Search

Background: In the prospective, multicentre, randomised TARGET All Comers study, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the FIREHAWK biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) was non-inferior to the durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) for the primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months., Aims: We aimed to report the final study outcomes at 5 years., Methods: Patients referred for PCI were randomised to receive either a BP-SES or DP-EES in a 1:1 ratio in 10 European countries. Randomisation was stratified by centre and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, and clinical follow-up extended to 5 years. The primary endpoint was TLF (composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [MI], or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation). Secondary endpoints included patient-oriented composite events (POCE; composite of all-cause death, all MI, or any revascularisation and its components)., Results: From December 2015 to October 2016, 1,653 patients were randomly assigned to the BP-SES or DP-EES groups, of which 93.8% completed 5-year clinical follow-up or were deceased. At 5 years, TLF occurred in 17.1% of the BP-SES group and in 16.3% of the DP-EES group (p=0.68). POCE occurred in 34.0% of the BP-SES group and 32.7% of the DP-EES group (p=0.58). Revascularisation was the most common POCE, occurring in 19.3% of patients receiving BP-SES and 19.2% receiving DP-EES, of which less than one-third was ischaemia-driven target lesion-related. In the landmark analysis, there were no differences in the rates of TLF and POCE between groups from 1 to 5 years, and these results were consistent across all subgroups., Conclusions: In an all-comers population requiring stent implantation for myocardial ischaemia, the BP-SES was non-inferior to the DP-EES for the primary endpoint of TLF at 12 months, and results were sustained at 5 years, confirming the long-term safety and efficacy of the FIREHAWK BP-SES.

Provisional stenting is considered the gold standard approach for most bifurcation lesions, but the benefit of routine side branch (SB) strut dilatation has not been fully elucidated. A benchtop model was used to determine the benefits of routine side branch (SB) dilatation techniques on strut apposition, acute thrombogenicity, and flow disruption. Three different provisional bifurcation techniques were compared: no SB dilatation "keep it open" method (KIO), sequential balloon dilatation (SBD), and kissing balloon inflation (KBI). Stents were deployed in a silicon bifurcation model and perfused with blood at a flow rate of 200 ml/min for 60 min. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) pullbacks were obtained before and after flow perfusion to conduct strut analysis and acute thrombus measurement respectively. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) models were created using OCT pullbacks and simulated based on experimental conditions to analyze flow disruption. The strut analysis showed that KBI had the lowest percentage of floating (10.6 ± 2.3%) (p = 0.0004) and malapposed (41.2 ± 8.5%) struts (p = 0.59), followed by SBD and then KIO. This correlated to KBI having the lowest amount of thrombus formed at the SB, followed by SBD, with KIO being the most thrombogenic (KBI: 0.84 ± 0.22mm 2 , SBD: 1.17 ± 0.25mm 2 , KIO: 1.31 ± 0.36mm 2 , p = 0.18). CFD models also predicted a similar trend, with KBI having the lowest amount of area of high shear rate as well as flow recirculation. Based on this benchtop model, SB intervention strategies demonstrated a reduction in number of struts and resulting thrombogenicity at the bifurcation ostia. Graphical abstract., (© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Drug eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been developed to address the risk of very late adverse events. Long-term comparison data between the biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent (BES; Nobori®) and the second-generation durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent (EES; XIENCE V® or XIENCE PRIME® or PROMUS™) in diabetic patients are scarce., Methods: The COMPARE II trial was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, open-label, randomized, all-comers trial which assigned patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in a 2:1 fashion to either BES or EES. We analyzed the safety and efficacy outcomes in diabetic patients at 5 year follow-up. The primary pre-specified composite endpoint major adverse cardiac event (MACE) was defined as cardiac death, non-fatal target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization (CD-TVR)., Results: Out of 2707 study patients, 588 were diabetics (21.7%) of whom 391 were treated with BES and 197 with EES. At 5 years follow-up, MACE occurred in 87 patients (22.2%) in the BES group and in 34 patients (17.2%) in the EES group (p = .34). Other safety and efficacy endpoints did not differ between stent groups., Conclusions: At 5 years follow-up, no differences in terms of MACE as well as all analyzed safety and efficacy measures, including stent thrombosis, between the biodegradable