Search

Background: The optimal antiplatelet strategy in the second year after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remains unclear.Aims: We aimed to compare ticagrelor monotherapy with aspirin monotherapy on clinical outcomes beyond 1 year post-PCI.Methods: This post hoc subanalysis of the open-label, all-comers, randomised GLOBAL LEADERS trial, which compared 23-month ticagrelor monotherapy following 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) with 12-month aspirin monotherapy following 12-month DAPT, only included patients who, at 12 months, were free from ischaemic and bleeding events and were adherent to their assigned antiplatelet therapy. The incidences of ischaemic events (all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any stroke) and bleeding events (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] type 3 or 5 bleeding) during the second year (12-24 months) were compared between patients receiving either ticagrelor or aspirin monotherapy.Results: The present analysis included 11,121 (ticagrelor monotherapy n=5,308, and aspirin monotherapy n=5,813) of the 15,991 patients enrolled in GLOBAL LEADERS. During the second year, the ischaemic composite endpoint was lower with ticagrelor monotherapy compared to aspirin monotherapy (1.9% vs 2.6%: log-rank p=0.014, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.74, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-0.96; p=0.022), which was primarily driven by a reduced risk of myocardial infarction. In contrast, BARC type 3 or 5 bleeding was numerically higher with ticagrelor monotherapy (0.5% vs 0.3%: log-rank p=0.051, adjusted HR 1.89, 95% CI: 1.03-3.45; p=0.005).Conclusions: Patients free from events at the end of the first year post-PCI and who adhered to their prescribed regimen had a reduced risk of ischaemic events compared to aspirin mootherapy in the second year post-PCI.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01813435

Background In the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, ticagrelor monotherapy beyond 1 month compared with standard antiplatelet regimens after coronary stent implantation did not improve outcomes at intention‐to‐treat analysis. Considerable differences in treatment adherence between the experimental and control groups may have affected the intention‐to‐treat results. In this reanalysis of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, we compared the experimental and control treatment strategies in a per‐protocol analysis of patients who did not deviate from the study protocol. Methods and Results Baseline and postrandomization information were used to classify whether and when patients were deviating from the study protocol. With logistic regressions, we derived time‐varying inverse probabilities of nondeviation from protocol to reconstruct the trial population without protocol deviation. The primary end point was a composite of all‐cause mortality or nonfatal Q‐wave myocardial infarction at 2 years. At 2‐year follow‐up, 1103 (13.8%) of 7980 patients in the experimental group and 785 (9.8%) of 7988 patients in the control group qualified as protocol deviators. At per‐protocol analysis, the rate ratio for the primary end point was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.75–1.03; P =0.10) on the basis of 274 versus 325 events in the experimental versus control group. The rate ratio for the key safety end point of major bleeding was 1.00 (95% CI, 0.79–1.26; P =0.99). The per‐protocol and intention‐to‐treat effect estimates were overall consistent. Conclusions Among patients who complied with the study protocol in the GLOBAL LEADERS trial, ticagrelor plus aspirin for 1 month followed by ticagrelor monotherapy was not superior to 1‐year standard dual antiplatelet therapy followed by aspirin alone at 2 years after coronary stenting. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01813435.

Background: In the TALENT study, the sirolimus-eluting ultrathin strut Supraflex stent was non-inferior to the XIENCE stent for a device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE: defined as cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], or clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation [CI-TLR]) at 12 months. Aims: This study investigated the 3-year outcomes of the TALENT trial and long-term impact of ultrathin drug-eluting stents (DES), compared to the XIENCE everolimus-eluting thin stent. Methods: The TALENT trial is a prospective, multicentre, randomised all-comers trial comparing the Supraflex sirolimus-eluting stent with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent, with planned follow-up for 3 years. Results: The TALENT trial enrolled 1,435 patients (Supraflex n=720, XIENCE n=715) with 3-year follow-up data available in 97.8% in the Supraflex group, and in 98.9% in the XIENCE group. At 3 years, DoCE occurred in 57 patients (8.1%) in the Supraflex group, and in 66 patients (9.4%) in the XIENCE group (p=0.406). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of cardiac death, TV-MI or CI-TLR. The rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis were low and similar between groups (1.1% vs 1.4%; p=0.640). In a meta-analysis of long-term follow-up (3-5 years), ultrathin strut DES tended to reduce DoCE (relative risk 0.89 [0.79-1.01]; p=0.068), compared to thicker strut DES. The risks for cardiac death and definite or probable stent thrombosis were similar between ultrathin strut DES and thicker strut DES. Conclusions: At 3-year follow-up, the use of the Supraflex stent was at least as safe and efficacious as the XIENCE stent in an all-comers population. ClinicalTrials.gov

