Novel Supreme Drug-Eluting Stents With Early Synchronized Antiproliferative Drug Delivery to Inhibit Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation After Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation in Coronary Artery Disease: Results of the PIONEER III Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accelerated endothelial healing after targeted antiproliferative drug delivery may limit the long-term inflammatory response of drug-eluting stents (DESs). The novel Supreme DES is designed to synchronize early drug delivery within 4 to 6 weeks of implantation, leaving behind a prohealing permanent base layer. Whether the Supreme DES is safe and effective in the short term and can improve long-term clinical outcomes is not known. METHODS: In an international, 2:1 randomized, single-blind trial, we compared treatment with Supreme DES to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes. The primary end point was target lesion failure-a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority (margin of 3.58%) of the Supreme DES at 12 months compared with DP-EES (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03168776). RESULTS: From October 2017 to July 2019, a total of 1629 patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the Supreme DES (N=1086) or DP-EES (N=543). At 12 months, target lesion failure occurred in 57 of 1057 patients (5.4%) in the Supreme DES group and in 27 of 532 patients (5.1%) in the DP-EES group (absolute risk difference, 0.32% [95% CI, -1.87 to 2.5]; Pnoninferiority=0.002]. There were no significant differences in rates of device success, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 12 months, and the safety composite of cardiovascular death and target vessel myocardial infarction was 3.5% versus 4.6% (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.46-1.25]) with Supreme DES compared with DP-EES, although rates of combined clinically and non-clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months were higher with Supreme DES. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the Supreme DES proved to be noninferior to the standard DP-EES. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03168776.

One-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents in High-Bleeding-Risk Patients.

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment guidance endorsing shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients after drug-eluting stents, limited evidence exists to support these recommendations. The present study was designed to examine the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention with zotarolimus-eluting stents in HBR patients. METHODS: Onyx ONE Clear was a prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT followed by single antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents. The primary analysis of cardiac death or myocardial infarction between 1 month and 1 year was performed in the prespecified one-month clear population of patients pooled from the Onyx ONE US/Japan study and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial. One-month clear was defined as DAPT adherence and without major adverse events during the first month following percutaneous coronary intervention. RESULTS: Among patients enrolled in Onyx ONE US/Japan (n=752) and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial (n=1018), 1506 patients fulfilled one-month clear criteria. Mean HBR characteristics per patient was 1.6 with 44.7% having multiple risks. By 2 months and 1 year, respectively, 96.9% and 89.3% of patients were taking single antiplatelet therapy. Between 1 month and 1 year, the rate of the primary end point was 7.0%. The 1-sided upper 97.5% CI was 8.4%, less than the performance goal of 9.7% (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among HBR patients who were event free before DAPT discontinuation at 1 month, favorable safety and effectiveness through 1 year support treatment with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents as part of an individualized strategy for shortened DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier NCT03647475.

One-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents in High-Bleeding-Risk Patients

BACKGROUND: Despite treatment guidance endorsing shortened dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients after drug-eluting stents, limited evidence exists to support these recommendations. The present study was designed to examine the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention with zotarolimus-eluting stents in HBR patients. METHODS: Onyx ONE Clear was a prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of 1-month DAPT followed by single antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents. The primary analysis of cardiac death or myocardial infarction between 1 month and 1 year was performed in the prespecified one-month clear population of patients pooled from the Onyx ONE US/Japan study and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial. One-month clear was defined as DAPT adherence and without major adverse events during the first month following percutaneous coronary intervention. RESULTS: Among patients enrolled in Onyx ONE US/Japan (n=752) and Onyx ONE randomized controlled trial (n=1018), 1506 patients fulfilled one-month clear criteria. Mean HBR characteristics per patient was 1.6 with 44.7% having multiple risks. By 2 months and 1 year, respectively, 96.9% and 89.3% of patients were taking single antiplatelet therapy. Between 1 month and 1 year, the rate of the primary end point was 7.0%. The 1-sided upper 97.5% CI was 8.4%, less than the performance goal of 9.7% (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among HBR patients who were event free before DAPT discontinuation at 1 month, favorable safety and effectiveness through 1 year support treatment with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents as part of an individualized strategy for shortened DAPT duration following percutaneous coronary intervention.

