Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE): a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial

Efficacy and Safety of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With Biodegradable Polymer Ultimaster™ in Unselected Korean Population: A Multicenter, Prospective, Observational Study From Korean Multicenter Ultimaster Registry

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Ultimaster™, a third-generation sirolimus-eluting stent using biodegradable polymer, has been introduced to overcome long term adverse vascular events, such as restenosis or stent thrombosis. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the 12-month clinical outcomes of Ultimaster™ stents in Korean patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

This study is a multicenter, prospective, observational registry across 12 hospitals. To reflect real-world clinical evidence, non-selective subtypes of patients and lesions were included in this study. The study end point was target lesion failure (TLF) (the composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [MI], and target lesion revascularization [TLR]) at 12-month clinical follow up.

RESULTS

A total of 576 patients were enrolled between November 2016 and May 2021. Most of the patients were male (76.5%), with a mean age of 66.0±11.2 years. Among the included patients, 40.1% had diabetes mellitus (DM) and 67.9% had acute coronary syndrome (ACS). At 12 months, the incidence of TLF was 4.1%. The incidence of cardiac death was 1.5%, MI was 1.0%, TLR was 2.7%, and stent thrombosis was 0.6%. In subgroup analysis based on the presence of ACS, DM, hypertension, dyslipidemia, or bifurcation, there were no major differences in the incidence of the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSIONS

The present registry shows that Ultimaster™ stent is safe and effective for routine real-world clinical practice in non-selective Korean patients, having a low rate of adverse events at least up to 12 months.

Ultrathin-strut versus thin-strut stent healing and outcomes in preclinical and clinical subjects

BACKGROUND

Compared with thin-strut durable-polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES), ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) improve stent-related clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Reduced stent strut thickness is hypothesised to underlie these benefits, but this conjecture remains unproven.

AIMS

We aimed to assess the impact of strut thickness on stent healing and clinical outcomes between ultrathin-strut and thin-strut BP-SES.

METHODS

First, we performed a preclinical study of 8 rabbits implanted with non-overlapping thin-strut (diameter/thickness 3.5 mm/80 μm) and ultrathin-strut (diameter/thickness 3.0 mm/60 μm) BP-SES in the infrarenal aorta. On day 7, the rabbits underwent intravascular near-infrared fluorescence optical coherence tomography (NIRF-OCT) molecular-structural imaging of fibrin deposition and stent tissue coverage, followed by histopathological analysis. Second, we conducted an individual data pooled analysis of patients enrolled in the BIOSCIENCE and BIOSTEMI randomised PCI trials treated with ultrathin-strut (n=282) or thin-strut (n=222) BP-SES. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1-year follow-up, with a landmark analysis at 30 days.

RESULTS

NIRF-OCT image analyses revealed that ultrathin-strut and thin-strut BP-SES exhibited similar stent fibrin deposition (p=0.49) and percentage of uncovered stent struts (p=0.63). Histopathological assessments corroÂborated these findings. In 504 pooled randomised trial patients, TLF rates were similar for those treated with ultrathin-strut or thin-strut BP-SES at 30-day (2.5% vs 1.8%; p=0.62) and 1-year follow-up (4.3% vs 4.7%; p=0.88).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrathin-strut and thin-strut BP-SES demonstrate similar early arterial healing profiles and 30-day and 1-year clinical outcomes.

Revolutionizing Cardiovascular Frontiers: A Dive Into Cutting-Edge Innovations in Coronary Stent Technology

Plain balloon angioplasty was the initial method used to enlarge the intracoronary lumen size. However, it was linked to acute coronary closure due to early vessel recoil. This led to the invention of coronary stents, which offer mechanical support to open and maintain the vascular lumen. Nevertheless, the metallic scaffold introduced other issues, such as thrombosis and restenosis caused by neointimal proliferation. To address these concerns, polymers were employed to cover the scaffold, acting as drug reservoirs and regulators for controlled drug release. The use of polymers prevents direct contact between blood and metallic scaffolds. Drugs within the stent were incorporated to inhibit proliferation and expedite endothelialization in the healing process. Despite these advancements, adverse effects still arise due to the inflammatory reaction caused by the polymer material. Consequently, resorbable polymers and scaffolds were later discovered, but they have limitations and are not universally applicable. Various scaffold designs, thicknesses, materials, polymer components, and drugs have their own advantages and complications. Each stent generation has been designed to address the shortcomings of the preceding generation, yet new challenges continue to emerge. Conflicting data regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of coronary stents, especially in the extended follow-up, further complicates the assessment.

Long-Term Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes in Chronic Versus Acute Coronary Syndromes (TARGET All Comers Trial)

In the Targeted therapy with a localised abluminal coated, low-dose sirolimus-eluting, biodegreadable polymer coronary stent (TARGET; NCT02520180) All Comers trial the biodegradable polymer (BP) sirolimus-eluting FIREHAWK stent was noninferior to the durable polymer (DP) everolimus-eluting XIENCE stent with respect to target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 and 5 years; however, the long-term safety and efficacy in the setting of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) are not known. We sought to assess the long-term outcomes in ACS versus chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) with BP sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) versus DP everolimus-eluting stent (EES). The TARGET AC study was a multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial of all comer patients randomly allocated 1:1 to BP SES or DP EES (stratified by ST-elevation myocardial infarction and study site). In this predefined substudy, the outcomes were compared based on clinical presentation (ACS vs CCS) and treatment allocation. A total of 1,653 patients were enrolled (728 with ACS and 922 with CCS), with 94% completing the 5-year follow-up. The baseline characteristics were well-matched between the 2 stent types; however, co-morbidities were more prevalent in the CCS than in the ACS population. TLF (15.5% vs 17.7%, p = 0.24), patient-oriented outcomes (32.0% vs 34.4%, p = 0.31), and stent thrombosis (4.1% vs 3.3%, p = 0.40) were similar between patients with ACS and patients with CCS. In the ACS cohort, the outcomes at 5 years for BP SES versus DP EES were similar for TLF (16.0% vs 14.9%, p = 0.70), ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (5.6% vs 8.3%, p = 0.17), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (2.7% vs 4.6%, p = 0.18). The same was true for the CCS cohort, with 5-year outcomes for BP SES versus DP EES for TLF (18.0% vs 17.4%, p = 0.82), ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (6.4% vs 5.0%, p = 0.37), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (3.0% vs 1.8%, p = 0.26). In conclusion, in the TARGET AC trial, 1 in 3 patients had a major adverse event at 5 years, irrespective of CCS or ACS presentation. Long-term, the BP sirolimus-eluting FIREHAWK stent was as safe and effective as the DP everolimus-eluting XIENCE stent across the spectrum of clinical presentations.

Comparison Among Ultra-Thin Coronary Stents: A Network Meta-Analysis

Ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) have been related to potential improvement in stent-related outcomes compared with thicker-struts DES. However, comparisons among different ultrathin devices are lacking. All randomized controlled trials comparing ultrathin (struts thickness <70 µm) and thicker-struts DESs in an all-comers population were included. Target lesion failure (TLF), as defined by included trials, at 1-year follow-up was the primary end point. Overall mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. Arms of included trials were compared using network meta-analysis. Nine studies encompassing 20,081 patients were included, of which 9,509 patients had an ultrathin DES: Orsiro (evaluated in 7 arms with 8,086 patients), MiStent (1 arm with 703 patients), or Supraflex (1 arm with 720 patients). At 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were noted for TLF among these ultrathin DES. In particular, Orsiro was associated with a similar risk of TLF compared with Supraflex (risk rate 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.78) and showed the highest probability of performing best in terms of TLF, myocardial infarction, and TLR. Ultrathin DES are all associated with a comparable risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut DES. In terms of TLR and TLF risk, Orsiro was the one with the highest probability of best performances, either compared with other ultrathin DES or to devices with thicker struts.

