Search

Objectives: This study sought to present an angiography-based computational model for serial assessment of superficial wall strain (SWS, dimensionless) of de-novo coronary stenoses treated with either bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) or drug-eluting stent (DES)., Background: A novel method for SWS allows the assessment of the mechanical status of arteries in-vivo, which may help for predicting cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: Patients with arterial stenosis treated with BRS (n = 21) or DES (n = 21) were included from ABSORB Cohort B1 and AIDA trials. The SWS analyses were performed along with quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at pre-PCI, post-PCI, and 5-year follow-up. Measurements of QCA and SWS parameters were quantified at the treated segment and adjacent 5-mm proximal and distal edges., Results: Before PCI, the peak SWS on the 'to be treated' segment (0.79 ± 0.36) was significantly higher than at both virtual edges (0.44 ± 0.14 and 0.45 ± 0.21; both p < 0.001). The peak SWS in the treated segment significantly decreased by 0.44 ± 0.13 (p < 0.001). The surface area of high SWS decreased from 69.97mm 2 to 40.08mm 2 (p = 0.002). The peak SWS in BRS group decreased to a similar extent (p = 0.775) from 0.81 ± 0.36 to 0.41 ± 0.14 (p < 0.001), compared with DES group from 0.77 ± 0.39 to 0.47 ± 0.13 (p = 0.001). Relocation of high SWS to device edges was often observed in both groups after PCI (35 of 82 cases, 41.7 %). At follow-up of BRS, the peak SWS remained unchanged compared to post-PCI (0.40 ± 0.12 versus 0.36 ± 0.09, p = 0.319)., Conclusion: Angiography-based SWS provided valuable information about the mechanical status of coronary arteries. Device implantation led to a significant decrease of SWS to a similar extent with either polymer-based scaffolds or permanent metallic stents., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Y. Onuma reports institutional research grants related to his work as the chairman of cardiovascular imaging core labs of several clinical trials and registry sponsored by industry, for which they receive no direct compensation. P. W. Serruys reports personal fees from Sino Medical Sciences Technology, Philips/Volcano, Xeltis, outside the submitted work. S. Tu reports grants and consultancy from Pulse Medical. Authors have no other disclosures or financial involvement with any organization or entity with a financial interest in or financial conflict with the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript apart from those disclosed., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In the TALENT study, the sirolimus-eluting ultrathin strut Supraflex stent was non-inferior to the XIENCE stent for a device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE: defined as cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation [CI-TLR]) at 12 months., Aims: This study investigated the 3-year outcomes of the TALENT trial and long-term impact of ultrathin drug-eluting stents (DES), compared to the XIENCE everolimus-eluting thin stent., Methods: The TALENT trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised all-comers trial comparing the Supraflex sirolimus-eluting stent with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent, with planned follow-up for 3 years., Results: The TALENT trial enrolled 1,435 patients (Supraflex n=720, XIENCE n=715) with 3-year follow-up data available in 97.8% in the Supraflex group, and in 98.9% in the XIENCE group. At 3 years, DoCE occurred in 57 patients (8.1%) in the Supraflex group, and in 66 patients (9.4%) in the XIENCE group (p=0.406). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of cardiac death, TV-MI or CI-TLR. The rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis were low and similar between groups (1.1% vs 1.4%; p=0.640). In a meta-analysis of long-term follow-up (3-5 years), ultrathin strut DES tended to reduce DoCE (relative risk 0.89 [0.79-1.01]; p=0.068), compared to thicker strut DES. The risks for cardiac death and definite or probable stent thrombosis were similar between ultrathin strut DES and thicker strut DES., Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, the use of the Supraflex stent was at least as safe and efficacious as the XIENCE stent in an all-comers population., Clinicaltrials: gov: NCT02870140.

Background: Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS)-related events have been reported between 1 and 3 years - the period of active scaffold bioresorption. Data on the performance of the Absorb BVS in daily clinical practice beyond this time point are scarce., Aims: This report aimed to provide the final five-year clinical follow-up of the Absorb BVS in comparison with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES). In addition, we evaluated the effect of prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) administration on events in the scaffold group., Methods: AIDA was a multicentre, investigator-initiated, non-inferiority trial, in which 1,845 unselected patients with coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to either the Absorb BVS (n=924) or the XIENCE EES (n=921). Target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularisation, was the primary endpoint. Scaffold thrombosis cases were matched with controls and tested for the effect of prolonged DAPT., Results: Up to five-year follow-up, there was no difference in TVF between the Absorb BVS (17.7%) and the XIENCE EES (16.1%) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-1.41; p=0.302). Definite or probable device thrombosis (DT) occurred in 43 patients (4.8%) in the scaffold group compared to 13 patients (1.5%) in the stent group (HR 3.32, 95% CI: 1.78-6.17; p<0.001). DT between 3 and 4 years occurred six times in the Absorb arm versus three times in the XIENCE arm. Between 4 and 5 years, the incidence was three versus two, respectively. Of those three DT in the scaffold group, two occurred in XIENCE EES-treated lesions. The odds ratio of scaffold thrombosis in patients on DAPT compared to off DAPT throughout five-year follow-up was 0.36 (95% CI: 0.15-0.86)., Conclusions: The excess risk of the Absorb BVS on late adverse events, in particular device thrombosis, in routine PCI continues up to 4 years and seems to plateau afterwards. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01858077.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess 10-year all-cause mortality in patients with heavily calcified lesions (HCLs) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG)., Background: Limited data are available on very long term outcomes in patients with HCLs according to the mode of revascularization., Methods: This substudy of the SYNTAXES (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery Extended Survival) study assessed 10-year all-cause mortality according to the presence of HCLs within lesions with >50% diameter stenosis and identified during the calculation of the anatomical SYNTAX (Synergy Between PCI With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score among 1,800 patients with the 3-vessel disease and/or left main disease randomized to PCI or CABG in the SYNTAX trial. Patients with HCLs were further stratified according to disease type (3-vessel disease or left main disease) and assigned treatment (PCI or CABG)., Results: The 532 patients with ≥1 HCL had a higher crude mortality rate at 10 years than those without (36.4% vs 22.3%; HR: 1.79; 95% CI: 1.49-2.16; P < 0.001). After adjustment, an HCL remained an independent predictor of 10-year mortality (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.09-1.69; P = 0.006). There was a significant interaction in mortality between treatment effect (PCI and CABG) and the presence or absence of HCLs (P interaction  = 0.005). In patients without HCLs, mortality was significantly higher after PCI than after CABG (26.0% vs 18.8%; HR: 1.44; 95% CI: 0.97-1.41; P = 0.003), whereas in those with HCLs, there was no significant difference (34.0% vs 39.0%; HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.64-1.13; P = 0.264)., Conclusions: At 10 years, the presence of an HCL was an independent predictor of mortality, with a similar prognosis following PCI or CABG. Whether HCLs require special consideration when deciding the mode of revascularization beyond their current contribution to the anatomical SYNTAX score deserves further evaluation. (Synergy Between PCI With TAXUS and Cardiac Surgery: SYNTAX Extended Survival [SYNTAXES], NCT03417050; SYNTAX Study: TAXUS Drug-Eluting Stent Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for the Treatment of Narrowed Arteries [SYNTAX], NCT00114972)., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The SYNTAX Extended Survival study was supported by the German Foundation of Heart Research. The SYNTAX trial, during 0- to 5-year follow-up, was funded by Boston Scientific. Both sponsors had no role in the study design, data collection, data analyses, and interpretation of the study data and were not involved in the decision to publish the final manuscript. The principal investigators and authors had complete scientific freedom. Dr Serruys has received personal fees from SMT, Philips/Volcano, Xeltis, Novartis, and Merillife. Dr Hara has received a grant for studying overseas from the Japanese Circulation Society and a grant from Fukuda Foundation for Medical Technology, outside the submitted work. Dr Morice is a CEO and shareholder of CERC, a contract research organization based in Paris, with no role in this trial. Dr Kappetein is an employee of Medtronic. 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: In this prespecified AIDA-trial sub-study we investigate the clinical performance of absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) compared to Xience everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in routine percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) at complete 3-year follow-up., Methods and Results: All 1,845 randomized patients were subdivided by medical history with DM or without DM. Of the 924 Absorb BVS patients, 171 (18.5%) patients had DM, of which 65 (38.0%) were treated with insulin (iTDM). Of the 921 Xience EES patients, 153 (16.6%) patients had DM, of which 45 (29.4%) were insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (iTDM). Target vessel failure (TVF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, occurred in 18.7% of diabetic patients treated with Absorb patients versus in 18.0% patients treated with Xience EES (p = .840). In nondiabetics the rates of TVF were 12.3% in Absorb BVS versus 11.0% in Xience EES (p = .391). Definite/probable device thrombosis occurred more frequently in Absorb BVS compared to Xience EES in both diabetic and nondiabetic patients (4.8% versus 0.7%; p = .028 and 3.2% vs. 0.5%; p < .001, respectively)., Conclusions: In routine PCI practice, both Absorb BVS and Xience EES have worse clinical outcomes in diabetic patients as compared to nondiabetic patients. Throughout all clinical presentations, Absorb BVS was associated with higher rates of device thrombosis at 3-year follow-up., (© 2020 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Objectives: This final report from the REMEDEE Registry assessed the long-term safety and efficacy of the dual-therapy COMBO stent in a large unselected patient population., Background: The bio-engineered COMBO stent (OrbusNeich Medical BV, The Netherlands) is a dual-therapy pro-healing stent. Data of long-term safety and efficacy of the this stent is lacking., Methods: The prospective, multicenter, investigator-initiated REMEDEE Registry evaluated clinical outcomes after COMBO stent implantation in daily clinical practice. One thousand patients were enrolled between June 2013 and March 2014., Results: Five-year follow-up data were obtained in 97.2% of patients. At 5-years, target lesion failure (TLF) (composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) was present in 145 patients (14.8%). Definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 0.9%, with no additional case beyond 3-years of follow-up. In males, 5-year TLF-rate was 15.6 versus 12.6% in females (p = .22). Patients without diabetes mellitus (DM) had TLF-rate of 11.4%, noninsulin-treated DM 22.7% (p = .001) and insulin-treated DM 41.2% (p < .001). Patients presenting with non-ST segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) had higher incidence of TLF compared to non-ACS (20.4 vs. 13.3%; p = .008), while incidence with STE-ACS was comparable to non-ACS (10.7 vs. 13.3%; p = .43)., Conclusion: Percutaneous coronary intervention with the dual-therapy COMBO stent in unselected patient population shows low rates of TLF and ST to 5 years. Remarkably, no case of ST was noted beyond 3 years., (© 2020 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: The COMBO biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent includes endothelial progenitor cell capture (EPC) technology for rapid endothelialization, which may offer advantage in acute coronary syndromes (ACS). We sought to analyze the performance of the COMBO stent by ACS status and ACS subtype., Methods: The COMBO collaboration (n = 3614) is a patient-level pooled dataset from the MASCOT and REMEDEE registries. We evaluated outcomes by ACS status, and ACS subtype in patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) or non-STEMI (NSTEMI) versus unstable angina (UA). The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST)., Results: We compared 1965 (54%) ACS and 1649 (46.0%) non-ACS patients. ACS presentations included 40% (n = 789) STEMI, 31% (n = 600) NSTEMI, and 29% (n = 576) UA patients. Risk of 1-year TLF was greater in ACS patients (4.5% vs. 3.3%, HR 1.51 95% CI 1.01-2.25, p = 0.045) without significant differences in definite/probable ST (1.1% vs 0.5%, HR 2.40, 95% CI 0.91-6.31, p = 0.08). One-year TLF was similar in STEMI, NSTEMI, and UA (4.8% vs 4.8% vs. 3.7%, p = 0.60), but definite/probable ST was higher in STEMI patients (1.9% vs 0.5% vs 0.7%, p = 0.03). Adjusted outcomes were not different in MI versus UA patients., Conclusions: Despite the novel EPC capture technology, COMBO stent PCI was associated with somewhat greater risk of 1-year TLF in ACS than in non-ACS patients, without significant differences in stent thrombosis. No differences were observed in 1-year TLF among ACS subtypes.