Global Approach to High Bleeding Risk Patients With Polymer-Free Drug-Coated Coronary Stents: The LF II Study.

BACKGROUND: High bleeding risk (HBR) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention have been widely excluded from randomized device registration trials. The LF study (LEADERS FREE) reported superior outcomes of HBR patients receiving 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with a polymer-free drug-coated stent (DCS). LFII was designed to assess the reproducibility and generalizability of the benefits of DCS observed in LF to inform the US Food and Drug Administration in a device registration decision. METHODS: LFII was a single-arm study using HBR inclusion/exclusion criteria and 30-day dual antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention with DCS, identical to LF. The 365-day rates of the primary effectiveness (clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) and safety (composite cardiac death and myocardial infarction) end points were reported using a propensity-stratified analysis compared with the LF bare metal stent arm patients as controls. RESULTS: A total of 1203 LFII patients were enrolled with an average 1.7 HBR criteria per patient, including 60.7% >75 years of age, 34.1% on anticoagulants, and 14.7% with renal failure. Propensity-adjusted 365-day clinically indicated target lesion revascularization was significantly lower with DCS (7.2% versus 9.2%; hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.52-0.98]; P=0.0338 for superiority), as was the primary safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction) composite (9.3% versus 12.4%; hazard ratio, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.55-0.94]; P=0.0150 for superiority). Stent thrombosis rates were 2.0% DCS and 2.2% bare metal stent. Major bleeding at 1 year occurred in 7.2% DCS patients and 7.2% bare metal stent. CONCLUSIONS: LFII reproduces the results of the DCS arm of LF in an independent, predominantly North American cohort of HBR patients.

First Report of the Resolute Onyx 2.0-mm Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent for the Treatment of Coronary Lesions With Very Small Reference Vessel Diameter.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to explore the safety and efficacy of a dedicated drug-eluting stent for the treatment of coronary lesions with very small reference vessel diameter (RVD). BACKGROUND: Smaller RVD is associated with increased risk for restenosis and target lesion failure (TLF) after stent implantation. METHODS: This was a prospective, single-arm, multicenter trial of the Resolute Onyx 2.0-mm zotarolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was 12-month TLF, which was compared with a pre-specified performance goal. Subjects with stable or unstable angina or ischemia, target lesions ≤27 mm in length, and RVD ≥2.0 and <2.25 mm were eligible for enrollment. A subset of subjects underwent follow-up angiography at 13 months post-procedure. RESULTS: A total of 101 subjects with 104 lesions were enrolled. The mean age was 67.3 ± 9.6 years, 47% of subjects had diabetes, the mean lesion length was 12.6 ± 6.3 mm, and the mean RVD was 1.91 ± 0.26 mm. The rate of TLF at 12 months was 5.0%, fulfilling the pre-specified performance goal of 19% (p < 0.001). The rates of target lesion revascularization and target vessel myocardial infarction were 2.0% and 3.0%, respectively. There were no episodes of stent thrombosis. In-stent late lumen loss was 0.26 ± 0.48 mm, and the rate of binary restenosis was 12.0%. CONCLUSIONS: In this first report of a drug-eluting stent with a dedicated size to treat lesions with RVD <2.25 mm, the Resolute Onyx 2.0-mm zotarolimus-eluting stent was associated with a low rate of TLF and late lumen loss, without a signal for stent thrombosis. This novel-sized drug-eluting stent appears to be a feasible option for the treatment of coronary lesions in extremely small vessels. (Medtronic Resolute Onyx 2.0 mm Clinical Study; NCT02412501).

Bleeding risk factors affecting warfarin therapy in the elderly with atrial fibrillation.

