Search

Background: Detailed long-term follow-up data on patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in general, and those with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in particular, are limited. We aimed to appraise the long-term outlook of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with state-of-the-art coronary stents for STEMI, other types of ACS and stable coronary artery disease (CAD), and also explore the potential beneficial impact of new-generation polymer-free drug-eluting stents (DES) in this setting., Methods: Baseline, procedural and very long-term outcome data on patients undergoing PCI and randomized to implantation of new-generation polymer-free vs. durable polymer DES were systematically collected, explicitly distinguishing subjects with admission diagnosis of STEMI, non-ST-elevation ACS (NSTEACS), and stable CAD. Outcomes of interest included death, myocardial infarction, revascularization (i.e. patient-oriented composite endpoints [POCE]), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and device-oriented composite endpoints (DOCE)., Results: A total of 3002 patients were included, 1770 (59.0%) with stable CAD, 921 (30.7%) with NSTEACS, and 311 (10.4%) with STEMI. At long-term follow-up (7.5±3.1 years), all clinical events were significantly more common in the NSTEACS group and, to a lesser extent, in the stable CAD group (e.g. POCE occurred in, respectively, 637 [44.7%] vs. 964 [37.9%] vs. 133 [31.5%], P<0.001). While these differences were largely attributable to adverse coexisting features in patients with NSTEACS (e.g. advanced age, insulin-dependent diabetes, and extent of CAD), the unfavorable outlook of patients presenting with NSTEACS persisted even after multivariable adjustment including several prognostically relevant factors (hazard ratio [HR] of NSTEACS vs. stable CAD 1.19 [95% confidence interval 1.03-1.38], P=0.016). Notably, even after encompassing all prognostically impactful features, no difference between polymer-free and permanent polymer drug-eluting stents appeared (HR=0.96 [0.84-1.10], P=0.560)., Conclusions: Unstable coronary artery disease, especially when presenting without ST-elevation, represents an informative marker of adverse long-term prognosis in current state-of-the-art invasive cardiology practice. Even considering admission diagnosis, and despite of using no polymer, polymer-free DES showed similar results with regards to safety and efficacy when compared with DES with permanent polymer.

Background: In-stent restenosis (ISR) is responsible for a rapid decline of vessel patency after stenting. To date, little is known about the role of in-stent neoatherosclerosis (NA) in stent failure in lower limb arteries., Aims: This study aimed to determine the prevalence and patterns of in-stent NA in patients with symptomatic ISR of the lower extremity vasculature using intravascular optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging., Methods: Patients underwent endovascular revascularisation for ISR including angiography and OCT imaging. NA was defined as the presence of at least 1 fibroatheroma or fibrocalcific plaque within the neointima of a stented segment., Results: Using OCT, we imaged 24 symptomatic patients with lower extremity artery disease (LEAD), with a total of 30 ISR in the lower limbs, prior to their scheduled endovascular interventions. NA formation was observed in 23 (76.7%) lesions, while all stents with an implant duration >5 years (n=8) showed signs of NA. The time from stent implantation to OCT was significantly increased in lesions with NA (p=0.002). Lesions without NA had a significantly shorter duration from index procedure to OCT than those with ≥50 percent (n=9; p=0.003) or <50 percent (n=14; p=0.015) of frames exhibiting signs of NA. NA was predominantly characterised by fibroatheroma with thick fibrous caps with or without calcification., Conclusions: In-stent NA is frequently identified by OCT imaging after endovascular therapy in lower limb arteries; this increased both in frequency and extent the longer the duration since implantation. Our findings indicate an active atherosclerotic process that may need tailored mitigation strategies.

Aims: To define the incidence of events related to the stented vessel (target vessel related events: TVRE) and events related to non-stented vessels (non-target vessel related events: NTVRE) through to 10-year follow-up in patients post-PCI with newer generation drug eluting stents (DES)., Methods and Results: The current study is a post-hoc analysis of patient level data from two randomised controlled trials in Germany. Patients older than 18 years with ischemic symptoms or evidence of myocardial ischemia in the presence of ≥ 50% de novo stenosis located in the native coronary vessels were considered eligible. The endpoints of interest were TVRE (a composite of first target vessel myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization) and NTVRE (a composite of first non-target vessel MI or non-target vessel revascularization) through to 10 years post PCI. We included 4953 patients in this analysis. Through to 10-years post-PCI, TVRE occurred in 1238 of 4953 patients (cumulative incidence: 25.8%) and NTVRE occurred in 1442 of 4953 patients (cumulative incidence: 30.3%). The majority of TVRE and NTVRE were revascularization events. From 0 to 1 years, the cumulative incidence of TVRE was 15.9% and of NTVRE was 12.3%. From 1 to 10 years, the cumulative incidences of TVRE and NTVRE were 11.2% and 22.4%, respectively., Conclusion: At 10-year post-PCI with new generation drug eluting stents, events related to remote vessel disease progression account for a higher proportion of events than events related to the stented vessel., Trial Registration: ISAR TEST 4 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00598676. ISAR TEST 5 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00598533., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objectives: This study aimed to compare 10-year clinical outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with new-generation biodegradable-polymer (BP-DES), polymer-free (PF-DES), and permanent-polymer drug-eluting stents (PPDES)., Methods: We analyzed 10-year clinical outcomes for 2042 patients with ACS enrolled in the ISAR-TEST 4 and ISAR-TEST 5 randomized controlled trials. Patients were divided into 3 groups: new-generation PP-DES, BP-DES, and PF-DES. Endpoints of interest included a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) and a patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) at 10 years., Results: BP-DES as compared with PP-DES demonstrated a lower DOCE frequency, but this did not meet statistical significance (BP-DES vs PP-DES, 35.4% vs 41.5%, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR), 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-1.00; P=.05). There was a significantly lower POCE frequency in patients treated with BP-DES compared with PP-DES (65.3% vs 69.0%, respectively; HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99; P=.04). The relative frequency of the DOCE (41.4% vs 41.5%; HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.83-1.15; P=.76) and the POCE (66.8% vs 69.0%; HR, 0.99; 0.87-1.12; P=.82) were comparable in patients treated with PF-DES and PP-DES., Conclusion: In patients with ACS, BP-DES were associated with a lower relative frequency of a POCE compared with new-generation PP-DES at 10 years. The relative frequencies of both device- and patient-related outcomes were comparable in patients treated with PF-DES and PP-DES at 10 years.