Background: The COMBO drug eluting stent is a novel device with luminal endothelial progenitor cell capture technology for rapid homogeneous endothelialization., Methods and Results: We examined for sex differences in 1-year outcomes after COMBO stenting from the COMBO collaboration, a pooled patient-level dataset from the MASCOT and REMEDEE multicenter registries. The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). Adjusted outcomes were assessed using Cox regression methods. The study included 861 (23.8%) women and 2,753 (76.2%) men. Women were older with higher prevalence of several comorbidities including diabetes mellitus. Risk of 1-year TLF was similar in both sexes (3.8% vs. 3.9%, HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.59-1.42, p = .70), without sex differences in the incidence of cardiac death (1.6% vs. 1.5%, p = .78), TV-MI (1.5% vs. 1.1%, p = .32), or CD-TLR (2.0% vs. 2.2%, p = .67). Definite or probable ST occurred in 0.4% women and 1.0% men (HR 0.26, 95% CI 0.06-1.11, p = .069)., Conclusions: Despite greater clinical risks at baseline, women treated with COMBO stents had similarly low 1-year TLF and other ischemic outcomes compared to men., (© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The DESSOLVE III OCT substudy aimed to compare serially neointimal hyperplasia volume obstruction (%VO) between the thin-strut MiStent with early polymer elimination and nine-month sustained drug release from microcrystalline sirolimus and the durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting XIENCE stent at six and 24 months after implantation., Methods and Results: The efficacy endpoint was %VO, calculated as abluminal neointimal volume/stent volume. Thirty-six patients (MiStent 16 patients, 16 lesions; XIENCE 20 patients, 22 lesions) underwent serial OCT evaluation at both six and 24 months. At six months, mean abluminal %VO was significantly lower in the MiStent group than in the XIENCE group (14.54±3.70% vs 19.11±6.70%; p=0.011), whereas the difference in %VO between the two groups decreased at 24 months (20.88±5.72% vs 23.50±7.33%; p=0.24). There was no significant difference in percentage malapposed struts and percentage uncovered struts between the two groups at both time points., Conclusions: In the serial comparative OCT analysis of the MiStent versus the XIENCE, the MiStent showed a more favourable efficacy for preventing neointimal formation with comparable strut tissue coverage, as compared with the XIENCE at six months, but this difference in %VO decreased at 24 months so that the difference in neointima at 24 months was no longer significant.

Aims: We aimed to evaluate the impact of the complexity of coronary disease as assessed by the SYNTAX score (SXscore) on the clinical outcomes in the AIDA trial., Methods and Results: In the AIDA trial, we compared Absorb versus XIENCE in routine clinical practice. Clinical outcomes were stratified by SXscore tertiles: SXlow (SXscore ≤8), SXmid (SXscore >8 and ≤15) and SXhigh (>15). The SXscore was available in 1,661 of the 1,845 (90%) patients. The event rate of TVF was numerically lower in Absorb compared to XIENCE (3.7% versus 5.6%; p=0.257) in the SXlow tertile, numerically higher in Absorb in the SXmid tertile (11.4% versus 9.3%, p=0.421) and similar in the SXhigh tertile (15.5% versus 15.6%; p=0.960). The rates of definite/probable device thrombosis in Absorb versus XIENCE were significantly higher in the SXmid tertile (3.3% versus 0.8%, p=0.043) and in the SXhigh tertile (3.7% versus 0.8%, p=0.006)., Conclusions: We found no significantly different rates of TVF between Absorb and XIENCE patients. Absorb-treated patients in the SXmid and SXhigh tertiles had an increased risk of device thrombosis when compared to XIENCE-treated patients. The rates of device thrombosis in the SXlow tertile, while still higher for Absorb, are more acceptable than in the SXmid and SXhigh score tertiles.

