Comparison of a novel biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent: results of the randomized BIOFLOW-II trial

Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stent vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results of the randomized ABSORB ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-TROFI II trial

AIMS

Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) feature thrombus-rich lesions with large necrotic core, which are usually associated with delayed arterial healing and impaired stent-related outcomes. The use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (Absorb) has the potential to overcome these limitations owing to restoration of native vessel lumen and physiology at long term. The purpose of this randomized trial was to compare the arterial healing response at short term, as a surrogate for safety and efficacy, between the Absorb and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients with STEMI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

ABSORB-STEMI TROFI II was a multicentre, single-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated 1:1 to treatment with the Absorb or EES. The primary endpoint was the 6-month optical frequency domain imaging healing score (HS) based on the presence of uncovered and/or malapposed stent struts and intraluminal filling defects. Main secondary endpoint included the device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) according to the Academic Research Consortium definition. Between 06 January 2014 and 21 September 2014, 191 patients (Absorb [n = 95] or EES [n = 96]; mean age 58.6 years old; 17.8% females) were enrolled at eight centres. At 6 months, HS was lower in the Absorb arm when compared with EES arm [1.74 (2.39) vs. 2.80 (4.44); difference (90% CI) -1.06 (-1.96, -0.16); Pnon-inferiority < 0.001]. Device-oriented composite endpoint was also comparably low between groups (1.1% Absorb vs. 0% EES). One case of definite subacute stent thrombosis occurred in the Absorb arm (1.1% vs. 0% EES; P = ns).

CONCLUSION

Stenting of culprit lesions with Absorb in the setting of STEMI resulted in a nearly complete arterial healing which was comparable with that of metallic EES at 6 months. These findings provide the basis for further exploration in clinically oriented outcome trials.

Safety and performance of the second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold in patients with de-novo coronary artery lesions (BIOSOLVE-II): 6 month results of a prospective, multicentre, non-randomised, first-in-man trial

BACKGROUND

Absorbable scaffolds were designed to overcome the limitations of conventional, non-absorbable metal-based drug-eluting stents. So far, only polymeric absorbable scaffolds are commercially available. We aimed to assess the safety and performance of a novel second-generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS 2G) in patients with de-novo coronary artery lesions.

METHODS

We did this prospective, multicentre, non-randomised, first-in-man trial at 13 percutaneous coronary intervention centres in Belgium, Brazil, Denmark, Germany, Singapore, Spain, Switzerland, and the Netherlands. Eligible patients had stable or unstable angina or documented silent ischaemia, and a maximum of two de-novo lesions with a reference vessel diameter between 2·2 mm and 3·7 mm. Clinical follow-up was scheduled at months 1, 6, 12, 24, and 36. Patients were scheduled for angiographic follow-up at 6 months, and a subgroup of patients was scheduled for intravascular ultrasound, optical coherence tomography, and vasomotion assessment. All patients were recommended to take dual antiplatelet treatment for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss at 6 months. We did analysis by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01960504.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 8, 2013, and May 22, 2015, we enrolled 123 patients with 123 coronary target lesions. At 6 months, mean in-segment late lumen loss was 0·27 mm (SD 0·37), and angiographically discernable vasomotion was documented in 20 (80%) of 25 patients. Intravascular ultrasound assessments showed a preservation of the scaffold area (mean 6·24 mm(2) [SD 1·15] post-procedure vs 6·21 mm(2) [1·22] at 6 months) with a low mean neointimal area (0·08 mm(2) [0·09]), and optical coherence tomography did not detect any intraluminal mass. Target lesion failure occurred in four (3%) patients: one (<1%) patient died from cardiac death, one (<1%) patient had periprocedural myocardial infarction, and two (2%) patients needed clinically driven target lesion revascularisation. No definite or probable scaffold thrombosis was observed.

INTERPRETATION

Our findings show that implantation of the DREAMS 2G device in de-novo coronary lesions is feasible, with favourable safety and performance outcomes at 6 months. This novel absorbable metal scaffold could be an alternative to absorbable polymeric scaffolds for treatment of obstructive coronary disease.

FUNDING

Biotronik AG.

Novel sirolimus-eluting stent Prolim® with a biodegradable polymer in the all-comers population: one year clinical results with quantitative coronary angiography and optical coherence tomography analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the safety and the efficacy of the novel sirolimus-eluting Prolim® stent with a biodegradable polymer in the all-comers population.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled all patients with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome treated with Prolim® stent between January and December 2013 in two interventional cardiology centers in Poland. Angiographic control was planned at 12 months, in which 15 % of patients (randomly chosen) underwent optical coherence tomography imaging. The primary end-point was the cumulative rate of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 12 months.

RESULTS

There were 204 patients enrolled, in whom 238 Prolim® stents were deployed (1.17 stent per patient). The mean age was 68 ± 10 years and 32.8 % were females. The examined stent was implanted in 5.9 % in STEMI patients, in 21.6 % - in NSTE-ACS and in 72.5 % - in patients with stable coronary artery disease. The Prolim® stent was most frequently implanted in right coronary artery (38.2 %) followed by left anterior descending artery (34.0 %). The cumulative major adverse cardiovascular events rate at 12 months was 6.9 %, and the clinically-driven target lesion revascularization rate - 5.4 %. At 12 months in quantitative coronary angiography the late lumen loss was 0.21 ± 0.18 mm, and in optical coherence tomography the mean neointima burden was 24.6 ± 8.6 %.

CONCLUSIONS

Sirolimus-eluting Prolim® stent with a biodegradable polymer is a feasible device with a very good safety profile and long-term clinical effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02545985 .

Everolimus-eluting stent platforms in percutaneous coronary intervention: comparative effectiveness and outcomes

Despite the remarkable benefits obtained following the introduction of the first-generation drug-eluting stent (DES), concerns were raised over its long-term safety, particularly with regard to very late (beyond 1 year) stent thrombosis. Newer-generation DESs have been developed to overcome this limitation using novel stent platforms, new drugs, more biocompatible durable polymers, and bioabsorbable polymers or backbones. To date, new-generation DESs have virtually replaced the use of first-generation DESs worldwide. In this review article, we discuss in detail the design, pharmacology, and mechanism of action of the newer-generation permanent and bioresorbable everolimus-eluting platforms. Furthermore, we present and evaluate the current evidence on the performance and safety of these devices compared to those of other available stent platforms.

Clinical Outcomes According to Diabetic Status in Patients Treated With Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents

Background—

Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus.

Methods and Results—

BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27–2.56; P =0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67–2.10; P =0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58–1.33; P =0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49–3.41; P =0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39–1.25; P =0.23, in nondiabetics).

Conclusions—

In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01443104.