A Randomized Comparison of Novel Biodegradable Polymer- and Durable Polymer–Coated Cobalt-Chromium Sirolimus-Eluting Stents

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting versus primary stenting for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions: REC-CAGEFREE I trial rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with primary stenting, which stands for stent implantation regardless of obtaining satisfactory results with balloon angioplasty, has superseded conventional plain old balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting. With drug-coated balloon (DCB), primary DCB angioplasty with provisional stenting has shown non-inferiority to primary stenting for de novo coronary small vessel disease. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of such a strategy to the primary stenting on clinical endpoints in de novo lesions without vessel diameter restrictions remain uncertain.

STUDY DESIGN

The REC-CAGEFREE I is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial aimed to enroll 2270 patients with acute or chronic coronary syndrome from 43 interventional cardiology centers in China to evaluate the non-inferiority of primary paclitaxel-coated balloons angioplasty to primary stenting for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. Patients who fulfill all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and have achieved a successful lesion pre-dilatation will be randomly assigned to the two arms in a 1:1 ratio. Protocol-guided DCB angioplasty and bailout stenting after unsatisfactory angioplasty are mandatory in the primary DCB angioplasty group. The second-generation sirolimus-eluting stent will be used as a bailout stent in the primary DCB angioplasty group and the treatment device in the primary stenting group. The primary endpoint is the incidence of Device-oriented Composite Endpoint (DoCE) within 24 months after randomization, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically and physiologically indicated target lesion revascularization.

DISCUSSION

The ongoing REC-CAGEFREE I trial is the first randomized trial with a clinical endpoint to assess the efficacy and safety of primary DCB angioplasty for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. If non-inferiority is shown, PCI with primary DCB angioplasty could be an alternative treatment option to primary stenting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04561739).

A novel biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent: 1-year results of the HELIOS registry

BACKGROUND

The HELIOS stent is a sirolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer and titanium oxide film as the tie-layer. The study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of HELIOS stent in a real-world setting.

METHODS

The HELIOS registry is a prospective, multicenter, cohort study conducted at 38 centers across China between November 2018 and December 2019. A total of 3060 consecutive patients were enrolled after application of minimal inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier methods were used to estimate the cumulative incidence of clinical events and construct survival curves.

RESULTS

A total of 2998 (98.0%) patients completed the 1-year follow-up. The 1-year incidence of TLF was 3.10% (94/2998, 95% closed interval: 2.54-3.78%). The rates of cardiac death, non-fatal target vessel MI and clinically indicated TLR were 2.33% (70/2998), 0.20% (6/2998), and 0.70% (21/2998), respectively. The rate of stent thrombosis was 0.33% (10/2998). Age ≥60 years, diabetes mellitus, family history of coronary artery disease, acute myocardial infarction at admission, and device success were independent predictors of TLF at 1 year.

CONCLUSION

The 1-year incidence rates of TLF and stent thrombosis were 3.10% and 0.33%, respectively, in patients treated with HELIOS stents. Our results provide clinical evidence for interventional cardiologists and policymakers to evaluate HELIOS stent.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03916432.

Data simulation to forecast the outcomes of the FAVOR III China trial

BACKGROUND

FAVOR III China (F3C) is a large-scale randomized trial comparing QFR-guided and angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategies. The aim of current study was to assess the feasibility of predicting the 1-year outcomes of the F3C trial using simulation of retrospectively assessed quantitative flow ratio (QFR) data obtained from the all-comers PANDA III trial.

METHODS

Among 2348 subjects from the PANDA III trial, angiography from 1391 patients was able to be analyzed with QFR. Each subject from the F3C was matched to a PANDA III patient according to the five baseline characteristics (age, sex, diabetes, multivessel disease, and existence of any vessel with diameter stenosis % >90% and thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow <3) through a bootstrapping sampling process. Outcome predictions were based on these blinded baseline data. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or revascularization at 1 year.

RESULTS

Among the patients with analyzable QFR, 814 patients were able to be matched to F3C patients undergoing a QFR-guided treatment strategy. After 10,000 simulations, the patients in the QFR-guided group were simulated to have a 1.9% (95% predictive intervals: -3.5% to -0.3%) absolute reduction of the occurrence of the primary study endpoint compared with the angiography-guided group. In total, 72.7% (7266/10,000) simulated point estimates fell within the actual 95% CI of F3C (-4.7% to -1.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

Using a simulation process based on a comparison to an existing trial cohort, the primary results of a prospectively conducted randomized controlled trial could be predicted with reasonable precision.