polymer-coated BES and the durable polymer-coated EES in diabetic patients were observed., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: To assess the vessel-healing pattern of Ultimaster drug-eluting stent using optical frequency domain imaging. Our hypothesis is that biodegradable polymer-based drug-eluting technology allows complete very early strut coverage., Methods and Results: The DISCOVERY 1TO3 study (Evaluation With OFDI of Strut Coverage of Terumo New Drug Eluting Stent With Biodegradable Polymer at 1, 2, and 3 Months) is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter study. A total of 60 patients with multivessel disease requiring staged procedure at 1 month were treated with Ultimaster. Optical frequency domain imaging was acquired at baseline, 1, 2, and 3 months. The primary end point is optical frequency domain imaging-assessed strut coverage at 3 months. Mean age of patients was 67.2±9.9 years, and 73.3% were male, and 36.7% presented with acute coronary syndrome. A total of 132 lesions were treated, with average 1.4 lesions per patient treated at baseline and 1.1 lesions treated at 1 month. Strut coverage at 3 months of single implanted stents (n=71, primary end point) was 95.2±5.2% and of combined single and overlapped stents was 95.4±4.9%. Strut coverage of combined single and overlapped stents at 1 (n=49) and 2 months (n=38) was 85.1±12.7% and 87.9±10.8%, respectively. The median neointimal hyperplasia thickness was 0.04, 0.05, and 0.06 mm, whereas mean neointimal hyperplasia obstruction was 4.5±2.4%, 5.2±3.4%, and 6.6±3.3% at 1, 2, and 3 months, respectively., Conclusions: Nearly complete strut coverage was observed in this complex population very early after implantation of Ultimaster drug-eluting stent., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01844843., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Several concerns have emerged about the higher risk of very late stent thrombosis (ST) with first generation drug-eluting stent (DES) especially among STEMI patients. Newer generation DES has demonstrated to reduce ST at mid-term follow-up. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to perform an individual patient's data meta-analysis of trials comparing 1st generation DES vs. 2nd generation DES (everolimus-eluting stent, EES) in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI., Methods: We performed a formal search of electronic databases (MEDLINE and CENTRAL) and scientific session presentations from January 2010 to June 2016. We included all completed randomized trials comparing 1st vs. EES for patient presenting with STEMI., Results: Individual patients data were obtained from 3 trials, including a total of 1581 patients (686 or 43.4% randomized to 1st generation DES and 895 or 56.4% randomized to EES). At long-term follow-up (1584±588days), EES did not significantly reduce mortality (7.8.% vs 11.7%, HR [95%CI]=0.77 [0.52, 1.13], p=0.18, p heterogeneity =0.93), cardiac mortality (6.2% vs 7.6%, HR [95%CI]=0.90 [0.56, 1.44], p=0.65, p heterogeneity =0.85), and reinfarction (8.1% versus 11.2%, respectively; HR [95%CI]=0.74 [0.51, 1.07], p=0.11, p heterogeneity =0.52). However, EES significantly reduced the occurrence of ST (3.4% versus 6.1% respectively, HR [95%CI]=0.56 [0.32, 0.97], p=0.04, p heterogeneity =0.42) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (14.2% versus 20.1%; HR [95%CI]=0.63 [0.42, 0.96], p=0.03, p heterogeneity =0.55). Landmark analysis showed more consistent benefits in ST with EES within 1year, whereas benefits in TVR were mostly observed later than 1year., Conclusions: The present pooled patient-level meta-analysis demonstrates that among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, EES as compared to 1st generation DES is associated with a significant reduction in ST and TVR at long-term follow-up., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This analysis investigates the 5-year outcomes of the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BP-BES) and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) in an all-comers population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention., Background: Recent 1- and 3-year results from randomized trials have indicated similar safety and efficacy outcomes of BP-BES and DP-EES. Whether benefits of the biodegradable polymer device arise over longer follow-up is unknown. Moreover, in-depth, prospective, long-term follow-up data on metallic drug-eluting stents with durable or biodegradable polymers are scarce., Methods: The COMPARE II trial (Abluminal Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent) was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, all-comers trial in which 2,707 patients were randomly allocated (2:1) to BP-BES or DP-EES. The pre-specified endpoint at 5 years was major adverse cardiac events, a composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization., Results: Five-year follow-up was available in 2,657 patients (98%). At 5 years, major adverse cardiac events occurred in 310 patients (17.3%) in the BP-BES group and 142 patients (15.6%) in the DP-EES group (p = 0.26). The rate of the combined safety