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

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

Final 5-year report of BIONYX comparing the thin-composite wire-strut zotarolimus-eluting stent versus ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent.

BACKGROUND: The BIONYX randomized trial is the first study to evaluate the Resolute Onyx durable polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in all-comers. Furthermore, it is the first trial to assess safety and efficacy of this stent versus the Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers, paying particular attention to patients with diabetes. It has previously shown promising results until 3 years of follow-up. AIMS: We aimed to assess long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with Onyx ZES versus Orsiro SES at 5-year follow-up. METHODS: The main composite endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Time to primary and secondary endpoints was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, applying the log-rank test for between-group comparison. RESULTS: Follow-up was available in 2414/2488 (97.0%) patients. After 5 years, TVF showed no significant difference between Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES (12.7% vs. 13.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.75-1.17], plog-rank = 0.55). Landmark analysis between 3- and 5-year follow-up found a lower target lesion revascularization rate for Onyx ZES (1.1% vs. 2.4%, HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.24-0.93], plog-rank = 0.026). A prespecified subgroup analysis showed no significant between-stent difference in clinical outcome among patients with diabetes. After treatment with Onyx ZES, patients aged ≥75 years had significantly lower rates of TVF (13.8% vs. 21.9%, HR 0.60, 95% CI [0.39-0.93], plog-rank = 0.023). CONCLUSIONS: The final 5-year analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial showed favorable and similar long-term outcomes of safety and efficacy for Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES in both all-comers and patients with diabetes.

Timing of Complete Multivessel Revascularization in Patients Presenting With Non-ST-Segment Elevation Acute Coronary Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD. METHODS: This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year. RESULTS: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018). CONCLUSIONS: ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year.

Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The importance of revascularisation of significant coronary artery disease (CAD) in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is unclear. Despite the lack of randomised controlled trials comparing different revascularisation strategies, guidelines currently recommend percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with significant proximal CAD undergoing TAVI. METHODS: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, a systematic search was conducted to identify studies comparing TAVI with and without PCI in patients with significant CAD on pre-TAVI coronary angiography. Endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac death, stroke, myocardial infarction and major bleeding. RESULTS: In total, 14 studies were included, involving 3838 patients, of whom 1806 (47%) underwent PCI before TAVI. All-cause mortality did not differ significantly between TAVI with and without preceding PCI at 30 days, 1 year and > 1 year. There were no significant differences in risk of cardiac death, stroke or myocardial infarction between the groups. However, TAVI performed with PCI resulted in a higher risk of major bleeding within 30 days after TAVI (odds ratio: 0.66; 95% confidence interval: 0.46-0.94). CONCLUSION: This systematic review and meta-analysis showed no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with concomitant significant CAD who were treated with TAVI with and without preceding PCI at both short- and long-term follow-up. However, there was a higher risk of major bleeding at 30 days in patients undergoing TAVI with preceding PCI. In the context of serious risk of bias in the included studies, results of randomised controlled trials are warranted.

Impact of premature coronary artery disease on adverse event risk following first percutaneous coronary intervention.

Objectives: We assessed differences in risk profile and 3-year outcome between patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for premature and non-premature coronary artery disease (CAD). Background: The prevalence of CAD increases with age, yet some individuals develop obstructive CAD at younger age. Methods: Among participants in four randomized all-comers PCI trials, without previous coronary revascularization or myocardial infarction (MI), we compared patients with premature (men <50 years; women <55 years) and non-premature CAD. Various clinical endpoints were assessed, including multivariate analyses. Results: Of 6,171 patients, 887 (14.4%) suffered from premature CAD. These patients had fewer risk factors than patients with non-premature CAD, but were more often smokers (60.7% vs. 26.4%) and overweight (76.2% vs. 69.8%). In addition, premature CAD patients presented more often with ST-segment elevation MI and underwent less often treatment of multiple vessels, and calcified or bifurcated lesions. Furthermore, premature CAD patients had a lower all-cause mortality risk (adj.HR: 0.23, 95%-CI: 0.10-0.52; p < 0.001), but target vessel revascularization (adj.HR: 1.63, 95%-CI: 1.18-2.26; p = 0.003) and definite stent thrombosis risks (adj.HR: 2.24, 95%-CI: 1.06-4.72; p = 0.034) were higher. MACE rates showed no statistically significant difference (6.6% vs. 9.4%; adj.HR: 0.86, 95%-CI: 0.65-1.16; p = 0.33). Conclusions: About one out of seven PCI patients was treated for premature CAD. These patients had less complex risk profiles than patients with non-premature CAD; yet, their risk of repeated revascularization and stent thrombosis was higher. As lifetime event risk of patients with premature CAD is known to be particularly high, further efforts should be made to improve modifiable risk factors such as smoking and overweight. TWENTE trials: (TWENTE I, clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01066650), DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II, NCT01331707), BIO-RESORT (TWENTE III, NCT01674803), and BIONYX (TWENTE IV, NCT02508714).

Outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention using ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting versus thin-strut durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with comorbid peripheral arterial disease: a post-hoc analysis from two randomized trials.

Background: In patients with peripheral arterial disease (PADs), who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), little is known about the potential impact of using different new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) on outcome. In PCI all-comers, the results of most between-stent comparisons-stratified by strut thickness-suggested some advantage of coronary stents with ultrathin-struts. The current post-hoc analysis aimed to assess outcomes of PCI with ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) vs. thin-strut durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DP-ZES) in patients with PADs. Methods: We pooled 3-year patient-level data from two large-scale randomized all-comer trials to compare Orsiro ultrathin-strut BP-SES vs. Resolute-type thin-strut DP-ZES in trial participants with concomitant PADs. BIO-RESORT (December 2012 to August 2015) and BIONYX (October 2015 to December 2016) included all-comer patients who were aged 18 years or older, capable of providing informed consent, and required a PCI. The trials had web-based randomization, with block sizes of 4 and 8, performed in a 1:1:1 or 1:1 fashion. Assessors, research staff, and patients were blinded to the type of stent used. We assessed the composite main clinical endpoint target vessel failure [TVF: cardiac death, target vessel related myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization (TVR)], its components, and stent thrombosis. Results: Of 4,830 trial participants, 360 had PADs: 177 (49.2%) were treated with BP-SES and 183 (50.8%) with DP-ZES. Baseline characteristics were similar. For BP-SES, the 3-year TVF rate was 11.0% and for DP-ZES 17.9% [hazard ratio (HR): 0.59, 95% CI: 0.33-1.04; P=0.07]. For BP-SES, the TVR rate was lower than for DP-ZES (4.1% vs. 11.0%; HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.15-0.86; P=0.016), but this did not translate into between-group differences in cardiac death or MI. In small vessels (<2.75 mm), the TVR rate was also lower in BP-SES (5.6% vs. 13.9%; HR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.11-0.91; P=0.024). Definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were 1.2% and 2.3% (P=0.43). Conclusions: In PCI patients with PADs, the 3-year TVF incidence was numerically lower in the ultrathin-strut BP-SES vs. the thin-strut DP-ZES group. Furthermore, TVR risk was significantly lower in ultrathin-strut BP-SES, mainly driven by a lower TVR rate in small vessels. Trial Registration: BIO-RESORT trial: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01674803); BIONYX trial: clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02508714).

First myocardial infarction in patients with premature coronary artery disease: insights into patient characteristics and outcome after treatment with contemporary stents.