Backgrounds: Data on optimal antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing stenting of the proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) are limited., Methods: This is a post-hoc analysis of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, a prospective, multi-center, randomized controlled trial, comparing the experimental strategy (1-month dual anti-platelet therapy [DAPT] followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy) with the reference regimen (12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy) in relation to stenting of the proximal LAD. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death or new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) and key secondary safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding at two years., Results: Among 15,845 patients included in the analysis, 3823 (23.9%) patients underwent stenting of the proximal LAD, while 12,022 (75.2%) did not. In the proximal LAD stenting group, there was no significant difference in the risk of the primary endpoint between the two antiplatelet strategies (3.38% vs. 3.93%; hazard ratio [HR]:0.86; 95% CI:0.62-1.20; P interaction  = 0.951). However, the risk of any MI (2.63% vs. 3.88%; HR:0.68; 95% CI:0.47-0.97; P interaction  = 0.015) and any revascularization (7.84% vs. 9.94%; HR:0.78; 95% CI:0.63-0.97; P interaction  = 0.058) was significantly lower in the experimental strategy group, while demonstrating a similar risk of BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding between the two antiplatelet strategies (1.93% vs. 1.99%; HR:0.98; 95% CI:0.62-1.54; P interaction  = 0.981)., Conclusions: The present study showed patients having stenting to the proximal LAD could potentially benefit from the experimental strategy with lower ischaemic events without a trade-off in major bleeding at two years., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest Dr. Hara reports grant from Japanese Circulation Society and Fukuda Foundation for Medical Technology, outside the submitted work; Dr. de Winter reports unrestricted educational research grant from Astra Zeneca for Acadamic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, outside the submitted work; Dr. Hamm reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, outside the submitted work; Dr. Steg reports grants and personal fees from Bayer/Janssen, grants and personal fees from Merck, grants and personal fees from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Amarin, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, personal fees from Boehringer-Ingelheim, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Regeneron, personal fees from Lilly, personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Servier, outside the submitted work; Dr. Windecker reports research and educational grants to the institution from Abbott, Amgen, BMS, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Johnson& Johnson, Medtronic, Querbet, Polares, Sanofi, Terumo, Sinomed, outside the submitted work. He serves as unpaid member of the steering/excecutive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, BMS, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Cardiovalve, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Polares, Sinomed, V-Wave and Xeltis, but has not received personal payments by any pharmaceutical company or device manufacturer. He is also member of the steering/excecutive committee group of several investigated-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. Dr. Vranckx reports personal fees from Astra Zeneca, personal fees from The Medicines Company, during the conduct of the study; personal fees from Bayer Health Care, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Terumo, personal fees from CLS Bhering, outside the submitted work; Dr. Valgimigli reports grants and personal fees from Abbott, personal fees from Chiesi, personal fees from Bayer, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Amgen, grants and personal fees from Terumo, personal fees from Alvimedica, grants from Medicure, grants and personal fees from Astrazeneca, personal fees from Biosensors, personal fees from Idorsia, outside the submitted work; Dr. Serruys reports personal fees from Abbott Laboratories, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Biotrinik, personal fees from GLG Research, personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Sino Medical Sciences Technology, personal fees from Société Europa Digital Publishing, personal fees from Stentys France, personal fees from Svelte Medical Systems, personal fees from Philips/Volcano, personal fees from Qualimed, personal fees from Xeltis, outside the submitted work; All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of a novel antiplatelet regimen in patients with increasing total stent length (TSL)., Methods and Results: This is a post hoc analysis of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, a prospective, multicentre, open-label, randomised trial, investigating the impact of the experimental strategy (one-month dual antiplatelet therapy [DAPT] followed by 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy) versus the reference regimen (12-month DAPT followed by 12-month aspirin monotherapy) in patients with a Biolimus A9-eluting stent (BES). The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death and new Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), and the secondary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding at two years. To investigate the association between total stent length and outcomes, groups were compared in quartiles according to TSL; the fourth quartile group was at significantly higher ischaemic risk at two years. In that stratum (TSL ≥46 mm), the experimental strategy significantly reduced the risk of the primary endpoint (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.90; pinteraction=0.043), while demonstrating a similar risk of BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.66-1.49; pinteraction=0.975)., Conclusions: Ticagrelor monotherapy could potentially balance ischaemic and bleeding risks, thereby achieving a net clinical benefit in patients with a TSL ≥46 mm with a BES.

Older patients who undergo coronary interventions are at greater risk of ischemic events and less likely to tolerate prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) due to bleeding risk. The COMBO biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent promotes rapid endothelialization through endothelial progenitor cell capture technology which may be advantageous in elderly patients. We compared 1-year clinical outcomes and DAPT cessation events in patients >75 versus ≤75 years from the MASCOT registry. MASCOT was a prospective, multicenter cohort study of all-comers undergoing attempted COMBO stenting. The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) not clearly attributed to a nontarget vessel or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Bleeding was adjudicated using the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria. Adjusted outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression methods. The study included 18% (n = 479) patients >75 years and 72% (n = 2,135) patients ≤75 years. One-year TLF occurred in 4.6% patients >75 years versus 3.1% patients ≤75years of age, p = 0.10; adj hazard ratio 1.36, 95% confidence intervals 0.77 to 2.38, p = 0.29. There were no significant differences in cardiac death (1.7% vs 1.3%, p = 0.55), MI (2.1% vs 1.2%, p = 0.14), target lesion revascularization (1.7% vs 1.4%, p = 0.60) and definite stent thrombosis (0.8% vs 0.4%, p = 0.19). Major Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 3,5 bleeding (3.1% vs 1.5%, p = 0.01) and DAPT cessation rates (32.4% vs 23.0%, p <0.001) were significantly higher in elderly patients. In conclusion, elderly patients >75 years treated with COMBO stents had similar TLF but significantly greater incidence of bleeding than younger patients and DAPT cessation in one-third of patients over 1 year., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Introduction: The technology of bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) spread out after the success of the first-in-man trials of the Absorb. However, the randomized trials demonstrated that major adverse cardiac events and scaffold thrombosis rates of the first-generation Absorb were higher than those of the metallic everolimus-eluting stent. To overcome the shortcoming of the firstly commercialized Absorb, novel technologies have been developed., Areas Covered: In this review, we overviewed the field of BRS in the treatment of coronary, peripheral artery and gastrointestinal fields. To date, 10 BRS devices developed by 6 manufacturers have acquired the CE mark in coronary artery disease. Currently 8 BRS are in clinical trial phase, whereas 7 BRS are in preclinical assessment phase. Most new-generation devices have a strut thickness of less than 100 μm. However, late favorable outcome might be achieved not only by device refinement but also by a proper technique of implantation using intra vascular imaging guidance, as well as with a careful patient and lesion selection., Expert Opinion: New-generation BRS will be soon tested in the clinical arena to demonstrate improved acute and long-term of safety and efficacy.

Background: Numerous randomized clinical trials have demonstrated the superiority of thin-strut biodegradable polymer second-generation drug-eluting stent to the first-generation drug-eluting stent and the noninferiority to the thin-strut second-generation permanent polymer drug-eluting stent. Data on long-term clinical outcomes with a novel ultrathin drug-eluting stent, to date, are limited., Methods: The DESSOLVE III trial (Multicenter Randomized Study of the MiStent Sirolimus Eluting Absorbable Polymer Stent System for Revascularization of Coronary Arteries; n=1398) is a prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, all-comers, randomized controlled trial (NCT02385279), allocating in a 1:1 ratio to either ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent or to thin-strut permanent polymer Xience everolimus-eluting stent. The primary end point was device-oriented composite end point, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. The secondary end point was patient-oriented composite end point, defined as the composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization., Results: At 3 years, follow-up data were available in 1381 patients (98.8%). The primary end point of device-oriented composite end point occurred in 10.5% for MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent and in 11.5% for Xience everolimus-eluting stent ( P =0.55). Rates of cardiac death (3.9% versus 3.8%; P =0.88), target vessel myocardial infarction (3.2% versus 2.5%; P =0.43), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (5.2% versus 6.5%; P =0.30) did not differ significantly between the 2 devices. The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis was infrequent and similar between the 2 arms (1.2% versus 1.5%; P =0.64). The 90-day landmark analysis showed no significant difference in device-oriented composite end point between the 2 groups after polymer degradation of MiStent. The risk of patient-oriented composite end point was comparable between the 2 groups (22.7% versus 22.9%; P =0.34)., Conclusions: In the DESSOLVE III trial, early safety and efficacy with MiStent sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent are confirmed at a longer term follow-up when compared with Xience everolimus-eluting permanent polymer-coated stent in a large all-comers population. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02385279.

