Search

Background: The 12-month outcomes of BIOMAG-I - the first-in-human study investigating the third-generation drug-eluting resorbable magnesium scaffold (DREAMS 3G) - showed promising results regarding clinical outcomes and late lumen loss., Aims: The current study aimed to investigate vascular healing parameters assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), focusing on strut visibility, vessel and scaffold areas, and neointimal growth patterns., Methods: This is a BIOMAG-I substudy including patients with available serial OCT and IVUS data. We conducted a frame-based analysis of OCT findings in conjunction with IVUS-derived vessel and scaffold areas, evaluating the qualitative and quantitative aspects of vascular healing., Results: Among the 116 patients enrolled in this trial, 56 patients treated with DREAMS 3G were included in the analysis. At 12 months, OCT imaging revealed that 99.0% of the struts were invisible, and no malapposed struts were depicted. While the vessel area showed no significant difference between the timepoints, the minimum lumen area significantly decreased from post-percutaneous coronary intervention to 6 months (6.88 mm 2 to 4.75 mm 2 ; p<0.0001), but no significant changes were observed between 6 and 12 months. Protruding neointimal tissue (PNT) - a unique neointimal presentation observed following resorbable magnesium scaffold implantation - was observed in 89.3% of the study patients at 12 months, and its area exhibited a 47.4% decrease from 6 to 12 months., Conclusions: This imaging substudy revealed that, at 12-month follow-up, virtually all struts of the DREAMS 3G scaffold became invisible, without evident malapposition. The vascular healing response to DREAMS 3G implantation also appeared favourable up to 12 months, which is indicated by advanced strut degradation and spontaneous regressing PNT between 6 and 12 months.

Background: Recent clinical data indicate a different performance of biodegradable polymer (BP)-drug eluting stent (DES) compared to durable polymer (DP)-DES. Whether this can be explained by a beneficial impact of BP-DES stent design on the local hemodynamic forces distribution remains unclear., Objectives: To compare endothelial shear stress (ESS) distribution after implantation of ultrathin (us) BP-DES and DP-DES and examine the association between ESS and neointimal thickness (NIT) distribution in the two devices at 9 months follow up., Methods and Results: We retrospectively identified patients from the BIOFLOW II trial that had undergone OCT imaging. OCT data were utilized to reconstruct the surface of the stented segment at baseline and 9 months follow-up, simulate blood flow, and measure ESS and NIT in the stented segment. The patients were divided into 3 groups depending on whether DP-DES (N = 8, n = 56,160 sectors), BP-DES with a stent diameter of >3 mm (strut thickness of 80 μm, N = 6, n = 36,504 sectors), or BP-DES with a stent diameter of ≤3 mm (strut thickness of 60 μm, N = 8, n = 50,040 sectors) were used for treatment. The ESS, and NIT distribution and the association of these two variables were estimated and compared among the 3 groups., Results: In the DP-DES group mean NIT was 0.18 ± 0.17 mm and ESS 1.68 ± 1.66 Pa; for the BP-DES ≤3 mm group the NIT was 0.17 ± 0.11 mm and ESS 1.49 ± 1.24 Pa and for the BP-DES >3 mm group 0.20 ± 0.23 mm and 1.42 ± 1.24 Pa respectively (p < 0.001 for both NIT and ESS comparisons across groups). A negative correlation between NIT and baseline ESS was found, the correlation coefficient for all the stented segments was -0.33, p < 0.001., Conclusion: In this OCT sub-study of the BIOFLOW II trial, the NIT was statistically different between groups of patients treated with BP-DES and DP-DES. In addition, regions of low ESS were associated with increased NIT in all studied devices., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Ron Waksman: Advisory Board: Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Grant Support: AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of the study is to assess the impact of the baseline plaque composition on the DREAMS 3G luminal late loss and to compare the serial plaque changes between baseline and 6 and 12 months (M) follow-up., Methods and Results: A total of 116 patients were enrolled in the BIOMAG-I trial. Patients were imaged with optical coherence tomography (OCT) pre- and post-DREAMS 3G implantation and at 6 and 12 M. OCTPlus software uses artificial intelligence to assess composition (i.e. lipid, calcium, and fibrous tissue) of the plaque. The differences between the OCT-derived minimum lumen area (MLA) post-percutaneous coronary intervention and 12 M were grouped into three terciles. Patients with larger MLA differences at 12 M (P = 0.0003) had significantly larger content of fibrous tissue at baseline. There was a reduction of 24.8% and 20.9% in lipid area, both P < 0.001, between the pre-DREAMS 3G OCT and the 6 and 12 M follow-up. Conversely, the fibrous tissue increased by 48.4% and 36.0% at 6 and 12 M follow-up, both P < 0.001., Conclusion: The larger the fibrous tissue in the lesion at baseline, the larger the luminal loss seen at 6 and 12 M. Following the implantation of DREAMS 3G, favourable healing of the vessel coronary wall occurs as shown by a decrease in the lipid area and an increase in fibrous tissue., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: H.M.G.-G., R.W., G.D.M., M.G., S.B., A.K., and M.B.L. were core laboratory members, and the remaining authors were investigators of the trial. H.M.G.-G. has grants or contracts from Medtronic, Biotronik, Abbott, Neovasc, Corflow, Alucentbio, Philips, and Chiesi (paid to institution), received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and ACIST, and participates in DSMB/advisory board of the VIVID study. R.W. has grants or contracts from Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Philips IGT; received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Medtronic, Philips IGT, Pi-Cardia Ltd, Swiss Interventional Systems/SIS Medical AG, Transmural Systems Inc, and Venous MedTech; received honoraria from AstraZeneca; participates in DSMB/advisory boards of Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips IGT, and Pi-Cardia Ltd; and is an investor in MedAlliance and Transmural Systems Inc. J.T. reports grants and contracts from Abbott paid to his institution, speaker honoraria and support for attending meetings from Biotronik, and is an associate editor of Cardiovascular Biologics and Regenerative Medicine and Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. J.E. reports personal fees/speaker honoraria from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Philips, and Shockwave, patents from Shared, and participation in advisory boards of Abbott and Phillips. The institution of J.F.I. receives grants or contracts from Terumo Corp, Biosensors, Concept Medical, Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Philips Volcano. J.F.I. reports consulting fees from Biotronik, Medtronic, Cordis, Terumo Corp., and ReCor Medical; speaker fees/honoraria from Terumo Corp, Biosensors, Medalliance, OrbusNeich, Concept Medical, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Novartis, Cordis, AstraZeneca, and Philips Volcano; and support to attend meetings from Biotronik and Amgen. The institution of J.B. receives grants or contracts from Shockwave IVLS. J.B. receives consulting fees from Biotronik AG and Boston Scientific and speaker fees/honoraria from Biotronik AG, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular, participates in the DSMB of Boston Scientific, and has a leadership or fiduciary role for Biotronik. G.G.T. reports consulting fees from Biotronik, Medtronic, Abbott, and Terumo and honoraria from Biotronik, Medtronic, Abbott, and Terumo. M.J. reports grant support from Boston Scientific, Cardiac Dimensions, Edwards Lifesciences, and Infraredx; consulting fees from AlchiMedics SAS, Biotronik, TriCares, Veryan, and Shockwave; speaker fees/honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Cardiac Dimensions, AstraZeneca, Recor Medical, and Shockwave; travel support from SIS Medical, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Cardiac Dimensions; and participation in Steering Committees of Biotronik and Edwards Lifesciences. R.T. reports lecture fees from Biotronik. M.W. reports speaker honoraria and conference attendance support from Biotronik. G.O. reports lecturer honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, and Cordis and is a DSMB member of the SCIENCE trial and a CEC-member of the BIOFREEDOM STEMI trial. M.H. reports grants/contracts from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, OrbusNeich, and Philips; consulting fees from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, Shockwave Medical, and OrbusNeich; honoraria/speaker fees from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, Shockwave Medical, OrbusNeich, and Philips; and support to attend meetings/travel support from Biotronik, is a steering committee member of the BIOSOLVE and BIOMAG trials, and is a past president of EAPCI. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Patients with atherothrombotic risk are at high hazard of ischemic events. Preventive medicine plays a major role in modifying their outcomes. Whether the choice of a BP-SES or DP-EES can contribute to the occurrence of events remains unclear. We sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with higher atherothrombotic risk (H-ATR) versus lower atherothrombotic risk (L-ATR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES)., Methods: Patients (n = 2361) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into H-ATR vs. L-ATR. L-ATR patients had ≤ 1 and H-ATR ≥ 2 of the following criteria: presentation in ACS, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI/CABG, or previous stroke. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and stent thrombosis (ST) at three years., Results: H-ATR patients (n = 1023) were more morbid than L-ATR patients (n = 1338). TLF rate was significantly higher in H-ATR patients as compared with L-ATR (11.6% vs. 7.0%; HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.20, p < 0.0001). With BP-SES TLF rates were numerically lower as compared with DP-EES in H-ATR (10.5% vs. 13.5%; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14, p = 0.20) and significantly lower in L-ATR (5.6% vs. 9.8%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, p = 0.006)., Conclusion: In the era of newer-generation DES, patients with H-ATR still are at hazard for ischemic events. Patients with BP-SES had lower TLF rates as compared with DP-EES, most consistent in L-ATR whereas in H-ATR patients most probably secondary preventive strategies are of higher value., Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrial.gov. NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946. https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 ., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Background: The third-generation coronary sirolimus-eluting magnesium scaffold, DREAMS 3G, is a further development of the DREAMS 2G (commercial name Magmaris), aiming to provide performance outcomes similar to drug-eluting stents (DES)., Aims: The BIOMAG-I study aims to assess the safety and performance of this new-generation scaffold., Methods: This is a prospective, multicentre, first-in-human study with clinical and imaging follow-up scheduled at 6 and 12 months. The clinical follow-up will continue for 5 years., Results: A total of 116 patients with 117 lesions were enrolled. At 12 months, after completion of resorption, in-scaffold late lumen loss was 0.24±0.36 mm (median 0.19, interquartile range 0.06-0.36). The minimum lumen area was 4.95±2.24 mm² by intravascular ultrasound and 4.68±2.32 mm² by optical coherence tomography. Three target lesion failures were reported (2.6%, 95% confidence interval: 0.9-7.9), all clinically driven target lesion revascularisations. Cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and definite or probable scaffold thrombosis were absent., Conclusions: Data at the end of the resorption period of DREAMS 3G showed that the third-generation bioresorbable magnesium scaffold is clinically safe and effective, making it a possible alternative to DES., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT04157153.

Background: Randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority of ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents compared with alternative stent designs. Whether these differences persist over late-term follow-up is uncertain., Objectives: This study sought to compare late-term (5-year) clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin strut (81 µm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES)., Methods: BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international, 2:1 randomized trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin strut BP SES versus thin strut DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Prespecified outcomes through 5 years were assessed., Results: Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 5-year rates of TLF were 12.3% for BP SES and 15.3% for DP EES (P = 0.108). Revascularization with BP SES was associated with a significantly lower target vessel-related myocardial infarction (6.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.015) and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.3% vs 1.6%, P = 0.021). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization was numerically but not significantly lower with BP SES (5.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.202). Cardiac death rates were 2.6% versus 1.9% (P = 0.495) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively., Conclusions: In a large, randomized trial, TLF and the individual outcomes of cardiac death and target lesion revascularization at 5 years were similar among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. Both target vessel-related myocardial infarction and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP SES. These results confirm the durability of safety and the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin BP SES., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was funded by BIOTRONIK AG, Bülach, Switzerland. Dr Kandzari has received institutional research/grant support from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems, Inc, Medtronic, Orbus Neich, and Teleflex; and has received personal consulting honoraria from Cardiovascular Systems, Inc, Medtronic, and Terumo. Dr Koolen has received lecturer and consultant fees from Medtronic; and has been a proctor for Biotronik. Dr Doros has been a consultant for Pfizer, Sarepta, Novartis, Softworld, and Lipocine. Drs Garcia-Garcia and Bennett have received research grants from Abbott Vascular and Biotronik AG; and have received speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik AG, Boston Scientific, and Terumo. Dr Cutlip has received salary support from Baim Institute. Dr Waksman has received consultant fees from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, MeAlliance, SIS Medical, Medtronic, and Philips Volcano; is on the advisory board for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Philips Volcano; has received grant support from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, and Boston Scientific; and is on the Speakers Bureau for AstraZeneca. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at higher risk of adverse outcomes, but data are scarce in the era of newer-generation coronary stents., Aim: We sought to compare the clinical outcomes after complex PCI with a bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) versus a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES)., Methods: Patients (n = 2350) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into non-complex PCI vs. complex PCI. Complex PCI had at least one of the following criteria: multi-vessel PCI, ≥ 3 lesions treated, ≥ 3 stents implanted, total stent length ≥ 60 mm. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and probable/definite stent thrombosis (ST) at three years., Results: Patients with complex PCI (n = 348) were older and presented more often with acute coronary syndrome than non-complex PCI patients (n = 2002). Complex PCI lesions were more often type B2/C and bifurcation lesions and required more pre- and post-dilatation. Complex PCI patients had higher rates of TLF (14.6% vs. 8.1%; aHR 1.89, 95% CI [1.31-2.73], p = 0.001), TV-MI (10.2% vs. 4.4%, aHR 2.17, 95% CI [1.40-3.37], p = 0.001), and ST (1.5% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.025) as compared with non-complex PCI. TLF was not lower with BP-SES as compared to DP-EES in complex PCI (12.6% vs 18.2%, p = 0.16)., Conclusion: Patients undergoing complex PCI with the newer-generation DES still sustain a higher risk of TLF, TV-MI and stent thrombosis as compared with non-complex PCI. This adverse outcome was not significantly modified by the stent platform (BP-SES vs. DP-EES)., Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrial.gov NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946, https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 ; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 ; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 ., (© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Despite contemporary advances in stent technology, in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a common issue following percutaneous coronary intervention. A novel classification system based on the underlying mechanism of action of restenosis was recently introduced. The Waksman In-Stent Restenosis Classification characterizes different patterns of ISR to best delineate the type of restenosis and help guide treatment. Intravascular imaging with either intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography allows for real-time evaluation of ISR. We herein provide an illustrative review of the Waksman In-Stent Restenosis Classification., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships, which may be considered as potential competing interests: Evan Shlofmitz: Consultant: Abbott Vascular; Speakers Bureau: Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Medtronic, Opsens Medical. Gary Mintz: Honoraria from Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips/Volcano. Ron Waksman: Advisory Board: Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd., Cardioset; Consultant: Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd., Cardioset; Grant Support: Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance. All other authors: No relevant disclosures., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains common. Intravascular imaging allows for the determination of the mechanism of ISR, potentially guiding appropriate therapy. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided stent implantation is associated with a reduction in adverse events after PCI, but its impact on treatment of ISR is not clear., Methods: All patients with 1-year follow-up after ISR treatment from 2003 through 2016 were included and stratified by IVUS use. The primary endpoint was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 1 year, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: The final analysis included 1522 ISR patients, 65.9% of whom were treated with IVUS guidance. The primary endpoint occurred in 18.0% of patients treated with IVUS guidance vs. 24.5% of patients treated with angiography guidance (p = 0.0014). Post-dilatation was used more often with IVUS (18.6% vs. 14.1%, p < 0.001), with a larger diameter of new stents (3.04 ± 0.35 mm vs. 2.94 ± 0.47 mm, p = 0.001). At 1 year, TVR occurred in 14.5% with IVUS guidance and 19.2% with angiography guidance (p = 0.021)., Conclusions: The use of IVUS is associated with decreased MACE at 1 year following PCI for ISR. These results support routine IVUS for the treatment of ISR lesions., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: This study sought to assess target lesion failure (TLF) and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR) through 1 year following second-generation drug-eluting magnesium scaffold (Magmaris) implantation using a dedicated technique (so-called "4 P's" strategy)., Methods and Results: The 4 P's strategy stands for: correct patient selection, proper scaffold sizing, pre-dilatation (<20% residual stenosis), post-dilatation. All the patient and lesion characteristics, preparation, and sizing of the device were compared in patients with TLF and CD-TLR through 1-year follow-up. We analyzed 315 patients for this study. At 1 year, there were 14 TLFs and 10 CD-TLRs. The TLF rates were 7.7%, 4.9%, and 4.1%; while the CD-TLR rates were 7.7%, 2.5%, and 3.2% in the undersized, properly sized, and oversized vessel groups, correspondingly. Diameter stenosis (DS) after pre-dilatation in patients with TLF and CD-TLR was significantly greater than in those without TLF and CD-TLR. In patients with a properly sized scaffold, DS after pre-dilatation was similar in patients with and without TLF and CD-TLR. However, in patients with non-properly sized scaffolds, greater post-balloon DS was observed in patients with TLF and CD-TLR., Conclusions: Improper sizing and poor lesion preparation before Magmaris implantation appear to be related to TLF during 1-year follow-up., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Yuichi Ozaki: Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists, Japan (No. 19 K17535). Michael Joner: Personal fees from Biotronik, Orbus Neich, Boston Scientific, Edwards, Astra Zeneca, Recor; grants from Boston Scientific, Edwards, Amgen. Stefano Galli: Speaker fees and institutional grant to registry from Biotronik. Ron Waksman: Advisory Board: Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Grant Support: AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance. Michael Haude: Grant support and personal fees: Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, Cardiac dimensions, Medtronic, Philips, and Lilly. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The prognosis of left circumflex (LC) versus non-LC in-stent restenosis (ISR) ostial lesions following treatment has not been assessed. We aimed to assess this prognosis. Anecdotally, treatment of ostial LC ISR has been associated with high recurrence rates. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients from our institution who underwent coronary intervention of an ostial ISR lesion between 2003 and 2018. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Overall, 563 patients underwent ostial ISR lesion intervention, 144 for an ostial LC ISR lesion. Compared to patients with ostial ISR in non-LC lesions, patients with ostial LC ISR were older, had higher rates of diabetes mellitus and previous coronary bypass surgery. At 1-year follow-up, TLR-MACE rates were 26.6% in the LC group versus 18.4% in the non-LC group (p = 0.036). The TLR rate was also higher in the LC group compared to the non-LC group (p = 0.0498). Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated a higher TLR-MACE rate for LC versus non-LC ostial ISR lesions. In conclusion, our study shows increased event rates after treatment of LC versus non-LC ISR lesions. Further studies should be done to assess the optimal treatment approach for ostial LC ISR., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Ron Waksman – Advisory Board: Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Abbott Vascular, Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd., Transmural Systems; Grant Support: AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance; Transmural Systems. All other authors – None.

Background Percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions was associated with worse outcomes in the era of bare-metal and first-generation drug-eluting stents. Data on percutaneous coronary intervention of calcified lesions with newer-generation drug-eluting stents are scarce. Therefore, we investigated the impact of lesion calcification on clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with a bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent or a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Methods and Results Patients (n=2361) from BIOFLOW II, IV, and V trials were categorized into moderate/severe versus none/mild lesion calcification by a core laboratory. End points were target-lesion failure (TLF) (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-lesion revascularization) and probable/definite stent thrombosis at 2 years. The agreement in calcification assessment between the operator and the core laboratory was weak (weighted κ, 0.23). Patients with moderate/severe calcification (n=303; 16%) had higher TLF (13.5% versus 8.4%; P =0.003) and stent thrombosis rates (2.1% versus 0.2%; P <0.0001), whereas target-lesion revascularization was not different between the groups (5.0% versus 3.9%; P =0.302). After adjustment, calcification did not emerge as an independent predictor of TLF (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.37; 95% CI, 0.89-2.08; P =0.148) but did for target-vessel myocardial infarction (aHR, 1.66; 95% CI, 1.03-2.68; P =0.037). TLF rates were similar between bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (12.6% versus 15.4%, P =0.482) in moderate/severe calcification. In none/mild calcification, the bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent showed lower TLF (7.5% versus 10.3%, P =0.045). Conclusions With newer-generation drug-eluting stents, moderate/severe lesion calcification was not associated with more TLF after adjustment for the higher risk of patients with coronary calcification, whereas the rate of target-vessel myocardial infarction was higher. The bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent were equally effective and safe in calcified lesions. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946.

During a coronary intervention, the stainless-steel spring tip incorporated into the EluNIR drug-eluting stent detached from the delivery system while we were retrieving the balloon. The spring was captured., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Ron Waksman – Advisory Board: Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Grant Support: AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance. Other authors – None., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Congenital left main (LM) coronary artery to right atrium fistulas with progression to aneurysm development are rare. Most patients remain asymptomatic, but for those with progressive symptoms, intervention is required. However, there are potential life-threatening complications associated with surgical intervention. We present a case of an extremely rare markedly aneurysmal LM to right atrial fistula treated with surgical ligation complicated by inferolateral ST-elevation myocardial infarction several days post-operatively treated successfully using mechanical aspiration thrombectomy, a stent-retriever, balloon angioplasty, and subsequent intravascular ultrasound-guided percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stent., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Intravascular brachytherapy (VBT) is an effective and safe treatment option for recurrent drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the optimal therapy for patients with failed VBT is not well-defined. In this study, we sought to evaluate the optimal treatment strategy for patients after a failed VBT. Patients with recurrent ISR after an initial unsuccessful VBT were identified from our percutaneous coronary intervention database. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts (standard treatment with DES or balloon angioplasty versus repeat VBT). Baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes during follow-up were extracted. A total of 279 patients underwent PCI after an initial unsuccessful VBT at our institution. Of those, 215 (77%) patients underwent standard treatment with balloon angioplasty with or without DES, and 64 (33%) underwent balloon angioplasty followed by repeat VBT. The mean age of the cohort was 64±11 years. Overall, 71% were men, 47% had diabetes, and 22% had heart failure. The majority (64%) presented with unstable angina. The groups had similar baseline characteristics. The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was significantly lower in the repeat VBT group at 1 year (31% vs 14%, p = 0.03), 2 years (51% vs 31%, p = 0.03), and 3 years (57% vs 41%, p = 0.08). Target lesion revascularization and target vessel revascularization were consistently lower in the repeat VBT group at all follow-up intervals than in the standard treatment group. Treatment of recalcitrant ISR following an initial failed VBT is associated with a high MACE rate at 3-year follow-up. Repeat VBT is safe and effective and should be considered as the preferred strategy., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relations that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this report., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background/purpose: To avoid long-term effects associated with permanent implants, bioresorbable vascular scaffolds were developed, as they provide transient vessel support and disappear thereafter. The aim of the BIOSOLVE-II and -III studies was to assess the safety and performance of a magnesium-based sirolimus-eluting scaffold; we report the clinical outcomes at 3 years, 2 years after scaffold resorption., Methods/materials: BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III are international, prospective multi-center studies, including 184 patients with 189 de novo lesions and stable or unstable angina, or documented silent ischemia. Acute myocardial infarction, 3-vessel coronary artery disease, and heavily calcified lesions were excluded. Antiplatelet therapy was recommended for 6 months., Results: Patients were 65.5 ± 10.8 years old, and lesions were 12.1 ± 4.5 mm long and located in vessels with a diameter of 2.7 ± 0.4 mm. More than half of the lesions (56.5%) were type B2/C lesions. At 2 years, 92.5% (160/173) of patients were symptom-free and 91.5% (151/165) at 3 years; all the other patients had stable angina. At 3 years, target lesion failure occurred in 11 patients (6.3%), consisting of 4 cardiac deaths (2.3%), one target-vessel myocardial infarction (0.6%), and 6 clinically driven target lesion revascularizations (3.4%). There was no definite or probable scaffold thrombosis., Conclusion: In a low-risk patient population, treatment with a sirolimus-eluting magnesium bioresorbable scaffold can be considered safe, in particular with no definite or probable scaffold thrombosis., Annotated Table of Contents: BIOSOLVE-II and -III are prospective, international, multi-center studies including 184 patients with de novo lesions. At 3 years, target lesion failure was 6.3%, consisting of 4 cardiac deaths (2.3%), one target-vessel myocardial infarction (0.6%), and 6 clinically driven target lesion revascularizations (3.4%). There was no definite or probable scaffold thrombosis., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest MH reports study grants and personal fees from Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, Cardiac Dimensions, and Philips. HI reports speaker fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Astra Zeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Bristol Meyers (BMS), Pfizer. AA reports grants from Biotronik. RT reports personal fees from Biotronik and Abbott Vascular. PAL reports grants from Biotronik. NvM reports personal fees from Abbott Vascular and Pulsecath and grants from Medtronic, Pulsecath, Boston Scientific, and Edwards LifeSciences. SV reports personal fees from Biotronik, Elixir and Neovasc. CvB reports institutional research grants from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, and Medtronic. HGG and RW report that MedStar was the core laboratory of the study, and RW reports grant and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, AstraZeneca, Biosensors, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi, personal fees from Amgen, Corindus, Lifetech Medical, Medtronic, Philips Volcano and Pi-Cardia LTD, being an investor in MedAlliance, and grants from Edwards Lifesciences. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: The ultrathin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) demonstrated comparable performance to durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) in randomized controlled trials. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the performance of a BP-SES compared with a DP-EES in calcified or small vessel lesions, which represent higher risk of restenosis., Methods: From the pooled BIOFLOW (BIOFLOW-II, IV, and V; BIOTRONIK - A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions ) randomized controlled trials, a total of 1553 BP-SES and 784 DP-EES patients with valid 1-year follow-up data were available. Coronary lesions were assessed for the presence of moderate-to-severe calcification or small vessels (reference vessel diameter, ≤2.75 mm) by core laboratory analysis. One-year clinical outcomes were assessed with or without the lesion subsets between BP-SES and DP-EES., Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Among patients with small vessel disease, target lesion failure (8.0% versus 12.4%; P <0.01) and target vessel myocardial infarction (4.2% versus 7.6%; P <0.01) were significantly lower in BP-SES than in DP-EES. No difference in the outcome between the stents was shown in patients with non-small vessel lesions. In patients with calcified lesions, target lesion failure (12.2% versus 6.9%; P =0.056), and cardiac death (1.9% versus 0.3%; P =0.081) were numerically higher in DP-EES than in BP-SES. In the noncalcified lesion analysis, target vessel myocardial infarction in DP-EES was significantly higher than in BP-SES. Stent thrombosis was similar between the stents in both lesion groups., Conclusions: Among patients with more complex disease representing a higher risk of target lesion failure, the effectiveness of an ultrathin-strut BP-SES compared with a thin-strut DP-EES was maintained through 1 year. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare late-term clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin-strut (60-μm) bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin-strut (81μm) durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES)., Background: Emerging evidence from comparative studies of drug-eluting stents demonstrates improved safety and efficacy with ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents, but limited insight exists regarding late-term outcomes., Methods: BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) is an international randomized trial comparing coronary revascularization with BP SES and DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure. Analysis of pre-specified 3-year clinical outcomes was performed., Results: Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 3-year rate of target lesion failure was 8.2% for BP SES and 13.6% for DP EES (p = 0.002), driven by differences in both target vessel myocardial infarction (MI) (5.0% vs. 9.2%; p = 0.003) and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (3.2% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.006). In landmark analysis, significant differences in target vessel MI and target lesion revascularization were observed favoring treatment with BP SES. Definite or probable late or very late stent thrombosis was significantly lower with BP SES (0.1% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.018). Cardiac death or MI rates were 7.7% and 11.7% (p = 0.017) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively., Conclusions: In a large randomized trial, both target lesion failure and the outcomes of target vessel MI, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and late or very late stent thrombosis at 3 years were significantly lower among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. The results endorse the continued superiority of ultrathin-strut BP SES compared with DP EES. (Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in Subjects With Coronary Artery Lesions [BIOFLOW-V]; NCT02389946)., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) is required for coronary artery disease treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation. Shortening DAPT duration would be beneficial for patients with high bleeding risk., Areas Covered: Early healing patterns, especially stent strut coverage, assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) as a surrogate of neointima have been investigated to make decisions on whether short DAPT would be a safe alternative. This review evaluates the OCT evidence (i.e. neointimal coverage of stent struts within 3 months) for shortening DAPT duration after DES implantation., Expert Commentary: Shortening DAPT (i.e. within 3 months) duration after DES implantation might reduce complications including bleeding without increasing stent thrombosis. However, the optimal duration of DAPT after DES implantation is under discussion. Long-term assessment of short DAPT is required for the decision of the new guidelines regarding the recommended duration of DAPT.