Development of Multifunctional Commercial Pure Titanium-Polyethylene Glycol Drug-Eluting Substrates with Enhanced Optical and Antithrombotic Properties

PURPOSE

Development of multifunctional advanced stent implants (metal/polymer composite)-drug-eluting stents with superior material and optical properties is still a challenge. In this research work, multifunctional metal-polymer composite drug-eluting substrates (DES) for stent application were developed by using commercially pure titanium (cpTi) and polyethylene glycol (PEG).

METHODS

Surface modifications on titanium substrates were carried out by sodium hydroxide under various concentrations; 5M (6 and 24 h) and 10M (6 and 24 h). It induces a nanoporous structure which facilitates the larger area for encapsulation of the drug, Aspirin (ASA) via intermolecular forces followed by polymer coating of PEG (MW-20,000) by physical adsorption process, which is structured as layer-by-layer gathering.

RESULTS

The developed cpTi-PEG DES were characterized using X-ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), optical energy bandgap, static contact angle measurement, antithrombotic and drug release studies. The development of sodium titanate oxide prompted surface nano-features revealed by SEM and XRD. Moreover, FTIR confirms the presence of ASA and PEG functional groups over the cpTi surface. Drug release studies fitted with Ritger-Peppas kinetic model (≤ 60%), which indicates the super case II transport mechanisms (n > 1). Further UV-visible absorbance spectrum was quantified by the Tauc plot, which shows the broadening of the energy bandgap (E_g). In addition, the shrink in blood clots was more around the Tib2/ASA/PEG.Please confirm the inserted city name in affiliations [1,2] are correct and amend if necessary.Yes, city name "Rourkela" is correct.

CONCLUSION

Developed cpTi-PEG DES has improved optical properties and prevent thrombus formation which suggesting it a potential substrate to overcome prime clinical challenges.

P2Y12 Antagonists in Cardiovascular Disease—Finding the Best Balance Between Preventing Ischemic Events and Causing Bleeding

Dual antiplatelet therapy comprising of aspirin and oral P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists are an established cornerstone of therapy in acute coronary syndromes and percutaneous coronary intervention. As a result, the platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor remains a key therapeutic target in cardiovascular medicine since pharmacological antagonists were first developed in the 1990’s. With a greater understanding of platelet biology and the role played by the P2Y₁₂ receptor in the amplification of platelet activation and thrombus formation, there has been progressive refinement in the development of P2Y₁₂ receptor antagonists with greater potency and consistency of antiplatelet effect. However, challenges remain in the utilization of these agents particularly in balancing the need for greater protection from ischemic events whilst minimizing the bleeding risk and present a real opportunity for the institution of individualized medicine. Future drug developments will provide clinicians with greater avenues to achieve this.

Sirolimus Release from Biodegradable Polymers for Coronary Stent Application: A Review

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) are commonly used for the treatment of coronary artery disease. The evolution of the drug-eluting layer on the surface of the metal stent plays an important role in DES functionality. Here, the use of biodegradable polymers has emerged as an attractive strategy because it minimizes the occurrence of late thrombosis after stent implantation. Furthermore, understanding the drug-release behavior of DESs is also important for improving the safety and efficacy of stent treatments. Drug release from biodegradable polymers has attracted extensive research attention because biodegradable polymers with different properties show different drug-release behaviors. Molecular weight, composition, glass transition temperature, crystallinity, and the degradation rate are important properties affecting the behavior of polymers. Sirolimus is a conventional anti-proliferation drug and is the most widely used drug in DESs. Sirolimus-release behavior affects endothelialization and thrombosis formation after DES implantation. In this review, we focus on sirolimus release from biodegradable polymers, including synthetic and natural polymers widely used in the medical field. We hope this review will provide valuable up-to-date information on this subject and contribute to the further development of safe and efficient DESs.

A Novel Multiple Risk Score Model for Prediction of Long-Term Ischemic Risk in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights From the I-LOVE-IT 2 Trial

Backgrounds: A plug-and-play standardized algorithm to identify the ischemic risk in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) could play a valuable step to help a wide spectrum of clinic workers. This study intended to investigate the ability to use the accumulation of multiple clinical routine risk scores to predict long-term ischemic events in patients with CAD undergoing PCI.

