Predicted clinical and economic burden associated with reduction in access to acute coronary interventional care during the COVID-19 lockdown in two European countries.

AIMS: As a consequence of untimely or missed revascularization of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients during the COVID-19 pandemic, many patients died at home or survived with serious sequelae, resulting in potential long-term worse prognosis and related health-economic implications.This analysis sought to predict long-term health outcomes [survival and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)] and cost of reduced treatment of STEMIs occurring during the first COVID-19 lockdown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Using a Markov decision-analytic model, we incorporated probability of hospitalization, timeliness of PCI, and projected long-term survival and cost (including societal costs) of mortality and morbidity, for STEMI occurring during the first UK and Spanish lockdowns, comparing them with expected pre-lockdown outcomes for an equivalent patient group.STEMI patients during the first UK lockdown were predicted to lose an average of 1.55 life-years and 1.17 QALYs compared with patients presenting with a STEMI pre-pandemic. Based on an annual STEMI incidence of 49 332 cases, the total additional lifetime costs calculated at the population level were £36.6 million (€41.3 million), mainly driven by costs of work absenteeism. Similarly in Spain, STEMI patients during the lockdown were expected to survive 2.03 years less than pre-pandemic patients, with a corresponding reduction in projected QALYs (-1.63). At the population level, reduced PCI access would lead to additional costs of €88.6 million. CONCLUSION: The effect of a 1-month lockdown on STEMI treatment led to a reduction in survival and QALYs compared to the pre-pandemic era. Moreover, in working-age patients, untimely revascularization led to adverse prognosis, affecting societal productivity and therefore considerably increasing societal costs.

Targeted therapy with a localised abluminal groove, low-dose sirolimus-eluting, biodegradable-polymer coronary stent - five-year results of the TARGET All Comers randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: In the prospective, multicentre, randomised TARGET All Comers study, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the FIREHAWK biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) was non-inferior to the durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) for the primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months. AIMS: We aimed to report the final study outcomes at 5 years. METHODS: Patients referred for PCI were randomised to receive either a BP-SES or DP-EES in a 1:1 ratio in 10 European countries. Randomisation was stratified by centre and ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) presentation, and clinical follow-up extended to 5 years. The primary endpoint was TLF (composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction [MI], or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation). Secondary endpoints included patient-oriented composite events (POCE; composite of all-cause death, all MI, or any revascularisation and its components). RESULTS: From December 2015 to October 2016, 1,653 patients were randomly assigned to the BP-SES or DP-EES groups, of which 93.8% completed 5-year clinical follow-up or were deceased. At 5 years, TLF occurred in 17.1% of the BP-SES group and in 16.3% of the DP-EES group (p=0.68). POCE occurred in 34.0% of the BP-SES group and 32.7% of the DP-EES group (p=0.58). Revascularisation was the most common POCE, occurring in 19.3% of patients receiving BP-SES and 19.2% receiving DP-EES, of which less than one-third was ischaemia-driven target lesion-related. In the landmark analysis, there were no differences in the rates of TLF and POCE between groups from 1 to 5 years, and these results were consistent across all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: In an all-comers population requiring stent implantation for myocardial ischaemia, the BP-SES was non-inferior to the DP-EES for the primary endpoint of TLF at 12 months, and results were sustained at 5 years, confirming the long-term safety and efficacy of the FIREHAWK BP-SES.

Incidence, Predictors, and Prognostic Impact of New Permanent Pacemaker Implantation After TAVR With Self-Expanding Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of new permanent pacemaker implantation after TAVR with self-expanding valves

OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to evaluate the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with contemporary self-expanding valves (SEV). BACKGROUND: Need for PPI is frequent post-TAVR, but conflicting data exist on new-generation SEV and on the prognostic impact of PPI. METHODS: This study included 3,211 patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries (January 2012 to December 2021) who underwent transfemoral TAVR with SEV. Implanted transcatheter heart valves (THV) were Acurate neo (n = 1,090), Acurate neo2 (n = 665), Evolut PRO (n = 1,312), and Evolut PRO+ (n = 144). Incidence and predictors of new PPI and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: New PPI was needed in 362 patients (11.3%) within 30 days after TAVR (8.8%, 7.7%, 15.2%, and 10.4%, respectively, after Acurate neo, Acurate neo2, Evolut PRO, and Evolut PRO+). Independent predictors of new PPI were Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality score, baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation, both in patients treated with Acurate neo/neo2 and in those treated with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Predischarge reduction in ejection fraction (EF) was more frequent in patients requiring PPI (P = 0.014). New PPI was associated with higher 1-year mortality (16.9% vs 10.8%; adjusted HR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.13-2.43; P = 0.010), particularly in patients with baseline EF <40% (P for interaction = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: New PPI was frequently needed after TAVR with SEV (11.3%) and was associated with higher 1-year mortality, particularly in patients with EF <40%. Baseline right bundle branch block and depth of THV implantation independently predicted the need of PPI.

Temporal Trends and Contemporary Outcomes After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Evolut PRO/PRO+ Self-Expanding Valves: Insights From the NEOPRO/NEOPRO-2 Registries.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) techniques and technology have continuously improved. Data regarding the impact of these advancements on outcomes in large real-world settings are still limited. The aim of this study was to investigate temporal trends and assess contemporary outcomes after TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ supra-annular self-expanding valves. METHODS: This study included patients enrolled in the multicenter NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) and NEOPRO-2 (A Multicenter Comparison of ACURATE NEO2 Versus Evolut PRO/PRO+ Transcatheter Heart Valves 2) registries who underwent transfemoral TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+. Procedural dates (August 2017 through November 2021) were stratified in quartiles (Q) and used to investigate temporal trends in TAVR outcomes. Predischarge, 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 defined, and 1-year outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: In total, 1616 patients from 28 centers were included. Over time, patients had lower Society of Thoracic Surgeon-Predicted Risk of Mortality score (Q1-4, 4.1% [2.8-6.3%], 3.7% [2.6-5.3%], 3.3% [2.4-4.9%], 2.9% [2.2-4.3%]; P<0.001) and more moderate or heavy valve calcification (Q1-4, 80%, 80%, 82%, 88%; P=0.038). Overall Valve Academic Research Consortium-3 technical success was 94.1%, with 30-day and 1-year all-cause mortality of 2.4% and 10%, respectively. Throughout the study period, procedures were associated with higher rates of 30-day device success (Q1-4, 81.2%, 82.2%, 82.0%, 88.0%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and early safety (Q1-4, 66.8%, 67.5%, 74.0%, 77.6%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001), with fewer permanent pacemaker implantations (Q1-4: 15.3%, 20.0%, 12.1%, 11.6%; Cochran-Armitage P=0.023) and residual mild or greater paravalvular leaks (Q1-4, 50.4%, 42.1%, 36.5%, 35.8%; Cochran-Armitage P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: TAVR with Evolut PRO/PRO+ self-expanding valve is safe and effective. Despite the treatment of heavier calcified anatomies, procedural outcomes are improving over time with less need for pacemaker implantation and less significant paravalvular leaks.

