Search

Introduction: The introduction of drug-eluting coronary stents (DES) into clinical practice in 2002 represented a major milestone in the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease. Over the years, significant advances in polymer coating and in antiproliferative agent technology have further improved the safety and clinical performance of newer-generation DES. Areas covered: Development of platinum chromium (PtCr) alloys with high radial strength and high radiopacity have enabled the design of new, thin-strut, flexible, and highly trackable stent platforms, while simultaneously improving stent visibility. These advances have facilitated complex percutaneous treatment of a diverse population of patients in clinical practice. This review will provide an overview of the evolution in PtCr everolimus-eluting stents from PROMUS Element™ to SYNERGY™ to the recently introduced SYNERGY MEGATRON™. The clinical data will be summarized and put into perspective, especially focusing on the role of the SYNERGY™ and MEGATRON™ platforms in the treatment of complex coronary artery disease and high-risk patients. Expert opinion: The SYNERGY™ stent demonstrates favorable clinical efficacy and safety outcome data, and whilst the clinical data on MEGATRON™ are sparse, early experience is promising. The specific overexpansion capabilities, visibility, and radial strength of the MEGATRON™ are attractive features for complex coronary interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims The aim of the study is to assess the impact of the baseline plaque composition on the DREAMS 3G luminal late loss and to compare the serial plaque changes between baseline and 6 and 12 months (M) follow-up. Methods and results A total of 116 patients were enrolled in the BIOMAG-I trial. Patients were imaged with optical coherence tomography (OCT) pre- and post-DREAMS 3G implantation and at 6 and 12 M. OCTPlus software uses artificial intelligence to assess composition (i.e. lipid, calcium, and fibrous tissue) of the plaque. The differences between the OCT-derived minimum lumen area (MLA) post-percutaneous coronary intervention and 12 M were grouped into three terciles. Patients with larger MLA differences at 12 M (P = 0.0003) had significantly larger content of fibrous tissue at baseline. There was a reduction of 24.8% and 20.9% in lipid area, both P < 0.001, between the pre-DREAMS 3G OCT and the 6 and 12 M follow-up. Conversely, the fibrous tissue increased by 48.4% and 36.0% at 6 and 12 M follow-up, both P < 0.001. Conclusion The larger the fibrous tissue in the lesion at baseline, the larger the luminal loss seen at 6 and 12 M. Following the implantation of DREAMS 3G, favourable healing of the vessel coronary wall occurs as shown by a decrease in the lipid area and an increase in fibrous tissue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 12-month outcomes of BIOMAG-I - the first-in-human study investigating the third-generation drug-eluting resorbable magnesium scaffold (DREAMS 3G) - showed promising results regarding clinical outcomes and late lumen loss., Aims: The current study aimed to investigate vascular healing parameters assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), focusing on strut visibility, vessel and scaffold areas, and neointimal growth patterns., Methods: This is a BIOMAG-I substudy including patients with available serial OCT and IVUS data. We conducted a frame-based analysis of OCT findings in conjunction with IVUS-derived vessel and scaffold areas, evaluating the qualitative and quantitative aspects of vascular healing., Results: Among the 116 patients enrolled in this trial, 56 patients treated with DREAMS 3G were included in the analysis. At 12 months, OCT imaging revealed that 99.0% of the struts were invisible, and no malapposed struts were depicted. While the vessel area showed no significant difference between the timepoints, the minimum lumen area significantly decreased from post-percutaneous coronary intervention to 6 months (6.88 mm 2 to 4.75 mm 2 ; p<0.0001), but no significant changes were observed between 6 and 12 months. Protruding neointimal tissue (PNT) - a unique neointimal presentation observed following resorbable magnesium scaffold implantation - was observed in 89.3% of the study patients at 12 months, and its area exhibited a 47.4% decrease from 6 to 12 months., Conclusions: This imaging substudy revealed that, at 12-month follow-up, virtually all struts of the DREAMS 3G scaffold became invisible, without evident malapposition. The vascular healing response to DREAMS 3G implantation also appeared favourable up to 12 months, which is indicated by advanced strut degradation and spontaneous regressing PNT between 6 and 12 months.