Methods: This was a secondary analysis of the I-LOVE-IT 2 (Evaluate Safety and Effectiveness of the Tivoli drug-eluting stent (DES) and the Firebird DES for Treatment of Coronary Revascularization) trial, which was a prospective, multicenter, and randomized study. The Global Registry for Acute Coronary Events (GRACE), baseline Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX), residual SYNTAX, and age, creatinine, and ejection fraction (ACEF) score were calculated in all patients. Risk stratification was based on the number of these four scores that met the established thresholds for the ischemic risk. The primary end point was ischemic events at 48 months, defined as the composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST).

Results: The 48-month ischemic events had a significant trend for higher event rates (from 6.61 to 16.93%) with an incremental number of risk scores presenting the higher ischemic risk from 0 to ≥3 (p trend &lt; 0.001). In addition, the categories were associated with increased risk for all components of ischemic events, including cardiac death (from 1.36 to 3.15%), myocardial infarction (MI) (from 3.31 to 9.84%), stroke (3.31 to 6.10%), definite/probable ST (from 0.58 to 1.97%), and all-cause mortality (from 2.14 to 6.30%) (all p trend &lt; 0.05). The net reclassification index after combined with four risk scores was 12.5% (5.3–20.0%), 9.4% (2.0–16.8%), 12.1% (4.5–19.7%), and 10.7% (3.3–18.1%), which offered statistically significant improvement in the performance, compared with SYNTAX, residual SYNTAX, ACEF, and GRACE score, respectively.

Conclusion: The novel multiple risk score model was significantly associated with the risk of long-term ischemic events in these patients with an increment of scores. A meaningful improvement to predict adverse outcomes when multiple risk scores were applied to risk stratification.

Angiographic quantitative flow ratio-guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Compared with visual angiographic assessment, pressure wire-based physiological measurement more accurately identifies flow-limiting lesions in patients with coronary artery disease. Nonetheless, angiography remains the most widely used method to guide percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In FAVOR III China, we aimed to establish whether clinical outcomes might be improved by lesion selection for PCI using the quantitative flow ratio (QFR), a novel angiography-based approach to estimate the fractional flow reserve.

METHODS

FAVOR III China is a multicentre, blinded, randomised, sham-controlled trial done at 26 hospitals in China. Patients aged 18 years or older, with stable or unstable angina pectoris or patients who had a myocardial infarction at least 72 h before screening, who had at least one lesion with a diameter stenosis of 50-90% in a coronary artery with a reference vessel of at least 2·5 mm diameter by visual assessment were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to a QFR-guided strategy (PCI performed only if QFR ≤0·80) or an angiography-guided strategy (PCI based on standard visual angiographic assessment). Participants and clinical assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the 1-year rate of major adverse cardiac events, a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven revascularisation. The primary analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03656848).

FINDINGS

Between Dec 25, 2018, and Jan 19, 2020, 3847 patients were enrolled. After exclusion of 22 patients who elected not to undergo PCI or who were withdrawn by their physicians, 3825 participants were included in the intention-to-treat population (1913 in the QFR-guided group and 1912 in the angiography-guided group). The mean age was 62·7 years (SD 10·1), 2699 (70·6%) were men and 1126 (29·4%) were women, 1295 (33·9%) had diabetes, and 2428 (63·5%) presented with an acute coronary syndrome. The 1-year primary endpoint occurred in 110 (Kaplan-Meier estimated rate 5·8%) participants in the QFR-guided group and in 167 (8·8%) participants in the angiography-guided group (difference, -3·0% [95% CI -4·7 to -1·4]; hazard ratio 0·65 [95% CI 0·51 to 0·83]; p=0·0004), driven by fewer myocardial infarctions and ischaemia-driven revascularisations in the QFR-guided group than in the angiography-guided group.

INTERPRETATION

In FAVOR III China, among patients undergoing PCI, a QFR-guided strategy of lesion selection improved 1-year clinical outcomes compared with standard angiography guidance.

FUNDING

Beijing Municipal Science and Technology Commission, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences, and the National Clinical Research Centre for Cardiovascular Diseases, Fuwai Hospital.

Clinical outcomes three-year after revascularization with biodegradable polymer stents: ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent versus biolimus-eluting stent: from the Scandinavian organization for randomized trials with clinical outcome VII trial

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy. However, drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers may not be a class effect, as stent strut thickness, polymer coating, and drug resorption differ between these groups of stents. Twelve months results of Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome VII showed that ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was noninferior to the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent. The sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was associated with a reduced risk of definite stent thrombosis.

