Clinical outcomes with thin versus thick strut polymer-free biolimus-coated stents at 3 years.

BACKGROUND: For high bleeding-risk patients (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the LEADERS FREE (LF) and LEADERS FREE II (LF II) trials established the safety and efficacy of a stainless steel polymer-free biolimus-coated stent (SS-BCS) with 30 days of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). The LEADERS FREE III (LF III) trial investigated clinical outcomes after PCI with the next-generation cobalt-chromium thin-strut polymer-free biolimus-coated stent (CoCr-BCS) in HBR patients. AIMS: To report the final 3-year results of the LF III trial and compare them to LF II. METHODS: LF III was a prospective, multicentre, open-label single-arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CoCr-BCS stent. The primary safety endpoint was the composite of cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction(MI) or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). The primary efficacy endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (cd-TLR). We performed a propensity-matched comparison to the 3-year outcomes of LF II. RESULTS: After 3 years, CD/MI/ST had occurred in 57 patients (15%, 95% CI 11.8% to 19%) and cd-TLR in 23 (6.2%, 95% CI 4.1% to 9.2%) patients. In a propensity-matched comparison of patients treated with the CoCr-BCS versus the SS-BCS, there were similar rates of CD (6.6% vs 7.8%, p=0.50), MI (7.1% vs 8.3%, p=0.47) and definite/probable ST (1.1% vs 2%, HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.93, p=0.35). The rates of cd-TLR were 5.3% with CoCr-BCS versus 9.8% with SS-BCS (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.96, p=0.03). CONCLUSION: LF III confirms the long-term safety and efficacy of the CoCr-BCS in HBR patients treated with 1 month of DAPT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02843633, NCT03118895.

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials.

BACKGROUND: Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals. METHODS: Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

Comparing a strategy of sirolimus-eluting balloon treatment to drug-eluting stent implantation in de novo coronary lesions in all-comers: Design and rationale of the SELUTION DeNovo Trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug eluting stents (DES) are associated with a 2% to 4% annual rate of target lesion failure through 5-to-10-year follow-up. The presence of a metallic protheses is a trigger for neo-atherosclerosis and very late stent thrombosis. A "leave nothing behind" strategy using Drug Coated Balloons has been suggested; however, paclitaxel coated balloons are only recommended in selected indications. Recently a novel sirolimus eluting balloon, the SELUTION SLR TM 014 PTCA balloon (SEB) (M.A. MedAlliance SA, Nyon, Switzerland) has been developed. HYPOTHESIS: A strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with SEB and provisional DES is non-inferior to a strategy of systematic DES on target vessel failure (TVF) at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at 5 years, superiority will be tested. DESIGN: SELUTION DeNovo is a multi-center international open-label randomized trial. Subjects meeting eligibility criteria are randomized 1:1 to treatment of all lesions with either SEB and provisional DES or systematic DES. Major inclusion criteria are PCI indicated for ≥1 lesion considered suitable for treatment by either SEB or DES and clinical presentation with chronic coronary syndrome, unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). There is no limitation in the number of lesions to be treated. Target lesions diameters are between 2 and 5 mm. Major exclusion criteria are lesions in the left main artery, chronic total occlusions, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and unstable non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Three thousand three hundred twenty six patients will be included in 50 sites in Europe and Asia. TVF rates and their components will be determined at 30 days, 6 months and annually up to 5 years post-intervention. Among secondary endpoints, bleeding events, cost-effectiveness data and net clinical benefits will be assessed. SUMMARY: SELUTION DeNovo trial is an open-label, multi-center international randomized trial comparing a strategy of PCI with SEB and provisional DES to a strategy of PCI with systematic DES on TVF at one and five years. Non-inferiority will be tested at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at five years, superiority will be tested.

Individual Patient Data Meta-analysis of Drug-eluting Versus Bare-metal Stents for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Chronic Versus Acute Coronary Syndromes.

