Search

Background: Left atrial appendage (LAA) occluder embolization is an infrequent but serious complication., Objectives: We aim to describe timing, management and clinical outcomes of device embolization in a multi-center registry., Methods: Patient characteristics, imaging findings and procedure and follow-up data were collected retrospectively. Device embolizations were categorized according to 1) timing 2) management and 3) clinical outcomes., Results: Sixty-seven centers contributed data. Device embolization occurred in 108 patients. In 70.4 % of cases, it happened within the first 24 h of the procedure. The device was purposefully left in the LA and the aorta in two (1.9 %) patients, an initial percutaneous retrieval was attempted in 81 (75.0 %) and surgery without prior percutaneous retrieval attempt was performed in 23 (21.3 %) patients. Two patients died before a retrieval attempt could be made. In 28/81 (34.6 %) patients with an initial percutaneous retrieval attempt a second, additional attempt was performed, which was associated with a high mortality (death in patients with one attempt: 2.9 % vs. second attempt: 21.4 %, p < 0.001). The primary outcome (bailout surgery, cardiogenic shock, stroke, TIA, and/or death) occurred in 47 (43.5 %) patients. Other major complications related to device embolization occurred in 21 (19.4 %) patients., Conclusions: The majority of device embolizations after LAA closure occurs early. A percutaneous approach is often the preferred method for a first rescue attempt. Major adverse event rates, including death, are high particularly if the first retrieval attempt was unsuccessful., Condensed Abstract: This dedicated multicenter registry examined timing, management, and clinical outcome of device embolization. Early embolization (70.4 %) was most frequent. As a first rescue attempt, percutaneous retrieval was preferred in 75.0 %, followed by surgical removal (21.3 %). In patients with a second retrieval attempt a higher mortality (death first attempt: 2.9 % vs. death second attempt: 24.1 %, p < 0.001) was observed. Mortality (10.2 %) and the major complication rate after device embolization were high., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest A. Aminian is a consultant and proctor for Boston Scientific and Abbott. I. Akin received lecture and proctoring fees from Boston Scientific for the Watchman Okkluder. J. Lund discloses a clinical advisor (proctor) role in LAAC (Abbott) and lecture fees (Abbott, Boston scientific). E. Guerios serves as proctor for LAA closure for Abbott and Lifetech Scientific. N. Amabile has received proctoring and consulting fees from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. C. Skurk has received proctor honoraria from Boston Scientific and speaker fees from Boston Scientific and Lifetech Scientific. J. Harvey is proctor for Abiomed, Boston Scientific and Medtronic and part of the Speaker's bureau for Abiomed, Boston Scientific and Medtronic. He also is part of the advisory board for Avail, Boston Scientific and Medtronic. H. Sievert has received study honoraria to institution, travel expenses and consulting fees from 4tech Cardio, Abbott, Ablative Solutions, Adona Medical, Akura Medical, Ancora Heart, Append Medical, Axon, Bavaria Medizin Technologie GmbH, Bioventrix, Boston Scientific, Cardiac Dimensions, Cardiac Success, Cardimed, Cardionovum, Celonova, Contego, Coramaze, Croivalve, CSL Behring LLC, CVRx, Dinova, Edwards, Endobar, Endologix, Endomatic, Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Hangzhou Nuomao Medtech, Holistick Medical, Intershunt, Intervene, K2, Laminar, Lifetech, Magenta, Maquet Getinge Group, Metavention, Mitralix, Mokita, Neurotronic, NXT Biomedical, Occlutech, Recor, Renal Guard, Shifamed, Terumo, Trisol, Vascular Dynamics, Vectorious Medtech, Venus, Venock, Vivasure Medical, Vvital Biomed and Whiteswell. M. Kühne received personal fees from Bayer, Böhringer Ingelheim, Pfizer BMS, Daiichi Sankyo, Medtronic, Biotronik, Boston Scientific, Johnson & Johnson, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., as well as grants from Bayer, Pfizer, Boston Scientific, BMS, Biotronik, and Daiichi Sankyo. S. Sabir is part of the Boston Scientific WATCHMAN advisory board. J. Kim has received proctoring fees from Abbott Vascular. M. Montorfano received consultant fees from Abbott, Boston Scientific, Kardia. M. Ancona received consultant fees from Abbott. Relevant research funding went to Vanderbilt University Medical Center from Boston Scientific, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Medtronic and Atricure, where C. Ellis is practicing. He also reseves