Search

Ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) have been related to potential improvement in stent-related outcomes compared with thicker-struts DES. However, comparisons among different ultrathin devices are lacking. All randomized controlled trials comparing ultrathin (struts thickness <70 µm) and thicker-struts DESs in an all-comers population were included. Target lesion failure (TLF), as defined by included trials, at 1-year follow-up was the primary end point. Overall mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. Arms of included trials were compared using network meta-analysis. Nine studies encompassing 20,081 patients were included, of which 9,509 patients had an ultrathin DES: Orsiro (evaluated in 7 arms with 8,086 patients), MiStent (1 arm with 703 patients), or Supraflex (1 arm with 720 patients). At 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were noted for TLF among these ultrathin DES. In particular, Orsiro was associated with a similar risk of TLF compared with Supraflex (risk rate 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.78) and showed the highest probability of performing best in terms of TLF, myocardial infarction, and TLR. Ultrathin DES are all associated with a comparable risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut DES. In terms of TLR and TLF risk, Orsiro was the one with the highest probability of best performances, either compared with other ultrathin DES or to devices with thicker struts., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Dr. Pilgrim received research grants to the institution from Biotronik, Edwards Lifesciences, and Boston Scientific, and speaker fees/consultancy from Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Edwards Lifesciences, Abbott, Medtronic, and HighLife SAS. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) may have worse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention compared to patients without ACS., Aims: To compare 5-year efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with and without ACS treated with biodegradable polymers, the ultrathin strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) or the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES)., Methods: The Scandinavian Organisation for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome VII is a randomized trial comparing O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer setting. Of 2525 patients, 1329 (53%) patients had ACS and 1196 (47%) patients were without ACS. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF) (a composite of cardiac death, target lesion myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) and definite stent thrombosis within 5 years., Results: At 5-year follow-up, TLF did not differ significantly between patients with and without ACS (12.3% vs. 13.2%; rate ratio (RR) 1.00; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.70-1.44), whereas the risk of definite stent thrombosis was increased in patients with ACS (2.3% vs. 1.3; RR: 2.01 [95% CI: 1.01-3.98]). In patients with ACS, the rate of TLF was similar between O-SES and N-BES (12.4% vs. 12.3%; RR: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.74-1.40). The reduced risk of definite stent thrombosis in O-SES treated ACS patients within the first year (0.2% vs. 1.6%; RR: 0.12; 95% CI: 0.02-0.93) was not maintained after 5 years (1.8% vs. 2.7%; RR: 0.77; 95% CI: 0.37-1.63)., Conclusion: Patients with ACS had an increased risk of stent thrombosis regardless of the stent type used. Long-term outcomes were similar for ACS patients treated with O-SES or N-BES at 5 years., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Background: Although some studies have investigated sex-related outcomes up to 5 years after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), analyses at longer follow-up (ie, to 10 years) in large cohorts treated exclusively with drug-eluting stent (DES) platforms are lacking. Therefore, this study aimed to define whether sex-related differences in long-term outcomes after PCI persist both in the DES era and at longer-term follow-up., Methods: Individual data of patients treated with DES in 5 randomized controlled trials with 10-year follow-up were pooled. Patients were divided into 2 groups by sex. The analysis of individual participant data was performed using a 1-stage approach by entering a clustering effect by parent study in all univariable and multivariable models focusing on sex. The main outcomes of interest for this analysis included cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and definite stent thrombosis to 10 years after PCI. Survival was analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method to estimate the time to first event, and differences between the 2 groups were tested with the log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs were calculated with a Cox proportional hazards model. Conventional multivariable analyses with adjustment for relevant variables were performed., Results: Among 9700 patients undergoing PCI with DES implantation included in the present analysis, 2296 were women and 7404 were men. Through to 10 years, cardiovascular death occurred in 407 of the 2296 female patients and 1012 of the 7404 male patients (adjusted HR [HR adj ], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.80-1.11]). Female sex was associated with a lower risk of repeat revascularization of the target lesion (HR adj , 0.80 [95% CI, 0.74-0.87]), target vessel (HR adj , 0.81 [95% CI, 0.76-0.87]), and nontarget vessels (HR adj , 0.69 [95% CI, 0.62-0.77]). Compared with male patients, female patients displayed an increased risk of myocardial infarction in the first 30 days after PCI with DES (HR adj , 1.65 [95% CI, 1.24-2.19]) but a comparable risk of myocardial infarction thereafter. The risk of definite stent thrombosis was not significantly different between female and male patients (HR adj , 1.14 [95% CI, 0.89-1.47])., Conclusions: Through to 10-year follow-up after PCI with DES, female patients are at increased risk of early myocardial infarction, receive fewer repeat revascularizations, and have no difference in cardiovascular mortality compared with male patients.

Background: Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents were developed to improve safety and efficacy outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, few long-term follow-up efficacy studies are available. The study sought to investigate 5-year results from the SORT OUT VII trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome) comparing the biodegradable polymer ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES) versus the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (N-BES)., Methods: This registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blinded, noninferiority trial compared O-SES and N-BES in an all-comer population. The composite primary end point, target lesion failure, consisted of cardiac death, myocardial infarction related to the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year. Follow-up was extended to 5 years., Results: Five-year follow-up was completed for 2521 patients (99.8%). Five-year target lesion failure did not differ between O-SES (12.4%) and N-BES (13.1%; rate ratio [RR], 0.94 [95% CI, 0.75-1.18]). Cardiac death (RR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.67-1.34]), target myocardial infarction (RR, 1.14 [95% CI, 0.76-1.71]), target lesion revascularization (RR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.67-1.21]), and definite stent thrombosis rates (RR, 0.73 [95% CI, 0.41-1.33]) did not differ significantly between the 2 stents. Within the first year, definite ST was significantly lower for O-SES (0.4%) compared to N-BES (1.2%; RR, 0.33 [95% CI, 0.12-0.92]), but no difference was from 1 through 5 years: O-SES 1.2% and N-BES 0.9% (RR, 1.28 [95% CI, 0.58-2.82])., Conclusions: Five years after treatment with biodegradable polymer stents, target lesion failure did not differ among O-SES and N-BES. Definite stent thrombosis was less often seen within the first year in the O-SES but the difference was not maintained after 5 years., Registration: URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01879358.

Background: For patients with high bleeding risk, the BioFreedom stent is safer and more effective than a bare metal stent. However, at the one-year follow-up of the SORT OUT IX trial, the BioFreedom stent did not meet the criteria for non-inferiority for target lesion failure (TLF) when compared with the Orsiro stent and had a higher incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR)., Aims: The aim of the study was to compare the two-year outcomes following coronary implantation of the BioFreedom or the Orsiro stents in all-comer patients., Methods: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) IX trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised clinical trial comparing the BioFreedom and the Orsiro stents. The primary endpoint, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI; not related to other lesions) and TLR., Results: A total of 1,572 patients were randomised to treatment with the BioFreedom stent and 1,579 patients with the Orsiro stent. At two-year follow-up, TLF was 7.8% in the BioFreedom and 6.3% in the Orsiro stent groups (rate ratio [RR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.94-1.61). Risks of cardiac death, MI and definite stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between the groups, whereas more patients in the BioFreedom group had TLR (5.1% vs 2.6%; RR 1.98, 95% CI: 1.26-2.89) attributable to a higher risk of TLR within the first year (3.5% vs 1.3%; RR 2.77, 95% CI: 1.66-4.62)., Conclusions: At two years, there were no significant differences between the BioFreedom and Orsiro stents for TLF. TLR was significantly higher with the BioFreedom stent due to higher risk of TLR within the first year.

