Impact of intravascular ultrasound and final kissing balloon dilatation on long-term clinical outcome in percutaneous revascularization with 1-stent strategy for left main coronary artery stenosis in drug-eluting stent era.

BACKGROUND: It remains uncertain whether intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) use and final kissing balloon (FKB) dilatation would be standard care of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a simple 1-stent technique in unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. This study sought to investigate the impact of IVUS use and FKB dilatation on long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) in PCI with a simple 1-stent technique for unprotected LMCA stenosis. METHODS: Between June 2006 and December 2012, 255 patients who underwent PCI with 1 drug-eluting stent for LMCA stenosis were analyzed. Mean follow-up duration was 1663 ± 946 days. Long-term MACEs were defined as death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and repeat revascularizations. RESULTS: During the follow-up, 72 (28.2%) MACEs occurred including 38 (14.9%) deaths, 21 (8.2%) nonfatal MIs and 13 (5.1%) revascularizations. The IVUS examination and FKB dilatation were done in 158 (62.0%) and 119 (46.7%), respectively. IVUS use (20.3 versus 41.2%; log-rank P < 0.001), not FKB dilatation (30.3 versus 26.5%; log-rank P = 0.614), significantly reduced MACEs. In multivariate analysis, IVUS use was a negative predictor of MACEs [hazards ratio 0.51; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.88; P = 0.017], whereas FKB dilatation (hazard ratio 1.68; 95% CI, 1.01-2.80; P = 0.047) was a positive predictor of MACEs. In bifurcation LMCA stenosis, IVUS use (18.7 versus 48.0%; log-rank P < 0.001) significantly reduced MACEs. In nonbifurcation LMCA stenosis, FKB dilatation showed a trend of increased MACEs (P = 0.076). CONCLUSION: IVUS examination is helpful in reducing clinical events in PCI for LMCA bifurcation lesions, whereas mandatory FKB dilatation after the 1-stent technique might be harmful in nonbifurcation LMCA stenosis.

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a contemporary registry-based analysis.

AIMS: We aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES). METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 11 517 PCIs with second-generation DES performed in our institution between 2007 and 2019, we identified 8042 procedures performed using DP-DES and 3475 using BP-DES. The primary outcome was target lesion failure, the composite target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel myocardial infarction and death. Propensity score matching was used to create a well-balanced cohort. Mean follow-up was 4.8 years. Of the 3413 matched pairs, 21% were females, and the mean age was 66 years. At 1 year, the primary outcome occurred in 8.3% patients versus 7.1% (P = 0.07), and TLR rate was 3% versus 2% (P = 0.006) in patients with DP-DES and BP-DES respectively. Within 5 years, the primary outcome occurred in 23.1% versus 23.4% (P = 0.44), and the rate of TLR was 7.2% versus 6.5% (P = 0.07) in patients with DP-DES and BP-DES, respectively. CONCLUSION: Similar rates of the composite outcome were observed throughout the entire follow-up. Target lesion revascularization rates were lower in the BP-DES group at 1-year but equalized within 5 years.

Predictors and outcomes of acute recoil after ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents implantation: an intravascular ultrasound in native coronary arteries.

BACKGROUND: Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SESs) may easily lead to acute recoil. This study investigated acute recoil after BP-SES implantation on the basis of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS: We enrolled 40 consecutive stents. Absolute acute recoil by quantitative coronary angiography was defined as the difference between the mean diameter of the last inflated balloon (X) and mean lumen diameter of the BP-SES immediately after balloon deflation (Y). Percent (%) acute recoil was defined as (X-Y)×100/X. IVUS was performed within the culprit lesion. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and calcification grade score were assessed using IVUS. Calcification grade was scored on the basis of quadrants. On the basis of the median acute recoil value of 5.0%, the stents were divided into two groups: low (LAR, n = 20) and high % acute recoil (HAR, n = 20). RESULTS: Mean % acute recoil was 5.8 ± 5.3%. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and stent/artery ratio were significantly higher in the HAR group than in the LAR group. Significant differences in % acute recoil were not observed regarding the types of stent diameter. In multivariate logistic regression and multiple linear regression analysis, plaque eccentricity and % plaque burden in the culprit plaque were significant positive predictors for the occurrence of % acute recoil. No significant differences, including clinical outcomes, were found between both groups at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Acute recoil of BP-SESs may be influenced by an eccentric plaque with a large burden, which did not affect long-term outcomes. However, the present study might suggest the proper strategy (e.g. a more exhaustive plaque preparation) before BP-SES implantation in a case with these IVUS characteristics.