Purpose: The BIOFLOW-VI (Biotronik-Safety and Clinical Performance of the Drug Eluting Orsiro Stent in the Treatment of Subjects With De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions-VI) study evaluates the angiographic efficacy, clinical safety, and effectiveness of the ultrathin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) compared with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). This randomized controlled clinical trial was designed to enable approval of new drug-eluting stents in China., Methods: A total of 440 eligible patients from 11 sites with up to 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions were randomly assigned to receive either BP-SES (n = 220) or DP-EES (n = 220) from July 2014 to September 2016 in this prospective, multicenter, noninferiority trial., Findings: The primary end point of 9-month in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) was 0.05 (0.02) mm in the BP-SES group versus 0.07 (0.02) mm in the DP-EES group, with a mean difference of -0.02 mm (95% CI, -0.06 to 0.03; P = 0.44; P noninferiority  < 0.0001). At 1 year, the target lesion failure rate (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) was similar between the 2 groups (BP-SES 2.3% vs DP-EES 1.4%; P = 0.50). No definite or probable stent thrombosis had occurred in any of the 2 treatment arms., Implications: The randomized BIOFLOW-VI trial showed that BP-SES was noninferior to DP-EES with regard to the primary end point of 9-month in-stent LLL in a Chinese population. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02870985., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Advances in stent design and the development of bioresorbable polymers have allowed the development of novel stent technologies such as the Orsiro bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus eluting stent (BP-SES). Over several noninferiority trials, the BP-SES has demonstrated itself to be a safe and effective therapy for obstructive coronary artery disease. This article reviews the current evidence of the efficacy of the BP-SES and examines its performance in high-risk populations, such as patients presenting with ST-segment myocardial infarction, chronic total occlusions, diabetes, and small vessel disease., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Ron Waksman – Advisory Board: Amgen, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Consultant: Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cardioset, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medtronic, Philips, Pi-Cardia Ltd.; Grant Support: AstraZeneca, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Chiesi; Speakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Chiesi; Investor: MedAlliance. All other authors: None., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a therapeutic challenge in the current drug-eluting stent (DES) era. Vascular brachytherapy (VBT) is a therapeutic option for ISR, but data about the outcomes of combination therapy with VBT and stenting for ISR lesions are sparse. We retrospectively analyzed patients who presented with ISR at our institution from 2003 through 2017. Three treatment arms were compared: VBT alone, VBT plus bare-metal stent (BMS), and VBT plus DES. Clinical, procedural, and 1-year outcome data were collected. Follow-up was obtained by phone calls and clinic visits. The patient cohort included 461 patients (764 ISR lesions). Of these, 333 patients (533 lesions) were treated with VBT alone, 89 patients (158 lesions) with VBT plus BMS, and 39 patients (73 lesions) with VBT plus DES. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics among the 3 groups except for more patients with a remote smoking history in the VBT plus BMS (43.8%) and VBT plus DES groups (56.4%), and more patients with history of peripheral vascular disease (39.5%) and congestive heart failure (27%) in the VBT plus DES group. The most common clinical presentation was unstable angina (64.6%). In the VBT plus DES group, 10.3% of patients presented with MI, versus 5.5% in the VBT alone group and 2.2% in the VBT plus BMS group. At 1-year follow-up, the VBT plus DES group had higher rates of target vessel revascularization-major adverse cardiovascular events (38.5%) than the VBT plus BMS (21.3%) and VBT alone (15.6%) groups (p = 0.002). In conclusion, in patients with ISR, combination therapy with VBT and stenting at the same setup is associated with worse outcomes at 12 months and, if possible, should be avoided., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the safety and performance of a magnesium-based sirolimus-eluting metal scaffold at three-year follow-up to assess vessel response two years beyond scaffold resorption., Methods and Results: BIOSOLVE-II is an international, multicentre first-in-man study, including 123 patients with de novo lesions. Predilatation was mandatory and post-dilatation was left to the discretion of the investigators. Dual antiplatelet therapy was recommended for six months. At three years, 91.1% of patients were angina-free and 8.0% were on dual antiplatelet therapy. The target lesion failure rate was 6.8% (n=8: two cardiac deaths, one target vessel myocardial infarction and five target lesion revascularisations). No probable or definite scaffold thrombosis was observed. Imaging follow-up was voluntary and serial angiographic assessment at 6, 12, and 36 months was available in 25 patients. In these, a slight increase in in-segment and in-scaffold late lumen loss and diameter stenosis was observed between 12 and 36 months (by 0.11±0.28 mm and 0.13±0.30 mm for late lumen loss, and by 3.8±10.1% and 4.1±10.2% for diameter stenosis)., Conclusions: Two years beyond the resorption period of a sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable metal scaffold built from a proprietary magnesium alloy, complication rates remained low. In the patients with serial angiographic assessment, late lumen loss and diameter stenosis did not increase substantially beyond the resorption period.

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the 12-month clinical outcomes of patients treated with Magmaris or Orsiro. Second generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold Magmaris (Dreams 2G) has proved to be safe and effective in the BIOSOLVE-II study. Similarly, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent, Orsiro has shown notable clinical results even in all-comer populations., Methods: Magmaris group patients were taken from the BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III trials, while the patients from Orsiro group were enrolled in BIOFLOW-II trial. The primary outcome was explored using a time-to-event assessment of the unadjusted clinical outcomes for target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months, followed by a multivariate analysis adjusting for all the significantly different covariates between the groups., Results: The study population consisted of 482 patients (521 lesions), 184 patients (189 lesions) in Magmaris group and 298 patients (332 lesions) in Orsiro group. The mean age was 65.5 ± 10.8 and 62.7 ± 10.4 years in Magmaris and Orsiro groups, respectively (p = 0.005). Magmaris and Orsiro unadjusted TLF rates were 6.0 and 6.4% with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.869). In the multivariate analysis, there were no meaningful differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups. Finally, none of the groups presented device thrombosis cases at 12 months., Conclusion: At 12 months there were no significant differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups neither in the unadjusted assessment nor in the multivariate analysis for target lesion failure. These results should be taken as hypothesis generating and may warrant a head to head comparison on a randomized fashion., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Aims: The BIOFLOW-IV clinical trial was designed for regulatory submission in Japan. It assessed the safety and efficacy of a new third-generation sirolimus-eluting stent system with bioresorbable polymer (Orsiro, BP-SES) compared with an everolimus-eluting stent system with permanent polymer (XIENCE Prime/Xpedition, PP-EES)., Methods and Results: This prospective, international, multicentre, 2:1 randomised, non-inferiority trial enrolled 575 patients (385 BP-SES and 190 PP-EES) with 659 stenotic de novo lesions. Of these, 137 patients (23.8%) were Japanese. Follow-up until five years is ongoing. We herein report outcomes at 12 months. Baseline parameters were well balanced. Device success was 98.9% for BP-SES versus 99.6% for PP-EES, p=0.670. Non-inferiority related to 12-month target vessel failure was met (pnon-inferiority <0.001). Further, there was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the groups. The target vessel failure rate was 5.5% for BP-SES and 7.5% for PP-EES, the target lesion failure rate was 4.2% versus 5.4%, and the definite or probable stent thrombosis rate was 0.8% versus 0%., Conclusions: The randomised BIOFLOW-IV trial provides further evidence on the safety and efficacy of the Orsiro BP-SES and its non-inferiority to the current benchmark, an everolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01939249.

Patients with diabetes mellitus are prone to increased adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention, even with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Randomized controlled trials have demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes between an ultrathin bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) and a thin-strut durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) that has specific labeling for patients with diabetes. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the BP-SES in patients with diabetes mellitus. To determine the performance of the BP-SES in diabetic patients, patient-level data from the BIOFLOW II, IV, and V randomized controlled trials were pooled. The primary end point was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, and definite or probable stent thrombosis, at 1 year. Among 1,553 BP-SES and 791 DP-EES patients, 757 diabetic patients were identified. Of the diabetic patients included in this analysis (494 BP-SES vs 263 DP-EES), the proportion of insulin- and noninsulin-treated patients was similar between groups. The 1-year TLF rate in the diabetic population was 6.3% in the BP-SES group and 8.7% in the DP-EES group (hazard ratio 0.82, 95% confidence interval 0.047 to 1.43, p = 0.493). There were no significant differences, based on stent type or diabetes treatment regimen, in TLF hazards. In a patient-level pooled analysis of the diabetic population from randomized trials, 1-year clinical safety and efficacy outcomes were similar in patients treated with ultrathin BP-SES and thin-strut DP-EES., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: Second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G) is an alternative novel device for treating coronary lesions. However, the relationship between in-scaffold dimensions after implantation of DREAMS 2G and vessel healing and luminal results at follow-up is unknown. The aim of this study is, therefore, to investigate whether the expansion index after implantation of DREAMS 2G as assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) impacts late luminal status and healing of the vessel wall., Methods and Results: This study comprises of a total 65 out of 123 patients who were enrolled in the BIOSOLVE-II trial. We assessed both qualitative and quantitative OCT findings and the expansion index of DREAMS 2G after implantation frame by frame using OCT. Expansion index was defined as minimum scaffold area/mean reference lumen area. The over-expansion group was also defined with expansion index >1.0. The total number of analysed frames at post-procedure and 6-month follow-up was 8243 and 8263 frames, respectively. At 6-month follow-up, in-scaffold healing was documented by the reduction of 82% in dissections, 93% in attached intra-luminal mass (ILM), 65% in non-attached ILM, and 76% in jailed side branch. The over-expansion group had significantly greater in-scaffold luminal volume loss (LVL) compared with the non-over-expansion group [over-expansion: 35.0 (18.5-52.1) mm3 vs. non-over-expansion: 21.0 (11.6-37.9) mm3, P = 0.039]., Conclusion: Excellent in vivo healing process after implantation of DREAMS 2G was observed at 6 months. We found that higher expansion indices were associated with higher in-scaffold LVL at 6 months assessed by OCT., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Despite on-going evolution and iteration of drug-eluting stent (DES) technology, the prevalence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains relatively unchanged, encompassing ≈10% of percutaneous coronary interventions. The mechanism of ISR is multifactorial, including biological, mechanical, patient, and operator-related factors. The main mechanical contributors are stent underexpansion or fracture, while biological factors include local inflammation leading to aggressive neointimal proliferation and late neoatherosclerosis. Intracoronary imaging is critical to identify the mechanism of ISR and tailor therapy accordingly. The presentation of DES-ISR is not benign and is challenging for optimal treatment. Among the proposed treatment modalities are scoring and high-pressure balloons, percutaneous coronary intervention with additional DES, atheroablative therapies by laser or mechanical atherectomy, drug-coated balloons, vascular brachytherapy, and surgical revascularization. We propose a new classification for ISR that differentiates among mechanical, biological, and mixed etiologies. Stratifying ISR by mechanism guides individualized treatment of DES-ISR to improve clinical outcomes. An algorithmic approach, guided by intracoronary imaging, for the treatment of DES-ISR, is recommended based on the specific cause of restenosis.