This sub-study of the SORT OUT IX trial sought to compare clinical outcomes between patients with diabetes randomized to implantation of either the polymer-free biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom stent (BF-BES) or the ultra-thin strut, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (O-SES). Patients with diabetes have an increased risk of target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The impact of different stent types in patients with diabetes is still discussed. A total of 607 of the 3151 patients (19.3%) enrolled in the SORT OUT IX study had diabetes. Randomization was stratified by patients with/without diabetes; 304 received BF-BES and 303 O-SES. The primary endpoint was TLF, which was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than the index lesion) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 1 year. After 1 year, patients with diabetes had higher TLF (7.2% vs. 3.7%, incidence rate ratio [IRR]: 1.65; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.08-2.50), than patients without diabetes. TLF did not differ significantly between BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes (8.2% vs. 6.3%, IRR: 1.17; 95% CI: 0.63-2.20). In patients with diabetes, cardiac death occurred in 2.3% of BF-BES and in 3.6% of O-SES (IRR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.23-1.45) and TLR occurred in 5.3% and 2.3% of BF-BES and O-SES, respectively (IRR: 2.12; 95% CI: 0.81-5.56). Definite stent thrombosis rates of 1.3% were found in both stent types. Patients with diabetes had higher 1-year TLF rate after PCI compared to patients without diabetes, whereas TLF did not differ significantly between the two stent types BF-BES and O-SES in patients with diabetes., (© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

This study aimed to examine the 30-day risk of myocardial infarction (MI) and death in patients who underwent noncardiac surgery within 1 year after coronary drug-eluting stent implantation for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or stable angina pectoris (SAP) and to compare it with the risk in surgical patients without known coronary artery disease. Patients with drug-eluting stent implantation for ACS (n = 2,291) or SAP (n = 1,804) who underwent noncardiac surgery were compared with a cohort from the general population without known coronary artery disease matched on the surgical procedure, hospital contact type, gender, and age. In patients with ACS, the 30-day MI risk was markedly increased when surgery was performed within 1 month after stenting (10% vs 0.8%; adjusted odds ratio [OR adj ] 20.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 8.85 to 45.6), whereas mortality was comparable (10% vs 8%, OR adj 1.17, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.79). When surgery was performed between 1 and 12 months after stenting, the 30-day absolute risk for MI was low but higher than in the comparison cohort (0.6% vs 0.2%, OR adj 2.18, 95% CI 0.89 to 5.38), whereas the mortality risks were similar (2.0% vs 1.8%, OR adj 1.03, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.55). In patients with SAP, the 30-day MI risk was low but higher than in the comparison cohort (0.4% vs 0.2%, OR adj 1.90, 95% CI 0.70 to 5.14), whereas the mortality risks were similar (2.2% vs 2.1%, OR adj 0.91, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.37). In conclusion, patients with ACS and SAP who underwent surgery between 1 and 12 months after stent implantation had a risk for MI and death that was similar to the risk observed in surgical patients without coronary artery disease., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy. However, drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers may not be a class effect, as stent strut thickness, polymer coating, and drug resorption differ between these groups of stents. Twelve months results of Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome VII showed that ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was noninferior to the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent. The sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was associated with a reduced risk of definite stent thrombosis., Methods: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome VII trial is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in all-comers patients. The endpoint target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion) and target lesion revascularization., Results: A total of 1261 patients were randomized to treatment with sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and 1264 patients to biolimus-eluting Nobori stent and followed for 3 years. At 3-year the target lesion failure was comparable for sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent (9.0%) and the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent (9.1%), (rate ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-1.29). Cardiac death (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 3.0% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 2.6% [rate ratio, 1.16; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.86]), target lesion revascularization (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 5.2% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 5.9% [rate ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.25]), myocardial infarction (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 4.7% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 4.5% [rate ratio, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.50]), and definite stent thrombosis (sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent 1.0% vs. biolimus-eluting Nobori stent 1.7% [rate ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.30-1.18]) did not differ significantly between the two groups., Conclusion: At 3-year follow-up, target lesion failure did not differ among ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and biolimus-eluting Nobori stent with biodegradable polymers.

Background: In patients with increased bleeding risk, the biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom stent, a stainless steel drug-coated stent free from polymer, has shown superiority compared with a bare-metal stent. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the BioFreedom stent is noninferior to a modern ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers patient population treated with percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods: The SORT OUT IX trial (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IX), was a large-scale, registry-based, randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial. The primary end point, major adverse cardiovascular events, was defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction not related to any segment other than the target lesion, or target lesion revascularization within 1 year, analyzed by intention-to-treat. The trial was powered to assess noninferiority for major adverse cardiovascular events of the BioFreedom stent compared with the Orsiro stent with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 0.021., Results: Between December 14, 2015 and April 21, 2017, 3151 patients were assigned to treatment with the BioFreedom stent (1572 patients, 1966 lesions) or to the Orsiro stent (1579 patients, 1985 lesions). Five patients were lost to follow-up because of emigration (99.9% follow-up rate). Mean age was 66.3±10.9, diabetes mellitus was seen in 19.3% of patients, and 53% of the patients had acute coronary syndromes. At 1 year, intention-to-treat analysis showed that 79 (5.0%) patients, who were assigned the BioFreedom stent, and 59 (3.7%), who were assigned the Orsiro stent, met the primary end point (absolute risk difference 1.29% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2.50%]; P noni nferiority =0.14). Significantly more patients in the BioFreedom stent group had target lesion revascularization than those in the Orsiro stent group (55 [3.5%] vs 20 [1.3%], rate ratio 2.77 [95% CI, 1.66-4.62]; P <0.0001)., Conclusions: The biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom polymer-free stent did not meet criteria for noninferiority for major adverse cardiovascular events at 12 months when compared with the ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers population Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02623140.

