Impact of preprocedural left ventricular systolic function on the safety and durability of percutaneous coronary intervention.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered less safe in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), an impression based on older data. Whether the safety and durability of contemporary PCI are different in patients with reduced EF compared with normal EF patients is unknown. METHODS: Patients from the BIOFLOW II, IV and V clinical trials were grouped as normal EF (≥50%) and reduced EF (30%-50%). Using multivariable logistic regression and cox proportional hazards regression, we determined relations of EF category with procedural safety (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke and urgent coronary artery bypass grafting within 30 days of PCI) and target lesion failure (TLF; comprising cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization within 1 year of PCI) respectively. In sensitivity analyses, we regrouped patients into EF < 45% and ≥55% and repeated the aforementioned analyses. RESULTS: In 1685 patients with normal EF (mean age 65 years; 27% women; mean EF 61%) and 259 with low EF (mean age 64 years; 17% women; mean EF 41%), 101 safety and 148 TLF events occurred. Compared with patients in the normal EF group, those with reduced EF had neither a statistically significant higher proportion of safety events, nor a higher multivariable-adjusted risk for such events. Similarly, patients with reduced EF and normal EF did not differ in terms of TLF event proportions or multivariable-adjusted risk for TLF. The results were similar in sensitivity analyses with EF groups redefined to create a 10% between-group EF separation. CONCLUSION: PCI safety and durability outcomes are similar in patients with mild-moderately reduced EF and normal EF.

Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents vs durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from 5 randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Newest generation drug-eluting stents combine biodegradable polymers with ultrathin stent platforms in order to minimize vessel injury and inflammatory response. Evidence from randomized controlled trials suggested that differences in stent design translate into differences in clinical outcome. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrathin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus eluting stents (BP SES) compared with thin strut, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We pooled individual participant data from 5 randomized trials (NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946, NCT01443104, NCT02579031) including a total of 5,780 patients, and performed a one-stage meta-analysis using a mixed effects Cox regression model. RESULTS: At a median duration of follow-up of 739 days (interquartile range 365-1,806 days), target-lesion failure occurred in 337 (10.3%) and 304 (12.2%) patients treated with BP SES and DP EES (HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.71-1.06, P = .16). There were no significant differences between BP SES and DP EES with regards to cardiac death (111 (3.4%) vs 102 (4.1%); HR 1.05, 95%CI 0.80-1.37, P = .73), target-vessel myocardial infarction (136 (4.1%) vs 126 (5.0%), HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.62-1.01, P = .061), and clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization (163 (5.0%) vs 147 (5.9%); HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.75-1.18, P = .61). The effect was consistent across major subgroups. In a landmark analysis, there was no significant interaction between treatment effect and timing of events. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient-level meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials, BP SES were associated with a similar risk of target-lesion failure compared with DP EES among patients undergoing PCI. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registry (CRD42018109098).

Individual patient data analysis of the BIOFLOW study program comparing safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent.

OBJECTIVES: This analysis of pooled individual patient data (IPD) aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent system (BP-SES; Orsiro) compared to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent system (DP-EES; Xience) in the pooled population as well as in subgroups. METHODS: IPD with up to 12 months follow-up of the randomized controlled trials BIOFLOW-II (NCT01356888), -IV (NCT01939249), and -V (NCT02389946) as well as the all comers registry BIOFLOW-III (NCT01553526) were pooled. A total of 3,717 subjects (2,923 in BP-SES and 794 in DP-EES) with 5,328 lesions (4,225 lesions in BP-SES and 1,103 in DP-EES) were included in the IPD. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months follow-up. Subgroups analyzed included diabetes, age (≥65 years), gender, complex lesions (B2/C), small vessels (reference vessel diameter ≤2.75 mm), multivessel treatment, renal disease, and patients with acute coronary syndrome. RESULTS: Overall, TLF at 12 months was significantly lower with 5.2%in the BP-SES group versus 7.6% in the DP-EES group (p = .0098). Similarly, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) was 3.1 versus 5.7% (p = .0005). The rate of stent thrombosis was similar in both groups (0.004%). By regression analysis, an independent stent effect in favor of BP-SES was observed for TLF (p = .0043) and TV-MI (p = .0364) in small vessels. CONCLUSION: Results of this IPD analysis suggest that the BP-SES with ultrathin struts is as safe as and more efficacious than DP-EES in the overall cohort and especially in small vessels.