New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) strongly reduce restenosis and repeat revascularization compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) for percutaneous coronary intervention. There is residual uncertainty as to whether other prognostically relevant outcomes are affected by DES versus BMS concerning initial presentation (chronic coronary syndrome [CCS] vs acute coronary syndrome [ACS]). We performed an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing new-generation DES versus BMS (CRD42017060520). The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI). Outcomes were examined at maximum follow-up and with a 1-year landmark. Risk estimates are expressed as hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). A total of 22,319 patients were included across 14 trials; 7,691 patients (34.5%) with CCS and 14,628 patients (65.5%) with ACS. We found evidence that new-generation DES versus BMS consistently reduced the risk of cardiac death or MI in both patients with CCS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.98, p <0.001) and ACS (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.92, p <0.001) (p-interaction = 0.931). This benefit was mainly driven by a similar reduction in the risk of MI (p-interaction = 0.898) for both subsets (HRCCS 0.80, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; HRACS 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.89). In CCS and ACS, we found a time-dependent treatment effect, with the benefit from DES accumulating during 1-year follow-up, without offsetting effects after that. In conclusion, patients with CCS were slightly underrepresented in comparative clinical trials. Still, they benefited similarly to patients with ACS from new-generation DES instead of BMS with a sustained reduction of cardiac death or MI because of lower event rates within 1 year.

Polymer-free Biolimus-A9 coated thin strut stents for patients at high bleeding risk 1-year results from the LEADERS FREE III study.

BACKGROUND: In patients at high bleeding risk (HBR), the LEADERS FREE (LF) trial established the safety and efficacy of a polymer-free drug coated (Biolimus-A9) stainless steel stent (SS-DCS) with 30 days of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). In LEADERS FREE III, we studied a new cobalt-chromium thin-strut stent (CoCr-DCS) in HBR patients. METHODS: The CoCr-DCS shares all of the design features of the SS-DCS but has a CoCr stent platform with strut thickness of 84-88 µm. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and definite/probable stent thrombosis. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. Outcomes were compared to those of LF (non-inferiority to SS-DCS for safety and superiority to SS-BMS for efficacy). Additional propensity-matched comparisons were performed to account for baseline differences. RESULTS: We recruited 401 HBR patients using identical criteria to the LF trial. At 1 year, the primary safety endpoint was reached by 31/401 (8.0%) of patients treated with the CoCr-DCS versus 35/401 (8.9%) for the propensity-matched cohort (HR: 0.89, [0.55-1.44], p < 0.001 for non-inferiority, 0.62 for superiority). The efficacy endpoint was reached by 16/401 (4.2%) of CoCr-DCS patients versus 41/401 (10.6%) in the propensity-matched cohort (HR: 0.4 [0.2:0.7]) (p = 0.007 for superiority). There was no statistical difference between CoCr-DCS and SS-DCS in terms of efficacy (HR: 1.46 [0.68-3.15], p = 0.33). CONCLUSIONS: The new thin-strut CoCr-DCS proved non-inferior to the SS-DCS for safety, and superior to the BMS for efficacy in HBR patients treated with 30 days of DAPT.

Design and Rationale of a Randomized Trial of COBRA PzF Stenting to REDUCE Duration of Triple Therapy (COBRA-REDUCE).

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: A coronary stent with thromboresistant and pro-healing properties such as the polymer polyzene F-coated (COBRA PzF) stent might safely allow for a very short duration of triple therapy in patients taking oral anticoagulation (OAC) who undergo coronary stenting. METHODS: The COBRA-REDUCE trial is a prospective, multinational, randomized, open-label, assessor-blinded trial. A total of 996 patients at high bleeding risk because of requirement for OAC (with a vitamin K antagonist or non-vitamin K antagonist for any indication) will be randomized at sites in the United States and Europe to treatment with the COBRA-PzF stent followed by very short duration (14 days) DAPT or a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved new generation drug-eluting stent followed by guideline-recommended DAPT duration (3 or 6 months). Two co-primary endpoints will be tested at 6 months: a bleeding co-primary endpoint (bleeding academic research consortium [BARC] ≥2 bleeding beyond 14 days or after hospital discharge, whichever is later [superiority hypothesis]) and a thrombo-embolic co-primary endpoint (the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite/probable stent thrombosis or ischaemic stroke [non-inferiority hypothesis]). The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02594501). CONCLUSION: The COBRA-REDUCE trial will determine whether coronary stenting with the COBRA PzF stent followed by 14 days of clopidogrel will reduce bleeding without increasing thrombo-embolic events compared with FDA-approved DES followed by 3-6 months clopidogrel in patients taking OAC and aspirin.

Bleeding avoidance strategies in percutaneous coronary intervention.

