Elastic stent recoil in coronary total occlusions: Comparison of durable-polymer zotarolimus eluting stent and ultrathin strut bioabsorbable-polymer sirolimus eluting stent

Serration Angioplasty Is Associated With Less Recoil in Infrapopliteal Arteries Compared With Plain Balloon Angioplasty

PURPOSE

Recoil following balloon angioplasty of tibial arteries is a known mechanism of lumen loss and widely considered to be a contributing factor in early failure or later restenosis. The Serranator balloon has been designed to provide a controlled lumen gain while minimizing vessel injury. The objective of this study was to assess the ability to define and measure postangioplasty recoil in infrapopliteal arteries and to compare recoil after serration angioplasty and plain balloon angioplasty (POBA).

METHODS

This multi-center, sequential comparative study included patients with de novo or restenotic lesions of infrapopliteal arteries up to 22 cm in length. Patients were enrolled sequentially and underwent alternating POBA or serration angioplasty with Serranator. The study captured angiographic imaging at pre, immediately post, and 15-minute after angioplasty. Vessel recoil, final diameter stenosis, and dissection were compared using core laboratory analysis.

RESULTS

This study enrolled 36 patients who underwent treatment of 39 infrapopliteal lesions. There was no significant difference between Serranator (n=20) and POBA (n=19) with respect to baseline demographics and lesion characteristics. Arterial recoil (>10%) occurred in 25% of Serranator-treated lesions versus 64% in POBA-treated lesions (p=0.02. Clinically relevant recoil (>30%) was present after serration angioplasty in 10% of patients and after POBA in 53% (p=0.01). There was no significant difference in technical success (100% for both), dissection rate between Serranator (5%) and POBA (5.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Arterial recoil occurs after infrapopliteal angioplasty. Serration angioplasty produces substantially less arterial recoil compared with POBA. Additional studies are needed to assess whether reduced arterial recoil translates into superior long-term clinical outcomes.

CLINICAL IMPACT

Prior studies have demonstrated over 90% recoil in patients after balloon angioplasty (POBA) of the infrapopliteal vessels, which significantly impacts the durability and impact of endovascular interventions in this clinical space. This study compared recoil after infrapopliteal angioplasty with serration angioplasty and POBA. Serration angioplasty produces substantially less arterial recoil compared with POBA. Additional studies are needed to assess whether reduced arterial recoil translates into superior long-term clinical outcomes.

Safety and Efficacy of Post-Dilation in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Using Polymer-Free Ultrathin Strut Sirolimus-Probucol Coated Drug-Eluting Stents

Background and Objectives: Polymer-free ultrathin strut sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents (PF-SES) are recognized as safe and effective in diverse patient populations, although the implications of post-dilation during stent implantation remain underexamined. Materials and Methods: In this study, patients implanted with PF-SES at Gachon University Gil Medical Center between December 2014 and February 2018 were evaluated. Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), encompassing nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), nonfatal stroke, and cardiovascular death were identified as primary outcomes, with secondary outcomes including target vessel revascularization (TVR), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and in-stent restenosis (ISR). Results: Of the 384 initial patients, 299 were considered eligible for analysis. The groups, delineated by those undergoing post-dilation (143 patients) and those not (156 patients), exhibited comparable rates of primary outcomes [hazard ratio (HR), 2.17; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.40 to 11.87; p = 0.37]. The outcomes remained consistent irrespective of the post-dilation status and were similarly unaffected in multivariate analyses (HR, 2.90; 95% CI, 0.52 to 16.34; p = 0.227). Conclusions: These results suggest that the clinical outcomes of patients with post-dilation were similar to that of those without post-dilation in those with the polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents.

Stent expansion in calcified coronary chronic total occlusions: The impact of different stent platforms

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the stent expansion of the durable-polymer Zotarolimus-eluting stent (dp-ZES), the durable-polymer Everolimus-eluting stent (dp-EES), and the bioabsorbable-polymer Sirolimus-eluting stent (bp-SES) in calcified coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO).

BACKGROUND

The newer generation stents with ultrathin struts might raise concerns regarding reduced radial strength and higher stent recoil (SR) when implanted in calcified CTOs.

