Search

Importance: Although intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) guidance promotes favorable outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), many catheterization laboratories worldwide lack access., Objective: To investigate whether systematic implementation of quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) to assist angiography-guided PCI could be an alternative strategy to IVUS guidance during stent implantation., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized, open-label, noninferiority clinical trial enrolled adults (aged ≥18 years) with chronic or acute coronary syndrome and angiographically confirmed native coronary artery stenosis requiring PCI. Patients were enrolled in 6 cardiac centers in Korea from February 23, 2017, to August 23, 2021, and follow-up occurred through August 25, 2022. All principal analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle., Interventions: After successful guidewire crossing of the first target lesion, patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either QCA- or IVUS-guided PCI., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was target lesion failure at 12 months, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. The trial was designed assuming an event rate of 8%, with the upper limit of the 1-sided 97.5% CI of the absolute difference in 12-month target lesion failure (QCA-guided PCI minus IVUS-guided PCI) to be less than 3.5 percentage points for noninferiority., Results: The trial included 1528 patients who underwent PCI with QCA guidance (763; mean [SD] age, 64.1 [9.9] years; 574 males [75.2%]) or IVUS guidance (765; mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.5] years; 622 males [81.3%]). The post-PCI mean (SD) minimum lumen diameter was similar between the QCA- and IVUS-guided PCI groups (2.57 [0.55] vs 2.60 [0.58] mm, P = .26). Target lesion failure at 12 months occurred in 29 of 763 patients (3.81%) in the QCA-guided PCI group and 29 of 765 patients (3.80%) in the IVUS-guided PCI group (absolute risk difference, 0.01 percentage points [95% CI, -1.91 to 1.93 percentage points]; hazard ratio, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.60-1.68]; P = .99). There was no difference in the rates of stent edge dissection (1.2% vs 0.7%, P = .25), coronary perforation (0.2% vs 0.4%, P = .41), or stent thrombosis (0.53% vs 0.66%, P = .74) between the QCA- and IVUS-guided PCI groups. The risk of the primary end point was consistent regardless of subgroup, with no significant interaction., Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this randomized clinical trial indicate that QCA and IVUS guidance during PCI showed similar rates of target lesion failure at 12 months. However, due to the lower-than-expected rates of target lesion failure in this trial, the findings should be interpreted with caution., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02978456.

Importance: P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT; a P2Y12 inhibitor plus aspirin) for a brief duration has recently emerged as an attractive alternative for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a drug-eluting stent., Objective: To investigate whether P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT was noninferior to 12 months of DAPT following PCI with a drug-eluting stent., Design, Setting, and Participants: The Short-Term Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Deployment of Bioabsorbable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent (SHARE) open-label, noninferiority randomized clinical trial was conducted from December 15, 2017, through December 14, 2020. Final 1-year clinical follow-up was completed in January 2022. This study was a multicenter trial that was conducted at 20 hospitals in South Korea. Patients who underwent successful PCI with bioabsorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stents were enrolled., Interventions: Patients were randomly assigned to receive P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3 months of DAPT (n = 694) or 12 months of DAPT (n = 693)., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was a net adverse clinical event, a composite of major bleeding (based on Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or type 5 bleeding) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) between 3 and 12 months after the index PCI. The major secondary outcomes were major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events and major bleeding. The noninferiority margin was 3.0%., Results: Of the total 1452 eligible patients, 65 patients were excluded before the 3-month follow-up, and 1387 patients (mean [SD] age, 63.0 [10.7] years; 1055 men [76.1%]) were assigned to P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy (n = 694) or DAPT (n = 693). Between 3 and 12 months of follow-up, the primary outcome (using Kaplan-Meier estimates) occurred in 9 patients (1.7%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and in 16 patients (2.6%) in the DAPT group (absolute difference, -0.93 [1-sided 95% CI, -2.64 to 0.77] percentage points; P < .001 for noninferiority). For the major secondary outcomes (using Kaplan-Meier estimates), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 8 patients (1.5%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and in 12 patients (2.0%) in the DAPT group (absolute difference, -0.49 [95% CI, -2.07 to 1.09] percentage points; P = .54). Major bleeding occurred in 1 patient (0.2%) in the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy group and in 5 patients (0.8%) in the DAPT group (absolute difference, -0.60 [95% CI, -1.33 to 0.12] percentage points; P = .10)., Conclusions and Relevance: In patients with coronary artery disease undergoing PCI with the latest generation of drug-eluting stents, P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT was not inferior to 12-month DAPT for net adverse clinical events. Considering the study population and lower-than-expected event rates, further research is required in other populations., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03447379.