Background: It is still uncertain whether coronary bifurcations with lesions involving a large side branch (SB) should be treated by stenting the main vessel and provisional stenting of the SB (simple) or by routine two-stent techniques (complex). We aimed to compare clinical outcome after treatment of lesions in large bifurcations by simple or complex stent implantation., Methods: The study was a randomised, superiority trial. Enrolment required a SB≥2.75 mm, ≥50% diameter stenosis in both vessels, and allowed SB lesion length up to 15 mm. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, non-procedural myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation at 6 months. Two-year clinical follow-up was included in this primary reporting due to lower than expected event rates., Results: A total of 450 patients were assigned to simple stenting (n=221) or complex stenting (n=229) in 14 Nordic and Baltic centres. Two-year follow-up was available in 218 (98.6%) and 228 (99.5%) patients, respectively. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 6 months was 5.5% vs 2.2% (risk differences 3.2%, 95% CI -0.2 to 6.8, p=0.07) and at 2 years 12.9% vs 8.4% (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35 to 1.13, p=0.12) after simple versus complex treatment. In the subgroup treated by newer generation drug-eluting stents, MACE was 12.0% vs 5.6% (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.17 to 1.17, p=0.10) after simple versus complex treatment., Conclusion: In the treatment of bifurcation lesions involving a large SB with ostial stenosis, routine two-stent techniques did not improve outcome significantly compared with treatment by the simpler main vessel stenting technique after 2 years., Trial Registration Number: NCT01496638., Competing Interests: Competing interests: IK received institutional research grants from Cordis, Abbott and speaker fee from Astra Zeneca. NRH has received institutional research grants from Cordis, Abbott, Terumo, Biosensors, Biotronik, Medis medical imaging, Reva Medical, Boston Scientific, St. Jude Medical and Medtronic and has received speaker fees and personal honorarium from St. Jude Medical, Terumo, Reva Medical and Biotronik. LOJ has received institutional research grants from Terumo, Biosensors and Biotronik. JFL has received institutional research grants from Cordis, Abbott, Terumo, Biosensors, Biotronik, Medis medical imaging, Reva Medical, Boston Scientific, Heartflow, St. Jude Medical and Medtronic and has received speaker fees from Biotronik, Biosensors, Tryton, Boston Scientific, St. Jude Medical, Terumo, Reva medical, Cordis, Astra Zeneca and Abbott. GL has received speaker fees from Astra Zeneca., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In patients with increased bleeding risk during dual antiplatelet therapy, the biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom, a stainless steel drug-coated stent devoid of polymer, has shown superiority compared to a bare-metal stent. The aim of this study was to investigate whether the polymer-free biolimus A9-coated BioFreedom is noninferior to a modern thin-strut biodegradable polymer cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent in an all-comers patient population treated with percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods: The multicenter SORT OUT IX trial (NCT02623140) randomly assigned all-comers patients to treatment with the BioFreedom drug-coated stent or the biodegradable polymer Orsiro stent in 4 Danish University Hospitals. The primary end point target lesion failure is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Clinically driven event detection based on Danish registries will be used and continue through 5 years. Assuming an event rate of 4.2% in each stent group, 1,563 patients in each treatment arm will provide 90% power to detect noninferiority of the drug-coated BioFreedom stent with a noninferiority margin of 2.1%., Results: A total of 3,150 patients have been randomized and enrolled in the study., Conclusions: The SORT OUT IX trial will determine whether the drug-coated BioFreedom stent is noninferior to a modern biodegradable polymer Orsiro stent., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the thin-strut biodegradable-polymer everolimus-eluting platinum-chromium stent (EES) with the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stainless-steel stent (BES)., Background: Currently available drug-eluting coronary stents have been refined to reduce the risk for coronary events following implantation., Methods: This randomized, multicenter, all-comers, noninferiority trial was undertaken at 3 sites in western Denmark. Patients with clinical indications for percutaneous coronary intervention were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to either EES or BES. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a nontarget lesion) and efficacy (target lesion revascularization) at 12 months, analyzed using intention-to-treat principles. The trial was powered to assess target lesion failure noninferiority of the EES compared with the BES with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 3%., Results: A total of 1,385 patients were assigned to treatment with EES and 1,369 patients to treatment with BES. The analysis showed that 55 patients (4.0%) assigned to the EES and 60 (4.4%) assigned to the BES met the primary endpoint (absolute risk difference 0.4%; upper limit of 1-sided 95% confidence interval: 1.7%; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: At 1-year follow-up, the EES was found to be noninferior to the BES with respect to target lesion failure. (Everolimus-eluting SYNERGY Stent Versus Biolimus-Eluting Biomatrix NeoFlex Stent-SORT-OUT VIII; NCT02093845)., (Copyright © 2019. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objectives: In this substudy of the SORT OUT VII trial, the clinical outcomes among patient with diabetes mellitus treated with Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES; Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) or Nobori biolimus-eluting stent (N-BES; Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) were compared., Background: Diabetes is associated with increased risk of target lesion failure (TLF) after percutaneous coronary intervention., Methods: In total, 2525 patients were randomized to stent implantation with O-SES (n = 1261, diabetes: n = 236) or N-BES (n = 1264, diabetes: n = 235). The primary endpoint, TLF, was a composite of cardiac death, target-lesion myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 2 years., Results: At 2 year, TLF did not differ between O-SES vs N-BES in diabetic (9.3% vs 9.4%; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.54-1.78) patients. The individual components of the primary endpoint did not differ among stent type. In diabetics, cardiac death occurred in 3% of O-SES-treated and in 3.8% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.29-2.08), MI occurred in 3.0% of O-SES-treated and in 3.8% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.28-2.06) and TLR occurred in 5,5% of O-SES-treated and in 6.0% of N-BES-treated patients (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.43-1.95)., Conclusion: TLF did not differ between O-SES- and N-BES-treated diabetic patients., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aims: The current guidelines from the European Society of Cardiology and European Society of Anaesthesiology on non-cardiac surgery (ESC/ESA-NCS) divide surgical procedures into those associated with low risk (<1%), intermediate risk (1-5%), and high risk (>5%) of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Evaluating surgical risk might be particularly appropriate in patients with recent stent implantation, and thus we validated the ESC/ESA-NCS classification in patients undergoing NCS within 1 year after coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation., Methods and Results: By record-linking the Western Denmark Heart Registry and the Danish National Patient Registry, we identified 4046 patients, who underwent NCS between 1 and 12 months after DES implantation. Primary outcomes were MACE [cardiac death and myocardial infarction (MI)] and a combined endpoint of mortality and MI within 30 days after surgery. Both MACE (low risk 0.6%, intermediate risk 1.2%, and high risk 3.4%) and the combined endpoint of mortality and MI (1.5%, 4.6%, and 14.9%) were associated with the ESC/ESA-NCS classification. As compared with low-risk surgery, the odds ratios (OR) for MACE were 1.9 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.9-4.1] for intermediate-risk surgery and 5.8 (95% CI 1.7-20.1) for high-risk surgery. For the combined endpoint of mortality and MI, the OR's were 3.1 (95% CI 2.1-4.7) for intermediate-risk surgery and 11.3 (95% CI 5.9-21.9) for high-risk surgery., Conclusion: The ESC/ESA-NCS classification is a valid tool to predict the risk of both MACE and the combined endpoint of mortality and MI for patients undergoing NCS.

Background: In the risk assessment of patients considered for non-cardiac surgery and with recent coronary stent implantation, coronary drug-eluting stent implantation procedure characteristics may be taken into account. We aimed to evaluate associations between coronary drug-eluting stent implantation procedure characteristics and the risk of myocardial infarction and all-cause death within 30 days after non-cardiac surgery., Design: Patients with coronary drug-eluting stents were identified using the Western Denmark Heart Registry. Surgical procedures performed after stent implantation were detected using the Danish National Patient Registry. We used registry-based detection of myocardial infarction and all-cause death., Results: Of 22 590 patients treated with drug-eluting stents between 2005 and 2012, 4046 underwent non-cardiac surgery within 1 and 12 months after stent implantation. We found no significant association between the risk of myocardial infarction or all-cause death within 30 days after surgery and number of arteries treated (1 [reference] vs more), number of lesions treated (1 [reference] vs more), segments treated (left main and proximal left anterior descending artery vs other [reference]), total stent length (<20 mm [reference] vs ≥20 mm), number of stents (1 [reference] vs >1) and largest balloon diameter (≥3 mm [reference] vs <3 mm). All-cause death, but not myocardial infarction, risk was lower among patients treated with first-generation vs second-generation stents (odds ratio 0.58)., Conclusions: We identified no significant associations between stent implantation procedure characteristics and risk of myocardial infarction or all-cause death among patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. All-cause death was lower with first- vs second-generation drug-eluting stents., (© 2018 Stichting European Society for Clinical Investigation Journal Foundation.)

Aims: Our aim was to report the long-term safety and efficacy of the biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus- eluting Nobori stent compared to the durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting CYPHER stent., Methods and Results: SORT OUT V randomised 2,468 patients 1:1 to the Nobori (n=1,229) versus the CYPHER stent (n=1,239). Clinically driven event detection based on Danish registries was used. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation). Individual components of the primary endpoint comprise the secondary endpoints. At five-year follow-up, the composite endpoint rate was found to be similar in patients treated with the two study stents (Nobori 182/1,229 [14.8%] vs. CYPHER 197/1,239 [15.8%]; odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% CI: 0.75-1.16; p=0.53). The rates of definite stent thrombosis were also found to be similar in patients treated with the two study stents (Nobori 23/1,229 [1.9%] vs. CYPHER 18/1,239 [1.5%]; OR 1.31, 95% CI: 0.70-2.47; p=0.40), as were the other secondary endpoints., Conclusions: At five-year follow-up, the Nobori stent with a biodegradable polymer coating provided a similar safety and efficacy profile when compared to the durable polymer first-generation CYPHER stent.