endpoint all-cause death or myocardial infarction was 15.0% in the BP-BES group versus 14.8% in the DP-EES group (p = 0.90), whereas the efficacy measure target vessel revascularization was 10.6% versus 9.0% (p = 0.18), respectively. Interestingly, definite stent thrombosis rates did not differ between groups (1.5% for BP-BES vs. 0.9% for DP-EES; p = 0.17)., Conclusions: The 5-year analysis comparing biodegradable polymer-coated BES and the durable polymer-coated EES confirms the initial early- and mid-term results regarding similar safety and efficacy outcomes in this all-comers percutaneous coronary intervention population., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: This study sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of a biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer (BP-BES) (Nobori; Terumo Corp.) compared to an everolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer (DP-EES) (XIENCE V or Prime; Abbott Vascular, or PROMUS; Boston Scientific)., Methods and Results: The all-comers NEXT and COMPARE II clinical trials randomly assigned 5,942 patients to BP-BES (N=3,412) or DP-EES (N=2,530). We conducted a patient level pooled analysis at three-year follow-up with specified study endpoints: definite stent thrombosis (ST), the combined safety endpoint cardiac death or target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and the efficacy endpoint target lesion revascularisation (TLR). At three-year follow-up, all endpoints, namely definite stent thrombosis (BP-BES 0.8% vs. 0.4%, p=0.20), death or TV-MI (BP-BES 7.8% vs. 6.7%, p=0.07), as well as TLR (BP-BES 6.4% vs. 6.4%, p=0.78) were similar between groups. Interestingly, unadjusted (BP-BES 5.6% vs. 4.5%, p=0.02) and adjusted (HR 1.36; 1.01-1.82, p=0.04) TV-MI rates were higher in the BP-BES group than in the DP-EES group., Conclusions: In this large-scale patient level pooled analysis of the NEXT and COMPARE II randomised trials, the use of BP-BES compared with DP-EES resulted in similar outcomes, but with an observed higher rate of TV-MI in the BP-BES group.

Objectives: This study sought to report the 5-year outcomes of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in an all-comers population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Background: The medium-term 1 and 2-year results of the prospective randomized COMPARE trial (A Trial of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice) showed superior clinical outcomes with EES compared with PES in an all-comers PCI population. Whether this benefit is sustained over longer-term follow-up is unknown. Furthermore, systematic long-term follow-up data on these metallic drug eluting stents with durable polymers are scarce., Methods: We randomly assigned 1,800 patients undergoing PCI to EES or PES. The pre-specified composite primary endpoint was death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: Follow-up at 5 years was completed in 1,791 (99.5%) patients. Treatment with EES compared with PES led to a relative risk reduction of the primary endpoint by 27% (18.4% vs. 25.1%, p = 0.0005), driven by lower rates of MI (7.0% vs. 11.5%, p = 0.001) and TVR (7.4% vs. 11.4%, p = 0.003), but not with mortality (9.0% vs. 10.3%, relative risk 0.88, p = 0.36). Moreover, patients treated with EES compared with PES had lower rates of definite/probable stent thrombosis at 5 years (3.1% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.005). The hazard curves for TVR, MI, and stent thrombosis diverge over the first 3 years and, subsequently, progress in parallel., Conclusions: The early- and medium-term superiority of EES over PES measured both by safety and efficacy endpoints is sustained at 5 years in this all-comer population. (A Trial of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice [COMPARE]; NCT01016041)., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this analysis was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) with that of the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES)., Methods and Results: The COMPARE II study was a prospective, randomised, multicentre, all-comers trial in which 2,707 patients were randomly allocated (2:1) to BES or EES. The pre-specified endpoint at three years was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularisation (TVR). Moreover, the combined endpoint all-cause death or MI was analysed as a safety, and TVR as an efficacy measure. Three-year follow-up was available in 2,683 patients (99.1%). At three years, MACE occurred in 213 patients (11.9%) in the BES group and in 101 patients (11.1 %) in the EES group (p=0.57). The rate of the combined safety endpoint all-cause death or MI was 9.3% in the BES group vs. 8.4% (p=0.52), while the efficacy measure TVR was 7.6% in BES vs. 6.5% (p=0.27). Interestingly, definite stent thrombosis rates did not differ between groups (1.2% for BES vs. 0.8%, p=0.33)., Conclusions: At three-year follow-up, MACE as well as safety and efficacy measures including stent thrombosis were not statistically different between the biodegradable polymer-coated BES and the durable polymer-coated EES. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01233453.

