Proximal LAD Treated With Thin-Strut New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of TWENTE I-III.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess 2-year clinical outcome following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with thin-strut new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients treated in proximal left anterior descending artery (P-LAD) versus non-P-LAD lesions. BACKGROUND: In current revascularization guidelines, P-LAD coronary artery stenosis is discussed separately, mainly because of a higher adverse event risk and benefits of bypass surgery. METHODS: The study included 6,037 patients without previous bypass surgery or left main stem involvement from the TWENTE I, II, and III randomized trials. A total of 1,607 (26.6%) patients had at least 1 DES implanted in P-LAD and were compared with 4,430 (73.4%) patients who were exclusively treated in other (non-P-LAD) segments. RESULTS: Two-year follow-up was available in 5,995 (99.3%) patients. At baseline, P-LAD patients had more multivessel treatment and longer total stent length. The rate of the patient-oriented composite clinical endpoint (any death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization) was similar in P-LAD versus non-P-LAD patients (11.4% vs. 11.6%; p = 0.87). In P-LAD patients, the rate of the device-oriented composite clinical endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) was higher (7.6% vs. 6.0%; p = 0.020), driven by a higher rate of target vessel myocardial infarction (4.1% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.002). However, multivariate analysis showed no independent association between stenting P-LAD lesions and clinical endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: In this patient-level pooled analysis of 3 large-scale contemporary DES trials, treatment of P-LAD lesions was not independently associated with higher 2-year adverse clinical event rates. These results imply that separate consideration in future revascularization guidelines may not be mandatory any longer.

Rationale and Design of the Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) Registry: Towards "Personalized Medicine" in Daily Clinical Practice.

Diagnostic and treatment strategies for acute coronary syndrome have improved dramatically over the past few decades, but mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction rates remain high. An aging population with increasing co-morbidities heralds new clinical challenges. Therefore, in order to evaluate and improve current treatment strategies, detailed information on clinical presentation, treatment and follow-up in real-world patients is needed. The Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03823547) is a multi-center, prospective real-world registry of patients admitted with (suspected) acute coronary syndrome. Both non-interventional and interventional cardiac centers in different regions of the Netherlands are currently participating. Patients are treated according to local protocols, enabling the evaluation of different diagnostic and treatment strategies used in daily practice. Data collection is performed using electronic medical records and quality-of-life questionnaires, which are sent 1, 12, 24 and 36 months after initial admission. Major end points are all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, revascularization and all bleeding requiring medical attention. Invasive therapy, antithrombotic therapy including patient-tailored strategies, such as the use of risk scores, pharmacogenetic guided antiplatelet therapy and patient reported outcome measures are monitored. The FORCE-ACS registry provides insight into numerous aspects of the (quality of) care for acute coronary syndrome patients.

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.

5-Year Outcome Following Randomized Treatment of All-Comers With Zotarolimus-Eluting Resolute Integrity and Everolimus-Eluting PROMUS Element Coronary Stents: Final Report of the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The study sought to evaluate for the first time the 5-year outcomes after treating an all-comers population with newer-generation cobalt chromium-based Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) versus platinum chromium-based PROMUS Element everolimus eluting stents (EES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). BACKGROUND: The DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) (DUrable polymer-based sTent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt versus ReSolute integrity: TWENTE II) trial is a randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, investigator-initiated all-comers trial that found at its main analysis similar 1-year safety and efficacy for both drug-eluting stents. It is the first randomized trial ever to investigate the Resolute Integrity ZES and the first trial to compare both devices. METHODS: In total, 1,811 patients were 1:1 randomized to ZES versus EES. We performed a pre-specified assessment of the 5-year clinical outcomes in terms of safety and efficacy. The main endpoint target vessel failure (TVF) is a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary endpoints included the individual components of TVF, and stent thrombosis. The study was independently monitored, and adverse clinical events were independently adjudicated. RESULTS: Five-year clinical follow-up data was available in 1,798 (99.3%) patients. The ZES and EES groups showed favorable outcomes, with similar 5-year incidence of TVF (13.2% vs. 14.2%; plog-rank = 0.62) and its individual components: cardiac death (4.5% vs. 4.9%; plog-rank = 0.69), target vessel-related myocardial infarction (3.1% vs. 2.6%; plog-rank = 0.47), and target vessel revascularization (7.6% vs. 8.6%; plog-rank = 0.46). The 5-year incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was similar (1.5% vs. 1.3%; plog-rank = 0.83). CONCLUSIONS: At 5-year follow-up, the Resolute Integrity ZES and PROMUS Element EES showed similar and sustained results in terms of safety and efficacy for treating a broad population of all-comers.

