Search

Aims: To investigate geographic disparity in long-term mortality following revascularization in patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD)., Methods and Results: The SYNTAXES trial randomized 1800 patients with three-vessel and/or left main CAD to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and assessed their survival at 10 years. Patients were stratified according to the region of recruitment: North America (N-A, n = 245), Eastern Europe (E-E, n = 189), Northern Europe (N-E, n = 425), Southern Europe (S-E, n = 263), and Western Europe (W-E, n = 678), which also served as the reference group. Compared to W-E, patients were younger in E-E (62 vs 65 years, p < 0.001), and less frequently male in N-A (65.3% vs 79.6%, p < 0.001). Diabetes (16.0% vs 25.4%, p < 0.001) and peripheral vascular disease (6.8% vs 10.9%, p = 0.025) were less frequent in N-E than W-E. Ejection fraction was highest in W-E (62% vs 56%, p < 0.001). Compared to W-E, the mean anatomic SYNTAX score was higher in S-E (29 vs 31, p = 0.008) and lower in N-A (26, p < 0.001). Crude ten-year mortality was similar in N-A (31.6%), and W-E (30.7%), and significantly lower in E-E (22.5%, p = 0.041), N-E (21.9%, p = 0.003) and S-E (22.0%, p = 0.014). Compared to W-E, adjusted mortality in N-E (HR 0.85, p = 0.019) and S-E (HR 0.72, p = 0.043) remain significantly lower after adjustment for pre- and peri-procedural factors, but no significant interaction (P interaction  = 0.728) between region and modality of revascularization was seen., Conclusion: In the era of globalization, knowledge, and understanding of geographic disparity are of paramount importance for the correct interpretation of global studies., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To analyze the clinical outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using the Xience drug eluting stent (DES) versus other modern DES., Methods: This retrospective study based on the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) analyzed the outcome of PCI using Xience versus other commonly used modern DES, 2007 to 2017. The primary outcome measure was a combination of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) and revascularisation with PCI. Angiographical outcome measures were in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST)., Results: Rates of the primary outcome measure for Xience and other DES were 31.9% and 28.2% respectively, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.99 (95% CI 0.95-1.03). Crude rates of ISR were 2.9% versus 2.1% over 4.3 and 2.9 years respectively, adjusted HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.81-1.06). Crude rates of ST were 0.9% versus 0.7%, adjusted HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.82-1.39). Results were consistent in all sensitivity analyses., Conclusions: This nationally complete, real-world study confirms that Xience is a safe and effective DES with low-event rates of ISR and ST. Compared with a control group containing a large proportion of thinner strut stents and absorbable polymers, Xience exhibits similar results in all important clinical endpoints., (© 2021 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the real-world clinical performance of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stent (DES) (Orsiro) in a large nationwide cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)., Methods and Results: From the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, the two-year outcomes of 4,561 patients implanted with Orsiro (Orsiro group) and 69,570 receiving other newer-generation DES (n-DES group) were analysed. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was low in both groups (0.67% and 0.83% for Orsiro and n-DES, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.46, p-value 0.66). Restenosis was also infrequent (1.5% vs 2.0% with Orsiro and n-DES, adjusted HR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.63-1.03, p-value=0.09). The risk of target lesion revascularisation by PCI was lower in the Orsiro group (1.6% vs 2.3%, adjusted HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.60-0.94, p-value=0.013). All-cause mortality and myocardial infarction did not show a statistically significant difference between the two groups (mortality of 7.5% in both groups, adjusted HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.72-1.35, p-value=0.94; 6.0% vs 5.2% for myocardial infarction, adjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.00-1.43, p-value=0.06)., Conclusions: In a nationwide scenario, the use of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut DES portended favourable clinical outcomes.

Background: The results of a recent meta-analysis aroused concern about an increased risk of death associated with the use of paclitaxel-coated angioplasty balloons and stents in lower-limb endovascular interventions for symptomatic peripheral artery disease., Methods: We conducted an unplanned interim analysis of data from a multicenter, randomized, open-label, registry-based clinical trial. At the time of the analysis, 2289 patients had been randomly assigned to treatment with drug-coated devices (the drug-coated-device group, 1149 patients) or treatment with uncoated devices (the uncoated-device group, 1140 patients). Randomization was stratified according to disease severity on the basis of whether patients had chronic limb-threatening ischemia (1480 patients) or intermittent claudication (809 patients). The single end point for this interim analysis was all-cause mortality., Results: No patients were lost to follow-up. Paclitaxel was used as the coating agent for all the drug-coated devices. During a mean follow-up of 2.49 years, 574 patients died, including 293 patients (25.5%) in the drug-coated-device group and 281 patients (24.6%) in the uncoated-device group (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.92 to 1.22). At 1 year, all-cause mortality was 10.2% (117 patients) in the drug-coated-device group and 9.9% (113 patients) in the uncoated-device group. During the entire follow-up period, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death between the treatment groups among patients with chronic limb-threatening ischemia (33.4% [249 patients] in the drug-coated-device group and 33.1% [243 patients] in the uncoated-device group) or among those with intermittent claudication (10.9% [44 patients] and 9.4% [38 patients], respectively)., Conclusions: In this randomized trial in which patients with peripheral artery disease received treatment with paclitaxel-coated or uncoated endovascular devices, the results of an unplanned interim analysis of all-cause mortality did not show a difference between the groups in the incidence of death during 1 to 4 years of follow-up. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02051088.)., (Copyright © 2020 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: We hypothesized that the transition from bare-metal stents (BMS) to newer generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES) in clinical practice may have reduced the risk also in patients with kidney dysfunction., Methods: Observational study in the national SWEDEHEART registry, that compared the 1-year risk of in-stent restenosis (RS) and stent thrombosis (ST) in all percutaneous coronary intervention treated patients(n = 92 994) during 2007-2013., Results: N-DES patients were younger than BMS, but had more often diabetes, previous myocardial infarction, previous revascularization and were more often treated with potent platelet inhibition. N-DES versus BMS, was associated with lower 1-year risk of RS in patients with estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) >60 with a cumulative probability of 2.1% versus 5.3%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.30, 95% CI (0.27-0.34) and with eGFR 30-60: 3.0% versus 4.9%; hazard ratio 0.46 (0.36-0.60) but not in patients with eGFR <30: 8.1% versus 6.0%; hazard ratio 1.32 (0.71-2.45) (pinteraction = 0.009) as well as lower risk of ST for eGFR >60 and eGFR 30-60: 0.5% versus 0.9%; hazard ratio 0.52 (0.40-0.68) and 0.6% versus 1.3%; hazard ratio 0.54 (0.54-0.72) but not for eGFR <30; 2.1% versus 1.1%; hazard ratio 1.49 (0.56-3.98) (pinteraction = 0.027)., Conclusion: N-DES is associated with lower 1-year risk of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis in patients with normal or moderately reduced kidney function but not in patients with severe kidney dysfunction, where stenting is associated with worse outcomes regardless of stent type.