a consultant and advisor fee from Abbott Medical, Atricure, Boston Scientific, Medtronic. L. Nombela-Franco is proctor for Abbott Vascular and has received lectures fees from Boston Scientific. A. Natale has received speaker honoraria from Boston Scientific, Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, Biotronik, and Medtronic. He also is a consultant for Biosense Webster, St. Jude Medical, and Janssen. All other authors declare that they have no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the ACURATE neo device has been associated with a non-negligible incidence of paravalvular aortic regurgitation (AR). The new-generation ACURATE neo2 has been designed to mitigate this limitation., Aims: The aim of the study was to compare TAVR with the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices., Methods: The NEOPRO and NEOPRO-2 registries retrospectively included patients undergoing transfemoral TAVR with self-expanding valves at 24 and 20 centres, respectively. Patients receiving the ACURATE neo and neo2 devices (from January 2012 to December 2021) were included in this study. Predischarge and 30-day VARC-3 defined outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR. Subgroup analyses per degree of aortic valve calcification were performed., Results: A total of 2,026 patients (neo: 1,263, neo2: 763) were included. Predischarge moderate or severe paravalvular AR was less frequent for the neo2 group (2% vs 5%; p<0.001), resulting in higher VARC-3 intended valve performance (96% vs 90%; p<0.001). Furthermore, more patients receiving the neo2 had none/trace paravalvular AR (59% vs 38%; p<0.001). The reduction in paravalvular AR with neo2 was mainly observed with heavy aortic valve calcification. New pacemaker implantation and VARC-3 technical and device success rates were similar between the 2 groups; there were more frequent vascular and bleeding complications for the neo device. Similar 1-year survival was detected after TAVR (neo2: 90% vs neo: 87%; p=0.14)., Conclusions: TAVR with the ACURATE neo2 device was associated with a lower prevalence of moderate or severe paravalvular AR and more patients with none/trace paravalvular AR. This difference was particularly evident with heavy aortic valve calcification.

Objective: Patients with rapidly deteriorating clinical status due to severe aortic stenosis are often referred for expedited transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). Data regarding the outcome of such interventions is limited. We aimed to evaluate the outcome of patients undergoing expedited TAVR., Design and Setting: Data were derived from the Israeli Multicenter Registry., Subjects: Subjects were divided into two groups based on procedure urgency: patients who were electively hospitalized for the procedure (N = 3140) and those who had an expedited TAVR (N = 142). Procedural and periprocedural complication rates were significantly higher among patients with an expedited indication for TAVR compared to those having an elective procedure: valve malposition 4.6% versus 0.6% (p &lt; 0.001), procedural cardiopulmonary resuscitation 4.3% versus 1.0% (p = 0.007), postprocedure myocardial infarction 2.0% versus 0.4% (p = 0.002), and stage 3 acute kidney injury 3.0% versus 1.1%, (p &lt; 0.001). Patients with expedited indication for TAVR had significantly higher in hospital mortality (5.6% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.003). Kaplan-Meier's survival analysis showed that patients undergoing expedited TAVR had higher 3-year mortality rates compared to patients undergoing an elective TAVR procedure (p &lt; 0.001). Multivariate analysis found that patients with expedited indication had fourfolds increased risk of in-hospital mortality (odds ratio: 4.07, p = 0.001), and nearly twofolds increased risk of mortality at 3-year (hazard ratio: 1.69, p = 0.001) compared to those having an elective procedure., Conclusion: Patients with expedited indications for TAVR suffer from poor short- and long-term outcomes. It is important to characterize and identify these patients before the deterioration to perform TAVR in a fast-track pathway to minimize their procedural risk., (© 2022 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