For many years, bleeding has been perceived as an unavoidable consequence of strategies aimed at reducing thrombotic complications in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the paradigm has now shifted towards bleeding being recognized as a prognostically unfavourable event to the same extent as having a new or recurrent ischaemic or thrombotic complication. As such, in parallel with progress in device and drug development for PCI, there is clinical interest in developing strategies that maximize not only the efficacy but also the safety (for example, by minimizing bleeding) of any antithrombotic treatment or procedural aspect before, during or after PCI. In this Review, we discuss contemporary data and aspects of bleeding avoidance strategies in PCI, including risk stratification, timing of revascularization, pretreatment with antiplatelet agents, selection of vascular access, choice of coronary stents and antithrombotic treatment regimens.

Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents for Left Anterior Descending or Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization.

Background New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce target-vessel revascularization compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), and recent data suggest that DES have the potential to decrease the risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. We evaluated the treatment effect of DES versus BMS according to the target artery (left anterior descending [LAD] and/or left main [LM] versus other territories [no-LAD/LM]). Methods and Results The Coronary Stent Trialist (CST) Collaboration gathered individual patient data of randomized trials of DES versus BMS for the treatment of coronary artery disease. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were derived from a 1-stage individual patient data meta-analysis. We included 26 024 patients across 19 trials: 13 650 (52.4%) in the LAD/LM and 12 373 (47.6%) in the no-LAD/LM group. At 6-year follow-up, there was strong evidence that the treatment effect of DES versus BMS depended on the target vessel (P-interaction=0.024). Compared with BMS, DES reduced the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction to a greater extent in the LAD/LM (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68-0.85) than in the no-LAD/LM territories (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.05). This benefit was driven by a lower risk of cardiac death (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.98) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85) in patients with LAD/LM disease randomized to DES. An interaction (P=0.004) was also found for all-cause mortality with patients with LAD/LM disease deriving benefit from DES (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76-0.97). Conclusions As compared with BMS, new-generation DES were associated with sustained reduction in the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction if used for the treatment of LAD or left main coronary stenoses. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO; Unique identifier: CRD42017060520.

Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents for Left Anterior Descending or Left Main Coronary Artery Revascularization

BACKGROUND: New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce target-vessel revascularization compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), and recent data suggest that DES have the potential to decrease the risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. We evaluated the treatment effect of DES versus BMS according to the target artery (left anterior descending [LAD] and/or left main [LM] versus other territories [no-LAD/LM]). METHODS AND RESULTS: The Coronary Stent Trialist (CST) Collaboration gathered individual patient data of randomized trials of DES versus BMS for the treatment of coronary artery disease. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were derived from a 1-stage individual patient data meta-analysis. We included 26 024 patients across 19 trials: 13 650 (52.4%) in the LAD/LM and 12 373 (47.6%) in the no-LAD/LM group. At 6-year follow-up, there was strong evidence that the treatment effect of DES versus BMS depended on the target vessel (P interaction=0.024). Compared with BMS, DES reduced the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction to a greater extent in the LAD/LM (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68­0.85) than in the no-LAD/LM territories (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83­1.05). This benefit was driven by a lower risk of cardiac death (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70­0.98) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65­0.85) in patients with LAD/LM disease randomized to DES. An interaction (P=0.004) was also found for all-cause mortality with patients with LAD/LM disease deriving benefit from DES (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76­0.97). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with BMS, new-generation DES were associated with sustained reduction in the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction if used for the treatment of LAD or left main coronary stenoses.

Sex-Based Differences in Bleeding Risk After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Implications for the Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Criteria.

Background Female sex was not included among the high bleeding risk (HBR) criteria by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) as it remains unclear whether it constitutes an HBR condition after percutaneous coronary intervention. We investigated whether female sex associates with HBR and assessed the performance of ARC HBR criteria separately in women and men. Methods and Results Among all consecutive patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention between 2009 and 2018, bleeding occurrences up to 1 year were prospectively collected and centrally adjudicated. All but one of the originally defined ARC HBR criteria were assessed, and the ARC HBR score generated accordingly. Among 16 821 patients, 25.6% were women. Compared with men, women were older and had lower creatinine clearance and hemoglobin values. After adjustment, female sex was independently associated with access-site (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.22-3.74; P=0.008) but not with overall or non-access-site 1-year Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3 or 5 bleeding. This association remained consistent when the femoral but not the radial approach was chosen. The ARC HBR score discrimination, using the original criteria, was lower among women than men (c-index 0.644 versus 0.688; P=0.048), whereas a revised ARC HBR score, in which age, creatinine clearance, and hemoglobin were modeled as continuous rather than dichotomized variables, performed similarly in both sexes. Conclusions Female sex is an independent predictor for access-site bleeding but not for overall bleeding events at 1 year after percutaneous coronary intervention. The ARC HBR framework shows an overall good performance in both sexes, yet is lower in women than men, attributable to dichotomization of age, creatinine clearance, and hemoglobin values, which are differently distributed between sexes. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02241291.