Aims: Randomized clinical trials have consistently demonstrated the non-inferiority of bioabsorbable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) with respect to DES having permanent polymers (PP-DES). To date, the comparative performance of BP- and PP-DES in the real world has not been extensively investigated., Methods and Results: From October 2011 to June 2016, we analysed the outcomes associated with newer generation DES use in Sweden. After stratification according to the type of DES received at the index procedure, a total of 16 504 and 79 106 stents were included in the BP- and PP-DES groups, respectively. The Kaplan-Meier estimates for restenosis at 2 years were 1.2% and 1.4% in BP- and PP-DES groups, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) was low in both groups (0.5% and 0.7% in BP- and PP-DES groups, respectively). The adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for either restenosis or definite ST did not differ between BP- and PP-DES [adjusted HR 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74-1.21; P = 0.670 and adjusted HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.57-1.09; P = 0.151, respectively]. Similarly, there were no differences in the adjusted risk of all-cause death and myocardial infarction (MI) between the two groups (adjusted HR for all-cause death 1.01, 95% CI 0.82-1.25; P = 0.918 and adjusted HR for MI 1.05, 95% CI 0.93-1.19; P = 0.404)., Conclusion: In a large, nationwide, and unselected cohort of patients, percutaneous coronary intervention with BP-DES implantation was not associated with an incremental clinical benefit over PP-DES use at 2 years follow-up., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2019. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

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., (© 2019 The Authors. The European Heart Journal is published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology, Inc., by Oxford University Press. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made.)

Background: The optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in high-bleeding risk (HBR) patients with coronary artery disease treated with newer-generation drug-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stents remains unclear., Design: MASTER DAPT (clinicaltrial.govNCT03023020) is an investigator-initiated, open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial comparing an abbreviated versus a standard duration of antiplatelet therapy after bioresorbable polymer-coated Ultimaster (TANSEI) sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in approximately 4,300 HBR patients recruited from ≥100 interventional cardiology centers globally. After a mandatory 30-day dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) run-in phase, patients are randomized to (a) a single antiplatelet regimen until study completion or up to 5 months in patients with clinically indicated oral anticoagulation (experimental 1-month DAPT group) or (b) continue DAPT for at least 5 months in patients without or 2 in patients with concomitant indication to oral anticoagulation, followed by a single antiplatelet regimen (standard antiplatelet regimen). With a final sample size of 4,300 patients, this study is powered to assess the noninferiority of the abbreviated antiplatelet regimen with respect to the net adverse clinical and major adverse cardiac and cerebral events composite end points and if satisfied for the superiority of abbreviated as compared to standard antiplatelet therapy duration in terms of major or clinically relevant nonmajor bleeding. Study end points will be adjudicated by a blinded Clinical Events Committee., Conclusions: The MASTER DAPT study is the first randomized controlled trial aiming at ascertaining the optimal duration of antiplatelet therapy in HBR patients treated with sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer-coated stent implantation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Old-generation drug-eluting coronary stents (o-DES) have despite being safe and effective been associated with an increased propensity of late stent thrombosis (ST). We evaluated ST rates in o-DES, new-generation DES (n-DES) and bare metal stents (BMS) the first year (< 1 year) and beyond 1 year (> 1 year)., Methods: We evaluated all implantations with BMS, o-DES (Cordis Cypher, Boston Scientific Taxus Liberté and Medtronic Endeavor) and n-DES in the Swedish coronary angiography and angioplasty registry (SCAAR) between 1 January 2007 and 8 January 2014 (n = 207 291). All cases of ST (n = 2 268) until 31 December 2014 were analyzed., Results: The overall risk of ST was lower in both n-DES and o-DES compared with BMS up to 1 year (n-DES versus BMS: adjusted risk ratio (RR) 0.48 (0.41-0.58) and o-DES versus BMS: 0.56 (0.46-0.67), both p < 0.001). From 1 year after stent implantation and onward, the risk for ST was higher in o-DES compared with BMS [adjusted RR, 1.82 (1.47-2.25], p < 0.001). N-DES were associated with similar low ST rates as BMS from 1 year and onward [adjusted RR 1.21 (0.94-1.56), p = 0.135]., Conclusion: New-generation DES were associated with lower ST rates in comparison to BMS during the first-year post-stenting. After 1 year, n-DES and BMS were associated with similar ST rates., Trial Registration: This study was a retrospective observational study and as such did not require clinical trial database registration.