METHODS

The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome VII trial is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in all-comers patients. The endpoint target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion) and target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

A total of 1261 patients were randomized to treatment with sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and 1264 patients to biolimus-eluting Nobori stent and followed for 3 years. At 3-year the target lesion failure was comparable for sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (9.0%) and the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (9.1%), (rate ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.29). Cardiac death (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 3.0% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 2.6% [rate ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.86]), target lesion revascularization (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 5.2% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 5.9% [rate ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.25]), myocardial infarction (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 4.7% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 4.5% [rate ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.50]), and definite stent thrombosis (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 1.0% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 1.7% [rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-1.18]) did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

At 3-year follow-up, target lesion failure did not differ among ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and biolimus-eluting Nobori stent with biodegradable polymers.

Impact of 6- versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy on clinical prognosis in patients with high bleeding risk: Insights from the 4-year results of the I LOVE IT 2 study

OBJECTIVES

To explore the impact of 6- versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) on the clinical prognosis of high bleeding risk (HBR) patients.

BACKGROUND

The optimal DAPT duration after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in HBR patients is unclear.

METHODS

This study is a post hoc analysis of the 4-year clinical follow-up results of the I LOVE IT 2 study. Prevalence and prognosis of HBR patients were explored, and clinical outcomes of HBR patients who underwent 6- versus 12-month DAPT were compared. The primary outcome was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) type 3 or 5 bleeding. The secondary outcomes were BARC type 2-5 bleeding and net clinical adverse events (NACE), defined as a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven revascularization, stroke, stent thrombosis, or any bleeding events.

RESULTS

HBR occurred in 440 of 2,737 patients (16.0%). HBR patients were associated with a higher risk of BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (2.95 vs. 1.52%, p = .03), NACE (31.82 vs. 25.99%, p = .01), all-cause death (5.68 vs. 3.13%, p = .008) and stroke (9.09 vs. 3.83%, p < .001) than non-HBR patients at 4 years. There were no significant differences in BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding (3.07 vs. 2.76%, p = 1.00) or NACE rate (31.9 vs. 33.8%, p = .72) between patients who underwent 6- and 12-month DAPT.

CONCLUSIONS

HBR patients are at a higher risk of long-term bleeding and ischemic events than non-HBR patients. The safety and efficacy of 6- and 12-month DAPT were comparable in HBR patients.

Biodegradable polymer-coated versus durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stents: the final 5-year outcomes of the I-LOVE-IT 2 trial

AIMS

This analysis presents the final five-year results of the I-LOVE-IT 2 trial, a non-inferiority study comparing a biodegradable polymer (BP) sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with a durable polymer (DP) SES in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Overall, 2,737 Chinese patients eligible for coronary stenting were treated with BP-SES or DP-SES in a 2:1 ratio. Patients who were randomised to the BP-SES group were additionally re-randomised to receive either six-month or 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was 12-month target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation). At five years, the overall follow-up rate was 90.8%, and the cumulative incidence of TLF as the primary endpoint was similar between BP-SES and DP-SES (hazard ratio [HR] 1.01, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 1.28), as was that for the patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE: all-cause death, all MI and any revascularisation) (HR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.23), or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) (HR 0.91, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.77). Cumulative events were also similar between the six-month DAPT and 12-month DAPT groups after BP-SES implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

I-LOVE-IT 2 showed that the five-year safety and efficacy of BP-SES and DP-SES were similar, as were those between six months and 12 months of DAPT after BP-SES implantation.

Three-year clinical outcomes of a sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (XINSORB) and a metallic stent to treat coronary artery stenosis

Background

Recent studies have shown increased risks of late target lesion failure (TLF) and thrombosis using a bioresorbable scaffold (BRS). However, the results of the ABSORB China study offered a different means of understanding the long-term performance of BRSs. We tested the 3-year clinical outcome of the XINSORB BRS in a multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial (ChiCTR1800014966).

Methods

Eligible patients with one or two de novo coronary lesions were randomly assigned 1:1 to be treated with XINSORB scaffolds and metallic sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs). The clinical endpoints include TLF [cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TV-MI), or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR)], its components, and devised thrombosis.

