Search

Summary: Background: The DynamX™ bioadaptor is the first coronary implant technology with a unique mechanism of unlocking the bioadaptor frame after polymer resorption over 6 months, uncaging the vessel while maintaining a dynamic support to the vessel. It aims to achieve the acute performance of drug-eluting stents (DES) with the advantages of restoration of vessel function. Methods: This international, single blinded, randomised controlled (1:1) trial compared a sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with a contemporary zotarolimus-eluting stent (DES) in 34 hospitals in Europe, Japan and New Zealand. Patients with de novo coronary lesions and absence of acute myocardial infarction were enrolled from January 2021 to Feburary 2022. The implantation of the bioadaptor followed the standards of DES. An imaging subset of 100 patients had angiographic and intravascular ultrasound assessments, and 20 patients additionally optical coherence tomography. Data collection will continue through 5 years, we herein report 12-month data based on an intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04192747). Findings: 445 patients were randomised between January 2021 and February 2022. Device, lesion and procedural success rates, and acute gain were similar amongst the groups. The primary endpoint, 12-month target lesion failure, was 1.8% [95% CI: 0.5; 4.6] (n = 4) versus 2.8% [95% CI: 1.0; 6.0] (n = 6), pnon-inferiority < 0.001 for the bioadaptor and the DES, respectively (Δ-1.0% [95% CI: −3.3; 1.4]). One definite or probable device thrombosis occurred in each group. The 12-month imaging endpoints showed superior effectiveness of the bioadaptor such as in-device late lumen loss (0.09 mm [SD 0.34] versus 0.25 mm [SD 0.39], p = 0.04), and restored compliance and cyclic pulsatility (%mid in-device lumen area change of 7.5% versus 2.7%, p

Abstract The global coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with reduced rate of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, there were a few data showing how emergency medical system (EMS) and management strategies for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) changed during the pandemic. We sought to clarify changes on characteristics, treatments, and in-hospital mortality of patients with ACS transported via EMS between pre- and post-pandemic. We examined consecutive 656 patients with ACS admitted to Sapporo City ACS Network Hospitals between June 2018 and November 2021. The patients were divided into pre- and post-pandemic groups. The number of ACS hospitalizations declined significantly during the pandemic (proportional reduction 66%, coefficient −0.34, 95% CI −0.50 to −0.18, p

The frequency of radial artery occlusion was compared between patients receiving 4Fr versus 6Fr transradial coronary interventions (TRIs) in an open-label randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00815997). The primary outcome measure was radial artery occlusion on the day after TRI. The secondary outcome measures were the procedural success, major advanced cardiac events, access siteerelated complications, procedural times, fluoroscopy times, and contrast dye usage. A total of 160 patients were included. The procedure was successful in 79 of 80 patients (99%) in both groups. Whereas the 4Fr group showed no access siteerelated complications, the 6Fr developed 5 (6%), including 3 radial arteryocclusions and 2 bleedings (1 radial artery perforation and 1 massive hematoma; p = 0.02). Although the radial artery occlusion rate was lower in the 4Fr versus the 6Fr groups, the difference was not significant (0% vs 4%, p = 0.08). The mean hemostasis time was significantly shorter in the 4Fr than in the 6Fr groups (237 ± 105 vs 320 ± 238 minutes, p = 0.007). In conclusion, these findings suggest that 4Fr TRI may become a less invasive alternative to 6Fr TRI in treating coronary artery diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]