Search

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JFI reports a research grant to their institution, speaker fees, and support for attending meetings from Biotronik; research grants to their institution from Abbott Vascular, Astra Zeneca, Biosensors, Concept Medical, Philips, and Terumo Corporation, outside the submitted work; and speaker fees from AstraZeneca, Biosensors, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cordis, Concept Medical, Medalliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Terumo Corporation, Pfizer, and Philips, outside the submitted work. MR reports research grants to the institution from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Cordis, Medtronic, and Terumo Corporation, outside the submitted work. SL and DH are employed by the CTU Bern, University of Bern, which has a staff policy of not accepting honoraria or consultancy fees. However, CTU Bern is involved in design, conduct, or analysis of clinical studies funded by not-for-profit and for-profit organisations. In particular, pharmaceutical and medical device companies provide direct funding to some of these studies. An up-to-date list of CTU Bern's conflicts of interest can be found online. OM reports a research grant to their institution, and speaker and personal fees from Edwards Lifesciences, outside the submitted work; and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, outside the submitted work. SD reports research grants to their institution from Abbott Vascular and Biotronik, outside the submitted work; and speaker fees from Biotronik, Medalliance, and Medtronic, outside the submitted work. LH reports research grants to their institution from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed, Amarin, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Biosense Webster, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Bracco, Bristol Myers Squibb, B-Braun, Daiichi-Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, GE HealthCare, Medtronic, Microport, Novartis, Pfizer, Vascular Medical, and Zoll, outside the submitted work; speaker fees from Medtronic, outside the submitted work; and support for attending meetings from Daiichi-Sankyo and Biotronik. CK reports consulting fees to the institution from Unimedtec Switzerland; and support for attending meetings from Medtronic, outside the submitted work. SW reports research, travel, or educational grants to their institution from Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bbraun, Biotronik, Boehringer Ingelheim, Boston Scientific, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cardinal Health, CardioValve, Cordis Medical, Corflow Therapeutics, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Edwards Lifesciences, Farapulse, Fumedica, Guerbet, Idorsia, Inari Medical, InfraRedx, Janssen-Cilag, Johnson & Johnson, Medalliance, Medicure, Medtronic, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Miracor Medical, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Organon, OrPha Suisse, Pharming Tech, Pfizer, Polares, Regeneron, Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Sinomed, Terumo Corporation, Vifor, and V-Wave; and served as an advisory board member or member of the steering or executive group of trials funded by Abbott, Abiomed, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Boston Scientific, Biotronik, Bristol Myers Squibb, Edwards Lifesciences, MedAlliance, Medtronic, Novartis, Polares, Recardio, Sinomed, Terumo Corporation, and V-Wave, with payments to the institution but no personal payments. He is also a member of the steering or executive committee group of several investigator-initiated trials that receive funding by industry without impact on his personal remuneration. TP reports a research grant to their institution from Biotronik; research, travel, or educational grants to their institution without personal remuneration from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, and ATSens, outside the submitted work; and speaker fees and consultancy fees to their institution from Abbott Vascular, Biotronik, Biosensors, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Highlife, and Medtronic, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: We investigated whether optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) implantation can improve in-scaffold minimal lumen area (MLA) at 6-month compared with angiography guidance., Methods: The OPTICO BVS was a randomized, international multicenter, assessor blind, superiority trial comparing OCT- versus angiography-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (1:1 allocation) in patients with coronary artery disease undergoing Absorb BVS 1.1 implantation. The primary endpoint was in-scaffold MLA at 6-month., Results: The trial was prematurely stopped on May 31, 2017 after enrollment of 38 of 270 planned patients (14%) following the retraction of the device in Europe. Patients were randomly assigned to OCT- (n = 19) or angiography-guided PCI (n = 19). Scaffold diameter (OCT 3.0 ± 0.3 mm vs. angiography 3.1 ± 0.3 mm, P = .333) and length (28.8 ± 13.6 mm vs. 23.8 ± 12.3 mm, P = .223) were comparable. There was no significant difference in in-scaffold MLA at 6 months (4.47mm 2 vs. 5.08mm 2 , P = .692). Scaffold expansion at 6-month was significantly higher in the OCT-guided PCI as compared with angiography-guided PCI (84.5% vs. 76.5%, P = .010). There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes., Conclusions: Although in-scaffold MLA at 6-month did not differ between groups, scaffold expansion was improved following OCT- as compared with angiography-guided PCI. The findings of this study must be interpreted in view of the premature termination with inclusion of 14% of the initially planned study sample., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Y. Ueki reports personal fees from Infraredex, outside the submitted work. E. Barbato reports personal fees from Abbott Vascular, personal fees from Boston Scientific, personal fees from GE, outside the submitted work. S. Brugaletta reports other from Boston Scientific, other from iVascular, grants from Astrazeneca, outside the submitted work. J. Hill reports grants and personal fees from Shockwave Medical, grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, grants and personal fees from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Abiomed, outside the submitted work. F. Burzotta reports personal fees from ABBOTT, personal fees from MEDTRONIC, personal fees from ABIOMED, outside the submitted work. S. Windecker reports grants from Abbott Vascular, during the conduct of the study; grants from Amgen, grants from Bayer, grants from BMS, grants from Boston Scientific, grants and personal fees from Biotronik, grants from CSL Behring, grants from Edwards Lifesciences, grants from Medtronik, grants from Polares, grants from Sinomed, outside the submitted work. L. Räber reports grants and personal fees from Abbott Vascular, during the conduct of the study; grants from Biotronik, grants from Boston Scientific, grants from HeartFlow, grants and personal fees from Sanofi, grants from Regeneron, personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from CSL Behring, personal fees from Occlutech, non-financial support from Vifor, outside the submitted work. The other author has no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Elderly patients receive bare metal stents instead of drug-eluting stents (DES) to shorten the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The SENIOR trial compared outcomes between these 2 types of stents combined with a short duration of DAPT. A significant decrease in the number of patients with at least 1 major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) was noted in the DES group., Objectives: The objective of this article was to perform an economic evaluation of the SENIOR trial., Methods: This evaluation was performed separately in 5 participating countries using pooled patient-level data from all study patients and country-specific unit costs and utility values. Costs, MACCEs, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were calculated in both arms at 1 year, and an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated. Uncertainty was explored by probabilistic bootstrapping., Results: A total of 1200 patients underwent randomization. The average total cost per patient was higher in the DES group. The number of MACCEs and average QALYs were not statistically different between the 2 groups. The 1-year incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for each country of reference ranged from €13 752 to €20 511/MACCE avoided and from €42 835 to €68 231/QALY gained. The scatter plots found a wide dispersion, reflecting a large uncertainty surrounding the results. But in each country studied, 90% of the bootstrap replications indicated a higher cost for greater effectiveness for the DES group. Assuming a willingness to pay of €50 000/QALY, there was between a 40% and 50% chance that the use of DES was cost-effective in 4 countries., Conclusion: The use of DES instead of bare metal stents combined with a short duration of DAPT in elderly patients induced higher cost for greater effectiveness in each of the 5 countries studied., (Copyright © 2019 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The advent of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) was considered as a potential improvement in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) after the groundbreaking development of drug eluting stents (DES). However, the clinical performance, long-term safety and efficacy of BVS in complex coronary lesions remain uncertain. COMPARE ABSORB, a multicenter, single blind, prospective randomized trial, aims to compare the clinical outcomes between the Absorb BVS and Xience everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in patients with coronary artery disease and a high risk of restenosis., Design: COMPARE ABSORB is designed to enroll 2100 patients at up to 45 European