PURPOSE: Inadequate anticoagulation among elderly individuals with atrial fibrillation (AF) is a common problem. This synthesis of the literature review describes the pathophysiology of AF, explains the mechanism of action of warfarin (Coumadin), identifies factors that contribute to warfarin (Coumadin)-associated bleeding in the elderly population, and explores alternatives to warfarin (Coumadin) therapy. Implications for advanced practice nurse practice, education, and research will be discussed. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using Academic Search Premier, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, and Medline from 1999 to 2012. Search terms included warfarin (Coumadin), warfarin (Coumadin) genetics, diet, interactions, bleeding, atrial fibrillation, genetics, anticoagulation clinic, dabigatran, apixaban, rivaroxaban, and elderly. RESULTS: The literature indicates that the potential bleeding risk associated with warfarin (Coumadin) therapy limits its use in the elderly population. However, some studies have found warfarin (Coumadin) to be more effective than aspirin in preventing stroke. The safety profiles of both medications were comparable; also, effective alternatives to warfarin (Coumadin) that do not require routine testing are now available. CONCLUSIONS: Atrial fibrillation increases the probability of an embolic stroke, especially for the elderly population. Stroke risk and bleeding risk tools, in conjunction with patient preference, determine the best stroke prevention treatment. Anticoagulant clinics manage long-term warfarin (Coumadin) therapy effectively. Newer anticoagulants offer effective alternatives to warfarin (Coumadin) therapy.

Effect of platelet inhibition with cangrelor during PCI on ischemic events.

BACKGROUND: The intensity of antiplatelet therapy during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an important determinant of PCI-related ischemic complications. Cangrelor is a potent intravenous adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-receptor antagonist that acts rapidly and has quickly reversible effects. METHODS: In a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 11,145 patients who were undergoing either urgent or elective PCI and were receiving guideline-recommended therapy to receive a bolus and infusion of cangrelor or to receive a loading dose of 600 mg or 300 mg of clopidogrel. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 48 hours after randomization; the key secondary end point was stent thrombosis at 48 hours. The primary safety end point was severe bleeding at 48 hours. RESULTS: The rate of the primary efficacy end point was 4.7% in the cangrelor group and 5.9% in the clopidogrel group (adjusted odds ratio with cangrelor, 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.93; P=0.005). The rate of the primary safety end point was 0.16% in the cangrelor group and 0.11% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 1.50; 95% CI, 0.53 to 4.22; P=0.44). Stent thrombosis developed in 0.8% of the patients in the cangrelor group and in 1.4% in the clopidogrel group (odds ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.90; P=0.01). The rates of adverse events related to the study treatment were low in both groups, though transient dyspnea occurred significantly more frequently with cangrelor than with clopidogrel (1.2% vs. 0.3%). The benefit from cangrelor with respect to the primary end point was consistent across multiple prespecified subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: Cangrelor significantly reduced the rate of ischemic events, including stent thrombosis, during PCI, with no significant increase in severe bleeding. (Funded by the Medicines Company; CHAMPION PHOENIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01156571.).

Quantification of the effect of clopidogrel on enzymatic infarct size related to a percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes: insights from the CHAMPION percutaneous coronary intervention trial.

OBJECTIVES: Using data from the CHAMPION percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), we determined the relationship between clopidogrel started at least 5 days before PCI (maintenance of clopidogrel) and PCI-related enzymatic infarct size. BACKGROUND: Clopidogrel is recommended in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) managed with PCI, but its effect on PCI-related myonecrosis in contemporary patients has not been quantified. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with ACS (with or without ST-segment elevation) who underwent PCI and had at least three creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB) samples after PCI were included. Enzymatic infarct size was defined as the peak CK-MB concentration indexed by its upper limit of normal. Associations between maintenance clopidogrel and enzymatic infarct size were explored using multivariable linear regression (with and without missing data imputation) and propensity score analysis using inverse probability weighting. RESULTS: Of 8877 patients randomized, 6327 (71.3%) were included (median age 61 years, 73% male, 13% ACS with ST-segment elevation). Of these 6327 patients, 2015 (31.8%) were on maintenance clopidogrel. After multivariable adjustment, maintenance clopidogrel was associated with a reduction in enzymatic infarct size {ß=-0.63; 47% decrease in peak CK-MB [95% confidence interval (CI) 35, 56%]}. Multivariable linear regression with multiple imputations and inverse probability weighting propensity score analysis yielded similar results, with maintenance clopidogrel associated with 44% (95% CI 33, 53%) and 29% (95% CI 24, 33%) infarct size reductions. CONCLUSION: In this subgroup analysis of modern ACS patients, clopidogrel maintenance was independently associated with smaller enzymatic infarct size after PCI. These results are consistent with previous observations suggesting a benefit of clopidogrel on the procedural outcome and quantify this benefit.