Background: Previous meta-analyses have investigated the relative safety and efficacy profiles of different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS); however, most prior trials in these meta-analyses reported follow-up to only 1 year, and as such, the relative long-term safety and efficacy of these devices are unknown. Many recent studies have now reported extended follow-up data., Objectives: This study sought to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of durable polymer-based DES, bioabsorbable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents (BES), and BMS by means of network meta-analysis., Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing DES to each other or to BMS were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases and proceedings of international meetings. Information on study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted., Results: Fifty-one trials that included a total of 52,158 randomized patients with follow-up duration ≥3 years were analyzed. At a median follow-up of 3.8 years, cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES) were associated with lower rates of mortality, definite stent thrombosis (ST), and myocardial infarction than BMS, paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and less ST than BES. Phosphorylcholine-based zotarolimus-eluting stents had lower rates of definite ST than SES and lower rates of myocardial infarction than BMS and PES. The late rates of target-vessel revascularization were reduced with all DES compared with BMS, with cobalt-chromium EES, platinum chromium-EES, SES, and BES also having lower target-vessel revascularization rates than PES., Conclusions: After a median follow-up of 3.8 years, all DES demonstrated superior efficacy compared with BMS. Among DES, second-generation devices have substantially improved long-term safety and efficacy outcomes compared with first-generation devices., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of the RESOLUTE(TM)zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES; Medtronic, Inc, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) in Japanese patients for the treatment of de novo native coronary lesions., Methods and Results: Both RESOLUTE Japan (R-Japan) and RESOLUTE Japan Small Vessel Study (R-Japan SVS) were prospective, multicenter, single-arm observational studies. R-Japan enrolled 100 patients (reference vessel diameter, 2.5-3.5 mm) and R-Japan SVS enrolled 65 patients (at least 1 lesion suitable for 2.25-mm stent) treated with R-ZES. In R-Japan, in-stent late lumen loss (LLL; the primary endpoint) at 8 months was 0.12 ± 0.22 mm and volume obstruction on intravascular ultrasound was 2.33 ± 3.51%. At 4 years, there were no cases of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR); the target lesion failure (TLF; composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven TLR) was 5.6% (5/90). In R-Japan SVS, in-stent LLL at 9 months was 0.27 ± 0.33 mm, TLF (primary endpoint) was 4.6% (3/65), without incidence of TLR. At 3 years, TLF was 7.9% (5/63) and clinically driven TLR, 3.2% (2/63)., Conclusions: R-Japan and R-Japan SVS demonstrate substantial suppression of neointimal hyperplasia, low LLL, and excellent and sustained long-term clinical outcome with R-ZES in Japanese patients.

Objective: The following retrospective observational study assesses the long-term results of intracoronary beta-radiation therapy for patients with in-stent restenosis., Background: Beta-radiation has been used to treat patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. However, long-term clinical success using this technique has not at this time been established., Methods: Two-hundred and thirteen consecutive patients received intracoronary brachytherapy (noncentered beta-emitter, Novoste BetaCath) for in-stent restenosis and were followed up over a period of 39.1 +/- 18.4 months. The combined end-point was defined as a major adverse clinical event (MACE)and comprised mortality, acute myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: MACE occurred in 110 patients (51.6%): death in 27 patients (12.7%), acute myocardial infarction in 8 patients (3.8%), TVR in 90 patients (42.3%). TVR comprised percutaneous coronary reinterventions in 76 patients (35.7%) and coronary bypass surgery in 24 patients (11.3%). Secondary end-point was determined as target vessel failure and occurred in 93 patients (43.7%). Of note, the frequency of at least two previous target lesion interventions as well as impairment of left ventricular function was associated with reduced success rate, whereas other clinical parameters did not indicate outcome after treatment with intracoronary radiation therapy., Conclusion: During the mean, a period of 3 years, more than half of the patients receiving intracoronary radiation therapy reached primary end-point, representing, in the main, TVR. During this period a mortality rate of nearly 13% was documented. These results signify a delayed, though continued, restenotic process after index procedure.