sites. Enrolled patients will possess high risk for restenosis due to clinical profile or coronary lesion complexity and will undergo elective or emergent PCI. Once included in the study, patients will receive either Absorb BVS or Xience EES. Specific advice on implantation technique including mandatory pre-dilatation, sizing and post-dilatation (PSP), will be used in the Absorb BVS arm. The primary endpoint is target lesion failure (TLF), a device-oriented composite endpoint (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization). The trial is powered to assess non-inferiority of Absorb BVS compared with Xience EES with a predetermined non-inferiority margin of 4.5% at 1 year after index procedure. The clinical follow-up will continue for 7 years., Conclusions: The prospective COMPARE ABSORB randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.govNCT02486068) will help to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of Absorb BVS compared with Xience EES in the treatments of patients with complex coronary artery disease and a high attendant risk of restenosis., (Copyright © 2019 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the Ultraseal device for left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) (Cardia, Eagan, Minnesota) in patients with nonvalvular atrial fibrillation at high bleeding risk., Background: The Ultraseal device is a novel bulb-and-sail designed LAAC device, with an articulating joint enabling conformability to heterogeneous angles and shapes of appendage anatomy., Methods: This was a multicenter study including consecutive patients undergoing LAAC with the Ultraseal device at 15 Canadian and European sites. Periprocedural and follow-up events were systematically collected, and transesophageal echocardiography at 45 to 180 days post-procedure was routinely performed in all centers but 3., Results: A total of 126 patients (mean age 75 ± 8 years; mean CHA 2 DS 2 -VASc score 5 ± 2; mean HAS-BLED score 4 ± 1) were included. The device was successfully implanted in 97% of patients. A major periprocedural adverse event occurred in 3 (2.4%) patients (clinically relevant pericardial effusion [n = 1], stroke [n = 1], device embolization [n = 1]). Ninety percent of patients were discharged on single or dual antiplatelet therapy. Follow-up transesophageal echocardiography was available in 89 (73%) patients, with no cases of large (>5 mm) residual leak and 5 (5.6%) cases of device-related thrombosis (all successfully treated with anticoagulation therapy). At a median follow-up of 6 (interquartile range: 3 to 10) months, the rates of stroke and transient ischemic attack were 0.8% and 0.8%, respectively, with no systemic emboli. None of the events occurred in patients with device-related thrombosis., Conclusions: In this initial multicenter experience, LAAC with the Ultraseal device was associated with a high implant success rate and a very low incidence of periprocedural complications. There were no late device-related clinical events and promising efficacy results were observed regarding thromboembolic prevention at midterm follow-up. Larger studies are further warranted to confirm the long-term safety and efficacy of this novel device., (Copyright © 2018 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents combining an ultrathin cobalt-chromium stent platform with a biodegradable polymer eluting sirolimus have been shown to be non-inferior or superior to thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents in terms of 1 year safety and efficacy outcomes., Methods: In the randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority BIOSCIENCE trial, we compared biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes. Here, we assess the final 5-year clinical outcomes of BIOSCIENCE with regards to the primary clinical outcome of target lesion failure, which was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation. The primary analysis was done by intention to treat. The BIOSCIENCE trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104., Findings: 2008 (95%) of 2119 patients recruited between March 1, 2012, and May 31, 2013, completed 5 years of follow-up. Target lesion failure occurred in 198 patients (cumulative incidence 20·2%) treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and in 189 patients (18·8%) treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (rate ratio [RR] 1·07, 95% CI 0·88-1·31; p=0·487). All-cause mortality was significantly higher in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents than in those treated with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (14·1% vs 10·3%; RR 1·36, 95% CI 1·06-1·75; p=0·017), driven by a difference in non-cardiovascular deaths. We observed no difference between groups in cumulative incidence of definite stent thrombosis at 5 years (1·6% in both groups; 1·02, 0·51-2·05; p=0·950)., Interpretation: 5-year risk of target lesion failure among all-comer patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention is similar after implantation of ultrathin-strut, biodegradable-polymer, sirolimus-eluting stents or thin-strut, durable-polymer, everolimus-eluting stents. Higher incidences of all-cause and non-cardiovascular mortality in patients treated with biodegradable-polymer stents eluting sirolimus than in those treated with durable-polymer stents eluting everolimus warrant careful observation in ongoing clinical trials., Funding: Clinical Trials Unit of the University of Bern and Biotronik., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The authors aimed to compare long-term data of an ultrathin cobalt-chromium stent with passive silicon carbide coating and an active biodegradable polymer that releases sirolimus (O-SES) (Orsiro, BIOTRONIK, Bülach, Switzerland) with the durable polymer-based Xience Prime everolimus-eluting stent (X-EES) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California)., Background: Biodegradable polymer stents have been developed aiming to overcome long-term detrimental effects of durable polymer stents, ultimately leaving a bare-metal stent in the vessel., Methods: This multicenter, assessor-blinded trial randomized 452 patients with 505 lesions to either O-SES or X-EES in a 2:1 fashion. Endpoints at 5 years were target lesion failure (TLF), its components, and stent thrombosis., Results: TLF occurred in 10.4% (n = 30) of O-SES patients versus 12.7% (n = 19) of X-EES patients (p = 0.473), overall stent thrombosis occurred in 0.7% (n = 2) versus 2.8% (n = 4) (p = 0.088), and definite stent thrombosis in 0% versus 0.7% (n = 1) (p = 0.341). Post hoc analysis was performed in diabetic patients (n = 128) and vessels ≤2.75 mm (n = 259). In diabetic patients, the O-SES group had numerically more target lesion revascularizations (13.5% vs. 4.5%; p = 0.138), but fewer cardiac deaths (1.3% vs. 6.9%; p = 0.089) and stent thrombosis (0% vs. 6.9%; p = 0.039). In small vessels, the O-SES group had a significantly lower 5-year mortality (3.7% vs. 11.3%; p = 0.022)., Conclusions: At 5 years, the biodegradable polymer O-SES demonstrated low TLF rates comparable to the durable polymer X-EES, confirming its long-term safety and performance. Particularly encouraging is the absence of definite stent thrombosis., (Copyright © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Elderly patients regularly receive bare-metal stents (BMS) instead of drug-eluting stents (DES) to shorten the duration of double antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The aim of this study was to compare outcomes between these two types of stents with a short duration of DAPT in such patients., Methods: In this randomised single-blind trial, we recruited patients from 44 centres in nine countries. Patients were eligible if they were aged 75 years or older; had stable angina, silent ischaemia, or an acute coronary syndrome; and had at least one coronary artery with a stenosis of at least 70% (≥50% for the left main stem) deemed eligible for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Exclusion criteria were indication for myocardial revascularisation by coronary artery bypass grafting; inability to tolerate, obtain, or comply with DAPT; requirement for additional surgery; non-cardiac comorbidities with a life expectancy of less than 1 year; previous haemorrhagic stroke; allergy to aspirin or P2Y 12 inhibitors; contraindication to P2Y 12 inhibitors; and silent ischaemia of less than 10% of the left myocardium with a fractional flow reserve of 0·80 or higher. After the intended duration of DAPT was recorded (1 month for patients with stable presentation and 6 months for those with unstable presentation), patients were randomly allocated (1:1) by a central computer system (blocking used with randomly selected block sizes [two, four, eight, or 16]; stratified by site and antiplatelet agent) to either a DES or similar BMS in a single-blind fashion (ie, patients were masked), but those assessing outcomes were masked. The primary outcome was to compare major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (ie, a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation) between groups at 1 year in the intention-to-treat population, assessed at 30 days, 180 days, and 1 year. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02099617., Findings: Between May 21, 2014, and April 16, 2016, we randomly assigned 1200 patients (596 [50%] to the DES group and 604 [50%] to the BMS group). The primary endpoint occurred in 68 (12%) patients in the DES group and 98 (16%) in the BMS group (relative risk [RR] 0·71 [95% CI 0·52-0·94]; p=0·02). Bleeding complications (26 [5%] in the DES group vs 29 [5%] in the BMS group; RR 0·90 [0·51-1·54]; p=0·68) and stent thrombosis (three [1%] vs eight [1%]; RR 0·38 [0·00-1·48]; p=0·13) at 1 year were infrequent in both groups., Interpretation: Among elderly patients who have PCI, a DES and a short duration of DAPT are better than BMS and a similar duration of DAPT with respect to the occurrence of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation. A