Clinical outcomes with biodegradable versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) built with either durable (DP) or biodegradable (BP) polymeric coatings have been largely tested and are extensively available for routine use. However, their comparative performance remains an open question, particularly in more complex subsets of patients.

AIMS

We evaluated the outcomes of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) using DP-DES versus BP-DES in a large multicenter real-world registry.

METHODS

The population comprised patients with STEMI treated with pPCI within 12 h of symptoms onset. Those treated with more than one DES who received different polymer types were excluded. The final cohort for analysis was selected after propensity score matching (PSM), computed to generate similar groups of DP DES versus BP DES. Primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of total death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization at 2 years.

RESULTS

From January 2017 to April 2022, a total of 1527 STEMI patients underwent pPCI with a single DES type (587 DP-DES; 940 BP-DES). After PSM, 836 patients (418 patients in the DP-DES and 418 patients in the BP-DES groups), comprised the final study population. Both study groups had a similar baseline profile. Patients treated with BP-DES group had similar rates of MACE (15.3 % vs. 19.4 %, HR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.50-0.94, p = 0.022). Rates of target lesion revascularization was lower in BP DES group (0.7 % vs. 3.8 %, HR 0.17, 95 % CI 0.05-0.51, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In a cohort of STEMI patients submitted to pPCI, BP and DP DES had similar rates of the primary outcome. Patients treated with BP DES, however, had a decreased incidence of TLR at after 2-year follow-up.

The relation of polymer structure of stent used in patients with acute coronary syndrome revascularized by stent implantation with long-term cardiovascular events

INTRODUCTION

Drug-eluting stents (DES) have revolutionized percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) by improving event-free survival compared to older stent designs. However, early-generation DES with polymer matrixes have raised concerns regarding late stent thrombosis due to delayed vascular healing. To address these issues, biologically bioabsorbable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) and polymer-free drug-eluting stents (PF-DES) have been developed.

AIM

The aim of the present study is to evaluate and compare the long-term effects of different stent platforms in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing PCI.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational study involving 1192 ACS patients who underwent urgent PCI. Patients were treated with thin- strut DP-DES, ultra-thin strut BP-DES, or thin-strut PF-DES. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CITLR) at 12 months and 4 years.

RESULTS

The baseline demographics and clinical characteristics of patients in the three stent subgroups were similar. No significant differences were observed in target lesion failure (TLF), cardiac mortality, TVMI, and stent thrombosis (ST) rates among the three subgroups at both 12 months and 4 years. However, beyond the first year, the rate of CITLR was significantly lower in the ultra-thin strut BP-DES subgroup compared to thin-strut DP-DES, suggesting potential long-term advantages of ultra-thin strut BP-DES. Additionally, both ultra-thin strut BP-DES and thin-strut PF-DES demonstrated lower ST rates after the first year compared to thin-strut DP-DES.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the potential advantages of ultra-thin strut BP-DES in reducing CITLR rates in the long term, and both ultra-thin strut BP-DES and thin-strut PF-DES demonstrate lower rates of ST beyond the first year compared to thin-strut DP-DES. However, no significant differences were observed in overall TLF, cardiac mortality and TVMI rates among the three stent subgroups at both 12 months and 4 years.

Long-term outcomes with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 5-year follow-up of the BIOSTEMI randomised superiority trial

BACKGROUND

Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents improve early stent-related clinical outcomes compared to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. The long-term advantages of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents after complete degradation of its polymer coating in patients with STEMI remains however uncertain.

METHODS

BIOSTEMI Extended Survival (BIOSTEMI ES) was an investigator-initiated, follow-up extension study of the BIOSTEMI prospective, multicentre, single-blind, randomised superiority trial that compared biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention at ten hospitals in Switzerland. All individuals who had provided written informed consent for participation in the BIOSTEMI trial were eligible for this follow-up study. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial re-infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation, at 5 years. Superiority of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents over durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents was declared if the Bayesian posterior probability for a rate ratio (RR) of less than 1 was greater than 0·975. Analyses were performed according to the intention-to-treat principle. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05484310.

FINDINGS

Between April 26, 2016, and March 9, 2018, 1300 patients with STEMI (1622 lesions) were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (649 patients, 816 lesions) or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (651 patients, 806 lesions). At 5 years, the primary composite endpoint of target lesion failure occurred in 50 (8%) patients treated with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and in 72 (11%) patients treated with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (difference of -3%; RR 0·70, 95% Bayesian credible interval 0·51-0·95; Bayesian posterior probability for superiority 0·988).

INTERPRETATION

In patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were superior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents with respect to target lesion failure at 5 years of follow-up. The difference was driven by a numerically lower risk for ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation.

FUNDING

Biotronik.

Evolution of Coronary Stent Platforms: A Brief Overview of Currently Used Drug-Eluting Stents

Cardiovascular disease, including ischemic heart disease, is the leading cause of death worldwide, and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) have been demonstrated to improve the prognosis of these patients on top of optimal medical therapy. PCIs have evolved from plain old balloon angioplasty to coronary stent implantation at the end of the last century. There has been a constant technical and scientific improvement in stent technology from bare metal stents to the era of drug-eluting stents (DESs) to overcome clinical challenges such as target lesion failure related to in-stent restenosis or stent thrombosis. A better understanding of the underlying mechanisms of these adverse events has led DESs to evolve from first-generation DESs to thinner and ultrathin third-generation DESs with improved polymer biocompatibility that seems to have reached a peak in efficiency. This review aims to provide a brief historical overview of the evolution of coronary DES platforms and an update on clinical studies and major characteristics of the most currently used DESs.

Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents in US patients undergoing coronary revascularization: 1-Year outcomes from the BIOFLOW VII trial

BACKGROUND

Ultrathin strut coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) have demonstrated improved safety and efficacy in large contemporary trials. The evaluation of an ultrathin strut DES in a post-market United States (US) patient population was undertaken.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this post-approval study is to confirm that the clinical performance of an ultrathin strut bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP SES) in clinical practice is similar to that observed with BP SES in the BIOFLOW V pivotal trial.

METHODS

BIOFLOW VII is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm US post-market approval study to confirm the clinical performance of BP SES in a real-world setting. The primary endpoint of 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) was compared with a performance goal of 6.9% based on an adapted BIOFLOW V trial BP SES TLF rate and TLF rates from other US market-released DES utilizing the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition for peri-procedural myocardial infarction (MI). Subjects undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with BP SES were consented within 24 h post-index procedure with planned follow-up through 5 years.

RESULTS

Among 556 enrolled patients, clinical demographics included: 34.7% female, 35.6% with diabetes mellitus, and 56.8% with acute coronary syndromes. The average stent length (mean ± standard deviation) was 20.2 ± 11.8 mm, and the mean number of stents per patient was 1.3 ± 0.6. Procedure success was 99.1% (551/556), and device success was 99.9% (689/690). Among 531 subjects included in the primary endpoint analysis, the 1-year rate of TLF rate was 1.7% (9/531), and the primary endpoint was met compared with the performance goal (p < 0.0001, 95% confidence interval: 0.69%, 3.43%). Rates of target vessel MI and clinically driven target lesion revascularization were 1.3% (7/531) and 0.9% (5/531), with no occurrence of cardiac death. Definite stent thrombosis was observed for two cases (0.4%; 2/556) with one acute (≤24 h) and one late (>30 days and ≤1 year) event.

