Search

Objectives To compare stent recoil (SR) of the thin-strut durable-polymer Zotarolimus-eluting stent (dp-ZES) and the ultrathin-strut bioabsorbable-polymer Sirolimus-eluting stent (bp-SES) in chronic total occlusions (CTOs) and to investigate the predictors of high SR in CTOs. Background Newer ultrathin drug eluting stent might be associated with lower radial force and higher elastic recoil due to the thinner strut design, possibly impacting on the rate of in-stent restenosis and thrombosis. Methods Between January 2017 and November 2019, consecutive patients with CTOs undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. Only patients treated with dp-ZES or bp-SES were included and stratified accordingly. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis was used to assess absolute SR, relative SR, absolute focal SR, relative focal SR, high absolute, and high relative focal SR. Results A total of 128 lesions (67 treated with dp-ZES and 61 with bp-SES) in 123 patients were analyzed. Between bp-SES and dp-ZES no differences were found in absolute SR (p = .188), relative SR (p = .138), absolute focal SR (p = .069), and relative focal SR (p = .064). High absolute and high relative focal SR occurred more frequently in bp-SES than in dp-ZES (p = .004 and p = .015). Bp-SES was a predictor of high absolute focal SR (Odds ratio [OR] 3.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50-7.22, p = .003]. High-pressure postdilation and bp-SES were predictors of high relative focal SR (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.01-4.86, p = .047; OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.24-6.02, p = .012, respectively). Conclusions Both stents showed an overall low SR. However, ultra-thin strut bp-SES was a predictor of high absolute and high relative focal SR.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the added value and predictive power of the TAVIguide (Added Value of Patient-Specific Computer Simulation in Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) software in clinical practice. BACKGROUND Optimal outcome after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may become more important as TAVR shifts toward low-risk patients. Patient-specific computer simulation is able to provide prediction of outcome after TAVR. Its clinical role and validation of accuracy, however, have not yet been studied prospectively. METHODS A prospective, observational, multicenter study was conducted among 80 patients with severe aortic stenosis treated with the Evolut R valve. Simulation was performed in 42 patients and no simulation in 38. A comparison between the valve size (decision 1) and target depth of implantation selected by the operator on the basis of multislice computed tomography and the valve size (decision 2) and target depth of implantation selected after simulation were the primary endpoints. Predictive power was examined by comparing the simulated and observed degree of aortic regurgitation. RESULTS Decision 2 differed from decision 1 in 1 of 42 patients because of predicted paravalvular leakage, and changes in valve type occurred in 2 of 42. In 39 of 42 patients, decisions 1 and 2 were similar. Target depth of implantation differed in 7 of 42 patients after simulation (lower in 4 and higher in 3). In 16 of 42 patients, simulation affected the TAVR procedure; in 9, the operator avoided additional measures to achieve the target depth of implantation, and in 7 patients, additional measures were performed. There was a trend toward a higher degree of predicted than observed aortic regurgitation (17.5 vs. 12 ml/s; p = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS Patient-specific computer simulation did not affect valve size selection but did affect the selection of the target depth of implantation and the execution of TAVR to achieve the desired target depth of implantation. (c) 2020 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.