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.

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.

Short-Term Outcomes of Elective High-Risk PCI with Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation Support: A Single-Centre Registry.

Background: If surgical revascularization is not feasible, high-risk PCI is a viable option for patients with complex coronary artery disease. Venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) provides hemodynamic support in patients with a high risk for periprocedural cardiogenic shock. Objective: This study aims to provide data about short-term outcomes of elective high-risk PCI with ECMO support. Methods: A retrospective single-center registry was performed on patients with high-risk PCI receiving VA-ECMO support. The short-term outcome was defined as the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during the hospital stay and within 60 days after discharge. Results: Between January 2020 and December 2021, 14 patients underwent high-risk PCI with ECMO support. The mean age was 66.5 (±2.5) and the majority was male (71.4%) with a mean left ventricular ejection fraction of 33% (±3.0). Complexity indexes were high (STS-PROM risk score: 2.9 (IQR 1.5-5.8), SYNTAX score I: 35.5 (±2.0), SYNTAX score II (PCI): 49.8 (±3.2)). Femoral artery ECMO cannulation was performed in 13 patients (92.9%) requiring additional antegrade femoral artery cannula in one patient because of periprocedural limb ischemia. The mean duration of the ECMO run was 151 (±32) minutes. One patient required prolonged ECMO support and was weaned after 2 days. Successful revascularization was achieved in 13 patients (92.8%). Procedural success was achieved in 12 patients (85.7%) due to one unsuccessful revascularization and one procedural death. MACE during hospital stay occurred in 4 patients (28.6%) and within 60 days after discharge in 2 patients (16.7%). Conclusion: High-risk PCI with hemodynamic support using VA-ECMO is a feasible treatment option, if surgical revascularization is considered very high risk. Larger and prospective studies are awaited to confirm the benefits of ECMO support in elective high-risk PCI comparing ECMO with other mechanical circulatory support devices, including coaxial left cardiac support devices and IABP. Trial Registration. This trial is registered with NCT05387902.

Using real-world data to monitor and improve quality of care in coronary artery disease: results from the Netherlands Heart Registration.

Worldwide, quality registries for cardiovascular diseases enable the use of real-world data to monitor and improve the quality of cardiac care. In the Netherlands Heart Registration (NHR), cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons register baseline, procedural and outcome data across all invasive cardiac interventional, electrophysiological and surgical procedures. This paper provides insight into the governance and processes as organised by the NHR in collaboration with the hospitals. To clarify the processes, examples are given from the percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting registries. Physicians who are mandated by their hospital to instruct the NHR to process their data are united in registration committees. The committees determine standard sets of variables and periodically discuss the completeness and quality of data and patient-relevant outcomes. In the case of significant variation in outcomes, processes of healthcare delivery are discussed and good practices are shared in a non-competitive and safe setting. To create new insights for further improvement in patient-relevant outcomes, quality projects are initiated on, for example, multivessel disease treatment, cardiogenic shock and diagnostic intracoronary procedures. Moreover, possibilities are explored to expand the quality registries through additional relevant indicators, such as resource use before and after the procedure, by enriching NHR data with other existing data resources.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Three contemporary thin-strut drug-eluting stents implanted in severely calcified coronary lesions of participants in a randomized all-comers trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to assess the 2-year clinical performance of three drug-eluting stents in all-comer patients with severely calcified coronary lesions. BACKGROUND: Severe lesion calcification increases cardiovascular event risk after coronary stenting, but there is a lack of data on the clinical outcome of all-comers with severely calcified lesions who were treated with more recently introduced drug-eluting stents. METHODS: The BIO-RESORT trial (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01674803) randomly assigned 3,514 all-comer patients to biodegradable polymer Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES) or Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), versus durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). In a post hoc analysis, we assessed 783 patients (22.3%) with at least one severely calcified target lesion. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up (available in 99% of patients), the main composite endpoint target vessel failure occurred in 19/252 (7.6%) of the EES and in 33/265 (12.6%) of the ZES-treated patients (p = .07). Target vessel failure occurred in 24/266 (9.1%) of the SES-treated patients (vs. ZES: p = .21). There was a difference in target vessel revascularization, which was required in EES in 6/252 (2.4%) patients and in ZES in 20/265 (7.7%) patients (p = .01); the target vessel revascularization rate in SES was 9/266 (3.4%, vs. ZES: p = .04). Multivariate analysis showed that implantation of EES, but not SES, was independently associated with lower target vessel revascularization rates than in ZES. CONCLUSIONS: In BIO-RESORT participants with severely calcified target lesions, treatment with EES was associated with a lower 2-year target vessel revascularization rate than treatment with ZES.