Safety and Efficacy of Triple Therapy With Ticagrelor or Prasugrel Versus Clopidogrel After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Patients on dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention often have indications for concomitant oral anticoagulation, known as triple antithrombotic therapy. Majority of literature evaluating triple antithrombotic therapy fails to adequately represent patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and those prescribed potent P2Y12 inhibitors, ticagrelor or prasugrel. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of triple antithrombotic regimens containing ticagrelor or prasugrel versus clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention in the setting of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective cohort trial. The primary endpoint was net adverse clinical event, defined as the primary efficacy endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular accident and the primary safety endpoint of any bleeding event. RESULTS: Between October 2017 and October 2019, a total of 65 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction were initiated on triple therapy. Forty-six patients were included in the primary analysis, of which 26 were discharged on triple antithrombotic therapy with clopidogrel and 20 discharged on potent P2Y12 inhibitors (ticagrelor or prasugrel). The primary endpoint occurred in 27% of the clopidogrel group and 40% of the potent P2Y12 inhibitor group (P = 0.35). Bleeding occurred in 23% of the clopidogrel group and 35% of the potent P2Y12 inhibitor group (P = 0.37). CONCLUSIONS: This small cohort study suggests, in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the net adverse clinical event rate does not differ between clopidogrel and potent P2Y12 inhibitors in the setting of triple antithrombotic therapy. The results of this exploratory analysis warrant confirmation in a larger, randomized study.

Effects of stent generation on clinical outcomes after acute myocardial infarction compared between prediabetes and diabetes patients.

We investigated the effects of stent generation on 2-year clinical outcomes between prediabetes and diabetes patients after acute myocardial infarction (AMI). A total of 13,895 AMI patients were classified into normoglycemia (group A: 3673), prediabetes (group B: 5205), and diabetes (group C: 5017). Thereafter, all three groups were further divided into first-generation (1G)-drug-eluting stent (DES) and second-generation (2G)-DES groups. Patient-oriented composite outcomes (POCOs) defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (Re-MI), and any repeat revascularization were the primary outcome. Stent thrombosis (ST) was the secondary outcome. In both prediabetes and diabetes groups, the cumulative incidences of POCOs, any repeat revascularization, and ST were higher in the 1G-DES than that in the 2G-DES. In the diabetes group, all-cause death and cardiac death rates were higher in the 1G-DES than that in the 2G-DES. In both stent generations, the cumulative incidence of POCOs was similar between the prediabetes and diabetes groups. However, in the 2G-DES group, the cumulative incidences of Re-MI and all-cause death or MI were significantly higher in the diabetes group than that in the prediabetes group. To conclude, 2G-DES was more effective than 1G-DES in reducing the primary and secondary outcomes for both prediabetes and diabetes groups.

Early Vascular Healing Following Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Placement Compared to That with Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent.

A recent thinner strut drug-eluting stent might facilitate early strut coverage after its placement. We aimed to investigate early vascular healing responses after the placement of an ultrathin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) compared to those with a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging.This study included 40 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) who underwent OCT-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Twenty patients each received either BP-SES or DP-EES implantation. OCT was performed immediately after stent placement (baseline) and at 1-month follow-up.At one month, the percentage of uncovered struts reduced significantly in both the BP-SES (80.9 ± 10.3% to 2.9 ± 1.7%; P < 0.001) and DP-EES (81.9 ± 13.0% to 5.7 ± 1.8%; P < 0.001) groups, and the percentage was lower in the BP-SES group than in the DP-EES group (P < 0.001). In the BP-SES group, the percentage of malapposed struts also decreased significantly at 1 month (4.9 ± 3.7% to 2.6 ± 3.0%; P = 0.025), which was comparable to that of the DP-EES group (2.5 ± 2.2%; P = 0.860). The optimal cut-off value of the distance between the strut and vessel surface immediately after the placement to predict resolved malapposed struts was ≤ 160 µm for BP-SES and ≤ 190 µm for DP-EES.Compared to DP-EES, ultrathin-strut BP-SES demonstrated favorable vascular responses at one month, with a lower rate of uncovered struts and a comparable rate of malapposed struts.