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of drug eluting stent (DES) overlap on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Background: While the use of overlapping bare metal stent has been associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events, the long-term impact of DES overlap on clinical outcomes is not certain at present. Similarly, the effect of different DES generations and polymer types on DES overlap associated clinical outcomes has not previously been comprehensively elucidated., Methods: We analyzed the angiographic and clinical outcomes of 5605 patients treated with DES in the setting of the ISAR-TEST 4 and ISAR-TEST 5 randomized control trials according to the presence or absence of stent overlap. The clinical endpoints assessed in this study were all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and definite or probable stent thrombosis at 10-years. We also compared rates of binary angiographic restenosis (BAR) at 6-8 months., Results: At 10 years, all-cause mortality (Hazard ratios [HR] = 1.05 [0.95-1.16]; p = 0.348) did not differ between the stent overlap and no stent overlap groups. MI (8.4% vs. 5.2%; HR = 1.67 [1.35-2.07], p < 0.001) and TLR (23.7% vs. 16.3%; HR = 1.54 [1.36-1.74], p < 0.001) occurred more frequently in the stent overlap group. For MI, landmark analysis demonstrated that this increase in risk was primarily in the first 30 days post PCI. BAR at 6-8 months was also more frequent in the stent overlap group (16.0% vs. 10.3%; HR = 1.65 [1.41-1.92], p < 0.001)., Conclusion: DES overlap is associated with an increased risk of adverse clinical events post PCI., (© 2021 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Very long-term outcomes according to diabetic status of patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are scant. Both, the durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent (DP-ZES), the first DES to gain FDA-approval for specific use in patients with diabetes mellitus, and the polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent (PF-SES), with a unique design that enables effective drug release without the need of a polymer offer the potential to enhance clinical long-term outcomes especially in patients with diabetes mellitus., Methods: We investigate 10-year clinical outcomes of the prespecified subgroups of patients with and without diabetes mellitus, randomly assigned to treatment with PF-SES versus DP-ZES in the ISAR-TEST 5 trial. The primary endpoint of interest was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction or any revascularization. Further endpoints of interest were cardiac death, myocardial infarction related to the target vessel and target lesion revascularization as well as the individual components of the primary composite endpoint and the incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis at 10 years., Results: This analysis includes a total of 3002 patients randomly assigned to PF-SES (n = 2002) or DP-ZES (n = 1000). Prevalence of diabetes mellitus was high and comparable, 575 Patients (28.7%) in PF-SES group and 295 patients (29.5%) in DP-ZES group (P = 0.66). At 10 years 53.5% of patients with diabetes mellitus and 68.5% of patients without diabetes mellitus were alive. Regarding major adverse cardiac events, PF-SES as compared to DP-ZES showed comparable event rates in patients with diabetes mellitus (74.8% vs. 79.6%; hazard ratio 0.86; 95% CI 0.73-1.02; P = 0.08) and in patients without diabetes (PF-SES 62.5% vs. DP-ZES 62.2%; hazard ratio 0.99; 95% CI 0.88-1.11; P = 0.88)., Conclusion: At 10 years, both new-generation DES show comparable clinical outcome irrespective of diabetic status or polymer strategy. Event rates after PCI in patients with diabetes mellitus are considerable higher than in patients without diabetes mellitus and continue to accrue over time., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00598533, Registered 10 January 2008, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00598533?term=NCT00598533 Kaplan-Meier estimates of endpoints of interest for patients with vs. without diabetes mellitus treated with PF-SES vs. DP-ZES. Bar graphs: Kaplan-Meier estimates as percentages. PF-SES: polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent; DP-ZES: durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent; DM: diabetes mellitus. Comparison of event rates of individual endpoints in patients with and without diabetes mellitus treated with PF-SES vs. DP-ZES all without statistically significant differences. Comparison of event rates of individual endpoints in overall patients with vs. without diabetes mellitus significantly different (P ≤ 0.01 for all comparisons)., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Introduction and Objectives: Long-term outcomes of unselected patients treated with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation are lacking, especially for the period after complete dissolution of the BVS. This study sought to evaluate 5-year outcomes in patients treated with BVS in routine practice., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent implantation of everolimus-eluting BVS during routine clinical practice at 2 high-volume centres in Germany were studied. The patients were followed-up for up to 5 years. The primary endpoints of interest were the composite of death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization, as well as definite scaffold thrombosis., Results: A total of 419 patients (mean age 66.6 ± 10.9 years; 31.5% had diabetes) were included, of whom 38.9% presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Of the 527 lesions treated, 49.0% were classified as complex and 13.1% were bifurcation lesions. At 5 years, the composite clinical endpoint occurred in 33.1% of patients and definite scaffold thrombosis occurred in 4.7%. Most definite scaffold thrombosis occurred within 2 years after BVS implantation., Conclusions: In patients treated with BVS implantation in routine clinical practice the rates of adverse clinical events at 5 years were high, including a considerable incidence of scaffold thrombosis., (Copyright © 2020 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background Extended long-term follow-up data of new-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus is scant. The aim of this study is to assess the 10-year clinical outcome of new-generation biodegradable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer-based everolimus-eluting stents (XIENCE) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results In a prespecified subgroup analysis, outcomes of patients with or without diabetes mellitus treated with drug-eluting stents were compared. The primary end point of this analysis was major adverse cardiac event, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. The analysis includes a total of 1951 patients (560 patients with and 1391 patients without diabetes mellitus) randomized to treatment with Yukon Choice PC (n=1299) or Xience (n=652). Regarding the primary end point, at 10 years patients with diabetes mellitus showed significantly higher major adverse cardiac event rates than patients without diabetes mellitus ( P <0.001; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.22-1.63). There was no significant difference between patients treated with Yukon Choice PC versus Xience, neither in the subgroup of patients with ( P =0.91; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30) nor without diabetes mellitus ( P =0.50; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79-1.21). Rates of definite/probable stent thrombosis were 2.3% in patients with and 1.9% in patients without diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.34-2.60; P =0.52), without significant differences between study devices. Conclusions The clinical outcome of patients with diabetes after percutaneous coronary intervention with different new-generation drug-eluting stents is considerably worse than that of patients without diabetes mellitus, with event rates constantly increasing out to 10 years. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique Identifier: NCT00598676.

Background: Outcome data after extended long-term follow-up of patients with coronary artery disease treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) in randomized clinical trials are scant., Objectives: Performance differences among devices may be expected to emerge over time depending on whether stenting is done with polymer-free or durable polymer DES. This study assessed the 10-year outcomes of patients enrolled in the ISAR-TEST-5 (Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents) trial., Methods: A total of 3,002 patients were randomized to treatment with either polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents (n = 2,002) or durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (n = 1,000). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (a device-oriented composite endpoint [DOCE]). Additional endpoints of interest were the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), including all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization; individual components of the composite endpoints; and definite or probable stent thrombosis., Results: The median age of the patients at randomization was 67.8 years. At 10 years, 63.9% of patients were alive. The rates of DOCE and POCE were high in both groups with no difference in the incidence between polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents and durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DOCE: 43.8% vs. 43.0%, respectively; hazard ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89 to 1.14; p = 0.90; POCE: 66.2% vs. 67.7%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.04; p = 0.22). The rates of the individual components of the composite endpoints were comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis over 10 years was low and comparable in both groups (1.6% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.54; p = 0.58)., Conclusions: At 10 years, there were no measurable differences in outcomes between patients treated with polymer-free versus durable polymer DES. The incidence of stent thrombosis was low and comparable in both groups. High overall adverse clinical event rates were observed during extended follow-up. (Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents [ISAR-TEST-5]; NCT00598533)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction and Objectives: Outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous intervention for drug-eluting stent (DES) restenosis are poorer than those in patients with bare-metal stent restenosis. It is unknown if this is related to the presence of polymer coating. We sought to compare outcomes after interventions for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of polymer-free DES vs durable polymer DES., Methods: Patients enrolled in the ISAR-TEST 5 randomized trial who underwent repeat percutaneous intervention for ISR during follow-up were included. Angiographic outcomes at 6 to 8 months and clinical outcomes at 2 years were analyzed and compared between 2 groups according to whether the restenosed stent was a polymer-free or a durable polymer DES. Multivariate analysis was used to adjust for differences between groups., Results: A total of 326 patients with ISR were included: 220 with ISR in polymer-free DES and 106 with ISR in durable polymer DES. Angiographic follow-up was available for 83.4% of patients. No difference was observed in recurrent binary restenosis between the 2 groups (31.7% vs 27.0%; P=.38; P adjusted =.29). At 2 years, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat target lesion revascularization were similar between the 2 groups (35.7% vs 34.0%; HR=1.04, 95%CI, 0.70-1.55; P=.83; P adjusted =.79). The rate of repeat target lesion revascularization was also similar in the 2 groups (29.8% vs 31.5%; HR=0.91, 95%CI, 0.60-1.39; P=.68; P adjusted =.62)., Conclusions: In patients undergoing reintervention for DES-ISR, we found no evidence of differences in outcomes according to whether the restenosed stent was a polymer-free or durable polymer DES., (Copyright © 2019 Sociedad Española de Cardiología. Published by Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: New-generation drug-eluting stents offer the potential for enhanced late outcomes in comparison with early generation drug-eluting stents. However, assessment of extended long-term outcomes for these devices is lacking, especially regarding the comparison between new-generation drug-eluting stents with biodegradable or permanent polymers. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES; Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer-based everolimus-eluting stents (PP-EES; Xience) versus early generation permanent polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (PP-SES; Cypher) at 10-year follow-up., Methods: Overall, 2603 patients were randomized to treatment with BP-SES (n=1299), PP-EES (n=652), or PP-SES (n=652). The primary end point of this analysis was major adverse cardiac event, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. The main secondary end point of interest was definite/probable stent thrombosis. Follow-up at 10 years was available in 83% of the study patients., Results: The 10-year incidence of major adverse cardiac event (BP-SES 47.7% versus PP-EES 46.0% versus PP-SES 54.9%, P=0.003) and mortality (BP-SES 31.8% versus PP-EES 30.3% versus PP-SES 37.2%, P=0.02) was different among the groups. Definite/probable stent thrombosis was not significantly different among the groups (BP-SES 1.8% versus PP-EES 2.5% versus PP-SES 3.7%, P=0.09). Definite stent thrombosis was significantly different among the groups (BP-SES 1.1% versus PP-EES 0.8% versus PP-SES 2.4%, P=0.03). There were no significant differences between BP-SES and PP-EES., Conclusions: In this unique long-term outcome analysis, BP-SES and PP-EES showed comparable clinical outcomes out to 10 years. PP-SES had higher rates of major adverse cardiac events and definite stent thrombosis., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00598676.

