Search

Intravascular imaging has become an integral part of the diagnostic and management strategies for intracoronary pathologies. In this White Paper we summarize current evidence and its implications on the use of intravascular imaging in interventional cardiology practice. The areas addressed are planning and optimization of percutaneous coronary intervention, management of stent failure, and evaluation of ambiguous coronary lesions and myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary disease. The findings presented followed the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system in an expert consensus process that involved a diverse writing group vetted by a review group. Expert consensus was achieved around 9 statements. Use of intravascular imaging in guiding percutaneous revascularization is supported by high-quality evidence, particularly for lesions with increased risk of recurrent events or stent failure. Specific considerations for intravascular imaging guidance of intervention in left main lesions, chronic occlusion lesions, and in patients at high risk of contrast nephropathy are explored. Use of intravascular imaging to identify pathologies associated with stent failure and guide repeat intervention, resolve ambiguities in lesion assessment, and establish diagnoses in patients who present with myocardial infarction with nonobstructive coronary disease is supported by moderate- to low-quality evidence. Each topic is accompanied by clinical pointers to aid the practicing interventional cardiologist in implementation of the White Paper findings. The findings presented in this White Paper will help to guide the use of intravascular imaging toward situations in which the balance of efficacy, safety, and cost are most optimal., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Evidence regarding the comparative efficacy of the different methods to determine the significance of coronary stenoses in the catheterization laboratory is lacking. We aimed to compare all available methods guiding the decision to perform percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We searched Medline, Embase, and CENTRAL until October 5, 2023. We included trials that randomized patients with greater than 30% stenoses who were considered for PCI and reported major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We performed a frequentist random-effects network meta-analysis and assessed the certainty of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. We included 15 trials with 16,333 participants with a mean weighted follow-up of 34 months. The trials contained a median of 49.3% (interquartile range: 32.6%, 100%) acute coronary syndrome participants. Quantitative flow ratio (QFR) was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with coronary angiography (CA) (risk ratio [RR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56 to 0.82, high certainty), fractional flow reserve (FFR) (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.92, moderate certainty), and instantaneous wave-free ratio (iFR) (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.82, moderate certainty), and ranked first for MACE (88.1% probability of being the best). FFR (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.06, moderate certainty) and iFR (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.28, moderate certainty) likely did not decrease the risk of MACE compared with CA. Intravascular imaging may not be associated with a significant decrease in MACE compared with CA (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.17, low certainty) when used to guide the decision to perform PCI. In conclusion, a decision to perform PCI based on QFR was associated with a decreased risk of MACE compared with CA, FFR, and iFR in a mixed stable coronary disease and acute coronary syndrome population. These hypothesis-generating findings should be validated in large, randomized, head-to-head trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Marc-André d'Entremont is a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Canada Graduate Scholarship Doctoral awardee. Sanjit Jolly reports receiving grants or contracts from Boston Scientific and consultation and advisory fees from Penumbra, Teleflex, and Abiomed. Gregg W. Stone has received speaker honoraria from Medtronic, Pulnovo, Abiomed, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim (Ingelheim, Germany); has served as a consultant to Abbott, Daiichi Sankyo, Ablative Solutions, CorFlow, Cardiomech, Robocath, Miracor, Vectorious, Apollo Therapeutics, Elucid Bio, Cardiac Success, Valfix, TherOx, HeartFlow, Neovasc, Ancora, Occlutech, Impulse Dynamics, Adona Medical, Millennia BioPharma, Oxitope, HighLife, Elixir, Remote Cardiac Enablement, Aria; and has equity/options from Cardiac Success, Ancora, Cagent, Applied Therapeutics, BioStar (Waltham, Massachusetts) family of funds, SpectraWave, Orchestra® Biomed, Aria, Valfix, Xenter. Dr. Stone's employer, Mount Sinai Hospital, receives research grants from Shockwave, Abbott, Abiomed, Bioventrix, Cardiovascular Systems Inc., Phillips, Biosense-Webster, Vascular Dynamics, Pulnovo, and V-wave. The remaining authors have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Despite the introduction of improved drug eluting stents (DES), the rate of repeat revascularization procedures following percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in coronary chronic total occlusions (CTO) remains high. By leaving vessels uncaged and limiting length of stented segments, drug-coated balloons (DCB) represent an appealing alternative to DES for CTO-PCI. Since data supporting the use of DCBs in CTO-PCI is scarce, we compared the outcomes of patients undergoing CTO-PCI involving DCBs vs DES only., Methods: From 2 prospective registries, outcomes of patients undergoing CTO-PCI involving DCBs and those undergoing PCI with DES only were compared. Outcomes included major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) and cardiovascular death (CV-death)., Results: Overall, 157 patients were studied; 112 (71%) underwent CTO-PCI involving DCBs and 45 (29%) were treated with DES only. Mean J-CTO score was 1.84 ± 0.7. Most CTO-lesions involved the right coronary artery, 88 (56%), and 26 (17%) cases were in-stent occlusions. In the DCB group, 46 (41%) lesions were treated with DCBs alone. Mean lengths of the stented segments in the DCB vs DES cohorts were 59 ± 28 mm vs 87 ± 37 mm (P less than .001), respectively. After 12 months, the MACCE rate was higher in the DES only vs DCB group (26% vs 11%, P=.03). Length of the stented segment was an independent predictor for MACCE (HR 1.15 [95% CI, 1.05-1.26] per 10-mm stent length)., Conclusions: Revascularization of CTO lesions involving DCBs appears safe and potentially lowers MACCE rates compared to treatment with DES alone. Importantly, using DCBs for CTO treatment may reduce total stent length, which determines PCI outcomes.