Impact of clinical presentation on bleeding risk after percutaneous coronary intervention and implications for the ARC-HBR definition.

BACKGROUND: The identification of bleeding risk factors in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is essential to inform subsequent management. Whether clinical presentation per se affects bleeding risk after PCI remains unclear. AIMS: We aimed to assess whether clinical presentation per se predisposes to bleeding in patients undergoing PCI and if the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) High Bleeding Risk (HBR) criteria perform consistently in acute (ACS) and chronic (CCS) coronary syndrome patients. METHODS: Consecutive patients undergoing PCI from the Bern PCI Registry were stratified by clinical presentation. Bleeding events at one year were compared in ACS versus CCS patients, and the originally defined ARC-HBR criteria were assessed. RESULTS: Among 16,821 patients, 9,503 (56.5%) presented with ACS. At one year, BARC 3 or 5 bleeding occurred in 4.97% and 3.60% of patients with ACS and CCS, respectively. After adjustment, ACS remained associated with higher BARC 3 or 5 bleeding risk (adjusted HR 1.21, 95% CI: 1.01-1.43; p=0.034), owing to non-access site-related occurrences, which accrued mainly within the first 30 days after PCI. The ARC-HBR score had lower discrimination among ACS compared with CCS patients, and its performance slightly improved when ACS was computed as a minor criterion. CONCLUSIONS: ACS presentation per se predicts one-year major bleeding risk after PCI. The ARC-HBR score discrimination appeared lower in ACS than CCS, and its overall performance improved numerically when ACS was computed as an additional minor risk criterion.

Assessing the Risks of Bleeding vs Thrombotic Events in Patients at High Bleeding Risk After Coronary Stent Implantation: The ARC-High Bleeding Risk Trade-off Model.

Importance: Patients who are candidates for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are at high bleeding risk constitute a therapeutic challenge because they often also face an increased risk of thrombotic complications. Objectives: To develop and validate models to predict the risks of major bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and myocardial infarction (MI) and/or stent thrombosis (ST) for individual patients at high bleeding risk and provide assistance in defining procedural strategy and antithrombotic regimens. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prognostic study used individual patient data from 6 studies conducted from July 1, 2009, to September 5, 2017, for 6641 patients at more than 200 centers in Europe, the US, and Asia who underwent PCI and were identified as being at high bleeding risk using the Academic Research Consortium criteria. In 1 year of follow-up (excluding periprocedural events), individual patient risks of MI and/or ST and major bleeding were evaluated using 33 baseline variables. To validate these models, a subgroup of 1458 patients at high bleeding risk from the ONYX ONE trial were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed from February 1, 2019, to April 30, 2020. Exposures: All patients underwent PCI with bare metal, drug-coated, or drug-eluting stent implants. Main Outcomes and Measures: Forward, stepwise multivariable proportional hazards models were used to identify highly significant predictors of MI and/or ST and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding. Results: A total of 6641 patients (4384 men [66.0%]; median age, 77.9 years [interquartile range, 70.0-82.6 years]) were included in this study. Over 365 days, nonperiprocedural MI and/or ST occurred in 350 patients (5.3%), and BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding occurred in 381 patients (5.7%). Eight independent baseline predictors of risk of MI and/or ST and 8 predictors for risk of BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding were identified. Four of these predictors were in both risk models. Both risk models showed moderate discrimination: C statistic = 0.69 for predicting MI and/or ST and 0.68 for predicting BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding. Applying these same models to the validation cohort gave a similar strength of discrimination (C statistic = 0.74 for both MI and/or ST and BARC types 3-5 bleeding). Patients with MI and/or ST had a mortality hazard ratio of 6.1 (95% CI, 4.8-7.7), and those with BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding had a mortality hazard ratio of 3.7 (95% CI, 2.9-4.8) compared with patients free of both events. Taking these data into account, the risk scores facilitate investigation of the individual patient trade-off between these 2 risks: 2931 patients (44.1%) at high bleeding risk in the 6 studies had a greater risk of MI and/or ST than of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding, 1555 patients (23.4%) had a greater risk of BARC 3 to 5 bleeding than of MI and/or ST, and 2155 (32.4%) had a comparable risk of both events. Conclusions and Relevance: In a large cohort of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing PCI, 2 prognostic models have been developed to identify individual patients' risk of major coronary thrombotic and bleeding events. In future clinical practice, using an application on a smartphone to evaluate the trade-off between these 2 quantifiable risks for each patient may help clinicians choose the most appropriate revascularization strategy and tailor the duration and intensity of antithrombotic regimens.