Background: In the ISAR-CABG (Is Drug-Eluting-Stenting Associated with Improved Results in Coronary Artery Bypass Grafts?) trial, clinical outcomes at 1 year in patients undergoing treatment of saphenous vein graft lesions were superior with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents., Objectives: The authors compared outcomes between treatment groups at 5 years., Methods: Patients were randomized (1:1:1:3) to receive DES (either permanent-polymer paclitaxel-eluting stents, permanent-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, or biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents) or bare-metal stents. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary endpoints were the composite of death or MI and TLR., Results: A total of 610 patients were allocated to treatment with DES (n = 303) or bare-metal stents (n = 307). At 5 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 159 (55.5%) versus 157 (53.6%) patients in the DES and bare-metal stent groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 1.23; p = 0.89). There was interaction between treatment effect and time (p interaction  = 0.005), with a lower event rate in the DES group at 1 year (HR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.44 to 0.94; p = 0.02) but a numerically higher rate between 1 and 5 years (HR: 1.24; 95% CI: 0.94 to 1.63; p = 0.13). Death or MI occurred in 93 (32.8%) versus 108 (36.6%) patients, respectively (HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.12; p = 0.24), without significant interaction between treatment effect and time (p interaction  = 0.57). TLR occurred in 84 (33.1%) versus 69 (25.5%) patients in the DES and bare-metal stent groups, respectively (HR: 1.20; 95% CI: 0.87 to 1.64; p = 0.27). There was interaction between treatment effect and time (p interaction  <0.001): TLR was significantly lower in the DES group at 1 year (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.86; p = 0.01) but significantly higher thereafter (HR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.32 to 3.08; p = 0.001)., Conclusions: In patients undergoing treatment of saphenous vein graft lesions, the advantage of DES over bare-metal stents demonstrated at 1 year was lost at 5 years due to higher attrition of efficacy in the DES group. (Efficacy Study of Drug-Eluting and Bare Metal Stents in Bypass Graft Lesions [ISAR-CABG]; NCT00611910)., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer coatings have shown promising outcomes in randomised studies., Methods: We compared neointimal healing patterns including strut coverage and assessed neointimal maturity using a novel algorithm in coronary lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer coating (BP-SES) or everolimus eluting stents with permanent polymer coating (PP-EES) using optical coherence tomography after 6months., Results: A total of 39 patients were randomised to BP-SES (n=19) or PP-EES (n=20) for the treatment of coronary lesions. Of those, 29 patients (14 BP-SES and 15 PP-EES) underwent optical coherence tomography (OCT) and angiography at 6-month follow-up. Tissue coverage and apposition were assessed in a total of 6162 struts (BP-SES, n=2889; PP-EES, n=3273). Neointimal maturity was assessed in 3672 neointimal regions above struts using grey scale intensity analysis. OCT analysis showed neointimal coverage of 2433 (BP-SES) vs. 2702 (PP-EES) struts (84.2% vs. 82.6%, p=0.70), whereas the remainder was uncovered after 6months. Mean neointimal thickness did not differ significantly between groups (54.3±7.8μm vs. 80±14.6μm, p=0.12). The rate of malapposed struts was comparable between groups (1.3% vs. 2.2%, p=0.27). Grey scale signal intensity analysis showed mature tissue coverage of struts in 46.2% in BP-SES vs. 31.8% in PP-EES (p=0.31) of neointimal regions., Conclusion: The present study showed comparable early vascular healing response characterised by neointimal coverage with mainly immature neointima in both BP-SES and PP-EES., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCB) is recommended for treatment of patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) according to European clinical practice guidelines. Most clinical trials have investigated iopromide-based PCB and there is a paucity of data comparing efficacy against butyryl-tri-hexyl citrate (BTHC)-based PCB. Our aim was to compare the performance of two widely-used PCB in the treatment of coronary ISR., Methods: We analysed patients treated with BTHC- or iopromide-PCB for treatment of drug-eluting stent ISR in the setting of 2 consecutive trials with identical inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was diameter stenosis at 6-8month angiographic surveillance. The secondary endpoint of interest was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI) or target-lesion revascularisation (TLR) at 1year. Multivariate analysis was performed to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between groups., Results: In total, 264 patients were treated with BTHC-PCB (n=127) or iopromide-PCB (n=137). Baseline patient characteristics were similar for both groups. Post-procedure stenosis was slightly larger with BTHC-PCB (22.3 [SD 8.2]% vs. 18.4 [SD 9.9]%, P=0.001). At 6-8month angiography, diameter stenosis was 40.4 [SD 21.9]% vs. 37.4 [SD 21.4]% in the BTHC-PCB and iopromide-PCB groups, respectively (P=0.16, P adjusted =0.32). At 1year, death, MI or TLR occurred in 29 (23.2%) vs. 32 (23.4%) patients in the BTHC-PCB and iopromide-PCB groups, respectively (HR 1.03 [95% CI 0.62-1.70], P=0.91, P adjusted =0.96)., Conclusions: In patients undergoing intervention for ISR, angioplasty with BTHC-PCB showed similar angiographic and clinical results at 1year compared with iopromide-PCB., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The success of drug-coated balloon therapy might be compromised by intraprocedural particulate embolisation of matrix coating, which may cause downstream microvascular obstruction. We aimed to investigate whether drug-coated balloon therapy was associated with an increase in markers of myocardial necrosis compared with drug-eluting stents or plain balloon angioplasty., Methods and Results: In the ISAR-DESIRE-3 trial, patients with limus-eluting stent restenosis were randomised to treatment with a paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB), paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) or balloon angioplasty. We included enrolled patients who had pre- and post-intervention high-sensitivity troponin (hs-TnT) levels available. The delta (peak post-procedure minus baseline) troponin was compared between treatment arms. The association between delta troponin tertiles and three-year mortality was also evaluated. Three hundred and forty-three (343) patients were included, comprising patients treated with PCB (n=115), PES (n=112) and balloon angioplasty (n=116). Groups were well matched in terms of baseline characteristics. There was no difference in delta troponin in patients treated with PCB, PES and balloon angioplasty (36±65, 70±183, and 51±124 ng/L, respectively, p=0.16). Three-year mortality was 7.7%, 8.8% and 14.3% for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd tertiles of delta troponin, respectively, p=0.23., Conclusions: In patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis, there was no difference in subclinical myocardial necrosis among patients treated with PCB, PES, and balloon angioplasty.