Prevalence, predictors, and outcomes of patient prosthesis mismatch in women undergoing TAVI for severe aortic stenosis: Insights from the WIN-TAVI registry.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the incidence, predictors and outcomes of female patients with patient-prosthesis mismatch (PPM) following transcatheter aortic valve intervention (TAVI) for severe aortic stenosis (AS). BACKGROUND: Female AS TAVI recipients have a significantly lower mortality than surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) recipients, which could be attributed to the potentially lower PPM rates. TAVI has been associated with lower rates of PPM compared to SAVR. PPM in females post TAVI has not been investigated to date. METHODS: The WIN-TAVI (Women's INternational Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry is a multicenter registry of women undergoing TAVR for severe symptomatic AS. Two hundred and fifty patients with detailed periprocedural and follow-up echocardiographic investigations were included in the WIN-TAVI echocardiographic sub-study. PPM was defined as per European guidelines stratified by the presence of obesity. RESULTS: The incidence of PPM in our population was 32.8%. Patients with PPM had significantly higher BMI (27.4 ± 6.1 vs. 25.2 ± 5.0, p = .002), smaller sized valves implanted (percentage of TAVI ≤23 mm 61% vs. 29.2%, PPM vs. no PPM, p < .001) and were more often treated with balloon expandable valves (48.3 vs. 32.5%, p < .001) rather than self expanding ones (26.3 vs. 52.8%, <.001). BMI (OR = 1.08; 95%CI 1.02-1.14, p = .011) and valve size ≤23 mm (OR = 3.00 95%CI 1.14-7.94, p = .027) were the only independent predictors of PPM. There was no significant interaction between valve size and valve type (p = .203). No significant differences were observed in 1-year mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events. CONCLUSIONS: PPM in females undergoing TAVI occurs in one third of patients. BMI and valve size ≤23 mm are independent predictors. Larger registries are required to determine the impact of PPM on future clinical outcomes.

Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Coronary Stent Restenosis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) requiring reintervention, it is unclear if the choice of treatment should depend on whether the restenotic stent was a bare-metal stent (BMS) or a drug-eluting stent (DES). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of the 2 most frequently used treatments - angioplasty with drug-coated balloon (DCB) and repeat stenting DES - in patients with BMS-and DES-ISR. METHODS: The DAEDALUS (Difference in Antirestenotic Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stent and Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for the Occurrence of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis) study was a pooled analysis of individual patient data from all 10 existing randomized clinical trials comparing DCB angioplasty with repeat DES implantation for the treatment of coronary ISR. In this pre-specified analysis, patients were stratified according to BMS- versus DES-ISR and treatment assigned. The primary efficacy endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 3 years. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis at 3 years. Primary analysis was performed by mixed-effects Cox models accounting for the trial of origin. Secondary analyses included nonparsimonious multivariable adjustment accounting also for multiple lesions per patient and 2-stage analyses. RESULTS: A total of 710 patients with BMS-ISR (722 lesions) and 1,248 with DES-ISR (1,377 lesions) were included. In patients with BMS-ISR, no significant difference between treatments was observed in terms of primary efficacy (9.2% vs. 10.2%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 1.37) and safety endpoints (8.7% vs. 7.5%; HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.96); results of secondary analyses were consistent. In patients with DES-ISR, the risk of the primary efficacy endpoint was higher with DCB angioplasty than with repeat DES implantation (20.3% vs. 13.4%; HR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.16 to 2.13), whereas the risk of the primary safety endpoint was numerically lower (9.5% vs. 13.3%; HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.00); results of secondary analyses were consistent. Regardless of the treatment used, the risk of TLR was lower in BMS- versus DES-ISR (9.7% vs. 17.0%; HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.74), whereas safety was not significantly different between ISR types. CONCLUSIONS: At 3-year follow-up, DCB angioplasty and repeat stenting with DES are similarly effective and safe in the treatment of BMS-ISR, whereas DCB angioplasty is significantly less effective than repeat DES implantation in the treatment DES-ISR, and associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the primary composite safety endpoint. Overall, DES-ISR is associated with higher rates of treatment failure and similar safety compared with BMS-ISR.

Impact of predilatation prior to transcatheter aortic valve implantation with the self-expanding acurate neo device (From the Multicenter NEOPRO Registry)

Safety and feasibility of transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without systematic predilatation are not fully investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of pre-implantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with Acurate neo. The NEOPRO Registry retrospectively included 1,263 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with Acurate neo at 18 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. Information on preBAV was available for 1,262 patients (99.9%). Primary endpoints were pre-discharge moderate-tosevere paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR II+), 30-day new permanent pacemaker implantation (PPI), and 30-day all-cause mortality or stroke. A total of 1,262 patients who underwent TAVI with (n=1,051) or without predilatation (n=211) were included. A reduction in the pre-BAV rate was observed during the study period (from 95.7% in the first date quintile to 78.4% in the last date quintile). Patients who underwent pre-BAV had higher degrees of aortic valve (AV) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Primary endpoints were similar between pre-BAV and no pre-BAV groups (PAR II+ 5.5% vs. 3.4%, p=0.214; 30-day PPI 9.0% vs. 8.0%, p=0.660; 30-day death or stroke 4.9% vs. 4.4%, p=0.743). The need for postdilatation and other procedural outcomes were comparable between groups. Predilatation did not have a significant impact on primary endpoints across AV and LVOT calcification subgroups (subgroup analyses) and was not independently associated with primary endpoints (multivariate analyses). In conclusion, transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without predilatation appears to be feasible and safe, especially in patients with milder degrees of AV and LVOT calcification. (AU)