Background: Optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) have shown comparable outcomes in guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, their comparative effectiveness in complex coronary artery lesions remains unclear., Objectives: This study compared the effectiveness and safety of OCT-guided vs IVUS-guided PCI for complex coronary artery lesions., Methods: This was a prespecified, main subgroup analysis of complex coronary artery lesions in the OCTIVUS (Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial, which included unprotected left main disease, bifurcation disease, an aorto-ostial lesion, a chronic total occlusion, a severely calcified lesion, an in-stent restenotic lesion, a diffuse long lesion, or multivessel PCI. The primary endpoint was a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization., Results: In 2,008 randomized patients, 1,475 (73.5%) underwent imaging-guided PCI for complex coronary artery lesions; 719 (48.7%) received OCT-guided and 756 (51.3%) IVUS-guided PCI. At a median follow-up of 2.0 years, primary endpoint event had occurred in 47 patients (6.5%) in the OCT-guided group and in 56 patients (7.4%) in the IVUS-guided group (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.59-1.29; P = 0.50). These findings were consistent in adjusted analyses. The incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy was similar between the 2 groups (1.9% vs 1.5%; P = 0.46). The incidence of major procedural complications was lower in the OCT-guided group than in the IVUS-guided group (1.7% vs 3.4%; P = 0.03)., Conclusions: Among patients with complex coronary artery lesions, OCT-guided PCI showed a similar risk of primary composite event of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization as compared with IVUS-guided PCI. (Optical Coherence Tomography Versus Intravascular Ultrasound Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [OCTIVUS]; NCT03394079)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures This study was an investigator-initiated trial and was funded by the CardioVascular Research Foundation, Abbott Vascular, and Medtronic. The funders of the study had no role in study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, or writing of the report. Dr S.-J. Park has received research grants or speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Daiichi-Sankyo, ChongKunDang Pharm, Daewoong Pharm, and Edwards. Dr D.-W. Park has received research grants or speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and Daiichi-Sankyo; and has received grants from ChongKunDang Pharm and Daewoong Pharm. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Intravascular imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) showed superior clinical outcomes compared with angiography-guided PCI. However, the comparative effectiveness of OCT-guided and IVUS-guided PCI regarding clinical outcomes is unknown., Methods: In this prospective, multicenter, open-label, pragmatic trial, we randomly assigned 2008 patients with significant coronary artery lesions undergoing PCI in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either an OCT-guided or IVUS-guided PCI. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at 1 year, which was powered for noninferiority of the OCT group compared with the IVUS group. Safety outcomes were also assessed., Results: At 1 year, primary end point events occurred in 25 of 1005 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 2.5%) in the OCT group and in 31 of 1003 patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate, 3.1%) in the IVUS group (absolute difference, -0.6 percentage points; upper boundary of one-sided 97.5% CI, 0.97 percentage points; P <0.001 for noninferiority). The incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy was similar (14 patients [1.4%] in the OCT group versus 15 patients [1.5%] in the IVUS group; P =0.85). The incidence of major procedural complications was lower in the OCT group than in the IVUS group (22 [2.2%] versus 37 [3.7%]; P =0.047), although imaging procedure-related complications were not observed., Conclusions: In patients with significant coronary artery lesions, OCT-guided PCI was noninferior to IVUS-guided PCI with respect to the incidence of a composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. The selected study population and lower-than-expected event rates should be considered in interpreting the trial., Registration: URL: https://www., Clinicaltrials: gov; Unique number: NCT03394079., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr D.-W. Park reports research grants or speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, and Daiichi-Sankyo; grants from ChongKunDang Pharm and Daewoong Pharm. Dr. S.-J. Park reports research grants or speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Medtronic, Daiichi-Sankyo, ChongKunDang Pharm, Daewoong Pharm, and Edwards. All other authors declare no competing interests.