Introduction: Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. The aim of the study was to evaluate, by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), the minimum lumen area site in the stented segment and the distribution of intimal hyperplasia in patients presenting with a DES or bare-metal stent (BMS) in-stent restenosis., Methods: The "Nordic Intravascular Ultrasound Study (NIVUS)" study was conducted in Nordic and Baltic countries as a prospective multicenter registry. Two hundred nine patients (DES n=121 and BMS n=88) with in-stent restenosis were enrolled., Results: At the minimum lumen area site in the stented segment, the stent area (5.8±2.2mm 2 vs. 7.6±2.4mm 2 , p<0.001) and intimal hyperplasia area (2.6±2.0mm 2 vs. 5.0±2.2mm 2 , p<0.001) were significantly lower in patients treated with DES compared to BMS. The percentage of stents that did not have a minimum stent area of at least 5.0mm 2 (under expansion) was higher in DES (58.7% vs. 37.7%, p=0.008) compared to BMS. Intimal hyperplasia covered 55.4±33.3% of the stent length in the DES compared to 90.7±17.4% in the BMS group, p<0.001. Focal in-stent restenosis was more often seen in DES treated patients compared to BMS treated patients (DES n=84 (59.9%) vs. BMS n=15 (17.0%), p<0.001)., Conclusion: Stent underexpansion was more often seen in DES than BMS in-stent restenosis. DES more often had focal in-stent restenosis with less intimal hyperplasia., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to investigate the effect of post-dilatation on angiographic and intracoronary imaging parameters in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention comparing the everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) with the everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES)., Background: Routine post-dilatation of BRS has been suggested to improve post-procedural angiographic and subsequent device-related clinical outcomes., Methods: In the ABSORB STEMI TROFI II trial, 191 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned to treatment with BRS (n = 95) or EES (n = 96). Minimal lumen area and healing score as assessed by optical coherence tomography at 6 months were compared between BRS- and EES-treated patients stratified according to post-dilatation status., Results: Primary percutaneous coronary intervention with post-dilatation was performed in 48 (50.5%) BRS- and 25 (25.5%) EES-treated lesions. There were no differences in baseline characteristics and post-procedural minimal lumen diameter between groups. In the BRS group, lesions with post-dilatation were associated with a trend toward a smaller minimal lumen area at 6 months (5.07 ± 1.68 mm 2 vs. 5.72 ± 1.77 mm 2 ; p = 0.09) and significantly larger angiographic late lumen loss (0.28 ± 0.34 mm vs. 0.12 ± 0.25 mm; p = 0.02), whereas no difference was observed in the EES arm (5.46 ± 2.18 mm 2 vs. 5.55 ± 1.77 mm 2 ; p = 0.85). The neointimal healing score was low and comparable between groups with and without post-dilation (BRS: 1.55 ± 2.61 vs. 1.92 ± 2.17; p = 0.48; EES: 2.50 ± 3.33 vs. 2.90 ± 4.80; p = 0.72)., Conclusions: In the setting of selected patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention with BRS or EES, post-dilatation did not translate into larger lumen area or improved arterial healing at follow-up. (ABSORB STEMI: The TROFI II; NCT01986803)., (Copyright © 2017 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

An 81-year-old male patient with a severe de novo coronary artery stenosis in the proximal left anterior descending artery was treated with a BioFreedom stent (3.5×11mm), three months later, the patient was re-admitted with chest pain and slightly increased troponin. The angiogram showed a significant in-stent restenosis in the recently treated lesion. Optical coherence tomography revealed a fully expanded stent without areas of incomplete stent apposition. Severe immature neointimal hyperplasia without formation of thrombosis was visualized, causing a severe in-stent restenosis. An underlying plaque rupture within the mid-proximal part of the in-stent restenosis was evident., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Surgery may necessitate interruption of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) within the first year after coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. We conducted a population-based cohort study to assess the rate of surgery within the first year after DES implantation, surgery-associated major adverse cardiac events (MACE), reoperation for bleeding within 30 days after surgery, and two nested case-control analyses to explore any association between preoperative antiplatelet therapy, MACE, and reoperation for bleeding. In the cohort of 22,654 patients treated with DES, 1,944 patients (8.6 %) underwent moderate- to high-risk surgery within 12 months. Of these, 62 (3.2 %) experienced MACE and 54 (2.8 %) needed reoperation for bleeding within 30 days. In the nested case-control analyses of 458 cases and controls, where 70 % (n=324) had a first generation DES, absence of preoperative antiplatelet therapy was associated with an increased MACE rate (OR 2.36, 95 % CI 1.02-5.48) compared to single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) or DAPT. Preoperative SAPT versus DAPT showed no difference in MACE rates (OR 0.85, 95 % CI 0.30-2.40). Surgery within the first month was associated with increased MACE rate (OR 4.67, 95 % CI 2.22-9.83) compared to surgery 2-12 months after DES implantation. Absence of preoperative antiplatelet therapy did not reduce reoperation for bleeding as compared to patients on SAPT or DAPT (OR 1.32, 95 % CI 0.56-3.12). In conclusion, absence of preoperative antiplatelet therapy and surgery within the first month after DES implantation were associated with increased MACE rates.