Results

Three hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled and randomized to the XINSORB (N=200) and SES (N=195) arms. The clinical 3-year follow-up included 95.5% of the XINSORB-treated patients and 92.8% of the SES-treated patients. Dual antiplatelet therapy was at 59.0% of the XINSORB-treated and 52.8% of the SES-treated patients (P=0.34). There were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes between the XINSORB and SES arms, including in TLF (4.0% vs. 6.2%, P=0.29), cardiac death (1.0% vs. 0%, P=NA), TV-MI (1.0% vs. 0%, P=NA), and ID-TLR (3.5% vs. 6.2%, P=0.19). The rate of confirmed/probable device thrombosis in the XINSORB-treated patients was only 1.0% (2/200).

Conclusions

In this XINSORB randomized clinical trial, the XINSORB scaffolds and SESs showed similar efficacy and safety up to the 3-year follow-up. The rates of TLF and device thrombosis were low and comparable between the two arms.

Quantitative flow ratio-guided strategy versus angiography-guided strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention: Rationale and design of the FAVOR III China trial

BACKGROUND

Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) is a novel angiography-based approach enabling fast computation of fractional flow reserve without use of pressure wire or adenosine. The objective of this investigator-initiated, multicenter, patient- and clinical assessor-blinded randomized trial is to evaluate the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a QFR-augmented angiography-guided (QFR-guided) strategy versus an angiography-only guided (angiography-guided) strategy for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

Approximately 3,830 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to a QFR-guided or an angiography-guided strategy. Included subjects scheduled for coronary angiography have at least 1 lesion eligible for PCI with 50%-90% stenosis in an artery with ≥2.5 mm reference diameter. Subjects assigned to the QFR-guided strategy will have QFR measured in each interrogated vessel and undergo PCI when QFR ≤0.80, with deferral for lesions with QFR >0.80. Those assigned to the angiography-guided strategy will undergo PCI based on angiography. Optimal medical therapy will be administered to all treated and deferred patients. The primary end point is the 1-year rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction, or any ischemia-driven revascularization. The major secondary end point is 1-year MACE excluding periprocedural myocardial infarction. Other secondary end points include the individual components of MACE and cost-effectiveness end points. The sample size affords 85% power to demonstrate superiority of QFR guidance compared with angiography guidance.

CONCLUSIONS

The FAVOR III China study will be the first randomized trial to examine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a QFR-guided versus an angiography-guided PCI strategy in coronary artery disease patients.

Twelve-month angiographic and clinical outcomes of the XINSORB bioresorbable sirolimus-eluting scaffold and a metallic stent in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Recent studies showed bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) increased risks of late target lesion failure (TLF) and thrombosis. XINSORB scaffold is a poly-L-lactic acid based BRS.

METHODS

The study included randomization and registry parts. Eligible patients with one or two de novo lesions were randomly 1:1 assigned to XINSORB scaffold and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in randomization part. These patients were clinically and angiographically assessed. In registry part, patients were treated with XINSORB scaffold only and were clinically assessed. The primary endpoint was in-segment late luminal loss (LLL) at 12-month in randomization part. The secondary endpoint was 12-month TLF in all XINSORB-treated patients.

RESULTS

Total 395 and 798 patients were enrolled in randomization and registry part, respectively. Device success was 98.0% (1069/1091) in all XINSORB-treated and 100% (221/221) in SES-treated lesions. The primary endpoint of in-segment LLL at 12-month was 0.19 ± 0.32 mm in XINSORB and 0.31 ± 0.41 mm in SES (P = 0.003), which met the noninferior margin of 0.195 mm (95% CI: -0.20, -0.04, P ≪ 0.0001). No difference was found in TLF between two devices. In all XINSORB-treated patients, 12-month TLF was 0.8% (8/998), which also met the noninferior margin of 9.0% (95% CI: 0.3%, 1.4%, P ≪ 0.0001). Only one device thrombosis was recorded in all XINSORB-treated patients while none in SES.

CONCLUSIONS

In the multicenter clinical trial, XINSORB BRS was noninferior to sirolimus-eluting stent for the primary endpoint of in-segment LLL at 12-month in patients with simple and moderate complex de novo coronary lesions. TLF at 12-month was low and comparable.

One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in patients needing short dual antiplatelet therapy. Insight from the ULISSE registry (ULtimaster Italian multicenter all comerS Stent rEgistry)

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate real-world clinical outcome of patients needing short dual antiplatelet therapy (S-DAPT) following PCI with Ultimaster® thin-strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES), which was supposed to induce faster stent endothelialization and reduce device thrombogenicity.