Wall shear stress (WSS) estimated in 3D-quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) models appears to provide useful prognostic information and identifies high-risk patients and lesions. However, conventional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) analysis is cumbersome limiting its application in the clinical arena. This report introduces a user-friendly software that allows real-time WSS computation and examines its reproducibility and accuracy in assessing WSS distribution against conventional CFD analysis.From a registry of 414 patients with borderline negative fractional flow reserve (0.81-0.85), 100 lesions were randomly selected. 3D-QCA and CFD analysis were performed using the conventional approach and the novel CAAS Workstation WSS software, and QCA as well as WSS estimations of the two approaches were compared. The reproducibility of the two methodologies was evaluated in a subgroup of 50 lesions.A good agreement was noted between the conventional approach and the novel software for 3D-QCA metrics (ICC range: 0.73-0-93) and maximum WSS at the lesion site (ICC: 0.88). Both methodologies had a high reproducibility in assessing lesion severity (ICC range: 0.83-0.97 for the conventional approach; 0.84-0.96 for the CAAS Workstation WSS software) and WSS distribution (ICC: 0.85-0.89 and 0.83-0.87, respectively). Simulation time was significantly shorter using the CAAS Workstation WSS software compared to the conventional approach (4.13 ± 0.59 min vs 23.14 ± 2.56 min, p 0.001).CAAS Workstation WSS software is fast, reproducible, and accurate in assessing WSS distribution. Therefore, this software is expected to enable the broad use of WSS metrics in the clinical arena to identify high-risk lesions and vulnerable patients.

Drug-eluting stents (DES) showed improved efficacy and safety compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), and international guidelines recommend their use as first line treatment. Yet, BMS are still widely used in practice, especially in large coronary vessels. We aimed to compare efficacy and safety of second-generation DES over BMS in large coronary culprit ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction lesions.We evaluated impact of large coronary stents (maximum size ≥3.50 mm) or smaller stents (3.50 mm), among 1498 patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, randomly allocated to everolimus-eluting DES or to an equivalent BMS platform in the EXAMINATION trial (Clinical Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial). Clinical events up to 5 years of follow-up were evaluated.Large coronary stents were used in 683 patients (45.9%). At 5-year follow-up, the crude rate of the primary end point, a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization, was similar among patients treated with large or smaller coronary stents. The impact of DES versus BMS implantation was consistent irrespective of the stent size both for the primary end point (POur results do not support the preferential use of BMS for patients with large coronary vessels. DES may warrant improved efficacy irrespective of stent size among patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00828087.

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are considered revascularization procedures, but only CABG can prolong life in stable coronary artery disease. Thus, PCI and CABG mechanisms may differ. Viability and/or ischemia detection to guide revascularization have been unable to accurately predict treatment effects of CABG or PCI, questioning a revascularization mechanism for improving survival. By contrast, preventing myocardial infarction may save lives. However, the majority of infarcts are generated by non-flow-limiting stenoses, but PCI is solely focused on treating flow-limiting lesions. Thus, PCI cannot be expected to significantly limit new infarcts, but CABG may do so through providing flow distal to vessel occlusions. All comparisons of CABG to PCI or medical therapy that demonstrate survival effects with CABG also demonstrate infarct reduction. Thus, CABG may differ from PCI by providing "surgical collateralization," prolonging life by preventing myocardial infarctions. The evidence is reviewed here.