Randomized Multicenter Trial Investigating Angiographic Outcomes of Hybrid Sirolimus-Eluting Stents With Biodegradable Polymer Compared With Everolimus-Eluting Stents With Durable Polymer in Chronic Total Occlusions: The PRISON IV Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the hybrid ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with biodegradable polymer compared with the thin-strut everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with durable polymer in successfully recanalized chronic total occlusions (CTOs). BACKGROUND: The introduction of drug-eluting stents revolutionized the treatment of CTOs. However, limited data are available on new-generation drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer in CTOs. METHODS: In this multicenter trial, patients were randomized, after successful CTO recanalization, to either SES or EES. The primary noninferiority endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (noninferiority margin 0.2 mm). Secondary endpoints included in-stent late lumen loss and clinical endpoints. RESULTS: Overall, 330 patients were included. At 9 months, angiography was available in 281 patients (85%). Duration of occlusion ≥3 months was 92.5%, with mean stent length of 52.4 ± 28.1 mm versus 52.3 ± 26.5 mm in the SES and EES groups. The primary noninferiority endpoint, in-segment late lumen loss, was not met for SES versus EES (0.13 ± 0.63 mm vs. 0.02 ± 0.47 mm; p = 0.08, 2-sided; difference 0.11 mm; 95% confidence interval: -0.01 to 0.25 mm; pnoninferiority = 0.11, 1-sided). In-stent late lumen loss was comparable between SES and EES (0.12 ± 0.59 mm vs. 0.07 ± 0.46 mm; p = 0.52). The incidence of in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis was significantly higher with SES compared with EES (8.0% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.028), with comparable rates of reocclusions (2.2% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.68). Clinically indicated target lesion and target vessel revascularization (9.2% vs. 4.0% [p = 0.08] and 9.2% vs. 6.0% [p = 0.33]), target vessel failure (9.9% vs. 6.6%; p = 0.35), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 1.00) were comparable between the SES and EES groups. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial failed to show noninferiority of hybrid SES relative to EES in terms of in-segment late lumen loss in successfully recanalized CTOs. Furthermore, a statistically significantly higher rate of binary restenosis was found with SES.

Outcome After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Resolute Integrity and Promus Element Stents: Insights From the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: In acute myocardial infarction (MI), novel highly deliverable drug-eluting stents (DES) may be particularly valuable as their flexible stent designs might reduce device-induced traumas to culprit lesions. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions with 2 novel durable polymer-coated DES in patients with acute MI. METHODS: The prospective, randomized DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) multicenter trial compares Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents in 1811 all-comer patients, of whom 817 (45.1%) were treated for ST-segment elevation MI or non-ST-segment elevation MI and the 2-year outcome is available in 99.9%. The primary clinical endpoint is target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel related MI, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Of all 817 patients treated for acute MI, 421 (51.5%) were treated with Resolute Integrity and 396 (48.5%) with Promus Element stents. At the 2-year follow-up, the rates of TVF (7.4% vs 6.1%; P = .45), target lesion revascularization (3.1% vs 2.8%; P = .79), and definite stent thrombosis (1.0% vs 0.5%; P = .69) were low for both stent groups. Consistent with these findings in all patients with acute MI, outcomes for the 2 DES were favorable and similar in both, with 370 patients with ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 5.1% vs 4.9%; P = .81) and 447 patients with non-ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 9.0% vs 7.5%; P = .56). CONCLUSIONS: Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents were both safe and efficacious in treating patients with acute MI. The present 2-year follow-up data underline the safety of using these devices in this particular clinical setting.