Implications of pre-procedural TIMI flow in patients with non ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary revascularization: insights from the ACUITY trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic implications of preprocedural TIMI flow in ACS patients undergoing early invasive management. BACKGROUND: Although the negative prognostic impact of reduced Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) has been well described, whether this relationship holds in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS; unstable angina and non-STEMI) has not been examined. METHODS: We evaluated 3582 moderate and high-risk patients with ACS undergoing PCI enrolled in the ACUITY trial. Patients were divided in 3 groups according to pre-procedural culprit vessel TIMI flow (TIMI 0/1, TIMI 2 and TIMI 3 flows), determined by an independent angiographic core laboratory. RESULTS: Baseline culprit vessel flow was absent (TIMI 0/1) in 453 patients (12.6%), reduced (TIMI 2) in 389 patients (10.9%) and normal (TIMI 3) in 2740 patients (76.5%) patients. Post-PCI TIMI 3 flow was achieved in 87.2%, 86.8% and 98.8% of the 3 groups, respectively (P<0.0001). At 1 year, mortality occurred in 2.7%, 2.4% and 3.0% of patients with baseline TIMI 0/1, 2 and 3 flows, respectively (P=0.82). By multivariable analysis, pre-PCI TIMI flow 0/1 (vs. TIMI 3) was not an independent predictor of 1-year mortality (P=0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Reduced baseline TIMI flow in moderate and high-risk patients with ACS undergoing PCI does not appear to affect survival at 1 year, in contrast to that described in patients with STEMI.

Are adverse events following an invasive strategy in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes more frequent at US sites versus non-US sites? Analysis from the ACUITY trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes between US and non-US (OUS) sites in patients with non ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTEACS) and to evaluate potential reasons for differences in outcomes. BACKGROUND: There are little data comparing outcomes at US versus OUS sites in patients with NSTEACS managed with an invasive strategy. METHODS: The ACUITY trial randomized 13,819 patients with NSTEACS in 17 countries to an invasive approach with one of three strategies: (1) heparin plus glycoprotein platelet inhibitors (GPI), (2) bivalirudin plus GPI, or (3) bivalirudin alone. RESULTS: US patients were more often female, were younger, heavier, and had more diabetes, prior myocardial infarction (MI), and prior bypass surgery. US patients were less often treated with percutaneous coronary intervention but had more frequent drug-eluting stent use. US patients had lower mortality and higher MI rates at 30 days and 1 year and higher composite ischemic outcome at 30 days. After adjusting for differences in baseline variables, US patients had higher rates of MI and composite ischemic outcome at 30 days and higher rates of MI at 1 year {HR [95% confidence interval (CI)] = 1.36 [1.18-1.56], P < 0.0001} with no differences in mortality. There were no differences in treatment effects comparing bivalirudin with the other strategies between US and OUS sites. CONCLUSIONS: US versus OUS patients with NSTEACS had higher adjusted rates of MI and ischemia. The reasons for these differences are not clear but may be due to unmeasured confounders, different thresholds for event reporting, or valid differences in systems of care which may impact outcomes.