ContextCompared with bare metal stents, sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents have been shown to markedly improve angiographic and clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary revascularization, but their performance in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions has not been compared in a prospective multicenter study.ObjectiveTo compare the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents.DesignProspective, randomized comparative trial (the REALITY trial) conducted between August 2003 and February 2004, with angiographic follow-up at 8 months and clinical follow-up at 12 months.SettingNinety hospitals in Europe, Latin America, and Asia.PatientsA total of 1386 patients (mean age, 62.6 years; 73.1% men; 28.0% with diabetes) with angina pectoris and 1 or 2 de novo lesions (2.25-3.00 mm in diameter) in native coronary arteries.InterventionPatients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a sirolimus-eluting stent (n = 701) or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (n = 685).Main Outcome MeasuresThe primary end point was in-lesion binary restenosis (presence of a more than 50% luminal-diameter stenosis) at 8 months. Secondary end points included 1-year rates of target lesion and vessel revascularization and a composite end point of cardiac death, Q-wave or non–Q-wave myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft surgery, or repeat target lesion revascularization.ResultsIn-lesion binary restenosis at 8 months occurred in 86 patients (9.6%) with a sirolimus-eluting stent vs 95 (11.1%) with a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-1.17; P = .31). For sirolimus- vs paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the mean (SD) in-stent late loss was 0.09 (0.43) mm vs 0.31 (0.44) mm (difference, −0.22 mm; 95% CI, −0.26 to −0.18 mm; P

To investigate the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in bifurcation versus non-bifurcation lesions using the next-generation Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES).We analyzed 3-year pooled data from the RESOLUTE All-Comers trial and the RESOLUTE International registry. The R-ZES was used in 2772 non-bifurcation lesion patients and 703 bifurcation lesion patients, of which 482 were treated with a simple-stent technique (1 stent used to treat the bifurcation lesion) and 221 with a complex bifurcation technique (2 or more stents used). The primary endpoint was 3-year target lesion failure (TLF, defined as the composite of death from cardiac causes, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization [TLR]), and was 13.3% in bifurcation vs 11.3% in non-bifurcation lesion patients (adjusted P=.06). Landmark analysis revealed that this difference was driven by differences in the first 30 days between bifurcation vs non-bifurcation lesions (TLF, 6.6% vs 2.7%, respectively; adjusted P.001), which included significant differences in each component of TLF and in-stent thrombosis. Between 31 days and 3 years, TLF, its components, and stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between bifurcation lesions and non-bifurcation lesions (TLF, 7.7% vs 9.0%, respectively; adjusted P=.50).The 3-year risk of TLF following PCI with R-ZES in bifurcation lesions was not significantly different from non-bifurcation lesions. However, there was an increased risk associated with bifurcation lesions during the first 30 days; beyond 30 days, bifurcation lesions and non-bifurcation lesions yielded similar 3-year outcomes.

ST-elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMI) caused by proximal left-anterior descending (LAD) lesions have more myocardium at risk and worse outcomes than those located in other segments. The aim is to compare outcomes of patients with STEMI and proximal-LAD lesions treated with bare-metal stents (BMS) versus everolimus-eluting stents (EES).The EXAMINATION trial randomized 1498 STEMI patients to BMS versus EES. The primary end point was the patient-oriented combined of all-cause death, any-recurrent myocardial infarction (MI) and any-revascularization. The secondary end point included the device-oriented combined of cardiac death, target-vessel MI and target-lesion revascularization (TLR).STEMI with a proximal-LAD occlusion was observed in 290 patients (BMS = 132 and EES = 158). Both groups were similar except for diabetes (12.9% vs 24.1%; P = .016). At 1 year, the primary end point was observed in 18.9% and 9.5% of patients treated with BMS and EES, respectively (P = .023). The secondary end point was observed in 11.4% and 5.1%, respectively (P = .053). There were no differences in cardiac death (4.5% vs 3.8%; P = .750) and MI (1.5% vs 0%; P = .121). BMS had higher rate of TLR compared to EES (6.8% vs 1.3%; P = .014). Patients with proximal-LAD STEMI had higher mortality than patients with non proximal-LAD STEMI (5.5% vs 2.9%; P = .027). Proximal-LAD lesions treated with BMS tended to increase the risk of the primary end point compared with other segments (18.9% vs 13.0%; P = .079). However, EES implanted in proximal-LAD had similar outcomes compared with other locations (9.5% vs 12.0%; P = .430). Adjusting for confounders, the interaction between BMS and proximal-LAD location was associated with the primary end point.Patients with STEMI and proximal-LAD lesions treated with EES have better outcomes compared with BMS at 1 year. Although further investigations are required, it seems reasonable to consider EES for proximal-LAD STEMI-lesions.