The Valve-in-Valve (ViV) technique is an emerging alternative for the treatment of bioprosthetic structural valve deterioration (SVD) in the mitral position. We report on intermediate-term outcomes of patients with symptomatic SVD in the mitral position who were treated by transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve (TM-ViV) implantation during the years 2010-2019 in our center. Three main outcomes were examined during the follow-up period: NYHA functional class, TM-ViV hemodynamic data per echocardiography, and mortality. Our cohort consisted of 49 patients (mean age 77.4 ± 10.5 years, 65.3% female). The indications for TM-ViV were mainly for regurgitant pathology (77.6%). All 49 patients were treated with a balloon-expandable device. The procedure was performed via transapical access in 17 cases (34.7%) and transfemoral vein/trans-atrial septal puncture in 32 cases (65.3%). Mean follow-up was 4.4 ± 2.0 years. 98% and 91% of patients were in NYHA I/II at 1 and 5 years, respectively. Mitral regurgitation was ≥moderate in 86.3% of patients prior to the procedure and this decreased to 0% ( p < 0.001) following the procedure and was maintained over 2 years follow-up. The mean trans-mitral valve gradients decreased from pre-procedural values of 10.1 ± 5.1 mmHg to 7.0 ± 2.4 mmHg at 1 month following the procedure ( p = 0.03). Mortality at 1 year was 16% (95%, CI 5-26) and 35% (95%, CI 18-49) at 5 years. ViV in the mitral position offers an effective and durable treatment option for patients with SVD at high surgical risk., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Schamroth Pravda, Mishaev, Levi, Witberg, Shapira, Orvin, Barkan, Hamdan, Sharoni, Perl, Sagie, Assa, Kornowski and Codner.)

Severe aortic stenosis (AS) is often characterized by myocardial interstitial fibrosis. Myocardial interstitial fibrosis, classically measured by magnetic resonance imaging, was also shown to be accurately measured by computed tomography (CT)-derived extracellular volume fraction (ECVF). Serum albumin (SA) level (g/dl) has been shown to correlate with ECVF among patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction. Our objective was to evaluate the association between SA and ECVF among patients with severe symptomatic AS. Patients with symptomatic severe AS who were evaluated as candidates for intervention between 2016 and 2018 were enrolled prospectively. All patients underwent precontrast and postcontrast CT for estimating myocardial ECVF. Valid ambulatory SA within 6 weeks of the cardiac CT were obtained and classified as (tertiles) <3.8, 3.8 to 4.19, and ≥4.2 g/dl. Patients with acute systemic illness at the time of the albumin test were excluded. The study included 68 patients, mean age 81 ± 6 years, 53% women. Patients with lower SA were more likely to have chronic renal failure, previous percutaneous coronary interventions, and a reduced functional class. The mean ECVF (%) in the study cohort was 41 ± 12%, significantly higher among the patients in the lower SA level groups (50 ± 12% vs 38 ± 7% vs 33 ± 9% in the <3.8 g/dl, 3.8 to 4.19 g/dl and ≥4.2 g/dl groups respectively, p for trend <0.001). A statistically significant inverse correlation was found between SA levels and ECVF (r -0.7, p <0.001). Multivariable analysis showed significant independent association between low SA and ECVF. In conclusion, the SA level is inversely associated with CT-derived ECVF in patients with severe AS., Competing Interests: Disclosures The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is a growing interest in transcutaneous aortic valve implantation (TAVI) therapy among patients with bicuspid severe aortic stenosis (BAV). Conduction disturbances remain a frequent complication of TAVI, and new-onset permanent LBBB (NOP-LBBB) post-TAVI may be a marker of worse outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the rate of NOP-LBBB following TAVI among patients with BAV as compared to tricuspid severe aortic stenosis (TAV). Patients enrolled in the multicenter (5 centers) Bicuspid AS TAVI Registry were reviewed and compared with patients with TAV. Patients with previous aortic valve replacement, other valve morphologies and those with preprocedural LBBB or pacemaker were excluded. NOP-LBBB was defined as LBBB first detected and persisting 30-days following TAVI. A total of 387 patients (66 with BAV, 321 with TAV), age 80.3 ± 7.3, 47% females were analyzed. The device success rates were 95% in both groups without any conversions to surgery. The rate of NOP-LBBB was significantly higher among patients with BAV versus TAV (29.2% vs 16.9%, p = 0.02). However, the rate of post procedural pacemaker implantation was similar (14.8% vs 12.5%; respectively, p = 0.62). In BAV and TAV groups, 1-year mortality (6.1% vs 7.2%; respectively, p = 0.75) and stroke rates (6.1% vs 3.5%; respectively, p = 0.30) were not significantly different. Multivariate analysis identified BAV as an independent predictor of NOP-LBBB (AdjOR = 2.7, 95%CI 1.3 to 5.4). Furthermore, BAV subtypes with raphe (type 