Introduction: Angiography remains the gold standard for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, it is prone to suboptimal stent results due to the visual estimation of coronary measurements. Although the benefit of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided PCI is becoming increasingly recognised, IVUS is not affordable for many catheterisation laboratories. Thus, a more practical and standardised angiography-based approach is necessary to support stent implantation., Methods and Analysis: The Quantitative Coronary Angiography versus Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance for Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation trial is a randomised, investigator-initiated, multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority trial comparing the quantitative coronary angiography (QCA)-guided PCI strategy with IVUS-guided PCI in all-comer patients with significant coronary artery disease. A novel, standardised, QCA-based PCI protocol for the QCA-guided group will be provided to all participating operators, while the PCI optimisation criteria will be predefined for both strategies. A total of 1528 patients will be randomised to either group at a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint is the 12-month cumulative incidence of target-lesion failure defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction or ischaemia-driven target-lesion revascularisation. Clinical follow-up assessments are scheduled at 1, 6 and 12 months for all patients enrolled in the study., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethics approval for this study was granted by the Institutional Review Board of Asan Medical Center (no. 2017-0060). Informed consent will be obtained from every participant. The study findings will be published in peer-reviewed journal articles and disseminated through public forums and academic conference presentations. Cost-effectiveness and secondary imaging analyses will be shared in secondary papers., Trial Registration Number: NCT02978456., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Aims: There are few randomised studies concerning the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for patients who receive a second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES). This trial aimed to investigate the safety of six-month compared with 12-month DAPT maintenance after second-generation DES implantation., Methods and Results: A prospective, randomised, multicentre trial was performed at 10 medical centres. The 1,368 patients included in the study received a biolimus-eluting stent (BES) or a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES). The primary outcome measured was the composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation at the 12-month follow-up. The secondary outcome was the percentage of uncovered struts at six months in 60 patients (30 ZES, 30 BES) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) assessment. Each patient was randomly assigned to six-month (n=684) or 12-month DAPT (n=684). Major adverse cardiac events at 12 months occurred in eight patients (1.2%) in the six-month DAPT group and in four patients (0.6%) in the 12-month DAPT group (risk difference 0.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.4-1.6%; p=0.24). The upper 95% CI limit was lower than the pre-specified limit of 4% non-inferiority (p for non-inferiority <0.05). The percentage of uncovered struts was 3.16±4.30% at six months in 60 stents of 60 patients., Conclusions: After second-generation DES implantation, six-month DAPT was not inferior to 12-month DAPT in terms of MACE occurrence over the 12-month follow-up period. OCT examination revealed favourable stent strut coverage at six months after stent implantation.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent of neointimal response after the implantation of a second-generation drug-eluting stent, zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES-ER, Endeavor Resolute) or everolimus-eluting stent (EES, Xience V), using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in diabetic patients., Materials and Methods: In all, 154 diabetic patients with de-novo coronary lesions were randomized to be implanted with a ZES-ER or EES, and the angiographic follow-up at 9 months combined with a complete IVUS study was available for 96 patients with 101 lesions., Results: Baseline demographic and lesion parameters were similar in both groups at index percutaneous coronary intervention. On follow-up angiography, in-stent late lumen loss and minimal lumen diameter were not different between the two groups. On IVUS study, neointimal hyperplasia volume [median (interquartile range): ZES-ER vs. EES; 2.25 mm (0.57-6.25) vs. 1.59 mm (0.45-8.37), P=0.615] and in-stent percentage of volume obstruction [median (interquartile range): ZES-ER vs. EES; 1.16% (0.33-3.61) vs. 0.77% (0.29-4.01), P=0.615] showed similar results between the two groups., Conclusion: In diabetic patients, the second-generation drug-eluting stents, ZES-ER and EES, were comparable in inhibiting neointimal proliferation.