Outcomes of patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting and acute coronary syndromes: analysis from the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to assess the contemporary outcomes of patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) who present with moderate and high-risk acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and are treated with an early invasive strategy and contemporary antithrombin regimens. BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with ACS and prior CABG in relation to triage strategy and contemporary antithrombotic regimens is unknown. METHODS: In the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial, 2,475 of 13,764 patients (18.0%) with ACS managed with an early invasive strategy had previously undergone CABG. Their outcomes were examined according to treatment and randomized antithrombin regimen. RESULTS: Prior CABG was associated with older age, more frequent comorbidities, higher Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction risk score, and lower left ventricular ejection fraction. Patients with versus without prior CABG were less likely to undergo (repeat) CABG and were more likely to be managed medically. At 1 year, patients with versus without prior CABG had higher rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (22.5% vs. 15.2%, p < 0.0001) due to greater mortality (5.4% vs. 3.9%, p < 0.0001), myocardial infarction (10.0% vs. 6.8%, p < 0.0001), and unplanned revascularization (13.1% vs. 8.2%, p < 0.0001). History of CABG was an independent predictor of MACE. The 1-year MACE rates were not significantly different after randomization to bivalirudin versus heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor (odds ratio: 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 0.90 to 1.70). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the progress in the treatment of coronary artery disease, patients with prior CABG and ACS have a poor prognosis, substantially worse than for those without prior CABG. Whereas bivalirudin monotherapy was an acceptable treatment for these patients, it did not improve their prognoses.

Predictive value of C-reactive protein on 30-day and 1-year mortality in acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY trial.

We sought to evaluate the association between C-reactive protein (CRP) sampled on admission and short- and long-term mortality in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing early invasive treatment. Baseline levels of CRP were determined in 2,974 patients with moderate and high-risk ACS undergoing an early invasive treatment strategy in the large-scale randomized ACUITY trial. The relationship of CRP to 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes were assessed according to quartiles of CRP values. Patients with CRP levels in the fourth quartile compared to the first quartile had significantly higher 30-day mortality (2.3 vs. 0.3%, P = 0.0004) and 1-year mortality (5.5 vs. 2.8%, P = 0.0003). CRP level as a continuous variable was associated with 30-day mortality (OR [95% CI] for one unit increase in logarithmically transformed CRP level = 1.42 [1.08-1.89], P = 0.01) and 1-year mortality (OR [95% CI] = 1.24, [1.04-1.47], P = 0.02). By multivariable analysis, higher baseline CRP levels independently predicted 30-day and 1-year mortality, a relationship that was particularly strong for patients with the highest quartile of CRP (OR [95% CI] = 5.19 [1.14-23.68], P = 0.009). In troponin-positive patients, increasing quartiles of CRP were associated with a trend for 30-day mortality (P (trend) = 0.08) and a significant increase in 1-year mortality (P (trend) = 0.02); this relationship was not present in troponin-negative patients. Baseline CRP level is a powerful independent predictor of both early and late mortality in patients with ACS being treated with an early invasive strategy, especially in troponin positive patients.

Comparison of catheterization laboratory initiated abciximab and eptifibatide during percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes (an ACUITY substudy).

Abciximab and eptifibatide have been shown to reduce ischemic complications compared with heparin alone in patients with acute coronary syndromes who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention. Whether 1 agent is safer and/or more effective has not been prospectively examined. The aim of this study was to assess the outcomes related to downstream glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor treatment selection during percutaneous coronary intervention in 2,211 patients with moderate and high-risk acute coronary syndromes in the prospective multicenter Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial. The protocol permitted operator selection of abciximab (n = 835) or eptifibatide (n = 1,376) for routine use in the trial. Multivariate and propensity-based adjustments were used to assess the independent association of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor treatment selection with prespecified study end points. Compared to patients receiving eptifibatide, those administered abciximab were older, more likely to be enrolled outside of North America, more frequently had biomarker elevations and ST-segment deviation, but had fewer baseline cardiac risk factors and previous revascularization procedures. After multivariate propensity-based adjustment, abciximab was independently associated with significantly fewer net clinical adverse events (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.90, p = 0.01), mediated by composite ischemia (odds ratio 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.38 to 0.98, p = 0.04) and major bleeding (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval 0.34 to 1.00, p = 0.051). In conclusion, in this prespecified but nonrandomized comparison in patients with acute coronary syndromes who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with catheterization laboratory initiation of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, the use of abciximab rather than eptifibatide was associated with improved clinical outcomes at 30 days. These findings should be viewed as exploratory in light of the nonrandomized and heterogeneous nature of the comparator groups and significant potential for residual confounding.