1) were identified as independent predictors of NOP-LBBB (AdjOR = 3.2, 95%CI: 1.5 to 6.7). In conclusion, patients with BAV undergoing TAVI have greater risk for developing NOP-LBBB compared with patients with TAV and the presence of raphe was associated with increased risk of NOP-LBBB. The prognostic significance for this finding warrants further evaluation in future studies., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Distinct anatomical features predispose bicuspid AS patients to conduction disturbances after TAVR. This study sought to evaluate whether the incidence of permanent pacemaker implantation (PPMI) and left bundle branch block (LBBB) in patients with bicuspid aortic stenosis (AS) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is related to an anatomical association between bicuspid AS and short membranous septal (MS) length., Methods: Sixty-seven consecutive patients with bicuspid AS from a Bicuspid AS TAVR multicenter registry and 67 propensity-matched patients with tricuspid AS underwent computed tomography before TAVR., Results: MS length was significantly shorter in bicuspid AS compared with tricuspid AS (6.2 ± 2.5 mm vs. 8.4 ± 2.7 mm, respectively; p < 0.001). In patients with bicuspid AS, MS length and aortic valve calcification were the most powerful pre-procedural independent predictors of PPMI or LBBB (odds ratio [OR]: 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.15 to 1.55, p = 0.003 and OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.1 to 3.34, p = 0.022, respectively). When taking into account pre- and post-procedural parameters, aortic valve calcification and the difference between MS length and implantation depth were the most powerful independent predictors of PPMI or LBBB in patients with bicuspid AS (OR: 1.82, 95%: 1.1 to 3.1, p = 0.027; OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 1.10 to 1.38, p = 0.003)., Conclusion: MS length, which was significantly shorter in bicuspid AS compared with tricuspid AS, aortic valve calcification, and device implantation deeper than MS length predict PPMI or LBBB in bicuspid AS after TAVR., (Copyright © 2020 Society of Cardiovascular Computed Tomography. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: In contrast to surgical aortic valve replacement, left ventricle (LV) hypertrophy (LVH) had not been clearly associated with mortality following transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR)., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of patients enrolled in the Israeli multicenter TAVR registry for whom preprocedural LV mass index (LVMI) data were available. Patients were divided into categories according to LVMI: normal LVMI and mild, moderate, and severe LVH. Mild LVH was regarded as the reference group. Additionally, LV geometry patterns were examined (concentric and eccentric LVH, and concentric remodeling)., Results: The cohort consisted of 1,559 patients, 46.5% male, with a mean age of 82.2 (±6.8) years and mean LVMI of 121 (±29) g/m 2 . Rates of normal LVMI and mild, moderate, and severe LVH were 31% (n = 485), 21% (n = 322), 18% (n = 279), and 30% (n = 475), respectively. Three-year mortality rates for normal LVMI and mild, moderate, and severe LVH were 19.8%, 18.3%, 23.7%, and 24.4%, respectively. Compared to mild LVH, moderate LVH and severe LVH were independently associated with an increased risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 1.58, 95% CI 1.15-2.18, P = .005; HR 1.46, 95% CI 1.1-1.95, P = .009; respectively). Concentric LVH was independently associated with a decreased risk for mortality compared to normal LV geometry (HR 0.75, 95% CI 0.63-0.89, P = .001). Compared to concentric LVH, eccentric LVH was independently associated with a 33% increased risk for mortality (HR 1.33, 95% CI 1.11-1.60, P = .002)., Conclusions: Mild concentric LVH confers a protective effect among patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR. However, hypertrophy becomes maladaptive, and an increased baseline LVMI, eccentric pattern particularly, may be associated with all-cause mortality in this population., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Ariel Finkelstein receives proctor fees from Medtronic and Edwards Lifesciences. None of the other authors have disclosures to declare., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There is limited organized "real life" data regarding the long-term structural and functional durability of transcatheter aortic valve implants, a topic of major importance. We assessed the 5-year structural and functional integrity outcomes following trans-catheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with