Aims: The clinical performance of the SYNERGY drug-eluting stent (DES) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) has not been investigated in detail. We sought to report on the outcomes after SYNERGY DES (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA, USA) implantation in patients with MI undergoing percutaneous revascularisation (PCI)., Methods and Results: We included all consecutive patients with MI undergoing PCI with the SYNERGY DES and newer-generation DES (n-DES group) in Sweden. From March 2013 to September 2016, a total of 36,292 patients, of whom 39.7% presented with ST-elevation MI, were included. As compared to patients in the n-DES group (n=31,403), patients in the SYNERGY group (n=4,889) were older and presented more often with left main or three-vessel disease involvement, as well as with restenotic lesions (p<0.001 for all parameters). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of ST at two years in the SYNERGY and n-DES groups were 0.69% and 0.81%, respectively (adjusted HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.69-1.46; p=0.99). Clinically relevant restenosis was encountered in 1.48% and 1.25% of patients in the SYNERGY and n-DES groups, respectively (adjusted HR 1.05, 95% CI: 0.81-1.37; p=0.72). No differences in the risk of all-cause death and recurrent MI were found between the two groups after adjustment (adjusted HR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.98-1.28; p=0.10, and adjusted HR 0.95, 95% CI: 0.82-1.10; p=0.49, respectively)., Conclusions: In a large and unselected cohort of patients with MI undergoing percutaneous revascularisation with the SYNERGY DES, stent performance and clinical outcomes did not differ compared with other n-DES up to two years.

Aims: Randomised trials indicate higher rates of stent thrombosis (ST) and target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) compared with modern drug-eluting stents (DES). We aimed to investigate the outcome of all Swedish patients treated with the Absorb BRS., Methods and Results: The Absorb BRS (n=810) was compared with commonly used modern DES (n=67,909). The main outcome measure was definite ST; mean follow-up was two years. Despite being implanted in a younger, lower-risk population compared with modern DES, the Absorb BRS was associated with a higher crude incidence of definite ST at stent level: 1.5 vs. 0.6%, hazard ratio (HR) 2.38 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.34-4.23), adjusted HR 4.34 (95% CI: 2.37-7.94); p<0.001. The patient level adjusted HR was 4.44 (95% CI: 2.25-8.77). Rates of in-stent restenosis were similar for BRS and DES. Non-compliance with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) guidelines was noted in six out of 12 BRS ST events. Three very late ST events occurred with the Absorb BRS., Conclusions: In this real-world observational study, the Absorb BRS was associated with a significantly higher risk of definite ST compared with modern DES. Non-compliance with DAPT guideline recommendations was common among Absorb definite ST events.

Background: No previous studies have evaluated the performance of the Synergy stent in a large real-life population., Objectives: To describe the initial real-life experience with a novel everolimus eluting platinum chromium stent with abluminal biodegradable polymer (SYNERGY) in unselected patients from a nationwide registry., Methods: All implanted Synergy stents were compared with other new generation drug eluting stents (n-DES) with >1,000 implantations in Sweden between March 2013 and October 2015. Restenosis, definite stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI) and death rates were assessed using propensity score and Cox regression analyses., Results: A total of 7,886 of Synergy stents and 64,429 other n-DES (BioMatrix, N = 1,953; Orsiro, N = 4,946; Promus Element Plus, N= 2,543; Promus Premier, N= 20,414; Xience Xpedition, N= 7,971, Resolute/Resolute Integrity, N = 19,021; Ultimaster, N = 1,156; Resolute Onyx, N = 6,425) were implanted in 42,357 procedures. Restenosis and stent thrombosis occurred in 642 and 314 cases, respectively, in the overall population at 1 year. The cumulative rate of restenosis (1.1% vs. 1.0%, adjusted HR: 1.24 95% CI: 0.88-1.75; P = 0.21) and ST (0.4% vs. 0.5%, adjusted HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.63-1.50; P = 0.17) up to 1 year was low in both the Synergy group and the other n-DES group. Death occurred in 5.2% versus 4.5% (adjusted HR: 1.14; 95% CI: 0.96-1.36; P = 0.11) and MI in 3.2% versus 3.5%, (adjusted HR: 1.11; 95% CI: 0.93-1.33; P = 0.24) up to 1 year., Conclusions: In a large real-life population the Synergy stent appears to be safe and effective with a low rate of restenosis and ST comparable with other n-DES. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc., (© 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

The evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention has been considerable. Coronary stents were introduced to avoid vessel recoil and reduce acute and late vessel complications. Later, drug-eluting stents were developed to decrease the neointimal hyperplasia associated with bare metal stents in order to reduce restenosis. However, very late stent thrombosis remains problematic, and the permanent presence of a metal stent could be associated with local inflammation and impaired vascular physiology. Thus, bioresorbable stents have been developed, to prevent recoil initially when this risk is the highest, with subsequent degradation over time, to avoid long-term complications of the presence of stents in the coronary vasculature. Here, we review the current status of bioresorbable stents in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), with focus on the platforms that have been studied the most: ABSORB, DESolve, and DREAMS. In terms of clinical outcomes, bioresorbable stents have not yet shown superiority compared with current generation drug-eluting stents, but rather a signal of increased stent thrombosis. Further development and longer-term studies are needed before the routine implementation of bioresorbable stents in clinical practice.