A randomized comparison of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent versus the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent in de novo native coronary lesions 12-month outcomes from the ENDEAVOR IV trial.

OBJECTIVES: The ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) compared with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES). BACKGROUND: First-generation drug-eluting stents have reduced angiographic and clinical restenosis, but long-term safety remains controversial. A second-generation drug-eluting stent, which delivers zotarolimus, a potent antiproliferative agent, via a biocompatible phosphorylcholine polymer on a cobalt alloy thin-strut stent has shown promising experimental and early clinical results. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized (1:1), single-blind, controlled trial comparing outcomes of patients with single de novo coronary lesions treated with ZES or PES. The primary end point was noninferiority of 9-month target vessel failure defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Among a total of 1,548 patients assigned to ZES (n = 773) or PES (n = 775), at 9 months, ZES was noninferior to PES with rates of target vessel failure 6.6% versus 7.1%, respectively (p(noninferiority) < or = 0.001). There were fewer periprocedural myocardial infarctions with ZES (0.5% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.007), whereas at 12 months, there were no significant differences between groups in rates of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis. Although incidence of 8-month binary angiographic in-segment restenosis was higher in patients treated with ZES versus PES (15.3% vs. 10.4%; p = 0.284), rates of 12-month target lesion revascularization were similar (4.5% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.228), especially in patients without planned angiographic follow-up (3.6% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.756). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that ZES has similar clinical safety and efficacy compared with PES in simple and medium complexity single de novo coronary lesions. (ENDEAVOR IV Clinical Trial; NCT00217269).

Impact of femoral vascular closure devices and antithrombotic therapy on access site bleeding in acute coronary syndromes: The Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial.

BACKGROUND: The Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial demonstrated that bivalirudin monotherapy significantly reduces major bleeding compared with heparin (unfractionated or enoxaparin) or bivalirudin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor in acute coronary syndromes. Whether vascular closure devices (VCD) impact these results is unknown. Therefore, this study sought to determine whether VCD impact major access site bleeding (ASB) in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing early invasive management by the femoral approach. METHODS AND RESULTS: Major ASB in ACUITY was defined as ASB requiring interventional or surgical correction, hematoma > or =5 cm at the access site, retroperitoneal bleeding, or hemoglobin drop > or =3 g/dL with ecchymosis or hematoma <5 cm, oozing blood, or prolonged bleeding (>30 minutes) at the access site. Stepwise logistical regression was performed to identify the independent determinants of ASB. Of 11 621 patients undergoing angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention by the femoral approach, 4307 (37.1%) received a VCD and 7314 (62.9%) did not. Rates of major ASB were lower with VCD compared with no VCD (2.5% versus 3.3%, relative risk, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.94; P=0.01) and were lowest in patients treated with bivalirudin monotherapy and a VCD (0.7%). Stepwise logistic regression revealed that a VCD (odds ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.99; P=0.04) and bivalirudin monotherapy (odds ratio, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.49; P<0.0001) were both independent determinates of freedom from major ASB. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing an early invasive management strategy by the femoral approach, the use of a VCD, bivalirudin monotherapy, or both minimizes rates of major ASB. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT00093158.

Frequency and clinical consequences associated with sidebranch occlusion during stent implantation using zotarolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents.