Pressure gradient vs. flow relationships to characterize the physiology of a severely stenotic aortic valve before and after transcatheter valve implantation.

Aims: Echocardiography and tomographic imaging have documented dynamic changes in aortic stenosis (AS) geometry and severity during both the cardiac cycle and stress-induced increases in cardiac output. However, corresponding pressure gradient vs. flow relationships have not been described. Methods and results: We recruited 16 routine transcatheter aortic valve implantations (TAVI's) for graded dobutamine infusions both before and after implantation; 0.014″ pressure wires in the aorta and left ventricle (LV) continuously measured the transvalvular pressure gradient (ΔP) while a pulmonary artery catheter regularly assessed cardiac output by thermodilution. Before TAVI, ΔP did not display a consistent relationship with transvalvular flow (Q). Neither linear resistor (median R2 0.16) nor quadratic orifice (median R2 < 0.01) models at rest predicted stress observations; the severely stenotic valve behaved like a combination. The unitless ratio of aortic to left ventricular pressures during systolic ejection under stress conditions correlated best with post-TAVI flow improvement. After TAVI, a highly linear relationship (median R2 0.96) indicated a valid valve resistance. Conclusion: Pressure loss vs. flow curves offer a fundamental fluid dynamic synthesis for describing aortic valve pathophysiology. Severe AS does not consistently behave like an orifice (as suggested by Gorlin) or a resistor, whereas TAVI devices behave like a pure resistor. During peak dobutamine, the ratio of aortic to left ventricular pressures during systolic ejection provides a 'fractional flow reserve' of the aortic valve that closely approximates the complex, changing fluid dynamics. Because resting assessment cannot reliably predict stress haemodynamics, 'valvular fractional flow' warrants study to explain exertional symptoms in patients with only moderate AS at rest.

Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: The development of coronary drug-eluting stents has included use of new metal alloys, changes in stent architecture, and use of bioresorbable polymers. Whether these advancements improve clinical safety and efficacy has not been shown in previous randomised trials. We aimed to examine the clinical outcomes of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in a broad patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: BIOFLOW V was an international, randomised trial done in patients undergoing elective and urgent percutaneous coronary intervention in 90 hospitals in 13 countries (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Israel, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, and the USA). Eligible patients were those aged 18 years or older with ischaemic heart disease undergoing planned stent implantation in de-novo, native coronary lesions. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either an ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or to a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Randomisation was via a central web-based data capture system (mixed blocks of 3 and 6), and stratified by study site. The primary endpoint was 12-month target lesion failure. The primary non-inferiority comparison combined these data from two additional randomised trials of bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent with Bayesian methods. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02389946. FINDINGS: Between May 8, 2015, and March 31, 2016, 4772 patients were recruited into the study. 1334 patients met inclusion criteria and were randomly assigned to treatment with bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (n=884) or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (n=450). 52 (6%) of 883 patients in the bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent group and 41 (10%) of 427 patients in the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent group met the 12-month primary endpoint of target lesion failure (95% CI -6·84 to -0·29, p=0·0399), with differences in target vessel myocardial infarction (39 [5%] of 831 patients vs 35 [8%] of 424 patients, p=0·0155). The posterior probability that the bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent is non-inferior to the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent was 100% (Bayesian analysis, difference in target lesion failure frequency -2·6% [95% credible interval -5·5 to 0·1], non-inferiority margin 3·85%, n=2208). INTERPRETATION: The outperformance of the ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent over the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in a complex patient population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention suggests a new direction in improving next generation drug-eluting stent technology. FUNDING: BIOTRONIK.

Rationale of a novel study design for the BIOFLOW V study, a prospective, randomized multicenter study to assess the safety and efficacy of the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting coronary stent system using a Bayesian approach.