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) enhances diagnostic assessment with identification and characterization of plaque morphology. Determination of predominant plaque morphology prior to percutaneous coronary intervention can guide optimal treatment strategy. The transducers used with IVUS catheters include solid-state, phased array systems that have multiple stationary transducers, or rotational, mechanical IVUS systems that have a single transducer that rotates on a driveshaft. Real-time online analysis with IVUS allows determination of lumen and vessel size, guiding appropriate stent selection. Following stent implantation, IVUS can assess for parameters that include stent malapposition, underexpansion, and stent edge complications. Multiple stent sizing and stent optimization strategies have been proposed. Clinical data have supported the use of IVUS for improved periprocedural and long-term outcomes, and recent guidelines have evolved to reflect this benefit. Nonetheless, worldwide utilization of intravascular imaging remains low. IVUS has particular benefit in a number of complex lesion subsets including lesions involving the left main coronary artery, severe calcification or in-stent restenosis. The use of IVUS may allow for the reduction of total contrast volume used during percutaneous coronary interventions. Intravascular imaging plays a critical role in procedural planning and stent optimization in the drug-eluting stent era. Greater utilization of IVUS for the treatment of complex lesions may further improve outcomes with drug-eluting stents.

Introduction and Objective: The edge vascular response (EVR) remains unknown in second generation drug-eluting Resorbable Magnesium Scaffold (RMS), such as Magmaris. The aim of the study was to evaluate tissue modifications in the RMS edges over time, assessed by different invasive imaging modalities., Methods: The patients treated with the device were assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT), grayscale intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and virtual histology IVUS at baseline and 12 months. The EVR study performed a segment- and frame-level analysis of the 5 mm segments proximal and distal of the actual RMS., Results: The segment-level grayscale IVUS (n = 10), virtual histology IVUS (n = 10), and OCT (n = 18) analysis did not show any significant changes after 12 months, except for a fibrous plaque area (FPA) reduction of 0.5mm 2 (p = 0.017) in the proximal segment compared to baseline. In the frame-level analysis, IVUS evaluation revealed a vessel area decreased 2.80 ± 1.43 mm 2 (p = 0.012) and 2.49 ± 1.53 mm 2 (p = 0.022) in 2 proximal frames. This was accompanied by plaque area reduction of 0.88 ± 0.70 mm 2 (p = 0.048) and a FPA decreased by 0.63 ± 0.48 mm 2 (p = 0.004) in one proximal frame. In 1 distal frame, there was a dense calcium area reduction of 0.10 ± 0.12 mm 2 (p = 0.045), FPA and fibrous fatty plaque increased 0.54 ± 0.53 mm 2 (p = 0.023) and 0.17 ± 0.16 mm 2 (p = 0.016), respectively. By OCT, there was a lumen area decrease of 0.76 ± 1.51 mm 2 (p = 0.045) in a distal frame., Conclusion: At 12 months, Magmaris EVR assessment does not show overall significant changes, except for a fibrous plaque area reduction in the proximal segment. This could be translated as a benign healing process at the edges of the RMS., Summary: The edge vascular response (EVR) remains unknown in second generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffolds (RMS), such as Magmaris. Patients treated with the device were assessed by multi invasive imaging modalities [i.e. optical coherence tomography (OCT), grayscale intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and virtual histology IVUS] evaluating the tissue changes over time in the segment- and frame-level analysis of the 5 mm segments proximal and distal of the actual RMS. As a result, after 12 months, Magmaris EVR assessment does not show overall significant changes, except for a fibrous plaque area reduction in the proximal segment, translating a benign healing process at the edges of the RMS., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G) is used for treating coronary lesions. However, the natural history of the jailed side-branch (SB) after DREAMS 2G implantation remains to be elucidated. The aim of this study is to investigate the effect of scaffold struts on jailed SBs as assessed by 3-dimensional (3D) optical coherence tomography (OCT) after implantation of DREAMS 2G. We enrolled the patients who received a DREAMS 2G implantation and where OCT was performed at postprocedure and 12-month follow-up in the BIOSOLVE-II trial. The area of the ostium of jailed SBs and number of compartments divided by scaffold struts were assessed by cut-plane analysis using 3D OCT. A total of 24 patients with 61 jailed SBs were analyzed in this study. The number of compartments was significantly decreased (postprocedure; 1.98 ± 0.84 vs 12 months; 1.10 ± 0.30, p <0.001) during the 12 months. Since most of the struts disappeared, the ostium area was increased in 62% of jailed SBs at 12 months, however, not significantly different from postprocedure (postprocedure; 0.74 [0.34 to 1.46] mm 2 vs 12 months; 0.78 [0.41 to 1.68] mm 2 , p = 0.055). The number of compartments created by scaffold struts and branching angle at postprocedure had no effect on the changes of SB ostium area. DREAMS 2G has a favorable absorption process in the jailed SBs up to 12 months and may be considered as an optional therapy for treating lesions that involve SBs., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in men and women, black and white. However, there exists limited outcomes data for women and blacks after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The aim of this study was to evaluate the 1-year major cardiovascular events in patients who underwent PCI based on gender and race. We retrospectively analyzed data that were prospectively collected over 13 years at a large tertiary hospital in the United States. There were 12,050 patients who underwent PCI for both stable disease and acute coronary syndrome from 2003 to 2016. Of those, 1,952 were black men, 6,013 white men, 1,619 black women, and 2,466 white women. Major cardiovascular events at 1 year were assessed, and proportional Cox hazard model analyses were performed to assess outcome adjusted for confounding factors (i.e., age, body mass index, presentation with acute myocardial infarction, diabetes, smoking, history of coronary artery disease, family history of coronary artery disease, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, previous cardiovascular intervention, and chronic kidney disease). At 1 year, white men had significantly lower major cardiovascular events driven by lower rate of death compared with the other groups. Adjusted for confounders, major cardiovascular events were 1.3 to 1.5 times more likely to occur in black men and women and white women than in white men. There was a significant race by gender interaction (p <0.001)., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Coronary drug-eluting stent development has introduced new metal alloys, changes in stent architecture, and bioresorbable polymers. Whether these advancements improve long-term clinical safety and efficacy has been inconsistent in prior studies., Objectives: The authors sought to compare late-term clinical outcomes among patients treated with an ultrathin strut (60 μm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP SES) and a thin strut (81 μm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP EES) in a large randomized trial., Methods: BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international randomized trial comparing coronary revascularization with BP SES and DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Analysis of pre-specified 2-year clinical outcomes was performed., Results: Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 2-year TLF rate was 7.5% for BP SES and 11.9% for DP EES (-4.33% treatment difference; 95% confidence interval: -8.16% to -0.91%; p = 0.015), driven by differences in target vessel myocardial infarction (MI) (5.3% vs. 9.5%; p = 0.01) and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (2.6% vs. 4.9%; p = 0.04). Rates of cardiac death or MI were 7.0% versus 10.4% for BP SES and DP EES, respectively (p = 0.047). Late/very late definite stent thrombosis was statistically lower for BP SES compared with DP EES (0.1% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.045)., Conclusions: In a large randomized trial, significant differences in both TLF and target vessel-related MI persisted through 2 years, favoring treatment with BP SES over DP EES. Significantly lower cumulative target lesion revascularization and late/very late stent thrombosis were also observed with BP SES. (Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in Subjects With Coronary Artery Lesions [BIOFLOW-V]; NCT02389946)., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background/purpose: Dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) varies after placement of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). Our aim was to study patient characteristics and predictors of switching, in-hospital or at discharge, from clopidogrel (CLO) to ticagrelor (TIC) or vice versa., Methods/materials: The study population included patients with ACS who had DES and initially received either CLO or TIC between January 2011 and December 2017. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on initial DAPT choice and whether DAPT was switched in-hospital or during discharge. Clinical outcomes of interest were bleeding events, need for anticoagulation, and need for in-hospital coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)., Results: We identified 2837 patients who received DES and started on DAPT. DAPT switch from 1 P2Y12 inhibitor to another occurred in 9%, either in-hospital or at discharge. Of 1834 patients started on CLO, 112 were switched to TIC. Of 1003 patients started on TIC, 142 were switched to CLO. The need for in-hospital CABG was 7.8% in the TIC-CLO group compared to none in the CLO-TIC group (p = 0.002). Adjusted for covariates, the TIC-CLO group was 3 times more likely to need anticoagulation with warfarin than the CLO-CLO group (p < 0.001) and over 5 times more likely than the CLO-TIC group and the TIC-TIC group (p < 0.005 for both)., Conclusions: Switching from 1 generation P2Y12 inhibitor to another does occur in ACS patients. Clinical needs such as in-hospital CABG or oral anticoagulation upon discharge are real and dictate the switch from TIC to CLO., Summary: A single-center observational study of 2837 patients with acute coronary syndromes treated with drug-eluting stents found that some do get switched from one generation P2Y12 inhibitor to another. The switch from clopidogrel to ticagrelor is driven by clinical needs such as in-hospital coronary artery bypass grafting or the need for oral anticoagulation upon discharge., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Based on outcomes of the BIOSOLVE-II study, a novel second generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold gained CE-mark in 2016. The BIOSOLVE-III study aimed to confirm these outcomes and to obtain additional 12-month angiographic data., Background: Bioresorbable scaffolds are intended to overcome possible long-term effects of permanent stents such as chronic vessel wall inflammation, stent crushing, and fractures., Methods: The prospective, multicenter BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III studies enrolled 184 patients with 189 lesions (123 patients in BIOSOLVE-II and 61 patients in BIOSOLVE-III). Primary endpoints were in-segment late lumen loss at 6 months (BIOSOLVE-II) and procedural success (BIOSOLVE-III)., Results: Mean patient age was 65.5 ± 10.8 years and mean lesion reference diameter was 2.70 ± 0.43 mm. In BIOSOLVE-III, there were significantly more type B2/C lesions than in BIOSOLVE-II (80.3% versus 43.4%, P < 0.0001) and significantly more moderate-to-severe calcifications (24.2% versus 10.7%, P = 0.014). At 12 months, there was no difference in late lumen loss between the two studies; in the overall population, it was 0.25 ± 0.31 mm in-segment and 0.39 ± 0.34 mm in-scaffold. Target lesion failure occurred in six patients (3.3%) and included two cardiac deaths, one target-vessel myocardial infarction, and three clinically driven target lesion revascularizations. No definite or probable scaffold thrombosis was observed., Conclusion: The pooled outcomes of BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III provide further evidence on the safety and performance of a novel drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold with constant clinical and angiographic performance parameters at 12 months and no definite or probable scaffold thrombosis., (© 2018 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The aim of this network meta-analysis is to assess the impact of strut thickness on clinical outcomes in patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. We searched Medline/PubMed and performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare outcomes of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES) of different strut thicknesses (ultrathin 60 to 80 μm; thin 81 to 100 μm; intermediate 101 to 120 μm; thick ≥120 μm). Studies comparing DES with similar strut thickness, bare metal stents, and fully bioresorbable scaffolds were excluded. Odds ratios with credible intervals (OR [CrIs]) were generated with random-effects models to compare outcomes. Our primary end point was stent thrombosis (ST). We identified 69 RCTs including 80,885 patients (ultrathin group = 10,219; thin group = 36,575; intermediate group = 11,399; thick group = 22,692). Mean age was 64 ± 11 years and 75% were male gender. When compared with thick-strut DES, ultrathin struts had significant less ST and myocardial infarction (OR 0.43 [CrI 0.27 to 0.68]; and OR 0.73 [CrI 0.62 to 0.92], respectively). Sensitivity analysis including only studies with permanent polymer DES gave similar results. Improvement in DES technology with thinner struts is associated with significant reduction in ST and myocardial infarction compared with thicker struts., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This review will focus on our approach for the treatment of refractory in-stent restenosis., Recent Findings: The discovery of bare metal stents over three decades ago set a milestone in the evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention, which is currently the most widely performed procedure for the treatment of symptomatic coronary disease. However, the broad utilization of stents resulted in the new phenomenon of in-stent restenosis (ISR). Over the years, there has been an increase of the incidence of ISR despite continued improvement of drug-eluting stent (DES) technology. The mechanism of ISR is multifactorial, including biological, mechanical, patient, and operator-related factors. The most common factor is aggressive neointimal proliferation and neoatherosclerosis. ISR presentation is not benign, and treatment is challenging, especially in cases of DES-ISR. We review available therapy modalities for ISR, including medical therapy, scoring balloons, atheroablative therapies, repeat DES, vascular brachytherapy, drug-coated balloons, and coronary artery bypass grafting.

Background: Presentation with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) constitutes a high-risk subset of patients with worse outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. We report clinical outcomes in subjects with ACS from the BIOFLOW V trial (BIOTRONIK - A Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions) comparing an ultrathin strut (60 μm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) with a thin strut (81 μm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES)., Methods and Results: Among 1334 patients randomized to 2:1 treatment with either BP-SES or DP-EES, 677 (50.7%) ACS patients without ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (MI; 454 BP-SES and 223 DP-EES) were identified in the retrospective post hoc analysis. The primary end point of 12-month target lesion failure, individual component end points, and stent thrombosis were evaluated. Recurrent MI was defined as a ≥50% increase of creatine kinase-myocardial band or in the absence of creatine kinase-myocardial band, troponin >50% increase over previous level and >3× the upper limit of normal). All events were adjudicated by a blinded independent clinical events committee. Overall, baseline clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics of the ACS population were similar between the 2 treatment groups. At 12 months, target lesion failure occurred in 5.6% (24/426) of BP-SES patients versus 11.0% (23/209) in DP-EES patients ( P=0.02); target lesion failure composite components were cardiac death, 0% versus 1.0% ( P=0.11); target vessel-related MI, 3.5% versus 9.7% ( P=0.003); and clinically driven target lesion revascularization, 2.8% versus 3.4% ( P=0.80). Spontaneous target vessel MI was 0.5% (2/425) for BP-SES versus 2.4% (5/206) for DP-EES ( P=0.041). Stent thrombosis rates at 1 year were similar (0.5% versus 1.0%; P=0.601)., Conclusions: In the ACS subgroup population of the BIOFLOW V study, treatment with BP-SES compared with DP-EES was associated with a significantly lower rate of 12-month target lesion failure, a difference driven by significantly lower periprocedural MI and spontaneous MI. These findings support treatment with an ultrathin strut BP-SES in ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02389946.