The evaluation for European Union market approval of coronary stents falls under the Medical Device Directive that was adopted in 1993. Specific requirements for the assessment of coronary stents are laid out in supplementary advisory documents. In response to a call by the European Commission to make recommendations for a revision of the advisory document on the evaluation of coronary stents (Appendix 1 of MEDDEV 2.7.1), the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI) established a Task Force to develop an expert advisory report. As basis for its report, the ESC-EAPCI Task Force reviewed existing processes, established a comprehensive list of all coronary drug-eluting stents that have received a CE mark to date, and undertook a systematic review of the literature of all published randomized clinical trials evaluating clinical and angiographic outcomes of coronary artery stents between 2002 and 2013. Based on these data, the TF provided recommendations to inform a new regulatory process for coronary stents. The main recommendations of the task force include implementation of a standardized non-clinical assessment of stents and a novel clinical evaluation pathway for market approval. The two-stage clinical evaluation plan includes recommendation for an initial pre-market trial with objective performance criteria (OPC) benchmarking using invasive imaging follow-up leading to conditional CE-mark approval and a subsequent mandatory, large-scale randomized trial with clinical endpoint evaluation leading to unconditional CE-mark. The data analysis from the systematic review of the Task Force may provide a basis for determination of OPC for use in future studies. This paper represents an executive summary of the Task Force's report., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2015. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Aim: The aim of this study was to establish safety and efficacy of a new sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer, Ultimaster (BP-SES). Sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer was compared with everolimus-eluting, permanent polymer, Xience stent (PP-EES) in the frame of a CENTURY II clinical trial designed to make global clinical data compliant with regulatory requirements in Europe and Japan., Methods and Results: The CENTURY II is a prospective, multicentre, randomized (1 : 1), single blind, controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial conducted at 58 study sites in Japan, Europe, and Korea. A total of 1123 patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedure, with implantation of drug-eluting stent (DES), were enrolled [total population (TP)]. Randomization of patients was stratified for the subset of patients matching requirements for DES in Japan (Cohort JR, n = 722). Baseline patient demographic and angiographic characteristics were similar in both study arms, with minimal differences between the TP and Cohort JR. The primary endpoint, freedom from target lesion failure (TLF) at 9 months-TLF [composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI) and target lesion revascularization]-was 95.6% with BP-SES and 95.1% with PP-EES (Pnon-inferiority<0.0001). Composite of cardiac death and MI rate was 2.9 and 3.8% (P = 0.40) and target vessel revascularization was 4.5% with BP-SES and 4.2% with PP-EES (P = 0.77). The stent thrombosis rate was 0.9% in both arms. In Cohort JR, freedom from TLF was 95.9 and 94.6% (Pnon-inferiority < 0.0005) with BP-SES and PP-EES, respectively., Conclusion: The new bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent showed safety and efficacy profiles similar to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent at 9-month follow-up., Study Registration Number: UMIN000006940., (Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author 2014. For permissions please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Some concerns still have not been resolved about the long-term safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with acute STEMI., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the stent thrombosis (ST) rate up to 3 years in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated by primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) and old-generation drug-eluting stents (o-DES) enrolled in the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry)., Methods: From January 2007 to January 2013, 34,147 patients with STEMI were treated by PCI with n-DES (n = 4,811), o-DES (n = 4,271), or BMS (n = 25,065). The risks of early/late (up to 1 year) and very late definite ST (after 1 year) were estimated., Results: Cox regression landmark analysis showed a significantly lower risk of early/late ST in patients treated with n-DES (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.43 to 0.99; p = 0.04) and o-DES (HR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.89; p = 0.01) compared with the BMS group. The risk of very late ST was similar between the n-DES and BMS groups (HR: 1.52; 95% CI: 0.78 to 2.98; p = 0.21), whereas a higher risk of very late ST was observed with o-DES compared with BMS (HR: 2.88; 95% CI: 1.70 to 4.89; p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Patients treated with n-DES have a lower risk of early/late ST than patients treated with BMS. The risk of very late ST is low and comparable between n-DES and BMS up to 3 years of follow-up, whereas o-DES treatment is associated with an increased risk of very late ST. The current STEMI guidelines might require an update in light of the results of this and other recent studies., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of lesions in the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) may confer a worse prognosis compared with the proximal right coronary artery (RCA) and left circumflex coronary artery (LCX)., Methods: From May 2005, to May 2011 we identified all PCIs for proximal, one-vessel coronary artery disease in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR). We evaluated restenosis, stent thrombosis (ST) and mortality in the LAD as compared to the RCA and LCX according to stent type, bare metal (BMS) or drug-eluting stents (DES)., Results: 7840 single vessel proximal PCI procedures were identified. Mean follow-up time was 792 days. No differences in restenosis or ST were seen between the LAD and the RCA. The frequency of restenosis and ST was higher in the proximal LAD compared to the proximal LCX (restenosis: hazard ratio (HR) 2.28, confidence interval (CI) 1.56-3.34 p<0.001; ST: HR 2.32, CI 1.11-4.85 p=0.024). We found no difference in mortality related to coronary artery. In the proximal LAD, DES implantation was associated with a lower restenosis rate (HR 0.39, CI 0.27-0.55 p<0.001) and mortality (HR 0.58, CI 0.41-0.82 p=0.002) compared with BMS. In the proximal RCA and LCX, DES use was not associated with lower frequency of clinical restenosis or mortality., Conclusions: Following proximal coronary artery intervention restenosis was more frequent in the LAD than in the LCX. Solely in the proximal LAD we found DES use to be associated with a lower risk of restenosis and death weighted against BMS., (© 2013.)