BACKGROUND: Myocardial infarction (MI) after drug-eluting stent placement has been associated with an unfavorable late prognosis. Although the etiology of periprocedural MI is multifactorial, sidebranch occlusion may be an important contributing factor. We sought to identify the incidence of sidebranch occlusion during zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) placement and to relate sidebranch occlusion to the occurrence of periprocedural MI. METHODS AND RESULTS: Angiograms were reviewed from patients randomly assigned to treatment with a ZES (597 patients; 943 sidebranches) or a PES (619 patients; 977 sidebranches). Sidebranch occlusion was defined as Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade 0 or 1. Sidebranch occlusion was correlated with frequency of MI, as assessed by the creatine phosphokinase MB isoenzyme. Sidebranch occlusion occurred less often after the first stent deployment in patients treated with ZES (2.2%) than in patients treated with PES (4.0%; P=0.032). A similar reduction in the frequency of sidebranch occlusion at any point during the procedure was found in patients treated with ZES (2.9% versus 4.8% in PES patients; P=0.042). Multivariable predictors of sidebranch occlusion included baseline sidebranch stenosis, complex lesion morphology, smaller baseline minimal lumen diameters, and the use of a PES. Of the 20 patients with MI within 30 days of the procedure, 30% had evidence of sidebranch occlusion during the stent procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with ZES were less likely to develop sidebranch occlusion during stent placement than patients treated with PES. Less frequent sidebranch occlusion with ZES may have contributed to the lower frequency rates of periprocedural MI in this study.

Clinical and angiographic outcomes in diabetics from the ENDEAVOR IV trial: randomized comparison of zotarolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine outcomes related to the use of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) in the 477 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the randomized ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial. BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients is associated with increased rates of restenosis-related end points compared with PCI in nondiabetic patients. Although ZES has been associated with similar clinical efficacy compared with PES in the overall trial population of the ENDEAVOR IV trial, whether these results are maintained in the higher-risk restenosis subgroup of patients with DM has not been determined. METHODS: Clinical and angiographic outcomes were compared according to randomized treatment assignment to either ZES or PES. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar among ZES (n = 241) and PES (n = 236) diabetic patients, with slightly longer lesion lengths in PES-treated patients (12.9 mm vs. 14.0 mm, p = 0.041). Among the 86 DM patients assigned to routine angiographic follow-up (18% of the overall DM cohort), in-stent percent diameter stenosis at 8 months was greater among ZES-treated patients (32.9 vs. 21.1, p = 0.023), with a trend toward higher in-stent late loss. One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with either ZES or PES (target vessel failure: 8.6% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.53; target lesion revascularization: 6.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.70; target vessel revascularization: 8.6% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.87). There were no significant interactions between DM status and stent type with respect to the outcomes measured, and the relative efficacy/safety of ZES and PES were similar among insulin- and noninsulin-requiring subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with ZES and PES in the ENDEAVOR IV trial. These findings parallel the overall trial results, which demonstrated similar efficacy and safety of ZES and PES for single de novo coronary lesions.

Gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with acute coronary syndromes: incidence, predictors, and clinical implications: analysis from the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial.

OBJECTIVES: We assessed the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND: GIB is a potential hemorrhagic complication in patients with ACS treated with antithrombotic and/or antiplatelet medications. The clinical outcomes associated with GIB in this setting have not been systematically studied. METHODS: In the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial, 13,819 patients with moderate- and high-risk ACS, enrolled at 450 centers in 17 countries between August 2003 and December 2005, were randomized to the open-label use of 1 of 3 antithrombin regimens (heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, bivalirudin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, or bivalirudin monotherapy). RESULTS: GIB within 30 days occurred in 178 patients (1.3%). Older age, baseline anemia, longer duration of study drug administration before angiogram, smoking, ST-segment deviation>or=1 mm, and diabetes were identified as independent predictors of GIB. On multivariable analysis, GIB was strongly associated with 30-day all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR]: 4.87 [interquartile range (IQR) 2.61 to 9.08], p<0.0001), cardiac mortality (HR: 5.35 [IQR 2.71 to 10.59], p<0.0001), and composite ischemia (HR: 1.94 [IQR 1.14 to 3.30], p=0.014), as well as with 1-year all-cause mortality (HR: 3.97 [IQR 2.64 to 5.99], p<0.0001), cardiac mortality (HR: 3.77 [IQR 2.14 to 6.63], p<0.0001), myocardial infarction (HR: 1.74 [IQR 1.01 to 3.02], p=0.047), and composite ischemia (HR: 1.90 [IQR 1.37 to 2.64], p=0.0001). Patients who experienced GIB had significantly higher rates of stent thrombosis compared with patients without GIB (5.8% vs. 2.4%, p=0.009). CONCLUSIONS: GIB is a serious condition in the scenario of ACS and is independently associated with mortality and ischemic complications.