both self-expandable and balloon-expandable prosthetic valve devices. This study included 450 consecutive patients who underwent TAVI for severe symptomatic aortic stenosis (AS) between September 2008 and December 2011. Data were acquired from a multicenter Israeli registry and the median follow up time was 5.6 years. In 184 patients (40.9%) who survived 5 years, prostheses displayed sustained hemodynamic performance, with average peak and mean aortic valve gradients of 16.2 ± 8.9 and 9.2 ± 6.6 mm Hg, respectively. Late structural valve deterioration was found in 22 (12.3%) patients. Of these, 16 (8.9%) experienced valve deterioration and 6 (3.3%) experienced valve failure. Among the 6 patients with bioprosthetic valve failure, only 3 underwent re-interventions. Bioprosthetic valve dysfunction occurred more frequently in patients with small valves (23 mm) and high peak and mean transvalvular gradients at baseline. In conclusion, a relatively low rate of valve deterioration or failure was noted in our long-term follow-up study after TAVI procedures with both the catheter-based self-expandable and balloon-expandable prosthetic valves., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To compare procedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) patients who were implanted with older versus newer generation valves., Background: The current evidence base for improved safety of the newer commercially available TAVI valves is limited., Methods: A retrospective analysis of the Israeli multicenter TAVI registry was performed. Patients were stratified by valve generation of four commercially available devices: Edwards Sapien (ESX) Edwards Sapien S3 (ES3), Medtronic CoreValve (MCV), and Medtronic Evolut R (MER)., Results: The cohort consisted of 737 patients with new generation valves (NGVs; ES3 n = 223; MER n = 514) and 1,869 with old generation valves (OGVs; MCV n = 1,181; ESX n = 688). Device success rates were significantly higher in NGV (97.5 versus 95.4%), with less post-procedural paravalvular leak (3 versus 5.8%), and valve mal-positioning (1.2 versus 3.4%); all P-values<0.05. There were no differences in rates of permanent pacemaker implantation, stroke or acute kidney injury (AKI) of any stage between the groups, although stage ≥2 AKI was more prevalent in NGV. After adjustment to significant differences in baseline patient and procedural characteristics, device success was higher (OR 1.86, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09-3.18, P = 0.023) and the 1-month safety outcome was significantly lower (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.55-0.96, P = 0.025) for NGV. Device success was driven mainly by improved rates of PVL of ES3, while the safety outcome was mainly driven by improved rates of life-threatening bleeding and valve mal-positioning of MER., Conclusion: As compared to OGV, use of NGV for TAVI was associated with higher rates of device success and lower rates of adverse events., (© 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Aim: To compare procedural outcomes of transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) patients treated with new-generation valves., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis on an Israeli multicenter registry comprised of four tertiary centers, comparing patient outcomes implanted with the Edwards SAPIEN S3 (ES3) vs. the Medtronic Evolut R (MER) valves., Results: The study population included 735 patients (ES3 n = 223; MER n = 512). The use of MER was significantly associated (p < 0.05) with higher rates of post-dilatation (35% vs. 10%), and the need for a second valve (2.7% vs. 0.5%). Procedural device success was comparable between groups (97% vs. 98%, p = 0.76); however, moderate angiographic paravalvular leak was higher (3.3% vs. 0.5%, p = 0.027) for MER vs. ES3, respectively. As compared to MER, 1 month echocardiography revealed higher peak and mean aortic valve gradients for ES3 (12/6 vs. 17/10 mmHg, p < 0.001, respectively). While the safety outcome at 1 month was lower for MER (8.8% vs. 13.9%, p = 0.035), similar 1-month, 1-year, and 3-year all-cause mortality were observed (1.9% vs. 1.3%; 8% vs. 8.5%, and 9.7 vs. 10.3%, for MER vs. ES3, respectively). In a propensity score matching analysis, there was no difference in major outcomes between the groups, including device success and the 1 month safety outcome., Conclusion: Although favorable efficacy and safety clinical outcomes were observed in this large contemporary registry for both new-generation devices used, some procedural and post-procedural outcomes differ significantly between the two valves.