Thin composite wire strut, durable polymer-coated (Resolute Onyx) versus ultrathin cobalt-chromium strut, bioresorbable polymer-coated (Orsiro) drug-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIONYX): an international, single-blind, randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: During the past decade, many patients had zotarolimus-eluting stents implanted, which had circular shape cobalt-chromium struts with limited radiographic visibility. The Resolute Onyx stent was developed to improve visibility while reducing strut thickness, which was achieved by using a novel composite wire with a dense platinum-iridium core and an outer cobalt-chromium layer. We did the first randomised clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of this often-used stent compared with the Orsiro stent, which consists of ultrathin cobalt-chromium struts. METHODS: We did an investigator-initiated, assessor-blinded and patient-blinded, randomised non-inferiority trial in an allcomers population at seven independently monitored centres in Belgium, Israel, and the Netherlands. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older and required percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents. After guide wire passage with or without predilation, members of the catheterisation laboratory team used web-based computer-generated allocation sequences to randomly assign patients (1:1) to either the Resolute Onyx or the Orsiro stent. Randomisation was stratified by sex and diabetes status. Patients and assessors were masked to allocated stents, but treating clinicians were not. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure at 1 year, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation, and was assessed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin 2·5%) on the basis of outcomes adjudicated by an independent event committee. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02508714. FINDINGS: Between Oct 7, 2015, and Dec 23, 2016, 2516 patients were enrolled, 2488 of whom were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (28 withdrawals or screening failures). 1243 participants were assigned to the Resolute Onyx group, and 1245 to the Orsiro group. Overall, 1765 (70·9%) participants presented with acute coronary syndromes and 1275 (51·2%) had myocardial infarctions. 1-year follow-up was available for 2478 (99·6%) patients. The primary endpoint was met by 55 (4·5%) patients in the Resolute Onyx group and 58 (4·7%) in the Orsiro group. Non-inferiority of Resolute Onyx to Orsiro was thus established (absolute risk difference -0·2% [95% CI -1·9 to 1·4]; upper limit of the one-sided 95% CI 1·1%; pnon-inferiority=0·0005). Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in one (0·1%) participant in the Resolute Onyx group and nine (0·7%) in the Orsiro group (hazard ratio 0·11 [95% CI 0·01-0·87]; p=0·0112). INTERPRETATION: The Resolute Onyx stent was non-inferior to Orsiro for a combined safety and efficacy endpoint at 1-year follow-up in allcomers. The low event rate in both groups suggests that both stents are safe, and the very low rate of stent thrombosis in the Resolute Onyx group warrants further clinical investigation. FUNDING: Biotronik and Medtronic.

Bioresorbable Polymer-Coated Orsiro Versus Durable Polymer-Coated Resolute Onyx Stents (BIONYX): Rationale and design of the randomized TWENTE IV multicenter trial.