An increased total stent length (TSL) might be associated with a higher risk of clinical events; however, in patients with multivessel disease (MVD), a considerable TSL is often required. In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and MVD, immediate complete revascularization was associated with shorter TSL in the BIOVASC (Immediate versus staged complete revascularisation in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and multivessel coronary disease) Trial. This is a subanalysis of the BIOVASC trial comparing clinical outcomes in patients with either <60 or ≥60 mm TSL. The primary outcome was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischemia driven revascularization, or cerebrovascular events at 2 years after the index procedure. A total of 1,525 patients were enrolled in the BIOVASC trial, of whom 855 had a TSL of ≥60 mm (long TSL). No significant difference was established when comparing patients treated with either long or short TSL in terms of the primary outcome at 2-year follow-up, which occurred in 117 patients (13.7%) in the ≥60 mm group and 69 patients (10.3%) in the <60 mm group (adjusted hazard ratio 1.25, 95% confidence interval 0.92 to 1.69, p = 0.16). Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in the secondary end points. In conclusion, in patients with acute coronary syndrome and MVD, long stenting did not show a significant difference in clinical event rate compared with short stenting., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Diletti reports a relation with Erasmus Medical Center that includes funding grants. Dr. Van Mieghem reports a relation with Erasmus Medical Center that includes funding grants, speaking and lecture fees, and travel reimbursement. Dr. den Dekker reports a relation with Erasmus Medical Center that includes funding grants. Dr. Bennett reports a relation with University Hospitals Leuven that includes funding grants. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Complete revascularisation is supported by recent trials in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD) without cardiogenic shock. However, the optimal timing of non-culprit lesion revascularisation is currently debated., Aims: This prespecified analysis of the BioVasc trial aims to determine the effect of immediate complete revascularisation (ICR) compared to staged complete revascularisation (SCR) on clinical outcomes in patients with STEMI., Methods: Patients presenting with STEMI and MVD were randomly assigned to ICR or SCR. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation, or cerebrovascular events at 1-year post-index procedure., Results: Between June 2018 and October 2021, 608 (ICR: 305, SCR: 303) STEMI patients were enrolled. No significant differences between ICR and SCR were observed at 1-year follow-up in terms of the primary endpoint (7.0% vs 8.3%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.47-1.50; p=0.55): all-cause mortality (2.3% vs 1.3%, HR 1.77, 95% CI: 0.52-6.04; p=0.36), myocardial infarction (1.7% vs 3.3%, HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.17-1.47; p=0.21), unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation (4.1% vs 5.0%, HR 0.80, 95% CI: 0.38-1.71; p=0.57) and cerebrovascular events (1.4% vs 1.3%, HR 1.01, 95% CI: 0.25-4.03; p=0.99). At 30-day follow-up, a trend towards a reduction of the primary endpoint in the ICR group was observed (ICR: 3.0% vs SCR: 6.0%, HR 0.50, 95% CI: 0.22-1.11; p=0.09). ICR was associated with a reduction in overall hospital stay (ICR: median 3 [interquartile range {IQR} 2-5] days vs SCR: median 4 [IQR 3-6] days; p<0.001)., Conclusions: Clinical outcomes at 1 year were similar for STEMI patients who had undergone ICR and those who had undergone SCR.

Background: In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the number of diseased vessels may affect the efficacy of a complete revascularisation strategy., Aims: The authors sought to evaluate the safety and efficacy of immediate complete revascularisation (ICR) and staged complete revascularisation (SCR) in patients presenting with ACS stratified by the number of diseased vessels., Methods: In this prespecified analysis of the BIOVASC trial, ICR was compared with SCR in patients with two-vessel disease (2VD) or three-vessel disease (3VD). The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), any unplanned ischaemia-driven revascularisation or cerebrovascular events at 1 year after the index procedure. Comparisons were performed using Cox regression., Results: A total of 1,525 patients were enrolled in the BIOVASC trial, of whom 1,177 presented with 2VD and 265 with 3VD. In the 2VD group, 613 patients were assigned to ICR and 564 to SCR. In the 3VD group, 117 patients were assigned to ICR and 148 to SCR. ICR and SCR led to similar results in both the 2VD (hazard ratio [HR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50-1.13; p=0.18) and 3VD groups (HR 0.79, 95% CI: 0.39-1.59; p=0.51) (p interaction =0.91) in terms of the primary endpoint. ICR was associated with a lower rate of MI in patients with 3VD (HR 0.21, 95% CI: 0.046-0.93; p=0.04) (p interaction =0.30)., Conclusions: ICR might be an option in patients presenting with extensive 3VD and might be associated with a lower rate of myocardial infarction compared with SCR.