BACKGROUND: Traditional study design submitted to the Food and Drug Administration to test newer drug-eluting stents (DES) for marketing approval is the prospective randomized controlled trial. However, several DES have extensive clinical data from trials conducted outside the United States that have led to utilization of a novel design using the Bayesian approach. This design was proposed for testing DES with bioresorbable polymer compared with DES most commonly in use today that use durable polymers for drug elution. STUDY DESIGN AND OBJECTIVES: This prospective, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial is designed to assess the safety and efficacy of the Orsiro bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP SES). Up to 1,334 subjects with up to 3 de novo or restenotic coronary artery lesions who qualify for percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting will be randomized 2:1 to the BP SES versus the Xience durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP EES). Data from this trial will be combined with data from 2 similarly designed trials that also randomize subjects to BP SES and DP EES (BIOFLOW II, N=452 and BIOFLOW IV, N=579) by using a Bayesian approach. The primary end point is target lesion failure at 12 months post index procedure, defined as cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and the primary analysis is a test of noninferiority of the BP SES versus DP EES on the primary end point according to a noninferiority delta of 3.85%. Secondary end points include stent thrombosis and the individual components of target lesion failure. Subjects will be followed for 5 years after randomization. CONCLUSIONS: The BIOFLOW V trial offers an opportunity to assess clinical outcomes in patients treated with coronary revascularization using the Orsiro BP SES relative to a commonly used DP EES. The use of a Bayesian analysis combines a large randomized cohort of patients 2 two smaller contributing randomized trials to augment the efficiency of the comparison.

Third generation drug eluting stent (DES) with biodegradable polymer in diabetic patients: 5 years follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To report the long-term safety and efficacy data of a third generation drug eluting stent (DES) with biodegradable polymer in the complex patient population of diabetes mellitus after a follow-up period of 5 years. BACKGROUND: After percutaneous coronary intervention patients with diabetes mellitus are under higher risk of death, restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST) compared to non-diabetic patients. METHODS: In 126 centers worldwide 3067 patients were enrolled in the NOBORI 2 registry, 888 patients suffered from diabetes mellitus (DM), 213 of them (14%) being insulin dependent (IDDM). Five years follow-up has been completed in this study. RESULTS: At 5 years, 89.3% of the patients were available for follow-up. The reported target lesion failure (TLF) rates at 5 years were 12.39% in DM group and 7.34% in non-DM group; (p < 0.0001). In the DM group, the TLF rate in patients with IDDM was significantly higher than in the non-IDDM subgroup (17.84 vs. 10.67%; p < 0.01). The rate of ST at 5 years was not different among diabetic versus non-diabetic patients or IDDM versus NIDDM. Only 10 (<0.4%) very late stent thrombotic events beyond 12 months occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The Nobori DES performed well in patients with DM. As expected patients with DM, particularly those with IDDM, had worse outcomes. However, the very low rate of very late stent thrombosis in IDDM patients might have significant clinical value in the treatment of these patients. Clinical trial registration ISRCTN81649913; http://www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn/search.html?srch=81649913&sort=3&dir=desc&max=10.

Appropriate use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: a recommendation from experienced users : A position statement on the use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in the Netherlands.

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) have become a reliable revascularisation option to treat ischaemic coronary artery disease. Drug-eluting stents (DES) are widely used as first choice devices in many procedures due to their established good medium to long term outcomes. These permanent implants, however, do not have any residual function after vascular healing following the PCI. Beyond this initial healing period, metallic stents may induce new problems, resulting in an average rate of 2 % reinterventions per year. To eliminate this potential late limitation of permanent metallic DES, bioresorbable coronary stents or 'vascular scaffolds' (BVS) have been developed. In a parallel publication in this journal, an overview of the current clinical performance of these scaffolds is presented. As these scaffolds are currently CE marked and commercially available in many countries and as clinical evidence is still limited, recommendations for their general usage are needed to allow successful clinical introduction.

Safety and performance of the drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS) in patients with de-novo coronary lesions: 12 month results of the prospective, multicentre, first-in-man BIOSOLVE-I trial.

