The medical device development ecosystem: Current regulatory state and challenges for future development: A review

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

There has been increasing emphasis on the development of new technology to mitigate unmet clinical needs in cardiovascular disease. This emphasis results in part from recognition that many devices, although being initially developed in the United States, were studied, and then eventually approved abroad before being returned to the U.S. for clinical application. The FDA (Food and Drug Administration) guidance document on Early Feasibility Studies (EFS) and then the 21st Century Cures Act from 2013 to 2016 focused on these issues.

MATERIALS/METHODS

There are multiple components of medical device translational pathways to be considered in continuing to reach the goal of providing early access to safe and effective products to the U.S.

POPULATION

This review article documents the various stages from early idea innovation to device design and iteration to clinical testing and then potential approval and application in the wide clinical practice of cardiovascular health care.

RESULTS

The CDRH (Centers for Devices and Radiological Health) has focused on key components including EFS, Breakthrough Devices Program, Total Product Life Cycle, the Unique Device Identification Program, the establishment of a Digital Health Center of Excellence, and leveraging Collaborative Communities. Each of these initiatives focuses on improving the Medical Device Development Ecosystem.

CONCLUSIONS

Major changes in device translational research have improved the device research climate in the United States. Goals remain including increased training and education for constituencies aspiring to work in the field of device development and regulation as part of a continuous health care learning system.

Consensus minimum core data elements adapted to peripheral vascular intervention in the drug-eluting era: Consensus report from the Registry Assessment of Peripheral Interventional Devices (RAPID) Pathways "LEAN" working group

Registry Assessment of Peripheral Interventional Devices (RAPID) initiated the Pathways Program to provide a transparent, collaborative forum in which to pursue insights into multiple unresolved questions on benefit-risk of paclitaxel-coated devices, including understanding the basis of the mortality signal, without a demonstrable potential biological mechanism, and whether the late mortality signal could be artifact intrinsic to multiple independent prospective randomized data sources that did not prespecify death as a long-term end point. In response to the directive, the LEAN-Case Report Form working group focused on enhancements to the RAPID Phase I Minimum Core Data set through the addition of key clinical modifiers that would be more strongly linked to longer-term mortality outcomes after peripheral arterial disease intervention in the drug-eluting device era, with the goal to have future mortality signals more accurately examined.

Standardized Definitions for Cardiogenic Shock Research and Mechanical Circulatory Support Devices: Scientific Expert Panel From the Shock Academic Research Consortium (SHARC)

The Shock Academic Research Consortium is a multi-stakeholder group, including representatives from the US Food and Drug Administration and other government agencies, industry, and payers, convened to develop pragmatic consensus definitions useful for the evaluation of clinical trials enrolling patients with cardiogenic shock, including trials evaluating mechanical circulatory support devices. Several in-person and virtual meetings were convened between 2020 and 2022 to discuss the need for developing the standardized definitions required for evaluation of mechanical circulatory support devices in clinical trials for cardiogenic shock patients. The expert panel identified key concepts and topics by performing literature reviews, including previous clinical trials, while recognizing current challenges and the need to advance evidence-based practice and statistical analysis to support future clinical trials. For each category, a lead (primary) author was assigned to perform a literature search and draft a proposed definition, which was presented to the subgroup. These definitions were further modified after feedback from the expert panel meetings until a consensus was reached. This manuscript summarizes the expert panel recommendations focused on outcome definitions, including efficacy and safety.

Early feasibility studies in the United States: Focus on electrophysiology

The care of patients with heart rhythm disorders is often dependent on technologies developed to address their unique clinical needs. Although much innovation occurs in the United States, recent decades have seen a significant proportion of early clinical studies performed outside the United States, driven largely by costly and time-inefficient processes seemingly inherent to the United States research ecosystem. As a result, the goals of early patient access to novel devices to address unmet needs and efficient technology development in the United States remain incompletely realized. This review will introduce key aspects of this discussion, organized by the Medical Device Innovation Consortium, in an effort to broaden awareness and encourage engagement by stakeholders in an effort to address central issues and therefore further a growing effort to shift Early Feasibility Studies to the United States for the benefit of all involved.