Background: The safety and efficacy of the Promus Element stent have been recently demonstrated in a selected population from one randomized trial. The aim of this study was to describe the initial clinical experience with the everolimus eluting platinum chromium stent (Promus Element) in unselected patients from a real life nationwide registry., Methods: The Promus Element DES was compared to all other DES implanted in Sweden (with more than 500 implants) from November 2009 to March 2011. The results were assessed using Cox regression., Results: A total of 13,577 stents (Promus Element, n=2724, Cypher, n=782; Endeavor, n=747; Taxus Liberté, n=1393, Xience V/Promus, n=4832, Resolute, n=1566, Xience Prime, n=4832) were implanted at 8375 procedures. At one year the restenosis rate in the Promus Element was not significantly different from the overall DES group (2.8% vs. 2.7%, adjusted HR:1.17, 95% CI: 0.75-1.75). A significantly lower restenosis rate was observed in the Promus Element when compared with Endeavor (2.8% vs. 5.8%; adjusted HR: 0.44; 95% CI: 0.26-0.74). The stent thrombosis (ST) rate at one year was not significantly different in the Promus Element as compared with the overall DES group (0.2% vs. 0.5% adjusted HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 025-1.40). ST rate was significantly lower as compared with Endeavor stent (0.2% vs. 0.8%; HR: 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.67)., Conclusions: In a large unselected population the Promus Element stent appears to be safe and effective with a low risk of restenosis and ST., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to report the 5-year follow-up results of the Nordic Bifurcation Study., Background: Randomized clinical trials with short-term follow-up have indicated that coronary bifurcation lesions may be optimally treated using the optional side branch stenting strategy., Methods: A total of 413 patients with a coronary bifurcation lesion were randomly assigned to a simple stenting strategy of main vessel (MV) and optional stenting of side branch (SB) or to a complex stenting strategy, namely, stenting of both MV and SB., Results: Five-year clinical follow-up data were available for 404 (98%) patients. The combined safety and efficacy endpoint of cardiac death, non-procedure-related myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization were seen in 15.8% in the optional SB stenting group as compared to 21.8% in the MV and SB stenting group (p = 0.15). All-cause death was seen in 5.9% versus 10.4% (p = 0.16) and non-procedure-related myocardial infarction in 4% versus 7.9% (p = 0.09) in the optional SB stenting group versus the MV and SB stenting group, respectively. The rates of target vessel revascularization were 13.4% versus 18.3% (p = 0.14) and the rates of definite stent thrombosis were 3% versus 1.5% (p = 0.31) in the optional SB stenting group versus the MV and SB stenting group, respectively., Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up in the Nordic Bifurcation Study, the clinical outcomes after simple optional side branch stenting remained at least equal to the more complex strategy of planned stenting of both the main vessel and the side branch., (Copyright © 2013 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-coated balloons (DCBs) have been developed for the percutaneous treatment of coronary artery disease. An initial focus has been the management of in-stent restenosis (ISR) but randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been small and powered only for angiographic endpoints., Objective: The aim of the work was to assess the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated for ISR with DCB versus control (balloon angioplasty or drug-eluting stents) by a meta-analysis of RCTs., Methods: A comprehensive search was performed of RCTs where patients with ISR were randomly assigned to either DCB or alternative coronary intervention. Outcome measurements were death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularisation (TLR), binary definition of restenosis and in-lesion late luminal loss (LLL)., Results: Four studies were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for patients treated for ISR (n = 399). Mean follow-up duration was 14.5 months. DCBs were associated with lower rates of TLR [8.8 vs. 29.7 % OR (95 % confidence interval, CI) 0.20 (0.11-0.36), p < 0.0001], binary restenosis [10.3 vs. 41.3 % OR (95 % CI) 0.13 (0.07-0.24), p < 0.00001] and MI [0.5 vs. 3.8 %, OR (95 % CI) 0.21 (0.04-1.00), p = 0.05]. No significant heterogeneity was identified., Conclusion: Drug-coated balloons appear to be effective versus control in reducing TLR and possibly MI versus balloon angioplasty or drug-eluting stents in the management of ISR.

Objectives: This study sought to study the second-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES) as compared with first-generation sirolimus-eluting (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in diabetes mellitus (DM) patients., Background: There are limited data available comparing clinical outcomes in this setting with EES and SES, whereas studies comparing EES with PES are not powered for low-frequency endpoints., Methods: All DM patients treated with EES, PES, or SES from January 18, 2007, to July 29, 2011, from the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registery) were included. The EES was compared with SES or PES for the primary composite endpoint of clinically driven detected restenosis, definite stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause mortality., Results: In 4,751 percutaneous coronary intervention-treated DM patients, 8,134 stents were implanted (EES = 3,928, PES = 2,836, SES = 1,370). The EES was associated with significantly lower event rates compared with SES (SES vs. EES hazard ratio [HR]: 1.99; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.19 to 3.08). The same was observed when compared with PES (PES vs. EES HR: 1.33; 95% CI: 0.93 to 1.91) but did not reach statistical significance. These results were mainly driven by lower incidence of ST (SES vs. EES HR: 2.87; 95% CI: 1.08 to 7.61; PES vs. EES HR: 1.74, 95% CI: 0.82 to 3.71) and mortality (SES vs. EES HR: 2.02; 95% CI: 1.03 to 3.98; PES vs. EES HR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.06 to 2.72). No significant differences in restenosis rates were observed between EES and SES or PES (SES vs. EES HR: 1.26; 95% CI: 0.77 to 2.08; PES vs. EES HR: 1.05; 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.55)., Conclusions: In all-comer DM patients the use of EES was associated with improved outcomes compared with SES and PES mainly driven by lower rates of ST and mortality. These results suggest better safety rather than efficacy with EES when compared with SES or PES., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To compare the long-term outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention with 'new-generation' drug-eluting stents (n-DES) to 'older generation' DES (o-DES), and bare-metal stents (BMS) in a real-world population., Methods and Results: We evaluated 94 384 consecutive stent implantations (BMS, n = 64 631; o-DES, n = 19 202; n-DES, n = 10 551) in Sweden from November 2006 to October 2010. All cases of definite stent thrombosis (ST) and restenosis were documented in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR). Older generation DES were classified as: Cypher and Cypher Select (Cordis Corporation, Miami, FL, USA), Taxus Express and Taxus Liberté (Boston Scientific Corporation), and Endeavor (Medtronic Inc.) and n-DES as: Endeavor Resolute (Medtronic Inc.), XienceV, Xience Prime (Abbott Laboratories) and Promus, Promus Element (Boston Scientific Corporation). The Cox regression analyses unadjusted and adjusted for clinical and angiographic covariates showed a statistically significant lower risk of restenosis in n-DES compared with BMS [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.29; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.33] and o-DES (HR 0.62; 95% CI: 0.53-0.72). A lower risk of definite ST was found in n-DES compared with BMS (HR 0.38; 95% CI: 0.28-0.52) and o-DES (HR, 0.57; 95% CI: 0.41-0.79). The risk of death was significantly lower in n-DES compared with o-DES (adjusted HR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.63-0.95) and BMS (adjusted HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.46-0.67)., Conclusion: Percutaneous coronary intervention with n-DES is associated with a 38% lower risk of clinically meaningful restenosis, a 43% lower risk of definite ST, and a 23% lower risk of death compared with o-DES in this observational study from a large real-world population.

