Thin, very thin, or ultrathin-strut biodegradable or durable polymer-coated drug-eluting stents

Final 5-year report of BIONYX comparing the thin-composite wire-strut zotarolimus-eluting stent versus ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent

BACKGROUND

The BIONYX randomized trial is the first study to evaluate the Resolute Onyx durable polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in all-comers. Furthermore, it is the first trial to assess safety and efficacy of this stent versus the Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers, paying particular attention to patients with diabetes. It has previously shown promising results until 3 years of follow-up.

AIMS

We aimed to assess long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with Onyx ZES versus Orsiro SES at 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

The main composite endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Time to primary and secondary endpoints was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, applying the log-rank test for between-group comparison.

RESULTS

Follow-up was available in 2414/2488 (97.0%) patients. After 5 years, TVF showed no significant difference between Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES (12.7% vs. 13.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.75-1.17], plog-rank = 0.55). Landmark analysis between 3- and 5-year follow-up found a lower target lesion revascularization rate for Onyx ZES (1.1% vs. 2.4%, HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.24-0.93], plog-rank = 0.026). A prespecified subgroup analysis showed no significant between-stent difference in clinical outcome among patients with diabetes. After treatment with Onyx ZES, patients aged ≥75 years had significantly lower rates of TVF (13.8% vs. 21.9%, HR 0.60, 95% CI [0.39-0.93], plog-rank = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The final 5-year analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial showed favorable and similar long-term outcomes of safety and efficacy for Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES in both all-comers and patients with diabetes.

Ethnic minorities treated with new-generation drug-eluting coronary stents in two European randomised clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Several ethnic minorities have an increased risk of cardiovascular events, but previous European trials that investigated clinical outcome after coronary stenting did not assess the patients' ethnic background.

AIMS

To compare ethnic minority and Western European trial participants in terms of both cardiovascular risk profile and 1‑year clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

In the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX randomised trials, which assessed new-generation drug-eluting stents, information on patients' self-reported ethnic background was prospectively collected. Pooled patient-level data of 5803 patients, enrolled in the Netherlands and Belgium, were analysed in this prespecified analysis. The main endpoint was target vessel failure after 1 year.

RESULTS

Patients were classified as belonging to an ethnic minority (n = 293, 5%) or of Western European origin (n = 5510, 95%). Follow-up data were available in 5772 of 5803 (99.5%) patients. Ethnic minority patients were younger, less often female, more often current smokers, more often medically treated for diabetes, and more often had a positive family history of coronary artery disease. The main endpoint target vessel failure did not differ between ethnic minority and Western European patients (3.5% vs 4.9%, hazard ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.38-1.33; p = 0.28). There was also no difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the unfavourable cardiovascular risk profile of ethnic minority patients, short-term clinical outcome after treatment with contemporary drug-eluting stents was highly similar to that in Western European patients. Further efforts should be made to ensure the enrolment of more ethnic minority patients in future coronary stent trials.

Ten-year mortality after treating obstructive coronary atherosclerosis with contemporary stents in patients with or without concomitant peripheral arterial disease

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Previous studies in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients showed a higher 3-year adverse event risk, including all-cause mortality, in those with concomitant peripheral arterial disease (PADs). Ten-year data of mortality and causes of death are scarce. This analysis assessed PCI patients, treated with contemporary drug-eluting stents, the impact of concomitant PADs on very long-term mortality, and causes of death.

METHODS

We assessed PCI all-comers from our center who participated in the TWENTE and DUTCH PEERS trials (clinicaltrials.gov:NCT01066650, NCT01331707), comparing patients with versus without PADs. Life status was checked in the Dutch Personal Records Database; causes of death were obtained from medical records.

RESULTS

Of 2705 study patients, 668 (24.7%) died during follow-up: 88/212 (41.5%) patients with PADs and 580/2493 (23.1%) without PADs. In PADs patients, the 10-year rate of all-cause mortality was about twice as high as in patients without PADs (41.5% vs.23.1%, HR: 2.05, 95%-CI: 1.64-2.57, p<0.001). For both groups, the rates of patients dying from various causes of death were: cardiac (14.1% vs.6.8%), vascular (2.8% vs. 1.1%), non-cardiovascular (17.4% vs. 9.8%), and unclear causes (7.1% vs. 5.3%), without a statistically significant between-group difference. When multivariate analysis was adjusted for between-group differences in cardiovascular risk profile, PADs remained predictor of all-cause mortality (adjusted HR: 1.38, 95%-CI: 1.08-1.75, p=0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The 10-year all-cause mortality rate in PCI patients with concomitant PADs was almost twice as high as in those without PADs. Age and other traditional cardiovascular risk factors were higher in patients with PADs, but after correction for these confounders PADs still accounted for almost 40% increase in mortality.

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.