Outcomes of patients with coronary artery perforation complicating percutaneous coronary intervention and correlations with the type of adjunctive antithrombotic therapy: pooled analysis from REPLACE-2, ACUITY, and HORIZONS-AMI trials.

BACKGROUND: The lack of a specific counteragent to bivalirudin may complicate the management of patients with coronary artery (CA) perforation during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). AIM: Assess outcomes of patients with CA perforation from three PCI trials comparing intravenous bivalirudin with provisional glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibition versus unfractionated heparin (UFH) plus GP IIb/IIIa. METHODS: A pooled analysis of patients treated with PCI in three randomized trials including REPLACE-2, ACUITY, and HORIZONS-AMI. RESULTS: Among a total of 12,921 patients, CA perforation occurred in 35 patients (0.27%). By multivariable analysis, baseline creatinine clearance was the only independent predictor of CA perforation (per 10 mL/min decrease, odds ratio [95% confidence interval]= 1.28 [1.11, 1.47], P = 0.0007). At 30 days, patients with versus without CA perforation had significantly (all P values < or =0.001) higher rates of 30-day mortality (11.4% vs. 1.0%), myocardial infarction (MI) [Q wave: 22.9% vs. 5.7%; non-Q wave: 17.1% vs. 4.9%], target vessel revascularization (TVR) [20.1% vs. 1.8%], and composite end-point of death/MI/TVR (31.4% vs. 7.8%). Patients assigned to bivalirudin versus UFH plus a GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor had nonsignificantly lower rates of death (0% vs. 18.8%, P = 0.08), similar rates of MI (26.7% vs. 25.0%, P = 0.92), significantly lower rates of TVR (6.7% vs. 37.5%, P = 0.04), and similar rates of the composite end-point of death/MI/TVR (35.5% vs. 26.7%, P = 0.54). CONCLUSION: In three PCI trials, treatment of patients experiencing CA perforation with adjunctive antithrombotic therapy of bivalirudin monotherapy was not associated with worse outcomes compared to treatment with UFH plus GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors.

Prognostic significance of periprocedural versus spontaneously occurring myocardial infarction after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes: an analysis from the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the relative impact of spontaneously occurring and periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) on survival after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of periprocedural MI after PCI remains uncertain. METHODS: Outcomes during a 1-year follow-up were evaluated among 7,773 patients enrolled in the ACUITY (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy) trial with a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome in whom PCI was performed. RESULTS: Periprocedural MI developed in 466 patients (6.0%), and spontaneous MI unrelated to PCI subsequently developed in 200 patients (2.6%). Patients developing spontaneous and periprocedural MI compared with those patients without MI had significantly greater unadjusted rates of mortality at 30 days (5.0% vs. 3.2% vs. 0.8%, respectively, p < 0.0001) and at 1 year (16.0% vs. 6.0% vs. 2.6%, respectively, p < 0.0001). In a time-updated multivariable analysis, after adjusting for differences in baseline and procedural characteristics between the groups, we found that spontaneous MI was a powerful independent predictor of subsequent mortality (hazard ratio: 7.49, 95% confidence interval: 4.95 to 11.33, p < 0.0001), whereas periprocedural MI was not a significant predictor of mortality (hazard ratio: 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 0.85 to 1.98, p = 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI, the spontaneous development of an MI unrelated to PCI is a powerful predictor of subsequent mortality. In contrast, periprocedural MI is a marker of baseline risk, atherosclerosis burden, and procedural complexity but in most cases does not have independent prognostic significance. (Comparison of Angiomax Versus Heparin in Acute Coronary Syndromes [ACS]; NCT00093158).