AIM: The aim was to compare in a noninferiority trial the efficacy and safety of 2 contemporary drug-eluting stents (DESs): a novel, durable polymer-coated stent versus an established bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: The BIONYX trial (ClinicalTrials.gov-no.NCT02508714) is an investigator-initiated, prospective, randomized, patient- and assessor-blinded, international, multicenter study in all-comer patients with all types of clinical syndromes and lesions who require percutaneous coronary interventions with DES. Patients at 7 study sites in the Netherlands, Belgium, and Israel were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified for gender and diabetes mellitus) to treatment with the novel, zotarolimus-eluting, durable polymer-coated Resolute Onyx stent that has a radiopaque, thin-strut, CoreWire stent platform versus the sirolimus-eluting, bioresorbable polymer-coated Orsiro stent (reference device) that has a very thin-strut, cobalt-chromium stent backbone. The primary end point is the 1-year incidence of the composite clinical end point target vessel failure consisting of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization. A power calculation, assuming a target vessel failure rate of 6.0% (noninferiority margin 2.5%), revealed that 2,470 study patients would give the study 80% power (α level 5%), allowing for up to 3% loss to follow-up. The first patient was enrolled on October 7, 2015; on December 23, 2016, the last patient entered the study. CONCLUSIONS: BIONYX is a large-scale, prospective, randomized, international, multicenter trial comparing a novel DES with durable coating versus a reference DES with biodegradable coating in all-comers. The study is the first randomized assessment of the Resolute Onyx stent, which is an often-used DES outside the United States.

High Bleeding Risk Patients Treated with Very Thin-Strut Biodegradable Polymer or Thin-Strut Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in the BIO-RESORT Trial.

PURPOSE: Patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention also have an increased risk of ischemic events and represent an overall high-risk population. The coating of durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) may induce inflammation and delay arterial healing, which might be reduced by novel biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES). We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treating HBR patients with very thin-strut BP-DES versus thin-strut DP-DES. METHODS: Participants in BIO-RESORT (NCT01674803), an investigator-initiated multicenter, randomized all-comers trial, were treated with very thin-strut BP-DES (Synergy or Orsiro) or thin-strut DP-DES (Resolute Integrity). For the present analysis, patients were classified following HBR criteria based on previous trials. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure: a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization at 1 year. RESULTS: Of all 3514 patients, 1009 (28.7%) had HBR. HBR patients were older (p < 0.001) and had more co-morbidities than non-HBR patients (p < 0.001). At 1-year follow-up, HBR patients had significantly higher rates of target vessel failure (6.7 vs. 4.2%, p = 0.003), cardiac death (1.9 vs. 0.4%, p < 0.001), and major bleeding (3.3 vs. 1.5%, p = 0.001). Of all 1009 HBR patients, 673 (66.7%) received BP-DES and 336 (33.3%) had DP-DES. The primary endpoint was met by 43/673 (6.5%) patients treated with BP-DES and 24/336 (7.3%) treated with DP-DES (HR 0.88 [95%CI 0.54-1.46], p = 0.63). There were no significant between-group differences in the most global patient-oriented clinical endpoint (9.7 vs. 10.5%, HR 0.92 [95%CI 0.61-1.39], p = 0.69) and other secondary endpoints. CONCLUSIONS: At 1-year follow-up, very thin-strut BP-DES showed similar safety and efficacy for treating HBR patients as thin-strut DP-DES.