Comparative Effectiveness of Percutaneous Microaxial Left Ventricular Assist Device vs Intra-Aortic Balloon Pump or No Mechanical Circulatory Support in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock

IMPORTANCE

Recent studies have produced inconsistent findings regarding the outcomes of the percutaneous microaxial left ventricular assist device (LVAD) during acute myocardial infarction with cardiogenic shock (AMICS).

OBJECTIVE

To compare the percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments among patients presenting with AMICS using observational analyses of administrative data.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This comparative effectiveness research study used Medicare fee-for-service claims of patients admitted with AMICS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from October 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019. Treatment strategies were compared using (1) inverse probability of treatment weighting to estimate the effect of different baseline treatments in the overall population; (2) instrumental variable analysis to determine the effectiveness of the percutaneous microaxial LVAD among patients whose treatment was influenced by cross-sectional institutional practice patterns; (3) an instrumented difference-in-differences analysis to determine the effectiveness of treatment among patients whose treatment was influenced by longitudinal changes in institutional practice patterns; and (4) a grace period approach to determine the effectiveness of initiating the percutaneous microaxial LVAD within 2 days of percutaneous coronary intervention. Analysis took place between March 2021 and December 2022.

INTERVENTIONS

Percutaneous microaxial LVAD vs alternative treatments (including medical therapy and intra-aortic balloon pump).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Thirty-day all-cause mortality and readmissions.

RESULTS

Of 23 478 patients, 14 264 (60.8%) were male and the mean (SD) age was 73.9 (9.8) years. In the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis and grace period approaches, treatment with percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with a higher risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (risk difference, 14.9%; 95% CI, 12.9%-17.0%). However, patients receiving the percutaneous microaxial LVAD had a higher frequency of factors associated with severe illness, suggesting possible confounding by measures of illness severity not available in the data. In the instrumental variable analysis, 30-day mortality was also higher with percutaneous microaxial LVAD, but patient and hospital characteristics differed across levels of the instrumental variable, suggesting possible confounding by unmeasured variables (risk difference, 13.5%; 95% CI, 3.9%-23.2%). In the instrumented difference-in-differences analysis, the association between the percutaneous microaxial LVAD and mortality was imprecise, and differences in trends in characteristics between hospitals with different percutaneous microaxial LVAD use suggested potential assumption violations.

CONCLUSIONS

In observational analyses comparing the percutaneous microaxial LVAD to alternative treatments among patients with AMICS, the percutaneous microaxial LVAD was associated with worse outcomes in some analyses, while in other analyses, the association was too imprecise to draw meaningful conclusions. However, the distribution of patient and institutional characteristics between treatment groups or groups defined by institutional differences in treatment use, including changes in use over time, combined with clinical knowledge of illness severity factors not captured in the data, suggested violations of key assumptions that are needed for valid causal inference with different observational analyses. Randomized clinical trials of mechanical support devices will allow valid comparisons across candidate treatment strategies and help resolve ongoing controversies.

Defining Strategies of Modulation of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Consensus Document from the Academic Research Consortium

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment to prevent thrombotic or ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and those treated medically for an acute coronary syndrome. The use of antiplatelet therapy comes at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding complications. Defining the optimal intensity of platelet inhibition according to the clinical presentation of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and individual patient factors is a clinical challenge. Modulation of antiplatelet therapy is a medical action that is frequently performed to balance the risk of thrombotic or ischemic events and the risk of bleeding. This aim may be achieved by reducing (ie, de-escalation) or increasing (ie, escalation) the intensity of platelet inhibition by changing the type, dose, or number of antiplatelet drugs. Because de-escalation or escalation can be achieved in different ways, with a number of emerging approaches, confusion arises with terminologies that are often used interchangeably. To address this issue, this Academic Research Consortium collaboration provides an overview and definitions of different strategies of antiplatelet therapy modulation for patients with coronary artery disease, including but not limited to those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and consensus statements on standardized definitions.

Comparison of Unibody and Non-Unibody Endografts for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair in Medicare Beneficiaries: The SAFE-AAA Study

BACKGROUND

Concerns have been raised about the long-term performance of aortic stent grafts for the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms, in particular, unibody stent grafts (eg, Endologix AFX AAA stent grafts). Only limited data sets are available to evaluate the long-term risks related to these devices. The SAFE-AAA Study was designed with the Food and Drug Administration to provide a longitudinal assessment of the safety of unibody aortic stent grafts among Medicare beneficiaries.

