Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial

Unravelling the progress and potential of drug-eluting stents and drug-coated balloons in cardiological insurgencies

AIM

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is the leading cause of mortality. Though percutaneous transluminal angioplasty followed by stenting is still the default treatment of choice for revascularization of obstructive CAD, the high rate of restenosis compromises the outcomes of endovascular procedures. To overcome restenosis, drug-eluting stents (DES) and drug-coated balloons (DCB) are designed that release antiproliferative drugs like sirolimus, paclitaxel, everolimus, etc., over time to inhibit cell growth and proliferation. Our review aims to summarize the challenges and progress of DES/DCBs in clinical settings.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The comprehensive review, search and selection encompasses in relevant articles through Google Scholar, Springer online, Cochrane library and PubMed that includes research articles, reviews, letters and communications, various viewpoints, meta-analyses, randomized trials and quasi-randomized trials. Several preclinical and clinical data have been included from National Institutes of Health and clinicaltrials.gov websites.

KEY FINDINGS

Challenges like delayed endothelialization, stent thrombosis (ST), and inflammation was prominent in first-generation DES. Second-generation DES with improved designs and drug coatings enhanced biocompatibility with fewer complications. Gradual absorption of bioresorbable DES over time mitigated long-term issues associated with permanent implants. Polymer-free DES addressed the inflammation concerns but still, they leave behind metallic stents in the vasculature. As an alternative therapeutic strategy, DCB were developed to minimize inflammation in the vessel. Although both DES and DCBs have shown considerable progress, challenges persist.

SIGNIFICANCE

This review illustrates the advancements in the designs, preparation technologies, biodegradable materials, and drugs used as well as challenges associated with DES and DCBs in clinical settings.

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.

Comparative effectiveness of ultrathin vs. standard strut drug-eluting stents: insights from a large-scale meta-analysis with extended follow-up

BACKGROUND

Newer generation ultrathin strut stents are associated with less incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the short term. However, its long-term effect on different cardiovascular outcomes remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to identify the effects of newer-generation ultrathin-strut stents vs. standard thickness second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) on long-term outcomes of revascularization in coronary artery disease.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registries that compare newer-generation ultrathin-strut (< 70 mm) with thicker strut (> 70 mm) DES to evaluate cardioprotective effects over a period of up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary outcomes included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death were pooled as the standardized mean difference between the two groups from baseline to endpoint.

RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs and two prospective registries (103,101 patients) in this analysis. The overall effect on the primary outcome was in favor of second-generation ultrathin struts stents in terms of TLF at ≥ 1 year, ≥ 2 years, and ≥ 3 years (P value = 0.01, 95% CI [0.75, 0.96]), P value = 0.003, 95% CI [0.77, 0.95]), P value = 0.007, 95% CI [0.76, 0.96]), respectively. However, there was no reported benefit in terms of TLF when we compared the two groups at ≥ 5 years (P value = 0.21), 95% CI [0.85, 1.04]). Some of the reported components of the primary and secondary outcomes, such as TLR, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and TVMI, showed the same pattern as the TLF outcome.

CONCLUSION

Ultrathin-strut DES showed a beneficial effect over thicker strut stents for up to 3 years. However, at the 5-year follow-up, the ultrathin strut did not differ in terms of TLF, TLR, TVR, and TVMI compared with standard-thickness DES, with similar risks of patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.

Biodegradable Polymer Versus Polymer-Free Ultrathin Sirolimus-Eluting Stents: Analysis of the Stent Arm Registry From the HOST-IDEA Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of each third-generation drug-eluting stent with ultrathin struts and advanced polymer technology remain unclear. We investigated the clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using the Coroflex ISAR polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or Orsiro biodegradable polymer SES.

METHODS

The HOST-IDEA trial (Harmonizing Optimal Strategy for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenosis-Coronary Intervention With Next-Generation Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms and Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy), initially designed with a 2×2 factorial approach, sought to randomize patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention based on dual antiplatelet therapy duration (3 versus 12 months) and stent type (Coroflex ISAR versus Orsiro). Despite randomizing 2013 patients for dual antiplatelet therapy duration, the stent arm transitioned to a registry format during the trial. Among these, 328 individuals (16.3%) were randomized for Coroflex ISAR or Orsiro SES, while 1685 (83.7%) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without stent-type randomization. In this study, the Coroflex ISAR (n=559) and Orsiro groups (n=1449) were matched using a propensity score. The prespecified primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months.

RESULTS

The baseline patient and procedural characteristics were well balanced between the Coroflex ISAR and Orsiro groups after propensity score matching (n=559, each group). The Coroflex ISAR group was significantly associated with a higher rate of target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, compared with the Orsiro group (3.4% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio, 3.21 [95% CI, 1.28-8.05]; P=0.01). A higher risk of target lesion failure in the Coroflex ISAR group was consistently observed across various subgroups. The rates of any bleeding (hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.51-1.40]; P=0.52) and major bleeding (hazard ratio, 1.58 [95% CI, 0.61-4.08]; P=0.34) were comparable between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity score-matched analysis of the stent arm registry from the HOST-IDEA trial, the Orsiro SES was associated with significantly better outcomes in terms of 1-year target lesion failure, mainly driven by clinically driven target lesion revascularization, than the Coroflex ISAR SES.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02601157.