AIMS: Patients with premature coronary artery disease (CAD) have a higher incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) than patients with non-premature CAD. The aim of the present study is to asess differences in clinical outcome after a first acute MI, percutaneously treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents between patients with premature and non-premature CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: We pooled and analysed the characteristics and clinical outcome of all patients with a first MI (and no previous coronary revascularization) at time of enrolment, in four large-scale drug-eluting stent trials. Coronary artery disease was classified premature in men aged <50 and women <55 years. Myocardial infarction patients with premature and non-premature CAD were compared. The main endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE): all-cause mortality, any MI, emergent coronary artery bypass surgery, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. Of 3323 patients with a first MI, 582 (17.5%) had premature CAD. These patients had lower risk profiles and underwent less complex interventional procedures than patients with non-premature CAD. At 30-day follow-up, the rates of MACE [hazard ratio (HR): 0.22, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.07-0.71; P = 0.005), MI (HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.05-0.89; P = 0.020), and target vessel failure (HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.11-0.82; P = 0.012) were lower in patients with premature CAD. At 1 year, premature CAD was independently associated with lower rates of MACE (adjusted HR: 0.50, 95% CI: 0.26-0.96; P = 0.037) and all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 0.24, 95% CI: 0.06-0.98; P = 0.046). At 2 years, premature CAD was independently associated with lower mortality (adjusted HR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05-0.50; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: First MI patients with premature CAD, treated with contemporary stents, showed lower rates of MACE and all-cause mortality than patients with non-premature CAD, which is most likely related to differences in cardiovascular risk profile. TWENTE trials: TWENTE I, clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01066650), DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II, NCT01331707), BIO-RESORT (TWENTE III, NCT01674803), and BIONYX (TWENTE IV, NCT02508714).

Periprocedural continuation versus interruption of oral anticoagulant drugs during transcatheter aortic valve implantation: rationale and design of the POPular PAUSE TAVI trial.

About one-third of patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) use oral anticoagulants (OAC), mainly due to atrial fibrillation. General guidelines advise interrupting OAC in patients with a high risk of bleeding undergoing interventions. However, preliminary observational data suggest that the continuation of OAC during TAVI is safe and may reduce the risk of periprocedural thromboembolic events. The Periprocedural Continuation Versus Interruption of Oral Anticoagulant Drugs During Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation (POPular PAUSE TAVI) is a multicentre, randomised clinical trial with open-label treatment and blinded endpoint assessment. Patients are randomised 1:1 to periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC and are stratified for vitamin K antagonist or direct oral anticoagulant use. The primary endpoint is a composite of cardiovascular mortality, all stroke, myocardial infarction, major vascular complications and type 2-4 bleeding within 30 days after TAVI, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 criteria. Secondary endpoints include separate individual and composite outcomes, quality of life and cost-effectiveness. Since continuation of OAC is associated with the ancillary benefit that it simplifies periprocedural management, the primary outcome is first analysed for non-inferiority; if non-inferiority is proven, superiority will be tested. Recruitment started in November 2020, and the trial will continue until a total of 858 patients have been included and followed for 90 days. In summary, POPular PAUSE TAVI is the first randomised clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of periprocedural continuation versus interruption of OAC in patients undergoing TAVI.

Serially measured high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T, N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, high-sensitivity C-reactive protein, and growth differentiation factor 15 for risk assessment after acute coronary syndrome: the BIOMArCS cohort.

AIMS: Evidence regarding the role of serial measurements of biomarkers for risk assessment in post-acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients is limited. The aim was to explore the prognostic value of four, serially measured biomarkers in a large, real-world cohort of post-ACS patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: BIOMArCS is a prospective, multi-centre, observational study in 844 post-ACS patients in whom 12 218 blood samples (median 17 per patient) were obtained during 1-year follow-up. The longitudinal patterns of high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), and growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) were analysed in relation to the primary endpoint (PE) of cardiovascular mortality and recurrent ACS using multivariable joint models. Median age was 63 years, 78% were men and the PE was reached by 45 patients. The average biomarker levels were systematically higher in PE compared with PE-free patients. After adjustment for 6-month post-discharge Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events score, 1 standard deviation increase in log[hs-cTnT] was associated with a 61% increased risk of the PE [hazard ratio (HR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02-2.44, P = 0.045], while for log[GDF-15] this was 81% (HR 1.81, 95% CI 1.28-2.70, P = 0.001). These associations remained significant after multivariable adjustment, while NT-proBNP and hs-CRP were not. Furthermore, GDF-15 level showed an increasing trend prior to the PE (Structured Graphical Abstract). CONCLUSION: Longitudinally measured hs-cTnT and GDF-15 concentrations provide prognostic value in the risk assessment of clinically stabilized patients post-ACS. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: The Netherlands Trial Register. Currently available at URL https://trialsearch.who.int/; Unique Identifiers: NTR1698 and NTR1106.

Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease (BIOVASC): a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease, complete revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PCI for non-culprit lesions should be attempted during the index procedure or staged. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial was done at 29 hospitals across Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. We included patients aged 18-85 years presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel (ie, two or more coronary arteries with a diameter of 2·5 mm or more and ≥70% stenosis based on visual estimation or positive coronary physiology testing) coronary artery disease with a clearly identifiable culprit lesion. A web-based randomisation module was used to randomly assign patients (1:1), with a random block size of four to eight, stratified by study centre, to undergo immediate complete revascularisation (PCI of the culprit lesion first, followed by other non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator during the index procedure) or staged complete revascularisation (PCI of only the culprit lesion during the index procedure and PCI of all non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator within 6 weeks after the index procedure). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 1 year after the index procedure. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients by intention to treat. Non-inferiority of immediate to staged complete revascularisation was considered to be met if the upper boundary of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not exceed 1·39. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03621501. FINDINGS: Between June 26, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021, 764 patients (median age 65·7 years [IQR 57·2-72·9] and 598 [78·3%] males) were randomly assigned to the immediate complete revascularisation group and 761 patients (median age 65·3 years [58·6-72·9] and 589 [77·4%] males) were randomly assigned to the staged complete revascularisation group, and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 57 (7·6%) of 764 patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 71 (9·4%) of 761 patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, pnon-inferiority=0·0011). There was no difference in all-cause death between the immediate and staged complete revascularisation groups (14 [1·9%] vs nine [1·2%]; HR 1·56, 95% CI 0·68-3·61, p=0·30). Myocardial infarction occurred in 14 (1·9%) patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 34 (4·5%) patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·76, p=0·0045). More unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisations were performed in the staged complete revascularisation group than in the immediate complete revascularisation group (50 [6·7%] patients vs 31 [4·2%] patients; HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·39-0·95, p=0·030). INTERPRETATION: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, immediate complete revascularisation was non-inferior to staged complete revascularisation for the primary composite outcome and was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation. FUNDING: Erasmus University Medical Center and Biotronik.

Risk of bleeding after percutaneous coronary intervention and its impact on further adverse events in clinical trial participants with comorbid peripheral arterial disease.

BACKGROUND: Both patients with obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) and patients with peripheral arterial disease (PADs) have an increased bleeding risk. Information is scarce on bleeding in CAD patients, treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), who have comorbid PADs. We assessed whether PCI patients with PADs have a higher bleeding risk than PCI patients without PADs. Furthermore, in PCI patients with PADs we evaluated the extent by which bleeding increased the risk of further adverse events. METHODS: Three-year pooled patient-level data of two randomized PCI trials (BIO-RESORT, BIONYX) with drug-eluting stents were analyzed to assess mortality and the composite endpoint major adverse cardiac events (MACE: all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, emergent coronary artery bypass surgery, or target lesion revascularization). RESULTS: Among 5989 all-comer patients, followed for 3 years, bleeding occurred in 7.7% (34/440) with comorbid PADs and 5.0% (279/5549) without PADs (HR: 1.59, 95%CI: 1.11-2.23, p = 0.010). Of all PADs patients, those with a bleeding had significantly higher rates of all-cause mortality (HR: 4.70, 95%CI: 2.37-9.33, p < 0.001) and MACE (HR: 2.39, 95%CI: 1.23-4.31, p = 0.003). Furthermore, PADs patients with a bleeding were older (74.4 ± 6.9 vs. 67.4 ± 9.5, p < 0.001). After correction for age and other potential confounders, bleeding remained independently associated with all-cause mortality (adj.HR: 2.97, 95%CI: 1.37-6.43, p = 0.006) while the relation of bleeding with MACE became borderline non-significant (adj.HR: 1.85, 95%CI: 0.97-3.55, p = 0.06). CONCLUSION: PCI patients with PADs had a higher bleeding risk than PCI patients without PADs. In PADs patients, bleeding was associated with all-cause mortality, even after adjustment for potential confounders.