Background: Coronary drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy., Methods and Results: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT) VII trial-a large-scale registry-based randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial-compared 2 biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents: the thin-strut cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and the stainless steel biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in an all-comer patient population. The primary end point target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 1 year, analyzed by intention to treat (noninferiority margin of 3.0%). Clinically driven event detection based on Danish registries was used. A total of 1261 patients were assigned to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent (1590 lesions) and 1264 patients to the biolimus-eluting stent (1588 lesions). At 1 year, the composite end point target lesion failure occurred in 48 patients (3.8%) in the sirolimus-eluting group and in 58 patients (4.6%) in the biolimus-eluting group (absolute risk difference, -0.78% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% confidence interval, 0.61%]; P<0.0001). Rates of definite stent thrombosis occurred in 5 (0.4%) of the sirolimus-eluting group compared with 15 (1.2%) biolimus-eluting stent-treated patients (rate ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.92; P=0.034), which largely was attributable to a lower risk of subacute definite stent thrombosis: 0.1% versus 0.6% (rate ratio, 0.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-1.00; P=0.05)., Conclusions: The thin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was noninferior to the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in unselected patients for target lesion failure at 1 year., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01879358., (© 2016 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Long-term safety and efficacy for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus those of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) are unknown., Objectives: This study compared 5-year outcomes for EES with those for SES from the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome) trial., Methods: Five-year follow-up was completed for 2,771 patients (99.9%). Primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and definite stent thrombosis., Results: At 5-years, MACE occurred in 14.0% and 17.4% in the EES and SES groups, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.80, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.66 to 0.97; p = 0.02). The MACE rate did not differ significantly within the first year (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.71 to 1.19; p = 0.79), but from years 1 through 5, the MACE rate was lower with EES (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55 to 0.90; p = 0.006; p interaction = 0.12). Definite stent thrombosis was lower with EES (0.4%) than with SES (2.0%; HR: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.46), with a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis in the EES group (0.2% vs. 1.4%, respectively; HR: 0.16, 95% CI: 0.05 to 0.53). When censoring the patients at the time of stent thrombosis, we found no significant differences between the 2 stent groups for MACE rates (HR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.73 to 1.08; p = 0.23), target lesion revascularization (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.27; p = 0.55), and MI (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.36; p = 0.72)., Conclusions: At 5-year follow-up, MACE rate was significantly lower with EES- than with SES-treated patients, due largely due to a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis. (Randomized Clinical Comparison of the Xience V and the Cypher Coronary Stents in Non-selected Patients With Coronary Heart Disease [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877)., (Copyright © 2016 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: We aimed to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes after the implantation of everolimus-eluting (EES) and sirolimus-eluting (SES) stents in patients with diabetes., Background: There are limited data on long-term outcome after EES vs SES implantation in diabetic patients., Methods: We randomized 213 patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease to EES (n = 108) or SES (n = 105) implantation. Angiographic follow-up was performed 10 months after the index procedure and all patients were followed clinically for 4 years. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-stent late luminal loss at 10-month follow-up. Secondary endpoints included angiographic restenosis rate, the need for target lesion revascularization (TLR) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE; defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or TLR) at 4-year follow-up., Results: At 10-month angiographic follow-up, in-stent late lumen loss was 0.20 ± 0.53 mm and 0.11 ± 0.49 mm (P = 0.28), and angiographic restenosis rate was 3.8% and 5.2% (P = 0.72) in the EES and SES groups, respectively. At 4-year clinical follow-up, MACE had occurred in 22 (20.4%) patients in the EES group and 25 (23.8%) patients in SES group (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.47-1.49; P = 0.55), with TLR performed in 6 (5.6%) and 10 (9.5%) patients in the two groups (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.21-1-58; P = 0.28)., Conclusion: EES and SES had comparable 10-month angiographic and 4-year clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease., (© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Purpose: Frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) is a high-resolution imaging tool (~10-15 μm), which enables near-histological in-vivo images of the coronary vessel wall. The use of the technique is increasing, both for research- and clinical purposes. This study sought to investigate the intra- and interobserver reliability, as well as the intra-catheter reproducibility of quantitative FD-OCT-assessment of morphometric stent parameters and qualitative FD-OCT-evaluation of strut coverage in 10 randomly selected 6-month follow-up Nobori® biolimus-eluting stents (N-BESs)., Methods: Ten N-BESs (213 cross sectional areas (CSAs) and 1897 struts) imaged with OCT 6 months post-implantation were randomly selected and analyzed by 2 experienced analysts, and the same 10 N-BESs were analyzed by one of the analysts 3 months later. Further, 2 consecutive pullbacks randomly performed in another 10 N-BESs (219 CSAs and 1860 struts) were independently assessed by one of the analysts., Results: The intraobserver variability with regard to relative difference of mean luminal area and mean stent area at the CSA-level was very low: 0.1%±1.4% and 0.5%±3.2%. Interobserver variability also proved to be low: -2.1%±3.3% and 2.1%±4.6%, and moreover, very restricted intra-catheter variation was observed: 0.02%±6.8% and -0.18%±5.2%. The intraobserver-, interobserver- and intra-catheter reliability for the qualitative evaluation of strut coverage was found to be: kappa (κ)=0.91 (95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-0.93, p<0.01), κ=0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.91, p<0.01), and κ=0.73 (95% CI: 0.68-0.78, p<0.01), respectively., Conclusions: FD-OCT is a reproducible and reliable imaging tool for quantitative evaluation of stented coronary segments, and for qualitative assessment of strut coverage., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Incomplete strut coverage has been documented an important histopathologic morphometric predictor for later thrombotic events. This study sought to investigate whether optical coherence tomography (OCT)-guided percutaneous coronary intervention with Nobori biolimus-eluting stent implantation in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction would provide improved strut coverage at 6 months in comparison with angiographic guidance only., Methods and Results: One hundred patients were randomized 1:1 to either OCT-guided or angio-guided Nobori biolimus-eluting stent implantation. Postprocedure OCT was performed in all patients. In the OCT-guided group, prespecified criteria indicating additional intervention were related to (1) stent underexpansion, (2) strut malapposition, (3) edge dissection(s), and (4) residual stenosis at the distal or proximal reference segment(s). A final OCT was performed in case of reintervention. Six-month OCT follow-up was available in 85 patients. Twenty-three (46%) OCT-guided patients had additional postdilation or stenting. The percentage of acutely malapposed struts was substantially lower in the OCT-guided group (3.4% [interquartile range, 0.3-7.6] versus 7.8% [interquartile range, 2.3-19.4]; P<0.01). At 6-month follow-up, the OCT-guided group had a significantly lower proportion of uncovered struts; 4.3% [interquartile range, 1.2-9.8] versus 9.0% [interquartile range, 5.5-14.5], P<0.01. Furthermore, OCT-guided patients had significantly more completely covered stents: 17.5% versus 2.2%, P=0.02. The percentages of malapposed struts and struts being both uncovered and malapposed at follow-up were comparable between groups., Conclusions: OCT-guided optimization of Nobori biolimus-eluting stent implantation improves strut coverage at 6-month follow-up in comparison with angiographic guidance alone., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT02272283., (© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.)

Background: Third-generation coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy. We designed a large scale registry-based randomized clinical trial to compare 2 third-generation DES: a thin strut, cobalt-chromium DES with silicon carbide-coating releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer (O-SES, Orsiro; Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) with the stainless steel biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stents (N-BES, Nobori; Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) in an all-comer patient population., Design: The multicenter SORT OUT VII trial (NCT01879358) randomly assigned 2,530 patients to treatment with biodegradable polymer O-SES or biodegradable polymer N-BES at 3 sites in Western Denmark. Patients were eligible, if they were ≥18 years old; had chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes; and ≥1 coronary lesion with >50% diameter stenosis, requiring treatment with a DES. The primary end point target lesion failure is a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Clinically, driven event detection based on Danish registries will be used. An event rate of 6.5% is assumed in each stent group. With a sample size of 1,157 patients in each treatment arm, a 2-group large-sample normal approximation test of proportions with a 1-sided 5% significance level will have 90% power to detect noninferiority of the O-SES compared with the N-BES with a predetermined noninferiority margin of 3.0%., Conclusion: The SORT OUT VII trial will determine whether the biodegradable polymers O-SES is noninferior to the N-BES with respect to driven event., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Previous meta-analyses have investigated the relative safety and efficacy profiles of different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS); however, most prior trials in these meta-analyses reported follow-up to only 1 year, and as such, the relative long-term safety and efficacy of these devices are unknown. Many recent studies have now reported extended follow-up data., Objectives: This study sought to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of durable polymer-based DES, bioabsorbable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents (BES), and BMS by means of network meta-analysis., Methods: Randomized controlled trials comparing DES to each other or to BMS were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases and proceedings of international meetings. Information on study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted., Results: Fifty-one trials that included a total of 52,158 randomized patients with follow-up duration ≥3 years were analyzed. At a median follow-up of 3.8 years, cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES) were associated with lower rates of mortality, definite stent thrombosis (ST), and myocardial infarction than BMS, paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and less ST than BES. Phosphorylcholine-based zotarolimus-eluting stents had lower rates of definite ST than SES and lower rates of myocardial infarction than BMS and PES. The late rates of target-vessel revascularization were reduced with all DES compared with BMS, with cobalt-chromium EES, platinum chromium-EES, SES, and BES also having lower target-vessel revascularization rates than PES., Conclusions: After a median follow-up of 3.8 years, all DES demonstrated superior efficacy compared with BMS. Among DES, second-generation devices have substantially improved long-term safety and efficacy outcomes compared with first-generation devices., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: New-generation drug-eluting coronary stents have reduced the risk of coronary events, especially in patients with complex disease or lesions. To what extent different stent platforms, polymers, and antiproliferative drugs affect outcomes, however, is unclear. We investigated the safety and efficacy of a third-generation stent by comparing a highly biocompatible durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent with a biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent., Methods: This open-label, randomised, multicentre, non-inferiority trial was done at three sites across western Denmark. All patients who presented with stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes and at least one coronary artery lesion (more than 50% stenosis) from March, 2011, to August, 2012, were assessed for eligibility. Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent or the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target lesion) and efficacy (target-lesion revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat. The trial was powered to assess non-inferiority of durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent compared with the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent with a predetermined non-inferiority margin of 0·025. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01956448., Findings: Of 7103 screened, 1502 patients with 1883 lesions were assigned to receive the durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1497 patients with 1791 lesions to receive the biodegradable-polymer biolimus-eluting stent. 79 (5·3%) and 75 (5·0%) patients, respectively, met the primary endpoint (absolute risk difference 0·0025, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 0·016%; p=0·004). The individual components of the primary endpoint did not differ significantly between stent types at 12 months., Interpretation: The durable-polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the biodegradable-polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients., Funding: Medtronic Cardiovascular and Biosensors Interventional Technologies., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Peri-stent contrast staining and late acquired malapposition represent pathological vessel wall healing patterns following percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation. Earlier studies have described these abnormal vessel wall responses commonly present after implantation of first-generation drug-eluting stents. These coronary vascular changes can cause flow disturbance and thereby dispose for later thrombotic events. This case report, based on coronary optical frequency domain imaging, describes peri-stent contrast staining, major evaginations and severe malapposition occurring 18months after third-generation biolimus-eluting stent implantation., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The impact of adherence to the recommended duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after first generation drug-eluting stent implantation is difficult to assess in real-world settings and limited data are available., Methods: We followed 4,154 patients treated with coronary drug-eluting stents in Western Denmark for 1 year and obtained data on redeemed clopidogrel prescriptions and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE, i.e., cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) from medical databases., Results: Discontinuation of clopidogrel within the first 3 months after stent implantation was associated with a significantly increased rate of MACE at 1-year follow-up (hazard ratio (HR) 2.06; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.08-3.93). Discontinuation 3-6 months (HR 1.29; 95% CI: 0.70-2.41) and 6-12 months (HR 1.29; 95% CI: 0.54-3.07) after stent implantation were associated with smaller, not statistically significant, increases in MACE rates. Among patients who discontinued clopidogrel, MACE rates were highest within the first 2 months after discontinuation., Conclusions: Discontinuation of clopidogrel was associated with an increased rate of MACE among patients treated with drug-eluting stents. The increase was statistically significant within the first 3 months after drug-eluting stent implantation but not after 3 to 12 months.