Background: The COMBO drug-eluting stent combines sirolimus-elution from a biodegradable polymer with an anti-CD34+ antibody coating for early endothelialization., Objective: We investigated for geographical differences in outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the COMBO stent among Asians and Europeans., Methods: The COMBO Collaboration is a pooled patient-level analysis of the MASCOT and REMEDEE registries of all-comers undergoing attempted COMBO stent PCI. The primary outcome was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR)., Results: This study included 604 Asians (17.9%) and 2775 Europeans (82.1%). Asians were younger and included fewer females, with a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus but lower prevalence of other comorbidities than Europeans. Asians had a higher prevalence of ACC/AHA C type lesions and received longer stent lengths. More Asians than Europeans were discharged on clopidogrel (86.5% vs 62.8%) rather than potent P2Y 12  inhibitors. One-year TLF occurred in 4.0% Asians and 4.1% of Europeans, p = 0.93. The incidence of cardiac death was higher in Asians (2.8% vs. 1.3%, p = 0.007) with similar rates of TV-MI (1.5% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.54) and definite stent thrombosis (0.3% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.84) and lower incidence of TLR than Europeans (1.0% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.025). After adjustment, differences for cardiac death and TLR were no longer significant., Conclusions: In the COMBO collaboration, although 1-year TLF was similar regardless of geography, Asians experienced higher rates of cardiac death and lower TLR than Europeans, while incidence of TV-MI and ST was similar in both regions. Adjusted differences did not reach statistical significance. CLINICALTRIAL., Gov Identifier-Numbers: NCT01874002 (REMEDEE Registry), NCT02183454 (MASCOT registry)., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Mehran has received institutional research grant support from Eli Lilly/Daiichi-Sankyo Inc., AstraZeneca, The Medicines Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, OrbusNeich, Beth Israel Deaconess, and Bayer; has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Medscape, and Shanghai BraccoSine Pharmaceutical; has received institutional advisory board funding from Bristol-Myers Squibb; has received institutional funding from Claret Medical; owns equity in Claret Medical and Elixir Medical; has served on the executive committee for Janssen Pharmaceuticals and Osprey Medical; has served on the data safety monitoring board for Watermark Research Partners; and has a spouse who has served as a consultant for Abiomed and the Medicines Company. Dr. Kala has served as a consultant for Boston Scientific; has received research support from AstraZeneca, Novartis, Zoll; has served on advisory board for Astra Zeneca, Bayer, Medtronic and Boston Scientific. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data of long-term safety and efficacy of the COMBO dual-therapy stent is lacking. REMEDEE Registry evaluated the COMBO stent and showed low clinical event rates up to 3 year. We report the clinical outcomes at 4-year follow-up of this registry., Methods: The REMEDEE Registry is a prospective, multicenter registry with minimal exclusion criteria, evaluating clinical outcomes after treatment with the COMBO stent. A 1000 patients were enrolled between June 2013 and March 2014. Target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR), at 4-year follow-up was the primary focus of this analysis., Results: Four-year follow-up data were obtained in 97.3% of patients. TLF was present in 117 patients (11.9%). Cardiac death occurred in 45 patients (4.6%), TV-MI was observed in 25 patients (2.6%) and TLR was performed in 73 patients (7.5%). Of the 7.5% TLR at 4 years, 1.5% were beyond 2 years. Definite ST was seen in 7 patients (0.7%) and probable ST in 1 (0.1%). No definite or probable ST occurred between 3 and 4 years follow-up. At 4-year follow-up, 93.1% of patients were free of ischemic symptoms., Conclusion: This registry showed excellent 4-year results after COMBO stent placement, with no ST beyond 3 years., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest All including centers received institutional grants. Drs. Menown has received grant support from Boston Scientific and Biosensors. Dr. den Heijer has received consultant fee from Medtronic CoreValve and Direct Flow Medical. Dr. van't Hof has received grant support from The Medicines Company and grant support from Abbott. Dr. de Winter has received grant support from OrbusNeich, Abbott, AstraZeneca, Stentys, and Tryton; and consultant fee from OrbusNeich. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine 1-year safety and efficacy after treatment with the COMBO and Orsiro stents., Background: The COMBO stainless-steel stent has an anti-CD34 + antibody coating to capture endothelial progenitor cells, thereby promoting faster endothelialization. The Orsiro is an ultrathin-strut cobalt-chromium stent, covered by an extremely thin layer of amorphous silicon carbide to minimize ion leakage. Both devices elute sirolimus from biodegradable polymers., Methods: For this analysis we included European patients from the COMBO collaboration, a patient-level pooling of 2 prospective all-comers registries of COMBO stent implantation (n = 2,775), and all patients randomized to the Orsiro stent (n = 1,169) from the Dutch BIO-RESORT (Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population) randomized trial. The main outcome of interest was 1-year target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization evaluated using propensity score-matched analysis., Results: At baseline, COMBO patients were older and had more insulin-treated diabetes, renal insufficiency, and other comorbidities. However, Orsiro patients included more current smokers and more acute coronary syndrome presentations. Orsiro patients also received longer stents and had more complex target lesions. After propensity score-matched analysis (n = 862/arm), 1-year target lesion failure occurred in 4.1% of COMBO-treated and 2.7% of Orsiro-treated patients (hazard ratio: 1.55; 95% confidence interval: 0.92 to 2.62; p = 0.10). Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 0.5% of COMBO-treated and 0.5% of Orsiro-treated patients (p = 0.99)., Conclusions: A propensity score-matched comparison of all comers treated with the COMBO or Orsiro stent showed no statistically significant differences. Stent thrombosis risk was low and similar between the stents. (Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population [BIO-RESORT], NCT01674803; MASCOT-Post Marketing Registry [MASCOT], NCT02183454; Prospective Registry to Assess the Long-term Safety and Performance of the Combo Stent [REMEDEE Reg], NCT01874002)., (Copyright © 2020 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

It has been hypothesized that dedicated optimized Absorb BVS implantation techniques might mitigate the risk of adverse events such as target vessel failure and device thrombosis. In this explorative AIDA trial QCA substudy, we sought to investigate the influence of implantation techniques on lesion-oriented outcomes in both the Absorb BVS and Xience EES arm at complete 3-year follow-up. The current analysis includes 2152 study lesions treated with at least one study device, of which the baseline angiogram was suited for offline QCA analysis, including Dmax analysis. The lesion-oriented composite outcome (LOCE) of this analysis was a composite of definite device thrombosis, target lesion revascularization and target-vessel myocardial infarction. In Absorb BVS, the Lesion-oriented composite endpoint (LOCE) occurred numerically less in correctly QCA sized vessels when compared to incorrectly sized vessels 8.5% (58/696) versus 11.1% (39/358), p = 0.151. In Xience EES, LOCE had occurred more frequently in incorrectly sized devices according to device diameter/RVD matching; 2.2% (4/187) in correctly sized devices versus 7.1% (63/911) in incorrectly sized devices (p = 0.014). In this AIDA trial QCA substudy, rates of LOCE were significantly lower in Xience EES treated lesions in which devices were correctly sized according to the definitions of device diameter/RVD matching.

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess whether the nine months of cytostatic inhibition by crystalline sirolimus has a beneficial effect in the two-year follow-up in an all-comer population undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods and Results: The DESSOLVE III study (n=1,398) is a prospective, all-comer, multicentre, randomised controlled study (NCT02385279) allocating 703 patients to receive the MiStent drug-eluting stent with a fully absorbable polymer coating containing and embedding a microcrystalline form of sirolimus into the vessel wall, and 695 patients to receive the XIENCE durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. At two years, the device-oriented composite endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation [TLR]) occurred in 8.7% and 8.6% (p=0.958) of patients, and the patient-oriented composite endpoint (all deaths, all MI, and all revascularisations) was observed in 18.5% and 19.6% (p=0.598) of patients in the MiStent and XIENCE arms, respectively. The frequency of TV-MI and clinically indicated TLR was also comparable for both stent types. The rate of definite/probable stent thrombosis was not different in the two arms (0.9% vs 1.3%, p=0.435)., Conclusions: In an all-comer population, at two-year follow-up, the use of the MiStent sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer-coated stent was at least as safe and efficacious as the XIENCE durable polymer stent. The MiStent's potential long-term clinical benefit will be further elucidated after five years of follow-up.

Background: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) might represent a specific subgroup, in which bioresorbable scaffold implantation in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), might lead to better outcomes when compared to conventional treatment with metallic drug eluting stents. In this prespecified subgroup analysis of the Amsterdam Investigator-Initiated Absorb Strategy All-Comers (AIDA) trial, we evaluated the clinical outcomes of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) versus Xience everolimus eluting stent (EES) treated patients presenting either with or without ACS., Methods and Results: We classified AIDA patients on the basis of clinical presentation of ACS or of no-ACS. The rate of the 2-year primary endpoint of target vessel failure (TVF) was similar after treatment with Absorb BVS or Xience EES in ACS patients (10.2% versus 9.0% respectively; P = 0.49) and in no-ACS patients (11.7% versus 10.7%, respectively; P = 0.67) Definite or probable device thrombosis occurred more frequently with Absorb BVS compared to Xience EES in ACS patients (4.3% versus 1.7%, respectively, P = 0.03) as well as in no-ACS patients (2.4% versus 0.2%, respectively; P = 0.002). There were no statistically significant interactions between clinical presentation and randomized device modality for TVF (P = 0.80) and for the endpoint of definite or probable device thrombosis (P = 0.17)., Conclusion: In the AIDA trial, the 2-year outcomes of PCI with Absorb BVS versus Xience EES were consistent in ACS and no-ACS patients: similar rates for TVF and consistently higher rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis under Absorb BVS versus Xience EES. There were no statistically significant interactions between clinical presentation and randomized device modality., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: To date, no specific drug-eluting stent (DES) has fully proven its superiority over others in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention., Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of coronary artery stents in STEMI patients in a patient-level network meta-analysis., Methods: Eligible studies were dedicated randomized controlled trials comparing different stents in STEMI patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with at least 12 months of clinical follow-up. Of 19 studies identified from the published data, individual patient data were collected in 15 studies with 10,979 patients representing 87.7% of patients in the overall network of evidence. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, reinfarction, or target lesion revascularization., Results: Overall, 8,487 (77.3%) of 10,979 STEMI patients were male and the mean age was 60.7 years. At a median follow-up of 3 years, compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), patients treated with paclitaxel-, sirolimus-, everolimus-, or biolimus-eluting stents had a significantly lower risk of the primary endpoint (adjusted hazard ratios [HRs]: 0.74 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.63 to 0.88], 0.65 [95% CI: 0.49 to 0.85], 0.70 [95% CI: 0.53 to 0.91], and 0.66 [95% CI: 0.49 to 0.88], respectively). The risk of primary endpoint was not different between patients treated with BMS and zotarolimus-eluting stents (adjusted HR: 0.83 [95% CI: 0.51 to 1.38]). Among patients treated with DES, no significant difference in the risk of the primary outcome was demonstrated. Treatment with second-generation DES was associated with significantly lower risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis compared with BMS (adjusted HR: 0.61 [95% CI: 0.42 to 0.89]) and first-generation DES (adjusted HR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.36 to 0.88])., Conclusions: In STEMI patients, DES were superior to BMS with respect to long-term efficacy. No difference in long-term efficacy and safety was observed among specific DES. Second-generation were superior to first-generation DES in reducing stent thrombosis. (Clinical Outcomes After Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PCI] Using Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stent [DES]: Evidence From the Individual Patient Data Network Meta-Analysis; CRD42018104053)., (Copyright © 2019 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The aim of this study is to compare the SUPRAFLEX sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with respect to target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months in a non-inferiority trial in a "real-world" patient population., Methods and Results: This is a prospective, randomised, 1:1 balanced, controlled, single-blind, multicentre study comparing clinical outcomes at 12 months between SUPRAFLEX and XIENCE in an "all-comers" patient population, comprising a total of 1,430 enrolled subjects with symptomatic coronary artery disease who qualify for percutaneous coronary interventions at 23 centres in Europe. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the device-oriented composite endpoint target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation) of the SUPRAFLEX group to the XIENCE group at 12 months post procedure. Secondary endpoints include the patient-oriented composite endpoint, target vessel failure, mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation and stent thrombosis rates (ARC classification)., Conclusions: The TALENT trial aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of the thin-strut SUPRAFLEX compared to the current standard of care (XIENCE EES) in patients with atherosclerotic lesions. This will provide valuable information on the impact of this thin-strut device in an all-comers population.