The DAPT score is a recently-proposed decision tool for guiding optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). It showed modest accuracy in prior derivation and validation cohorts of patients with ≥12 months DAPT. This study was aimed to evaluate the validity of the DAPT score in a cohort of patients with 6 or 12 months DAPT after implantation of predominantly second-generation drug-eluting stents. We analyzed data of patients enrolled in the ISAR-SAFE trial. Patients were classified into low (<2) or high (≥2) DAPT score groups. Primary ischaemic (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis or stroke) and bleeding (TIMI major or minor) outcomes were analyzed in the low and high DAPT score groups. Data of 3976 patients were available for DAPT score calculation. 2407 patients (60.5 %) were classified in the low DAPT score group and 1569 patients (39.5 %) in the high DAPT score group. In the low DAPT score group there were no significant differences between 6 and 12 months DAPT regarding ischaemic (1.0 % vs. 1.4 %, HR=0.74, 95 % CI, 0.35-1.57; p=0.43) or bleeding outcomes (0.3 % vs. 0.8 %, HR=0.44, 95 % CI, 0.13-1.42; p=0.17). In the high DAPT score group there were also no significant differences between 6 and 12 months DAPT regarding ischaemic (1.9 % vs. 1.8 %, HR=1.02, 95 % CI, 0.49-2.14; p=0.96) or bleeding (0.3 % vs. 0.5 %, HR=0.51, 95 % CI, 0.09-2.78; p=0.44) outcomes. In conclusion, the DAPT score failed to show a differential treatment effect in patients receiving 6 or 12 months DAPT after contemporary drug-eluting stent implantation.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare neointimal modification with scoring balloon pre-dilation before drug-coated balloon (DCB) versus DCB standard therapy in patients presenting with drug-eluting stent (DES) restenosis., Background: DCB angioplasty for the treatment of coronary drug-eluting stent restenosis has demonstrated encouraging results. The efficacy of DCB treatment relies on rapid initial drug transfer and tissue retention of the antiproliferative drug. Neointimal modification with scoring balloon pre-dilation may enhance the efficacy of DCB therapy., Methods: In this randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial, 252 patients with clinically significant DES restenosis were enrolled at 4 centers in Germany. Patients undergoing DCB angioplasty were randomly assigned to treatment with scoring balloon pre-dilation or standard therapy. The primary endpoint of the study was in-segment percentage diameter stenosis on 6- to 8-month follow-up angiography. The secondary endpoints included binary angiographic restenosis and late lumen loss on follow-up angiography, the combined incidence of death or myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and target lesion thrombosis at 1 year., Results: Follow-up angiographic data at 6 to 8 months were available for 203 patients (80.6%). Scoring balloon pre-dilation compared with standard therapy showed significantly lower rates with respect to the primary endpoint (35.0 ± 16.8% vs. 40.4 ± 21.4%; p = 0.047) and binary angiographic restenosis (18.5% vs. 32.0%; p = 0.026). Late lumen loss was numerically lower after scoring balloon pre-dilation compared with standard therapy (0.31 ± 59 mm vs. 0.41 ± 0.74 mm; p = 0.27). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of death or myocardial infarction (4.0% vs. 3.4%; p = 0.73). Scoring balloon versus standard therapy showed comparable rates of target lesion revascularization (16.2% vs. 21.8%; p = 0.26). No target lesion thrombosis occurred out to 1 year., Conclusions: In patients presenting with drug-eluting stent restenosis, neointimal modification with scoring balloon improves the antirestenotic efficacy of DCB therapy. (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Optimizing Treatment of Drug Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis 4 [ISAR-DESIRE 4]; NCT01632371)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atherosclerosis in the superficial femoral artery is common in patients suffering from peripheral artery disease. Paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB) angioplasty, stenting, and directional atherectomy (DA) have provided new options for the treatment of superficial femoral artery disease; however, the comparative efficacy of these interventional strategies remains uncertain., Methods: One hundred and fifty-five patients with symptomatic peripheral artery disease due to de novo superficial femoral artery stenotic or occlusive lesions were randomized to treatment with plain balloon angioplasty (BA) followed by PEB angioplasty and stenting (n=48), BA and stenting (n=52), or DA with distal protection and bailout stenting (n=55). The primary end point of the study was percentage diameter stenosis after 6 months measured by angiography. Other end points included target lesion revascularization, thrombosis, ipsilateral amputation, binary restenosis, and all-cause mortality at 6 and 24 months., Results: Baseline and lesion characteristics were comparable in all groups with a mean lesion length of 65.9±46.8 mm and 56% total occlusions. At 6 months angiography, the percent diameter stenosis was significantly lower in patients treated by PEB angioplasty and stenting (34±31%) as compared with BA angioplasty and stenting (56±29%, P =0.009) or DA (55±29%, P =0.007). Similarly, binary restenosis was significantly lower after treatment with PEB and stenting as compared with BA and stenting or DA. Clinical follow-up at 24 months revealed a lower risk for target lesion revascularization after PEB angioplasty and stenting as compared with BA and stenting or DA. We found no difference in terms of target lesion thrombosis and mortality among groups, and no patient underwent amputation., Conclusions: Treatment of de novo superficial femoral artery lesions with PEB angioplasty and stenting is superior to BA angioplasty and stenting or DA in terms of angiographic diameter stenosis at 6 months and target lesion revascularization at 24 months., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00986752., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the impact of drug-eluting stents (DES) compared to bare metal stents (BMS) for the endovascular treatment of atherosclerotic renal artery stenosis (ARAS)., Methods and Results: We retrospectively evaluated all of our endovascular BMS and DES implantations performed in de novo ARAS between 2000 and 2014 at our institution. The occurrence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) detected by ultrasound or angiography, kidney function, blood pressure (BP), and the number of antihypertensive drugs were analysed as endpoints. Overall, 338 renal arteries were treated in 298 patients. BMS were implanted in 163 (48%), and DES in 175 lesions (52%). Of the 175 lesions treated with DES, 55 (31%) were treated with a BMS-in-DES hybrid technique. For reasons of comparability, only lesions treated with balloon sizes of 4-6.5 mm were included in the final analysis. After 12 months, the rate of ISR >50% was 18.6% in the BMS group and 7.2% in the DES group (p=0.031). None of the BMS-in-DES-treated (hybrid) lesions developed ISR (hybrid technique vs. BMS only p=0.008, hybrid technique vs. DES only p=0.034). Systolic BP and number of antihypertensive drugs remained unchanged in the BMS group but declined in the DES group (p=0.02). Renal function significantly deteriorated in the BMS group (p=0.03) but did not change significantly in the DES group (p=0.188)., Conclusions: DES were superior to BMS in preventing ISR. Overall, the BMS-in-DES-technique (hybrid) achieved the lowest risk for ISR.