Polymer-free drug-coated vs. bare-metal coronary stents in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a subgroup analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial.

AIMS: To compare the outcomes of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS) after PCI with either a drug-coated stent (DCS) or a bare-metal stent (BMS), followed by 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy and to explore the impact of the timing of NCS. METHODS: This is a subgroup analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial. The primary safety end point was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis, and the primary efficacy end point was clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: Out of 2432 patients included in the LEADERS FREE trial, 278 (11.4%) underwent NCS within 1 year after PCI. Among NCS patients, the 1-year safety end point was numerically lower with DCS; however, this difference was not significant as compared to BMS (4.7% vs. 10.1%, HR: 0.459 [0.178-1.183], p = 0.099), clinically driven TLR was significantly lower after DCS (2.4% vs. 8.3%, HR: 0.281 [0.079-0.996], p = 0.036), and BARC 3-5 bleeding was similar with DCS vs. BMS (10.2% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.438). In patients treated with BMS, NCS within 3 months after PCI was associated with higher incidence of the safety end point than NCSs performed later: 14.9% vs. 4.4%, HR: 3.586 [1.012-12.709], p = 0.034. The timing of surgery had no impact on patients treated with DCS (4.7% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.947). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing NCS after PCI, DCS-treated patients had a lower probability of clinically driven TLR compared with BMS. However, there was no significant difference in the occurrence of the primary composite safety end point or bleeding complications. Early NCS after BMS-PCI was associated with impaired safety, while the timing of NCS had no such influence after DCS implantation.

Drug-coated stents versus bare metal stents in Academic Research Consortium-defined high bleeding risk patients.

BACKGROUND: More effective and progressively safer generations of drug-elut-ing stents (DES) have replaced bare metal stents (BMS) in rou-tine clinical practice. However, patients considered to be at high bleeding risk (HBR) have traditionally been underrepresented in pivotal DES trials. AIMS: The aim of this study was to model the safety and effectiveness of drug-coated stents (DCS) versus BMS in HBR patients according to the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) criteria. METHODS: Participants from the LEADERS FREE (LF) and LEADERS FREE II (LFII) studies were pooled into one data set. Participants were treated with 30 days of DAPT. The primary safety (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) and effectiveness (target lesion revascularisation) endpoints were compared between DCS and BMS in the subgroup of patients satisfying the ARC-HBR definition using propensity-score modelling. RESULTS: From the 3,635 participants included in the combined LF and LFII data set, 2,898 (79.7%) satisfied the ARC-HBR criteria (DCS: 1,923; BMS: 975). The primary safety endpoint occurred in 184 (9.8%) and in 132 (13.8%) participants in the DCS and BMS groups, respectively (adjusted HR 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.91; p=0.006). The risk of the primary effectiveness endpoint was also significantly lower with DCS (6.2%) versus BMS (8.8%) (adjusted HR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.52-0.94; p=0.016). The safety and effectiveness of DCS versus BMS were consistent according to ARC-HBR status (p for interaction=0.206 and 0.260, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: DCS are safer and more effective than BMS in an ARC-defined HBR population.

Validation of high bleeding risk criteria and definition as proposed by the academic research consortium for high bleeding risk.