Aims: The SYNTAX-LE MANS substudy prospectively evaluated 15-month angiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with treated left main (LM) disease., Methods and Results: In the SYNTAX trial, 1,800 patients with three-vessel and/or LM disease were randomised to either CABG or PCI; of these, 271 LM patients were prospectively assigned to receive a 15-month angiogram. The primary endpoint for the CABG arm was the ratio of ≥50% to <100% obstructed/occluded grafts bypassing LM lesions to the number placed. The primary endpoint for the PCI arm was the proportion of patients with ≤50% diameter stenosis ('patent' stents) of treated LM lesions. Per protocol, no formal comparison between CABG and PCI arms was intended based on the differing primary endpoints. Available 15-month angiograms were analysed for 114 CABG and 149 PCI patients. At 15 months, 9.9% (26/263) of CABG grafts were 100% occluded and an additional 5.7% (15/263) were ≥50% to <100% occluded. Overall, 27.2% (31/114) of patients had ≥1 obstructed/occluded graft. The 15-month CABG MACCE rate was 8.8% (10/114) and MACCE at 15 months was not significantly associated with graft obstruction/occlusion (p=0.85). In the PCI arm, 92.4% (134/145) of patients had ≤50% diameter LM stenosis at 15 months (89.7% [87/97] distal LM lesions and 97.9% [47/48] non-distal LM lesions). The 15-month PCI MACCE rate was 12.8% (20/156) and this was significantly associated with lack of stent patency at 15 months (p<0.001), mainly due to repeat revascularisation., Conclusions: At 15 months, 15.6% (41/263) of grafts were at least 50% obstructed but this was not significantly associated with MACCE; 92.4% (134/145) of patients had stents that remained patent at 15 months, and stent restenosis was significantly associated with MACCE, predominantly due to revascularisation.

Background: It is unknown whether the preferred 1-stent bifurcation stenting approach with stenting of the main vessel (MV) and optional side branch stenting using drug-eluting stents should be finalized by a kissing balloon dilatation (FKBD). Therefore, we compared strategies of MV stenting with and without FKBD., Methods and Results: We randomized 477 patients with a bifurcation lesion to FKBD (n=238) or no FKBD (n=239) after MV stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events: cardiac death, non-procedure-related index lesion myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis within 6 months. The 6-month major adverse cardiac event rates were 2.1% and 2.5% (P=1.00) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were longer and more contrast media was needed in the FKBD group than in the no-FKBD group. Three hundred twenty-six patients had a quantitative coronary assessment. At 8 months, the rate of binary (re)stenosis in the entire bifurcation lesion (MV and side branch) was 11.0% versus 17.3% (P=0.11), in the MV was 3.1% versus 2.5% (P=0.68), and in the side branch was 7.9% versus 15.4% (P=0.039) in the FKBD versus no-FKBD groups, respectively. In patients with true bifurcation lesions, the side branch restenosis rate was 7.6% versus 20.0% (P=0.024) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively., Conclusions: MV stenting strategies with and without FKBD were associated with similar clinical outcomes. FKBD reduced angiographic side branch (re)stenosis, especially in patients with true bifurcation lesions. The simple no-FKBD procedures resulted in reduced use of contrast media and shorter procedure and fluoroscopy times. Long-term data on stent thrombosis are needed. Clinical Trial Registration- URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00914199.

Background: The objective was to evaluate the role of risk factors and stent type for stent thrombosis (ST) using a large real world registry., Methods and Results: We evaluated all consecutive coronary stent implantations in Sweden from May 1, 2005, to June 30, 2007. All cases of ST, documented in the Swedish coronary angiography and angioplasty registry until September 21, 2008, were analyzed. ST was registered in 882 of 73 798 stents. Acute coronary syndromes, insulin-treated diabetes mellitus, smoking, previous coronary intervention, warfarin treatment, small stent diameter, and stenting in restenotic, complex, or bypass graft lesions had the strongest association with ST in the multivariable statistical model. There were considerable differences in the frequency of ST between different stent brands. The overall risk of ST was lower in drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents (adjusted risk ratio, 0.79; 99% CI, 0.63 to 0.99). However, from 6 months after stent implantation and onward, the risk for ST was higher in drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents (adjusted risk ratio, 2.02; 99% CI, 1.30 to 3.14)., Conclusions: ST is a multifactor disease, and the incidence varies considerably between patients based on clinical, vessel, and stent characteristics. For drug-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents, the risk pattern was biphasic; initially, bare metal stents demonstrated a higher risk of ST; whereas after the first months, ST risk was higher with drug-eluting stents. Our findings highlight the need for prospective randomized studies with head-to-head comparisons between different stents.

Background: The long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting coronary stents have been questioned., Methods: We evaluated 47,967 patients in Sweden who received a coronary stent and were entered into the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry between 2003 and 2006 and for whom complete follow-up data were available for 1 to 5 years (mean, 2.7). In the primary analysis, we compared patients who received one drug-eluting coronary stent (10,294 patients) with those who received one bare-metal stent (18,659), after adjustment for differences in clinical characteristics of the patients and characteristics of the vessels and lesions., Results: Analyses of outcome were based on 2380 deaths and 3198 myocardial infarctions. There was no overall difference between the group that received drug-eluting stents and the group that received bare-metal stents in the combined end point of death or myocardial infarction (relative risk with drug-eluting stents, 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.03) or the individual end points of death (relative risk, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.05) and myocardial infarction (relative risk, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.06), and there was no significant difference in outcome among subgroups stratified according to the indication for stent implantation. Patients who received drug-eluting stents in 2003 had a significantly higher rate of late events than patients who received bare-metal stents in the same year, but we did not observe any difference in outcome among patients treated in later years. The average rate of restenosis during the first year was 3.0 events per 100 patient-years with drug-eluting stents versus 4.7 with bare-metal stents (adjusted relative risk, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52); 39 patients would need to be treated with drug-eluting stents to prevent one case of restenosis. Among high-risk patients, the adjusted risk of restenosis was 74% lower with drug-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents, and only 10 lesions would need to be treated to prevent one case of restenosis., Conclusions: As compared with bare-metal stents, drug-eluting stents are associated with a similar long-term incidence of death or myocardial infarction and provide a clinically important decrease in the rate of restenosis among high-risk patients., (2009 Massachusetts Medical Society)