Real-World Clinical Performance of a Novolimus-Eluting Stent Versus a Sirolimus-Eluting Stent

INTRODUCTION

The DESyne novolimus-eluting coronary stent (NES) is a new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) that is widely used, but clinical data are rarely reported for this stent. We compared the safety and effectiveness of the DESyne NES and the Orsiro bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

This was a retrospective, single-center, observational study. Between July 2017 and December 2022, patients who presented with chronic or acute coronary syndrome undergoing PCI with DESyne NES or Orsiro SES were consecutively enrolled in the present study. The primary endpoint, major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), was a composite of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target-lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

A total of 776 patients (age 68.8 ± 12.2; 75.9% male) undergoing PCI were included. Overall, 231 patients with 313 lesions received NES and 545 patients with 846 lesions received SES. During a follow-up duration of 784 ± 522 days, the primary endpoint occurred in 10 patients (4.3%) in the NES group and in 36 patients (6.6%) in the SES group. After multivariate adjustment, the risk of MACE did not significantly differ between groups (NES vs. SES, hazard ratio 0.74, 95% CI, 0.35-1.55, p = 0.425). The event rate of individual components of the primary endpoint was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Favorable and similar clinical outcomes were observed in patients undergoing PCI with either NES or SES in a medium-term follow-up duration. Future studies with adequately powered clinical endpoints are required for further evaluation.

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.

One-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Followed by P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation - The REIWA Region-Wide Registry

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of using 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with thin-strut biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) in daily clinical practice remain uncertain.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The REIWA region-wide registry is a prospective study conducted in 1 PCI center and 9 local hospitals in northern Japan. A total of 1,202 patients who successfully underwent final PCI using BP-DES (Synergy: n=400; Ultimaster: n=401; Orsiro: n=401), were enrolled in the registry, and received 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12inhibitor (prasugrel 3.75 mg/day or clopidogrel 75 mg/day) monotherapy. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular and bleeding events at 12 months, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST), ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding. Based on the results of a previous study, we set the performance goal at 5.0%. Over the 1-year follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 3.08% of patients, which was lower than the predefined performance goal (Pnon-inferiority<0.0001). Notably, definite ST occurred in only 1 patient (0.08%) within 1 year (at 258 days). No differences were observed in the primary endpoint between stent types.

CONCLUSIONS

The REIWA region-wide registry suggests that 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy is safe and feasible for Japanese patients with BP-DES.

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.

Ticagrelor alone versus ticagrelor plus aspirin from month 1 to month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ULTIMATE-DAPT): a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Following percutaneous coronary intervention with stent placement to treat acute coronary syndromes, international clinical guidelines generally recommend dual antiplatelet therapy with aspirin plus a P2Y12 receptor inhibitor for 12 months to prevent myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis. However, data on single antiplatelet therapy with a potent P2Y12 inhibitor earlier than 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with an acute coronary syndrome are scarce. The aim of this trial was to assess whether the use of ticagrelor alone, compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, could reduce the incidence of clinically relevant bleeding events without an accompanying increase in major adverse cardiovascular or cerebrovascular events (MACCE).

METHODS

In this randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind clinical trial, patients aged 18 years or older with an acute coronary syndrome who completed the IVUS-ACS study and who had no major ischaemic or bleeding events after 1-month treatment with dual antiplatelet therapy were randomly assigned to receive oral ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) plus oral aspirin (100 mg once daily) or oral ticagrelor (90 mg twice daily) plus a matching oral placebo, beginning 1 month and ending at 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention (11 months in total). Recruitment took place at 58 centres in China, Italy, Pakistan, and the UK. Patients were required to remain event-free for 1 month on dual antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary drug-eluting stents. Randomisation was done using a web-based system, stratified by acute coronary syndrome type, diabetes, IVUS-ACS randomisation, and site, using dynamic minimisation. The primary superiority endpoint was clinically relevant bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [known as BARC] types 2, 3, or 5). The primary non-inferiority endpoint was MACCE (defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, definite stent thrombosis, or clinically driven target vessel revascularisation), with an expected event rate of 6·2% in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group and an absolute non-inferiority margin of 2·5 percentage points between 1 month and 12 months after percutaneous coronary intervention. The two co-primary endpoints were tested sequentially; the primary superiority endpoint had to be met for hypothesis testing of the MACCE outcome to proceed. All principal analyses were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03971500, and is completed.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 21, 2019, and Oct 27, 2022, 3400 (97·0%) of the 3505 participants in the IVUS-ACS study were randomly assigned (1700 patients to ticagrelor plus aspirin and 1700 patients to ticagrelor plus placebo). 12-month follow-up was completed by 3399 (>99·9%) patients. Between month 1 and month 12 after percutaneous coronary intervention, clinically relevant bleeding occurred in 35 patients (2·1%) in the ticagrelor plus placebo group and in 78 patients (4·6%) in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·45 [95% CI 0·30 to 0·66]; p<0·0001). MACCE occurred in 61 patients (3·6%) in the ticagrelor plus placebo group and in 63 patients (3·7%) in the ticagrelor plus aspirin group (absolute difference -0·1% [95% CI -1·4% to 1·2%]; HR 0·98 [95% CI 0·69 to 1·39]; pnon-inferiority<0·0001, psuperiority=0·89).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with an acute coronary syndrome who had percutaneous coronary intervention with contemporary drug-eluting stents and remained event-free for 1 month on dual antiplatelet therapy, treatment with ticagrelor alone between month 1 and month 12 after the intervention resulted in a lower rate of clinically relevant bleeding and a similar rate of MACCE compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin. Along with the results from previous studies, these findings show that most patients in this population can benefit from superior clinical outcomes with aspirin discontinuation and maintenance on ticagrelor monotherapy after 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy.