Due to expansion limits of the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold a meticulous implantation with correct sizing is required. We sought to investigate the clinical outcomes based on the sizing of the device related to the maximal lumen diameter measured by quantitative coronary angiography in Absorb BVS and Xience EES treated lesions in the AIDA trial. Sizing of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and Xience everolimus eluting stent (EES) was graded according to the definitions of device non-oversize and device oversize on pre-procedural angiography. Lesion-oriented outcomes (LOCE) (device thrombosis, TLR and TVMI) that occurred during 2 years follow-up were related to device non-oversized or oversized status. In the Absorb BVS group, LOCE occurred in 48 (7.4%) lesions in the oversized group and in 32 (8.2%) lesions in the non-oversized group (HR 0.91; 95% CI 0.58-1.42; p = 0.681), whereas TLR occurred in 34 (5.3%) lesions and in 23 lesions (5.9%), respectively (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.52-1.51; p = 0.666). Definite scaffold thrombosis occurred in 11 (1.7%) device oversized treated lesions against 16 (4.1%) device non-oversized treated lesions (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.19-0.89; p = 0.020). There were no differences in event rates between oversized and non-oversized groups in lesions treated with Xience EES. There was no significant difference in LOCE between oversized and non-oversized treated Absorb BVS and Xience EES treated lesions. Non-oversized Absorb BVS implantation was associated with a higher risk of scaffold thrombosis at complete 2 years follow-up. The majority of very late scaffold thrombosis occurred in properly sized devices.

Background: Supraflex is a sirolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer coating and ultra-thin struts. We aimed to compare Supraflex with the standard of care, Xience, an everolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer coating, regarding clinical outcomes with a randomised trial in an all-comer population., Methods: We did a prospective, randomised, single-blind, multicentre study (TALENT) across 23 centres in Europe (the Netherlands, Poland, the UK, Spain, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Italy). Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older, had one or more coronary artery stenosis of 50% or greater in a native coronary artery, saphenous venous graft, or arterial bypass conduit, and had a reference vessel diameter of 2·25-4·50 mm. Patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in an all-comer manner. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to implantation of either a sirolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer coating and ultra-thin struts (Supraflex) or an everolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer coating (Xience). Randomisation was done by local investigators by use of a web-based software with random blocks according to centre. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of a device-oriented composite endpoint-cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation-between groups at 12 months after the procedure, assessed in an intention-to-treat population. On assumption of 1-year composite endpoint prevalence of 8·3%, a margin of 4·0% was defined for non-inferiority of the Supraflex group compared with the Xience group. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02870140., Findings: Between Oct 21, 2016, and July 3, 2017, 1435 patients with 1046 lesions were randomly assigned to Supraflex, of whom 720 received the index procedure, and 715 patients with 1030 lesions were assigned to Xience, all receiving the index procedure. At 12 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in 35 patients (4·9 %) in the Supraflex group and in 37 patients (5·3%) in the Xience group (absolute difference -0·3% [one-sided 95% upper confidence bound 1·6%], p non-inferiority <0·0001). Definite or probable stent thrombosis prevalence, a safety indicator, was low in both groups and did not differ between them., Interpretation: The Supraflex stent was non-inferior to the Xience stent for a device-oriented composite clinical endpoint at 12 months in an all-comer population. Supraflex seems a safe and effective alternative drug-eluting stent to other stents in clinical practice., Funding: European Cardiovascular Research Institute., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate 1-year clinical safety and efficacy of the dual-therapy COMBO stent in a large, all-comers patient-level pooled cohort., Background: The COMBO stent (OrbusNeich Medical, Fort Lauderdale, Florida) is a novel stent with abluminal sirolimus elution from a biodegradable polymer and a luminal pro-healing anti-CD34+ antibody layer, which attracts circulating endothelial progenitor cells. These endothelial progenitor cells can quickly mature into normal endothelium, providing rapid endothelialization., Methods: The MASCOT (Multinational Abluminal Sirolimus Coated biO-engineered stenT) (N = 2,614, 61 global sites) and REMEDEE (Randomized study to Evaluate the safety and effectiveness of an abluMinal sirolimus coatED bio-Engineered StEnt Post Market Registry) (N = 1,000, 9 European sites) registries are 2 prospective, multicenter studies evaluating clinical outcomes after attempted COMBO stent placement in all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. In this patient-level pooled analysis we analyzed 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. Furthermore, we determined predictors of 1-year TLF., Results: A total of 3,614 patients (63.5 ± 11.2 years of age; 23.8% women) were included in this analysis. The prevalence of diabetes mellitus was 29.3%, and 54.3% patients presented with acute coronary syndrome. The primary endpoint of 1-year TLF occurred in 140 (3.9%) patients, with incidence of cardiac death in 1.6%, target vessel myocardial infarction in 1.2%, clinically driven target lesion revascularization in 2.2%, and definite stent thrombosis in 0.5% patients. Insulin-treated diabetes mellitus, chronic renal failure, and American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association lesion type B2/C were independent predictors of 1-year TLF., Conclusions: In this large patient-level pooled analysis of patients treated with the dual-therapy COMBO stent excellent results at 1-year were observed. (MASCOT - Post Marketing Registry [MASCOT]; NCT02183454; Prospective Registry to Assess the Long-term Safety and Performance of the COMBO Stent [REMEDEE Reg]; NCT01874002)., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Aims: We aimed to assess possible differences in neointimal quality after everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (BVS) implantation in comparison with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting scaffold (CoCr-EES) implantation by optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI)., Methods and Results: This study is a post hoc analysis of the TROFI II trial assessing neointimal quality six months after the implantation of BVS (N=82) and CoCr-EES (N=87) in STEMI patients. Neointimal light property analysis by OFDI fully automatically computed light attenuation, backscatter and light intensity for superficial and deep neointima. High light attenuation/backscatter and high light intensity are reportedly associated with lipidic change and tissue maturation, respectively. Superficial and deep neointima in BVS presented lower light attenuation than CoCr-EES (superficial: 0.77±0.15 vs. 1.27±0.55 mm-1, p<0.001; deep: 0.88±0.20 vs. 1.17±0.27 mm-1, p<0.001). Superficial neointima in BVS showed comparable backscatter to that of CoCr-EES (4.81±0.52 vs. 4.94±0.61, p=0.141), while deep neointima in BVS showed lower backscatter than that of CoCr-EES (4.60±0.62 vs. 4.97±0.62, p<0.001). Light intensity of superficial neointima was comparable between both arms (139±13 vs. 144±30, p=0.236), whereas light intensity of deep neointima in BVS was lower than CoCr-EES (129±14 vs. 138±21, p<0.001)., Conclusions: The present OFDI comparison suggested that tissue maturation was comparable but lipidic change of neointima was less prominent after BVS than after CoCr-EES implantation.