CONCLUSION

In a post-approval study, 1-year clinical outcomes with BP SES were consistent with prior trials supporting the safety and effectiveness of ultrathin BP SES.

Ultrathin-strut vs thin-strut drug-eluting stents for multi and single-stent lesions: A lesion-level subgroup analysis of 2 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Whether ultrathin-strut stents are particularly beneficial for lesions requiring implantation of more than 1 stent is unknown.

METHODS

In a post-hoc lesion-level analysis of 2 randomized trials comparing ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer Sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) vs thin-strut durable polymer Everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES), lesions were stratified into multistent lesions (MSL) vs single-stent lesions (SSL). The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of lesion-related unclear/cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or revascularization, at 24 months.

RESULTS

Among 5328 lesions in 3397 patients, 1492 (28%) were MSL (722 with BP-SES, 770 with DP-EES). At 2 years, TLF occurred in 63 lesions (8.9%) treated with BP-SES and 60 lesions (7.9%) treated with DP-EES in the MSL-group (subdistibution hazard ratio [SHR], 1.13; 95% CI, 0.77-1.64; P = .53), and in 121 (6.4%) and 136 (7.4%) lesions treated with BP-SES and DP-EES respectively (SHR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.62-1.18; P = .35) in the SSL-group (P for interaction = .241). While the rates of lesion-related MI or revascularization were significantly lower in SSL treated with BP-SES as compared to DP-EES (3.5% vs 5.2%; SHR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.46-0.97; P = .036), no significant difference was observed in MSL (7.1% vs 5.4%; SHR, 1.31; 95% CI 0.85-2.03; P = .216) with significant interaction between groups (P for interaction = .014).

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of TLF are similar between ultrathin-strut BP-SES and thin-strut DP-EES in MSL and SSL. The use of ultrathin-strut BP-SES vs thin-strut DP-EES did not prove to be particularly beneficial for the treatment of multistent lesions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Post-hoc analysis from the BIOSCIENCE (NCT01443104) and BIOSTEMI (NCT02579031) trials.

DES Strut Thickness and Clinical Outcomes After CTO Recanalization: Insights From LATAM CTO Registry

BACKGROUND

Ultra-thin strut drug-eluting stent (UTS-DES) may improve outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) but have received limited study in chronic total occlusion (CTO) PCI.

AIMS

To compare of 1-year incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between patients who underwent CTO PCI with ultrathin (≤ 75 μm) versus thin (>75 μm) strut DES in the LATAM CTO registry.

METHODS

Patients were considered for inclusion only if successful CTO PCI was performed and when only one type of stent strut thickness (ultrathin or thin) was used. A propensity score matching (PSM) was computed to produce similar groups in relation to clinical and procedural characteristics.

RESULTS

Between January 2015 and January 2020, 2092 patients underwent CTO PCI, of whom 1466 were included in the present analysis (475 in the ultra-thin and 991 in the thin strut DES). In unadjusted analysis the UTS-DES group had lower rate of MACE (HR: 0.63 95 % CI 0.42 to 0.94, p = 0.04) and repeat revascularizations (HR: 0.50 95 % CI 0.31 to 0.81, p = 0.02) at 1-year follow-up. After adjustment for confounding factors in a Cox regression model there was no difference in 1-year incidence of MACE between groups (HR: 1.15 95 % CI 0.41 to 2.97, p = 0.85). On PSM of 686 patients (343 in each group) the 1-year incidence of MACE (HR 0.68 95 % CI 0.37-1.23; P = 0.22) and individual components of MACE did not differ between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

One-year clinical outcomes after CTO PCI were similar with ultrathin and thin strut DES.

Investigation of Stent Prototypes for the Eustachian Tube in Human Donor Bodies

Chronic otitis media is often connected to Eustachian tube dysfunction. As successful treatment cannot be guaranteed with the currently available options, the aim is to develop a stent for the Eustachian tube (ET). Over the course of this development, different prototypes were generated and tested in ex vivo experiments. Four different prototypes of an ET stent and one commercially available coronary stent were implanted in the ET of seven human donor bodies. The position of the stents was verified by cone beam CT. The implanted ETs were harvested, embedded in resin and ground at 200 µm steps. Resulting images of the single steps were used to generate 3D models. The 3D models were then evaluated regarding position of the stent in the ET, its diameters, amount of squeezing, orientation of the axes and other parameters. Virtual reconstruction of the implanted ET was successful in all cases and revealed one incorrect stent placement. The cross-section increased for all metal stents in direction from the isthmus towards the pharyngeal orifice of the ET. Depending on the individual design of the metal stents (open or closed design), the shape varied also between different positions along a single stent. In contrast, the cross-section area and shape remained constant along the polymeric prototype. With the current investigation, insight into the behavior of different prototypes of ET stents was gained, which can help in defining the specifications for the intended ET stent.

Real-World Assessment of an Ultrathin Strut, Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Submitted to Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (INSTEMI Registry)

BACKGROUND

The current gold standard of coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) consists of metal alloys with thinner struts and bioresorbable polymers.

OBJECTIVES

Our aim was to compare an ultrathin strut, sirolimus-eluting stent (Inspiron®) with other third-generation DES platforms in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) submitted to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

We analyzed data from a STEMI multicenter registry from reference centers in the South Region of Brazil. All patients were submitted to primary PCI, either with Inspiron® or other second- or third-generation DES. Propensity score matching (PSM) was computed to generate similar groups (Inspiron® versus other stents) in relation to clinical and procedural characteristics. All hypothesis tests had a two-sided significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

From January 2017 to January 2021, 1711 patients underwent primary PCI, and 1417 patients met our entry criteria (709 patients in the Inspiron® group and 708 patients in the other second- or third-generation DES group). After PSM, the study sample was comprised of 706 patients (353 patients in the Inspiron® group and 353 patients in the other the other second- or third-generation DES group). The rates of target vessel revascularization (OR 0.52, CI 0.21 - 1.34, p = 0.173), stent thrombosis (OR 1.00, CI 0.29 - 3.48, p = 1.000), mortality (HR 0.724, CI 0.41 - 1.27, p = 0.257), and major cardiovascular outcomes (OR 1.170, CI 0.77 - 1.77, p = 0.526) were similar between groups after a median follow-up of 17 months.

CONCLUSION

Our findings show that Inspiron® was effective and safe when compared to other second- or third-generation DES in a contemporary cohort of real-world STEMI patients submitted to primary PCI.

Complex primary percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin-strut biodegradable versus thin-strut durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A subgroup analysis from the BIOSTEMI randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) are superior to thin-strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) with respect to target lesion failure (TLF) at 2 years among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). We sought to determine the impact of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) complexity on long-term clinical outcomes with BP-SES versus DP-EES in STEMI patients.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc subgroup analysis from the BIOSTEMI (NCT02579031) randomized trial, which included individual data from 407 STEMI patients enrolled in the BIOSCIENCE trial (NCT01443104). STEMI patients were randomly assigned to treatment with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES, and further categorized into those undergoing complex versus noncomplex pPCI. Complex pPCI was defined by the presence of ≥1 of the following criteria: 3 vessel treatment, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation lesion with ≥2 stents implanted, total stent length ≥60 mm, and/or chronic total occlusion treatment. The primary endpoint was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial reinfarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, within 2 years.

RESULTS

Among a total of 1707 STEMI patients, 421 (24.7%) underwent complex pPCI. Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. At 2 years, TLF occurred in 14 patients (7.1%) treated with BP-SES and 25 patients (11.6%) treated with DP-EES (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-1.19; p = 0.15) in the complex pPCI group, and in 28 patients (4.4%) treated with BP-SES and 49 patients (8.2%) treated with DP-EES (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.34-0.86; p = 0.008; p for interaction = 0.74) in the noncomplex pPCI group. Individual TLF components and stent thrombosis rates did not significantly differ between groups.

