Temporal Trends in the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus Eluting Stents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term follow-up results of various trials comparing Zotarolimus eluting stents (ZES) with Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been published recently. Additionally, over the last decade, there have been new trials comparing the ZES with various commercially available EES. We aim to conduct an updated meta-analysis in light of new evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to provide comprehensive evidence regarding the temporal trends in the clinical outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase. RCTs comparing ZES with EES for short (<2 years), intermediate (2-3 years), and long-term follow-ups (3-5 years) were included. Relative risk was used to pool the dichotomous outcomes using the random effects model employing the inverse variance method. All statistical analysis was conducted using Revman 5.4. RESULTS: A total of 18 studies reporting data at different follow-ups for nine trials (n = 14319) were included. At short-term follow-up (<2 years), there were no significant differences between the two types of stents (all-cause death, cardiac death, Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target vessel myocardial infarction, definite or probable stent thrombosis or safety outcomes (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, target lesion failure). At intermediate follow-up (2-3 years), EES was superior to ZES for reducing target lesion revascularization (RR = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.05-1.58, p < 0.05). At long-term follow-up (3-5 years), there were no significant differences between the two groups for any of the pooled outcomes (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: ZES and EES have similar safety and efficacy at short, intermediate, and long-term follow-ups.

Second-generation everolimus-eluting intracoronary stents: a comprehensive review of the clinical evidence.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) has emerged as a mainstay for the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease given its beneficial impact on clinical outcomes in these patients. Everolimus-eluting stents (EES) are one of the most frequently implanted second-generation DES; their use for the treatment of a wide range of patients including those with complex coronary lesions is supported by compelling evidence. Although newer stent platforms such as biodegradable polymer DES may lower local vessel inflammation, their efficacy and safety have not yet surpassed that of Xience stents. This article summarizes the properties of the Xience family of EES and the evidence supporting their use across diverse patient demographics and coronary lesion morphologies.

Patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) often require treatment for symptoms caused by blockages in coronary arteries. In addition to medical therapy, available procedure options include either coronary artery bypass grafting, a major heart surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stenting. PCI is a minimally invasive procedure where a metallic stent (a mesh made up of fine metallic network in a tube shape used to keep vessels open) is advanced over a wire through an artery to open the coronary artery blockage. Over the past few decades, improvements in procedure technique and stent material have made PCI a highly safe and efficacious procedure. A newer generation of stents, known as drug-eluting stents (DES), have been developed in which metallic struts are covered with a highly biocompatible polymer (a thin material coating over the metallic mesh) that releases drugs at the blockage site to prevent local cell growth in the vessel wall. Among the second-generation DES, Xience everolimus-eluting stents (EES) have shown better outcomes compared with earlier generations of stents. Another version of DES with biodegradable polymer coating is emerging but their advantage over EES remains uncertain. Currently, Xience EES are one of the most commonly used stents to treat CAD. This manuscript covers an in-depth review of clinical evidence on the performance of Xience stents in a diverse range patient populations.

1- or 3-Month DAPT in Patients With HBR With or Without Oral Anticoagulant Therapy After PCI.

BACKGROUND: The optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients on long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) therapy is still uncertain. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to assess the effects of 1- vs 3-month DAPT in patients with and those without concomitant OAC included in the XIENCE Short DAPT program. METHODS: The XIENCE Short DAPT program enrolled patients with high bleeding risk who underwent successful PCI with a cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent. DAPT was discontinued at 1 or 3 months in patients free from ischemic events and adherent to treatment. The effect of 1- vs 3-month DAPT was compared in patients with and those without OAC using propensity score stratification. The primary endpoint was all-cause death or any myocardial infarction (MI). The key secondary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) types 2 to 5 bleeding. Outcomes were assessed from 1 to 12 months after index PCI. RESULTS: Among 3,364 event-free patients, 1,462 (43%) were on OAC. Among OAC patients, the risk for death or MI was similar between 1- and 3-month DAPT (7.4% vs 8.8%; adjusted HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.49-1.11; P = 0.139), whereas BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding was lower with 1-month DAPT (adjusted HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.51-0.99; P = 0.046). These effects were consistent in patients with and those without OAC (P for interaction = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Between 1 and 12 months after PCI, 1-month compared with 3-month DAPT was associated with similar rates of all-cause death or MI and a reduced rate of BARC types 2 to 5 bleeding, irrespective of OAC treatment.