METHODS

The SAFE-AAA Study was a prespecified, retrospective cohort study evaluating whether unibody aortic stent grafts are noninferior to non-unibody stent grafts with respect to the composite primary outcome of aortic reintervention, rupture, and mortality. Procedures were evaluated from August 1, 2011, through December 31, 2017. The primary end point was evaluated through December 31, 2019. Inverse probability weighting was used to account for imbalances in observed characteristics. Sensitivity analyses were used to evaluate the effect of unmeasured confounding, including the falsification end points of heart failure, stroke, and pneumonia. A prespecified subgroup includes patients treated from February 22, 2016, through December 31, 2017, corresponding to the market release of the most contemporary unibody endograft (Endologix AFX2 AAA stent graft).

RESULTS

Of 87 163 patients who underwent aortic stent grafting at 2146 US hospitals, 11 903 (13.7%) received a unibody device. The average age was 77.0±6.7 years, 21.1% were female, 93.5% were White, 90.8% had hypertension, and 35.8% used tobacco. The primary end point occurred in 73.4% of unibody device-treated patients versus 65.0% of non-unibody device-treated patients (hazard ratio, 1.19 [95% CI, 1.15-1.22]; noninferior P value of 1.00; median follow-up, 3.4 years). Falsification end points were negligibly different between groups. In a contemporary subgroup of procedures, the cumulative incidence of the primary end point was 37.5% of unibody device-treated patients and 32.7% of non-unibody device-treated patients (hazard ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.14]).

CONCLUSIONS

In the SAFE-AAA Study, unibody endografts failed to meet noninferiority compared with non-unibody endografts with respect to aortic reintervention, rupture, and mortality. These data support the urgency of instituting a prospective longitudinal surveillance program for monitoring safety events related to aortic stent grafts.

One-Year Follow-Up of Vascular Intervention Trials Disrupted by the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Use-Case landscape

INTRODUCTION

The COVID-19 pandemic had an unprecedented impact on cardiovascular clinical research. The decision-making and state of study operations in cardiovascular trials 1-year after interruption has not been previously described.

METHODS

In the spring of 2020, we created a pandemic impact task force to develop a landscape of use case scenarios from 17 device trials of peripheral artery disease (PAD) and coronary artery disease (CAD) interventions. In conjunction with publicly available (clinictrials.gov) study inclusion criteria, primary endpoints and study design, information was shared for this use-case landscape by trial leadership and data owners.

RESULTS

A total of 17 actively enrolling trials (9 CAD and 8 PAD) volunteered to populate the use case landscape. All 17 were multicenter studies (12 in North America and 5 international). Fifteen studies were industry-sponsored, of which 13 were FDA approved IDEs, one was PCORI-sponsored and two were sponsored by the NIH. Enrollment targets ranged from 150 to 9000 pts. At the time of interruption, 5 trials were <20 % enrolled, 9 trials were 50-80 % enrolled and 3 trials were >80 % enrolled. At 1 year, the majority of studies were continuing to enroll in the context of more sporadic but ongoing pandemic activity.

CONCLUSIONS

At 1 year from the first surge interruptions, most trials had resumed enrollment. Trials most heavily interrupted were trials early in enrollment and those trials not able to pivot to virtual patient and site visits. Further work is needed to determine the overall impact on vascular intervention trials disrupted during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Development and validation of an automated algorithm for end point adjudication for a large U.S. national registry

BACKGROUND

Clinical events committee (CEC) evaluation is the standard approach for end point adjudication in clinical trials. Due to resource constraints, large registries typically rely on site-reported end points without further confirmation, which may preclude use for regulatory oversight.

METHODS

We developed a novel automated adjudication algorithm (AAA) for end point adjudication in the National Cardiovascular Data Registry Left Atrial Appendage Occlusion (LAAO) Registry using an iterative process using CEC adjudication as the "gold standard." A ≥80% agreement rate between automated algorithm adjudication and CEC adjudication was prespecified as clinically acceptable. Agreement rates were calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 92 in-hospital and 127 post-discharge end points were evaluated between January 1, 2016 and June 30, 2019 using AAA and CEC. Agreement for neurologic events was >90%. Percent agreement for in-hospital and post-discharge events was as follows: ischemic stroke 95.7% and 94.5%, hemorrhagic stroke 97.8% and 96.1%, undetermined stroke 97.8% and 99.2%, transient ischemic attack 98.9% and 98.4% and intracranial hemorrhage 100.0% and 94.5%. Agreement was >80% for major bleeding (83.7% and 90.6%) and major vascular complication (89.1% and 97.6%). With this approach, <1% of site reported end points require CEC adjudication. Agreement remained very good during the period after algorithm derivation.