CONCLUSION

In a post hoc subgroup analysis from the BIOSTEMI randomized trial, ultrathin-strut BP-SES were superior to thin-strut DP-EES with respect to TLF at 2 years among STEMI patients undergoing both complex and noncomplex pPCI.

The Outcome of Ultrathin-Strut Biodegradable Polymer-Coated Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Coronary Artery Disease Patients - A Feasibility Study

Background

Drug-eluting coronary stents with ultrathin struts and biodegradable polymers have been shown to reduce inflammation, neointimal proliferation, and thrombus formation, leading to less early and late complications in patients with coronary artery disease as compared to thinner strut and durable polymer second-generation stents. In Oman, currently, second-generation stents are used for all patients.

Objective

The purpose of this feasibility study was to evaluate the clinical safety and performance of ultrathin-strut (60 μm) biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stents in an all-comers patient population.

Methods

This was a prospective, observational, single-center, and single-arm investigator-initiated study from August 2018 to August 2019. Inclusion criteria: 18 years of age, patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease indicated for percutaneous coronary intervention, and stenting of at least one coronary lesion. All patients were followed clinically or telephonically at 12 months after the index procedure.

Results

A total of 88 patients were recruited in the study, but 10 patients were lost to follow-up and hence excluded from the analysis. The overall mean age was 63 ± 13 years and 78% were males. The main comorbid conditions were hypertension (58%), diabetes mellitus (49%), and hyperlipidemia (26%). Fifty-three percent presented with unstable angina or non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (MI), 10% with ST elevation MI, recent MI 16%, 18% with stable angina, and 1.3% in cardiogenic shock. The mean left ventricular ejection fraction of the cohort was 46 ± 14%. Angiographically, Type A lesions were seen in 25%, Type B in 32%, and Type C in 42%. Left anterior descending stenting was done in 44%, right coronary artery in 32%, left circumflex artery in 14%, left main in 5%, and graft stenting in 4%. Device success was 96%. Procedural success was seen in 97% of patients. At 1-year follow-up, 93% were asymptomatic; overall device-oriented clinical events were 6.8% including cardiac death in 2.7%, target-vessel MI in 2.7%, and target-lesion revascularization in 1.3% which all occurred in uncontrolled diabetic patients.

Conclusions

At index admission and 1 year, ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent study showed low device-related adverse clinical events which are comparable to published data for the second-generation stents. This feasibility study shows that these stents can be used in all types of stent-indicated patients with added advantages of biodegradable polymer and ultrathin struts. In addition, measures to prevent, diagnose, and control diabetes need to be taken in Oman as this cohort of patients develop ST after stenting.

Five-Year Clinical Outcome of the Biodegradable Polymer Ultrathin Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Compared to the Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: From the SORT OUT VII Trial

BACKGROUND

Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents were developed to improve safety and efficacy outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, few long-term follow-up efficacy studies are available. The study sought to investigate 5-year results from the SORT OUT VII trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome) comparing the biodegradable polymer ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) versus the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES).

METHODS

This registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, noninferiority trial compared O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer population. The composite primary end point, target lesion failure, consisted of cardiac death, myocardial infarction related to the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year. Follow-up was extended to 5 years.

RESULTS

Five-year follow-up was completed for 2521 patients (99.8%). Five-year target lesion failure did not differ between O-SES (12.4%) and N-BES (13.1%; rate ratio [RR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.18]). Cardiac death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.67-1.34]), target myocardial infarction (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.76-1.71]), target lesion revascularization (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.67-1.21]), and definite stent thrombosis rates (RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.41-1.33]) did not differ significantly between the 2 stents. Within the first year, definite ST was significantly lower for O-SES (0.4%) compared to N-BES (1.2%; RR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12-0.92]), but no difference was from 1 through 5 years: O-SES 1.2% and N-BES 0.9% (RR, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.58-2.82]).

CONCLUSIONS

Five years after treatment with biodegradable polymer stents, target lesion failure did not differ among O-SES and N-BES. Definite stent thrombosis was less often seen within the first year in the O-SES but the difference was not maintained after 5 years.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01879358.

Ultrathin Struts Drug-Eluting Stents: A State-of-the-Art Review

New-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) represent the standard of care for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent iterations in DES technology have led to the development of newer stent platforms with a further reduction in strut thickness. This new DES class, known as ultrathin struts DESs, has struts thinner than 70 µm. The evidence base for these devices consists of observational data, large-scale meta-analyses, and randomized trials with long-term follow-up, which have been conducted to investigate the difference between ultrathin struts DESs and conventional new-generation DESs in a variety of clinical settings and lesion subsets. Ultrathin struts DESs may further improve the efficacy and safety profile of PCI by reducing the risk of target-lesion and target-vessel failures in comparison to new-generation DESs. In this article, we reviewed device characteristics and clinical data of the Orsiro (Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland), Coroflex ISAR (B. Braun Melsungen, Germany), BioMime (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat, India), MiStent (MiCell Technologies, USA), and Supraflex (Sahajanand Medical Technologies, Surat, India) sirolimus-eluting stents.

Comparison of biodegradable and durable polymer drug-eluting stents in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety and effectiveness between biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) and durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were considered the primary endpoint. Efficacy endpoints included target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Safety endpoints included all-cause death, cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis (ST).

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for comparative studies of BP-DES and DP-DES in patients with ACS from January 2000 to July 2021. Statistical pooling was performed to estimate incidence using a random-effects model with generic inverse-variance weighting. Risk estimates were computed with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

Eight articles with seven RCTs that compared BP-DES and DP-DES in patients with ACS were identified and included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. There was no difference in the baseline characteristics, except for the number of smoking patients (OR: 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.24; p=0.008, I²=29%), which was significantly lower in the BP-DES group. The meta-analysis demonstrated that MACEs, efficacy endpoints and safety endpoints were similar between the groups at 1 year. However, the incidence of total ST was significantly different between the BP-DES and DP-DES groups in the follow-up period (p=0.0001). Further analysis showed a statistically significant difference in MACEs (OR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.88; p=0.002, I²=0 %), TLR (OR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.01; p=0.05, I²=0%), TVR (OR: 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94; p=0.002, I²=15%), total ST incidence (OR: 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.77; p=0.0001, I²=48%) and ST incidence (OR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.85; p=0.002, I²=0%) over 2 years.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis revealed that both stent types demonstrated excellent safety and efficacy profiles at 12 months. However, a slight increase in MACEs, TLR, TVR and ST incidence was observed in the DP-DES group over the 2-year follow-up period, suggesting that BP-DES may be more favourable when treating patients with ACS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00389220.

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Biodegradable and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents: A Nationwide Cohort Study

Background

Despite the theoretical benefits of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES), clinical benefits of BP-DES over durable polymer DES (DP-DES) have not been clearly demonstrated. Using data from a large-volume nationwide cohort, we compared long-term clinical outcomes between BP-DES- and DP-DES-treated patients.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study that enrolled all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation DES between 2010 and 2016 in Korea was conducted by using the National Health Insurance Service database. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and myocardial infarction (MI).