Longitudinal Assessment of Safety of Femoropopliteal Endovascular Treatment With Paclitaxel-Coated Devices Among Medicare Beneficiaries: The SAFE-PAD Study.

Importance: Paclitaxel-coated peripheral devices have been associated with increased mortality, yet this harm signal has not been replicated outside of meta-analyses of small trials. Objective: To provide a longitudinal assessment of the safety of femoropopliteal endovascular treatment with peripheral drug-coated devices (DCDs) among Medicare beneficiaries. Design, Setting, and Participants: SAFE-PAD (Safety Assessment of Femoropopliteal Endovascular Treatment With Paclitaxel-Coated Devices) was a retrospective cohort study designed with the US Food and Drug Administration to evaluate the noninferiority of mortality between DCDs and non-drug-coated devices (NDCDs) for femoropopliteal revascularization performed in 2978 inpatient and outpatient facilities in the US from April 1, 2015, through December 31, 2018. Evaluation of the primary outcome was assessed through May 31, 2020. Participants were Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries 66 years and older with 1 or more years of enrollment prior to femoropopliteal revascularization. Prespecified subgroups included low-risk cohorts, procedure location, disease severity, and device type. Inverse probability weighting was used to account for imbalances of observed characteristics. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the potential influence of unmeasured confounding. Exposures: Treatment with DCDs vs NDCDs as determined by claims codes during the index procedure. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included repeated hospitalization, repeated lower extremity revascularization, and lower extremity amputation. Falsification end points were acute myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, and pneumonia. Results: Of 168 553 patients, 70 584 (41.9%) were treated with a DCD. The mean (SD) age was 77.0 (7.6) years, 75 744 (44.9%) were female, 136 916 of 167 197 (81.9%) were White individuals, 85 880 of 168 553 (51.0%) had diabetes, 82 554 of 168 553 (49.0%) used tobacco, 78 665 of 168 553 (45.7%) had critical limb ischemia (CLI), and 13 296 of 168 553 (7.9%) had a prior amputation. Median follow-up was 2.72 years (interquartile range, 0.87-3.77; longest, 5.16 years). After weighting, the cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality was 53.8% with DCDs and 55.1% with NDCDs (hazard ratio [HR], 0.95; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97; noninferiority P < .001). Cox regression and instrumental variable analyses were consistent with the primary findings. No harm associated with DCDs was observed among subgroups, including those treated with stents (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-1.00) or balloons (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.92-0.96), with or without CLI (CLI: HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.93-0.97; non-CLI: HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.95-0.99), and those within the lowest quartile of total comorbidities (HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.92-0.99). Conclusions and Relevance: In this initial report from the SAFE-PAD cohort study, DCDs were found to be noninferior to NCDCs in respect to mortality through a median follow-up of 2.72 years. This finding remained robust in sensitivity analyses and was consistent across prespecified subgroups.

Early coronary healing in ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: sirolimus-eluting stents vs. drug-coated balloons after bare-metal stents. The PEBSI-2 optical coherence tomography randomized study.