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

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

Outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary stents in patients with concomitant peripheral arterial disease: A patient-level pooled analysis of four randomized trials.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A considerable number of patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) also have peripheral arterial disease (PAD) - a signal of more advanced atherosclerosis. After bare metal and early-generation drug-eluting coronary stent implantation, PAD patients showed inferior outcome. As stents and medical treatment were further improved, we aimed to assess the impact of PAD on outcome of PCI with contemporary new-generation stents. METHODS: We analyzed 3-year pooled patient-level data from 4 large-scale randomized new-generation stent trials to compare all-comer patients with and without (core lab-verified) history of symptomatic PAD, defined as obstructive lesions in peripheral locations including lower and upper extremities, carotid, vertebral, mesenteric and renal arteries. Main endpoint was target vessel failure: cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Of all 9204 patients, 695 (7.6%) had a history of symptomatic PAD. They were older and had more often diabetes, renal failure, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and prior stroke. PAD was an independent risk factor for target vessel failure (adjusted-HR:1.42, 95%-CI:1.12-1.73, p = 0.001). Target vessel revascularization (adjusted-HR:1.37, 95%-CI:1.04-1.80, p = 0.026), death (adjusted-HR:1.52, 95%-CI:1.17-1.99, p = 0.002), and major adverse cardiovascular event risks (adjusted-HR:1.36, 95%-CI:1.13-1.64, p = 0.001) were also substantially higher. CONCLUSIONS: A history of symptomatic PAD still allows to simply identify patients with increased risk of unfavorable clinical outcome after PCI, including a higher risk of repeated coronary revascularization, despite using contemporary stents. In clinical practice, this knowledge about higher event risks of PAD patients is helpful both during Heart Team discussions and when informing patients about the procedural risk.

Impact of prediabetes and diabetes on 3-year outcome of patients treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents in two large-scale randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is associated with adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES), but for prediabetes this association has not been definitely established. Furthermore, in patients with prediabetes treated with contemporary stents, bleeding data are lacking. We assessed 3-year ischemic and bleeding outcomes following treatment with new-generation DES in patients with prediabetes and diabetes as compared to normoglycemia. METHODS: For this post-hoc analysis, we pooled patient-level data of the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX stent trials which both stratified for diabetes at randomization. Both trials were multicenter studies performed in tertiary cardiac centers. Study participants were patients of whom glycemic state was known based on hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, or medically treated diabetes. Three-year follow-up was available in 4212/4330 (97.3 %) patients. The main endpoint was target vessel failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Baseline cardiovascular risk profiles were progressively abnormal in patients with normoglycemia, prediabetes, and diabetes. The main endpoint occurred in 54/489 patients with prediabetes (11.2 %) and 197/1488 with diabetes (13.7 %), as compared to 142/2,353 with normoglycemia (6.1 %) (HR: 1.89, 95 %-CI 1.38-2.58, p < 0.001, and HR: 2.30, 95 %-CI 1.85-2.86, p < 0.001, respectively). In patients with prediabetes, cardiac death and target vessel revascularization rates were significantly higher (HR: 2.81, 95 %-CI 1.49-5.30, p = 0.001, and HR: 1.92, 95 %-CI 1.29-2.87, p = 0.001), and in patients with diabetes all individual components of the main endpoint were significantly higher than in patients with normoglycemia (all p ≤ 0.001). Results were consistent after adjustment for confounders. Major bleeding rates were significantly higher in patients with prediabetes and diabetes, as compared to normoglycemia (3.9 % and 4.1 % vs. 2.3 %; HR:1.73, 95 %-CI 1.03-2.92, p = 0.040, and HR:1.78, 95 %-CI 1.23-2.57, p = 0.002). However, after adjustment for confounders, differences were no longer significant. CONCLUSIONS: Not only patients with diabetes but also patients with prediabetes represent a high-risk population. After treatment with new-generation DES, both patient groups had higher risks of ischemic and bleeding events. Differences in major bleeding were mainly attributable to dissimilarities in baseline characteristics. Routine assessment of glycemic state may help to identify patients with prediabetes for intensified management of cardiovascular risk factors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: BIO-RESORT ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01674803, registered 29-08-2012; BIONYX ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02508714, registered 27-7-2015.