FUNDING

The Chinese Society of Cardiology, the National Natural Scientific Foundation of China, and the Jiangsu Provincial & Nanjing Municipal Clinical Trial Project.

TRANSLATION

For the Mandarin translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

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.

Impact of preprocedural left ventricular systolic function on the safety and durability of percutaneous coronary intervention

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is considered less safe in patients with reduced ejection fraction (EF), an impression based on older data. Whether the safety and durability of contemporary PCI are different in patients with reduced EF compared with normal EF patients is unknown.

METHODS

Patients from the BIOFLOW II, IV and V clinical trials were grouped as normal EF (≥50%) and reduced EF (30%-50%). Using multivariable logistic regression and cox proportional hazards regression, we determined relations of EF category with procedural safety (a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke and urgent coronary artery bypass grafting within 30 days of PCI) and target lesion failure (TLF; comprising cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization within 1 year of PCI) respectively. In sensitivity analyses, we regrouped patients into EF < 45% and ≥55% and repeated the aforementioned analyses.

RESULTS

In 1685 patients with normal EF (mean age 65 years; 27% women; mean EF 61%) and 259 with low EF (mean age 64 years; 17% women; mean EF 41%), 101 safety and 148 TLF events occurred. Compared with patients in the normal EF group, those with reduced EF had neither a statistically significant higher proportion of safety events, nor a higher multivariable-adjusted risk for such events. Similarly, patients with reduced EF and normal EF did not differ in terms of TLF event proportions or multivariable-adjusted risk for TLF. The results were similar in sensitivity analyses with EF groups redefined to create a 10% between-group EF separation.

CONCLUSION

PCI safety and durability outcomes are similar in patients with mild-moderately reduced EF and normal EF.

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.

Coronary arterial repair in patients with stable angina pectoris or acute coronary syndrome after ultrathin biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent implantation at 1-year follow-up by coronary angioscopy

BACKGROUND

Imaging modality-based evidence is limited that compares the extent of coronary arterial repair after percutaneous coronary intervention between patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP) and those with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

METHODS

Between December 2018 and November 2021, a single-center, nonrandomized, observational study was conducted in 92 patients with SAP (n = 42) or ACS (n = 50), who were implanted with Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES) providing a hybrid (active and passive) coating and underwent 1-year follow-up by coronary angioscopy (CAS) after implantation. CAS assessed neointimal coverage (NIC), maximum yellow plaque (YP), and mural thrombus (MT).

RESULTS

Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the SAP and ACS groups. The follow-up periods were comparable between the two groups (390.1 ± 69.9 vs. 390.6 ± 65.7 days, p = 0.99). The incidences of MT at 1 year after implantation were comparable between the two groups (11.4% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.92). The proportions of "Grade 1" in dominant NIC grades were highest in both groups, and the proportions of maximum YP grades and MT were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

O-SES-induced coronary arterial repair at the site of stent implantation, irrespective of the types of coronary artery disease.

Ultrathin, biodegradable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: Final three-year results of the PERFORM-EVER registry

The registry reports 3-year safety and clinical performance of the ultrathin strut (60 μm) biodegradable polymer-coated Tetrilimus, an everolimus-eluting stent (EES) (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Limited, India), in 'real-world' patients with coronary artery disease. A total of 815 Tetrilimus EES were implanted in 735 lesions in 594 patients. At 3-year follow-up, primary endpoint (target lesion failure, TLF) was reported in 8.6 % patients, including 2.6 % cardiac deaths, 3.5 % myocardial infarction and 2.6 % target lesion revascularization. At three-year, no cases of definite stent thrombosis were reported. The final three-year results of PERFORM-EVER registry endorse the continuous safety and effectiveness Tetrilimus EES.

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.

Patients with higher-atherothrombotic risk vs. lower-atherothrombotic risk undergoing coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with atherothrombotic risk are at high hazard of ischemic events. Preventive medicine plays a major role in modifying their outcomes. Whether the choice of a BP-SES or DP-EES can contribute to the occurrence of events remains unclear. We sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with higher atherothrombotic risk (H-ATR) versus lower atherothrombotic risk (L-ATR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES).