Results

A total of 127,731 patients treated with new-generation DES with thin struts (<90 μm) were enrolled for this analysis. After stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, the incidence of all-cause death was significantly lower in patients treated with BP-DES (n = 19,521) at 5 years after PCI (11.3 vs. 13.0% in those treated with DP-DES [n = 108,067], hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–0.96, p < 0.001), while showing no statistically significant difference at 2 years after PCI (5.7 vs. 6.0%, respectively, HR 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89–1.01, p = 0.238). Similarly, use of BP-DES was associated with a lower incidence of cardiovascular death (7.4 vs. 9.6% in those treated with DP-DES, HR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.77–0.87, p < 0.001), and MI (7.4 vs. 8.7%, respectively, HR 0.90, 95% CI, 0.86–0.94, p = 0.006) at 5 years after PCI. There was no statistically significant difference of cardiovascular death (4.6 vs. 4.9%, respectively, HR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.85–1.01, p = 0.120) and MI (5.0 vs. 5.1%, respectively, HR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.92–1.05, p = 0.461) at 2 years after PCI.

Conclusions

Implantation of BP-DES was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and MI compared with DP-DES implantation. This difference was clearly apparent at 5 years after DES implantation.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04715594.

Evolutionary perspective of drug eluting stents: from thick polymer to polymer free approach

Background

Introduction of Bare Metal Stents (BMS) was itself a revolutionary step in the history of the medical industry; however, Drug Eluting Stents (DES) maintained its superiority over BMS in every aspect from restenosis rate to late lumen loss. The reason behind the magnanimous position of the DES in the stent market is the degree of improvement with which it evolves. New and better stents come into the market every year, surpassing their predecessors by many folds.

Literature review

This review paper discusses the journey of DES with supporting clinical trials in detail. In the first generation, there were stainless-steel stents with thicker coatings. Although they had superior results compared to BMS, there was still room for improvement. Afterward came the second-generation stents, which had superior metal platforms with thinner struts and thin coatings. The drugs were also changed from Paclitaxel and Sirolimus to Zotrolimus and Everolimus. These stents performed best; however, there was an issue of permanent coating, which remained intact over the stent surface after complete drug elution and started to cause issues in longer-term studies. Hence, an improved version of DES was introduced to these permanent coatings called the third generation of drug eluting stents, which initially utilized biodegradable polymer and ultimately moved towards polymer free drug coatings. This generation has introduced a unique amalgam of technologies to achieve its polymer free coatings; however, researchers have numerous prospects of growth in this field. This review paper highlights the major coups of stent technology evolution from BMS to DES, from thick polymeric coatings to thin coatings and from durable polymers to polymer free DES.

Conclusion

In conclusion, though the medical industry promptly accepted BMS as the best treatment option for cardiovascular diseases; however, DES has provided even better results than BMS. In DES, the first and second generation has ruled the technology for many years and are still on the shelves. Still, the issues aroused due to durable polymer shifted the attention towards biodegradable drug eluting stents, the third generation growing rapidly. But the scientific community has not restricted themselves and is investigating bioresorbable stents that completely eliminate the polymer intervention in drug eluting stent technology.

Temporal trends in clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review of 66,327 patients from 25 all-comers trials

BACKGROUND

With the improvements of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) technology and post-PCI patient management, several registry studies reported temporal trends in post-PCI clinical outcomes. However, their results are inconclusive, potentially reflecting region-specific trends, based on site-reported events without external validity.

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate temporal trends in post-PCI clinical outcomes in all-comers randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving coronary stents.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review identifying RCTs comparing a clinical outcome as a primary endpoint among different coronary stents with an all-comers design and independent clinical event adjudication, extracting the study start year, patient baseline characteristics, and one- and five-year clinical outcomes. Temporal trends in clinical outcomes (cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], target lesion revascularisation [TLR], stent thrombosis [ST]) were assessed using random-effects meta-regression analyses, estimating the relationship between clinical outcomes and study start year.

RESULTS

Overall, 25 all-comers trials (51 device arms, 66,327 patients) conducted between 2003 and 2018 fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Random-effects meta-regression analysis revealed significant decreasing trends in one- and five-year cardiac death, one-year TLR, and five-year ST incidences (relative risk per 10-year increase: 0.69 [0.51-0.92], 0.66 [0.44-0.98], 0.60 [0.41-0.88], and 0.18 [0.07-0.44], respectively). There was no significant trend in myocardial infarction incidences.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first attempt to clarify and quantify the temporal trends of post-PCI outcome incidence. The 15-year improvements in PCI therapy and post-therapeutic patient management are associated with reduced incidences of cardiac death and PCI-related adverse events.

PRospective Observational Registry Evaluating the Safety and Effectivenessof Orsiro Stent in Chilean Patients - ROSES Registry

BACKGROUND

There is little information on the performance of the new generation of stents with bioabsorbable polymers in the Latin American population. This registry aimed to further validate the safety and efficacy of the Orsiro bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BPSES) in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Chilean centers.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled patients undergoing PCI with BPSES in 6 Chilean centers. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

From April 2017 to February 2019, 520 patients were enrolled in the registry, more frequently male (74.6%), with a mean age of 62.7 ± 10.8 years and a high prevalence of diabetes (40.2%). The clinical presentation was stable angina in 41.1% (n = 214), acute MI in 52.5% (n = 167 [32.1%] ST-elevation MI and n = 106 [20.4%] non-ST-elevation MI), and unstable angina in 6.3% (n = 33). Of 610 treated lesions, 425 (69.7%) were American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association type B or C lesions. Device and procedural success were achieved in 99.4% and 98.7% of the patients, respectively. The primary endpoint of the study occurred in 4%, primarily driven by cardiac death.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the ROSES multicenter registry indicated good clinical outcomes of BPSES Orsiro in all-comers Latin Americann patients undergoing PCI, despite the high-risk patients and treated lesions.

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.

Differential Effects of Newer-Generation Ultrathin-Strut Versus Thicker-Strut Drug-Eluting Stents in Chronic and Acute Coronary Syndromes

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to compare the differential effects of ultrathin-strut and thicker-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with chronic (CCS) versus acute (ACS) coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND

Newest-generation ultrathin-strut DES reduce target lesion failure (TLF) compared with thicker-strut second-generation DES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing newer-generation ultrathin-strut (<70 μm) versus thicker-strut (≥70 μm) DES. Patients were divided based on baseline clinical presentation (CCS versus ACS). The primary endpoint was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

A total of 22,766 patients from 16 randomized controlled trials were included, of which 9 trials reported TLF rates in ACS patients. At a mean follow-up of 12.2 months, the risk of TLF was lower among patients treated with ultrathin-strut compared with thicker-strut DES (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.75-0.95; P = 0.006). The difference was driven by a lower risk of clinically-indicated TLR (RR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.63-0.89; P < 0.001) among patients treated with ultrathin-strut DES. The treatment effect was consistent between patients presenting with CCS and ACS (relative RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.73-1.31; P for interaction = 0.854). In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, TLF risk was lower among those treated with ultrathin- compared with thicker-strut DES (RR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.54-0.99; P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Ultrathin-strut DES reduce the risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut second-generation DES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, a difference caused by a lower risk of ischemia-driven TLR. The treatment effect was consistent among patients with CCS and ACS.

Individual patient data analysis of the BIOFLOW study program comparing safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent

OBJECTIVES

This analysis of pooled individual patient data (IPD) aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent system (BP-SES; Orsiro) compared to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent system (DP-EES; Xience) in the pooled population as well as in subgroups.

METHODS

IPD with up to 12 months follow-up of the randomized controlled trials BIOFLOW-II (NCT01356888), -IV (NCT01939249), and -V (NCT02389946) as well as the all comers registry BIOFLOW-III (NCT01553526) were pooled. A total of 3,717 subjects (2,923 in BP-SES and 794 in DP-EES) with 5,328 lesions (4,225 lesions in BP-SES and 1,103 in DP-EES) were included in the IPD. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months follow-up. Subgroups analyzed included diabetes, age (≥65 years), gender, complex lesions (B2/C), small vessels (reference vessel diameter ≤2.75 mm), multivessel treatment, renal disease, and patients with acute coronary syndrome.