Background: Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation are at increased risk of late adverse events, partly explained by an exaggerated inflammatory reaction to durable-polymer stent coatings., Objectives: We sought to investigate whether implantation of polymer-free DES would reduce this risk., Methods: In the ISAR-TEST 5 (the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents) trial, patients were randomly allocated to receive a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent or a new generation durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent. We analyzed late clinical outcomes in the subgroup of patients presenting with STEMI. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization at 5 years., Results: 311 patients with STEMI were randomized to receive sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents (n = 215) or zotarolimus-eluting stents (n = 96). At 5 years, there was no difference in the incidence of the primary endpoint in patients treated with sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents (18.3% versus 20.1% respectively, hazard ratio = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.50-1.51; P = 0.62). Rates of the individual components of the primary endpoint were also comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis was 1.4% versus 1.0% respectively (hazard ratio = 1.35, 95% CI, 0.14-12.94, P = 0.80)., Conclusions: Long-term outcomes of patients with STEMI treated with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents were similar. Stent thrombosis rates were low and comparable in both treatment groups, with no events beyond 12 months., Clinical Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT 00598533) © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Objectives: To evaluate the long-term prognostic value of risk scores in the setting of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for uLMCA., Background: Data on the prognostic value of novel risk scores developed to select the most appropriate revascularization strategy in patients undergoing DES implantation for uLMCA disease are relatively limited., Methods: The study represents a patient-level pooled analysis of the ISAR-LEFT-MAIN (607 patients randomized to paclitaxel-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents) and the ISAR-LEFT-MAIN-2 (650 patients randomized to everolimus-eluting or zotarolimus-eluting stents) randomized trials. The Syntax Score (SxScore) as well the Syntax Score II (SS-II), the EuroSCORE and the Global Risk Classification (GRC) were calculated. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality., Results: At a mean follow-up of 3 years there were 160 deaths (12.7%). The death-incidence was significantly higher in the upper tertiles than in the intermediate or lower ones for all risk scores (log-rank test P < 0.01 for all comparisons). The discriminatory power of a multivariable model for prediction of 3-year mortality was significantly improved after the inclusion of EuroSCORE (adjusted area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve = 0.779, 95% confidence interval 0.747 to 0.810, P = 0.008), but not after the inclusion of SxScore, SS II, or GRC., Conclusions: In patients undergoing DES implantation for uLMCA disease, all evaluated risk scores were able to stratify the mortality risk at long-term follow-up. EuroSCORE was the only risk score that significantly improved the discriminatory power of a multivariable model to predict long-term mortality. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) the optimal duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains unclear. At 6 months after intervention, patients receiving clopidogrel were randomly assigned to either a further 6-month period of placebo or clopidogrel. The primary composite endpoint was death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or major bleeding 9 months after randomization. The ISAR-SAFE trial was terminated early due to low event rates and slow recruitment. 1601/4000 (40.0%) patients presented with ACS and were randomized to 6 (n = 794) or 12 months (n = 807) clopidogrel. The primary endpoint occurred in 14 patients (1.8%) receiving 6 months of clopidogrel and 17 patients (2.2%) receiving 12 months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-1.68, P = 0.60. There were 2 (0.3%) cases of stent thrombosis in each group; HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.09, P = >0.99. Major bleeding occurred in 3 patients (0.4%) receiving 6 months clopidogrel and 5 (0.6%) receiving 12 months; HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.15-2.49, P = 0.49. There was no significant difference in net clinical outcomes after DES implantation in ACS patients treated with 6 versus 12 months clopidogrel. Ischaemic and bleeding events were low beyond 6-months.

Background: Improved outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remain an unmet clinical need. We assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of novel polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent in diabetic patients enrolled in intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: test efficacy of sirolimus- and probucol-eluting versus zotarolimus-eluting stents 5 trial., Methods: In a pre-specified subgroup analysis, outcomes of diabetic patients treated with a sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent or a second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent were compared. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite outcome comprising cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 5-year follow-up. Event-free survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard ratios (HR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were estimated from univariate Cox proportional hazards models., Results: A total of 870 patients with diabetes mellitus were treated with either a sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent (n = 575) or a second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent (n = 295). At 5 years, the rate of device-oriented composite endpoint was comparable between the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and the second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent (32.9 versus 33.4 %, HR 0.88, 95 % CI 0.76-1.26). No significant differences were observed between the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and the second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent groups in the incidence of cardiac death (15.6 versus 16.7 % HR 0.92, 95 % CI 0.63-1.32), target-vessel MI (4.6 versus 6.6 %, HR 0.73, 95 % CI 0.40-1.34), and TLR (18.6 versus 18.8 %, HR 1.00, 95 % CI, 0.72-1.41). The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis was low and similar in both groups (2.5 versus 2.6 %, HR 1.02, 95 % CI, 0.41-2.52)., Conclusions: In patients with diabetes the long-term efficacy and safety of a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent were comparable to a second-generation durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00598533. Registered 10 January 2008.

Background: In percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) has reduced adverse events in comparison to early-generation DES. The aim of the current study was to investigate the long-term clinical efficacy and safety of new-generation DES versus early-generation DES for PCI of unprotected left main coronary artery (uLMCA) disease., Methods: The patient-level data from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 randomized trials were pooled. The clinical outcomes of PCI patients assigned to new-generation DES (everolimus- or zotarolimus-eluting stent) versus early-generation DES (paclitaxel- or sirolimus-eluting stent) were studied. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization and stroke (MACCE, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event)., Results: In total, 1257 patients were available. At 3 years, the risk of MACCE was comparable between patients assigned to new-generation DES or early-generation DES (28.2 versus 27.5 %, hazard ratio-HR 1.03, 95 % confidence intervals-CI 0.83-1.26; P = 0.86). Definite/probable stent thrombosis was low and comparable between new-generation DES and early-generation DES (0.8 versus 1.6 %, HR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.18-1.57; P = 0.25); in patients treated with new-generation DES no cases occurred beyond 30 days. Diabetes increased the risk of MACCE in patients treated with new-generation DES but not with early-generation DES (P interaction = 0.004)., Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, a PCI with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease shows comparable efficacy to early-generation DES. Rates of stent thrombosis were low in both groups. Diabetes significantly impacts the risk of MACCE at 3 years in patients treated with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00133237; NCT00598637.

Aims: We sought to evaluate the impact of stent size on angiographic and clinical outcomes after implantation of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stents (BRS) in routine clinical practice., Methods and Results: All consecutive patients undergoing BRS implantation at two centres in Munich, Germany, were included prospectively. The patient population was divided according to the diameter of the implanted BRS. Angiographic surveillance was scheduled at six to eight months after stent implantation and films were analysed in a core laboratory. A BRS with 2.5 mm diameter was implanted in 101 patients and BRS >2.5 mm diameter in 318. Baseline patient characteristics were similar in both groups. Reference vessel diameter was 2.36±0.22 mm in patients with an implanted 2.5 mm BRS and 3.03±0.40 mm in the other group (p<0.001). At angiographic follow-up, in-stent late luminal loss (0.28±0.47 mm vs. 0.25±0.52 mm, p=0.74) was similar in both groups, though binary angiographic restenosis was numerically higher in patients treated with a 2.5 mm BRS (12.5% vs. 6.1%, p=0.05). After 12 months, the rate of the composite of death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularisation was 15.7% vs. 12.3% (p=0.49). Definite stent thrombosis was detected in 1.0% vs. 3.1% (p=0.31)., Conclusions: In patients treated with BRS in routine clinical practice, angiographic and clinical outcomes were comparable in patients treated with a 2.5 mm stent as compared with those treated with a larger stent size.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the late clinical performance of a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent compared with a new-generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent., Background: It was previously shown that polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents were noninferior to zotarolimus-eluting stents at 12 months. However, long-term follow-up of these devices is critical to evaluate late comparative efficacy., Methods: In a clinical trial with minimal exclusion criteria, 3,002 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization., Results: At 5 years, there was no difference in the incidence of the primary endpoint between sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents and zotarolimus-eluting stents (23.8% vs. 24.2%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval: 0.84 to 1.15; p = 0.80). The rates of the individual components of the primary endpoint were also comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was low in both groups (1.3% vs. 1.6%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.86; 95% confidence interval: 0.46 to 1.62; p = 0.64). The rates of any death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization were similar in both groups. Results were consistent across pre-specified subgroups of age, sex, diabetes, and vessel size., Conclusions: Long-term outcomes of patients treated with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents compared with a new-generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent were similar. Rates of stent thrombosis were low and comparable in both treatment groups, with few events beyond 12 months. (Efficacy Study of Rapamycin- vs. Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents to Reduce Coronary Restenosis [ISAR-TEST-5]; NCT00598533)., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Both biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stents offer potential for enhanced late outcomes in comparison with earlier-generation permanent polymer sirolimus-eluting stents. However, long-term comparative efficacy data among these devices remain a scientific gap. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stents (XIENCE) versus permanent polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (CYPHER) at five-year follow-up., Methods and Results: Overall, 2,603 patients were randomised to treatment with the Yukon Choice PC (n=1,299), XIENCE (n=652) or CYPHER (n=652) stents. The primary endpoint was the device-oriented composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularisation (TLR). The main secondary endpoint was definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). Follow-up was performed up to five years. Concerning the primary endpoint, there was no significant difference between Yukon Choice PC and XIENCE stents (20.5% vs. 19.5%, HR=1.04, 95% CI: 0.84-1.29; p=0.71) or between CYPHER and XIENCE stents (23.5% vs. 19.5%, HR=1.21, 95% CI: 0.95-1.53; p=0.12). In terms of safety, rates of ST were similar with both Yukon Choice PC and XIENCE (1.2% vs. 1.4%; HR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.37-1.91; p=0.67) but numerically higher with CYPHER as compared to XIENCE (2.4% vs. 1.4%, HR=1.67, 95% CI: 0.73-3.82; p=0.22)., Conclusions: Biodegradable polymer Yukon Choice PC and permanent polymer XIENCE stents showed comparable clinical outcomes at five years. Permanent polymer CYPHER stents showed numerically higher rates of device-related adverse events. Trials registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT00598676).