METHODS

Patients (n = 2361) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into H-ATR vs. L-ATR. L-ATR patients had ≤ 1 and H-ATR ≥ 2 of the following criteria: presentation in ACS, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI/CABG, or previous stroke. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and stent thrombosis (ST) at three years.

RESULTS

H-ATR patients (n = 1023) were more morbid than L-ATR patients (n = 1338). TLF rate was significantly higher in H-ATR patients as compared with L-ATR (11.6% vs. 7.0%; HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.20, p < 0.0001). With BP-SES TLF rates were numerically lower as compared with DP-EES in H-ATR (10.5% vs. 13.5%; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14, p = 0.20) and significantly lower in L-ATR (5.6% vs. 9.8%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In the era of newer-generation DES, patients with H-ATR still are at hazard for ischemic events. Patients with BP-SES had lower TLF rates as compared with DP-EES, most consistent in L-ATR whereas in H-ATR patients most probably secondary preventive strategies are of higher value.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrial.gov. NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946. https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 .

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.

A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing BioMime Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With Everolimus-Eluting Stent: Two-Year Outcomes of the meriT-V Trial

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) based on biodegradable polymers (BPs) have been introduced to reduce the risk for late and very late stent thrombosis (ST), which were frequently observed with earlier generations of DES designs based on durable polymers (DPs); however, randomized controlled trials on these DES designs are scarce. The meriT-V trial is a randomized, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial with a prospective, multicenter design that evaluated the 2-year efficacy of a novel third-generation, ultra-thin strut, BP-based BioMime sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) versus the DP-based XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) for the treatment of de novo lesions.

METHODS

The meriT-V is a randomized trial that enrolled 256 patients at 15 centers across Europe and Brazil. Here, we report the outcomes of the extended follow-up period of 2 years. The randomization of enrolled patients was in a 2:1 ratio; the enrolled patients received either the BioMime SES (n = 170) or the XIENCE EES (n = 86). The three-point major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (ID-TVR), was considered as the composite safety and efficacy endpoint. Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR) was evaluated as well as the frequency of definite/probable ST, based on the first Academic Research Consortium definitions.

RESULTS

The trial had a 2-year follow-up completion rate of 98.44% (n = 252/256 patients), and the clinical outcomes assessment showed a nonsignificant difference in the cumulative rate of three-point MACE between both arms (BioMime vs. XIENCE: 7.74% vs. 9.52%, P = 0.62). Even the MI incidences in the BioMime arm were insignificantly lower than those of the XIENCE arm (1.79% vs. 5.95%, P = 0.17). Late ST was observed in 1.19% cases of the XIENCE arm, while there were no such cases in the BioMime arm (P = 0.16).

CONCLUSIONS

The objective comparisons between the novel BP-based BioMime SES and the well-established DP-based XIENCE EES in this randomized controlled trial show acceptable outcomes of both the devices in the cardiac deaths, MI, ID-TVR, and ST. Moreover, since there were no incidences of cardiac death in the entire study sample over the course of 2 years, we contend that the findings of the study are highly significant for both these DES designs. In this preliminary comparative trial, the device safety of BioMime SES can be affirmed to be acceptable, considering the lower three-point MACE rate and absence of late ST in the BioMime arm over the 2-year period.

Complementary evidence on the performance of coronary stents generated by a randomized controlled trial and a worldwide registry

BACKGROUND

Large-scale registries can provide valuable complementary data to randomized controlled trials (RCT) for the postmarketing evaluation of coronary stents, but their scientific relevance remains debated.

METHODS

We sought to compare the evidence on the performance of a single coronary stent platform generated by the RCT for its regulatory approval and a well-conducted international registry. Patients treated with the Ultimaster coronary stent in the CENTURY II (CII-UM) trial (n = 551) were compared to patients in the real-world e-ULTIMASTER (e-UM) registry (n = 35,389). All major events were adjudicated by an independent clinical event committee in both studies. Propensity weighted analysis was used to balance baseline and procedural differences between the 2 populations.

RESULTS

Coronary artery disease was more complex in e-UM compared to CII-UM, including more acute coronary syndromes, multivessel disease, left main, arterial, or venous grafts, and chronic total occlusions (P < .005 for all). At one-year follow-up and after excluding periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) there was no statistically significant difference between CII-UM and e-UM regarding all-cause death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26-1.20, P = .14), cardiac death (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.29-1.72, P = .45), target lesion failure (HR 1.18, 95% CI 0.78-1.78, P = .44), and target vessel MI (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.24-2.38, P = .63). However, target vessel revascularization rate was significantly higher in CII-UM than in e-UM, HR 1.78, 95% CI 1.23-2.56, P = .002.

CONCLUSIONS

A well-conducted large-scale registry can provide valuable complementary evidence to RCTs on the postmarket performance of new coronary stents, across a wider range of uses and various geographic areas.

Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer-Coated Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents: Patient-Level Pooled Analysis From Two Indian Registries

Background Despite significant evolution in stent technology, female gender, and patients with diabetes mellitus, multivessel disease, total occlusions, long lesions, and small vessels represent the "Achilles' heel" of contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We performed a pooled analysis of high-risk subgroup on patient-level data from the T-Flex registry (1,203 patients) and a real-world Indian registry (1,269 patients), with the aim of assessing one-year safety and clinical performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer-coated Supra family of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Limited, Surat, India) in the real-world, all-comer population. Method We pooled the following high-risk subgroups data from two all-comer registries: female gender (n=678), diabetes mellitus (n=852), multivessel disease (n=406), total occlusions (n=420), long lesions (≥28 mm) (n=1241), and small vessels (≤2.5 mm) (n=726). Both the registries included patients with coronary artery disease who underwent implantation of at least one SES belonging to the Supra family of stents from May 2016 until March 2018, irrespective of lesion complexity and comorbidities. The primary endpoint was the inci-dence of target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revas-cularization by percutaneous or surgical methods up to one year. The safety endpoint was stent thrombosis.  Results According to prespecified high-risk subgroups, one-year rates of TLF and overall stent thrombosis, respectively, were as follows: female gender (4.9% and 0.6%), diabetes mellitus (6.9% and 1.0%), multivessel disease (6.4% and 0.8%), total occlusions (5.2% and 0.5%), long lesions (≥28 mm) (6.6% and 0.8%), and small vessels (≤2.5 mm) (6.1% and 1.3%). Conclusion This present pooled analysis demonstrated the one-year safety and clinical performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer-coated Supra family of SES in a real-world, all-comer population, with considerably low rates of TLF and stent thrombosis.

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.

A technology evaluation of the Onyx Frontier drug-eluting stent

INTRODUCTION

Onyx FrontierTM represents the latest iteration within the family of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), designed for the treatment of coronary artery disease. Approval by the Food and Drug Administration was granted in May 2022, and Conformité Européenne marking followed in August 2022.

AREAS COVERED

We hereby review the principal design features of Onyx Frontier, highlighting differences and similarities with other currently available drug-eluting stents. In addition, we focus on the refinements of this newest platform as compared with previous ZES versions, including the attributes yielding its exceptional crossing profile and deliverability. The clinical implications related to both its newest and inherited characteristics will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The nuances of the latest Onyx Frontier, together with the continuous refinement previously witnessed throughout the development of ZES, lead to a latest generation device ideal for a diverse spectrum of clinical and anatomical scenarios. In particular, its peculiarities will be of benefit in the settings often offered by a progressively aging population, such as high bleeding risk patients and complex coronary lesions.

Twelve-month clinical outcomes of "nano-crush technique" for the treatment of bifurcation lesions using ultra-thin (60 µm) sirolimus-eluting coronary stents

BACKGROUND

Provisional stenting is preferred for bifurcation lesion; however, certain anatomical substrate does require two stents as a part of dedicated stent technique. Here, the present study evaluated outcomes of ultra-thin (60 µm) Supra family sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) (Sahajanand Medical Technologies Limited, Surat, India) for dedicated bifurcation lesions using nano-crush technique at 12 months angiographic follow-up.

METHODS

This was prospective, single-center observational study which enrolled patients with de novo bifurcation lesion and underwent angioplasty with Supra family SES using nano-crush technique at a tertiary care center in India, between March-2017 and February-2019. Primary endpoint at 12 months was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), all-cause death, any revascularization, clinically driven target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, periprocedural and spontaneous MI, and device failure.

RESULTS

The study enrolled total 63 patients with a mean age of 62.5±4.9 years and had male dominance (89%). Left main (LM) bifurcation and non-LM bifurcation were observed in 21 (33%) and 42 (67%) patients, respectively. Total 50 (80%) patients had Medina class- 1,1,1. At 12 months, TLF occurred in 4 (6%) patients which included one cardiac death (1.5%), two (3.0%) TV-MI, and one CD-TLR (1.5%). POCE was observed in 6 (9.6%) patients. Stent failure was seen in 2 (3.1%) patient and one patient (1.5%) developed late stent thrombosis. Twelve months angiographic follow-up indicated intact stent patency in all other patients. On multivariate analysis, LM bifurcation, renal dysfunction, LM bifurcation with renal dysfunction, ejection fraction (<35%) and calcified lesion were found as predictors of TLF.

CONCLUSIONS

Dedicated stenting with ultra-thin Supra family SES for complex bifurcation lesion using nano-crush technique reported acceptable clinical outcomes among real-world patients and can be performed safely with ease without any procedural complications.

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.

Stent Thrombosis After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: From Bare-Metal to the Last Generation of Drug-Eluting Stents

Since their introduction in clinical practice in 1986, different types of coronary stents have been developed and become available for the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent thrombosis (ST) is an uncommon but harmful complication after percutaneous coronary implantation, with a high occurrence of acute myocardial infarction and risk of mortality. Among several procedural and clinical predictors, the type of coronary stent is a strong determinant of ST. This article reviews the available evidence on the most used coronary stent types in the modern era and the related risk of ST.