Impact of Predilatation Prior to Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation With the Self-Expanding Acurate neo Device (from the Multicenter NEOPRO Registry).

Safety and feasibility of transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without systematic predilatation are not fully investigated. Our aim was to evaluate the use and impact of pre-implantation balloon aortic valvuloplasty (pre-BAV) before transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) with Acurate neo. The NEOPRO Registry retrospectively included 1,263 patients who underwent transfemoral TAVI with Acurate neo at 18 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. Information on pre-BAV was available for 1,262 patients (99.9%). Primary end points were pre-discharge moderate-to-severe paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR II+), 30-day new permanent pacemaker implantation, and 30-day all-cause mortality or stroke. A total of 1,262 patients who underwent TAVI with (n = 1,051) or without predilatation (n = 211) were included. A reduction in the pre-BAV rate was observed during the study period (from 95.7% in the first date quintile to 78.4% in the last date quintile). Patients who underwent pre-BAV had higher degrees of aortic valve (AV) and left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) calcification. Primary endpoints were similar between pre-BAV and no pre-BAV groups (PAR II+ 5.5% vs 3.4%, p = 0.214; 30-day permanent pacemaker implantation 9.0% vs 8.0%, p = 0.660; 30-day death or stroke 4.9% vs 4.4%, p = 0.743). The need for postdilatation and other procedural outcomes were comparable between groups. Predilatation did not have a significant impact on primary endpoints across AV and LVOT calcification subgroups (subgroup analyses) and was not independently associated with primary endpoints (multivariate analyses). In conclusion, transfemoral Acurate neo implantation without predilatation appears to be feasible and safe, especially in patients with milder degrees of AV and LVOT calcification.

Systematic investment in the delivery of guideline-coherent therapy reduces mortality and overall costs in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Results from the Stent for Life economic model for Romania, Portugal, Basque Country and Kemerovo region.

AIMS: The Stent for Life initiative aims at the reduction of mortality in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction by enhancing timely access to primary percutaneous coronary intervention. To assess the associated health and socioeconomic impact, the Stent for Life economic project was launched and applied to four model regions: Romania, Portugal, the Basque Country in Spain, and the Kemerovo region in the Russian Federation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Stent for Life economic model is based on a decision tree that incorporates primary percutaneous coronary intervention rates and mortality. Healthcare costs and indirect costs caused by loss of productivity were estimated. A baseline scenario simulating the status quo was compared to the Stent for Life scenario which integrated changes initiated by the Stent for Life programme. In the four model regions, primary percutaneous coronary intervention numbers rose substantially between 29-303%, while ST-elevation myocardial infarction mortality was reduced between 3-10%. Healthcare costs increased by 8% to 70%. Indirect cost savings ranged from 2-7%. Net societal costs were reduced in all model regions by 2-4%. CONCLUSION: The joint effort of the Stent for Life initiative and their local partners successfully saves lives. Moreover, the increase in healthcare costs was outweighed by indirect cost savings, leading to a net cost reduction in all four model regions. These findings demonstrate that systematic investments to improve the access of ST-elevation myocardial infarction patients to guideline-coherent therapy is beneficial, not only for the individual, but also for the society at large.

Feasibility of Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation in Patients With Aortic Disease and Simultaneous or Sequential Endovascular Aortic Repair.