Background: In patients receiving aspirin, the optimal duration of clopidogrel therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains unclear., Methods: This multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial tested the hypothesis that in patients undergoing DES implantation, 6 months of clopidogrel is non-inferior to 12 months in terms of clinical outcomes. At 6 months after DES implantation, patients on clopidogrel were randomly assigned to either a 6-month period of placebo or an additional 6-month period of clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding at 9 months after randomization., Results: Owing to slow recruitment and low event rates, the trial was stopped prematurely after enrolment of 4005 of 6000 planned patients. Of 4000 patients included in the final analysis, 1997 received 6 months of clopidogrel and 2003 received 12 months. The primary endpoint occurred in 29 patients (1.5%) assigned to 6 months of clopidogrel and 32 patients (1.6%) assigned to 12 months, observed difference -0.1%, upper limit of one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.5%, limit of non-inferiority 2%, Pfor noninferiority <0.001. Stent thrombosis was observed in five patients (0.3%) assigned to 6 months of clopidogrel and three patients (0.2%) assigned to 12 months; hazard ratio (HR) 1.66, 95% CI: 0.40-6.96, P = 0.49. Thrombolysis in myocardial infarction major bleeding was observed in 4 patients (0.2%) assigned to 6 months clopidogrel and 5 patients (0.3%) assigned to 12 months; HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.21-2.98, P = 0.74., Conclusions: In the present trial, characterized by low event rates, we did not observe a significant difference in net clinical outcome between 6 and 12 months of clopidogrel therapy after DES implantation. However, the results of the trial must be considered in view of its premature termination and lower than expected event rates. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT00661206., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patients receiving oral anticoagulation (OAC) who undergo drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation require additional dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and clopidogrel. Such triple therapy confers an elevated bleeding risk, and its optimal duration is not known., Objectives: The goal of this study was to evaluate whether shortening the duration of clopidogrel therapy from 6 months to 6 weeks after DES implantation was associated with a superior net clinical outcome in patients receiving concomitant aspirin and OAC., Methods: In this randomized, open-label trial, we enrolled patients receiving OAC who underwent DES implantation at 3 European centers between September 2008 and December 2013. A total of 614 patients receiving concomitant aspirin and OAC were randomized to either 6-week clopidogrel therapy (n=307) or 6-month clopidogrel therapy (n=307). The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, stroke, or Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major bleeding at 9 months., Results: The primary endpoint occurred in 30 patients (9.8%) in the 6-week group compared with 27 patients (8.8%) in the 6-month group (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.91; p=0.63). There were no significant differences for the secondary combined ischemic endpoint of cardiac death, MI, definite stent thrombosis, and ischemic stroke (12 [4.0%] vs. 13 [4.3%]; HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.43 to 2.05; p=0.87) or the secondary bleeding endpoint of TIMI major bleeding (16 [5.3%] vs. 12 [4.0%]; HR: 1.35; 95% CI: 0.64 to 2.84; p=0.44)., Conclusions: Six weeks of triple therapy was not superior to 6 months with respect to net clinical outcomes. These results suggest that physicians should weigh the trade-off between ischemic and bleeding risk when choosing the shorter or longer duration of triple therapy. (Triple Therapy in Patients on Oral Anticoagulation After Drug Eluting Stent Implantation [ISAR-TRIPLE]; NCT00776633)., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Inhospital stent thrombosis (ST) and cerebrovascular accidents (CVA) are rare but serious adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The association of ST or CVA with long-term outcome after PCI remains poorly investigated., Methods: The study included 18,334 consecutive patients who underwent PCI. Patients were divided into 3 groups: the group with ST, the group with CVA, and the group without these events. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 3-year follow-up., Results: Inhospital ST or CVA occurred in 59 patients (0.32%) and in 90 patients (0. 49%), respectively. There were 2,149 deaths (11.7%) during the follow-up: 26 deaths among patients with ST, 32 deaths among patients with CVA, and 2,091 deaths among patients without ST or CVA (Kaplan-Meier estimates of 3-year mortality 45.3%, 38.0%, and 12.9%, odds ratio 6.1, 95% CI 3.6-10.2, P < .001 for ST group vs the group without ST or CVA and odds ratio 4.2 [2.7-6.6], P < .001 for CVA group vs the group without ST or CVA). There was no significant difference in the 3-year mortality between CVA and ST groups (P = .29). The Cox proportional hazards model showed that ST (adjusted hazard ratio 4.97, 95% CI 2.58-9.56, P < .001) and CVA (adjusted hazard ratio 2.25 [1.25-4.04], P = .006) were independently associated with the increased risk of 3-year mortality., Conclusion: Inhospital ST and CVA after PCI are associated with the increased risk of 3-year mortality. Both events seem to have a similar impact on long-term survival., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To compare through meta-analysis the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) in the treatment of extracranial vertebral artery (EVA) disease., Methods: A literature search of the PubMed database was conducted to identify English-language articles in which both BMS and DES stenting were performed for EVA stenosis by the same investigator(s). Further, eligible studies had to provide data on in-stent restenosis during follow-up. The search identified 9 nonrandomized studies that met the inclusion criteria. The random effects model was employed to pool data. Meta-regression analyses were performed to evaluate the relationships between risk of restenosis and the age of patients, the length of follow-up, or the percentage of male patients., Results: Reported technical success was high (range 99.2%-100%) and comparable for BMS [100% (276/276)] and DES [99.4% (166/167)]. The use of DES was associated with significantly lower (p<0.0001) overall restenosis rates [8.2% (14/170) over follow-up periods averaging 16 to 43 months] compared to BMS [23.7% (68/287) over mean follow-up periods of 19 to 46 months]. Moreover, DES showed significantly lower symptomatic restenosis rates as compared to BMS [4.7% (8/169) for DES vs. 11.6% (32/275) for BMS; p=0.005]. There was no change in the risk of restenosis for any factor explored in the meta-regression analysis., Conclusion: This meta-analysis demonstrates that the use of DES for extracranial vertebral artery stenting significantly reduces both the rate of restenosis and recurrence of symptoms as compared to BMS. In future, randomized trials are needed to support these findings.