Clinical results of everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background: It has been pronounced that everolimus-eluting stent (EES) had lower charge of goal-lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis as compared with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).The goal of this observation was to compare the efficacy and protection of EES with SES in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Methods: In this retrospective study, a total of 404 patients with coronary artery stenosis who underwent angioplasty of one or more coronary arteries were included in the study. Of these, 202 were treated with SES and the others with EES. The data were collected by a questionnaire through which the annual incidence of coronary stent complications including the occurrence of stent thrombosis (confirmed by re-angiography), the occurrence of acute coronary syndrome leading to hospitalization, the occurrence of vascular myocardial infarction related to the stenting vessel, the need for re-angiography and angioplasty and finally the incidence of cardiac mortality were evaluated. Results: This study showed that the odds ratio of EES thrombosis to SES stent in the unadjusted model is 1.01 (0.06-16.34) and in the adjusted model for confounding variables was equal to 0.80 (0.04-13.35) which in both models, these values were not statistically significant. Conclusion: The findings of the present study indicate that there is no statistically significant difference between the outcomes in the two groups treated with SES and EES release stents.

Long-Term Outcome of Drug-Coated Balloon vs Drug-Eluting Stent for Small Coronary Vessels: PICCOLETO-II 3-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Native vessel coronary artery disease represents 1 of the most attractive fields of application for drug-coated balloons (DCBs). To date, several devices have been compared with drug-eluting stents (DESs) in this setting with different outcomes. OBJECTIVES: The authors sought to compare the short- and long-term performance of the paclitaxel DCB with the everolimus-eluting stent in patients with de novo lesions in small coronary vessel disease. METHODS: PICCOLETO II (Drug Eluting Balloon Efficacy for Small Coronary Vessel Disease Treatment) was an academic, international, investigator-driven, multicenter, open-label randomized clinical trial in which patients were allocated to a DCB (n = 118) or DES (n = 114). We previously reported the superiority of DCBs regarding in-lesion late lumen loss at 6 months. Herein we report the final 3-year clinical follow-up with the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), a composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and its individual components. RESULTS: The 3-year clinical follow-up (median 1,101 days; IQR: 1,055-1,146 days) was available for 102 patients allocated to DCB and 101 to DES treatment. The cumulative rate of all-cause death (4% vs 3.9%; P = 0.98), cardiac death (1% vs 1.9%; P = 0.56), myocardial infarction (6.9% vs 2%; P = 0.14), and target lesion revascularization (14.8% vs 8.8%; P = 0.18) did not significantly differ between DCBs and DESs. MACEs and acute vessel occlusion occurred more frequently in the DES group (20.8% vs 10.8% [P = 0.046] and 4% vs 0% [P = 0.042], respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The long-term clinical follow-up of the PICCOLETO II randomized clinical trial shows a higher risk of MACEs in patients with de novo lesions in small vessel disease when they are treated with the current-generation DES compared with the new-generation paclitaxel DCB. (Drug Eluting Balloon Efficacy for Small Coronary Vessel Disease Treatment [PICCOLETO II]; NCT03899818).

Angioscopic Comparison of Early- and Mid-Term Vascular Responses Following Treatment of ST-Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction With Biodegradable vs. Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents　- A Prespecified Subanalysis of the MECHANISM AMI RCT.