Current guidelines recommend that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) should be restricted to the culprit vessel in ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with multi-vessel disease (MVD) and without cardiogenic shock. However, newer data suggests that performing complete revascularization (CR) in MVD patients may lead to better outcomes compared to intervention in the culprit vessel only. The aim of this meta-analysis is to examine the available data to determine if CR (using either angio- or fractional flow reserve guidance-FFR) following primary PCI in STEMI patients without cardiogenic shock impacts clinical outcomes. Meta-analysis was performed by conducting a literature search of PubMed from January 2004 to July 2017. Pooled estimates of outcomes, presented as odds ratios (OR) [95% confidence intervals], were generated using random-effect models. A total of 9 studies (3317 patients) were included. CR showed a significant MACE reduction (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.36-0.66, p < 0.001); All-cause mortality (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.48-0.98, p = 0.04) and repeat revascularization (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.28-0.51, p < 0.001) at ≥ 12 months follow-up. The FFR-guiding CR group presented a MACE reduction (odds ratio 0.52, 95% CI 0.30-0.90, p = 0.02) due to a decrease of repeat revascularization (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.21-0.80, p = 0.009). Overall, performing complete revascularization in STEMI patients showed a MACE reduction, all-cause death and repeat revascularization. Compared to culprit-only revascularization, treating multi-vessel disease in STEMI patients using FFR guidance is associated with decreased incidence of MACE, due to a decreased rate of revascularization.

Drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly reduced the incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, ISR still exists in the contemporary DES era. Previously deemed to be a benign process, ISR leads to complex presentation and intervention. This study aimed to compare the presentation and outcome of DES-ISR versus de novo lesions. We performed a retrospective analysis of 11,666 patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention from 2003 to 2017 and divided them into 2 groups by de novo stenosis and ISR. They were matched based on common cardiovascular risk factors at a 4:1 ratio, respectively. After matching, a total of 1,888 patients with 3,126 de novo lesions and 472 patients with 508 ISR lesions were analyzed. Patients with ISR presented more often with unstable angina (61% vs 45%, p <0.001) and less often with myocardial infarction (6% vs 14%, p <0.001). One-year composite major adverse cardiovascular event, defined as death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, was 10% in the de novo group and 17% in the ISR group (hazard ratio 1.98, 95% confidential interval 1.58 to 2.46, p <0.001). After adjusting for myocardial infarction presentation, hazard ratio of major adverse cardiovascular events was still higher for the ISR group at 1 year (2.03, 95% confidential interval 1.62 to 2.55, p <0.001). ISR of DES remains a therapeutic challenge and leads to complex presentation and worse outcomes compared with matched de novo patients. These data show that DES-ISR demands better appreciation and prevention with more precise stent technique and should motivate the continued development of fully bioresorbable scaffolds., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Rationale: Bioresorbable scaffolds may confer clinical benefit in long-term studies; early mechanistic studies using intravascular imaging have provided insightful information about the immediate and mid-term local serial effects of BRS on the coronary vessel wall., Objectives: We assessed baseline, 6- and 12-month imaging data of the drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G)., Methods and Results: The international, first-in-man BIOSOLVE-II trial enrolled 123 patients with up to 2 de novo lesions (in vessels of 2.2 to 3.7mm). Angiographic based vasomotion, curvature and angulation were assessed; intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) derived radiofrequency (RF) data analysis and echogenicity were evaluated; optical coherence tomography (OCT) attenuation and backscattering analysis were also performed. There was hardly any difference in curvature between pre-procedure and 12months (-0.0019; p=0.48). The change in angulation from pre- to 12months was negligible (-3.58°; 95% CI [-5.97, -1.20]), but statistically significant. At 6months, the change in QCA based minimum lumen diameter in response to high dose of acetylcholine and IVUS-RF necrotic core percentage showed an inverse relationship (estimate of -0.489; p=0.055) and with fibrous volume a positive relationship (estimate of 0.53, p=0.035). Bioresorption analysis by OCT showed that the maximum attenuation values decreased significantly from post-procedure at 6months (Δ 6months vs. post-proc. is -13.5 [95% CI -14.6, -12.4]) and at 12months (Δ 12months vs. post-proc. is -14.0 [95% CI -15.4, -12.6]). By radiofrequency data, the percentage of dense calcium decreased significantly from post-procedure at 6months and at 12months. Likewise, by echogenicity, hyperechogenic structures decreased significantly from post-procedure at 6months; thereafter, they remained unchanged., Conclusion: Following implantation of DREAMS 2G, restoration of the vessel geometry, vasomotion and bioresorption signs were observed at up to 12months; importantly, these changes occurred with preservation of the lumen size between 6 and 12months. NCT01960504., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Diabetic patients account for an increasing number of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, diabetes mellitus (DM) is associated with increased residual platelet activity during dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT) and DM patients have worse clinical outcomes after PCI as compared to non-DM., Objective: To evaluate efficacy and safety of short duration DAPT (S-DAPT) and long duration DAPT (L-DAPT) after drug eluting stent (DES) implantation in DM and non-DM patients., Methods: We searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the effect of S-DAPT versus L-DAPT after DES implantation in DM and non-DM patients. Efficacy endpoints were all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and composite end point of net adverse clinical events (NACE) (all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, ST, TVR, stroke, major bleeding). Safety endpoints were major bleeding and stroke. Event rates were compared using a forest plot of relative risk using a random effects model., Results: We included eight RCTs that randomized 28,318 patients to S-DAPT versus L-DAPT (8234 DM and 20,084 non-DM). S-DAPT was associated with an increased rate of ST in non-DM patients [3.67 (2.04, 6.59)]. There was no significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, ST, MI, TVR, major bleeding, stroke and NACE with S-DAPT and L-DAPT in DM patients [1.19 (0.72-1.95); 1.25 (0.69, 2.25); 1.52 (0.70, 3.29); 1.33 (0.88, 2.01); 1.39 (0.89, 2.17); 0.92 (0.19, 4.42); 0.98 (0.29, 3.28); and 0.94 (0.57, 1.54) respectively]. Further, there was no significant difference in the rate of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, TVR, major bleeding, stroke and NACE with S-DAPT and L-DAPT in non-DM patients [0.93 (0.58, 1.48); 0.75 (0.42, 1.35); 1.52 (0.81, 2.83); 0.99 (0.71, 1.39); 0.72 (0.28, 1.84); 1.01 (0.40, 2.56); and 1.01 (0.77, 1.32) respectively]., Conclusion: Compared to L-DAPT, S-DAPT was associated with significant increase in rate of ST in non-DM patients. Duration of DAPT had no significant impact on rates of all-cause mortality, cardiac mortality, MI, ST and TVR among DM patients., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Recent studies suggest the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES), which has ultrathin struts with a biodegradable sirolimus-eluting polymer coating, performed better than contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES). We performed a meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes for all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of O-SES vs contemporary DES., Methods/materials: PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and meeting abstracts were searched for all RCTs comparing O-SES with contemporary DES. Pooled estimates of longest available clinical outcomes at a minimum of one-year follow-up, presented as odds ratios (OR) [95% confidence intervals], were generated with random-effect models., Results: We included 8 RCTs with a total of 11,176 patients (5444 O-SES and 5732 contemporary DES [3537 EES, 1295 ZES, and 1264 BP-BES) with a mean age of 65±11, 74% were male, 40% underwent PCI for stable angina, and 56% for ACS. We assessed outcomes comparing O-SES vs. everolimus-eluting stents, vs. permanent-polymer DES, and vs. all DES including biodegradable-polymer DES. Orsiro performed comparably in all categories with a trend toward a reduction in myocardial infarction (0.83 [0.68, 1.02], p=0.07) and stent thrombosis (0.75 [0.54, 1.04], p=0.08)., Conclusion: Overall, the Orsiro SES had similar clinical outcomes to contemporary DES with a trend toward reduction in myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)