Objectives: Our aim was to evaluate restenosis rate of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus (DM) in a real-world setting., Background: DES seem less effective in patients with DM., Methods: The SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry) includes all patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in Sweden. From April 1, 2004, to April 20, 2008, all restenoses detected at a subsequent angiography and all DES types implanted at more than 500 occasions were assessed using Cox regression., Results: Four DES types qualified for inclusion. In total, 35,478 DES were implanted at 22,962 procedures in 19,004 patients and 1,807 restenoses were reported over a mean 29 months follow-up. In the entire population, the restenosis rate per stent was 3.5% after 1 year and 4.9% after 2 years. The adjusted risk of restenosis was higher in patients with DM compared with that in patients without DM (relative risk [RR]: 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.10 to 1.37). In patients with DM, restenosis was twice as frequent with the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor stent (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) compared with that in the other DES types. The Endeavor stent and the sirolimus-eluting Cypher stent (Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Miami, Florida) had higher restenosis rates in patients with DM compared with those in patients without DM (RR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.29 to 2.43 and RR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.51). Restenosis rate with the paclitaxel-eluting Taxus Express and Liberté (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) stents was unrelated to DM. Mortality did not differ between different DES., Conclusions: Restenosis rate with DES was higher in patients with DM compared with that in patients without DM. There seem to be important differences between different brands of DES.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of bare-metal stents (BMS) versus drug-eluting stents (DES) after on-label as well as off-label use., Background: DES lower restenosis rates while not influencing the risk for death and myocardial infarction when used in Federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved indications. It is debated whether the clinical results of this so-called on-label use might be extrapolated to off-label situations., Methods: The SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry) was used to investigate the outcomes in 17,198 patients who underwent stenting with an on-label indication (10,431 BMS and 6,767 DES patients) and 16,355 patients in the context of an off-label indication (9,907 BMS and 6,448 DES patients). The patients were included from 2003 to 2005 with a minimum follow-up of 1 year and a maximum of 4 years. The analysis was adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics., Results: There were not significant differences between on-label DES and BMS (adjusted hazard ratio: 1.02; 95% confidence interval: 0.92 to 1.13) or between off-label DES and BMS (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.95; 95% confidence interval: 0.87 to 1.04) use with regard to the incidence of myocardial infarction and death. Off-label use of DES did not lead to significant differences in the combined risk of death and myocardial infarction compared with BMS throughout the whole spectrum of clinical indications., Conclusions: In contemporary Swedish practice, neither on- nor off-label use of DES is associated with worse outcome than use of BMS.

Aims: The risk of stent thrombosis has been reported to increase with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) complexity. The present study reports the pre-specified secondary endpoint of a 14-month stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac events in patients stented with a simple versus a complex bifurcation technique using sirolimus eluting stents (SES)., Methods and Results: A total of 413 patients with a coronary bifurcation lesion were randomised to a simple treatment strategy; stenting of main vessel and optional stenting of side branch (MV group), or to a complex stenting strategy; stenting of both main vessel and side branch (MV+SB group). Mortality data were available in all patients and 14-month clinical follow-up data in 395 (96%) of the patients. After 14 months, the rates of definite, probable and possible stent thrombosis (ARC criteria) were 1.0% vs. 0.5%, 1.0% vs. 0% and 0.5% vs. 0% (ns) in the MV and in the MV+SB groups, respectively. Rates of MACE were 9.5% in the MV group and 8.2% in the MV+SB group (ns). Total death was seen in 2.4% vs. 1.0% and non-PCI related myocardial infarction in 2.0% vs. 1.0% in the MV and the MV+SB groups, respectively., Conclusions: After 14 months, two months after recommended cessation of dual antiplatelet therapy, the rates of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac events were low and independent of treatment complexity in patients treated with SES for coronary artery bifurcation lesions.