BACKGROUND: The vessel healing process after implantation of biodegradable polymer (BP) and durable polymer (DP) everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) lesions remains unclear.Methods and Results: We conducted a multicenter prospective randomized controlled trial to compare early (2 weeks) and mid-term (12 months) vascular responses after implantation of BP-EES vs. DP-EES in STEMI patients. In this prespecified subanalysis, serial coronary angioscopy (CAS) analysis was performed in 15 stents in the BP-EES arm (n=10 patients) and 14 stents in the DP-EES arm (n=10 patients). At the 2-week follow-up, there was no significant difference in the estimated marginal means of the neointimal coverage grade (primary endpoint) between the 2 arms (mean [±SE] 0.00±0.00 in both arms; P>0.999). There were no significant differences between the BP-EES and DP-EES groups in the yellow color grade (1.046±0.106 vs. 0.844±0.114, respectively; P=0.201) or the presence of thrombus (77.8% vs. 88.8%, respectively; P=0.205). At 12 months, competent strut coverage, defined as yellow color grade ≤1, no thrombus, and a neointimal coverage grade ≥1 was achieved more frequently in the BP-EES than DP-EES arm (85.2% vs. 53.1%; adjusted odds ratio 2.11 [95% confidence interval 1.26-3.53]; P=0.023). CONCLUSIONS: Neointimal coverage 2 weeks after implantation of BP-EES and DP-EES in STEMI lesions was comparable on CAS evaluation. However, at 1 year, BP-EES was independently associated with competent strut coverage.

Comparison of MECHANISM of early and late vascular responses following treatment of ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction with two different everolimus-eluting stents: a randomized controlled trial of biodegradable versus durable polymer stents.

The early and mid-term arterial healing profile of biodegradable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents (BP-EES) is unclear, especially in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) culprit lesions. This study aimed to compare early- and mid-term arterial healing between durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) and BP-EES in STEMI patients. In a prospective, multicenter, non-inferiority trial, STEMI patients were randomized to receive BP-EES (n = 60) or DP-EES (n = 60). The primary endpoint of this study was the mean percentage of covered struts (%covered struts) on FD-OCT 2 weeks post-PCI. Key secondary endpoints included the percentage of uncovered struts, frequency of abnormal intra-stent tissue, and percentage of malapposed struts by FD-OCT 2 weeks and 12 months post-PCI. They underwent serial frequency-domain optical coherence tomography (FD-OCT) evaluations immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention, and at 2 weeks and at 12 months after the procedure. The primary endpoint of %covered struts at 2 weeks was 71.4% in BP-EES and 72.3% in DP-EES [risk difference - 0.94%, lower limit of one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) - 5.6; Pnon-inferiority = 0.0756]. At 12 months, the mean percentage of uncovered struts was significantly lower [1.73% (95% CI 0.28-3.17) vs. 4.81% (95% CI 3.52-6.09); p = 0.002], and the average malapposed volume was significantly smaller in the BP-EES group than in the DP-EES group (p = 0.002). At 12 months, BP-EES had a significantly larger average neointimal area with a significantly smaller average intra-stent tissue unevenness score than DP-EES, suggesting more uniform neointimal coverage with BP-EES. Strut coverage was comparable between BP-EES and DP-EES at 2 weeks. Non-inferiority could not be proven because of an insufficient sample size. The significantly better arterial healing with BP-EES at 12 months suggests a safer profile for STEMI culprit lesions.Trial registration: jRCTs022180024 https://jrct.niph.go.jp/en-latest-detail/jRCTs022180024.

Comparison of Different Types of Drug-Eluting Stents for De Novo Long Coronary Artery Lesions.

Background: Outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention for diffuse long lesions remain relatively unfavorable. Prior clinical trials investigated the relative efficacy and safety of different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) in long lesions. Objectives: This study sought to compare the relative performance of different types of DES for de novo long (≥25 mm) coronary artery lesions. Methods: Using a pooled analysis of individual data of 1,450 patients from 3 randomized clinical trials, we compared angiographic and clinical outcomes of 5 different types of DES: 224 patients with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES), 255 with platinum-chromium EES, 250 with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents, 245 with biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents, and 476 with first-generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). The primary endpoint was in-segment late lumen loss at 9 months. Results: The primary endpoint was not significantly different between 4 second-generation DES and 1 first-generation SES (0.17 ± 0.41 mm in cobalt-chromium EES; 0.11 ± 0.37 in platinum-chromium EES: 0.14 ± 0.38 in Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents; 0.14 ± 0.38 in biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents; or 0.10 ± 0.37 in SES, respectively, overall P = 0.38). Also, there were no significant between-group differences with respect to death, myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 12 months. In the multiple treatment propensity-score analysis, the risk of angiographic and clinical outcomes was also similar among several types of DES. Conclusions: In this patient-level pooled analysis, several second-generation DES showed similar angiographic and clinical outcomes in patients with de novo long coronary lesions. (Percutaneous Treatment of LONG Native Coronary Lesions With Drug-Eluting Stent-III [LONG-DES-III]; NCT01078038; Percutaneous Treatment of LONG Native Coronary Lesions With Drug-Eluting Stent-IV [LONG-DES-IV]; NCT01186094; and Everolimus-eluting [PROMUS-ELEMENT] vs. Biolimus A9-Eluting [NOBORI] Stents for Long-Coronary Lesions [LONG-DES-V]; NCT01186120).