RESULTS

Overall, TLF at 12 months was significantly lower with 5.2%in the BP-SES group versus 7.6% in the DP-EES group (p = .0098). Similarly, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI) was 3.1 versus 5.7% (p = .0005). The rate of stent thrombosis was similar in both groups (0.004%). By regression analysis, an independent stent effect in favor of BP-SES was observed for TLF (p = .0043) and TV-MI (p = .0364) in small vessels.

CONCLUSION

Results of this IPD analysis suggest that the BP-SES with ultrathin struts is as safe as and more efficacious than DP-EES in the overall cohort and especially in small vessels.

Clinical outcomes of ultrathin biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stents in an all-comer population: One-year results from the T-FLEX registry including high-risk subgroups

OBJECTIVE

T-Flex registry was designed to investigate the safety and clinical performance of the ultrathin (60 µm) strut biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with a unique long dual Z (LDZ) link design on a cobalt-chromium stent platform (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Surat, India) in a real-world all-comer population including high-risk subgroups.

METHODS

This was an observational, multicenter, single-arm, and investigator-initiated retrospective registry. A total of 1,203 patients treated with an ultrathin biodegradable polymer-coated SES, irrespective of lesion complexity, comorbidities, and acute presentation were analyzed from May 2016 to January 2017. The primary endpoint was the one-year incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (CI-TLR). Stent thrombosis was assessed as an additional safety endpoint.

RESULTS

At the one-year follow-up, TLF was observed in 3.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.9-5.1] patients, composed of 0.6% (95% CI: 0.3-1.3) cardiac death, 1.3% (95% CI: 0.8-2.2) TV-MI, and 1.9% (95% CI: 1.3-2.9) CI-TLR. In the high-risk subgroups, TLF at one-year was 6.8% (95% CI: 4.6-9.8) in patients with diabetes, 5.2% (95% CI: 3.4-8) in patients with small-vessel disease, 6.1% (95% CI: 3.9-9.6) in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction, and 4.5% (95% CI: 2.4-8.3) in patients with total occlusion. During follow-up, stent thrombosis was reported in 0.8% (95% CI: 0.4-1.5) patients in the overall population.

CONCLUSION

Low event rates of TLF and stent thrombosis at one-year follow-up indicate that this ultrathin biodegradable polymer-coated SES has encouraging safety and clinical performance in real-world all-comer populations as well as in high-risk subgroups.

Biodegradable- Versus Durable-Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents for STEMI: Final 2-Year Outcomes of the BIOSTEMI Trial

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) compared with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

BACKGROUND

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is an effective treatment for patients with STEMI, and long-term outcomes are determined by the safety and efficacy profile of the newest generation drug-eluting stents.

METHODS

BIOSTEMI (A Comparison of an Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Patients With Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) was an investigator-initiated, multicenter, assessor-blind, randomized superiority trial using Bayesian methods. Patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI within 24 h of symptom onset were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive BP-SES (n = 649) or DP-EES (n = 651). The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial reinfarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 2 years.

RESULTS

Between April 2016 and March 2018, 1,300 patients were included. Baseline characteristics were comparable between the 2 treatment groups. Follow-up through 2 years was complete in 1,221 patients (94%). At 2 years, TLF occurred in 33 patients (5.1%) treated with BP-SES and in 53 patients (8.1%) treated with DP-EES (rate ratio: 0.58; 95% Bayesian credible interval: 0.40 to 0.84; posterior probability of superiority = 0.998). The difference was driven by a lower incidence of clinically indicated TLR in patients treated with BP-SES compared with DP-EES (2.5% vs. 5.1%; rate ratio: 0.52; 95% Bayesian credible interval: 0.30 to 0.87; posterior probability of superiority = 0.993). There were no significant differences in rates of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial reinfarction, and definite stent thrombosis between the 2 treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, BP-SES were superior to DP-EES with respect to TLF at 2 years. The difference was driven by lower rates of ischemia-driven TLR. (A Comparison of an Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Patients With Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [BIOSTEMI]; NCT02579031).

Target Lesion Failure With Current Drug-Eluting Stents: Evidence From a Comprehensive Network Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of currently used drug-eluting stents (DES).

BACKGROUND

Head-to-head comparisons among newer DES have shown conflicting results.

METHODS

For this network meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials comparing different types of currently used DES were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and proceedings of international meetings. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year and at long-term follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven trials with 99,039 patients were selected for this network meta-analysis. Among the 10 DES included in the meta-analysis, 4 received the most extensive investigation: Orsiro, XIENCE, Nobori/BioMatrix, and Resolute. At 1 year, the Orsiro stent was associated with lower rates of TLF compared with XIENCE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71 to 0.98; p = 0.03), Resolute (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.95; p = 0.01), and Nobori/BioMatrix (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.98; p = 0.03). Orsiro had the highest probability to be the best (70.8%), with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve value of 95.9%. However, after a median follow-up period of 50 months (range: 24 to 60 months), no significant difference was apparent in the rates of TLF between any DES, although Orsiro still ranked as the best stent (58.6% probability to be the best). In addition, Orsiro had a lower rate of long-term definite stent thrombosis compared with Nobori/BioMatrix (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.98; p = 0.04) and lower rates of definite and probable stent thrombosis compared with Resolute (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.99; p = 0.04). No differences in cardiac mortality between any DES were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Orsiro is associated with a lower 1-year rate of TLF compared with XIENCE, Resolute, and Nobori/BioMatrix but with an attenuation of the efficacy signal at long-term follow-up.

Long-term follow-up after ultrathin vs. conventional 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Contemporary 2nd-generation thin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A previous meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 11 658 patients demonstrated a 16% reduction in the 1-year risk of target lesion failure (TLF) with ultrathin-strut DES compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. Whether this benefit is sustained longer term is not known, and newer trial data may inform these relative outcomes. We therefore sought to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing clinical outcomes with ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 µm strut thickness) with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing ultrathin-strut DES to conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. The pre-specified primary endpoint was long-term TLF, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death. There were 16 eligible trials in which 20 701 patients were randomized. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 2.5 years. Ultrathin-strut DES were associated with a 15% reduction in long-term TLF compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES [relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.96, P = 0.008] driven by a 25% reduction in CD-TLR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences between stent types in the risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, or all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, ultrathin-strut DES reduced the risk of TLF, driven by less CD-TLR compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES, with similar risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.

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.

First Report of 3-Year Clinical Outcome After Treatment With Novel Resolute Onyx Stents in the Randomized BIONYX Trial

BACKGROUND

At 1 year, the international randomized BIONYX trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02508714) established non-inferiority regarding safety and efficacy of the novel Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent (RO-ZES) vs. the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES). Although the RO-ZES is used in daily practice, no clinical results have been published beyond 2 years.Methods and Results:We assessed 3-year clinical outcomes of 2,488 all-comers after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with RO-ZES vs. O-SES. The main endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization. Time-to-endpoints was assessed by Kaplan-Meier methods and between-group comparisons by log-rank tests. Follow-up was available in 2,433/2,488 (97.8%) patients. There was no significant between-stent difference in TVF (RO-ZES 112/1,243 [9.2%] vs. O-SES 109/1,245 [8.9%], hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.34; P_log-rank=0.85) and its individual components. The all-cause mortality was significantly lower after PCI with RO-ZES (3.7% vs.5.4%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.97; P_log-rank=0.034), but cardiac mortality did not differ significantly (1.1% vs.1.9%, HR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.28-1.11; P_log-rank=0.09). Definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were low for both groups (0.6% vs.1.2%, HR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.19-1.14; P_log-rank=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

This first 3-year randomized assessment of the RO-ZES showed a favorable rate of TVF that matched the outcomes of patients treated with O-SES. We observed a lower rate of all-cause death in the RO-ZES group, but long-term clinical follow-up is of interest.