METHODS

Between January 2017 and June 2021 consecutive patients with CTO undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with dp-ZES, dp-EES, or bp-SES were evaluated. The analysis was performed in calcific and in noncalcific CTOs. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis was used to assess diameter stenosis (DS), absolute and relative SR, absolute and relative focal SR, absolute and relative balloon deficit (BD), and absolute and relative focal BD. The primary endpoint was DS.

RESULTS

A total of 213 CTOs were evaluated, 115 calcific CTOs (dp-ZES:25, dp-EES:29, bp-SES:61) and 98 non-calcific CTOs (dp-ZES:41, dp-EES:11, bp-SES:46). In calcific CTOs, residual DS was lower in dp-ZES than in dp-EES and bp-SES (-1.00% [-6.50-6.50] vs. 13.00% [7.0-19.00] vs. 15.00% [5.00-20.00]; p < 0.001). Dp-ZES was also an independent predictor of residual DS ≤ 10% (OR 11.34, 95% CI 2.6-49.43, p = 0.001). Absolute and relative focal SR and absolute and relative SR were similar between dp-ZES, dp-EES, and bp-SES (p = 0.913, p = 0.890, p = 0.518, p = 0.426, respectively). In noncalcified CTOs, the residual DS was similar in the three groups (p = 0.340). High relative focal SR was less frequent in dp-ZES than in dp-EES and in bp-SES (19.5% vs. 54.5% vs. 37.0%; p < 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

The three stent platforms demonstrated an overall low residual DS when implanted in CTOs. However, dp-ZES was associated with the lowest residual DS and identified as independent predictor of residual DS ≤ 10% in patients with calcific CTOs. Dp-ZES was associated with a lower incidence of high relative focal stent recoil, in noncalcific CTOs. Balloon deficit might be considerate as a surrogate for stent expansion in calcified CTOs.

Is There an Advantage of Ultrathin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents over Second- and Third-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents?

In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered the gold standard of care for revascularization. By reducing neointimal hyperplasia, drug-eluting coronary stents decrease the need for repeat revascularizations compared with conventional coronary stents without an antiproliferative drug coating. It is important to note that early-generation DESs were associated with an increased risk of very late stent thrombosis, most likely due to delayed endothelialization or a delayed hypersensitivity reaction to the polymer. Studies have shown a lower risk of very late stent thrombosis with developing second-generation DESs with biocompatible and biodegradable polymers or without polymers altogether. In addition, research has indicated that thinner struts are associated with a reduced risk of intrastent restenosis and angiographic and clinical results. A DES with ultrathin struts (strut thickness of 70 µm) is more flexible, facilitates better tracking, and is more crossable than a conventional second-generation DES. The question is whether ultrathin eluting drug stents suit all kinds of lesions. Several authors have reported that improved coverage with less thrombus protrusion reduced the risk of distal embolization in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Others have described that an ultrathin stent might recoil due to low radial strength. This could lead to residual stenosis and repeated revascularization of the artery. In CTO patients, the ultrathin stent failed to prove non-inferiority regarding in-segment late lumen loss and showed statistically higher rates of restenosis. Ultrathin-strut DESs with biodegradable polymers have limitations when treating calcified (or ostial) lesions and CTOs. However, they also possess certain advantages regarding deliverability (tight stenosis, tortuous lesions, high angulation, etc.), ease of use in bifurcation lesions, better endothelialization and vascular healing, and reducing stent thrombosis risk. In light of this, ultrathin-strut stents present a promising alternative to existing DESs of the second and third generation. The aims of the study are to compare ultrathin eluting stents with second- and third-generation conventional stents regarding procedural performance and outcomes based on different lesion types and specific populations.

A Narrative Review of Ultrathin-strut Drug-eluting Stents: The Thinner the Better?

Second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Besides the polymer and antiproliferative drug used, the metallic backbone of DES is an attractive target for further development. Ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 μm strut thickness) are more flexible, have an improved trackability and crossability compared to conventional second-generation DES. Importantly, ultrathin-strut DES reduce the risk of in-stent restenosis, thereby decreasing the risk of angiographic and clinical restenosis. In this narrative review, we will discuss the clinical outcomes of the commercially available ultrathin-strut DES.