First Report of 3-Year Clinical Outcome After Treatment With Novel Resolute Onyx Stents in the Randomized BIONYX Trial.

BACKGROUND: At 1 year, the international randomized BIONYX trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02508714) established non-inferiority regarding safety and efficacy of the novel Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent (RO-ZES) vs. the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES). Although the RO-ZES is used in daily practice, no clinical results have been published beyond 2 years.Methods and Results:We assessed 3-year clinical outcomes of 2,488 all-comers after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with RO-ZES vs. O-SES. The main endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization. Time-to-endpoints was assessed by Kaplan-Meier methods and between-group comparisons by log-rank tests. Follow-up was available in 2,433/2,488 (97.8%) patients. There was no significant between-stent difference in TVF (RO-ZES 112/1,243 [9.2%] vs. O-SES 109/1,245 [8.9%], hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.34; Plog-rank=0.85) and its individual components. The all-cause mortality was significantly lower after PCI with RO-ZES (3.7% vs.5.4%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.97; Plog-rank=0.034), but cardiac mortality did not differ significantly (1.1% vs.1.9%, HR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.28-1.11; Plog-rank=0.09). Definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were low for both groups (0.6% vs.1.2%, HR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.19-1.14; Plog-rank=0.09). CONCLUSIONS: This first 3-year randomized assessment of the RO-ZES showed a favorable rate of TVF that matched the outcomes of patients treated with O-SES. We observed a lower rate of all-cause death in the RO-ZES group, but long-term clinical follow-up is of interest.

Acute myocardial infarction treated with novel Resolute Onyx and Orsiro stents in the randomized BIONYX trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare 2-year outcome following treatment with drug-eluting stents (DES) for acute myocardial infarction (MI) versus non-MI clinical syndromes. In acute MI patients, a stent-level comparison was performed, comparing Resolute Onyx versus Orsiro stents. BACKGROUND: In patients presenting with acute MI, higher adverse event rates have been reported. So far, no clinical results >1 year have been published of acute MI patients treated with Resolute Onyx. METHODS: This post-hoc analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial(NCT02508714) assessed the main outcome target vessel failure (TVF: cardiac death, target vessel MI, or target vessel revascularization) with Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Of all 2,488 trial participants, acute MI patients (n = 1,275[51.2%]) were significantly younger and had less comorbidities than non-MI patients (n = 1,213[48.8%]). TVF rates were lower in acute MI patients (77/1,275[6.1%] vs. 103/1,213[8.6%], HR:0.70, 95%-CI 0.52-0.94; plog-rank  = 0.02), mainly driven by target vessel revascularization (4.1 vs. 6.1%, plog-rank  = 0.03). Multivariate analysis showed no independent association of clinical syndrome with TVF (adjusted-HR: 0.81, 95%-CI 0.60-1.10; p = .17). In MI patients treated with Resolute Onyx (n = 626) versus Orsiro (n = 649), there was no difference in TVF (6.2 vs. 6.1%; plog-rank  = 0.97) and its components. There was only 1(0.2%) definite-or-probable stent thrombosis in RO-ZES and 8(1.2%) in O-SES (p = .053). CONCLUSIONS: Two years after treatment with thin-strut DES in this randomized trial, patients treated for acute MI had lower adverse event rates than non-MI patients. Yet, these findings were mainly attributable to between-group differences in patient and lesion characteristics. In patients who underwent PCI for acute MI, both Resolute Onyx and Orsiro showed favorable and similar 2-year outcomes.

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

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

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

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

New-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in octogenarians: Patient-level pooled analysis from the TWENTE I-IV trials.