OBJECTIVES: The transfemoral approach for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TF-TAVI) is associated with a significant survival benefit for intermediate and high-risk patients. Due to the increased procedural risk, many operators avoid TF-TAVI in patients with aortic disease. Moreover, significant peri-interventional device interaction may occur in patients with previous endovascular aortic repair (EVAR). We evaluated the feasibility of TF-TAVI in patients with aortic disease in combination with simultaneous or sequential EVAR. METHODS: Data from 15 TF-TAVI patients with concomitant aortic disease treated between 2009 and 2019 in three German heart centers representing 4410 TAVI procedures were analyzed. RESULTS: Two patients with progressive penetrating atherosclerotic ulcers (PAUs) in the descending thoracic aorta underwent sequential and simultaneous thoracic EVAR (TEVAR), respectively. One patient with stable PAU and 4 patients with not yet relevant abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) underwent isolated TF-TAVI. One patient with relevant AAA underwent TF-TAVI and sequential EVAR. Seven patients with previous EVAR due to an AAA underwent TF-TAVI (5 with a bifurcated graft and 2 with a straight graft). TF-TAVI and sequential or simultaneous TEVAR were technically successful in all patients. Vascular complications occurred in 1 patient. One patient died within 30 days and 2 patients died within 12 months. CONCLUSION: TF-TAVI can be performed successfully in patients with aortic disease or previous endovascular aortoiliac intervention. Simultaneous and sequential (T)EVAR is feasible.

Cardiovascular implantable electronic device infections due to enterococcal species: Clinical features, management, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Enterococcal cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) infections are not well characterized. METHODS: Data from the Multicenter Electrophysiologic Device Infection Cohort, a prospective study of CIED infections, were used for descriptive analysis of adults with enterococcal CIED infections. RESULTS: Of 433 patients, 21 (4.8%) had enterococcal CIED infection. Median age was 71 years. Twelve patients (57%) had permanent pacemakers, five (24%) implantable cardioverter defibrillators, and four (19%) biventricular devices. Median time from last procedure to infection was 570 days. CIED-related bloodstream infections occurred in three patients (14%) and 18 (86%) had infective endocarditis (IE), 14 (78%) of which were definite by the modified Duke criteria. IE cases were classified as follows: valvular IE, four; lead IE, eight; both valve and lead IE, six. Vegetations were demonstrated by transesophageal echocardiography in 17 patients (81%). Blood cultures were positive in 19/19 patients with confirmed results. The most common antimicrobial regimen was penicillin plus an aminoglycoside (33%). Antibiotics were given for a median of 43 days. Only 14 patients (67%) underwent device removal. There was one death during the index hospitalization with four additional deaths within 6 months (overall mortality 24%). There were no relapses. CONCLUSIONS: Enterococci caused 4.8% of CIED infections in our cohort. Based on the late onset after device placement or manipulation, most infections were likely hematogenous in origin. IE was the most common infection syndrome. Only 67% of patients underwent device removal. At 6 months follow-up, no CIED infection relapses had occurred, but overall mortality was 24%.

Protocol of the China ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) Care Project (CSCAP): a 10-year project to improve quality of care by building up a regional STEMI care network.

INTRODUCTION: Successful ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) management is time-sensitive and is based on prompt reperfusion mainly to reduce patient mortality. It has evolved from a single hospital care to an integrated regional network approach over the last decades. This prospective study, named the China STEMI Care Project (CSCAP), aims to show how implementation of different types of integrated regional STEMI care networks can improve the reperfusion treatment rate, shorten the total duration of myocardial ischaemia and lead to mortality reduction step by step. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The CSCAP is a prospective, multicentre registry study of three phases. A total of 18 provinces, 4 municipalities and 2 autonomous regions in China were included. Patients who meet the third universal definition of myocardial infarction and the Chinese STEMI diagnosis and treatment guidelines are enrolled. Phase 1 (CSCAP-1) focuses on the in-hospital process optimisation of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) hospitals, phase 2 (CSCAP-2) focuses on the PPCI hospital-based regional STEMI care network construction together with emergency medical services and adjacent non-PPCI hospitals, while phase 3 (CSCAP-3) focuses on the whole-city STEMI care network construction by promoting chest pain centre accreditation. Systematic data collection, key performance index assessment and subsequent improvement are implemented throughout the project to continuously improve the quality of STEMI care. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of Peking University First Hospital. Ranking reports of quality of care will be generated available to all participant affiliations. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at congresses. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03821012.