Objectives: The study sought to compare the risk of late outcome with a focus on very late definite stent thrombosis of the everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with that of the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) at 3-year follow-up., Background: In the SORT OUT IV (SORT OUT IV Trial), comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months. The SORT OUT IV trial provides long-term head-to-head randomized comparison of the EES with the SES., Methods: We prospectively randomized 2,774 patients in the SORT OUT IV trial. Follow-up through 3 years was complete in 2,771 patients (99.9%). The 3-year pre-specified endpoints were composites of safety and efficacy (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and definite stent thrombosis)., Results: At 3 years, the composite endpoint MACE occurred in 9.8% of the EES group and in 11.1% of the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.89, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70 to 1.12). Overall rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 1.4%; HR: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04 to 0.50), which was largely attributable to a lower risk of very late definite stent thrombosis: 0.1% versus 0.8% (HR: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.70)., Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, the MACE rate did not differ significantly between EES- and SES-treated patients. A significant reduction of overall and very late definite stent thrombosis was found in the EES group. (The SORT OUT IV TRIAL [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877)., (Copyright © 2014 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In head-to-head comparisons of coronary drug-eluting stents, the primary endpoint is traditionally assessed after 9-12 months. However, the optimum timepoint for this assessment remains unclear. In this study, we assessed clinical outcomes at up to 5 years' follow-up in patients who received two different types of drug-eluting stents., Methods: We undertook this multicentre, open-label, randomised superiority trial at five percutaneous coronary intervention centres in Denmark. We randomly allocated 2332 eligible adult patients (≥18 years of age) with an indication for drug-eluting stent implantation to the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor Sprint stent (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA, USA) or the sirolimus-eluting Cypher Select Plus stent (Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ, USA). Randomisation of participants was achieved by computer-generated block randomisation and a telephone allocation service. The primary endpoint of the SORT OUT III study was a composite of major adverse cardiac events-cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation-at 9 months' follow-up. In this study, endpoints included the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events and definite stent thrombosis at follow-up times of up to 5 years. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00660478., Findings: We randomly allocated 1162 patients to receive the zotarolimus-eluting stent and 1170 to the sirolimus-eluting stent. At 5-year follow-up, rates of major adverse cardiac events were similar in patients treated with both types of stents (zotarolimus-eluting stents 197/1162 [17.0%] vs sirolimus-eluting stents 182/1170 [15.6%]; odds ratio [OR] 1.10, 95% CI 0.88-1.37; p=0.40). This finding was indicative of the directly contrasting results for rates of major adverse cardiac events at 1-year follow up (zotarolimus 93/1162 [8.0%] vs sirolimus 46/1170 [3.9%]; OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.48-3.07; p<0.0001) compared with those at follow-up between 1 and 5 years (104 [9.0%] vs 136 [11.6%]; OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59-1.02; p=0.071). At 1-year follow-up, definite stent thrombosis was more frequent after implantation of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (13/1162 [1.1%]) than the sirolimus-eluting stent (4/1170 [0.3%]; OR 3.34, 95% CI 1.08-10.3; p=0.036), whereas the opposite finding was recorded for between 1 and 5 years' follow-up (zotarolimus-eluting stent 1/1162 [0.1%] vs sirolimus-eluting stent 21/1170 [1.8%], OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.36; p=0.003). 26 of 88 (30%) target lesion revascularisations in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group occurred between 1 and 5 years' follow-up, whereas 54 of 70 (77%) of those in the sirolimus-eluting stent group occurred during this follow-up period., Interpretation: The superiority of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with zotarolimus-eluting stents at 1-year follow-up was lost after 5 years. The traditional 1-year primary endpoint assessment therefore might be insufficient to predict 5-year clinical outcomes in patients treated with coronary drug-eluting stent implantation., Funding: Cordis and Medtronic., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the effects of the everolimus-eluting Xience™/Promus™ stent (EES) and the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ stent (SES) on intimal hyperplasia (IH) in diabetic patients., Background: Patients with diabetes mellitus have increased risk of in-stent restenosis after coronary stent implantation due to intimal hyperplasia (IH)., Methods: In a sub study of the Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (SORT OUT IV trial), serial intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) 10-month follow-up data were available in 88 patients, including 48 EES and 40 SES treated patients. IVUS endpoints included IH volume, in-stent % volume obstruction and changes in external elastic membrane (EEM) volume., Results: Compared with the SES group, IH volume was increased in the EES group [median (interquartile range): 2.8 mm(3) (0.0-12.6) vs. 0.0 mm(3) (0.0-1.1), P = 0.001]. In-stent % volume obstruction was increased in EES compared to SES [median (interquartile range): 1.6% (0.0-8.2) vs. 0.0% (0.0-1.0), P = 0.001]. Peri-stent external elastic membrane (EEM) volume: (post procedure vs. follow-up EES [300 mm(3) (219-491) vs. 307 mm(3) (223-482), P = 0.73] and SES [316 mm(3) (235-399) vs. 323 mm(3) (246-404), P = 0.05]) and peri-stent plaque volume: EES [163 mm(3) (103-273) vs. 184 mm(3) (115-291), P = 0.18] and SES [186 mm(3) (139-248) vs. 175 mm(3) (153-243), P = 0.26]) were unchanged in both groups. In the proximal reference segment a significant increase in plaque area was seen in the EES group only, without vascular remodeling., Conclusion: In diabetic patients, EES stent implantation was associated with increased IH volume obstruction without involvement of vascular remodeling., (Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: This prospective multicenter registry used intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients with definite stent thrombosis (ST) to compare rates of incomplete stent apposition (ISA), stent fracture and stent expansion in patients treated with drug-eluting (DES) versus bare metal (BMS) stents. ST is a rare, but potential life threatening event after coronary stent implantation. The etiology seems to be multifactorial., Methods: 124 patients with definite ST were assessed by IVUS during the acute ST event. The study was conducted in 15 high-volume percutaneous coronary intervention -centers in the Nordic-Baltic countries., Results: In early or late ST there were no differences in ISA between DES and BMS. In very late ST, ISA was a more frequent finding in DES than in BMS (52% vs.16%; p=0.005) and the maximum ISA area was larger in DES compared to BMS (1.1 ± 2.3mm(2) vs. 0.1 ± 0.5mm(2); p=0.004). Further, ISA was more prevalent in sirolimus-eluting than in paclitaxel-eluting stents (58% vs. 37%; p=0.02). Stent fractures were found both in DES (16%) and BMS (24%); p=0.28, and not related to time of stent thrombosis occurrence. For stents with nominal diameters ≥ 2.75 mm, 38% of the DES and 22% of the BMS had a minimum stent area of less than 5mm(2); p=0.14., Conclusions: Very late stent thrombosis was more prevalent and associated with more extensive ISA in DES than in BMS treated patients. Stent fracture was a common finding in ST after DES and BMS implantation., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Stent thrombosis remains among the most feared complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting. However, data on its incidence and predictors are sparse and conflicting. We thus aimed to perform a collaborative systematic review on incidence and predictors of stent thrombosis., Methods: PubMed was systematically searched for eligible studies from the drug-eluting stent (DES) era (1/2002-12/2010). Studies were selected if including ≥ 2000 patients undergoing stenting or reporting on ≥ 25 thromboses. Study features, patient characteristics, and incidence of stent thrombosis were abstracted and pooled, when appropriate, with random-effect methods (point estimate [95% confidence intervals]), and consistency of predictors was formally appraised., Results: A total of 30 studies were identified (221,066 patients, 4276 thromboses), with DES used in 87%. After a median of 22 months, definite, probable, or possible stent thrombosis had occurred in 2.4% (2.0%; 2.9%), with acute in 0.4% (0.2%; 0.6%), subacute in 1.1% (1.0%; 1.3%), late in 0.5% (0.4%; 0.6%), and very late in 0.6% (0.4%; 0.8%). Similar figures were computed for studies reporting only on DES. From a total of 47 candidate variables, definite/probable stent thrombosis was more commonly and consistently predicted by early antiplatelet therapy discontinuation, extent of coronary disease, and stent number/length, with acute coronary syndrome at admission, diabetes, smoking status, and bifurcation/ostial disease also proving frequent predictors, but less consistently., Conclusions: Despite numerous possible risk factors, the most common and consistent predictors of stent thrombosis are early antiplatelet therapy discontinuation, extent of coronary disease, and stent number/length., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Third-generation biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents might reduce the risk of stent thrombosis compared with first-generation permanent polymer drug-eluting stents. We aimed to further investigate the effects of a biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in a population-based setting., Methods: This randomised, multicentre, all-comer, non-inferiority trial was undertaken at three sites across western Denmark. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and at least one coronary artery lesion (>50% diameter stenosis). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) using an independently managed computer-generated allocation sequence to receive either a biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer stent (Nobori, Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) or a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent (Cypher Select Plus, Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ, USA). The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin of 0·02). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01254981., Findings: From July, 2009, to January, 2011, we assigned 1229 patients (1532 lesions) to receive the biolimus-eluting stent and 1239 (1555 lesions) to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent. One patient was lost to follow-up because of emigration. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that 50 (4·1%) patients who were assigned the biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3·1%) who were assigned the sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0·9% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2·1%]; p(non-inferiority)=0·06). Significantly more patients in the biolimus-eluting stent group had definite stent thrombosis at 12 months than did those in the sirolimus-eluting stent group (9 [0·7%] vs 2 [0·2%], risk difference 0·6% [95% CI 0·0-1·1]; p=0·034). Per-protocol analysis showed that 45 (3·8%) of 1193 patients who received a biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3·2%) of 1208 who received a sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0·5% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·8%]; p(non-inferiority)=0·03)., Interpretation: At 1 year follow-up, the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent did not improve clinical results compared with a first-generation sirolimus-eluting stent. We will need to obtain long-term data before we can make recommendations for the role of this biolimus-eluting stent in routine clinical practice., Funding: Terumo and Cordis (Johnson & Johnson)., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: There are limited data on the optimal management of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES) implantations. We assessed the clinical presentation, the incidence, and prognosis of definite stent thrombosis or restenosis after DES implantation for treatment of restenosis., Methods: From January 2002 to June 2005, all consecutive patients with restenosis < 12 months after index PCI with DES or BMS implantation, were identified in the population-based Western Denmark Heart Registry. Patients were followed until 24 months after their first restenosis., Results: A total of 589 lesions were treated for clinically driven restenosis with target lesion revascularization (TLR) within 12 months after the index PCI. Among those, 302 lesions were treated with DES (BMS-restenosis n = 244 and DES-restenosis n = 58). Admission were due to stable angina pectoris (n = 249 (82.4%)), unstable angina pectoris (n = 34 (11.3%)), or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (n = 19 (6.3%)). The clinical indication was not different between patients with BMS restenosis compared to DES restenosis. In the BMS restenosis group, older age, longer lesion, longer stent length, and a higher number of stents used was observed compared to the DES restenosis group. After a first restenosis, clinically driven re-TLR was seen in 26 (8.6%) patients within the following 24 months, stent thrombosis (median duration 155 days, interquartile range (IQR) 9-627 days) was seen in 3 lesions (1.0%), and secondary restenosis (median duration 168 days, IQR 88-266 days) was seen in 23 (7.6%) [DES restenosis group 6.9% vs. BMS restenosis group 7.8%, P = 0.818] lesions., Conclusion: The clinical presentation did not differ between BMS or DES and most patients present with stable angina pectoris. Risk of stent thrombosis or restenosis was not increased in patients with DES restenosis compared to patients with BMS restenosis treated with DES., (Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Diabetes is associated with increased risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) after percutaneous coronary intervention. The purpose of this substudy of the SORT OUT IV trial was to compare clinical outcomes in patients with and without diabetes mellitus treated with everolimus-eluting stents (EESs) or sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs). In total 2,774 patients (390 with diabetes, 14.1%) were randomized to stent implantation with EESs (n = 1,390, diabetes in 14.0%) or SESs (n = 1,384, diabetes in 14.2%). Randomization was stratified by presence/absence of diabetes. The primary end point was MACEs, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization within 18 months. MACEs were higher in diabetic than in nondiabetic patients (13.1% vs 6.4%, hazard ratio [HR] 2.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.51 to 2.86). In diabetic patients, MACEs were seen in 10.3% of those treated with EESs and in 15.8% of those treated with SESs (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.11). In nondiabetic patients, MACEs occurred in 6.6% of EES-treated and in 6.3% SES-treated patients (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.46). In diabetics, cardiac death occurred in 3.1% of EES-treated and in 4.6% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.89), myocardial infarction occurred in 0.5% of EES-treated and in 3.6% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.14, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.16), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization was needed in 3.1% of EES-treated and in 7.7% of SES-treated patients (HR 0.40, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.02). No interaction between diabetes status and type of drug-eluting stent was found for the end points. In conclusion, patients with diabetes have higher MACE rates than nondiabetics. No significant differences in safety or efficacy outcomes after EES or SES implantation were present in nondiabetic or diabetic patients., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: We evaluated the effectiveness and safety of a zotarolimus-eluting (ZES) versus a sirolimus-eluting (SES) coronary stent in a large cohort of patients treated with one of these stents in Western Denmark., Methods: A total of 6,122 patients treated with ZES (n=2,282) or SES (n=3,840) were followed for up to 27 months. We ascertained clinical outcomes based on national medical databases., Results: Incidence of target lesion revascularization (no. per 100 person-years) was 5.3 in the ZES group compared to 1.9 in the SES group (adjusted hazard ratio (HR)=2.19, 95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.39-3.47; p=0.001). All-cause mortality was also higher in the ZES group (ZES: 6.3; SES: 3.3; adjusted HR=1.34, 95% CI: 1.05-1.72; p=0.02), while stent thrombosis (ZES: 1.2; SES: 0.5; adjusted HR=1.98, 95% CI: 0.75-5.23; p=0.14) did not differ significantly., Conclusions: In agreement with previously published randomised data, this observational study indicated that the ZES was associated with an increased risk of death and TLR in a large cohort of consecutive patients.