Bifurcation treatment with novel, highly flexible drug-eluting coronary stents in all-comers: 2-year outcome in patients of the DUTCH PEERS trial.

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in bifurcated lesions with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) was associated with increased myocardial infarction (MI) rates. Flexible stent designs that accommodate well to vessel tapering may be of benefit in challenging anatomies such as bifurcated target lesions, but so far data are scarce. METHODS: We analyzed the 2-year follow-up data of the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) trial, which randomized 1811 all-comer patients to PCI with newer generation resolute integrity zotarolimus-eluting (Medtronic) or promus element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific). In bifurcated lesions, provisional stenting was generally performed. Target vessel failure is a composite endpoint, consisting of cardiac death, target vessel MI, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Patients with at least one bifurcated lesion (n = 465, 25.7 %) versus patients with non-bifurcated target lesions only (n = 1346, 74.3 %) showed similar rates of clinical endpoints including target vessel failure (9.2 versus 7.9 %, p = 0.36) and definite stent thrombosis (0.4 versus 1.0 %, p = 0.38). Target vessel MI was more common in patients with bifurcated lesions (3.4 versus 1.6 %, p = 0.02); but after multivariate analysis with propensity score adjustment, bifurcation treatment was found not to be an independent predictor of target vessel MI (HR 1.40, 95 % CI 0.71-2.76; p = 0.34). Among patients with bifurcated lesions, DES type and side-branch size did not affect outcome, but periprocedural MI occurred more often after two-stent approaches (9.0 versus 2.1 %; p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: All-comer patients treated for bifurcated and non-bifurcated target lesions showed similar and low rates of clinical endpoints, suggesting that the DES used are efficacious and safe for treating bifurcated target lesions.

Clinical Events and Patient-Reported Chest Pain in All-Comers Treated With Resolute Integrity and Promus Element Stents: 2-Year Follow-Up of the DUTCH PEERS (DUrable Polymer-Based STent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt Versus ReSolute Integrity) Randomized Trial (TWENTE II).

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed clinical events and patient-reported chest pain 2 years after treatment of all-comers with Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, California) and Promus Element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts). BACKGROUND: For both drug-eluting stents (DES), no all-comer outcome data from >12 months of follow-up have been published. Although there is increasing interest in patient-reported chest pain following stenting, data with novel DES are scarce. METHODS: The DUTCH PEERS multicenter trial (TWENTE II) (DUrable Polymer-Based STent CHallenge of Promus ElemEnt Versus ReSolute Integrity) Randomized Trial [TWENTE II]) randomized 1,811 all-comer patients to treatment with 1 type of DES. Monitoring and event adjudication were performed by independent contract research organizations. RESULTS: The 2-year follow-up of 1,810 patients (99.9%) was available. The primary composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 8.6% and 7.8% of patients treated with zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting stents, respectively (p = 0.55). Rates of components of target vessel failure were: cardiac death (2.4% vs. 1.9%, p = 0.42); target vessel-related myocardial infarction (2.4% vs. 1.8%, p = 0.33); clinically-indicated target vessel revascularization (4.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.83). At 1- and 2-year follow-up, >80% of patients were free from chest pain (no between-stent difference). In addition, >87% of patients were either free from chest pain or experienced pain only at maximal physical exertion, but not during normal daily activities. Patients with chest pain after 12 months at no more than moderate physical effort had a higher risk of target vessel revascularization during the following year (hazard ratio: 1.89 [95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 3.39], p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: During the second year of follow-up, the incidence of adverse clinical endpoints remained similar and low for both DES. The vast majority of patients were free from chest pain.