2-Year Clinical Outcomes of an Abluminal Groove-Filled Biodegradable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Compared With a Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the 2-year clinical outcomes of the Firehawk stent (Shanghai MicroPort Medical Group, Shanghai, China), a novel abluminal groove-filled biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent, compared with XIENCE (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California), a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting coronary stent. BACKGROUND: The long-term outcomes of the Firehawk stent have not been evaluated beyond 1 year in a randomized all-comers clinical trial. METHODS: The TARGET All Comers study is a prospective, multicenter, all-comers, randomized, noninferiority trial conducted in Europe. A total of 1,653 patients were randomly assigned to undergo implantation of either the Firehawk or the XIENCE stent. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, the incidence of target lesion failure was 8.7% in the Firehawk group versus 8.6% in the XIENCE group (p = 0.92). The event rates of individual components of the primary endpoint were comparable for the 2 groups. Landmark analyses between 1- and 2-year follow-up revealed no statistically significant difference of TLF for the Firehawk versus the XIENCE stent. Beyond 1 year, very late definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 3 patients (0.4%) in the Firehawk group and in 7 patients (0.9%) in the XIENCE group (p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: The 2-year follow-up of the TARGET All Comers study confirms comparable safety and efficacy profiles of the Firehawk and XIENCE stents.

Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement With Next-Generation Self-Expanding Devices: A Multicenter, Retrospective, Propensity-Matched Comparison of Evolut PRO Versus Acurate neo Transcatheter Heart Valves.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter registry, transfemoral TAVR with the NEO and PRO bioprostheses was associated with high device success, acceptable rates of paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and good 30-day clinical outcomes. After adjusting for potential confounders, short-term outcomes were similar between the devices.

Transcatheter aortic valve replacement with next-generation self-expanding devices: a multicenter, retrospective, propensity-matched comparison of evolut pro versus acurate neo transcatheter heart valves

Abstract OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with the Acurate neo (NEO) and Evolut PRO (PRO) devices. BACKGROUND: The NEO and PRO bioprostheses are 2 next-generation self-expanding devices developed for TAVR. METHODS: The NEOPRO (A Multicenter Comparison of Acurate NEO Versus Evolut PRO Transcatheter Heart Valves) registry retrospectively included patients who underwent transfemoral TAVR with either NEO or PRO valves at 24 centers between January 2012 and March 2018. One-to-one propensity score matching resulted in 251 pairs. Pre-discharge and 30-day Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC)-2 defined outcomes were evaluated. Binary logistic regression was performed to adjust the treatment effect for propensity score quintiles. RESULTS: A total of 1,551 patients (n = 1,263 NEO; n = 288 PRO) were included. The mean age was 82 years, and the mean Society of Thoracic Surgeons score was 5.1%. After propensity score matching (n = 502), VARC-2 device success (90.6% vs. 91.6%; p = 0.751) and pre-discharge moderate to severe (II+) paravalvular aortic regurgitation (7.3% vs. 5.7%; p = 0.584) were comparable between the NEO and PRO groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in any 30-day clinical outcome between matched NEO and PRO pairs, including all-cause mortality (3.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.221), stroke (2.4% vs. 2.8%; p = 1.000), new permanent pacemaker implantation (11.0% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.565), and VARC-2 early safety endpoint (10.6% vs. 10.4%; p = 1.000). Logistic regression on the unmatched cohort confirmed a similar risk of VARC-2 device success, paravalvular aortic regurgitation II+, and 30-day clinical outcomes after NEO and PRO implantation. CONCLUSIONS: (AU)