OBJECTIVES: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have theoretical advantages over drug-eluting stents (DESs) to facilitate stent healing. We studied whether, in patients undergoing primary coronary interventions (pPCIs), a strategy of DCB after bare-metal stent improves early healing as determined by optical coherence tomography (OCT) compared with new-generation DES. METHODS: pPCI patients were randomized (1:1) to treatment with new-generation sirolimus-eluting stents (DES group) or DCB-strategy. Vessel healing was assessed by OCT at 90 days. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were randomized (26 DES vs. 27 DCB). At 90 days, both strategies showed a low rate of uncovered struts (3.2 vs. 3.2%, P = 0.64) and a very high and similar rate of covered and apposed struts (96.6 vs. 96.1%, respectively; P = 0.58). However, DCB group had a significantly lower rate of major coronary evaginations (68 vs. 37%, P = 0.026), and more frequently developed a thin homogeneous neointimal layer (20 vs. 70.4%, P = 0.001) suggesting distinct superior healing at 3 months compared to DES. CONCLUSIONS: In pPCI both, sirolimus-DES and DCB-strategy, provide excellent strut coverage at 3 months. However, DCB ensures more advanced and optimal stent healing compared to sirolimus-DES. Further research is needed to determine whether, in patients undergoing pPCI, DCB offers superior long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes than new-generation DES (NCT03610347).

Primary coronary intervention in ST-elevation myocardial infarction / Primer coronariaintervenció ST-elevációs infarktusban.

Összefoglaló. Bevezetés: Heveny myocardialis infarctusban a szívizommentés sikere, a beteg életkilátása nagymértékben függ a panasz kezdete és az elzáródott koszorúér rekanalizálása között eltelt ischaemiás idotol. Jelenleg az ér nyitása optimális esetben minden betegnél koszorúér-intervencióval történik. Célkituzés: Annak vizsgálata, hogy öt év alatt mennyit változtak az ischaemiás ido összetevoi, és miben változott az elzáródott ér nyitásának módszere ST-elevációs myocardialis infarctus (STEMI) miatt végzett primer coronariaintervencióban. Módszer: 2014. 01. 01. és 2018. 12. 31. között 1663, STEMI miatt koszorúér-intervencióval kezelt betegnél (1173 férfi és 490 no) vizsgáltuk évenkénti bontásban a panasztól a koszorúér nyitásáig eltelt ido összetevoit és a 30 napos halálozást. Eredmények: Öt év alatt a panasztól az elso egészségügyi kontaktusig medián 2:53 vs. 2:10 óra (p = 0,0132), ettol az intervenciós centrumba történt felvételig medián 1:17 vs. 1:03 óra (p = 0,009), a felvételtol a ballon nyitásáig medián 0:31 vs. 0:29 óra (p = ns) telt el. A panasztól a ballon nyitásáig eltelt ido (medián 5:29 vs. 4:07 óra, p = 0,0001) rövidült, döntoen 2014 és 2015 között. A gyógyszerkibocsátó stent beültetése 15%-ról 96%-ra nott. A vizsgált években a légzés/keringés támogatás aránya 8,2-10,6-13,9-7,6-8,4, a 30 napos halálozásé 4,1-6,8-11,1-7,4-5,7% volt; a két érték korrelációt mutat (p = 0,827). Következtetés: Öt év alatt a panasztól az elso egészségügyi kontaktusig és a kórházi beszállításig eltelt ido rövidült, de az Európai Kardiológiai Társaság ajánlásához képest hosszú; a kórházi felvételtol a ballon nyitásáig eltelt ido megfelelo. A négy órán belüli reperfúzió a betegek közel felében valósult meg. Az intervenciós centrumba való gyorsabb bekerülés javíthatna az eredményen. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(13): 497-503. INTRODUCTION: In acute myocardial infarction, the heart muscle salvage, the patient's life expectancy is highly dependent on the elapsed ischaemic time from the onset of complaint to target vessel recanalisation. Nowadays, target vessel recanalisation is performed with coronary intervention in all patients in optimal case. OBJECTIVE: To examine how the components of ischemic time and the opening procedure of the occluded coronary have changed over five years in primary intervention done in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHOD: Authors studied data of 1663 (1173 male and 480 female) STEMI patients in annual breakdowns treated with coronary intervention between 01. 01. 2014 and 31. 12. 2018, time from complaint to coronary artery opening, details of intervention and 30 days mortality rate. RESULTS: During the five years, time intervals were as follows: from onset of complaint to first medical contact: median 2:53 vs. 2:10 hours (p = 0.0132), from this to admission in the interventional centre: median 1:17 vs. 1:03 hours (p = 0.009), from hospital admission to balloon opening: median 0:31 vs. 0:29 hours (p = ns). In total, the complaint to balloon opening time (median 5:29 vs. 4:07 hours, p = 0.0001) diminished, decisively from 2014 to 2015. Ratio of drug-eluting stent implantation increased from 15% to 96%. In the investigated years, the need of respiratory and/or circulatory device support ratio was 8.2-10.6-13.9-7.6-8.4, 30-day mortality rate between 4.1-6.8-11.1-7.4-5.7%; these two values showed a correlation (p = 0.827). CONCLUSION: The time from complaint to first medical contact and transfer to hospital against the significant decrease is still longer than the recommendation of the European Society of Cardiology. The time from hospital admission to balloon opening is adequate. Reperfusion within four hours was achieved in half of the patients in total. Faster hospitalization may improve results. Orv Hetil. 2021; 162(13): 497-503.