Aims: Specific implantation strategies have been proposed for the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) to optimise outcomes. We aimed to analyse whether the occurrence of definite scaffold thrombosis (ScT) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR) in Absorb-treated AIDA patients was influenced by scaffold implantation techniques., Methods and Results: Absorb BVS implantation in 1,074 lesions was graded according to definitions of optimal implantation based on predilatation, sizing, and post-dilatation (PSP). Lesion-oriented outcomes (definite ScT and TLR) that occurred during a median follow-up of 707 days were related to the presence or absence of PSP. Of 1,074 lesions, 158 (14.7%) lesions met PSP criteria. The most prevalent reason for not meeting PSP criteria was inadequate sizing: 863 (94.2%). Definite ScT occurred in four of 158 PSP-treated lesions compared with 27 of 916 non PSP-treated lesions, with two-year KM estimates of 3.0% vs. 4.1% and an HR of 1.14 (p=0.811). TLR occurred in eight of 158 PSP-treated lesions compared with 61 of 916 non PSP-treated lesions, with KM estimates of 5.6% vs. 7.1% and an HR of 1.29 (p=0.492)., Conclusions: In AIDA, lesions that underwent scaffold implantation according to an optimised Absorb BVS implantation technique did not have lower rates of ScT and TLR compared to scaffold-treated lesions that did not meet PSP criteria.

Background: Predictors and clinical outcomes of stent thrombosis (ST) in women have not been well investigated. Present study aimed to identify predictors of definite ST and its impact on mortality in women undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods: Patient-level data of women enrolled in 26 randomized trials of DES was pooled. The study population was stratified based on the presence or absence of definite ST. Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine the predictors of definite ST. To analyze the temporal impact of definite ST on mortality Cox regression with ST entered as time-updated covariate was used., Results: Of 11,557 patients undergoing PCI with stent implantation, definite ST occurred in 105 patients (0.9%) over median follow-up of 3years. Independent predictors of ST were age (HR 1.03 per year decrease, 95% CI 1.00-1.05; p=0.041), diabetes mellitus (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.27-3.99; p=0.005), non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) at presentation (HR 1.97, 95% CI 1.04-3.75; p=0.037) and stent diameter (HR 3.76 per mm decrease, 95% CI 1.66-8.53; p=0.002). Compared to women without ST, the adjusted hazard ratios for mortality in the first 7days, 8-30days, and beyond 30days from ST were 115.81 (95% CI 68.96-194.47); 37.44 (95% CI 17.31-80.98); 3.54 (95% CI 2.20-5.69), respectively., Conclusions: In this large-scale pooled analysis of women, definite ST was uncommon yet associated with substantial mortality risk, which peaked early and rapidly attenuated over time. Younger age, diabetes, NSTEMI and stent diameter were found to be predictors of ST., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To assess the long-term safety and clinical efficacy of the Genous endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent (ECS) compared with the TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in lesions with a high risk of restenosis., Background: Instead of the use of cytotoxic or cytostatic drugs in drug-eluting stents, a "pro-healing" approach in ECS may overcome impeded healing response due to delayed functional endothelialization of the stent struts., Methods: In the prospective, randomized TRIAS pilot study 193 patients with coronary artery lesions carrying a high risk of restenosis were included (ECS: n = 98, PES: n = 95). The primary focus of this analysis was target vessel failure (TVF) at 5 years. Dual antiplatelet therapy was prescribed for ≥1 month after ECS and for ≥6 months after PES., Results: At 5 years follow-up, no significant differences were found in TVF (ECS 24% vs. PES 29%, risk difference 95% confidence interval (RDCI) -17.3% to 7.4%). Between 2 and 5 years after the index procedure, low numbers of TVF were observed in ECS compared with PES (ECS 4% vs. PES 16%, RDCI -20.8% to -2.3%). There was no definite stent thrombosis in ECS compared with four patients in the PES group., Conclusion: This is the first randomized study providing very long-term clinical efficacy and safety of the ECS in lesions carrying a high risk of restenosis. At 5 years follow-up, TVF rates in ECS group are numerically lower compared with PES due to an increase of events between 2 and 5 years after the index procedure., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The novel dual-therapy COMBO stent aims to promote vessel healing after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary artery disease. The pro-healing technique consists of an anti-CD34+ antibody layer that attracts circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs), which bind to the stent surface and allow rapid endothelialization by differentiation of the EPCs into normal endothelial cells. The COMBO stent combines this pro-healing technique with an abluminal drug elution of sirolimus. The promise of this dual-therapy stent is that it may safely allow a shortened duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after stent placement. Moreover, with a mature endothelial layer, lower rates of in-stent restenosis may be expected. Clinical outcomes after COMBO stent implantation have been recently evaluated in both randomized trials and large, prospective, multicenter registries, showing low clinical event rates of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. Randomized clinical trials (HARMONEE and RECOVERY) have demonstrated the non-inferiority of COMBO versus "first in class" second generation and newer generation drug-eluting stents. Safety and efficacy of 3 months of DAPT after COMBO stent placement in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome has been evaluated in the large REDUCE randomized controlled trial, showing non-inferiority to standard duration of 12-month DAPT. In this review we provide an overview of the current pre-clinical and clinical evidence for the performance of the COMBO stent.