There is little evidence on the optimal mode of clopidogrel discontinuation. Epidemiological studies observed clustering of thrombotic events after cessation of chronic clopidogrel therapy. The underlying mechanism has been ascribed to transient platelet hyper-reactivity. Gradual tapering of clopidogrel may have the potential to attenuate this phenomenon. The objective of the present study was to assess whether in patients with drug-eluting stents (DES) gradual discontinuation of clopidogrel maintenance therapy is superior to conventional, abrupt discontinuation. Patients with planned discontinuation of chronic clopidogrel therapy after DES implantation were randomised in a double-blinded fashion to either gradual discontinuation (according to a tapering schema over four weeks) or abrupt discontinuation (after continued clopidogrel therapy for additional four weeks). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, major bleeding or rehospitalisation due to an acute coronary syndrome at 90 days. Enrollment of 3,000 patients was planned. The study was stopped prematurely due to slow recruitment after enrollment of 782 patients. At 90 days, nine of 392 patients (2.3%) with tapered cessation reached the primary endpoint compared to five of 390 patients (1.3%) with abrupt cessation (p=0.284). The composite of death or myocardial infarction occurred in three patients with tapered and three patients with abrupt discontinuation (p=0.764). In conclusion, tapered discontinuation of chronic clopidogrel therapy is not superior to abrupt discontinuation regarding the primary endpoint in this study. However, the results must be interpreted in view of the premature termination of the trial and low event rates.

Background: An increasing number of patients undergoing coronary stenting need lifelong anticoagulation and therefore require a triple therapy typically consisting of aspirin, clopidogrel, and a vitamin K antagonist. Triple therapy confers an elevated bleeding risk as compared with dual therapy; however, omission of either antiplatelet or anticoagulation therapy might increase the risk of stent thrombosis or thrombembolic events. Although guidelines recommend a duration of dual antiplatelet therapy of 6 to 12months after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients receiving oral anticoagulation is not known., Hypothesis: We postulate that 6-week clopidogrel therapy after DES implantation as compared with 6-month therapy is associated with improved clinical outcomes in patients undergoing DES implantation receiving concomitant aspirin and vitamin K antagonists., Study Design: The ISAR-TRIPLE is a randomized, open-label trial that examines the restriction of clopidogrel therapy from 6 months to 6 weeks after DES implantation in the setting of concomitant aspirin and oral anticoagulant. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 fashion to either 6-week or 6-month clopidogrel therapy. The primary end point is a composite of death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, stroke, or major bleeding. The secondary end point comprises ischemic and bleeding complications. According to sample size calculations, a total of 600 patients are required to be enrolled. Clinical follow-up is scheduled at 6 weeks and at 6 and 9 months after randomization., Summary: There is clinical equipoise regarding the optimal duration of triple therapy after DES implantation in patients who need vitamin K antagonist therapy. The ISAR-TRIPLE trial aims to test the hypothesis that a 6-week triple therapy compared with a 6-month triple therapy improves net clinical outcomes., (Copyright © 2014 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Systematic investigation of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stents (BMS) or first or second generation drug eluting stents (DES) in large scale, broadly inclusive patient populations undergoing follow-up angiography represents a gap in our scientific knowledge. We investigated the incidence of angiographically proven restenosis and its predictors in patients undergoing PCI with stents., Methods: All patients undergoing successful implantation of coronary stents for de novo lesions from 1998 to 2009 and follow-up angiography at 6-8 months at two centres in Munich, Germany were eligible for inclusion. Patients with cardiogenic shock, dialysis dependent renal insufficiency or previous cardiac transplantation were excluded. Data were prospectively collected. The incidence of restenosis, defined as diameter stenosis ≥50% in the in-segment area at follow-up angiography, and its predictors were evaluated., Results: A total of 12 094 patients met inclusion criteria. Angiographic follow-up was available for 10 004 patients (77.5%) with 15 004 treated lesions. Binary restenosis was detected in 2643 (26.4%) patients. Use of first generation DES versus BMS (OR 0.35, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.39) and second generation DES versus first generation DES (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.77) were independent predictors of lower rates of restenosis. At multivariate analysis, smaller vessel size (OR 1.59, 95% CI 1.52 to 1.68, for each 0.5 mm decrease), total stented length (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.33, for each 10 mm increase), complex lesion morphology (OR 1.35, 95% 1.21 to 1.51), presence of diabetes mellitus (OR 1.32, 95% 1.19 to 1.46), and history of bypass surgery (OR 1.38, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.58) were independently associated with restenosis and were similar across the spectrum of stent devices., Conclusions: In this large cohort of patients with angiographic surveillance we demonstrated the impact of device  development on antirestenotic efficacy, with sequentially improved efficacy from BMS to first generation DES to second generation DES. Predictors of restenosis were small vessel size, increased stented length, complex lesion morphology, diabetes mellitus, and prior bypass surgery.

