Search

Abstract Background Percutaneous recanalization of total coronary occlusion (TCO) was historically hampered by high rates of restenosis and reocclusions. The PRISON II trial demonstrated a significant restenosis reduction in patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents for TCO. Similar reductions in restenosis were observed with the second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent and everolimus-eluting stent. Despite favorable anti-restenotic efficacy, safety concerns evolved after identifying an increased rate of very late stent thrombosis (VLST) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of TCO. Late malapposition caused by hypersensitivity reactions and chronic inflammation was suggested as a probable cause of these VLST. New DES with bioresorbable polymer coatings were developed to address these safety concerns. No randomized trials have evaluated the efficacy and safety of the new-generation DES with bioresorbable polymers in patients treated for TCO. Methods/Design The prospective, randomized, single-blinded, multicenter, non-inferiority PRISON IV trial was designed to evaluate the safety, efficacy, and angiographic outcome of hybrid sirolimus-eluting stents with bioresorbable polymers (Orsiro; Biotronik, Berlin, Germany) compared with everolimus-eluting stents with durable polymers (Xience Prime/Xpedition; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) in patients with successfully recanalized TCOs. In total, 330 patients have been randomly allocated to each treatment arm. Patients are eligible with estimated duration of TCO ≥4 weeks with evidence of ischemia in the supply area of the TCO. The primary endpoint is in-segment late luminal loss at 9-month follow-up angiography. Secondary angiographic endpoints include in-stent late luminal loss, minimal luminal diameter, percentage of diameter stenosis, in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis and reocclusions at 9-month follow-up. Additionally, optical coherence tomography is performed in the first 60 randomized patients at 9 months to assess neointima thickness, percentage of neointima coverage, and stent strut malapposition and coverage. Personnel blinded to the allocated treatment will review all angiographic and optical coherence assessments. Secondary clinical endpoints include major adverse cardiac events, clinically driven target vessel revascularization, target vessel failure and stent thrombosis to 5-year clinical follow-up. An independent clinical event committee blinded to the allocated treatment will review all clinical events. Trial registration Clinical Trials.gov: NCT01516723. Patient recruitment started in February 2012.

Abstract Background In the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention, patients with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery were recently identified as a high-risk subgroup. It is unclear whether ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery should undergo additional percutaneous coronary intervention of the chronic total occlusion on top of optimal medical therapy shortly after primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Possible beneficial effects include reduction in adverse left ventricular remodeling and preservation of global left ventricular function and improved clinical outcome during future coronary events. Methods/Design The Evaluating Xience V and left ventricular function in Percutaneous coronary intervention on occLusiOns afteR ST-Elevation myocardial infarction (EXPLORE) trial is a randomized, prospective, multicenter, two-arm trial with blinded evaluation of endpoints. Three hundred patients after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction with a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery are randomized to either elective percutaneous coronary intervention of the chronic total occlusion within seven days or standard medical treatment. When assigned to the invasive arm, an everolimus-eluting coronary stent is used. Primary endpoints are left ventricular ejection fraction and left ventricular end-diastolic volume assessed by cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging at four months. Clinical follow-up will continue until five years. Discussion The ongoing EXPLORE trial is the first randomized clinical trial powered to investigate whether recanalization of a chronic total occlusion in a non-infarct related artery after primary percutaneous coronary intervention for ST-elevation myocardial infarction results in a better preserved residual left ventricular ejection fraction, reduced end-diastolic volume and enhanced clinical outcome. Trial registration trialregister.nl NTR1108.