strategy of combination of a DES to reduce the risk of subsequent repeat revascularisations with a short BMS-like DAPT regimen to reduce the risk of bleeding event is an attractive option for elderly patients who have PCI., Funding: Boston Scientific., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data from randomized controlled trials have shown that the ABSORB BVS is non-inferior to Cobalt Chromium everolimus-eluting stents at 2years., Methods & Results: The EVERBIO II trial (Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents with Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold) is a single-center, assessor-blind, randomized controlled trial enrolling 240 patients with an allocation ration of 1:1:1 conducted at University and Hospital Fribourg, Switzerland. The studied devices were an everolimus-eluting persistent polymer stent (EES), a biolimus-eluting stent with bioabsorbable polymer (BES) and a fully bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS). Clinical end points collected at 9months, 12months, and 2years, were academic research consortium defined composites, device thrombosis and target-vessel revascularization. Clinical follow-up at 2years was available in 96% (N=77) of patients in the EES group, in 100% (N=80) in the BES and 99% (N=77) in the BVS group. The device-oriented composite end point of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularization occurred in 13 (16%) patients treated with EES, in 7 (9%) patients treated with BES and in 16 (21%) patients treated with BVS. There was no significant difference when the metallic stents were compared to the BVS (p=0.12). There was one late scaffold thrombosis throughout the trial in the BVS group, and no definite stent thrombosis in either EES or BES treated patients., Conclusions: The current analysis shows no significant differences with regard to clinical outcomes at 2years between BVS and the best-in-class metallic DES. Event rates were numerically higher in BVS-treated patients. However, when BVS were compared to BES alone, the occurrence of device related adverse events was significantly increased., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been associated with local endothelial dysfunction in the segments proximal and distal to the stent (peristent segments) and increased thrombotic risk in long term follow-up. Little data exists on endothelial function post-implantation of new DES with biodegradable polymer. The aim of our study was to compare the local endothelial function assessed by exercise induced coronary vasomotion after implantation of a biolimus A9-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer (BES) with an everolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer (EES)., Methods: Coronary vasomotion was evaluated with quantitative coronary angiography at rest and during supine bicycle exercise in nine patients with EES and thirteen patients with BES, 16 months after stent implantation. Mean luminal diameter of the stent, peristent segments, and of a control vessel were determined at rest, during exercise, and after the administration of nitroglycerine., Results: The control vessel showed exercise-induced vasodilatation in both groups (EES: +6.4±5.5%, p=0.07; BES: +7.8±10.1%, p=0.07). Vasomotion in the stented vessel segment was abolished. There was exercise-induced vasoconstriction in both groups in the segments proximal (EES: -9.6±4.5%; p=0.03; BES: -4.3±5.4%, p=0.02) and distal to the stent (EES: -3.2±9.3%; p=0.41, BES -8.6±8.0%, p<0.01). Sublingual nitroglycerin was associated with maximal vasodilatation of the peristent segments in both groups., Conclusion: Alike DES with durable polymer, stents with a biodegradable polymer are associated with exercise-induced paradoxical coronary vasoconstriction of the peristent segments. This data suggests that endothelial dysfunction after DES implantation is not primarily caused by the durability of the polymer coating., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Refinements in stent design affecting strut thickness, surface polymer, and drug release have improved clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a novel, ultrathin strut cobalt-chromium stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer with a thin strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent., Methods: We did a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial with minimum exclusion criteria at nine hospitals in Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents. Randomisation was via a central web-based system and stratified by centre and presence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians were not. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularisation at 12 months. A margin of 3·5% was defined for non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104., Findings: Between Feb 24, 2012, and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned 2119 patients with 3139 lesions to treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents (1063 patients, 1594 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (1056 patients, 1545 lesions). 