Early Vascular Response to Ultrathin Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents for the Treatment of ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction After Plaque Rupture.

Recent clinical studies suggest that newer-generation drug-eluting stents that combine ultrathin struts and nanocoating (biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, BP-SES) could improve long-term clinical outcomes in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the early vascular response to BP-SES in these patients has not been investigated so far.We examined this response in 20 patients with STEMI caused by plaque rupture using frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) to understand the underlying mechanisms. Plaque rupture was diagnosed by OCT before PCI with BP-SES implantation was performed. OCT was again performed before the final angiography (post-PCI) and after 2 weeks (2W-OCT).BP-SES placement caused protrusion of atherothrombotic material into the stent lumen and incomplete stent apposition in all patients. After 2 weeks, incomplete stent apposition was significantly reduced (% malapposed struts: post-PCI 4.7 ± 3.3%; 2W-OCT 0.9 ± 1.2%; P < 0.0001), and the percentage of uncovered struts also significantly decreased (% uncovered struts: post-PCI; 69.8 ± 18.3%: 2W-OCT; 29.6 ± 11.0%, P < 0.0001). The maximum protrusion area of the atherothrombotic burden was significantly reduced (post-PCI 1.36 ± 0.70 mm2; 2W-OCT 0.98 ± 0.55 mm2; P = 0.004).This study on the early vascular responses following BP-SES implantation showed rapid resolution of atherothrombotic material and progression of strut apposition and coverage. (UMIN000041324).

One-Year COMBO Stent Outcomes in Acute Coronary Syndrome: from the COMBO Collaboration.

PURPOSE: The COMBO biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent includes endothelial progenitor cell capture (EPC) technology for rapid endothelialization, which may offer advantage in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We sought to analyze the performance of the COMBO stent by ACS status and ACS subtype. METHODS: The COMBO collaboration (n = 3614) is a patient-level pooled dataset from the MASCOT and REMEDEE registries. We evaluated outcomes by ACS status, and ACS subtype in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) versus unstable angina (UA). The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: We compared 1965 (54%) ACS and 1649 (46.0%) non-ACS patients. ACS presentations included 40% (n = 789) STEMI, 31% (n = 600) NSTEMI, and 29% (n = 576) UA patients. Risk of 1-year TLF was greater in ACS patients (4.5% vs. 3.3%, HR 1.51 95% CI 1.01-2.25, p = 0.045) without significant differences in definite/probable ST (1.1% vs 0.5%, HR 2.40, 95% CI 0.91-6.31, p = 0.08). One-year TLF was similar in STEMI, NSTEMI, and UA (4.8% vs 4.8% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.60), but definite/probable ST was higher in STEMI patients (1.9% vs 0.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.03). Adjusted outcomes were not different in MI versus UA patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the novel EPC capture technology, COMBO stent PCI was associated with somewhat greater risk of 1-year TLF in ACS than in non-ACS patients, without significant differences in stent thrombosis. No differences were observed in 1-year TLF among ACS subtypes.