Resultados de los stents Resolute Integrity y Promus Element en el infarto de miocardio: análisis del ensayo aleatorizado DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II ) / Outcome after myocardial infarction treated with Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents: insights from the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) randomized trial

Introducción y objetivos: En el infarto agudo de miocardio (IAM), los nuevos stents farmacoactivos (SFA) de alta liberación de fármacos pueden ser de especial utilidad, ya que su diseño flexible podría reducir los traumatismos inducidos por el dispositivo en la lesión culpable. El objetivo del estudio es evaluar la seguridad y la eficacia de las intervenciones coronarias percutáneas con 2 nuevos SFA con recubrimiento de polímero duradero en pacientes con IAM. Métodos: El ensayo multicéntrico prospectivo y aleatorizado DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) compara los stents Resolute Integrity y Promus Element en 1.811 pacientes consecutivos no seleccionados (all-comers); a 817 (45,1%) de ellos se los trató por un IAM con o sin elevación del segmento ST y se dispuso de un seguimiento de 2 años del 99,9% de los casos. El objetivo clínico principal es el fallo del vaso diana (FVD), que consiste en la combinación de muerte cardiaca, infarto de miocardio relacionado con el vaso diana y revascularización del vaso diana. Resultados: De los 817 pacientes tratados por un IAM, 421 (51,5%) recibieron un stent Resolute Integrity y 396 (48,5%), un Promus Element. A los 2 años de seguimiento, las tasas de FVD (el 7,4 frente al 6,1%; p = 0,45), revascularización de la lesión diana (el 3,1 frente al 2,8%; p = 0,79) y trombosis del stent definitiva (el 1,0 frente al 0,5%; p = 0,69) fueron bajas en los 2 grupos de stents. En consonancia con estos resultados obtenidos en el conjunto de los pacientes con IAM, los resultados observados con los 2 SFA fueron favorables y similares con ambos dispositivos en 370 pacientes con IAM con elevación del segmento ST (FVD, el 5,1 frente al 4,9%; p = 0,81) y 447 pacientes con IAM sin elevación del segmento ST (FVD, el 9,0 frente al 7,5%; p = 0,56). Conclusiones: Los stents Resolute Integrity y Promus Element fueron seguros y eficaces en el tratamiento de pacientes con IAM. Los datos de seguimiento a 2 años subrayan la seguridad de emplear estos dispositivos en este contexto clínico específico (AU)

Introduction and objectives: In acute myocardial infarction (MI), novel highly deliverable drug-eluting stents (DES) may be particularly valuable as their flexible stent designs might reduce device-induced traumas to culprit lesions. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions with 2 novel durable polymer-coated DES in patients with acute MI. Methods: The prospective, randomized DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) multicenter trial compares Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents in 1811 all-comer patients, of whom 817 (45.1%) were treated for ST-segment elevation MI or non—ST-segment elevation MI and the 2-year outcome is available in 99.9%. The primary clinical endpoint is target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel related MI, or target vessel revascularization. Results: Of all 817 patients treated for acute MI, 421 (51.5%) were treated with Resolute Integrity and 396 (48.5%) with Promus Element stents. At the 2-year follow-up, the rates of TVF (7.4% vs 6.1%; P = .45), target lesion revascularization (3.1% vs 2.8%; P = .79), and definite stent thrombosis (1.0% vs 0.5%; P = .69) were low for both stent groups. Consistent with these findings in all patients with acute MI, outcomes for the 2 DES were favorable and similar in both, with 370 patients with ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 5.1% vs 4.9%; P = .81) and 447 patients with non—ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 9.0% vs 7.5%; P = .56). Conclusions: Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents were both safe and efficacious in treating patients with acute MI. The present 2-year follow-up data underline the safety of using these devices in this particular clinical setting (AU)