Ultrathin Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: BIOFLOW V Final 5-Year Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority of ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents compared with alternative stent designs. Whether these differences persist over late-term follow-up is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to compare late-term (5-year) clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin strut (81 µm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES).

METHODS

BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international, 2:1 randomized trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin strut BP SES versus thin strut DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Prespecified outcomes through 5 years were assessed.

RESULTS

Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 5-year rates of TLF were 12.3% for BP SES and 15.3% for DP EES (P = 0.108). Revascularization with BP SES was associated with a significantly lower target vessel-related myocardial infarction (6.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.015) and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.3% vs 1.6%, P = 0.021). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization was numerically but not significantly lower with BP SES (5.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.202). Cardiac death rates were 2.6% versus 1.9% (P = 0.495) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, randomized trial, TLF and the individual outcomes of cardiac death and target lesion revascularization at 5 years were similar among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. Both target vessel-related myocardial infarction and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP SES. These results confirm the durability of safety and the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin BP SES.

Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: Rationale for Standardized Definition and Critical Appraisal of the Literature

Small vessel coronary artery disease (CAD) is present in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention according to different series, representing an unmet clinical need in light of an increased risk of technical failure, restenosis, and need for repeated revascularization. The definition of small vessel is inconsistent across trials, and no definite cutoff value has yet been determined. The lack of consensus on the definition of small vessel CAD has contributed to the high degree of heterogeneity in the safety and efficacy of the various revascularization options. Therefore, the aim of this article is to provide a critical appraisal of existing reports and to propose a reference vessel diameter of <2.5 ​mm definition of small vessel CAD to guide future clinical trials and clinical decision-making.

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.

Evolution of drug-eluting coronary stents: a back-and-forth journey from the bench-to-bedside

Coronary stents have revolutionized the treatment of coronary artery disease. Compared with balloon angioplasty, bare-metal stents effectively prevented abrupt vessel closure but were limited by in-stent restenosis due to smooth muscle cell proliferation and neointimal hyperplasia. The first-generation drug-eluting stent (DES), with its antiproliferative drug coating, offered substantial advantages over bare-metal stents as it mitigated the risk of in-stent restenosis. Nonetheless, they had several design limitations that increased the risk of late stent thrombosis. Significant advances in stent design, including thinner struts, enhanced polymers' formulation, and more potent antiproliferative agents, have led to the introduction of new-generation DES with a superior safety profile. Cardiologists have over 20 different DES types to choose from, each with its unique features and characteristics. This review highlights the evolution of stent design and summarizes the clinical data on the different stent types. We conclude by discussing the clinical implications of stent design in high-risk subsets of patients.

Polymer-free biolimus-coated stents versus ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents: two-year outcomes of the randomised SORT OUT IX trial

BACKGROUND

For patients with high bleeding risk, the BioFreedom stent is safer and more effective than a bare metal stent. However, at the one-year follow-up of the SORT OUT IX trial, the BioFreedom stent did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority for target lesion failure (TLF) when compared with the Orsiro stent and had a higher incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR).

AIMS

The aim of the study was to compare the two-year outcomes following coronary implantation of the BioFreedom or the Orsiro stents in all-comer patients.

METHODS

The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) IX trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised clinical trial comparing the BioFreedom and the Orsiro stents. The primary endpoint, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI; not related to other lesions) and TLR.

RESULTS

A total of 1,572 patients were randomised to treatment with the BioFreedom stent and 1,579 patients with the Orsiro stent. At two-year follow-up, TLF was 7.8% in the BioFreedom and 6.3% in the Orsiro stent groups (rate ratio [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.61). Risks of cardiac death, MI and definite stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the groups, whereas more patients in the BioFreedom group had TLR (5.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.26-2.89) attributable to a higher risk of TLR within the first year (3.5% vs 1.3%; RR 2.77, 95% CI: 1.66-4.62).

CONCLUSIONS

At two years, there were no significant differences between the BioFreedom and Orsiro stents for TLF. TLR was significantly higher with the BioFreedom stent due to higher risk of TLR within the first year.

A Randomized Comparison of the Healing Response Between the Firehawk Stent and the Xience Stent in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction at 6 Months of Follow-Up (TARGET STEMI OCT China Trial): An Optical Coherence Tomography Study

Background

The healing response of the Firehawk stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remains unclear.

Aim

We compared the vascular healing of a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Firehawk) vs. a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (Xience) at 6 months after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with STEMI.

Methods

In this prospective, multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority study, patients within 12 h of STEMI onset were randomized in a ratio of 1:1 to receive Firehawk or Xience stents. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) follow-up was performed 6 months after the index procedure and assessed frame by frame. The primary endpoint was the neointimal thickness (NIT) at 6 months evaluated by OCT. The safety endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months.