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) or newer-generation drug-eluting stents (n-DES). Notwithstanding the available evidence from a few randomized clinical trials and meta-analyses, the best device for PCI in patients with small-vessel coronary artery disease is not yet established. The study included all consecutive patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessels undergoing PCI in Sweden from April 2009 to July 2017. A small coronary vessel was defined by a device diameter ≤2.5 mm. The primary outcomes were restenosis and definite target lesion thrombosis at 3-year follow-up. The secondary outcomes were the occurrence of all-cause death and myocardial infarction. The study population included 14,788 patients: 1,154 treated with DCBs and 13,634 with n-DES. Overall, 35,541 PCIs were performed using 2,503 DCBs and 33,038 n-DES. The propensity score–adjusted regression analysis showed a significantly higher risk for restenosis in the DCB group compared with the n-DES group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 2.027; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.537 to 2.674). Conversely, no difference in the risk for target lesion thrombosis (adjusted HR: 0.741; 95% CI: 0.412 to 1.331) was detected. The risk for all-cause death (adjusted HR: 1.178; 95% CI: 0.992 to 1.399) and myocardial infarction (adjusted HR: 1.251; 95% CI: 0.960 to 1.629) was comparable between groups. Because of the significantly higher risk for restenosis up to 3 years, this research suggests that DCBs are not an equally effective alternative to n-DES for percutaneous treatment of small coronary vessels. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: We aimed to assess the patient experience of informed consent (IC) during acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in a sub-study of the VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART trial. The original trial compared two anticoagulant agents in patients undergoing coronary intervention. A witnessed oral IC was required prior to randomization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, which was subsequently complemented with a written IC after percutaneous coronary intervention. Written consent was obtained before angiography in patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.Background: The IC process in patients with AMI is under debate. Earlier trials in this population have required prospective consent before randomization. A trial published some years ago used deferred consent, but the patient experience of this process is poorly studied.Methods: A total of 414 patients who participated in the main trial were enrolled and asked the following questions: (1) Do you remember being asked to participate in a study? (2) How was your experience of being asked to participate; do you remember it being positive or negative? (3) Would you have liked more information about the study? (4) Do you think it would have been better if you were included in the study without being informed until a later time?Results: Of these patients, 94% remembered being included; 85% of them experienced this positively, 12% were neutral and 3% negative. Regarding more information, 88% did not want further information, and 68% expressed that they wanted to be consulted before inclusion. Of the patients, 5% thought it would have been better to have study inclusion without consent, and 27% considered it of no importance.Conclusion: It is reasonable to ask patients for verbal IC in the acute phase of AMI. Most patients felt positively about being asked to participate and had knowledge of being enrolled in a scientific study. In addition they objected to providing IC after randomization and treatment.Trial Registration: VALIDATE-SWEDEHEART European Union Clinical Trials Register: 2012-005260-10. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02311231. Registered on 8 Dec 2014. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The aim of this study was to describe the characteristics and outcome of all consecutive patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in an unselected nationwide cohort over the past 2 decades. Background Over the last 20 years, treatment with PCI has evolved dramatically, but the change in patient characteristics has not been well described. Methods We included all patients undergoing a PCI procedure for the first time between January 1990 and December 2010 from the SCAAR (Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry). Patients were divided into different cohorts on the basis of the year of the first PCI procedure. Results A total of 144,039 patients was included. The mean age increased from 60.1 ± 9.9 years in 1990 to 1995 to 67.1 ± 11.2 years in 2009 to 2010. The proportion of patients presenting with unstable coronary artery disease and ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction increased from 27.4% and 6.2% to 47.7% and 32.5%, respectively. Diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease were more often present in the later-year cohorts. The 1-year mortality increased from 2.2% in 1990 to 1995 to 5.9% in 2009 to 2010, but after adjustment for age and indication, a modest decrease was shown, mainly in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients. Conclusions Characteristics of PCI patients have changed substantially over time, reflecting the establishment of new evidence. The increasing age and proportion of patients undergoing PCI for acute coronary syndromes greatly influence outcome. Understanding the changing patient characteristics is important for the translation of evidence to real-world clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is associated with higher ischemic risk, which can be mitigated by long-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, concomitant high bleeding risk (HBR) may be present, making it unclear whether short- or long-term DAPT should be prioritized.Objectives: This study investigated the effects of ischemic (by PCI complexity) and bleeding (by PRECISE-DAPT [PREdicting bleeding Complications in patients undergoing stent Implantation and SubsequEnt Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy] score) risks on clinical outcomes and on the impact of DAPT duration after coronary stenting.Methods: Complex PCI was defined as ≥3 stents implanted and/or ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation stenting and/or stent length >60 mm, and/or chronic total occlusion revascularization. Ischemic and bleeding outcomes in high (≥25) or non-high (<25) PRECISE-DAPT strata were evaluated based on randomly allocated duration of DAPT.Results: Among 14,963 patients from 8 randomized trials, 3,118 underwent complex PCI and experienced a higher rate of ischemic, but not bleeding, events. Long-term DAPT in non-HBR patients reduced ischemic events in both complex (absolute risk difference: -3.86%; 95% confidence interval: -7.71 to +0.06) and noncomplex PCI strata (absolute risk difference: -1.14%; 95% confidence interval: -2.26 to -0.02), but not among HBR patients, regardless of complex PCI features. The bleeding risk according to the Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction scale was increased by long-term DAPT only in HBR patients, regardless of PCI complexity.Conclusions: Patients who underwent complex PCI had a higher risk of ischemic events, but benefitted from long-term DAPT only if HBR features were not present. These data suggested that when concordant, bleeding, more than ischemic risk, should inform decision-making on the duration of DAPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: An elevated admission plasma glucose (APG) during an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) often reflects undetected diabetes (DM). We investigate the prognostic impact of APG in patients with ACS treated with early PCI and new generation drug-eluting stents. Methods: Patients (n=5309) with established DM and patients without previously known DM with a reported APG, included in the VALIDATE trial 2014-2016, were followed for 4-MACE (mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure) within 180 days. Event rates were analyzed by glucose categories. Known DM was defined as reported DM and/or DM treatment at discharge. Patients without DM were categorized by APG into four categories according to WHO criteria for hyperglycemia and DM; I: APG <6.1 mmol/L, II: 6.1-6.9 mmol/L, III: 7.0-11.0 mmol/L, IV: >11.0 mmol/L. Odds ratios (OR) were calculated in a logistic regression model adjusting for age, gender, previous myocardial infarction and indication for PCI (STEMI or non-STEMI). Results: Mean age was 67 ±11 years. Mean APG was 11.6 ±4.8 and 7.0 ±1.7 mmol/L in those with and without DM, respectively. Among those without DM 26.5% (n=1406) had glucose levels in group I, 19.7% (n=1048) in group II, 30.4% (n=1616) in group III and 2.2% (n=115) in group IV. Previously known DM was present in 21.2% (n=1124). 4-MACE increased by increasing APG levels (Figure, p-value for trend <0.001) while bleeding complications did not differ significantly (9.1%, 8.5%, 8.4%, 12.2% and 8.5% respectively). After adjustment, 4-MACE OR (95% CI) was highest for group IV 3.59 (1.99-6.50) compared to the lowest APG group. Randomization to bivalirudin vs. heparin did not influence the composite endpoint of bleeding, myocardial infarction or death in the DM group (p-value 0.82 for interaction) nor 4-MACE; OR 0.81 (95% CI 0.50-1.28, p-value 0.36 for interaction). Conclusions: In a well-treated contemporary population of ACS patients 32.6% of those without DM had elevated APG levels and with greater risk for clinical events already within 180 days. Event rate increased by increasing APG levels. These findings highlight the importance of searching for undetected DM in the setting of ACS and that new treatment strategies are warranted to improve outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]