Background: When the pro-healing COMBO stent is used, a short duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) might be safe. However, no cases have been described of patients with short duration of DAPT after COMBO stent placement., Methods and Results: We investigate clinical outcomes at 1year after early discontinuation of DAPT in patients participating in the REMEDEE Registry. This is a prospective, multicentre, European, all-comers registry with a 1000 patients treated with COMBO stent. Target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of target vessel-myocardial infarction (tv-MI), cardiac death and target lesion revascularization, and the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST) in relation with DAPT cessation before 30 and 180days of follow-up is evaluated. At 30days follow-up 48 patients were not on DAPT, at 180days follow-up of 78 patients had no DAPT. Patients with DAPT discontinuation were older, had overall lower left ventricle ejection fraction and more frequent chronic renal failure. No TLF and especially no stent thrombosis were observed in these patients., Conclusions: Discontinuation of DAPT within 6months after COMBO stent placement did not influence the rate of TLF up to 1-year follow-up. Large randomized trials are needed to confirm the safety of short duration of DAPT after COMBO stent placement., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The authors sought to evaluate the relative performance of a drug-eluting balloon (DEB) and a drug-eluting stent (DES) in patients with any (bare-metal or drug-eluting stent) in-stent restenosis (ISR)., Background: The treatment of ISR remains challenging in contemporary clinical practice., Methods: In a multicenter randomized noninferiority trial, patients with any ISR were randomly allocated in a 1:1 fashion to treatment with a DEB (SeQuent Please paclitaxel-eluting balloon, B. Braun Melsungen, Melsungen, Germany), or a DES (XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California). The primary endpoint was noninferiority in terms of in-segment minimal lumen diameter (MLD) at 6-month angiographic follow-up. Secondary endpoints included angiographic parameters at 6 months and clinical follow-up up to 12 months., Results: A total of 278 patients, of whom 56% had DES-ISR, were randomized at 8 sites to treatment with DEB (n = 141) or DES (n = 137). As compared with DEB, DES was associated with larger MLD and lower % stenosis immediately post-procedure (1.84 ± 0.46 vs. 1.72 ± 0.35; p = 0.018; and 26 ± 10% vs. 30 ± 10%; p = 0.03). Angiographic follow up was completed at 196 ± 53 days in 79% of patients. With respect to the primary endpoint of in-segment MLD at 6 months, DEB was noninferior to DES (DEB 1.71 ± 0.51 mm vs. DES 1.74 ± 0.61 mm; p for noninferiority <0.0001). Target vessel revascularization at 12-month follow-up was similar in both groups (DES 7.1% vs. DEB 8.8%; p = 0.65)., Conclusions: In patients with ISR, treatment with DEB was noninferior compared with DES in terms of 6-month MLD. There were no differences in clinical endpoints, including target vessel revascularization up to 12 months. Therefore, use of a DEB is an attractive treatment option for in-stent restenosis, withholding the need for additional stent implantation., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: MiStent is a drug-eluting stent with a fully absorbable polymer coating containing and embedding a microcrystalline form of sirolimus into the vessel wall. It was developed to overcome the limitation of current durable polymer drug-eluting stents eluting amorphous sirolimus. The clinical effect of MiStent sirolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer drug-eluting stents has not been investigated in a large randomised trial in an all-comer population., Methods: We did a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, phase 3 study (DESSOLVE III) at 20 hospitals in Germany, France, Netherlands, and Poland. Eligible participants were any patients aged at least 18 years who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention in a lesion and had a reference vessel diameter of 2·50-3·75 mm. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to implantation of either a sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer stent (MiStent) or an everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent (Xience). Randomisation was done by local investigators via web-based software with random blocks according to centre. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE)-cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation-between the groups at 12 months after the procedure assessed by intention-to-treat. A margin of 4·0% was defined for non-inferiority of the MiStent group compared with the Xience group. All participants were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02385279., Findings: Between March 20, and Dec 3, 2015, we randomly assigned 1398 patients with 2030 lesions; 703 patients with 1037 lesions were assigned to MiStent, of whom 697 received the index procedure, and 695 patients with 993 lesions were asssigned to Xience, of whom 690 received the index procedure. At 12 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in 40 patients (5·8%) in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and in 45 patients (6·5%) in the everolimus-eluting stent group (absolute difference -0·8% [95% CI -3·3 to 1·8], p non-inferiority =0·0001). Procedural complications occurred in 12 patients (1·7%) in the sirolimus-eluting stent group and ten patients (1·4%) in the everolimus-eluting stent group; no clinical adverse events could be attributed to these dislodgements through a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The rate of stent thrombosis, a safety indicator, did not differ between groups and was low in both treatment groups., Interpretation: The sirolimus-eluting bioabsorbable polymer stent was non-inferior to the everolimus-eluting durable polymer stent for a device-oriented composite clinical endpoint at 12 months in an all-comer population. MiStent seems a reasonable alternative to other stents in clinical practice., Funding: The European Cardiovascular Research Institute, Micell Technologies (Durham, NC, USA), and Stentys (Paris, France)., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The natural course of post-procedural incomplete strut apposition (ISA) after the implantation of bioresorbable scaffolds (BVS) remains unknown. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the fate of post-procedural ISA after everolimus-eluting Absorb BVS in comparison with the second-generation everolimus-eluting cobalt chromium stent (CoCr-EES)., Methods and Results: Fate of post-procedural ISA was evaluated by serial optical coherence tomography (OCT) in the ABSORB Japan randomized trial [OCT-1 subgroup: 110 paired lesions of post-procedure and 2-year follow-up (BVS 73 lesions vs. CoCr-EES 37 lesions)] with respect to ISA distance. Post-procedure ISA struts were categorized into either 'resolved' or 'persistent' by matched OCT imaging at 2-year follow-up. Post-procedure %malapposed strut and ISA area were smaller in BVS than in CoCr-EES (%malapposed strut: 4.8 ± 6.9% vs. 9.9 ± 9.8%, P = 0.002; ISA area 0.10 ± 0.18 mm2 vs. 0.23 ± 0.26 mm2, P = 0.003). At 2-year follow-up, the difference diminished, and majority of the ISA struts spontaneously resolved in both arms (%malapposed strut: 0.10 ± 0.46% vs. 0.24 ± 0.65%, P = 0.183). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis (BVS 661 struts vs. CoCr-EES 807 struts) demonstrated that the best cut-off value of endoluminal ISA distance post-procedure for predicting persistent-ISA at 2-year follow-up was 396 µm for BVS (sensitivity 0.875; specificity 0.851) and 359 µm for CoCr-EES (sensitivity 0.778; specificity 0.881)., Conclusion: BVS as compared with CoCr-EES allows larger ISA distance at post-procedure, although we should make every effort to minimize post-procedure ISA. The reported cut-off value of OCT-estimated ISA distance at post-stenting for predicting persistent-ISA would be helpful to optimize PCI with BVS and CoCr-EES., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2017. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aims: The COMBO stent combines sirolimus elution with an endothelial progenitor cell-capturing layer to promote early endothelialisation. There has not been a head-to-head comparison of this novel device with any other currently used drug-eluting stent (DES). We sought to compare clinical outcome at two years after COMBO stent placement with the Resolute Integrity or PROMUS Element stent in an all-comers cohort., Methods and Results: Patients from the REMEDEE registry (COMBO, n=1,000) were matched with patients from the DUTCH PEERS trial (PROMUS Element/Resolute Integrity, n=1,811). Propensity score matching on 13 baseline characteristics was applied to create two balanced cohorts of patients treated with COMBO versus PROMUS Element/Resolute Integrity. Propensity score matching yielded 771 patient pairs, representing all-comers patients, with a median age of 65 years, 27% female and more than 50% of patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome. Target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel MI and any target lesion revascularisation, at two-year follow-up was 7.9% in COMBO and 6.4% in PROMUS Element/Resolute Integrity, HR 1.24 (95% CI: 0.85-1.81), p=0.26. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) was not significantly different between groups (0.8% vs. 0.9%, p=0.79)., Conclusions: In a propensity-matched analysis, the COMBO stent showed similar rates of TLF and ST at two-year follow-up compared to Resolute Integrity and PROMUS Element.

Background: The long-term fate of Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) struts jailing side branch ostia has not been clarified. We therefore evaluate serially (post-procedure and at 6 months, 1, 2, 3, and 5 years) the appearance and fate of jailed Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold struts., Methods and Results: We performed 3-dimensional optical coherence tomographic analysis of the ABSORB Cohort B trial (A Clinical Evaluation of the Bioabsorbable Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) up to 5 years using a novel, validated cut-plane analysis method. We included 29 patients with a total of 85 side branch ostia. From the 12 ostia which could be assessed in true serial fashion, 7 showed a pattern of initial decrease in the ostial area free from struts, followed by an increase in strut-free ostial area toward the end of the 5 years of follow-up. In a repeated-measures analysis with time as fixed variable and ostial area free from struts as dependent variable, we showed a numeric decrease in the estimated ostial area free from struts from 0.75 mm 2 (baseline) to 0.68 mm 2 (first follow-up visit at 6 months or 1 year) and 0.63 mm 2 (second follow-up visit at 2 or 3 years). However, from the second visit to the 5-year follow-up visit, there was a statistically significant increase from 0.63 to 0.89 mm 2 ( P =0.001). Struts overlying an ostium divided the ostium into compartments, and the number of these compartments decreased over time., Conclusions: This study showed that in most cases, the side branch ostial area free from struts initially decreased. However, with full scaffold bioresorption, the ostial area free from scaffold increased between 2 to 3 years and 5 years in the vast majority of patients., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00856856., (© 2017 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Aims: The APPOSITION III registry evaluated the feasibility and performance of the STENTYS self-apposing stent in an ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) population. This novel self-apposing stent device lowers stent strut malapposition rates and therefore carries the potential to prevent stent undersizing during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in STEMI patients. To date, no long-term data are available using this device in the setting of STEMI. We aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcomes of the APPOSITION III registry., Methods and Results: This was an international, prospective, multicentre post-marketing registry. The study population consisted of 965 STEMI patients. The primary endpoint, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was defined as the composite of cardiac death, recurrent target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (CD-TLR). At two years, MACE occurred in 11.2%, cardiac death occurred in 2.3%, TV-MI occurred in 2.3% and CD-TLR in 9.2% of patients. The two-year definite stent thrombosis (ST) rate was 3.3%. Incremental event rates between one- and two-year follow-up were 1.0% for TV-MI, 1.8% for CD-TLR, and 0.5% for definite ST. Post-dilation resulted in significantly reduced CD-TLR and ST rates at 30-day landmark analyses. Results were equivalent between the BMS and PES STENTYS subgroups., Conclusions: This registry revealed low rates of adverse events at two-year follow-up, with an incremental ST rate as low as 0.5% in the second year, demonstrating that the self-apposing technique is feasible in STEMI patients on long-term follow-up while using post-dilatation.

Aims: Immediately after stent/scaffold implantation, quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) in comparison to optical coherence tomography (OCT) more severely underestimates the lumen diameter (LD) in Absorb than in XIENCE. This OCT-QCA discrepancy has not been evaluated at long-term follow-up. The present study aimed to assess the accuracy of QCA with reference to OCT in Absorb as compared to XIENCE., Methods and Results: We assessed two-year QCA and OCT in the ABSORB Japan randomised trial (Absorb n=87, XIENCE n=44). The accuracy of QCA parameters was assessed with reference to OCT measurements. OCT-QCA luminal dimensions were compared in matched cross-sections at both edges of the scaffolds (n=127) and stents (n=78). OCT-QCA late lumen loss (LLL) was also assessed using the Bland-Altman method. The systematic error of LD on QCA in Absorb was -0.092 mm (relative difference -3.3%) with a random error of 0.473 mm, whereas in XIENCE the systematic error was -0.018 mm (-0.5%) with a random error of 0.477 mm. These OCT-QCA discrepancies did not differ between Absorb and XIENCE (p=0.275) at two-year follow-up. QCA tended to underestimate LLL more in Absorb than in XIENCE (QCA-LLL minus OCT-LLL: -0.180±0.308 mm vs. -0.058±0.322 mm, p=0.058) at two-year follow-up, although this comparison was not statistically powered., Conclusions: The two-year dimensional measurements on QCA had minor and insignificant systematic errors between both devices. A discrepancy between QCA-LLL and OCT-LLL would raise a question as to whether this parameter is appropriate for the comparative assessment of device performance.