Comparison of Hospitalization Trends and Outcomes in Acute Myocardial Infarction Patients With Versus Without Opioid Use Disorder.

Discrepancies in medical care are well known to adversely affect patients with opioid abuse disorders (OUD), including management and outcomes of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in patients with OUD. We used the National Inpatient Sample was queried from January 2006 to September 2015 to identify all patients ≥18 years admitted with a primary diagnosis of AMI (weighted N = 13,030; unweighted N = 2,670) and concomitant OUD. Patients using other nonopiate illicit drugs were excluded. Propensity matching (1:1) yielded 2,253 well-matched pairs in which intergroup comparison of invasive revascularization strategies and cardiac outcomes were performed. The prevalence of OUD patients with AMI over the last decade has doubled, from 163 (2006) to 326 cases (2015) per 100,000 admissions for AMI. The OUD group underwent less cardiac catheterization (63.2% vs 72.2%; p <0.001), percutaneous coronary intervention (37.0% vs 48.5%; p <0.001) and drug-eluting stent placement (32.3% vs 19.5%; p <0.001) compared with non-OUD. No differences in in-hospital mortality/cardiogenic shock were noted. Among subgroup of ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients (26.2% of overall cohort), the OUD patients were less likely to receive percutaneous coronary intervention (67.9% vs 75.5%; p = 0.002), drug-eluting stent (31.4% vs 47.9%; p <0.001) with a significantly higher mortality (7.4% vs 4.3%), and cardiogenic shock (11.7% vs 7.9%). No differences in the frequency of coronary bypass grafting were noted in AMI or its subgroups. In conclusion, OUD patients presenting with AMI receive less invasive treatment compared with those without OUD. OUD patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction have worse in-hospital outcomes with increased mortality and cardiogenic shock.

Overlapping Drug-Eluting Stent Is Associated with Increased Definite Stent Thrombosis and Revascularization: Results from 15,561 Patients in the AUTHENTIC Study.

PURPOSE: This study was to analyze the incidence of definite stent thrombosis (ST) after the implantation of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and cutoff value of overlapping length for predicting definite ST. An overlapping stent is associated with a high rate of clinical events after DES implantation compared with a non-overlapping stent. However, the rates of definite ST and clinical outcomes from a large patient population remain underreported. METHODS: A total of 15,561 patients with 24,183 lesions who underwent DES implantation from January 2005 to February 2017 were retrospectively included in 5 tertiary hospitals in China. The main endpoint was the incidence of definite ST after procedures. RESULTS: With a median of 1932 (IQR = 1194-2929) days, clinical follow-up was available in 7484 patients in the overlap group and in 8077 patients in the non-overlap group. The rates of definite ST were 3.1% in the overlap group and 1.2% in the non-overlap group (HR: 2.67 (95% CI: 2.11-3.38), p < 0.001). Of the 24,183 treated lesions, the incidences of definite ST were 2.4% in the overlap group and 0.9% in the non-overlap group (HR: 2.96 (95% CI: 2.38-3.69), p < 0.001). Stent overlap was associated with a higher rate of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (9.4%) compared with stent non-overlap (6.4%, p < 0.001). The length of overlapping stent ≥ 2.93 mm strongly correlated with definite ST. CONCLUSION: The present study shows that overlapping DES increases definite ST and revascularization in patients during long-term follow-up. In addition, the longer overlapping zone was associated with worse clinical outcomes.

Impact of PRECISE-DAPT and DAPT Scores on Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Duration After 2nd Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation.