Results

The Firehawk stent was non-inferior to the Xience stent in terms of the neointimal thickness (73.03 ± 33.30 μm vs. 78.96 ± 33.29 μm; absolute difference: −5.94 [one-sided 95% lower confidence bound: −23.09]; P_{non−inferiority} < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between the Firehawk and Xience groups regarding the percentage of uncovered struts (0.55 [0.08, 1.32]% vs. 0.40 [0.21, 1.19]%, P = 0.804), the percentage of malapposed struts (0.17 [0.00, 1.52]% vs. 0.17 [0.00, 0.69]%, P = 0.662), and the healing score (1.56 [0.23, 5.74] vs. 2.12 [0.91, 3.81], P = 0.647). At 12 months, one patient in the Firehawk group experienced a clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. No other TLF events occurred in both groups. Independent risk factors of the NIT included body mass index, hyperlipidemia, B2/C lesions, thrombus G3–G5, thrombus aspiration, and postdilation pressure.

Conclusion

In patients with STEMI, Firehawk was non-inferior to Xience in vascular healing at 6 months. Both stents exhibited nearly complete strut coverage, moderate neointimal formation, and minimal strut malapposition.

Clinical Trial Number

NCT04150016.

Osstem Cardiotec Centum Stent Versus Xience Alpine Stent for De Novo Coronary Artery Lesion: A Multicenter, Randomized, Parallel-Designed, Single Blind Test

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the safety and efficacy of a new everolimus-eluting stent with an abluminal-coated biodegradable polymer (Osstem Cardiotec Centum) with those of the Xience Alpine stent (Xience).

METHODS

This randomized, prospective, multicenter, parallel-designed, single-blind trial was conducted among patients with myocardial ischemia undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) from 21st September 2018 until 3rd July 2020. The primary efficacy endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss (LLL) at 270 days after the procedure and the primary safety endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

We enrolled 121 patients and analyzed 113 patients who finished 270 days of follow-up for the primary efficacy endpoint. The mean age of the participants was 66.8 years. As for the primary efficacy endpoint, LLL of the Osstem Cardiotec Centum group was 0.09±0.13 mm and that of the Xience group was 0.12±0.14 mm (upper limit of 1-sided 95% confidence interval, 0.02; p for non-inferiority, 0.0084). This result demonstrates the non-inferiority of the Osstem Cardiotec Centum. As for the primary safety endpoint, MACE occurred in one patient (1.59% of the Xience group). Meanwhile, no MACE occurred in the Osstem Cardiotec Centum group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Osstem Cardiotec Centum is non-inferior to the Xience Alpine® stent and is confirmed to be safe. It could be safely and effectively applied to patients with coronary artery disease undergoing PCI.

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.

Comparison of Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients Undergoing Complex High-Risk Indicated Procedures

BACKGROUND

Limited data are available on the relative performances of diverse contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients undergoing complex high-risk indicated procedures (CHIP).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of contemporary second-generation DES for CHIP patients in "real-world" settings.

METHODS

Of 28,843 patients enrolled in the IRIS-DES registry, a total of 6,645 patients with CHIP characteristics who received 5 different types of contemporary DES were finally included: 3,752 with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES), 1,258 with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (Re-ZES), 864 with platinum-chromium EES (PtCr-EES), 437 with ultrathin strut biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (UT-SES), and 334 with bioresorbable polymer SES (BP-SES). The primary outcome was target-vessel failure (a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) at 12 months.

RESULTS

At 12 months, the rate of target-vessel failure was highest in the CoCr-EES (7.1%) group; intermediate in the Re-ZES (5.0%), PtCr-EES (4.6%), and BP-SES (4.2%) groups; and lowest in the UT-SES (3.8%) group (overall long-rank P = 0.001). In multiple-treatment propensity-score analysis, the adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for target-vessel failure were significantly lower in the Re-ZES (HR: 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.52-0.97), the UT-SES (HR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.29-0.95), and BP-SES (HR: 0.33; 95% CI: 0.16-0.70) groups than in the CoCr-EES group (referent).

CONCLUSIONS

In this contemporary PCI registry, we observed the differential risks of target-vessel failure according to various types of contemporary DES in patients with CHIP characteristics. However, owing to inherent selection bias, the results should be considered hypothesis-generating, highlighting the need for further randomized trials. (Evaluation of the First, Second, and New Drug-Eluting Stents in Routine Clinical Practice [IRIS-DES]; NCT01186133).

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.

Complex vs. non-complex percutaneous coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are at higher risk of adverse outcomes, but data are scarce in the era of newer-generation coronary stents.

AIM

We sought to compare the clinical outcomes after complex PCI with a bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) versus a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES).

METHODS

Patients (n = 2350) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into non-complex PCI vs. complex PCI. Complex PCI had at least one of the following criteria: multi-vessel PCI, ≥ 3 lesions treated, ≥ 3 stents implanted, total stent length ≥ 60 mm. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and probable/definite stent thrombosis (ST) at three years.