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) offers tomographic images of the coronary artery, helping physicians to refine drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in angiographically complex lesions. However, controversy exists regarding whether the routine use of IVUS in short-length lesions leads to improved clinical outcomes after DES implantation. Therefore, we evaluated the usefulness of IVUS in predicting major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization, at 1 year after DES implantation in short-length lesions. The present study was a subanalysis of the REal Safety and Efficacy of a 3-month dual antiplatelet Therapy following Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation (RESET) study with different clinical outcome parameters. The study population consisted of 662 patients with IVUS guidance and 912 patients with angiography guidance who underwent DES implantation (stent length ≤24 mm). In the IVUS-guided group, adjuvant postdilation was more frequently performed (43.0% vs 34.6%, p <0.001), and the postintervention minimal lumen diameters were greater (2.88 ± 0.44 mm vs 2.72 ± 0.43 mm, p <0.001). MACE occurred in 15 IVUS-guided (2.3%) and 19 angiographically guided (2.1%) patients (p = 0.872). In a subset of patients with diabetes mellitus (n = 292), the MACE rate was 3.4% (n = 4) and 1.7% (n = 3) in the IVUS- and angiographically guided patients, respectively (p = 0.384). The MACE rate in the IVUS- and angiographically guided patients with acute coronary syndrome (n = 601) was 1.1% (n = 3) and 2.7% (n = 9), respectively (p = 0.194). The clinical benefits of IVUS-guided DES implantation compared with angiographically guided DES implantation in short-length lesions could not be confirmed even in patients with clinically high-risk presentations (acute coronary syndrome and diabetes mellitus). In conclusion, routine IVUS guidance does not provide clinical benefits when performing short-length DES implantation., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Siroliums-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) have been widely used for the treatment of coronary artery disease. We investigated 5-year clinical outcomes of patients treated with SES versus PES in a multicenter registry., Methods: We used a propensity score matching method with 2:1 matching, including 512 patients treated with SES and 256 patients treated with PES from March 2003 to December 2004. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events, which included all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: After matching, baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. At 5 years, cumulative survival free of major adverse cardiac events, MI, and stent thrombosis did not differ between the two groups. Survival free of TVR at 5 years was higher in the SES group (88.4%) than the PES group (84.3%, Log-rank p=0.016). In contrast to the trend toward more likely target lesion revascularization in the PES group during the first 2 years (hazard ratio 0.62, p=0.057), target lesion revascularization tended to occur more frequently in the SES group from 2 to 5 years (hazard ratio 2.26, p=0.099)., Conclusions: Long-term risk of TVR was slightly lower with SES, compared with PES, despite no significant difference in major adverse cardiac events. However, the SES group had more frequent target lesion reintervention 2 to 5 years after stent implantation, whereas reintervention in the PES group occurred mainly within the first 2 years. This may reflect the temporal difference in neointimal growth of the two stent types., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: There is a growing concern about the occurrence of coronary artery aneurysms (CAAs) after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation and their long-term course. We assessed the occurrence and the factors affecting the long-term outcome of DES-associated CAA., Methods and Results: We analyzed 3,612 consecutive patients (4,419 lesions) who underwent follow-up angiography after DES implantation. All 34 CAAs (0.76% per lesion) in 29 patients (0.8% per patient) were detected at follow-up, and the mean elapsed time from DES implantation to CAA diagnosis was 414 ± 213 days. Angiographically, CAAs developed almost exclusively in complex (type B2/C) de novo lesions (30 [88.2%] of 34 lesions), and lesion length was significantly greater in patients with CAA than without CAA (26.9 ± 9.03 vs 23.1 ± 7.14 mm; P = .004). Myocardial infarction with stent thrombosis occurred in 5 patients with CAA (17.2%), 4 of whom were on aspirin only without clopidogrel., Conclusion: Although CAAs rarely develop after DES implantation and show mostly favorable clinical courses, long-term