CONCLUSIONS

An AAA-guided approach for end point adjudication was successfully developed and validated for the LAAO Registry. With this approach, the need for formal CEC adjudication was substantially reduced, with accuracy maintained above an 80% agreement threshold. After application specific validation, these methods could be applied to large registries and clinical trials to reduce the cost of event adjudication while preserving scientific validity.

US FDA best practices for initiating early feasibility studies for neurological devices in the United States

This article describes the efforts of the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Office of Neurological and Physical Medicine Devices to facilitate early clinical testing of potentially beneficial neurological devices in the US. Over the past 5 years, the FDA has made significant advances to this aim by developing early feasibility study best practices and encouraging developers and innovators to initiate their clinical studies in the US. The FDA uses several regulatory approaches to help start neurological device clinical studies, such as early engagement with sponsors and developers, in-depth interaction during the FDA review phase of a regulatory submission, and provision of an FDA toolkit that reviewers can apply to the most challenging submissions.

Important considerations for trials for peripheral arterial disease: Lessons learned from the paclitaxel mortality signal: A report on behalf of the registry assessment for peripheral interventional Devices (RAPID) Paclitaxel Pathways Program

The Registry Assessment of Peripheral Devices (RAPID) convened a multidisciplinary group of stakeholders including clinicians, academicians, regulators and industry representatives to conduct an in-depth review of limitations associated with the data available to assess the paclitaxel mortality signal. Available studies were evaluated to identify strengths and limitations in the study design and data quality, which were translated to lessons learned to help guide the design, execution, and analyses of future studies. We suggest numerous actionable responses, such as the development and use of harmonized data points and outcomes in a consensus lean case report form. We advocate for reduction in missing data and efficient means for accrual of larger sample sizes in Peripheral arterial disease studies or use of supplemental datasets. Efforts to share lessons learned and working collaboratively to address such issues may improve future data in this device area and ultimately benefit patients. Condensed Abstract: Data sources evaluating paclitaxel-coated devices were evaluated to identify strengths and limitations in the study design and data quality, which were translated to lessons learned to help guide the design, execution, and analyses of future studies. We suggest numerous actionable responses, which we believe may improve future data in this device area and ultimately benefit patients.

Definitions and Clinical Trial Design Principles for Coronary Artery Chronic Total Occlusion Therapies: CTO-ARC Consensus Recommendations

Over the past 2 decades, chronic total occlusion (CTO) percutaneous coronary intervention has developed into its own subspecialty of interventional cardiology. Dedicated terminology, techniques, devices, courses, and training programs have enabled progressive advancements. However, only a few randomized trials have been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of CTO percutaneous coronary intervention. Moreover, several published observational studies have shown conflicting data. Part of the paucity of clinical data stems from the fact that prior studies have been suboptimally designed and performed. The absence of standardized end points and the discrepancy in definitions also prevent consistency and uniform interpretability of reported results in CTO intervention. To standardize the field, we therefore assembled a broad consortium comprising academicians, practicing physicians, researchers, medical society representatives, and regulators (US Food and Drug Administration) to develop methods, end points, biomarkers, parameters, data, materials, processes, procedures, evaluations, tools, and techniques for CTO interventions. This article summarizes the effort and is organized into 3 sections: key elements and procedural definitions, end point definitions, and clinical trial design principles. The Chronic Total Occlusion Academic Research Consortium is a first step toward improved comparability and interpretability of study results, supplying an increasingly growing body of CTO percutaneous coronary intervention evidence.

Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a consensus document from the Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk

Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention–related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Standardized classification and framework for reporting, interpreting, and analysing medication non-adherence in cardiovascular clinical trials: a consensus report from the Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium (NARC)

Non-adherence has been well recognized for years to be a common issue that significantly impacts clinical outcomes and health care costs. Medication adherence is remarkably low even in the controlled environment of clinical trials where it has potentially complex major implications. Collection of non-adherence data diverge markedly among cardiovascular randomized trials and, even where collected, is rarely incorporated in the statistical analysis to test the consistency of the primary endpoint(s). The imprecision introduced by the inconsistent assessment of non-adherence in clinical trials might confound the estimate of the calculated efficacy of the study drug. Hence, clinical trials may not accurately answer the scientific question posed by regulators, who seek an accurate estimate of the true efficacy and safety of treatment, or the question posed by payers, who want a reliable estimate of the effectiveness of treatment in the marketplace after approval. The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration among leading academic research organizations, representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and physician-scientists from the USA and Europe. One in-person meeting was held in Madrid, Spain, culminating in a document describing consensus recommendations for reporting, collecting, and analysing adherence endpoints across clinical trials. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation of investigational drugs from early development to post-marketing approval studies. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.

Trial Design Principles for Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing PCI: JACC Scientific Expert Panel

Investigating the balance of risk for thrombotic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is especially relevant for patients at high bleeding risk (HBR). The Academic Research Consortium for HBR recently proposed a consensus definition in an effort to standardize the patient population included in HBR trials. The aim of this consensus-based document, the second initiative from the Academic Research Consortium for HBR, is to propose recommendations to guide the design of clinical trials of devices and drugs in HBR patients undergoing PCI. The authors discuss the designs of trials in HBR patients undergoing PCI and various aspects of trial design specific to HBR patients, including target populations, intervention and control groups, primary and secondary outcomes, and timing of endpoint reporting.

Defining High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention are of major importance, but a lack of standardization in defining this population limits trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (ARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organizations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from the United States, Asia, and Europe focusing on percutaneous coronary intervention–related bleeding. Two meetings of the 31-member consortium were held in Washington, DC, in April 2018 and in Paris, France, in October 2018. These meetings were organized by the Cardiovascular European Research Center on behalf of the ARC-HBR group and included representatives of the US Food and Drug Administration and the Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency, as well as observers from the pharmaceutical and medical device industries. A consensus definition of patients at high bleeding risk was developed that was based on review of the available evidence. The definition is intended to provide consistency in defining this population for clinical trials and to complement clinical decision-making and regulatory review. The proposed ARC-HBR consensus document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of high bleeding risk in clinical trials evaluating the safety and effectiveness of devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

2017 Cardiovascular and Stroke Endpoint Definitions for Clinical Trials

This publication describes uniform definitions for cardiovascular and stroke outcomes developed by the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The FDA established the Standardized Data Collection for Cardiovascular Trials Initiative in 2009 to simplify the design and conduct of clinical trials intended to support marketing applications. The writing committee recognizes that these definitions may be used in other types of clinical trials and clinical care processes where appropriate. Use of these definitions at the FDA has enhanced the ability to aggregate data within and across medical product development programs, conduct meta-analyses to evaluate cardiovascular safety, integrate data from multiple trials, and compare effectiveness of drugs and devices. Further study is needed to determine whether prospective data collection using these common definitions improves the design, conduct, and interpretability of the results of clinical trials.

Plaque Rupture and Plaque Erosion

There are multiple substrates for coronary thrombosis overlying an atherosclerotic plaque. The most common, plaque rupture, consists of an interruption of a thin fibrous cap overlying a lipid rich core. Plaque rupture is a result of macrophage infiltration and matrix degradation, is often seen in calcified plaques, and is highly associated with hypercholesterolemia. A less common substrate, plaque erosion, is not associated with elevated cholesterol and is the prime cause of coronary thrombosis in premenopausal women. The characteristic histologic features are abundant surface smooth muscle cells and proteoglycans, and a small or absent lipid rich core. The mechanisms of plaque erosion are unclear, and there are no consistent risk factors, although patients are often smokers.

New technology in electrophysiology: FDA process and perspective

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is a large regulatory agency that monitors everything from food, tobacco, and veterinary medicine to pharmaceutical drugs and medical devices. The Mission statement of the CDRH, one of the Centers of the FDA, in its most succinct form is to protect and promote public health. This is accomplished through timely and continued access to safe, effective, and high quality medical devices. This paper aims to review the overarching principles of the Agency's review process for cardiac devices as well as highlight some of the newer programs that FDA has engaged in to facilitate innovation, device development, research, and timely market approval.