METHODS

In this sub-group analysis of patients enrolled in the ULISSE registry, two groups were identified: 1) patients discharged with S-DAPT (≤3-month) due to high bleeding risk or need for urgent major non-cardiac surgery and 2) patients discharged with recommended DAPT (R-DAPT) duration (≥6-month). The primary ischemic-safety and bleeding-safety endpoints were TLF (composite of cardiac-death, target vessel MI, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization), and BARC major bleedings (≥type-3a) at 1-year follow-up. To account for events occurring before DAPT discontinuation we performed 3-month landmark analysis.

RESULTS

82 patients (5%) were discharged with ≤3-month DAPT (57 ± 27 days), and 1558 patients (94%) were discharged with ≥6-month DAPT (318 ± 75 days). No significant differences between S-DAPT and R-DAPT group were observed in TLF at 1-year (7.9% vs. 4.6%). The rate of BARC major bleeding resulted significantly higher in S-DAPT group (3.9% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.001), with the majority of bleeding events occurring within 3 months. The landmark analysis showed no significant differences in BARC major bleedings between groups (1.4% vs. 0.3%; p = 0.142).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared to those treated with R-DAPT (≥6-month), patients needing -S-DAPT (≤3-month) after PCI with Ultimaster® BP-SES had similar rates of 1-year TLF and BARC major bleedings following early DAPT discontinuation.

Ultrathin-strut, biodegradable-polymer, sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary revascularisation: 5-year outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents combining an ultrathin cobalt-chromium stent platform with a biodegradable polymer eluting sirolimus have been shown to be non-inferior or superior to thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents in terms of 1 year safety and efficacy outcomes.

METHODS

In the randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority BIOSCIENCE trial, we compared biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes. Here, we assess the final 5-year clinical outcomes of BIOSCIENCE with regards to the primary clinical outcome of target lesion failure, which was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation. The primary analysis was done by intention to treat. The BIOSCIENCE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104.

FINDINGS

2008 (95%) of 2119 patients recruited between March 1, 2012, and May 31, 2013, completed 5 years of follow-up. Target lesion failure occurred in 198 patients (cumulative incidence 20·2%) treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and in 189 patients (18·8%) treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (rate ratio [RR] 1·07, 95% CI 0·88-1·31; p=0·487). All-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents than in those treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (14·1% vs 10·3%; RR 1·36, 95% CI 1·06-1·75; p=0·017), driven by a difference in non-cardiovascular deaths. We observed no difference between groups in cumulative incidence of definite stent thrombosis at 5 years (1·6% in both groups; 1·02, 0·51-2·05; p=0·950).

INTERPRETATION

5-year risk of target lesion failure among all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is similar after implantation of ultrathin-strut, biodegradable-polymer, sirolimus-eluting stents or thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents. Higher incidences of all-cause and non-cardiovascular mortality in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer stents eluting sirolimus than in those treated with durable-polymer stents eluting everolimus warrant careful observation in ongoing clinical trials.

FUNDING

Clinical Trials Unit of the University of Bern and Biotronik.

Drug-Eluting Balloons versus Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents for Treating In-Stent Restenosis in Coronary Heart Disease after PCI: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

In-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a common problem following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, the best treatment strategy remains uncertain. There is some controversy over the efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) for treating ISR.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was used to compare the efficacy of the DEB and second-generation DES in the treatment of ISR. The primary endpoint is the incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoint is the occurrence of target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause death (ACM), cardiac death (CD), major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), minimum luminal diameter (MLD), late luminal loss (LLL), binary restenosis (BR), and percent diameter stenosis (DS%).

RESULTS

A total of 12 studies (4 randomized controlled trials and 8 observational studies) including 2020 patients with a follow-up of 6-25 months were included in the present study. There was a significant difference in the MLD between the two groups during follow-up (P=0.007, RR = 0.23, and 95% CI: 0.06-0.4 mm). There was no significant difference in LLL, BR, or DS% and the overall incidence of MACEs between the two groups. Subgroup analysis showed no significant difference in the incidence of primary and secondary endpoints when considering RCTs or observational studies only.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of the DEB and second-generation DES in the treatment of ISR is comparable. However, our results need further verification through multicenter randomized controlled trials.