Aims: The aim of the study is to assess the impact of the baseline plaque composition on the DREAMS 3G luminal late loss and to compare the serial plaque changes between baseline and 6 and 12 months (M) follow-up., Methods and Results: A total of 116 patients were enrolled in the BIOMAG-I trial. Patients were imaged with optical coherence tomography (OCT) pre- and post-DREAMS 3G implantation and at 6 and 12 M. OCTPlus software uses artificial intelligence to assess composition (i.e. lipid, calcium, and fibrous tissue) of the plaque. The differences between the OCT-derived minimum lumen area (MLA) post-percutaneous coronary intervention and 12 M were grouped into three terciles. Patients with larger MLA differences at 12 M (P = 0.0003) had significantly larger content of fibrous tissue at baseline. There was a reduction of 24.8% and 20.9% in lipid area, both P < 0.001, between the pre-DREAMS 3G OCT and the 6 and 12 M follow-up. Conversely, the fibrous tissue increased by 48.4% and 36.0% at 6 and 12 M follow-up, both P < 0.001., Conclusion: The larger the fibrous tissue in the lesion at baseline, the larger the luminal loss seen at 6 and 12 M. Following the implantation of DREAMS 3G, favourable healing of the vessel coronary wall occurs as shown by a decrease in the lipid area and an increase in fibrous tissue., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: H.M.G.-G., R.W., G.D.M., M.G., S.B., A.K., and M.B.L. were core laboratory members, and the remaining authors were investigators of the trial. H.M.G.-G. has grants or contracts from Medtronic, Biotronik, Abbott, Neovasc, Corflow, Alucentbio, Philips, and Chiesi (paid to institution), received consulting fees from Boston Scientific and ACIST, and participates in DSMB/advisory board of the VIVID study. R.W. has grants or contracts from Amgen, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Philips IGT; received consulting fees from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Medtronic, Philips IGT, Pi-Cardia Ltd, Swiss Interventional Systems/SIS Medical AG, Transmural Systems Inc, and Venous MedTech; received honoraria from AstraZeneca; participates in DSMB/advisory boards of Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, Philips IGT, and Pi-Cardia Ltd; and is an investor in MedAlliance and Transmural Systems Inc. J.T. reports grants and contracts from Abbott paid to his institution, speaker honoraria and support for attending meetings from Biotronik, and is an associate editor of Cardiovascular Biologics and Regenerative Medicine and Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine. J.E. reports personal fees/speaker honoraria from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Philips, and Shockwave, patents from Shared, and participation in advisory boards of Abbott and Phillips. The institution of J.F.I. receives grants or contracts from Terumo Corp, Biosensors, Concept Medical, Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Philips Volcano. J.F.I. reports consulting fees from Biotronik, Medtronic, Cordis, Terumo Corp., and ReCor Medical; speaker fees/honoraria from Terumo Corp, Biosensors, Medalliance, OrbusNeich, Concept Medical, Bristol Myers Squibb/Pfizer, Novartis, Cordis, AstraZeneca, and Philips Volcano; and support to attend meetings from Biotronik and Amgen. The institution of J.B. receives grants or contracts from Shockwave IVLS. J.B. receives consulting fees from Biotronik AG and Boston Scientific and speaker fees/honoraria from Biotronik AG, Boston Scientific, and Abbott Vascular, participates in the DSMB of Boston Scientific, and has a leadership or fiduciary role for Biotronik. G.G.T. reports consulting fees from Biotronik, Medtronic, Abbott, and Terumo and honoraria from Biotronik, Medtronic, Abbott, and Terumo. M.J. reports grant support from Boston Scientific, Cardiac Dimensions, Edwards Lifesciences, and Infraredx; consulting fees from AlchiMedics SAS, Biotronik, TriCares, Veryan, and Shockwave; speaker fees/honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Cardiac Dimensions, AstraZeneca, Recor Medical, and Shockwave; travel support from SIS Medical, Edwards