Objectives: It is uncertain, if omitting post-dilatation and stent oversizing (stent optimization) is safe and may decrease the risk for distal thrombus embolization (DTE) in STEMI patients with large thrombus burden (LTB)., Background: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) with stenting, (DTE) and flow deterioration are common and increase infarct size leading to worse outcomes., Methods: From a prospective registry, 74 consecutive STEMI patients with LTB undergoing pPCI with stenting and intentionally deferred stent optimization were analyzed. Imaging data and outcomes up to 2 years follow-up were analyzed., Results: Overall, 74 patients (18% females) underwent deferred stent optimization. Direct stenting was performed in 13 (18%) patients. No major complications occurred during pPCI. Staged stent optimization was performed after a median of 4 (interquartile range (IQR) 3; 7) days. On optical coherence tomography, under-expansion and residual thrombus were present in 59 (80%) and 27 (36%) cases, respectively. During deferred stent optimization, we encountered no case of flow deterioration (slow or no-reflow) or side branch occlusion. Minimal lumen area (mm 2 ) and stent expansion (%) were corrected from 4.87±1.86mm to 6.82±2.36mm (p<0.05) and from 69±18% to 91±12% (p<0.001), respectively. During follow-up, 1 patient (1.4%) required target lesion revascularization and 1 (1.4%) patient succumbed from cardiovascular death., Conclusions: Among STEMI patients with LTB, deferring stent optimization in the setting of pPCI appears safe and potentially mitigates the risk of DTE. The impact of this approach on infarct size and clinical outcomes warrants further investigation in a dedicated trial., (© 2023. BioMed Central Ltd., part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Covered coronary stent (CS) implantation is associated with a high risk for in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST). We describe the outcomes after overstenting ("burying") CS using contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES)., Methods: We analyzed short- and long-term outcomes of consecutive patients who had had a CS implanted, which was consecutively covered ("buried") with a third-generation DES. CSs were primarily post-dilated and then covered with a longer DES overlapping the proximal and distal edges of the CS. To ensure optimal stent expansion and appositions, all lesions were post-dilated using adequately sized non-compliant balloons., Results: Between 2015 and 2020, 23 patients (mean age 67 ± 14 years, 74% males) were treated using this novel approach. Reasons for implanting CS included treatment of coronary aneurysms (n = 7; 30%), coronary perforations (n = 13; 57%), and aorto-ostial dissections (n = 3; 13%). All CSs were successfully deployed, and no peri-procedural complications occurred. The median time of follow-up was 24.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 11.7-37.9) months. All patients had a 1-month follow-up (FU) and 19/23 (83%) patients had 12-month FU (FU range 1-60 months). No probable or definite STs occurred, and no cardiovascular deaths were observed. Among patients undergoing angiographic FU (11/23 [48%]), 1/23 showed angiographically significant ISR 6 months post CS implantation., Conclusions: Burying a coronary CS under a DES appears to be a safe and promising strategy to overcome the limitations of the currently available CS devices, including a relatively high risk for target lesion failure due to ISR and ST.