Objectives: There are limited head-to-head randomized data on patient-related versus stent-related outcomes for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES)., Background: In the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV) trial, comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months., Methods: The primary endpoint was a composite: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization. Safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years were further assessed with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all MI, or any revascularization) and stent-related composite outcomes (cardiac death, target vessel MI, or symptom-driven target lesion revascularization). A total of 1,390 patients were assigned to receive the EES, and 1,384 patients were assigned to receive the SES., Results: At 2 years, the composite primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in the EES group and in 8.7% in the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.22). The patient-related outcome: 15.0% in the EES group versus 15.6% in the SES group, (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.15), and the stent-related outcome: 5.2% in the EES group versus 5.3% in the SES group (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.35) did not differ between groups. Rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 0.9%, (HR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.80)., Conclusions: At 2-year follow-up, the EES was found to be noninferior to the SES with regard to both patient-related and stent-related clinical outcomes., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: This study sought to examine the 3-year clinical outcomes in patients treated with the Endeavor (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) or the Cypher (Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Warren, New Jersey) sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in routine clinical practice., Background: The long-term clinical outcome in patients treated with ZES in comparison with SES is unclear., Methods: The authors randomized 2,332 patients to ZES (n = 1,162) or SES (n = 1,170) implantation. Endpoints included major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization; the individual endpoints of MACE; and definite stent thrombosis., Results: At 3-year follow-up, the MACE rate was higher in patients treated with ZES than in patients treated with SES (148 [12.9%] vs. 116 [10.1%]; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.04 to 1.69; p = 0.022). Target vessel revascularization was more frequent in the ZES group compared with the SES group (103 [9.1%] vs. 76 [6.7%]; HR: 1.40, 95% CI: 1.04 to 1.89; p = 0.025), whereas the occurrence of myocardial infarction (3.8% vs. 3.3%) and cardiac death (2.8% vs. 2.8%) did not differ significantly. Although the rate of definite stent thrombosis was similar at 3-year follow-up (1.1% vs. 1.4%), very late (12 to 36 months) definite stent thrombosis occurred in 0 (0%) patients in the ZES group versus 12 (1.1%) patients in the SES group (p = 0.0005)., Conclusions: Although the 3-year MACE rate is higher in patients treated with ZES versus SES, our data highlight a late safety problem concerning definite stent thrombosis with the use of SES. This finding underscores the importance of long-term follow-up in head-to-head comparisons of drug-eluting stents. (Randomized Clinical Comparison of the Endeavor and the Cypher Coronary Stents in Non-selected Angina Pectoris Patients [SORT OUT III]; NCT00660478)., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data on clinical outcomes among patients treated with the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor™ stent versus the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ stent favor the sirolimus-eluting stent. However, a separate comparison of clinical outcome among patients treated for multiple lesions with these stents is lacking. We performed this comparison within the SORT OUT III trial data set., Methods: Among 2332 patients randomized in SORT OUT III, 695 were treated for multiple lesions with zotarolimus-eluting (n = 350) or sirolimus-eluting (n = 345) stents and followed for 18 months. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE); composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR); was the primary endpoint., Results: Zotarolimus-eluting compared to sirolimus-eluting stent treatment was associated with increased MACE rate (13.2% vs. 2.6%; hazard ratio 5.29 with 95% confidence interval: 2.59-10.8). All secondary endpoints; all cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, TVR, target lesion revascularization, in-stent restenosis, and definite stent thrombosis; were observed more frequently among zotarolimus-eluting stent treated patients. For all endpoints, hazard ratios were 1.6 to 4.6 times higher than in the overall results of the SORT OUT III trial., Conclusions: We observed better clinical outcomes among patients treated for multiple lesions with the sirolimus-eluting stent compared to those treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent.