BACKGROUND: Bioabsorbable vascular scaffolds were developed to overcome limitations of permanent bare-metal or drug-eluting coronary stents­ie, stent thrombosis (despite prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy), the life-long presence of a caged vessel segment that does not allow vasomotion or remodelling, and chronic vessel wall inflammation. We assessed the safety and performance of a new magnesium-based paclitaxel-eluting absorbable metal scaffold in symptomatic patients with de-novo coronary lesions. METHODS: We did a prospective, multicentre, first-in-man trial (BIOSOLVE-1) of the drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS). 46 patients with 47 lesions were enrolled at five European centres. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularisation, at 6 and 12 months. Clinical follow-up was scheduled at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36 months. Patients were consecutively assigned to angiographic and intravascular ultrasonographic follow-up at 6 months or 12 months. Optical coherence tomography was done in some patients. All patients were recommended to take dual antiplatelet therapy for at least 12 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01168830. FINDINGS: Overall device and procedural success was 100%. Two of 46 (4%) patients had target lesion failure at 6 months (both clinically driven target lesion revascularisations), which rose to three of 43 (7%) at 12 months (one periprocedural target vessel myocardial infarction occurred during angiography at the 12 month follow-up visit). We noted no cardiac death or scaffold thrombosis. INTERPRETATION: Our results show feasibility, a good safety profile, and promising clinical and angiographic performance results up to 12 months for DREAMS. Our promising clinical results show that absorbable metal scaffolds might be an alternative to polymeric absorbable scaffolds. FUNDING: Biotronik.

A brief mindfulness based intervention for increase in emotional well-being and quality of life in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients: the MindfulHeart randomized controlled trial.

In this study effects of a brief mindfulness-based stress reduction intervention were examined in cardiac patients who had a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). One-hundred-and-fourteen patients (mean age 55 ± 7 years, 18 % women) were randomly assigned to a 4-session mindfulness group intervention or a minimal mindfulness self-help control group that received a booklet containing identical information. Compared to self-help, the group intervention showed larger increases in psychological and social quality of life (p < .05, partial η(2) = .04 and .05, respectively). For symptoms of anxiety and depression, and for perceived stress, this effect was evident only in patients younger than 60 years (p < .01, partial η(2) = .10 and .15, respectively). These effects were partially or fully mediated by increase in mindfulness. The brief group mindfulness intervention seems beneficial for cardiac PCI patients regarding general psychosocial quality of life, although for specific psychological symptoms, this intervention can be recommended only for nonelderly patients.

Assessment of optimum stent deployment by stent boost imaging: comparison with intravascular ultrasound.

Stent boost (SB) imaging is an enhancement of the radiologic edge of the stent by digital management of regular X-ray images. The purpose of the present study was to validate SB imaging by comparison with the anatomical standard using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). We investigated SB and IVUS after stent implantation in 68 arteries in 60 patients. Based on those findings, we added high-pressure dilatation in four patients and another stent implantation in four patients. We defined the SB criteria for adequate stent deployment as: complete stent expansion, stent minimum diameter ≥70% of reference diameter, and stent minimum diameter ≥2.0 mm; and IVUS criteria for adequate stent deployment as: minimal stent area ≥5.0 mm(2). If the reference vessel was <2.8 mm, adequate stent deployment was defined as minimum stent area ≥4.5 mm(2). IVUS findings indicated inadequate stent deployment in 21/72 observations (29%). Seven SB images showed inadequate stent expansion. SB predicted inadequate findings of IVUS with 100% specificity, 33% sensitivity, and 81% agreement. Although the sensitivity of SB image for adequate stent deployment is low, the specificity is sufficiently high for it to be the first-line for monitoring just after stent implantation in centers where IVUS is not used routinely.

Endothelial-dependent vasomotion in a coronary segment treated by ABSORB everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold system is related to plaque composition at the time of bioresorption of the polymer: indirect finding of vascular reparative therapy?

