin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Small Coronary Vessels: A Prespecified Analysis of the Randomized BIO-RESORT Trial.

Importance: Stenting small-vessel lesions has an increased adverse cardiovascular event risk. Very thin-strut or ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents might reduce this risk, but data are scarce. Objective: To assess the outcome of all-comer patients with small coronary vessel lesions treated with 3 dissimilar types of drug-eluting stents. Design: This is a prespecified substudy of the Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-eluting Stents in an All Comers Population (BIO-RESORT) trial, an investigator-initiated, randomized, patient-blinded comparative clinical drug-eluting stent trial. Patients treated with ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stents, very thin-strut everolimus-eluting stents, or previous-generation thin-strut zotarolimus-eluting stents were enrolled from December 2012 to August 2015. This multicenter trial was conducted in 4 Dutch centers for cardiac intervention. Of all 3514 all-comer BIO-RESORT participants, 1506 patients with treatment in at least 1 small-vessel lesion (reference vessel <2.5 mm) were included. Data were analyzed between September 2018 and February 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Target lesion failure at 3-year follow-up, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization, analyzed by Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: In 1452 of 1506 participants (96.4%) (1057 men [70.2%]; 449 women [29.8%]; mean [SD] age, 64.3 [10.4] years), follow-up was available. Target lesion failure occurred in 36 of 525 patients (7.0%) treated with sirolimus-eluting stents, 46 of 496 (9.5%) with everolimus-eluting stents, and 48 of 485 (10.0%) with zotarolimus-eluting stents (sirolimus-eluting vs zotarolimus-eluting hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.44-1.05; P = .08; everolimus-eluting vs zotarolimus-eluting HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.62-1.39; P = .72). There was a difference in target lesion revascularizations between sirolimus-eluting and zotarolimus-eluting stents (2.1% vs 5.3%; HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.20-0.81; P = .009) that emerged after the first year of follow-up (1.0% vs 3.7%; P = .006); multivariate analysis showed that sirolimus-eluting stent implantation was independently associated with a lower target lesion revascularization rate at 3-year follow-up (adjusted HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.20-0.85; P = .02). In the everolimus-eluting stents, the revascularization rate was 4.0% (vs zotarolimus-eluting, HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.41-1.34; P = .31). There was no significant between-stent difference in cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients stented in small coronary vessels experienced fewer repeated revascularizations if treated with ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stents vs previous generation thin strut zotarolimus-eluting stents. Further research is required to evaluate the potential effect of particularly thin stent struts. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01674803.

Thin, Very Thin, or Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable or Durable Polymer-Coated Drug-Eluting Stents: 3-Year Outcomes of BIO-RESORT.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the 3-year safety and efficacy of treating all-comer patients with 3 contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: The BIO-RESORT (Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population) (TWENTE III) randomized trial (NCT01674803) found similar 1-year safety and efficacy for the 2 biodegradable-polymer DES (i.e., ultrathin-strut cobalt-chromium Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent [SES] and very-thin-strut platinum-chromium Synergy everolimus-eluting stent) compared with the durable-polymer thin-strut cobalt-chromium Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES). Two-year follow-up suggested that the SES might reduce repeat revascularizations beyond 1 year compared with the ZES. METHODS: A total of 3,514 all-comer patients were treated at 4 centers for coronary intervention. The main clinical endpoint, target vessel failure, was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target vessel-related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (target vessel revascularization). Secondary endpoints included the individual components of target vessel failure and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: Three-year follow-up data were available for 3,393 of 3,514 patients (96.6%). Target vessel failure occurred in 8.5% with SES and 10.0% with ZES (plog rank = 0.22) and in 8.8% with everolimus-eluting stents (vs. ZES, plog rank = 0.32). Rates of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization were similar between stent groups. Landmark analyses found no statistically significant between-stent difference in repeat revascularization between 1 and 3 years. Definite or probable stent thrombosis rates were low (SES, 1.1%; everolimus-eluting stent, 1.1%; ZES, 0.9%) and similar with all 3 DES. CONCLUSIONS: Despite substantial differences in stent backbone and polymer coating, all 3 DES showed favorable 3-year safety and efficacy in all comers, without significant between-stent differences. Further follow-up is required to definitely answer the question of whether one stent might improve clinical outcomes at a later stage.

Two-year clinical outcome of all-comers treated with three highly dissimilar contemporary coronary drug-eluting stents in the randomised BIO-RESORT trial.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to evaluate the two-year clinical outcome of all-comer trial participants who were treated with two very different thin-strut biodegradable polymer versus thin-strut durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DES). Prolonged clinical outcome after discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy is of particular interest, given the highly dissimilar polymer types, amount, distribution, and degradation speed of both biodegradable polymer DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: The BIO-RESORT trial (NCT01674803) randomly assigned 3,514 patients to treatment with biodegradable polymer SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stents (EES) or Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), or durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). At two-year follow-up (available in 98.8%), the rate of the primary composite endpoint target vessel failure (TVF) was 8.3% in ZES versus 6.8% in EES (p=0.19) and 6.6% in SES (p=0.12). Landmark analyses at one year revealed differences between SES and ZES in the rates of target lesion revascularisation and target lesion failure (0.6% vs. 1.5%, p=0.04, and 1.1% vs. 2.4%, p=0.02, respectively) as well as other composite secondary endpoints that reached statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: At two-year follow-up, there was no significant between-DES difference in the rates of the primary endpoint. Landmark analyses provided a signal that the use of SES versus ZES might reduce the risk of repeat revascularisation after one-year follow-up.