407 (19%) patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Target lesion failure with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (69 cases; 6·5%) was non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (70 cases; 6·6%) at 12 months (absolute risk difference -0·14%, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·97%, p for non-inferiority <0·0004). No significant differences were noted in rates of definite stent thrombosis (9 [0·9%] vs 4 [0·4%], rate ratio [RR] 2·26, 95% CI 0·70-7·33, p=0·16). In pre-specified stratified analyses of the primary endpoint, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with improved outcome compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7 [3·3%] vs 17 [8·7%], RR 0·38, 95% CI 0·16-0·91, p=0·024, p for interaction=0·014)., Interpretation: In a patient population with minimum exclusion criteria and high adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for the combined safety and efficacy outcome target lesion failure at 12 months. The noted benefit in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction needs further study., Funding: Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, and Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to compare the efficacy of passive stent coating with titanium-nitride-oxide (TiNO) with drug-eluting stents releasing zotarolimus (ZES) (Endeavor, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota)., Background: Stent coating with TiNO has been shown to reduce restenosis compared with bare-metal stents in experimental and clinical studies., Methods: In an assessor-blind noninferiority study, 302 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to treatment with TiNO or ZES. The primary endpoint was in-stent late loss at 6 to 8 months, and analysis was by intention to treat., Results: Both groups were well balanced with respect to baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. The TiNO group failed to reach the pre-specified noninferiority margin for the primary endpoint (in-stent late loss: 0.64 ± 0.61 mm vs. 0.47 ± 0.48 mm, difference: 0.16, upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.26; p(noninferiority) = 0.54), and subsequent superiority testing was in favor of ZES (p(superiority) = 0.02). In-segment binary restenosis was lower with ZES (11.1%) than with TiNO (20.5%; p(superiority) = 0.04). A stratified analysis of the primary endpoint found particularly pronounced differences between stents among diabetic versus nondiabetic patients (0.90 ± 0.69 mm vs. 0.39 ± 0.38 mm; p(interaction) = 0.04). Clinical outcomes showed a similar rate of death (0.7% vs. 0.7%; p = 1.00), myocardial infarction (5.3% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.60), and major adverse cardiac events (21.1% vs. 18.0%, hazard ratio: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.71 to 2.00; p = 0.50) at 1 year. There were no differences in rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 0%; p = 0.51) at 1 year., Conclusions: Compared with TiNO, ZES was superior with regard to late loss and binary restenosis. The concept of passive stent coating with TiNO remains inferior to drug-eluting stent technology in reducing restenosis. ([TIDE] Randomized Trial Comparing Titan Stent With Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent: NCT00492908)., (Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Mechanisms underlying improvement of myocardial contractile function after cell therapy as well as arrhythmic side effect remain poorly understood. We hypothesised that cell therapy might affect the mechanical properties of isolated host cardiomyocytes., Methods: Two weeks after myocardial infarction (MI), rats were treated by intramyocardial myoblast injection (SkM, n=8), intramyocardial vehicle injection (Medium, n=6), or sham operation (Sham, n=7). Cardiac function was assessed by echocardiography. Cardiomyocytes were isolated in a modified Langendorff perfusion system, their contraction was measured by video-based inter-sarcomeric analysis. Data were compared with a control-group without myocardial infarction (Control, n=5)., Results: Three weeks post-treatment, ejection fraction (EF) further deteriorated in vehicle-injected and non-injected rats (respectively 40.7+/-11.4% to 33+/-5.5% and 41.8+/-8% to 33.5+/-8.3%), but was stabilised in SkM group (35.9+/-6% to 36.4+/-9.7%). Significant cell hypertrophy induced by MI was maintained after cell therapy. Single cell contraction (dL/dt(max)) decreased in SkM and vehicle groups compared to non-injected group as well as cell shortening and relaxation (dL/dt(min)) in vehicle group. A significantly increased predisposition for alternation of strong and weak contractions was observed in isolated cardiomyocytes of the SkM group., Conclusion: Our study provides the first evidence that injection of materials into the myocardium