Very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIO-RESORT): a three-arm, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with coronary artery disease, treated with durable polymer-coated drug-eluting stents, the life-long presence of the polymer might delay arterial healing. Novel very thin strut biodegradable polymer stents, which leave only a bare metal stent after polymer resorption, might improve long-term outcome. We investigated in allcomers the safety and efficacy of three stents eluting either everolimus, sirolimus, or zotarolimus, often clinically used but never compared, of which the biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent was never before assessed in allcomers. METHODS: The large-scale, investigator-initiated, multicentre, assessor and patient blinded, three-arm, randomised, BIO-RESORT non-inferiority trial was done at four clinical sites in the Netherlands. All-comer patients were aged 18 years or older, capable of providing informed consent, and required a percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent implantation according to clinical guidelines or the operators' judgment. Exclusion criteria were: participation in another randomised drug or device study before reaching the primary endpoint of that study; planned surgery necessitating interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy within the first 6 months; known intolerance to components of the investigational product or medication required; uncertainty about the adherence to follow-up procedures or an assumed life expectancy of less than 1 year; or known pregnancy. Web-based computer-generated allocation sequences randomly assigned patients (1:1:1) to treatment with very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents (which differ substantially in type, amount, distribution, and resorption speed of their respective coating), or thin strut durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target vessel-related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) at 12 months of follow up with a very thin strut biodegradable polymer of either everolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents, compared with durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents, analysed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin 3·5%). This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01674803. FINDINGS: From Dec 21, 2012, to Aug 24, 2015, 3514 patients were enrolled and analysed, of whom 2449 (70%) had acute coronary syndromes, which included 1073 (31%) ST-elevation myocardial infarctions. 12 month follow-up of 3490 (99%) patients (three lost to follow-up; 21 withdrawals) was available. The primary endpoint was met by 55 (5%) of 1172 patients assigned to everolimus-eluting stents, 55 (5%) of 1169 assigned to sirolimus-eluting stents and 63 (5%) of 1173 assigned to zotarolimus-eluting stents. Non-inferiority of the everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents compared with zotarolimus-eluting stents was confirmed (both -0·7% absolute risk difference, 95% CI -2·4 to 1·1; upper limit of one sided 95% CI 0·8%, pnon-inferiority<0·0001). Definite stent thrombosis (defined by the Academic Research Consortium) occurred in four (0·3%) of 1172 patients who were allocated to everolimus-eluting stents, four (0·3%) of 1169 patients who were allocated to sirolimus-eluting stents, and three (0·3%) of 1173 patients who were allocated to zotarolimus-eluting stents (log-rank p=0·70 for both comparisons with zotarolimus-eluting stents). INTERPRETATION: At 12 month follow-up, both very thin strut drug-eluting stents with dissimilar biodegradable polymer coatings (eluting either everolimus or sirolimus) were non-inferior to the durable polymer stent (eluting zotarolimus) in treating allcomers with a high proportion of patients with acute coronary syndromes. The absence of a loss of 1 year safety and efficacy with the use of these two biodegradable polymer-coated stents is a prerequisite before assessing their potential longer-term benefits. FUNDING: Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic.

Three-Year Clinical Outcome of Patients with Coronary Disease and Increased Event Risk Treated with Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents: From the Randomized DUTCH PEERS Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Limited data is available on the long-term outcome of patients with increased cardiovascular event risk, treated with newer-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DES). METHODS: We therefore assessed 3-year follow-up data of high-risk versus low- to intermediate-risk patients of the randomized DUTCH PEERS trial (NCT01331707). In both risk groups we also compared patients treated with Resolute Integrity versus Promus Element DES. Patients were categorized as "high-risk" if they met ≥1 of the following criteria: (1) diabetes (17.9%); (2) previous myocardial infarction (21.9%); (3) previous coronary revascularization (25.8%); (4) chronic renal failure (3.5%); (5) left ventricular ejection fraction ≤30% (1.5%); and (6) age ≥75 years (17.3%). RESULTS: At the 3-year follow-up, the incidence of the composite endpoint target vessel failure (TVF) (13.2 vs. 7.5%; logrank p < 0.001) and 2 of its components - cardiac death (4.7 vs. 1.5%; logrank p < 0.001) and target vessel revascularization (7.3 vs. 4.7%; logrank p = 0.03) - was higher in high-risk (n = 957) versus low- to intermediate-risk patients (n = 854). Among high-risk patients, treatment with Resolute Integrity (n = 481) and Promus Element stents (n = 476) was similarly safe and efficacious (TVF: 13.3 vs. 13.1%; logrank p = 0.95; definite-or-probable stent thrombosis: 1.7 vs. 1.7%; logrank p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The newer-generation Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents showed similar results in terms of safety and efficacy for treating high-risk patients, who had significantly higher event rates than patients with low-to-intermediate risk.