AIMS: To validate the set of clinical and biochemical criteria proposed by consensus by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) for High Bleeding Risk (HBR) for the identification of HBR patients. These criteria were categorized into major and minor, if expected to carry in isolation, respectively, ≥4% and <4% Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding risk within 1-year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). High bleeding risk patients are those meeting at least 1 major or 2 minor criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: All patients undergoing PCI at Bern University Hospital, between February 2009 and September 2018 were prospectively entered into the Bern PCI Registry (NCT02241291). Age, haemoglobin, platelet count, creatinine, and use of oral anticoagulation were prospectively collected, while the remaining HBR criteria except for planned surgery were retrospectively adjudicated. A total of 16 580 participants with complete ARC-HBR criteria were included. After assigning 1 point to each major and 0.5 point to each minor criterion, we observed for every 0.5 score increase a step-wise augmentation of BARC 3 or 5 bleeding rates at 1 year ranging from 1.90% among patients fulfilling no criterion, through 4.01%, 5.98%, 7.42%, 8.60%, 12.21%, 12.29%, and 17.64%. All major and five out of six minor criteria, conferred in isolation a risk for BARC 3 or 5 bleeding at 1 year exceeding 4% at the upper limit of the 95% confidence intervals. CONCLUSION: All major and the majority of minor ARC-HBR criteria identify in isolation patients at HBR.

Trial Design Principles for Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI: JACC Scientific Expert Panel.

Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting.

Impacto del acceso vascular en el pronóstico tras la angioplastia coronaria en pacientes con alto riesgo hemorrágico: subanálisis predefinido del estudio LEADERS FREE / Impact of vascular access on outcome after PCI in patients at high bleeding risk: a pre-specified sub-analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: El objetivo es evaluar el impacto del acceso vascular en las complicaciones hemorrágicas tras una intervención coronaria percutánea en pacientes con alto riesgo de sangrado (ARS) a los 30 días y a los 2 años. MÉTODOS: El presente estudio es un subanálisis predefinido del estudio LEADERS FREE, que incluyó a 2.432 pacientes con ARS y en el que el stent farmacoactivo Biolimus A9 resultó superior al stent convencional en seguridad y eficacia. RESULTADOS: El acceso radial (AR) se utilizó en 1.454 pacientes (59,8%) y el femoral (AF), en 978 (40,2%), ambos a elección del operador. La seguridad y los beneficios del stent farmacoactivo sobre el convencional fueron independientes del acceso vascular. A los 30 días y a los 2 años, habían sufrido un sangrado mayor el 2,4 y el 7,5% de los pacientes con AR y el 4,6 y el 10,9% de los pacientes con AF (p = 0,003), la mayoría en ambos grupos (el 2,1 y el 7,0% del de AR; el 3,2 y el 9,4% del de AF) no relacionados con el sitio de acceso vascular. El AR se asoció con una reducción significativa en las tasas ajustadas de sangrado mayor tanto a 30 días (HR=1,98; IC95%, 1,25-3,11; p = 0,003) como a 2 años de seguimiento (HR=1,51; IC95%, 1,14-2,01; p = 0,003). CONCLUSIONES: Los operadores prefirieron el AR en la mayoría de los pacientes con ARS, lo cual se asoció con una reducción significativa del sangrado mayor. Asimismo, un número significativo de sangrados en el seguimiento de esta población son no relacionados con el acceso vascular

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The prognostic impact of bleeding in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients depending on the location of bleeding and prognosis in nonaccess site bleeding is unknown. We aimed to assess the impact of vascular access site on bleeding complications after percutaneous coronary interventions for HBR patients at 30-day and 2-year follow-up. METHODS: The LEADERS FREE trial included 2432 HBR PCI patients. A Biolimus A9 drug-coated stent was superior to a bare-metal stent for safety and efficacy. This is a predefined sub-analysis of the LEADERS FREE trial. RESULTS: Transradial access (TRA) was used in 1454 patients (59.8%) and transfemoral access (TFA) in 978 (40.2%), according to operator preference. The safety and benefits of drug-coated stents over bare-metal stents were independent of vascular access. At 30 days and 2 years, major bleeding had occurred in 2.4% and 7.5% of TRA patients and 4.6% and 10.9% of TFA patients (P=.003), respectively. Most of these events in both groups (2.1% and 7.0% for TRA; 3.2% and 9.4% for TFA, respectively) were nonaccess site-related. TRA was associated with a significant reduction in adjusted rates of major bleeding both at 30 days (HR, 1.98; 95%CI, 1.25-3.11; P=.003) and at 2 years of follow-up (HR, 1.51; 95%CI, 1.14-2.01; P=.003). This difference was driven by both access and nonaccess bleeding. CONCLUSIONS: Operators preferred TRA for most HBR patients, which was associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding events. However, most of these events in this population are unrelated to vascular access