Although he makes no claim to be a pioneer, Prof. Patrick Serruys,who recently retired as Chief of Interventional Cardiology at the Thoraxcenter, Rotterdam, and his colleagues have taken the simple idea of the stent to new heights, and in the process produced an original paper once every few days, reports Barry Shurlock PhD.

This study sought to assess whether patient age modifies the comparative effectiveness of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).Increasingly, CABG and PCI are performed in older patients to treat multivessel disease, but their comparative effectiveness is uncertain.Individual data from 7,812 patients randomized in 1 of 10 clinical trials of CABG or PCI were pooled. Age was analyzed as a continuous variable in the primary analysis and was divided into tertiles for descriptive purposes (≤56.2 years, 56.3 to 65.1 years, ≥65.2 years). The outcomes assessed were death, myocardial infarction and repeat revascularization over complete follow-up, and angina at 1 year.Older patients were more likely to have hypertension, diabetes, and 3-vessel disease compared with younger patients (p0.001 for trend). Over a median follow-up of 5.9 years, the effect of CABG versus PCI on mortality varied according to age (interaction p0.01), with adjusted CABG-to-PCI hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of 1.23 (95% CI: 0.95 to 1.59) in the youngest tertile; 0.89 (95% CI: 0.73 to 1.10) in the middle tertile; and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.67 to 0.94) in the oldest tertile. The CABG-to-PCI hazard ratio of less than 1 for patients 59 years of age and older. A similar interaction of age with treatment was present for the composite outcome of death or myocardial infarction. In contrast, patient age did not alter the comparative effectiveness of CABG and PCI on the outcomes of repeat revascularization or angina.Patient age modifies the comparative effectiveness of CABG and PCI on hard cardiac events, with CABG favored at older ages and PCI favored at younger ages.

Background: There is few information on the long-term efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare metal stents (BMS) in all-comer percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)patients complicated by renal insufficiency (RI). Objective: Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of PCI-patients with RI treated exclusively with BMS, SES, or PES in our academic hospital. Methods: A total of 1382 patients, included in three cohorts of consecutive PCI-patients (BMS = 392; SES = 498; PES = 492), were categorized by creatinine clearance calculated by the CockroftGault formula (normal kidney function = 90; mild RI = 6089; moderate RI < 60) and systematically followed for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results: Mortality rates were significantly higher for patients with moderate RI compared to mild RI and normal kidney function at 6 years (KaplanMeier estimate: moderate RI (34%) vs. mild RI (12%), P < 0.001; moderate RI (34%) vs. normal kidney function (8%), P < 0.001). After multivariate Cox-regression analysis, SES and PES decreased the occurrence of target-vessel revascularization (TVR) and MACE at 6 years in patients with a normal creatinine clearance compared to BMS [adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.280.84; aHR = 0.75, 95% CI: 0.570.97, respectively] with no significant effect on mortality. Safety- and efficacy end points were comparable for the three stent types in patients with mild- and moderate renal function. Conclusion: Patients with a normal creatinine clearance had significant improvement in TVR and MACE rates after SES- or PES implantation compared to BMS at 6 years. However, there was no superiority of both drug-eluting stents over BMS in safety and efficacy end points for patients with impaired renal function. (c) 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Short- and long-term data showed that drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly decreased target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). However, conflicting long-term data remain for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of all patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for a de novo lesion with exclusive use of BMS, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES).Three PPCI cohorts (BMS = 80; SES = 92; PES = 162) were systematically followed for the occurrence of MACE.Very late stent thrombosis was more common after the implantation of SES as compared to PES or BMS (7.6%, 0.6%, and 0.0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicate no statistically significant difference for mortality between the three stent types at 6 years (BMS = 25%; SES = 15%; PES = 21%; Log-rank p = 0.2). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, mortality, mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), and MACE rates were significantly lower for SES compared to BMS, but not for PES (aHR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.98; aHR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.96; aHR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, respectively). No differences were observed between the three stent types for TVR rates.Neither SES nor PES improved safety or efficacy as compared to BMS in a STEMI population at 6 years. After adjusting, the usage of SES resulted in a significant decrease in mortality, mortality/MI and MACE rates as compared to BMS, in contrast to the usage of PES. SES and PES have a similar effectiveness and safety profile, although very late stent thrombosis was more common with SES.