Background: Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is challenging and treatment failure rate remains high. Correction of stent under-expansion and neointimal compression using the twin-layer OPN™ highly non-compliant balloon (NCB) at high pressure (>30 atm) may lead to increased luminal gain and thus better clinical outcomes. We evaluated periprocedural safety and clinical long-term outcomes after ISR treatment using the OPN™ NCB in a real-world population., Methods: From an ongoing registry, consecutive ISR patients treated with the OPN™ NCB at a tertiary cardiology center in Switzerland were analyzed. We evaluated procedural efficacy, periprocedural complications, target lesion/vessel failure (TLF/TVF), and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)., Results: Totally, 208 ISR lesions were treated in 188 patients (mean age 68 ± 13 years, 78 % males). Most lesions were moderately to heavily calcified (89 %), the majority (70.2 %) had complex lesion characteristics (AHA Type B2/C lesions) and 50.5 % were non-focal ISR lesions. After ISR treatment using high pressure pre- and post-dilatation (mean pressure 33 ± 6 atm) with the OPN™ NCB device, the rate of major complications was low (0.96 % coronary perforation, 4 % major dissections, 1.9 % no-reflow and 0.5 % acute vessel closure). At 1-year follow-up, MACE occurred in 19.7 %; 15.4 % patients had TVF; MI and stent thrombosis was found in 5.9 % and 2.1 % of all patients, respectively; and 5 patients died., Conclusions: For ISR treatment, using the super non-compliant OPN™ balloon at very high pressures is safe. Moreover, its use might lead to a low rate of TLF/TVF during long-term follow-up, but this requires further evaluation in dedicated comparative trials., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest AAT has received consulting and speaker fees from SIS Medical. RK has received institutional grants from Abbott, Biosense-Webster, Biotronik, Boston-Scientific, Medtronic, SIS Medical and act as a consultant for Biosense-Webster, Biotronik and Medtronic. MB has received consulting and speaker fees from Abbott Vascular, Abiomed and SIS Medical. FC has received consulting and speaker fees from SIS Medical, Abiomed and Abbott Vascular. All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND Use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) is an important research topic. Many companies are quickly developing new, cutting-edge technologies and means to deliver drugs. Moreover, interest is growing in use of sirolimus-coated balloons, a promising technology in the "leaving nothing behind" era. This, in combination with interest in lesion preparation and intravascular imaging, creates a promising future for DCB for years to come. CASE REPORT A 72-year-old patient presented with NSTEMI. Coronary angiography showed a subtotal stenosis of the right coronary artery (RCA). PCI was performed on the native RCA and, given the patient's failure to adhere to the drug regimen, he was treated with a metal-free PCI strategy. After using a novel lesion preparation technique with cutting balloon and high-pressure non-compliant balloon, a novel Sirolimus DCB was used. Final angiography and OCT run showed good luminal gain despite diffuse dissections. To assess vascular healing, we performed coronary angiography 5 weeks later, which demonstrated an excellent result, with absence of residual dissection and further luminal gain compared to the index procedure. CONCLUSIONS The use of a novel lesion preparation technique (cutting balloon and high-pressure highly non-compliant balloon) in combination with guidance by intravascular imaging and the use of a new sirolimus-coated balloon may attract attention in the interventional cardiology community and stimulate discussion on lesion preparation and use of drug-coated balloons.

Background: Limus-eluting stents have become the mainstay for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, even with the latest generation drug-eluting stent, in-stent restenosis and very late stent thrombosis remain a concern. The Selution SLR™ drug-coated balloon (DCB) is a novel sirolimus-coated balloon that provides a controlled release of the antiproliferative drug. Herein we evaluated its performance in a real-world patient cohort with complex coronary artery lesions., Methods: Patients undergoing PCI using the Selution SLR™ DCB were analyzed from the prospective SIROOP registry. We evaluated procedural success and clinical outcomes, including major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization., Results: From September 2020 to April 2021, we enrolled 78 patients (87 lesions) treated using a "DCB only" strategy. The mean age was 66.7 ± 10.4 years and 28 (36%) presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Almost all lesions were type B2/C 86 (99%) and 49 (63%) had moderate to severe calcifications. Procedural success was 100%. After a median follow-up of 11.2 months (interquartile range: 10.0-12.6), MACE occurred in 5 (6.8%) patients. No acute vessel closure was observed., Conclusions: In complex coronary lesions, a "DCB only" strategy using the Selution SLR™ DCB is not just safe and feasible, but also seems to be associated with a low rate of MACE at 1-year follow-up. Our promising results warrant further evaluation in a dedicated comparative trial.

Background: Early studies evaluating the performance of bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) Absorb in in-stent restenosis (ISR) lesions indicated promising short-term to mid-term outcomes., Aims: To evaluate long-term outcomes (up to 5 years) of patients with ISR treated with the Absorb BRS., Methods: We did an observational analysis of long-term outcomes of patients treated for ISR using the Absorb BRS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California, USA) between 2013 and 2016 at the Heart Centre Luzern. The main outcomes included a device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE), defined as composite of cardiac death, target vessel (TV) myocardial infarction and TV revascularisation, target lesion revascularisation and scaffold thrombosis (ScT)., Results: Overall, 118 ISR lesions were treated using totally 131 BRS among 89 patients and 31 (35%) presented with an acute coronary syndrome. The median follow-up time was 66.3 (IQR 52.3-77) months. A DOCE had occurred in 17% at 1 year, 27% at 2 years and 40% at 5 years of all patients treated for ISR using Absorb. ScTs were observed in six (8.4%) of the cohort at 5 years., Conclusions: Treatment of ISR using the everolimus-eluting BRS Absorb resulted in high rates of DOCE at 5 years. Interestingly, while event rates were low in the first year, there was a massive increase of DOCE between 1 and 5 years after scaffold implantation. With respect to its complexity, involving also a more unpredictable vascular healing process, current and future BRS should be used very restrictively for the treatment of ISR., Competing Interests: Competing interests: MM, GMC, AA-T, MW, FM, TS, LV, ST and RK report no conflicts of interest. MB has received consulting and speaker fees from Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bayer and Mundipharma. FC has received consulting and speaker fees from SIS Medical and Abbott Vascular., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2021. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)