BACKGROUND: Patients aged ≥80 years are often treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES), but data from randomized studies are scarce owing to underrepresentation in most trials. We assessed 1-year clinical outcome of octogenarians treated with new-generation DES versus younger patients. METHODS: We pooled patient-level data of 9,204 participants in the TWENTE, DUTCH PEERS, BIO-RESORT, and BIONYX (TWENTE I-IV) randomized trials. The main clinical end point was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: The 671 octogenarian trial participants had significantly more comorbidities. TVF was higher in octogenarians than in 8,533 patients <80 years (7.3% vs 5.3%, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.36, 95% CI: 1.0-1.83, P = .04). The cardiac death rate was higher in octogenarians (3.9% vs 0.8%, P < .001). There was no significant between-group difference in target vessel MI (2.3% vs 2.3%, P = .88) and repeat target vessel revascularization (1.9% vs 2.8%, P = .16). In multivariate analyses, age ≥ 80 years showed no independent association with TVF (adjusted HR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.76-1.42), whereas the risk of cardiac death remained higher in octogenarians (adjusted HR: 3.38, 95% CI: 2.07-5.52, P < .001). In 6,002 trial participants, in whom data on major bleeding were recorded, octogenarians (n = 459) showed a higher major bleeding risk (5.9% vs 1.9%; HR: 3.08, 95% CI: 2.01-4.74, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Octogenarian participants in 4 large-scale randomized DES trials had more comorbidities and a higher incidence of the main end point TVF. Cardiac mortality was higher in octogenarians, whereas there was no increase in MI or target vessel revascularization rates. Treatment of octogenarian patients with new-generation DES appears to be safe and effective.

Aspirin with or without Clopidogrel after Transcatheter Aortic-Valve Implantation.

BACKGROUND: The effect of single as compared with dual antiplatelet treatment on bleeding and thromboembolic events after transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) in patients who do not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation has not been well studied. METHODS: In a randomized, controlled trial, we assigned a subgroup of patients who were undergoing TAVI and did not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive aspirin alone or aspirin plus clopidogrel for 3 months. The two primary outcomes were all bleeding (including minor, major, and life-threatening or disabling bleeding) and non-procedure-related bleeding over a period of 12 months. Most bleeding at the TAVI puncture site was counted as non-procedure-related. The two secondary outcomes were a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, non-procedure-related bleeding, stroke, or myocardial infarction (secondary composite 1) and a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, ischemic stroke, or myocardial infarction (secondary composite 2) at 1 year, with both outcomes tested sequentially for noninferiority (noninferiority margin, 7.5 percentage points) and superiority. RESULTS: A total of 331 patients were assigned to receive aspirin alone and 334 were assigned to receive aspirin plus clopidogrel. A bleeding event occurred in 50 patients (15.1%) receiving aspirin alone and in 89 (26.6%) receiving aspirin plus clopidogrel (risk ratio, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42 to 0.77; P = 0.001). Non-procedure-related bleeding occurred in 50 patients (15.1%) and 83 patients (24.9%), respectively (risk ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.83; P = 0.005). A secondary composite 1 event occurred in 76 patients (23.0%) receiving aspirin alone and in 104 (31.1%) receiving aspirin plus clopidogrel (difference, -8.2 percentage points; 95% CI for noninferiority, -14.9 to -1.5; P<0.001; risk ratio, 0.74; 95% CI for superiority, 0.57 to 0.95; P = 0.04). A secondary composite 2 event occurred in 32 patients (9.7%) and 33 patients (9.9%), respectively (difference, -0.2 percentage points; 95% CI for noninferiority, -4.7 to 4.3; P = 0.004; risk ratio, 0.98; 95% CI for superiority, 0.62 to 1.55; P = 0.93). A total of 44 patients (13.3%) and 32 (9.6%), respectively, received oral anticoagulation during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing TAVI who did not have an indication for oral anticoagulation, the incidence of bleeding and the composite of bleeding or thromboembolic events at 1 year were significantly less frequent with aspirin than with aspirin plus clopidogrel administered for 3 months. (Funded by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development; POPular TAVI EU Clinical Trials Register number, 2013-003125-28; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02247128.).