Current challenges for clinical trials of cardiovascular medical devices

Several features of cardiovascular devices raise considerations for clinical trial conduct. Prospective, randomized, controlled trials remain the highest quality evidence for safety and effectiveness assessments, but, for instance, blinding may be challenging. In order to avoid bias and not confound data interpretation, the use of objective endpoints and blinding patients, study staff, core labs, and clinical endpoint committees to treatment assignment are helpful approaches. Anticipation of potential bias should be considered and planned for prospectively in a cardiovascular device trial. Prospective, single-arm studies (often referred to as registry studies) can provide additional data in some cases. They are subject to selection bias even when carefully designed; thus, they are generally not acceptable as the sole basis for pre-market approval of high risk cardiovascular devices. However, they complement the evidence base and fill the gaps unanswered by randomized trials. Registry studies present device safety and effectiveness in day-to-day clinical practice settings and detect rare adverse events in the post-market period. No single research design will be appropriate for every cardiovascular device or target patient population. The type of trial, appropriate control group, and optimal length of follow-up will depend on the specific device, its potential clinical benefits, the target patient population and the existence (or lack) of effective therapies, and its anticipated risks. Continued efforts on the part of investigators, the device industry, and government regulators are needed to reach the optimal approach for evaluating the safety and performance of innovative devices for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.

Pathology of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein bypass graft lesions

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the pathological responses of atherosclerotic saphenous vein bypass grafts (SVBGs) to drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS).

BACKGROUND

Repeat bypass surgery is typically associated with a high rate of morbidity and mortality. Percutaneous coronary interventions have emerged as the preferred treatment; however, only limited data are available on SVBGs pathological responses to DES and BMS.

METHODS

Formalin-fixed SVBG of >2 years duration (n = 31) were collected to histologically characterize advanced atherosclerotic lesions in native SVBG. In a separate group, SVBGs treated with DES (n = 9) and BMS (n = 9) for >30 days duration were assessed for morphological and morphometric changes.

RESULTS

Necrotic core lesions were identified in 25% of SVBG sections, and plaque rupture with luminal thrombosis was observed in 6.3% of histological sections (32% [10 of 31] vein grafts examined). Morphometry of DES demonstrated reduction in neointimal thickening versus BMS (0.13 mm [interquartile range: 0.06 to 0.16 mm] vs. 0.30 mm [interquartile range: 0.20 to 0.48 mm], p = 0.004). DES lesions also showed greater delayed healing characterized by increased peristrut fibrin deposition, higher percentage of uncovered struts, and less endothelialization compared with BMS. Stent fractures (DES 56% vs. BMS 11%, p = 0.045) and late stent thrombosis (DES 44% vs. BMS 0%, p = 0.023) were more common in DES versus BMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Advanced SVBG atherosclerotic lesions are characterized by large hemorrhagic necrotic cores. Stenting of such lesions is associated with delayed vascular healing and late thrombosis particularly following DES implantation, which may help explain the higher rates of cardiovascular events observed in SVBG stenting as compared with native coronary arteries.

Inflammatory pseudothrombus on a patent foramen ovale occluder device

Herein, we describe late complications after the transcatheter device closure of a patent foramen ovale in a patient with migraine headaches. The clinical presentation included acute neurologic symptoms and new-onset atrial fibrillation. A mass on the left atrial side of the occluder was surgically removed. Histologic results showed an inflammatory lesion that consisted predominantly of lymphocytes, plasma cells, and macrophages. Despite complete surgical closure and the termination of atrial fibrillation, the patient continued to experience neurologic events. Although transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure is associated with low complication rates, a careful risk-benefit evaluation is warranted in view of the potentially severe complications and the current lack of robust pathophysiologic and clinical trial data to support this therapy in the treatment of migraine headaches.

Microemboli and microvascular obstruction in acute coronary thrombosis and sudden coronary death: relation to epicardial plaque histopathology

OBJECTIVES

This study examined myocardial microvascular emboli and obstruction, and related these to plaque in the epicardial coronary arteries supplying the affected microvessels.

BACKGROUND

Epicardial coronary thrombosis often causes microemboli and microvascular obstruction. The consequences of myocardial microvessel obstruction and myocyte necrosis are substantial, yet histopathologic characterization of epicardial coronary artery plaque has been incompletely characterized. This study examined myocardial microvascular emboli, and related these to plaque in the coronary arteries supplying the microvessels.