Targeted therapy with a localised abluminal groove, low-dose sirolimus-eluting, biodegradable polymer coronary stent (TARGET All Comers): a multicentre, open-label, randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: The FIREHAWK is a drug-eluting stent with a fully biodegradable sirolimus-containing polymer coating localised to recessed abluminal grooves on the stent surface. We investigated clinical outcomes with this targeted, low-dose, biodegradable polymer, sirolimus-eluting stent compared with XIENCE durable polymer, everolimus-eluting stents in an all-comers population. METHODS: The TARGET All Comers study was a prospective, multicentre, open-label randomised non-inferiority trial done at 21 centres in ten European countries. Patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic coronary artery disease and objective evidence of myocardial ischaemia who qualified for percutaneous coronary intervention were randomised 1:1 to undergo implantation of a FIREHAWK or XIENCE. Randomisation was web-based, with random block allocation and stratification by centre and ST elevation myocardial infarction. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians and patients were not. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure at 12 months, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation. The control event rate for XIENCE was assumed to be 7%, the non-inferiority margin was 3.5%, and the primary analysis was in the intention-to-treat population, censoring patients who did not have either an event before 365 days or contact beyond 365 days. Late lumen loss was the primary endpoint of an angiographic substudy designed to investigate the non-inferiority of the FIREHAWK compared with the XIENCE stent. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02520180. FINDINGS: From Dec 17, 2015, to Oct 14, 2016, 1653 patients were randomly assigned to implantation of the FIREHAWK (n=823) or XIENCE (n=830). 65 patients in the FIREHAWK group and 66 in the XIENCE group had insufficient follow-up data and were excluded from the analyses. At 12 months, target lesion failure occurred in 46 (6·1%) of 758 patients in the FIREHAWK group and in 45 (5·9%) of 764 patients in the XIENCE group (difference 0·2%, 90% CI -1·9 to 2·2, pnon-inferiority=0·004, 95% CI -2·2 to 2·6, psuperiority=0·88). There were no differences in ischaemia-driven revascularisation or stent thrombosis rates at 12 months. 176 patients were included in the angiographic substudy, in which in-stent late lumen loss was 0·17 mm (SD 0·48) in the FIREHAWK group and 0·11 mm (0·52) in the XIENCE group (p=0·48), with an absolute difference of 0·05 mm (95% CI -0·09 to 0·18, pnon-inferiority=0·024). INTERPRETATION: In a broad all-comers population of patients requiring stent implantation for myocardial ischaemia, the FIREHAWK was non-inferior to the XIENCE as assessed with the primary endpoint of target lesion failure at 12 months and in-stent late lumen loss at 13 months. The FIREHAWK is a safe and effective alternative stent to treat patients with ischaemic coronary artery disease in clinical practice. FUNDING: Shanghai Microport Medical.

Angiographic and clinical performance of a paclitaxel-coated balloon compared to a second-generation sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with in-stent restenosis: the BIOLUX randomised controlled trial.

AIMS: Although several studies have shown positive outcomes after the use of drug-coated balloons (DCB) for in-stent restenosis (ISR), data on randomised controlled trials versus latest-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are limited. Therefore, in this randomised trial, we sought to evaluate whether a butyryl-tri-hexyl citrate (BTHC)-based paclitaxel DCB is non-inferior to a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) therapy in patients with ISR in either a bare metal stent (BMS) or DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 229 patients with ISR in BMS or DES from 13 German centres and one Latvian centre were 2:1 randomly allocated to DCB (n=157) or DES (n=72). The primary efficacy endpoint was defined as in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) at six months, and the primary safety endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months. LLL in the DCB arm was 0.03±0.40 mm compared to 0.20±0.70 mm in the DES arm (p=0.40). DCB proved to be non-inferior to DES (Δ = -0.17±0.52 mm, 97.5% CI -∞; -0.01]; p<0.0001). At 12 months, Kaplan-Meier TLF estimates were 16.7% in the DCB arm and 14.2% in the DES arm (p=0.65) and remained similar at 18 months (DCB versus DES: 17.4% versus 19.5%, p=0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DES or BMS ISR, treatment with a paclitaxel DCB showed similar LLL at six months and TLF rates up to 18 months compared to a second-generation sirolimus DES.