AIMS: To analyse the vasoreactivity of a coronary segment, previously scaffolded by the ABSORB bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) device, in relationship to its intravascular ultrasound-virtual histology (IVUS-VH) composition and reduction in greyscale echogenicity of the struts. Coronary segments, transiently scaffolded by a polymeric device, may in the long-term recover a normal vasomotor tone. Recovery of a normal endothelial-dependent vasomotion may be enabled by scaffold bioresorption, composition of the underlying tissue, or a combination of both mechanisms. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients from the ABSORB Cohort A and B trials, who underwent a vasomotion test and IVUS-VH investigation at 12 and 24 months, were included. Acetylcholine (Ach) and nitroglycerin were used to test either the endothelial-dependent or -independent vasomotion of the treated segment. Changes in polymeric strut echogenicity-a surrogate for bioresorption-IVUS-VH composition of the tissue underneath the scaffold and their relationship with the pharmacologically induced vasomotion were all evaluated. Overall, 26 patients underwent the vasomotion test (18 at 12 and 8 at 24 months). Vasodilatory response to Ach was quantitatively associated with larger reductions over time in polymeric strut echogenicity (y= -0.159x- 6.85; r= -0.781, P< 0.001). Scaffolded segments with vasoconstriction to Ach had larger vessel areas (14.37 ± 2.50 vs. 11.85 ± 2.54 mm(2), P= 0.030), larger plaque burden (57.31 ± 5.96 vs. 49.09 ± 9.10%, P= 0.018), and larger necrotic core (NC) areas [1.39 (+1.14, +1.74) vs. 0.78 mm(2) (+0.20, +0.98), P= 0.006] compared with those with vasodilation. CONCLUSION: Vasodilatory response to Ach, in coronary segments scaffolded by the ABSORB BVS device, is associated with a reduction in echogenicity of the scaffold over time, and a low amount of NC. In particular, the latter finding resembles the behaviour of a native coronary artery not caged by an intracoronary device.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing BioMime Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With Everolimus-Eluting Stent: Two-Year Outcomes of the meriT-V Trial.

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DESs) based on biodegradable polymers (BPs) have been introduced to reduce the risk for late and very late stent thrombosis (ST), which were frequently observed with earlier generations of DES designs based on durable polymers (DPs); however, randomized controlled trials on these DES designs are scarce. The meriT-V trial is a randomized, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial with a prospective, multicenter design that evaluated the 2-year efficacy of a novel third-generation, ultra-thin strut, BP-based BioMime sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) versus the DP-based XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) for the treatment of de novo lesions. Methods: The meriT-V is a randomized trial that enrolled 256 patients at 15 centers across Europe and Brazil. Here, we report the outcomes of the extended follow-up period of 2 years. The randomization of enrolled patients was in a 2:1 ratio; the enrolled patients received either the BioMime SES (n = 170) or the XIENCE EES (n = 86). The three-point major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR), was considered as the composite safety and efficacy endpoint. Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR) was evaluated as well as the frequency of definite/probable ST, based on the first Academic Research Consortium definitions. Results: The trial had a 2-year follow-up completion rate of 98.44% (n = 252/256 patients), and the clinical outcomes assessment showed a nonsignificant difference in the cumulative rate of three-point MACE between both arms (BioMime vs. XIENCE: 7.74% vs. 9.52%, P = 0.62). Even the MI incidences in the BioMime arm were insignificantly lower than those of the XIENCE arm (1.79% vs. 5.95%, P = 0.17). Late ST was observed in 1.19% cases of the XIENCE arm, while there were no such cases in the BioMime arm (P = 0.16). Conclusions: The objective comparisons between the novel BP-based BioMime SES and the well-established DP-based XIENCE EES in this randomized controlled trial show acceptable outcomes of both the devices in the cardiac deaths, MI, ID-TVR, and ST. Moreover, since there were no incidences of cardiac death in the entire study sample over the course of 2 years, we contend that the findings of the study are highly significant for both these DES designs. In this preliminary comparative trial, the device safety of BioMime SES can be affirmed to be acceptable, considering the lower three-point MACE rate and absence of late ST in the BioMime arm over the 2-year period.

Vascular compliance changes of the coronary vessel wall after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in the treated and adjacent segments.