maintenance of clopidogrel therapy might be required to minimize occurrence of adverse clinical events resulting from stent thrombosis., (Copyright © 2010 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Several reports have suggested that stent fractures in sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) might be related to in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the role of stent strut fracture in ISR has not been clearly elucidated. Therefore, we investigated the association of the SES fracture and ISR., Methods: From 2003 to 2006, SES implantations with follow-up coronary angiography (CAG) for 628 lesions in 557 patients were analyzed. We reviewed clinical and procedural factors that might affect SES fracture and ISR. The median time interval from stent implantation to follow-up CAG was 9 months (range: 2-30 months)., Results: ISR occurred in 38 patients (5.7%), and 21 stent fractures (3.3%) were identified by follow-up CAG. Fourteen cases occurred in the left anterior descending artery, and seven occurred in the right coronary artery. The binary ISR rate in the stent fracture group was higher compared with that of the nonfracture group (38.1% vs. 4.6%, P<0.001). Predictors of ISR as estimated by multivariate analysis were a stent diameter less than 2.75 mm [odds ratio (OR)=2.76, P=0.012], a stent length over 28 mm (OR=3.30, P=0.024), and stent fracture (OR=11.03, P<0.001) after controlling for the angiographic and clinical risk factors of ISR., Conclusion: Stent fracture was an independent predictor of ISR and may be one of the crucial mechanisms of ISR after implantation of an SES.

Background: There is some controversy on long-term cardiac outcomes between sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in diabetes mellitus (DM). We compared cardiac adverse events after SES and PES implantation in patients with DM over a period of 3 year., Methods: A total of 634 patients with DM treated with SES (n = 428) or PES (n = 206) were consecutively enrolled in the KOMATE registry from 2003 to 2004. We assessed major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemia driven target vessel revascularization) and stent thrombosis (ST) according to the definitions set by the Academic Research Consortium., Results: Propensity score (PS) analysis was performed to adjust different baseline characteristics. The mean follow-up duration was 38 +/- 8 month (at least 36 month and up to 53 month). The 3-year MACE rate did not show a significant difference between the two groups [52 (12.1%) in SES vs. 29 (14.1%) in PES, P = 0.496]. The definite and probable ST at 3 year were similar in both SES and PES [12 (2.8%) in SES vs. 7 (3.4%) in PES, P = 0.681]. There were no differences in hazard ratio for MACE and ST between two stents [MACE, crude: 0.844 (0.536-1.330) and adjusted for PS: 0.858 (0.530-1.389); ST, crude: 0.820 (0.323-2.083) and adjusted for PS: 0.960 (0.357-2.587)]., Conclusions: The present study demonstrated that long-tem cardiac outcomes including ST were not significantly different between SES and PES in patients with DM., ((c) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: Cases of stent strut fractures (SSFs) after DES implantation have been reported, but the clinical significance is uncertain. Then we sought to define the incidence and clinical implications of SSFs developed after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation., Methods: We gathered SSF cases from 13 centers in Korea retrospectively. SSF was defined as angiographically visible interrupted connection of stent struts or fewer visible stent struts at the suspected site than normally looking stented area on intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Furthermore, we classified the SSFs cases into three patterns (disruption, avulsion, and displacement) according to the interruption site and absence or presence of displacement., Results: Thirty-seven SSFs (2 disruption, 7 avulsion, 28 displacement) were detected in 35 lesions in 35 patients. All fractured stents were sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs). The incidence of SSFs was 0.84% and the proportion of restenosis related with SSF was 6.3% after SES implantation driven from the data of 8 centers. The average length of stent used was 49 mm, overlapping stenting was performed in 19 lesions (54%), and the average maximal angulation in the initial coronary angiography was 67 degrees . Twenty-four fractures (65%) were associated with focal in stent restenosis and 11 fractures (30%) with target lesion revascularization. No acute coronary syndrome developed., Conclusions: SSF after DES implantation might be a considerable complication after DES implantation especially after SES implantation.