Lifesciences, Boston Scientific, and Cardiac Dimensions; and participation in Steering Committees of Biotronik and Edwards Lifesciences. R.T. reports lecture fees from Biotronik. M.W. reports speaker honoraria and conference attendance support from Biotronik. G.O. reports lecturer honoraria from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, and Cordis and is a DSMB member of the SCIENCE trial and a CEC-member of the BIOFREEDOM STEMI trial. M.H. reports grants/contracts from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, OrbusNeich, and Philips; consulting fees from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, Shockwave Medical, and OrbusNeich; honoraria/speaker fees from Biotronik, Cardiac Dimensions, Shockwave Medical, OrbusNeich, and Philips; and support to attend meetings/travel support from Biotronik, is a steering committee member of the BIOSOLVE and BIOMAG trials, and is a past president of EAPCI. All other authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Complete revascularization of the culprit and all significant nonculprit lesions in patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) and multivessel disease (MVD) reduces major adverse cardiac events, but optimal timing of revascularization remains unclear., Objectives: This study aims to compare immediate complete revascularization (ICR) and staged complete revascularization (SCR) in patients presenting with NSTE-ACS and MVD., Methods: This prespecified substudy of the BIOVASC (Percutaneous Complete Revascularization Strategies Using Sirolimus Eluting Biodegradable Polymer Coated Stents in Patients Presenting With Acute Coronary Syndrome and Multivessel Disease) trial included patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD. Risk differences of the primary composite outcome of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), unplanned ischemia-driven revascularization (UIDR), or cerebrovascular events and its individual components were compared between ICR and SCR at 1 year., Results: The BIOVASC trial enrolled 1,525 patients; 917 patients presented with NSTE-ACS, of whom 459 were allocated to ICR and 458 to SCR. Incidences of the primary composite outcome were similar in the 2 groups (7.9% vs 10.1%; risk difference 2.2%; 95% CI: -1.5 to 6.0; P = 0.15). ICR was associated with a significant reduction of MIs (2.0% vs 5.3%; risk difference 3.3%; 95% CI: 0.9 to 5.7; P = 0.006), which was maintained after exclusion of procedure-related MIs occurring during the index or staged procedure (2.0% vs 4.4%; risk difference 2.4%; 95% CI: 0.1 to 4.7; P = 0.032). UIDRs were also reduced in the ICR group (4.2% vs 7.8%; risk difference 3.5%; 95% CI: 0.4 to 6.6; P = 0.018)., Conclusions: ICR is safe in patients with NSTE-ACS and MVD and was associated with a reduction in MIs and UIDRs at 1 year., Competing Interests: Funding Support and Author Disclosures The BIOVASC trial was funded by the Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, and Biotronik SE & Co KG, Berlin. Dr Diletti has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Medtronic, ACIST Medical Systems, and Boston Scientific. Dr den Dekker has received institutional research grants from Biotronik. Dr Van Mieghem has received institutional research grants from Biotronik, Abbott, Medtronic, Edwards Lifesciences, PulseCath, Abiomed, and Daiichi-Sankyo; speaker fees from Abiomed and Amgen; and a travel grant from JenaValve. Dr Bennett has received institutional grants from Biotronik, Abbott Vascular, and Shockwave Medical. Dr Daemen has received institutional grant/research support from Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, ACIST Medical Systems, Medtronic, Microport, Pie Medical, and ReCor Medical; and consultancy and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, ACIST Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, Cardialysis BV, CardiacBooster, Kaminari Medical, ReCor Medical, PulseCath, Pie Medical, Sanofi, Siemens Healthineers, and Medtronic. All other authors have reported that they have no relationships relevant to the contents of this paper to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)