Prediabetes and its impact on clinical outcome after coronary intervention in a broad patient population.

AIMS: It is unclear whether detection of prediabetes (pre-DM) by routine assessment of glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES) may help identify subjects with increased event risk. We assessed the relation between glycaemia status and one-year outcome after PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Glycaemia status was determined in 2,362 non-diabetic BIO-RESORT participants, treated at all four study sites, to identify pre-DM (HbA1c 42-47 mmol/mol; FPG 6.1-6.9 mmol/L) and unknown diabetes mellitus (DM) (HbA1c ≥48 mmol/mol; FPG ≥7.0 mmol/L). Another 624 patients had medically treated DM. The main composite endpoint consisted of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularisation. Glycaemic state was known in 2,986 participants: 324 (11%) patients had pre-DM, 793 (27%) had DM (known or new), and 1,869 (63%) patients had normoglycaemia. Pre-DM and DM patients differed from normoglycaemic patients in cardiovascular risk factors. The composite endpoint occurred in 11.1% in pre-DM, 10.5% in DM, and 5.7% in normoglycaemia (p<0.001). Pre-DM was associated with a twofold higher event risk compared to normoglycaemia (adj. HR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.4-3.0). CONCLUSIONS: Following PCI with contemporary DES, all-comers with pre-DM had significantly higher event risks than normoglycaemic patients. In non-DM patients requiring PCI, routine assessment of HbA1c and FPG appears to be of value to identify subjects with increased event risk.

First-in-man evaluation of the novel balloon delivery system STENTYS Xposition S for the self-apposing coronary artery stent: impact on longitudinal geographic miss during stenting.

AIMS: A novel balloon delivery system (BDS) for the self-apposing STENTYS sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) has been developed for highly precise longitudinal stent positioning and deployment. The aim of this first-in-man study is to report the quantitative coronary analysis (QCA) angiography and optical coherence tomography (OCT) results as well as the 30-day clinical outcomes of the STENTYS Xposition S SES. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 25 patients (mean age 66.1±10.7 years) with stable coronary artery disease (24%) or acute coronary syndrome (including STEMI in 40%). The device was successfully placed at the intended site in all cases (100%), without procedural complications. Longitudinal geographic miss (entire lesion length [on QCA] not completely covered by the stent) was not observed. Pre-procedural MLD on QCA was 1.30±0.74 mm and post-procedural MLD was 2.74±0.44 mm, p<0.001 (acute gain 1.44±0.70 mm). OCT analyses showed a low percentage of malapposed stent struts directly post stent placement (2.4%), which further decreased after post-dilatation (0.6%, p=0.013), while mean stent area increased (from 9.7 mm2 to 10.5 mm2, p<0.001). At 30-day clinical follow-up, one (4%) major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was observed. One acute stent thrombosis (ST) occurred immediately post procedure in a STEMI patient which was related to inadequate medication therapy. CONCLUSIONS: This first-in-man study demonstrated that the use of the novel STENTYS Xposition S balloon delivery system is feasible with a high technical success rate without longitudinal geographical miss. Stent strut malapposition rate directly after STENTYS placement was low and improved further after post-dilatation.

Effect of additional treatment with EXenatide in patients with an Acute Myocardial Infarction (EXAMI): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction causes irreversible loss of cardiomyocytes and may lead to loss of ventricular function, morbidity and mortality. Infarct size is a major prognostic factor and reduction of infarct size has therefore been an important objective of strategies to improve outcomes. In experimental studies, glucagon-like peptide 1 and exenatide, a long acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, a novel drug introduced for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, reduced infarct size after myocardial infarction by activating pro-survival pathways and by increasing metabolic efficiency. METHODS: The EXAMI trial is a multi-center, prospective, randomized, placebo controlled trial, designed to evaluate clinical outcome of exenatide infusion on top of standard treatment, in patients with an acute myocardial infarction, successfully treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 108 patients will be randomized to exenatide (5 µg bolus in 30 minutes followed by continuous infusion of 20 µg/24 h for 72 h) or placebo treatment. The primary end point of the study is myocardial infarct size (measured using magnetic resonance imaging with delayed enhancement at 4 months) as a percentage of the area at risk (measured using T2 weighted images at 3-7 days). DISCUSSION: If the current study demonstrates cardioprotective effects, exenatide may constitute a novel therapeutic option to reduce infarct size and preserve cardiac function in adjunction to reperfusion therapy in patients with acute myocardial infarction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01254123.