From April 16, 2002 to October 16, 2002, 10 consecutive patients with coronary disease on chronic dialysis were treated with sirolimus-eluting stents. Diabetes was present in 30% and half of the patients had multivessel coronary disease. On average, patients had been on dialysis for 5 years prior to the procedure (range: 2-15 years). Five patients were on hemodialysis and 5 patients were on peritoneal dialysis. Overall, 18 lesions were treated with 1.9 +/- 1.1 sirolimus-eluting stents per patient. At a mean follow-up of 403 days, there were no cases of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

Restenosis at the site of an endoluminal procedure remains a significant problem in the practice of interventional cardiology. We present current data on intimal hyperplasia, which identify the major role of endothelial cells (ECs) in the development of restenosis. Considering endothelial denudation as one of the most important mechanisms contributing to restenosis, we focus more attention on methods of accelerating restoration of endothelial continuity. Prevention of restenosis may be achieved by promoting endothelial regeneration through the use of growth factors, EC seeding, vessel reconstruction with autologous EC/fibrin matrix, and the use of estrogen-loaded stents and stents designed to capture progenitor ECs.

The aim of this prospective, multicenter, single arm study was to assess the safety and feasibility of EXPRESS TM Coronary Stent implantation in native coronary arteries without balloon predilatation. Forty-two patients with de novo or restenotic lesions were enrolled, of which 38 were eligible for analysis. The coronary lesions were predominantly complex, occurring in arteries with a mean reference diameter of 2.80 ± 0.49 mm. Technical and procedural success were achieved in 89.5% and 84% of the cases respectively. The mean minimal lumen diameter increased from 1.08 ± 0.26 mm to 2.55 ± 0.44 mm and diameter stenosis decreased from 61 ± 7% to 13 ± 8%. The primary endpoint of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days was 2.6% and was limited to only one event (target vessel revascularization, nontarget lesion). No other MACE were observed during the three-month follow-up period. Based on the findings of this study, direct stenting with the EXPRESS TM Stent appears feasible and is well tolerated. (J Interven Cardiol 2003;16:491‐497)

Background Computerized quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) has fundamentally altered our approach to the assessment of coronary interventional techniques and strategies aimed at the prevention of recurrence and progression of stenosis. It is essential, therefore, that the performance of QCA systems, upon which much of our scientific understanding has become integrally dependent, is evaluated in an objective and uniform manner. Methods and Results We validated 10 QCA systems at core laboratories in North America and Europe. Cine films were made of phantom stenoses of known diameter (0.5 to 1.9 mm) under four experimental conditions: in vivo (coronary arteries of pigs) calibrated at the isocenter or by use of the catheter as a scaling device and in vitro with 50% contrast and 100% contrast. The cine films were analyzed by each automated QCA system without observer interaction. Accuracy and precision were taken as the mean and SD of the signed differences between the phantom stenoses, and the measured minimal luminal diameters and the correlation coefficient ( r ), the SEE, the y intercept, and the slope were derived by their linear regression. Performance of the 10 QCA systems ranged widely: accuracy, +0.07 to +0.31 mm; precision, ±0.14 to ±0.24 mm; correlation ( r ), .96 to .89; SEE, ±0.11 to ±0.16 mm; intercept, +0.08 to +0.31 mm; and slope, 0.86 to 0.64. Conclusions There is a marked variability in performance between systems when assessed over the range of 0.5 to 1.9 mm. The range of accuracy, intercept, and slope values of this report indicates that absolute measurements of luminal diameter from different multicenter angiographic trials may not be directly comparable and additionally suggests that such absolute measurements may not be directly applicable to clinical practice using an on-line QCA system with a different edge detection algorithm. Power calculations and study design of angiographic trials should be adjusted for the precision of the QCA system used to avoid the risk of failing to detect small differences in patient populations. This study may guide the fine-tuning of algorithms incorporated within each system and facilitate the maintenance of high standards of QCA for scientific studies.

Background: A 79-year-old female patient with past medical history of chronic myeloid leukaemia, presented to the outpatient cardiology clinic with shortness of breath (NYHA class 3) and fatigue. Investigation: Echocardiography (ECG) and multislice computed tomography (MSCT). Diagnosis: Severe calcified aortic valve stenosis by echocardiography. Logistic EuroSCORE 10.3. Porcelain aorta by multislice computed tomography (MSCT). Treatment: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with an 18 Fr Medtronic-CoreValve system (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, USA) using a right transfemoral arterial approach.