Long term outcomes of ultrathin versus standard thickness second-generation drug eluting stents: Meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

Identify the effect of ultrathin drug eluting stents on long term outcomes in coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND

Although second-generation drug eluting stents (DES) are superior to first-generation DES, persistence of adverse outcomes has led to continued refinement in design. Ultrathin second-generation DES have been shown to improve outcomes at 1-year follow-up. Beyond 1-year their effect remains unknown.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared ultrathin (defined as <70 um) to standard thickness second-generation DES. Studies were chosen according to the PROSPERO protocol (CRD42020185374). Data from randomized controlled trials were pooled using random-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel). The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF) at 2 years, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes included TLF at 3 and 5 years, the components of TLF and definite or probable stent thrombosis. Differences in outcomes between groups were presented in Forest plots as risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each trial.

RESULTS

We identified 18 publications from 10 trials with14,649 patients. At 2-years there was a significant 12% reduction in TLF (RR, 0.88; 95% CI 0.78-0.99; p < 0.05) associated with the use of ultrathin DES. At 3-years, there was a significant 19% reduction in TLF with ultrathin DES (RR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, ultrathin DES improve long term clinical outcomes.

Early Vascular Healing Following Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Placement Compared to That with Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent

A recent thinner strut drug-eluting stent might facilitate early strut coverage after its placement. We aimed to investigate early vascular healing responses after the placement of an ultrathin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) compared to those with a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging.This study included 40 patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) who underwent OCT-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Twenty patients each received either BP-SES or DP-EES implantation. OCT was performed immediately after stent placement (baseline) and at 1-month follow-up.At one month, the percentage of uncovered struts reduced significantly in both the BP-SES (80.9 ± 10.3% to 2.9 ± 1.7%; P < 0.001) and DP-EES (81.9 ± 13.0% to 5.7 ± 1.8%; P < 0.001) groups, and the percentage was lower in the BP-SES group than in the DP-EES group (P < 0.001). In the BP-SES group, the percentage of malapposed struts also decreased significantly at 1 month (4.9 ± 3.7% to 2.6 ± 3.0%; P = 0.025), which was comparable to that of the DP-EES group (2.5 ± 2.2%; P = 0.860). The optimal cut-off value of the distance between the strut and vessel surface immediately after the placement to predict resolved malapposed struts was ≤ 160 μm for BP-SES and ≤ 190 μm for DP-EES.Compared to DP-EES, ultrathin-strut BP-SES demonstrated favorable vascular responses at one month, with a lower rate of uncovered struts and a comparable rate of malapposed struts.

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

Objectives

To compare stent recoil (SR) of the thin‐strut durable‐polymer Zotarolimus‐eluting stent (dp‐ZES) and the ultrathin‐strut bioabsorbable‐polymer Sirolimus‐eluting stent (bp‐SES) in chronic total occlusions (CTOs) and to investigate the predictors of high SR in CTOs.

Background

Newer ultrathin drug eluting stent might be associated with lower radial force and higher elastic recoil due to the thinner strut design, possibly impacting on the rate of in‐stent restenosis and thrombosis.

Methods

Between January 2017 and November 2019, consecutive patients with CTOs undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were evaluated. Only patients treated with dp‐ZES or bp‐SES were included and stratified accordingly. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis was used to assess absolute SR, relative SR, absolute focal SR, relative focal SR, high absolute, and high relative focal SR.

Results

A total of 128 lesions (67 treated with dp‐ZES and 61 with bp‐SES) in 123 patients were analyzed. Between bp‐SES and dp‐ZES no differences were found in absolute SR (p = .188), relative SR (p = .138), absolute focal SR (p = .069), and relative focal SR (p = .064). High absolute and high relative focal SR occurred more frequently in bp‐SES than in dp‐ZES (p = .004 and p = .015). Bp‐SES was a predictor of high absolute focal SR (Odds ratio [OR] 3.29, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.50–7.22, p = .003]. High‐pressure postdilation and bp‐SES were predictors of high relative focal SR (OR 2.22, 95% CI 1.01–4.86, p = .047; OR 2.74, 95% CI 1.24–6.02, p = .012, respectively).

Conclusions

Both stents showed an overall low SR. However, ultra‐thin strut bp‐SES was a predictor of high absolute and high relative focal SR.

Biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents vs durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A meta-analysis of individual patient data from 5 randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Newest generation drug-eluting stents combine biodegradable polymers with ultrathin stent platforms in order to minimize vessel injury and inflammatory response. Evidence from randomized controlled trials suggested that differences in stent design translate into differences in clinical outcome. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ultrathin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus eluting stents (BP SES) compared with thin strut, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES) among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

We pooled individual participant data from 5 randomized trials (NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946, NCT01443104, NCT02579031) including a total of 5,780 patients, and performed a one-stage meta-analysis using a mixed effects Cox regression model.

RESULTS

At a median duration of follow-up of 739 days (interquartile range 365-1,806 days), target-lesion failure occurred in 337 (10.3%) and 304 (12.2%) patients treated with BP SES and DP EES (HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.71-1.06, P = .16). There were no significant differences between BP SES and DP EES with regards to cardiac death (111 (3.4%) vs 102 (4.1%); HR 1.05, 95%CI 0.80-1.37, P = .73), target-vessel myocardial infarction (136 (4.1%) vs 126 (5.0%), HR 0.79, 95%CI 0.62-1.01, P = .061), and clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization (163 (5.0%) vs 147 (5.9%); HR 0.94, 95%CI 0.75-1.18, P = .61). The effect was consistent across major subgroups. In a landmark analysis, there was no significant interaction between treatment effect and timing of events.

CONCLUSIONS

In this patient-level meta-analysis of 5 randomized controlled trials, BP SES were associated with a similar risk of target-lesion failure compared with DP EES among patients undergoing PCI.

STUDY REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registry (CRD42018109098).

Times up to demonstrate a difference is current DES platforms

Current generation durable polymer DES have sustained efficacy and safety out to 5 years. The Orsiro DES has both a bioresorbable polymer and ultra thin struts and has the potential to improve the safety of DES. In this all comers trial, 3 year outcomes with Orsiro DES were similar to the durable polymer zotarolimus eluting stent.

Bioresorbable polymer and durable polymer metallic stents in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Literature on bioresorbable-polymer-stents (BPS) and second-generation durable-polymer-stents (DPS) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for all comer CAD is conflicting.

METHODS

Randomized controlled studies comparing PCI among BPS and second-generation DPS were identified up until May-2020 from online databases.  Primary outcomes included are all-cause myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac-death, target-vessel-revascularization (TVR), target-vessel MI (TVMI), and stent-thrombosis (ST). Random effect method of risk ratio and confidence interval of 95% was used.