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus first-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Even if drug-eluting stents (DES) showed beneficial effects in patients with coronary artery diseases (CADs), limitations have been observed with the first-generation durable polymer DES (DP-DES). Recently, biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) have been approved to be used as an alternative to DP-DES, with potential benefits. We aimed to systematically compare BP-DES with the first-generation DP-DES using a large number of randomized patients.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing BP-DES with first-generation DP-DES. The main endpoints were the long-term (≥2 years) adverse clinical outcomes that were reported with these 2 types of DES. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and the analysis was carried out by RevMan 5.3 software.

RESULTS

Twelve trials with a total number of 13,480 patients (7730 and 5750 patients were treated by BP-DES and first-generation DP-DES, respectively) were included. During a long-term follow-up period of ≥2 years, mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were not significantly different between these 2 groups with OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.66-1.07; P = .16, I = 0%, OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.45-2.27; P = .98, I = 0%, OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.75-1.11; P = .37, I = 0% and OR: 0.86, 95% CI: 0.44-1.67; P = .65, I = 0%, respectively. Long-term total stent thrombosis (ST), definite ST, and probable ST were also not significantly different between BP-DES and the first-generation DP-DES with OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.50-1.18; P = .22, I = 0%, OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.43-1.18; P = .19, I = 0% and OR: 1.31, 95% CI: 0.56-3.08; P = .53, I = 6%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Long-term mortality, MI, TLR, MACEs, and ST were not significantly different between BP-DES and the first-generation DP-DES. However, the follow-up period was restricted to only 3 years in this analysis.

Randomized Multicenter Trial Investigating Angiographic Outcomes of Hybrid Sirolimus-Eluting Stents With Biodegradable Polymer Compared With Everolimus-Eluting Stents With Durable Polymer in Chronic Total Occlusions: The PRISON IV Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of the hybrid ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with biodegradable polymer compared with the thin-strut everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with durable polymer in successfully recanalized chronic total occlusions (CTOs).

BACKGROUND

The introduction of drug-eluting stents revolutionized the treatment of CTOs. However, limited data are available on new-generation drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer in CTOs.

METHODS

In this multicenter trial, patients were randomized, after successful CTO recanalization, to either SES or EES. The primary noninferiority endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (noninferiority margin 0.2 mm). Secondary endpoints included in-stent late lumen loss and clinical endpoints.

RESULTS

Overall, 330 patients were included. At 9 months, angiography was available in 281 patients (85%). Duration of occlusion ≥3 months was 92.5%, with mean stent length of 52.4 ± 28.1 mm versus 52.3 ± 26.5 mm in the SES and EES groups. The primary noninferiority endpoint, in-segment late lumen loss, was not met for SES versus EES (0.13 ± 0.63 mm vs. 0.02 ± 0.47 mm; p = 0.08, 2-sided; difference 0.11 mm; 95% confidence interval: -0.01 to 0.25 mm; p_{noninferiority} = 0.11, 1-sided). In-stent late lumen loss was comparable between SES and EES (0.12 ± 0.59 mm vs. 0.07 ± 0.46 mm; p = 0.52). The incidence of in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis was significantly higher with SES compared with EES (8.0% vs. 2.1%; p = 0.028), with comparable rates of reocclusions (2.2% vs. 1.4%; p = 0.68). Clinically indicated target lesion and target vessel revascularization (9.2% vs. 4.0% [p = 0.08] and 9.2% vs. 6.0% [p = 0.33]), target vessel failure (9.9% vs. 6.6%; p = 0.35), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 1.00) were comparable between the SES and EES groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This randomized trial failed to show noninferiority of hybrid SES relative to EES in terms of in-segment late lumen loss in successfully recanalized CTOs. Furthermore, a statistically significantly higher rate of binary restenosis was found with SES.

Current State of Bioabsorbable Polymer-Coated Drug-Eluting Stents

Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to significantly reduce clinical and angiographic restenosis compared to bare metal stents (BMS). The polymer coatings on DES elute antiproliferative drugs to inhibit intimal proliferation and prevent restenosis after stent implantation. Permanent polymers which do not degrade in vivo may increase the likelihood of stent-related delayed arterial healing or polymer hypersensitivity. In turn, these limitations may contribute to an increased risk of late clinical events. Intuitively, a polymer which degrades after completion of drug release, leaving an inert metal scaffold in place, may improve arterial healing by removing a chronic source of inflammation, neoatherosclerosis, and/or late thrombosis. In this way, a biodegradable polymer may reduce late ischemic events. Additionally, improved healing after stent implantation could reduce the requirement for long-term dual antiplatelet therapy and the associated risk of bleeding and cost. This review will focus on bioabsorbable polymer-coated DES currently being evaluated in clinical trials.

