Search

Aims The aim of this analysis was to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (BES) with that of the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES). Methods and results The COMPARE II study was a prospective, randomised, multicentre, all-comers trial in which 2,707 patients were randomly allocated (2:1) to BES or EES. The pre-specified endpoint at three years was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularisation (TVR). Moreover, the combined endpoint all-cause death or MI was analysed as a safety, and TVR as an efficacy measure. Three-year follow-up was available in 2,683 patients (99.1%). At three years, MACE occurred in 213 patients (11.9%) in the BES group and in 101 patients (11.1 %) in the EES group (p=0.57). The rate of the combined safety endpoint all-cause death or MI was 9.3% in the BES group vs. 8.4% (p=0.52), while the efficacy measure TVR was 7.6% in BES vs. 6.5% (p=0.27). Interestingly, definite stent thrombosis rates did not differ between groups (1.2% for BES vs. 0.8%, p=0.33). Conclusions At three-year follow-up, MACE as well as safety and efficacy measures including stent thrombosis were not statistically different between the biodegradable polymer-coated BES and the durable polymer-coated EES. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01233453.

QUESTIONS UNDER STUDY: Head-to-head optical coherence tomography (OCT) data comparing metallic stents with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) are lacking. This study assessed vascular healing at 9-month follow-up after implantation of everolimus- and biolimus-eluting stents (EES BES) and everolimus-eluting BVS.METHODS: OCT was performed in 74 patients enrolled in the EVERBIO II (NCT01711931) trial (23 with EES: 26 lesions, 7 625 struts; 23 with BES: 26 lesions, 6 140 struts; 28 with BVS: 33 lesions, 10 891 struts). OCT images were acquired using the pullback and nonocclusive flushing technique and analysed offline.RESULTS: BVS demonstrated fewer uncovered struts per patient (12 ± 27 [3.8 ± 8.4%] vs 59 ± 55 [21.8 ± 13.7%] in the EES and BES group, p

Aims: To compare clinical outcome of Amplatzer PFO (APFO) to Cardia PFO (CPFO) occluder. Percutaneous patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure prevents stroke recurrence in stroke due to paradoxical embolism. Methods and results: The primary endpoint was a composite of stroke, TIA, or peripheral embolism at follow-up. The secondary endpoint was residual shunt. Outcome was compared among 934 (APFO: 712; CPFO: 222) patients, and in 297 propensity score-matched patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 29 patients (0.71/100 patient-years): four (2%) with the CPFO (0.31/100 patient-years), and 25 (4%) with the APFO (0.89/100 patient-years) (p=0.20). Residual shunt at six months was more frequent with the CPFO (31% versus 9%, p

BACKGROUND Coronary atherosclerosis begins early in life, but acute coronary syndromes in adults aged