Background: Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear., Objectives: This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD., Methods: This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year., Results: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018)., Conclusions: ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The BIOVASC trial was funded by the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and Biotronik SE & Co KG, Berlin. Dr Diletti has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. Dr den Dekker has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi-Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. Dr Bennett has received institutional grants from Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Shockwave Medical. Dr Daemen has received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical Systems, Medtronic, Microport, Pie Medical, and ReCor Medical; and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, ACIST Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, Cardialysis BV, CardiacBooster, Kaminari Medical, ReCor Medical, PulseCath, Pie Medical, Sanofi, Siemens Healthineers, and Medtronic. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In patients with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease, complete revascularisation by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with improved clinical outcomes. We aimed to investigate whether PCI for non-culprit lesions should be attempted during the index procedure or staged., Methods: This prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised trial was done at 29 hospitals across Belgium, Italy, the Netherlands, and Spain. We included patients aged 18-85 years presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction or non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome and multivessel (ie, two or more coronary arteries with a diameter of 2·5 mm or more and ≥70% stenosis based on visual estimation or positive coronary physiology testing) coronary artery disease with a clearly identifiable culprit lesion. A web-based randomisation module was used to randomly assign patients (1:1), with a random block size of four to eight, stratified by study centre, to undergo immediate complete revascularisation (PCI of the culprit lesion first, followed by other non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator during the index procedure) or staged complete revascularisation (PCI of only the culprit lesion during the index procedure and PCI of all non-culprit lesions deemed to be clinically significant by the operator within 6 weeks after the index procedure). The primary outcome was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation at 1 year after the index procedure. Primary and secondary outcomes were assessed in all randomly assigned patients by intention to treat. Non-inferiority of immediate to staged complete revascularisation was considered to be met if the upper boundary of the 95% CI of the hazard ratio (HR) for the primary outcome did not exceed 1·39. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03621501., Findings: Between June 26, 2018, and Oct 21, 2021, 764 patients (median age 65·7 years [IQR 57·2-72·9] and 598 [78·3%] males) were randomly assigned to the immediate complete revascularisation group and 761 patients (median age 65·3 years [58·6-72·9] and 589 [77·4%] males) were randomly assigned to the staged complete revascularisation group, and were included in the intention-to-treat population. The primary outcome at 1 year occurred in 57 (7·6%) of 764 patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 71 (9·4%) of 761 patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·55-1·11, p non-inferiority =0·0011). There was no difference in all-cause death between the immediate and staged complete revascularisation groups (14 [1·9%] vs nine [1·2%]; HR 1·56, 95% CI 0·68-3·61, p=0·30). Myocardial infarction occurred in 14 (1·9%) patients in the immediate complete revascularisation group and in 34 (4·5%) patients in the staged complete revascularisation group (HR 0·41, 95% CI 0·22-0·76, p=0·0045). More unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisations were performed in the staged complete revascularisation group than in the immediate complete revascularisation group (50 [6·7%] patients vs 31 [4·2%] patients; HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·39-0·95, p=0·030)., Interpretation: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel disease, immediate complete revascularisation was non-inferior to staged complete revascularisation for the primary composite outcome and was associated with a reduction in myocardial infarction and unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation., Funding: Erasmus University Medical Center and Biotronik., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests RD has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. WKdD has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. NMVM has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Aims: The impact of endothelial shear stress (ESS) on vessel remodeling in vessels implanted with bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) as compared to metallic drug-eluting stent (DES) remains elusive. The aim of this study was to determine whether the relationship between ESS and remodeling patterns differs in BRS from those seen in metallic DES at 3-year follow-up., Methods: In the ABSORB II randomized trial, lesions were investigated by serial coronary angiography and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Three-dimensional reconstructions of coronary arteries post-procedure and at 3 years were performed. ESS was quantified using non-Newtonian steady flow simulation. IVUS cross-sections in device segment were matched using identical landmarks., Results: Paired ESS calculations post-procedure and at 3 years were feasible in 57 lesions in 56 patients. Post-procedure, median ESS at frame level was higher in BRS than in DES, with marginal statistical significance (0.97 ± 0.48 vs. 0.75 ± 0.39 Pa, p = 0.063). In the BRS arm, vessel area and lumen area showed larger increases in the highest tercile of median ESS post-procedure as compared to the lowest tercile. In contrast, in DES, no significant relationship between median ESS post-procedure and remodeling was observed. In multivariate analysis, smaller vessel area, larger lumen area, higher plaque burden post-procedure, and higher median ESS post-procedure were independently associated with expansive remodeling in matched frames. Only in BRS, younger age was an additional significant predictor of expansive remodeling., Conclusions: In a subset of lesions with large plaque burden, shear stress could be associated with expansive remodeling and late lumen enlargement in BRS, while ESS had no impact on vessel dimension in metallic DES., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) have become a reliable revascularisation option to treat ischaemic coronary artery disease. Drug-eluting stents (DES) are widely used as first choice devices in many procedures due to their established good medium to long term outcomes. These permanent implants, however, do not have any residual function after vascular healing following the PCI. Beyond this initial healing period, metallic stents may induce new problems, resulting in an average rate of 2 % reinterventions per year. To eliminate this potential late limitation of permanent metallic DES, bioresorbable coronary stents or 'vascular scaffolds' (BVS) have been developed. In a parallel publication in this journal, an overview of the current clinical performance of these scaffolds is presented. As these scaffolds are currently CE marked and commercially available in many countries and as clinical evidence is still limited, recommendations for their general usage are needed to allow successful clinical introduction.