Small-vessel treatment with contemporary newer-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in all-comers: Insights from 2-year DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of lesions in small vessels was associated with worse clinical outcome, and various definitions of "small vessels" have been used. Data with novel drug-eluting stents are scarce. METHODS: To compare the outcome of patients with vs without small-vessel treatment, we assessed 2-year follow-up data of the DUTCH PEERS randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01331707), in which 1,811 all-comers were treated with contemporary zotarolimus-eluting (Resolute Integrity) or everolimus-eluting (Promus Element) stents. Primary end point was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: The rates of TLF (9.5% vs 5.4%; P log rank = .001) and 2 individual components thereof-target vessel myocardial infarction (3.1% vs 1.3%; P log rank = .006) and target lesion revascularization (4.8% vs 2.8%; P log rank = .02)-were higher among 798 (44.1%) patients treated in at least one small vessel (<2.50 mm by quantitative coronary angiography). Multivariate analysis with propensity score adjustment demonstrated that treatment of small-vessel lesions independently predicted TLF at 2-year follow-up (hazard ratio 1.60, 95% CI 1.09-2.34). Patients with the smallest target vessel being <2.25 mm had TLF rates similar to patients with smallest target vessels of 2.25 to <2.50 mm; however, patients treated in vessels no smaller than 2.50 to <3.00 mm and patients treated in vessels ≥3.00 mm had lower TLF rates (9.3%, 9.8%, 5.0%, and 5.8%, respectively; P log rank = .009). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with novel drug-eluting stents in small-vessel lesions had higher adverse event rates than did patients who had no small-vessel treatment. Our data suggest that with current stents, a vessel diameter <2.50 mm is a suitable threshold to identify small target vessels.

Impact of severe lesion calcification on clinical outcome of patients with stable angina, treated with newer generation permanent polymer-coated drug-eluting stents: A patient-level pooled analysis from TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II).

BACKGROUND: The outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention with newer generation permanent polymer-coated drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with severely calcified lesions is greatly unknown. We assessed the impact of severe lesion calcification on clinical outcome in patients with stable angina who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with newer generation DES. METHODS: TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS randomized trials enrolled 1423 patients with stable angina, who were categorized into patients with versus without severe target lesion calcification. A patient-level pooled analysis assessed clinical outcome, including target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS: Patients with severe calcification (n = 342) were older (66.6 ± 9.1 vs 64.2 ± 9.8 years, P < .001) and had more diabetes (25.7% vs 20.4%, P = .04) than other patients (n = 1081). Patients with calcified lesions had higher rates of TVF (16.4% vs 9.8%, pLogrank = .001), cardiac death (4.4% vs 1.5%, P = .03), target vessel myocardial infarction (7.6% vs 3.4%, P = .001), and definite stent thrombosis (1.8% vs 0.4%, P = .02). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that severe calcification was an independent risk factor of 2-year TVF (HR 1.42, 95% CI: 1.02-1.99, pLogrank = .04); landmark analysis showed that this was based on a difference during the first year (periprocedural: 5.8% vs. 3.1%, pLogrank = .02; first year: 7.5% vs. 3.8%, pLogrank = .007; second year: 4.1% vs. 3.3%, pLogrank = .54). CONCLUSION: In patients with stable angina, severe target lesion calcification is associated with an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events following treatment with newer generation permanent polymer-coated DES. This increase in risk is restricted to the first year of follow-up, which is an encouraging finding.

Third-generation zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents in all-comer patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (DUTCH PEERS): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Third-generation, permanent-polymer-based drug-eluting stents with novel, flexible designs might be more easily delivered than previous generations of stents in complex coronary lesions, but might be less longitudinally stable. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy in all-comer patients of two third-generation stents that are often used clinically, but that have not yet been compared, and one of which has not previously been assessed in a randomised trial. METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomised, two-arm, non-inferiority trial, patients aged 18 years and older who required a percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of a drug-eluting stent were recruited from four study sites in the Netherlands. We randomly assigned patients by independently managed computer-generated allocation sequences in a 1:1 ratio to receive either cobalt-chromium-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (Resolute Integrity, Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) or platinum-chromium-based everolimus-eluting stents (Promus Element, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA). Patients and analysts were masked to the allocated stent, but treating clinicians were not. The primary endpoint of target-vessel failure was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target-vessel-related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (target-vessel revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat (with a non-inferiority margin of 3·6%). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01331707. FINDINGS: Between Nov 25, 2010, and May 24, 2012, 1811 eligible all-comer patients, with 2371 target lesions, were enrolled in the study. 370 (20%) patients presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction and 447 (25%) with non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction. 906 patients were assigned to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents and 905 to receive everolimus-eluting stents. Ease of stent delivery was shown by very low numbers of patients requiring treatment other than their assigned study treatment (six [1%] in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group vs five [1%] in the everolimus-eluting stent group; p=0·22). 12-month follow-up results were available for 1810 patients (one patient in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group withdrew consent). The primary endpoint was met by 55 (6%) of 905 patients in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and 47 (5%) of 905 in the everolimus-eluting stent group. The zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the everolimus-eluting stent (absolute risk difference 0·88%, 95% CI -1·24% to 3·01%; upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2·69%; non-inferiority p=0·006). We noted no significant between-group differences in individual components of the primary endpoint. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in three (0·3%) patients in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and six (0·7%) patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group (p=0·34). Longitudinal stent deformation was seen only in the everolimus-eluting stent group (nine [1·0%] of 905 vs 0 of 906, p=0·002; nine of 1591 [0·6%] everolimus-eluting stents implanted became deformed), but was not associated with any adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Both stents were similarly efficacious and safe, and provided excellent clinical outcomes, especially in view of the large number of patients who presented with acute myocardial infarctions. FUNDING: Boston Scientific, Medtronic.