Background: Among drug-eluting stents released to date, the sirolimus-eluting stent has demonstrated the least amount of late lumen loss, but its efficacy and safety have not been compared head-to-head with the next-generation everolimus-eluting stent., Methods and Results: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome IV (SORT OUT IV) trial was a randomized multicenter, single-blind, all-comer, 2-arm, noninferiority trial comparing the everolimus-eluting stent with the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. The primary end point was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularization) parameters. The noninferiority criterion was a risk difference of 0.015. Intention-to-treat analyses were done at 9- and 18-month follow-ups. A total of 1390 patients were assigned to receive the everolimus-eluting stent and 1384 patients to the sirolimus-eluting stent. At the 9-month follow-up, 68 patients (4.9%) treated with the everolimus-eluting stent compared with 72 patients (5.2%) treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent experienced the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.31; P for noninferiority=0.01). At the 18-month follow-up, this differential remained: 99 patients (7.2%) treated with the everolimus-eluting stent versus 105 (7.6%) treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% confidence interval, 0.71-1.23). At the 9-month follow-up, the rate of definite stent thrombosis was higher in the sirolimus-eluting group (2 patients [0.1%] versus 9 patients [0.7%]; hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.05-1.02). At the 18-month follow-up, this difference was sustained (3 patients [0.2%] versus 12 patients [0.9%]; hazard ratio, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.07-0.88)., Conclusion: The everolimus-eluting stent was found to be noninferior to the sirolimus-eluting stent., Clinical Trial Registration: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00552877.

Aims: Patients with diabetes mellitus have increased risk of in-stent restenosis after coronary stent implantation due to neointimal hyperplasia (NIH). The aim of this study was to use quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to evaluate the effects of the sirolimus-eluting Cypher® stent (SES) and the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor® stent (ZES) on angiographic late lumen loss and intima hyperplasia in diabetic patients., Methods and Results: In the DiabeDES III trial, 127 patients were randomised to SES or ZES stent implantation. Angiographic 10-month follow-up data were available in 105 patients, including 48 SES and 57 ZES treated patients. Angiographic endpoints were in-stent late lumen loss and minimal lumen diameter. IVUS endpoints included NIH volume and in-stent percent volume obstruction. Baseline clinical characteristics and lesion parameters were similar in the two groups. At 10-month follow-up, angiographic in-stent late lumen loss (0.14±0.37 mm vs. 0.74±0.45 mm, p<0.001) was reduced and minimum lumen diameter was higher (2.36±0.53 mm vs. 1.96±0.65, p<0.001) in the SES group as compared to the ZES group. As compared to the ZES group, NIH volume was significantly reduced in the SES group (median [interquartile range]: 0.0 mm3 [0.0 to 1.2] vs. 16.5 mm3 [6.2 to 31.1], p<0.001). In-stent% volume obstruction was significantly reduced in SES as compared to ZES (median [interquartile range]: 0.0% [0.0-0.7] vs. 13.0% [6.7-20.8], p<0.001)., Conclusions: In diabetic patients, the SES reduced angiographic late lumen loss and inhibited NIH more effectively than ZES.

We implanted a Cypher Select™ coronary stent and two months later a Nevo™ sirolimus-eluting coronary stent in another vessel. At a prescheduled angiographic follow-up, coronary aneurysms were seen in the two stented segments, 6 and 8 months after stent implantation, respectively. Six months later, the aneurysm had healed in the Nevo, but was still present in the Cypher stented segment. We hypothesize that aneurysm formation was induced by sirolimus and the polymer of the implanted stents, and that subsequent healing was possible in the Nevo stent after degradation of the polymer.