alters host cardiomyocytes contractile function independently of the global beneficial effect of the heart function. These findings may be important in understanding possible adverse effects., (Copyright (c) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Transient apical ballooning syndrome (TABS) or Takotsubo cardiomyopathy mimics acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction, but is considered to have a good prognosis with only moderate elevation of myocardial enzymes and full recovery of left ventricular function. Although it is increasingly reported, its exact incidence, clinical presentation, and prognosis in non-Asian populations remain largely unknown., Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics and long-term follow-up of patients who presented with TABS at our institution over a 3 year-period., Methods: Patients were retrospectively retrieved from our local database. Patient charts were carefully reviewed and the diagnosis of TABS was based on the Mayo Clinic diagnostic criteria. Moreover, psychosocial stress or gastrointestinal disease was recorded., Results: During the study period, 13,715 coronary angiographies were performed at our institution, including 2459 patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Forty-one TABS were diagnosed, which represents an incidence of 1.7% of ACS-patients and 0.3% of all coronary angiographies performed, respectively. Mean age was 65 years, with 85% women. Clinical presentations included chest pain, dyspnoea, and cardiogenic shock. A preceding psychological or physical condition perceived as "stress" was reported in 61%. At a mean follow-up of 675+/-288 days, none of the patients died of cardiac causes, but two patients had a recurrence of symptoms., Conclusions: This is the largest cohort of TABS patients reported out of Europe so far. The good overall prognosis and low likelihood of recurrence were confirmed.

Morbidity and mortality related to coronary artery disease (CAD) remain a great challenge in patients with diabetes mellitus. Revascularization of CAD is an important therapeutic intervention owing to its impact on both symptoms and prognosis. The optimal revascularization strategy continues to evolve due to the advent of new technologies and improved peri-procedural outcome with both percutaneous coronary interventions and coronary artery bypass grafting. Although clinical outcome following coronary artery bypass is worse in diabetic as opposed to non-diabetic patients, surgical revascularization tends to be associated with better outcome in stable patients with multivessel disease and reduced left ventricular function. The advent of drug-eluting stents has challenged the supremacy of coronary artery bypass grafting and has become a valuable alternative to surgery. The safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of patients with diabetes and multivessel disease is currently under investigation in several ongoing randomized controlled trials. Percutaneous coronary intervention is the therapy of choice in patients with acute coronary syndromes, particularly ST-elevation myocardial infarction. The focus of this review is to present the current evidence, define the role of percutaneous and surgical revascularization in the treatment of diabetic patients with CAD, and propose a tailored approach for clinical decision-making.

Objective: The tradition of yearly reports on cardiac catheter interventions in Europe has been initiated in 1992. This 11th report presents aggregated data on cardiac catheter procedures in 30 European countries in the year 2002., Design and Setting: A detailed questionnaire addressing summary data of all cardiac interventions was mailed to presidents or delegates of the national societies of cardiology in Europe. The questionnaire was distributed to all institutions with cardiac catheterisation programs. All questionnaires were compiled in a national summary data sheet, then entered into a central database and subsequently analysed., Main Outcome Measures: Coronary angiography, PTCA, and stenting in absolute numbers and per million inhabitants in the participating countries and the whole of Europe., Results: Overall, 1,901,932 coronary angiograms were reported. The population-adjusted rate of coronary angiograms amounted to an absolute mean of 3358 per 10(6) inhabitants, an increase of 7% compared with 2001. A total of 686,869 PTCA procedures were reported. The mean European number of PTCAs per 10(6) inhabitants increased by 10% from 1103 in 2001 to 1213 in 2002. Procedures with stenting increased by 17% from 508,999 to 593,906. The stenting rate was 86% compared with 82% in 2001., Conclusions: In pace with epidemiological demand and the need to catch-up from underuse in certain countries, a continuous and considerable growth of coronary interventions can be observed. It will take years to find out whether the announced change of paradigm in the treatment of multivessel disease in the wake of drug-eluting stents will come true.