Referral of low surgical risk (LSR) patients for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) becomes common in multiple tertiary centers, and clinical trial data for this population are not available to date. We performed a retrospective analysis on an Israeli multicenter registry. LSR and intermediate-high surgical risk (I-HSR) were defined by a Society of Thoracic Surgery score of <4% and ≥4%, respectively. The cohort included 2336 patients (LSR n = 1198, I-HLR n = 1138). As compared with LSR, patients with I-HSR were older and had significantly higher rates of baseline comorbidities. Although devices success rates (94% vs 96%), paravalvular leak (3.5% vs 5.2%), and permanent pacemaker implantation (17.2 vs 18%) were comparable (p >0.05 for all comparisons), the safety outcome at 1 month (12.7% vs 9.8%), procedural mortality (1.9% vs 0.6%), and mortality at 3 years (30.1% vs 16.1%) were higher in patients with I-HSR (p <0.05 for all comparisons). In a subanalysis of patients with very LSR, comparable rates of device success and safety outcomes were observed, whereas mortality at 1 to 3 years was lower. In conclusion, although procedural outcomes were comparable between LSR and I-HSR TAVI patients, the rates of short- and long-term mortality, as well as the safety outcome, were lower in LSR patients., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer might be particularly useful in diabetic patients who are at increased risk for target lesion/target vessel revascularization. We therefore aimed at assessing the safety and performance of a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) in combination with comprehensive optimal medical therapy following coronary interventions., Methods: This prospective, multicenter registry was conducted at six centers in Israel. Aside of stent treatment, we aimed for an LDL-C level<70mg/dl; at one and six months post-intervention a diabetic consultancy was required, and follow-up data were collected at six and twelve months. The primary outcome measure was target vessel failure, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes were target lesion failure, its individual components, and stent thrombosis., Results: From August 2013 until May 2014, 120 diabetic patients with 158 lesions were treated with a BP-SES. Mean age was 63.9±9.2years, 27.5% were insulin dependent, 28.3% had a history of myocardial infarction, and 47.5% had prior coronary interventions. By visual estimation, lesions were 3.0±0.5mm in diameter and 15.2±7.4mm long; mean stent diameter and length were 3.0±0.5mm and 19.2±6.8mm. Target vessel failure and target lesion failure at 12months occurred in seven (6.4% [95% CI: 3.1-13.0]) and four patients (3.5% [95% CI: 1.3-9.2]), respectively, and definite stent thrombosis in one patient (1.0% [95% CI: 0.1-7.0])., Conclusion: Treatment with a BP-SES demonstrated excellent target-vessel and target-lesion revascularization rates in a high-risk diabetic patient population undergoing catheter-based revascularization followed by intensified medical care., Annotated Table of Contents: In 120 high-risk diabetic patients with coronary artery stenosis, treatment with the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer and comprehensive antidiabetic therapy resulted in excellent clinical outcomes. Target vessel revascularization occurred in 6.4% of patients and target lesion revascularization in 3.5%., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to compare two techniques to treat bifurcation lesions: a single drug-eluting stent (DES) implanted in the main branch combined with balloon dilatation for the side branch vs. stenting of both branches (double stent)., Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention in coronary bifurcation lesions remains challenging. Although DES reduce restenosis in lesions, the double stent procedure has not shown clear advantages over a single stent with balloon dilation., Methods: Fifty-three symptomatic patients with true bifurcation lesions were treated using either the double stent technique (n = 25) or one stent in the parent vessel plus balloon angioplasty of the side branch (n = 28). Procedural results and major adverse cardiac event rates (MACE: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization (TVR)) were compared., Results: Angiographic procedural success (residual stenosis <30% in both branches) was 75% in the single stent group and 100% in the double stent group (P = 0.01). All differences were due to residual stenosis of the side branch. Clinical follow-up (6-18 months) was available for all patients; 90.5% of patients had a coronary angiography or nuclear stress test. Three patients (11%) in the single stent group and two (8%) in the double stent group had ischemia-driven TVR (P = NS). Asymptomatic angiographic restenosis (>50% diameter stenosis) in the ostium of the side branch was seen in two patients in the double-stent group. At 6 months, MACE-free was comparable between groups (89.3% vs. 88%, P = 0.7)., Conclusions: When treating bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents, restenosis following a single stent procedure is comparable to stenting both parent and side branch vessels. Thus, stenting the main-branch lesion, coupled with balloon angioplasty in the side branch, produces a high success rate and good clinical outcomes at 6 months.