RESULTS

Patients with complex PCI (n = 348) were older and presented more often with acute coronary syndrome than non-complex PCI patients (n = 2002). Complex PCI lesions were more often type B2/C and bifurcation lesions and required more pre- and post-dilatation. Complex PCI patients had higher rates of TLF (14.6% vs. 8.1%; aHR 1.89, 95% CI [1.31-2.73], p = 0.001), TV-MI (10.2% vs. 4.4%, aHR 2.17, 95% CI [1.40-3.37], p = 0.001), and ST (1.5% vs. 0.4%, p = 0.025) as compared with non-complex PCI. TLF was not lower with BP-SES as compared to DP-EES in complex PCI (12.6% vs 18.2%, p = 0.16).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing complex PCI with the newer-generation DES still sustain a higher risk of TLF, TV-MI and stent thrombosis as compared with non-complex PCI. This adverse outcome was not significantly modified by the stent platform (BP-SES vs. DP-EES).

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrial.gov NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946, https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 ; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 ; https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 .

Gender-Associated Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With a Third-Generation, Ultrathin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stent: A Real-World, Single-Center Experience

Introduction

In recent years, the new third-generation ultrathin bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES), characterized by some of the thinnest struts among commercially available devices (60–80 μm) and an amorphous silicon carbide coating, has been introduced for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). The present study aimed to assess different clinical outcomes and safety of this drug-eluting stent in male and female patients in a real-world setting.

Methods

The present study is a retrospective analysis including all patients treated with BP-SES between January 2017 and December 2019 at a single high-volume center. Follow-up data, including stress test results and clinical setting, were collected during outpatient visits or by telephone contact. Patients symptomatic for angina or with a positive stress test were addressed to CT scan/coronary angiogram. The main study outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

Results

Overall, 66 (15.9%) female and 349 (84.1%) male patients were included; women were older (median age 70 vs. 66, P = 0.003) and with a lower body mass index (BMI) (25.0 vs. 26.1, P = 0.010) compared to men, with no other relevant differences in baseline characteristics. Indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was acute coronary syndrome in 86 (20.7%) of the cases, with no significant differences between male and female patients. A total of 558 lesions were treated with BP-SES stents, 90 in women and 468 in men (1.36 vs. 1.34 lesions per patient, P = 0.83); cumulative stent length (33.6 vs. 38.4 mm, P = 0.078), and mean stent diameter (2.92 vs. 3.0 mm, P = 0.39) did not differ in women compared to men. Technical and clinical successes were achieved in all patients. Stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 2 (0.5%) patients, both men. TLF occurred in 10 (2.9%) men and 2 (3.0%) women after a median follow-up of 402 days, without significant differences at log-rank analysis (2.34 events per 100 patient-years in men, 2.53 in women; P = 0.80).

Conclusion

Ultrathin struts BP-SES showed to be a safe and effective option for the treatment of CAD in both women and men, with a very low ST rate and favorable long-term outcomes.

Ticagrelor Monotherapy After 3-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Acute Coronary Syndrome by High Bleeding Risk: The Subanalysis From the TICO Trial

This study demonstrated that for acute coronary syndrome patients treated with drug eluting stents, high bleeding risk (HBR) was associated with higher rates of net adverse clinical events (NACEs), not only including bleeding but also ischemic events. Ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was associated with lower rates of NACEs and major bleeding than ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT regardless of HBR, with no significant interaction between therapy and HBR. These findings were consistent regardless of HBR definition by Academic Research Consortium for HBR criteria or by Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent DAPT score.

Background and Objectives

Identifying patients with high bleeding risk (HBR) is important when making decisions for antiplatelet therapy strategy. This study evaluated the impact of ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) according to HBR in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) patients treated with drug eluting stents (DESs).

Methods

In this post-hoc analysis of the TICO trial, HBR was defined by 2 approaches: meeting Academic Research Consortium for HBR (ARC-HBR) criteria or Predicting Bleeding Complications in Patients Undergoing Stent Implantation and Subsequent DAPT (PRECISE-DAPT) score ≥25. The primary outcome was a 3–12 months net adverse clinical event (composite of major bleeding and adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events).

Results

Of the 2,980 patients without adverse events during the first 3 months after DES implantation, 453 (15.2%) were HBR by ARC-HBR criteria and 504 (16.9%) were HBR by PRECISE-DAPT score. The primary outcome rate was higher in HBR versus non-HBR patients (by ARC-HBR criteria: hazard ratio [HR], 2.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.76–4.69; p<0.001; by PRECISE-DAPT score: HR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.92–4.98; p<0.001). Ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT was associated with lower primary outcome rate than ticagrelor-based 12-month DAPT regardless of HBR by ARC-HBR criteria, with similar magnitudes of therapy effect for HBR and non-HBR patients (p-interaction=0.400). Results were consistent by PRECISE-DAPT score (p-interaction=0.178).

Conclusions

In ACS patients treated with DESs, ticagrelor monotherapy after 3-month DAPT was associated with lower rate of adverse clinical outcomes regardless of HBR, with similar magnitudes of therapy effect between HBR and non-HBR.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02494895