Drug-coated balloon strategy following orbital atherectomy for calcified coronary artery compared with drug-eluting stent: One-year outcomes and optical coherence tomography assessment

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for calcified coronary artery remains challenging in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era. While recent studies reported the efficacy of orbital atherectomy (OA) combined with DES for calcified lesion, the effectiveness of drug-coated balloon (DCB) following OA has not been fully elucidated.

METHODS

Between June 2018 and June 2021, 135 patients who received PCI for calcified de novo coronary lesions with OA were enrolled and divided into two groups; OA followed by DCB (n = 43) if the target lesion achieved acceptable preparation, or second- or third-generation DESs (n = 92) if the target lesion showed suboptimal preparation between June 2018 and June 2021. All patients underwent PCI with optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging. The primary endpoint was 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE), that was a composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

Mean age was 73 years and 82% was male. In OCT analysis, maximum calcium plaque was thicker (median: 1050 µm [interquartile range (IQR): 945-1175 µm] vs. 960 µm [808-1100 µm], p = 0.017), calcification arc tended to larger (median: 265° [IQR: 209-360°] vs. 222° [162-305°], p = 0.058) in patients with DCB than in DES, and the postprocedure minimum lumen area was smaller in DCB compared with minimum stent area in DES (median: 3.83 mm² [IQR: 3.30-4.52 mm² ] vs. 4.86 mm² [4.05-5.82 mm² ], p < 0.001). However, 1 year MACE free rate was not significantly different between 2 groups (90.3% in DCB vs. 96.6% in DES, log-rank p = 0.136). In the subgroup analysis of 14 patients who underwent follow-up OCT imaging, late lumen area loss was lower in patients with DCB than DES, despite lower lesion expansion rate in DCB than DES.

CONCLUSIONS

In calcified coronary artery disease, DCB alone strategy (if acceptable lesion preparation was performed with OA) was feasible compared with DES following OA with respect to 1-year clinical outcomes. Our finding indicated using DCB with OA might be reduce late lumen area loss for severe calcified lesion.

Polymer-free Biolimus-A9 coated thin strut stents for patients at high bleeding risk 1-year results from the LEADERS FREE III study

BACKGROUND

In patients at high bleeding risk (HBR), the LEADERS FREE (LF) trial established the safety and efficacy of a polymer-free drug coated (Biolimus-A9) stainless steel stent (SS-DCS) with 30 days of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). In LEADERS FREE III, we studied a new cobalt-chromium thin-strut stent (CoCr-DCS) in HBR patients.

METHODS

The CoCr-DCS shares all of the design features of the SS-DCS but has a CoCr stent platform with strut thickness of 84-88 μm. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and definite/probable stent thrombosis. The primary efficacy endpoint was clinically indicated target lesion revascularization. Outcomes were compared to those of LF (non-inferiority to SS-DCS for safety and superiority to SS-BMS for efficacy). Additional propensity-matched comparisons were performed to account for baseline differences.

RESULTS

We recruited 401 HBR patients using identical criteria to the LF trial. At 1 year, the primary safety endpoint was reached by 31/401 (8.0%) of patients treated with the CoCr-DCS versus 35/401 (8.9%) for the propensity-matched cohort (HR: 0.89, [0.55-1.44], p < 0.001 for non-inferiority, 0.62 for superiority). The efficacy endpoint was reached by 16/401 (4.2%) of CoCr-DCS patients versus 41/401 (10.6%) in the propensity-matched cohort (HR: 0.4 [0.2:0.7]) (p = 0.007 for superiority). There was no statistical difference between CoCr-DCS and SS-DCS in terms of efficacy (HR: 1.46 [0.68-3.15], p = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

The new thin-strut CoCr-DCS proved non-inferior to the SS-DCS for safety, and superior to the BMS for efficacy in HBR patients treated with 30 days of DAPT.

Risk and timing of clinical events according to diabetic status of patients treated with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting stent: 2-year results from a propensity score matched comparison of ABSORB EXTEND and SPIRIT trials

OBJECTIVES

to compare the occurrence of clinical events in diabetics treated with the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) versus everolimus-eluting metal stents (EES; XIENCE V; Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA) BACKGROUND: There are limited data dedicated to clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treated with bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) at 2-year horizon.

METHODS

The present study included 812 patients in the ABSORB EXTEND study in which a total of 215 diabetic patients were treated with Absorb BVS. In addition, 882 diabetic patients treated with EES in pooled data from the SPIRIT clinical program (SPIRIT II, SPIRIT III and SPIRIT IV trials) were used for comparison by applying propensity score matching using 29 different variables. The primary endpoint was ischemia driven major adverse cardiac events (ID-MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR).

RESULTS

After 2 years, the ID-MACE rate was 6.5% in the Absorb BVS vs. 8.9% in the Xience group (P = 0.40). There was no difference for MACE components or definite/probable device thrombosis (HR: 1.43 [0.24,8.58]; P = 0.69). The occurrence of MACE was not different for both diabetic status (insulin- and non-insulin-requiring diabetes) in all time points up to the 2-year follow-up for the Absorb and Xience groups.

CONCLUSION

In this largest ever patient-level pooled comparison on the treatment of diabetic patients with BRS out to two years, individuals with diabetes treated with the Absorb BVS had a similar rate of MACE as compared with diabetics treated with the Xience EES. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.