Comparison of 3 biodegradable polymer and durable polymer-based drug-eluting stents in all-comers (BIO-RESORT): rationale and study design of the randomized TWENTE III multicenter trial.

AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of 2 novel drug-eluting stents (DES) with biodegradable polymer-based coatings versus a durable coating DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: BIO-RESORT is an investigator-initiated, prospective, patient-blinded, randomized multicenter trial in 3540 Dutch all-comers with various clinical syndromes, requiring percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with DES implantation. Randomization (stratified for diabetes mellitus) is being performed in a 1:1:1 ratio between ORSIRO sirolimus-eluting stent with circumferential biodegradable coating, SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stent with abluminal biodegradable coating, and RESOLUTE INTEGRITY zotarolimus-eluting stent with durable coating. The primary endpoint is the incidence of the composite endpoint target vessel failure at 1 year, consisting of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization. Power calculation assumes a target vessel failure rate of 8.5% with a 3.5% non-inferiority margin, giving the study a power of 85% (α level .025 adjusted for multiple testing). The impact of diabetes mellitus on post-PCI outcome will be evaluated. The first patient was enrolled on December 21, 2012. CONCLUSIONS: BIO-RESORT is a large, prospective, randomized, multicenter trial with three arms, comparing two DES with biodegradable coatings versus a reference DES with a durable coating in 3540 all-comers. The trial will provide novel insights into the clinical outcome of modern DES and will address the impact of known and so far undetected diabetes mellitus on post-PCI outcome.

Characteristics and Outcome in Cardiogenic Shock according to Vascular Access Site for PCI.

BACKGROUND: The optimal vascular access site for percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remains uncertain. While observational data favor transradial access (TRA) due to lower complication rates and mortality, transfemoral (TFA) PCI offers advantages such as shorter access and procedure times, along with quicker escalation to mechanical circulatory support (MCS). In this study, we aimed to investigate factors associated with a transfemoral approach and compare mortality rates between TRA and TFA in AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: Data from a nationwide registry of AMI-CS patients undergoing PCI (2017-2021) were analyzed. We compared patient demographics, procedural details, and outcomes between TRA and TFA groups. Logistic regression identified access site factors and radial-to-femoral cross-over predictors. Propensity score matched (PSM) analysis examined the impact of access site on mortality. RESULTS: Of 1562 patients, 45% underwent TRA PCI, with an increasing trend over time. TFA patients were more often female, had a history of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), lower blood pressure, higher resuscitation and intubation rates, and elevated lactate levels. After PSM, 30-day mortality was lower in TRA (33% vs. 46%, p <0.001). Predictors for cross-over included left coronary artery interventions, multivessel PCI, and MCS initiation. CONCLUSION: Significant differences exist between TRA and TFA PCI in AMI-CS. TFA was more common in patients with worse hemodynamics and was associated with higher 30-day mortality compared to TRA. This mortality difference persisted in the propensity score matched analysis.

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).