Objectives: This study sought to compare the safety and efficacy of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) and the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) for treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (uLMCA) disease., Background: The second-generation ZES and EES have reduced the risk of restenosis in large patient cohorts. However, their comparative performance in uLMCA lesions is not known., Methods: In this study, patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for uLMCA lesions were randomly assigned to receive either a ZES (n = 324) or an EES (n = 326). The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 1 year. Secondary endpoints were definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1 year and angiographic restenosis based on analysis of the left main coronary artery area at follow-up angiography., Results: At 1 year, the cumulative incidence of the primary endpoint was 17.5% in the ZES group and 14.3% in the EES group (relative risk: 1.26; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.85 to 1.85; p = 0.25). Three patients in the ZES group (0.9%) and 2 patients in the EES group (0.6%) experienced definite or probable stent thrombosis (p > 0.99). All-cause mortality at 1 year was equal in the 2 groups (5.6%; relative risk: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.52 to 1.93; p = 0.98). Angiographic restenosis occurred in 21.5% of patients in the ZES group and 16.8% in the EES group (relative risk: 1.28; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.92; p = 0.24)., Conclusions: Within the statistical limitations of the present study, treatment of uLMCA lesions with a ZES or an EES provided comparable clinical and angiographic outcomes at 1-year follow-up., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to compare the risk of stent thrombosis among patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMS), first-generation drug-eluting stents (G1-DES), and second-generation drug-eluting stents (G2-DES) for a period of 3 years., Background: In patients undergoing coronary stenting, there is a scarcity of long-term follow-up data on cohorts large enough to compare rates of stent thrombosis across the stent generations., Methods: A total of 18,334 patients undergoing successful coronary stent implantation from 1998 to 2011 at 2 centers in Munich, Germany, were included in this study. Patients were stratified into 3 groups according to treatment with BMS, G1-DES, and G2-DES., Results: The cumulative incidence of definite stent thrombosis at 3 years was 1.5% with BMS, 2.2% with G1-DES, and 1.0% with G2-DES. On multivariate analysis, G1-DES compared with BMS showed a significantly higher risk of stent thrombosis (odds ratio [OR]: 2.05; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.47 to 2.86; p < 0.001). G2-DES were associated with a similar risk of stent thrombosis compared with BMS (OR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.56 to 1.19; p = 0.30). Beyond 1 year, the risk of stent thrombosis was significantly increased with G1-DES compared with BMS (OR: 4.72; 95% CI: 2.01 to 11.1; p < 0.001), but not with G2-DES compared with BMS (OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.32 to 3.25; p = 0.98)., Conclusions: In a large cohort of unselected patients undergoing coronary stenting, compared with BMS, there was a significant excess risk of stent thrombosis at 3 years with G1-DES, driven by an increased risk of stent thrombosis events beyond 1 year. G2-DES were associated with a similar risk of stent thrombosis compared with BMS., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The best way to manage restenosis in patients who have previously received a drug-eluting stent is unknown. We investigated the efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting balloons (PEB), paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), and balloon angioplasty in these patients., Methods: In this randomised, open-label trial, we enrolled patients older than 18 years with restenosis of at least 50% after implantation of any limus-eluting stent at three centres in Germany between Aug 3, 2009, and Oct 27, 2011. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1; stratified according to centre) to receive PEB, PES, or balloon angioplasty alone by means of sealed, opaque envelopes containing a computer-generated sequence. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment allocation, but events and angiograms were assessed by individuals who were masked. The primary endpoint was diameter stenosis at follow-up angiography at 6-8 months. Primary analysis was done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00987324., Findings: We enrolled 402 patients, of whom 137 (34%) were assigned to PEB, 131 (33%) to PES, and 134 (33%) to balloon angioplasty. Follow-up angiography at 6-8 months was available for 338 (84%) patients. PEB was non-inferior to PES in terms of diameter stenosis (38·0% [SD 21·5] vs 37·4% [21·8]; difference 0·6%, one-sided 95% CI 4·9%; p(non-inferiority)=0·007; non-inferiority margin of 7%). Findings were consistent in per-protocol analysis (p(non-inferiority)=0·011). PEB and PES were superior to balloon angioplasty alone (54·1% [25·0]; p(superiority)<0·0001 for both comparisons). Frequency of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis did not differ between groups., Interpretation: By obviating the need for additional stent implantation, PEB could be a useful treatment for patients with restenosis after implantation of a drug-eluting stent., Funding: Deutsches Herzzentrum., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Comparative assessment of clinical outcomes after use of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for treatment of aortocoronary saphenous vein graft lesions has not been undertaken in large randomised trials. We aimed to undertake a comparison in a randomised trial powered for clinical endpoints., Methods: In this randomised superiority trial, patients with de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions were assigned by computer-generated sequence (1:1:1:3) to receive either drug-eluting stents (one of three types: permanent-polymer paclitaxel-eluting stents, permanent-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents, or biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents) or bare-metal stents. Randomisation took place immediately after crossing of the lesion with a guidewire, and was stratified for each participating centre. Investigators assessing data were masked to treatment allocation; patients were not masked to allocation. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularisation at 1 year. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00611910., Findings: 610 patients were allocated to treatment groups (303 drug-eluting stent, 307 bare-metal stent). Drug-eluting stents reduced the incidence of the primary endpoint compared with bare-metal stents (44 [15%] vs 66 [22%] patients; hazard ratio [HR] 0.64, 95% CI 0.44-0.94; p=0.02). Target lesion revascularisation rate was reduced by drug-eluting stents (19 [7%] vs 37 [13%] patients; HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.28-0.86; p=0.01). No significant differences were seen between drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents regarding all-cause mortality (15 [5%] vs 14 [5%] patients; HR 1.08, 95% CI 0.52-2.24; p=0.83), myocardial infarction (12 [4%] vs 18 [6%]; HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.32-1.37; p=0.27), or definite or probable stent thrombosis (2 [1%] in both groups; HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.10; p=0.99)., Interpretation: In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for de-novo saphenous vein graft lesions, drug-eluting stents are the preferred treatment option because they reduce the risk of adverse events compared with bare-metal stents., Funding: Deutsches Herzzentrum., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Durable polymer coatings have been implicated in mid- and long-term adverse events after drug-eluting stent implantation. A polymer-free dual-drug sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and a new generation permanent polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent are recently developed technologies demonstrating encouraging results., Methods and Results: In a clinical trial with minimal exclusion criteria, we randomly assigned 3002 patients to treatment with sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority of the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents. The primary end point was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at 6 to 8 months. The sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of occurrence of the primary end point (13.1% versus 13.5%, respectively, P(noninferiority)=0.006; hazard ratio=0.97, 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.19; P(superiority)=0.74). The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis was low in both groups (1.1% versus 1.2%, respectively; hazard ratio=0.91 [95% confidence interval, 0.45 to 1.84], P=0.80). With regard to angiographic efficacy, there were no differences between the sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent and the zotarolimus-eluting stent in terms of either in-segment binary angiographic restenosis (13.3% versus 13.4% respectively; P=0.95) or in-stent late luminal loss (0.31±0.58 mm versus 0.29±0.56 mm, respectively; P=0.46)., Conclusion: In this large-scale study powered for clinical end points, a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent was noninferior to a new generation durable polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent out to 12 months., Clinical Trial Registration: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier NCT 00598533.

Background: Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of risk factors for a poor outcome have been identified. Thereby, cardiovascular comorbidity has a major impact on mortality. We investigated whether coronary calcification as a marker for coronary artery disease (CAD) is appropriate for risk prediction in COVID-19. Methods: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 (n = 109) were analyzed regarding clinical outcome after native computed tomography (CT) imaging for COVID-19 screening. CAC (coronary calcium score) and clinical outcome (need for intensive care treatment or death) data were calculated following a standardized protocol. We defined three endpoints: critical COVID-19 and transfer to ICU, fatal COVID-19 and death, composite endpoint critical and fatal COVID-19, a composite of ICU treatment and death. We evaluated the association of clinical outcome with the CAC. Patients were dichotomized by the median of CAC. Hazard ratios and odds ratios were calculated for the events death or ICU or a composite of death and ICU. Results: We observed significantly more events for patients with CAC above the group's median of 31 for critical outcome (HR: 1.97[1.09,3.57], p = 0.026), for fatal outcome (HR: 4.95[1.07,22.9], p = 0.041) and the composite endpoint (HR: 2.31[1.28,4.17], p = 0.0056. Also, odds ratio was significantly increased for critical outcome (OR: 3.01 [1.37, 6.61], p = 0.01) and for fatal outcome (OR: 5.3 [1.09, 25.8], p = 0.02). Conclusion: The results indicate a significant association between CAC and clinical outcome in COVID-19. Our data therefore suggest that CAC might be useful in risk prediction in patients with COVID-19. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: New-generation drug-eluting stents offer the potential for enhanced late outcomes in comparison with early generation drug-eluting stents. However, assessment of extended long-term outcomes for these devices is lacking, especially regarding the comparison between new-generation drug-eluting stents with biodegradable or permanent polymers. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES; Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer-based everolimus-eluting stents (PP-EES; Xience) versus early generation permanent polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents (PP-SES; Cypher) at 10-year follow-up.Methods: Overall, 2603 patients were randomized to treatment with BP-SES (n=1299), PP-EES (n=652), or PP-SES (n=652). The primary end point of this analysis was major adverse cardiac event, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. The main secondary end point of interest was definite/probable stent thrombosis. Follow-up at 10 years was available in 83% of the study patients.Results: The 10-year incidence of major adverse cardiac event (BP-SES 47.7% versus PP-EES 46.0% versus PP-SES 54.9%, P=0.003) and mortality (BP-SES 31.8% versus PP-EES 30.3% versus PP-SES 37.2%, P=0.02) was different among the groups. Definite/probable stent thrombosis was not significantly different among the groups (BP-SES 1.8% versus PP-EES 2.5% versus PP-SES 3.7%, P=0.09). Definite stent thrombosis was significantly different among the groups (BP-SES 1.1% versus PP-EES 0.8% versus PP-SES 2.4%, P=0.03). There were no significant differences between BP-SES and PP-EES.Conclusions: In this unique long-term outcome analysis, BP-SES and PP-EES showed comparable clinical outcomes out to 10 years. PP-SES had higher rates of major adverse cardiac events and definite stent thrombosis.Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00598676. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]