METHODS

Hearts from sudden coronary death patients underwent examination for coronary artery plaque type and cardiac microemboli.

RESULTS

Forty-four hearts were available for evaluation. Mean age at death was 51 +/- 15 years. Coronary artery analysis found 26 plaque ruptures and 21 erosions, and a mean of 4.5 microemboli per heart. Microemboli and microvascular obstruction occurred most often from eroded plaques. Microemboli and occluded intramyocardial vessels were most common in the left anterior descending coronary artery, and all vessels contained fibrin and platelets. Mean stenoses of the culprit lesion was 74% in those with emboli and 75% in those without (p = NS). Intramyocardial microemboli were more common in plaque erosion than in rupture. Microvessels <200 mum were most often those that were occluded.

CONCLUSIONS

Microemboli and microvascular obstruction are common in patients dying of acute coronary thrombosis. Plaque erosion is more likely to cause emboli in vessels <200 mum. These emboli and microvessel obstruction have a prominent clinical role since myonecrosis is often associated with these findings.

Severe coronary artery disease: is there a place for percutaneous coronary intervention?

Management of severe coronary artery disease (CAD), defined as multivessel disease with or without significant left main artery disease remains a topic for considerable discussion. Although coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery has been the mainstay of treatment, the steady pace of improvement in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) continues to beg the question as to whether PCI can perform as well as CABG for these patients. This short review is intended to place the recently published SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial in perspective, considering the previous major clinical trials in this field and to further consider whether PCI can be used appropriately in the management of patients with advanced CAD. The major clinical trials comparing PCI to CABG published prior to SYNTAX are briefly reviewed in chronologic order. The SYNTAX trial is reviewed in more depth and the implications of its results for contemporary clinical management are discussed. PCI has been applied to more advanced forms of CAD as percutaneous technology has evolved from balloon angioplasty to bare metal stents to drug eluting stents. Long-term survival has remained comparable between PCI and CABG patients despite the more advanced nature of disease treated in more recent trials, recognizing that a significant number of patients are excluded from randomization because equivalent revascularization is not achievable percutaneously. Repeat revascularization is more frequently required in PCI patients than in CABG patients. PCI has a role to play, although CABG remains the mainstay of therapy for patients with advanced CAD.

Atheromatous plaque reflects serum total cholesterol levels: a comparative morphologic study of endarterectomy coronary atherosclerotic plaques removed from patients from the southern part of India and Caucasians from Ottawa, Canada

BACKGROUND

Natives of South India have a very high incidence of coronary artery disease, despite low calorie and fat intake.

HYPOTHESIS

This study was undertaken to determine whether morphologic features of atheromatous plaque reflect the serum total cholesterol.

METHODS

Fifty-three endarterectomy specimens from patients (mean age 47 +/- 9 years, mean cholesterol 203 +/- 47 mg/dl) obtained from one cardiac surgeon working in a single institution in South India were evaluated. Morphologic findings were compared with 40 endoarterectomy specimens obtained from age-matched Caucasians from Ottawa, Canada, with a reported mean cholesterol of 262 +/- 47 mg/dl. Morphometric measurements of the vessel size, percent stenosis, and the various components of the atherosclerotic plaque were determined by computerized planimetry.

RESULTS

The vessel size was smaller in the Indian than in the Canadian population (4.6 +/- 2.9 vs. 5.6 +/- 3.0 mm2, p = 0.07), the plaque area was less (4.3 +/- 2.3 vs. 5.3 +/- 2.8 mm2, p = 0.055) and the calculated percent stenosis was significantly less (93 vs. 96%, p = 0.028). Of all the parameters evaluated, only necrotic core in the Indian population (7.1 +/- 10.9% vs. Canadian 16.7 +/- 19.7%, p < 0.001) and proteoglycan deposition (7.9 +/- 11.2% vs. Canadian 3.7 +/- 5.3%, p < 0.023) were significantly different. Despite the Indians having low total cholesterol, there was greater diffuse double and triple-vessel disease and at a younger age than in the Caucasians.

CONCLUSIONS

From our data, it appears that the mechanism of development of atherosclerotic disease in the Indians may be different because they have smaller vessels, smaller necrotic core, and greater proteoglycan deposition. Other etiologies, especially those related to a high carbohydrate diet (which is typical for South Indians), should be considered.