RESULTS

25 prospective randomized controlled trials with 31,822 patients (BPS n = 17,065 and DPS n = 14,757) were included in the study. Follow-up ranged between a minimum of 6 months to more than 5 years. Cardiac death (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.89-1.45, p = 0.16) was comparable in BPS and second-generation DPS. Risk of all-cause MI was similar between BPS and DPS (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84-1.11, p = 0.73). TVMI (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.69-1.11, p = 0.33) and ST rates were also comparable in BPS and DPS groups (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.80-1.40, p = 1.00). Overall TVR had comparable outcomes between BPS and DPS (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.79-1.14, p < 0.001); however, higher TVR was seen among BPS group at follow-up of ≥5 years (RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.12-1.14, p = 0.02). Bias was low and heterogeneity was moderate.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing PCI treated with BPS had comparable outcomes in terms of cardiac death, TVR, ST, TVMI, and all-cause MI to patients treated with second-generation DPS; however, BPS had higher rates of TVR for follow-up of ≥5-years.

Multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention with thin-strut biodegradable versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: A subgroup analysis of the BIOSTEMI randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Randomized evidence comparing newer-generation drug-eluting stents for multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) is limited. We sought to investigate clinical outcomes in STEMI patients undergoing multivessel PCI with thin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES).

METHODS

We performed a subgroup analysis of the BIOSTEMI (NCT02579031) randomized trial, which included individual patient data from STEMI patients enrolled into the BIOSCIENCE (NCT02579031) study. STEMI patients randomly allocated to BP-SES or DP-EES were divided into those undergoing multivessel versus culprit lesion-only PCI. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial re-infarction or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR), within 24 months.

RESULTS

Among 1707 STEMI patients, 145 patients underwent multivessel PCI. At 2 years, TLF occurred in 2 patients (2.8%) treated with BP-SES and 13 patients (18.7%) treated with DP-EES (hazard ratio [HR], 0.14; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.03-0.61; p = 0.009) in the multivessel PCI group, and in 40 (5.3%) and 61 (8.2%) patients treated with BP-SES and DP-EES respectively (HR, 0.64; 95%CI, 0.43-0.96; p = 0.03; p for interaction = 0.050) in the culprit lesion-only PCI group. In the multivessel PCI group, the rates of clinically indicated TLR (0% vs. 12.4%) and target vessel myocardial re-infarction (0% vs. 4.6%) at 2 years were lower in patients treated with BP-SES compared with DP-EES.

CONCLUSION

In a subgroup analysis of the BIOSTEMI trial, BP-SES were associated with lower 2-year TLF rates compared to DP-EES in STEMI patients undergoing multivessel PCI.

Outcomes of patients treated with a biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents after rotational atherectomy

OBJECTIVE

To compare Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Orsiro BP-SES) with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) regarding target lesion failure (TLF) after rotational atherectomy (RA), with a focus on small stents (diameter ≤ 3 mm) where Orsiro BP-SES has 60 µm strut thickness, while DP-EES remains with 81 µm strut thickness.

BACKGROUND

New-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) is superior to early-generation DES in all percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) settings including RA. Recently, the Orsiro BP-SES was superior to a DP-EES in an all comer's population.

METHODS

Among patients who underwent RA at a single center, 121 were treated with Orsiro BP-SES and 164 with DP-EES (Promus and Xience). Those treated with other stent types, presenting with acute myocardial infarction or had a chronic total occlusion were excluded. Incidence of TLF was assessed.

RESULTS

After 2 years, the TLF rate in Orsiro BP-SES and DP-EES groups was 10% and 18%, respectively (adjusted HR 0.55, 95%CI 0.26-1.16, p = 0.115). The rate of TLF was significantly lower in small Orsiro BP-SES with ultra-thin struts as compared to DP-EES with the same diameters (adjusted HR 0.19, 95% CI 0.04-0.87, p = 0.032), driven by lower rates of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (log-rank p = 0.022). Age (p = 0.035), total stent length (p = 0.007) and diabetes mellitus (p = 0.011) emerged as independent predictors of TLF in the whole population.

CONCLUSION

In the whole cohort, Orsiro BP-SES and DP-EES had comparable rates of long-term TLF after RA. In the small stent subgroup, the Orsiro BP-SES with ultra-thin struts showed significant lower rate of TLF at 2 years.

Randomized Clinical Comparison of the Dual-Therapy CD34 Antibody-Covered Sirolimus-Eluting Combo Stent With the Sirolimus-Eluting Orsiro Stent in Patients Treated With Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: The SORT OUT X Trial

BACKGROUND

Target lesion failure remains an issue with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Thus, the dual-therapy sirolimus-eluting and CD34+ antibody-coated Combo stent (DTS) was designed to further improve early healing. This study aimed to investigate whether the DTS is noninferior to the sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (SES) in an all-comers patient population.

METHODS

The SORT OUT X (Combo Stent Versus Orsiro Stent) trial, was a large-scale, randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial with registry-based follow-up. The primary end point target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization within 12 months, analyzed using intention-to-treat. The trial was powered for assessing target lesion failure noninferiority of the DTS compared with the SES with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 0.021.

RESULTS

A total of 3146 patients were randomized to treatment with the DTS (1578 patients; 2008 lesions) or SES (1568 patients; 1982 lesions). At 12 months, intention-to-treat analysis showed that 100 patients (6.3%) assigned the DTS and 58 patients (3.7%) assigned the SES met the primary end point (absolute risk difference, 2.6% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% CI, 4.1%]; P (noninferiority)=0.76). The SES was superior to the DTS (incidence rate ratios for target lesion failure, 1.74 [95% CI, 1.26-2.41]; P=0.00086). The difference was explained mainly by a higher incidence of target lesion revascularization in the DTS group compared with the SES group (53 [3.4%] vs. 24 [1.5%]; incidence rate ratio, 2.22 [95% CI, 1.37-3.61]; P=0.0012).

CONCLUSIONS

The DTS did not confirm noninferiority to the SES for target lesion failure at 12 months in an all-comer population. The SES was superior to the DTS mainly because the DTS was associated with an increased risk of target lesion revascularization. However, rates of death, cardiac death, and myocardial infarction at 12 months did not differ significantly between the 2 stent groups. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03216733.

Novel Supreme Drug-Eluting Stents With Early Synchronized Antiproliferative Drug Delivery to Inhibit Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation After Drug-Eluting Stents Implantation in Coronary Artery Disease: Results of the PIONEER III Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Accelerated endothelial healing after targeted antiproliferative drug delivery may limit the long-term inflammatory response of drug-eluting stents (DESs). The novel Supreme DES is designed to synchronize early drug delivery within 4 to 6 weeks of implantation, leaving behind a prohealing permanent base layer. Whether the Supreme DES is safe and effective in the short term and can improve long-term clinical outcomes is not known.

METHODS

In an international, 2:1 randomized, single-blind trial, we compared treatment with Supreme DES to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes. The primary end point was target lesion failure-a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority (margin of 3.58%) of the Supreme DES at 12 months compared with DP-EES (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03168776).

RESULTS

From October 2017 to July 2019, a total of 1629 patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the Supreme DES (N=1086) or DP-EES (N=543). At 12 months, target lesion failure occurred in 57 of 1057 patients (5.4%) in the Supreme DES group and in 27 of 532 patients (5.1%) in the DP-EES group (absolute risk difference, 0.32% [95% CI, -1.87 to 2.5]; P_{noninferiority}=0.002]. There were no significant differences in rates of device success, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 12 months, and the safety composite of cardiovascular death and target vessel myocardial infarction was 3.5% versus 4.6% (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.46-1.25]) with Supreme DES compared with DP-EES, although rates of combined clinically and non-clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months were higher with Supreme DES.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the Supreme DES proved to be noninferior to the standard DP-EES. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03168776.

Comparative Safety of Bioabsorbable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting, Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting, and Durable Polymer Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents in Contemporary Clinical Practice

[Figure: see text].