PURPOSE: Determining the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation is an important clinical issue. We evaluated the effects of ischemia (by DAPT score) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT score), as well as the impact of DAPT duration, on clinical outcomes. METHODS: From pooled analysis of four randomized clinical trials, 5131 patients undergoing second-generation DES implantation were randomized to short-duration (n = 2575; ≤ 6 months) or standard-duration (n = 2556; ≥ 12 months) DAPT groups. This population was further divided into four subgroups according to PRECISE-DAPT (high bleeding risk ≥ 25) and DAPT (high ischemic risk ≥ 2) scores. RESULTS: Net clinical outcomes (1.3% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.89) and ischemic events (5.0% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.44) did not differ between the two duration groups, although bleeding events were more frequent in patients with standard-duration DAPT (0.4% vs. 0.9%; p = 0.04). Standard-duration DAPT was associated with fewer ischemic events (6.9% vs. 4.0%; p = 0.02) and no increase in bleeding events only among patients at low bleeding risk and high ischemic risk. The other groups show no differences in net clinical outcomes, ischemic events, or bleeding events according to DAPT duration. CONCLUSION: Compared with short-duration DAPT, standard-duration DAPT was associated with similar net clinical outcomes and ischemic events, but more bleeding events at 12 months after second-generation DES implantation. However, standard-duration DAPT reduced ischemic events without increasing bleeding events among patients at low bleeding and high ischemic risk. When determining DAPT duration, considering both ischemic and bleeding risk can help optimize patient benefits. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EXCELLENT (NCT00698607), RESET (NCT01145079), IVUS-XPL (NCT01308281), OPTIMA-C (NCT03056118).

Sirolimus-Eluting Balloon for the Treatment of Coronary Lesions in Complex ACS Patients: The SELFIE Registry.

BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-coated balloons (SCBs) represent a novel therapeutic option for both in-stent restenosis (ISR) and de novo coronary lesions treatment, especially in small vessels. Our registry sought to evaluate the procedural and clinical outcomes of such devices in a complex acute coronary syndrome (ACS) clinical setting. METHODS AND RESULTS: We treated 74 consecutive patients with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with at least 1 SCB used for ISR and/or de novo coronary lesion in small vessels at our institution. Sixty-two patients presented with ACS, and their data were included in our analysis. The mean age was 67 ± 10 years, and patients presenting with ST-elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) were 14 (23%). De novo lesions were 52%, whereas ISR was 48%. Procedural success occurred in 100% of the cases. At the 11 ± 7 months follow-up, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were 3 (4.8%). Cardiovascular death (CD) occurred in 1 (1.6%) patient and myocardial infarction (MI) in 2 patients (3.2%) as well as ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR). One probable subacute thrombosis occurred (1.6%) with no major bleedings. In a subgroup analysis, the incidence of MACE did not show significant differences between patients treated for de novo lesions and ISR (HR: 0.239; CI 95%: 0.003-16.761, p=0.509). CONCLUSIONS: In the SELFIE prospective registry, SCB showed a good safety and efficacy profile for the treatment of coronary lesions, both ISR and/or de novo in small vessels, in a complex ACS population of patients at the 11 ± 7 months follow-up.

Long-Term Results After Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stent Implantation in Saphenous Vein Grafts: Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background Efficacy data on drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts are controversial. We aimed to compare DES with BMS among patients undergoing saphenous vein grafts intervention regarding long-term outcome. Methods and Results In this multinational trial, patients were randomized to paclitaxel-eluting or BMS. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. Secondary end points included major adverse cardiac events and its individual components at 5-year follow-up. One hundred seventy-three patients were included in the trial (89 DES versus 84 BMS). One-year major adverse cardiac event rates were lower in DES compared with BMS (2.2% versus 16.0%, hazard ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03-0.64, P=0.01), which was mainly driven by a reduction of subsequent myocardial infarctions and need for target-vessel revascularization. Five-year major adverse cardiac event rates remained lower in the DES compared with the BMS arm (35.5% versus 56.1%, hazard ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.68, P<0.001). A landmark-analysis from 1 to 5 years revealed a persistent benefit of DES over BMS (hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.74, P=0.007) in terms of target-vessel revascularization. More patients in the BMS group underwent multiple target-vessel revascularization procedures throughout the study period compared with the DES group (DES 1.1% [n=1] versus BMS 9.5% [n=8], P=0.013). Enrollment was stopped before the target sample size of 240 patients was reached. Conclusions In this randomized controlled trial with prospective long-term follow-up of up to 5 years, DES showed a better efficacy than BMS with sustained benefits over time. DES may be the preferred strategy in this patient population. Registration URL: https://www.clini​caltr​ials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT00595647.