BACKGROUND: Implantation of a metallic prosthesis creates local stiffness with a subsequent mismatch in the compliance of the vessel wall, disturbances in flow and heterogeneous distribution of wall shear stress. Polymeric bioresorbable ABSORB scaffolds have less stiffness than metallic platform stents. We sought to analyze the mismatch in vascular compliance after ABSORB implantation and its long-term resolution with bioresorption. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 83 patients from the ABSORB trials underwent palpography investigations (30 and 53 patients from ABSORB Cohorts A and B, respectively) to measure the compliance of the scaffolded and adjacent segments at various time points (from pre-implantation up to 24 months). The mean of the maximum strain values was calculated per segment by utilizing the Rotterdam Classification (ROC) score and expressed as ROC/mm. Scaffold implantation lead to a significant decrease in vascular compliance (median [IQR]) at the scaffolded segment (from 0.37 [0.24-0.45] to 0.14 [0.09-0.23], P<0.001) with mismatch in compliance in a paired analysis between the scaffolded and adjacent segments (proximal: 0.23 [0.12-0.34], scaffold: 0.12 [0.07-0.19], distal: 0.15 [0.05-0.26], P=0.042). This reported compliance mismatch disappears at short- and mid-term follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The ABSORB scaffold decreases vascular compliance at the site of scaffold implantation. A compliance mismatch is evident immediately post-implantation and in contrast to metallic stents disappears in the mid-term, likely leading to a normalization of the rheological behavior of the scaffolded segment.

Ultrathin Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: BIOFLOW V Final 5-Year Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority of ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents compared with alternative stent designs. Whether these differences persist over late-term follow-up is uncertain. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare late-term (5-year) clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin strut (81 µm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES). METHODS: BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international, 2:1 randomized trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin strut BP SES versus thin strut DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Prespecified outcomes through 5 years were assessed. RESULTS: Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 5-year rates of TLF were 12.3% for BP SES and 15.3% for DP EES (P = 0.108). Revascularization with BP SES was associated with a significantly lower target vessel-related myocardial infarction (6.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.015) and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.3% vs 1.6%, P = 0.021). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization was numerically but not significantly lower with BP SES (5.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.202). Cardiac death rates were 2.6% versus 1.9% (P = 0.495) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, randomized trial, TLF and the individual outcomes of cardiac death and target lesion revascularization at 5 years were similar among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. Both target vessel-related myocardial infarction and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP SES. These results confirm the durability of safety and the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin BP SES.

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.

Impact of Coronary Calcification on Clinical Outcomes After Implantation of Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents.

Background Percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions was associated with worse outcomes in the era of bare-metal and first-generation drug-eluting stents. Data on percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions with newer-generation drug-eluting stents are scarce. Therefore, we investigated the impact of lesion calcification on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with a bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Methods and Results Patients (n=2361) from BIOFLOW II, IV, and V trials were categorized into moderate/severe versus none/mild lesion calcification by a core laboratory. End points were target-lesion failure (TLF) (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization) and probable/definite stent thrombosis at 2 years. The agreement in calcification assessment between the operator and the core laboratory was weak (weighted κ, 0.23). Patients with moderate/severe calcification (n=303; 16%) had higher TLF (13.5% versus 8.4%; P=0.003) and stent thrombosis rates (2.1% versus 0.2%; P<0.0001), whereas target-lesion revascularization was not different between the groups (5.0% versus 3.9%; P=0.302). After adjustment, calcification did not emerge as an independent predictor of TLF (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.37; 95% CI, 0.89-2.08; P=0.148) but did for target-vessel myocardial infarction (aHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.03-2.68; P=0.037). TLF rates were similar between bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (12.6% versus 15.4%, P=0.482) in moderate/severe calcification. In none/mild calcification, the bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent showed lower TLF (7.5% versus 10.3%, P=0.045). Conclusions With newer-generation drug-eluting stents, moderate/severe lesion calcification was not associated with more TLF after adjustment for the higher risk of patients with coronary calcification, whereas the rate of target-vessel myocardial infarction was higher. The bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent were equally effective and safe in calcified lesions. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946.