Background: Patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are at increased risk of complications after percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement compared to patients with stable angina (SA) treated in an elective setting. The novel pro-healing COMBO stent is a bio-engineered drug eluting stent designed to promote vessel healing. Therefore, the stent may reduce this difference in clinical outcomes between elective and ACS-patients and prevent late stent thrombosis., Methods and Results: The European, prospective, multicenter, 1000 all-comers patient REMEDEE registry evaluates clinical outcomes after COMBO stent placement in ACS- and elective patients. The primary endpoint at 12 months is target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization. A total of 49.9% (n = 498) of patients presented with acute coronary syndrome. TLF was 7.1% in ACS patients, definite and probable stent thrombosis was observed in 0.5% of ACS patients and in all within 9 days post stenting. We found no significant difference in TLF between ACS and non-ACS patients and a low overall rate of TLF., Conclusions: The COMBO stent is a safe and efficient device for patients presenting with ACS. Low ST rate and only early stent thrombosis were observed. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Introduction: Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) involving coronary bifurcation lesions are associated with adverse outcomes compared with non-bifurcation lesions. The Tryton Side Branch Stent has been developed to improve clinical outcomes after bifurcation PCI. Areas covered: We will discuss observational data (clinical registries and intravascular imaging studies) and randomized data from the TRYTON trial (comparing Tryton [used in combination with a main branch drug-eluting stent (DES)] with side branch balloon angioplasty [in combination with a main branch DES; also referred to the provisional strategy]). Expert commentary: The published data showed that the use of Tryton was feasible (successful stent placement in ~95%) and safe (stent thrombosis rates ~0.5% at 9-12 months; no cardiac deaths in the TRYTON trial). Its use resulted in excellent acute angiographic results. However, the TRYTON trial also showed that due to neo-intimal tissue growth, luminal dimension at 9 months were similar between Tryton and the provisional strategy. Furthermore, the trial showed an increased risk of peri-procedural myocardial infarction when Tryton was used in small side branches. Based on all data available, the provisional strategy should still be considered as the default strategy in the majority of bifurcation cases, although the use of Tryton may be considered in complex bifurcation anatomies with extensive disease in large side branches, especially when the device will be further improved by a drug-coating.

Background: Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds were developed to overcome the shortcomings of drug-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We performed an investigator-initiated, randomized trial to compare an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent in the context of routine clinical practice., Methods: We randomly assigned 1845 patients undergoing PCI to receive either a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (924 patients) or a metallic stent (921 patients). The primary end point was target-vessel failure (a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization). The data and safety monitoring board recommended early reporting of the study results because of safety concerns. This report provides descriptive information on end-point events., Results: The median follow-up was 707 days. Target-vessel failure occurred in 105 patients in the scaffold group and in 94 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 11.7% and 10.7%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.48; P=0.43); event rates were based on Kaplan-Meier estimates in time-to-event analyses. Cardiac death occurred in 18 patients in the scaffold group and in 23 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 2.0% and 2.7%, respectively), target-vessel myocardial infarction occurred in 48 patients in the scaffold group and in 30 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 5.5% and 3.2%), and target-vessel revascularization occurred in 76 patients in the scaffold group and in 65 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 8.7% and 7.5%). Definite or probable device thrombosis occurred in 31 patients in the scaffold group as compared with 8 patients in the stent group (2-year cumulative event rates, 3.5% vs. 0.9%; hazard ratio, 3.87; 95% CI, 1.78 to 8.42; P<0.001)., Conclusions: In this preliminary report of a trial involving patients undergoing PCI, there was no significant difference in the rate of target-vessel failure between the patients who received a bioresorbable scaffold and the patients who received a metallic stent. The bioresorbable scaffold was associated with a higher incidence of device thrombosis than the metallic stent through 2 years of follow-up. (Funded by Abbott Vascular; AIDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01858077 .).

Introduction: Treatment of coronary artery disease has made strides over the last decades. Development of drug eluting stents (DES), coated with a polymer layer and an anti-proliferative drug to reduce neointimal hyperplasia, has reduced the incidence of in-stent-restenosis relative to treatment with bare metal stents. Patients treated with first generation DES more likely suffer from (very) late events which can be cause by the permanent presence of a polymer. Therefore second generation DES with more biocompatible coatings, and third generation DES, with very thin struts coated with biodegradable polymers, were developed. Areas covered: The MiStent SES is one of these third generation DES and is designed to limit the duration of polymer exposure, optimize coronary vessel healing and more precisely and consistently control drug elution to improve safety and clinical outcomes. This review provides a detailed description of the technique behind the MiStent SES, and describes the pre-clinical and clinical trials conducted with this device to date. Expert commentary: Recent clinical trials have shown non-inferiority of very thin strut biodegradable polymer coated DES compared to durable polymer coated DES, whilst maintaining an excellent safety profile. Longer follow-up, to see the real potential benefits of these devices, is mandatory however.

Aims: In the drug-eluting stent (DES) era, patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) had a higher risk of early stent thrombosis compared with stable patients. The present study aimed to evaluate whether the same is true for the bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA)., Methods and Results: We assessed the relationship between the incidence of definite/probable scaffold thrombosis (ScT) (overall ScT and early ScT) and ACS percentage with the latest publications, including the most recent large randomised controlled trials. Out of a total study population of 13,708 devices in 45 trials, overall ScT was observed in 185 devices (1.35%) at a weighted mean follow-up period of 9.4 months, while early ScT was reported in 125 devices (0.97%) out of 12,896 devices in 44 trials. Meta-regression analysis demonstrated no significant correlation between overall/early ScT and the percentage of patients with ACS (overall ScT: R2=0.030, p=0.255; early ScT: R2=0.067, p=0.090)., Conclusions: ACS appeared to have little impact on the incidence of ScT after the implantation of BVS. Further clinical study is warranted to investigate the predictors of ScT using multivariate analysis with sufficient statistical power.

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to evaluate vascular healing of the bioengineered COMBO Dual Therapy Stent compared with a cobalt-chromium (CoCr) everolimus-eluting stent (EES) as assessed by optical coherence tomography in patients with acute coronary syndromes., Background: CD34+ cells promote endothelial repair after vascular injury. The bioengineered COMBO Dual Therapy Stent combines CD34+ cell-capturing technology with abluminal sirolimus release, but more data from clinical studies evaluating the vascular response are needed., Methods: In a prospective randomized multicenter clinical trial, 60 patients with acute coronary syndromes were randomized 1:1 to COMBO or CoCr EES implantation. The primary endpoint was the percentage of uncovered stent struts per stent. Stent assessment by optical coherence tomography was performed at baseline and at 60 days, followed by independent core laboratory analysis., Results: The percentage of uncovered struts per stent was higher with the COMBO than the CoCr EES at 60 days (median 14.7% vs. 7.7%; p = 0.04). However, no significant difference in uncovered stent struts was observed in the strut level-based analysis at 60 days, which also accounted for clustering (COMBO vs. CoCr EES; 13.6% vs. 6.9%; p = 0.09; generalized linear mixed models-adjusted analysis). Neointimal thickness at 60 days was lower with the COMBO compared with the CoCr EES (median 30.17 vs. 50.26 μm; p = 0.02; stent-level analysis). There were no significant differences in the frequency of major adverse cardiac events and each component of major adverse cardiac events within the study population between the 2 groups at 30, 60, 180, 360, and 540 days post-procedure. No target vessel stent thrombosis has been documented within 540 days., Conclusions: The present multicenter, prospective clinical study for the first time compared the vascular response of the bioengineered COMBO Dual Therapy Stent with a CoCr EES in patients early after acute coronary syndrome by using intracoronary optical coherence tomographic analysis. The percentage of uncovered stent struts per stent was somewhat higher after COMBO versus CoCr EES implantation as detected by optical coherence tomography, associated with reduced neointimal thickness., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. All rights reserved.)

Background: The COMBO stent is a novel sirolimus-eluting stent with a luminal anti-CD34+ antibody layer to promote vessel healing. No data is currently available on clinical outcomes after treatment with this novel bio-engineered device in diabetic patients. We evaluate clinical outcomes at twelve months after COMBO stent placement in patients without diabetes mellitus (non-DM), patients with non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (nITDM) and patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM)., Methods: This study is a pre-specified subgroup analysis of the 1000 patient all-comers REMEDEE Registry. The primary endpoint is target lesion failure (TLF), which is a combined endpoint consisting of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (tv-MI) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at twelve months follow-up. Kaplan Meier method is used with log rank to compare outcomes between groups., Results: This subgroup analysis includes 807 non-DM, 117 nITDM and 67 ITDM. Kaplan-Meier estimates for TLF at twelve months are 4.4% in non-DM, 6.8% in nITDM and 20.3% in ITDM, p<0.001 (non-DM vs nITDM p=0.244, non-DM vs ITDM p<0.001)., Conclusions: This study gives the first insight into the impact of insulin-treated diabetes mellitus on clinical outcome of patients treated with the novel COMBO stent. At one year after COMBO stent placement significantly higher rates of target lesion failure are seen in patients with ITDM compared to patients with nITDM and patients without DM., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)