Second vs. First generation drug eluting stents in multiple vessel disease and left main stenosis: Two-year follow-up of the observational, prospective, controlled, and multicenter ERACI IV registry

OBJECTIVE

To compare second generation drug eluting stents (2DES) with first generation (1DES) for the treatment of patients (pts) with multiple coronary vessel disease (MVD).

BACKGROUND

Although 2DES improved safety and efficacy compared to 1DES, MVD remains a challenge for percutaneous coronary interventions.

METHODS

ERACI IV was a prospective, observational, and controlled study in pts with MVD including left main and treated with 2DES (Firebird 2, Microport). We included 225 pts in 15 sites from Argentina. Primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACCE) defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and unplanned revascularization; and to compare with 225 pts from ERACI III study (1DES). PCI strategy was planned to treat lesions ≥70% in vessels ≥ 2.00 mm, introducing a modified Syntax score (SS) where severe lesions in vessels < 2.0 mm and intermediate lesions were not scored.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics showed that compared to ERACI III, ERACI IV pts had higher number of diabetics (P = 0.02), previous revascularization (P = 0.007), unstable angina IIb/IIIc (P < 0.001) and three vessels/left main disease (P = 0.003). Modified SS was 22.2 ± 11. At 2 years of follow-up ERACI IV group had significantly lower incidence of death+ MI + CVA, (P = 0.01) and MACCE (P = 0.001). MACCE rate was similar in diabetics, (5.8%) and nondiabetics (7.0%). After performing a matched propensity score, MACCE remain significantly lower in ERACI IV (P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

This registry showed that 2DES in MVD has a remarkable low incidence of MACCE in unadjusted and adjusted analysis. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Six Versus 12 Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Implantation of Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent

Background—

There are no reports on a large-scale randomized trial exploring optimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration after biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. We sought to report the outcomes of a randomized substudy of the prospective Evaluate Safety and Effectiveness of the Tivoli DES and the Firebird DES for Treatment of Coronary Revascularization (I-LOVE-IT 2) trial.

Methods and Results—

In the prospective noninferiority randomized I-LOVE-IT 2 trial, 1829 patients allocated to the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent group were also randomized to receive either 6-month (n=909) or 12-month DAPT (n=920). The primary end points of this noninferiority substudy were 12-month target lesion failure (composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization), and the major secondary end points were 12-month net adverse clinical and cerebral events (composite of all-cause death, all myocardial infarction, stroke, or major bleeding [Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type ≥3]). The 12-month target lesion failure in 6-month DAPT group was comparable with the 12-month DAPT group (6.8% versus 5.9%; difference and 95% confidence interval, 0.87% [−1.37% to 3.11%], P for noninferiority=0.0065). Further follow-up at 18 months showed that incidence of target lesion failure and net adverse clinical and cerebral events were similar between the 2 groups (7.5% versus 6.3%, log-rank P =0.32; 7.8% versus 7.3%, log-rank P =0.60; respectively), as well as their individual end point components.

Conclusions—

This study indicated noninferiority in safety and efficacy of 6-month versus 12-month DAPT after implantation of a novel biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01681381.

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis

Background

A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DESs).

Methods

PubMed, Science Direct, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chongqing VIP databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of BP-DESs versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DESs). Efficacy included the prevalence of target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and late lumen loss (LLL), and safety of these stents at the end of follow-up for the selected research studies were compared.

Results

A total of 16 qualified original studies that addressed a total of 22,211 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In regard to efficacy, no statistically significant difference in TLR (odds ratio (OR) = 0.94, P = 0.30) or TVR (OR 1.01, P = 0.86) was observed between patients treated with BP-DESs and those with DP-DESs. However, there were significant differences in in-stent LLL (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.07, P = 0.005) and in-segment LLL (WMD = −0.03, P = 0.05) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. In terms of safety, there was no significant difference in overall mortality (OR 0.97, P = 0.67), cardiac death (OR 0.99, P = 0.90), early stent thrombosis (ST) and late ST (OR 0.94, P = 0.76; OR 0.96, P = 0.73), or myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.99, P = 0.88) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. However, there was a statistically significant difference in very late ST (OR 0.69, P = 0.007) between these two groups. In addition, the general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up.

Conclusion

BP-DESs are safe, efficient, and exhibit superior performance to DP-DESs with respect to reducing the occurrence of very late ST and LLL. The general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up.