Comparison of 6-month vascular healing response after bioresorbable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stent implantation in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A randomized serial optical coherence tomography study.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to use optical coherence tomography (OCT) to compare vascular healing between bioresorbable polymer (BP) and durable polymer (DP) everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). BACKGROUND: Whether BP-EES induce better vascular healing compared to contemporary DP-EES remains controversial, especially for ACS. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial, we used OCT to compare 6-month vascular healing in patients with ACS randomized to BP versus DP-EES: percent strut coverage (primary endpoint, non-inferiority margin of 2.0%) and neointimal thickness and percent neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) volume. As an exploratory analysis, morphological factors related to the endpoints and the effect of underlying lipidic plaque on stent healing were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 104 patients with ACS were randomly assigned to BP-EES (n = 52) versus DP-EES (n = 52). Of these, 86 patients (40 BP-EES and 46 DP-EES) were included in the final OCT analyses. Six-month percent strut coverage of BP-EES (83.6 ± 11.4%) was not non-inferior compared to those of DP-EES (81.6 ± 13.9%), difference 2.0% (lower 95% confidence interval-2.6%), pnon-inferiority  = 0.07. There were no differences in neointimal thickness 70.0 ± 33.9 µm versus 67.2 ± 33.9 µm, p = 0.71; and percent NIH volume 7.5 ± 4.7% versus 7.3 ± 5.3%, p = 0.85. By multivariable linear regression analysis, stent type was not associated with percent strut coverage or percent NIH volume; however, percent baseline embedded struts or stent expansion was positively associated with percent NIH volume. Greater NIH volume was observed in lipidic compared with non-lipidic segments (8.7 ± 5.6% vs. 6.1 ± 5.2%, p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Six-month strut coverage of BP-EES was not non-inferior compared to those of DP-EES in ACS patients. Good stent apposition and expansion were independently associated with better vascular healing.

Late neointimal volume reduction is observed following biodegradable polymer-based drug eluting stent in porcine model.

BACKGROUND: The BP-SES has an abluminally applied biodegradable polymer that is fully resorbed after 3-4 months but may have longer-lasting effects. The aim of this study was to determine the long-term vascular response to the novel Ultimaster™ sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES). METHODS: BP-SESs, everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EESs), and bare metal stents were implanted in 22 coronary arteries of 15 mini-swine. All animals underwent optical frequent domain imaging (OFDI) to assess neointimal volume and quality at either 1 (n = 7) or 3 (n = 8) months and at 9 (n = 15) months and were euthanized at 9 months. Stents were subsequently histologically investigated to analyze the vascular response and maturity of neointimal tissue according to cell density. RESULTS: OFDI revealed greater regression in neointimal volume from 3 to 9 months with BP-SESs than with DP-EESs (-0.6 ± 0.5 mm2 vs. 0.00 ± 0.4 mm2, p = 0.07). Although there was no significant difference between BP-SESs and DP-EESs in the inflammation score (BMS, BP-SES, and DP-EES: 0.1 ± 0.1, 0.3 ± 0.4, and 0.4 ± 0.4, respectively; p < 0.0001) in histological analysis, BP-SESs showed slightly greater maturity than DP-EESs (1.8 ± 0.3, 1.7 ± 0.3, and 1.6 ± 0.3, p = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: While both BP-SESs and DP-EESs showed minimal inflammatory responses at 9 months, BP-SESs showed a trend for greater neointimal maturity and regression, which may be related to earlier completion of the vascular response.

Stent-Related Adverse Events as Related to Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in First- vs Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents.

Background: There are limited data on the long-term stent-related adverse events as related to the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in second-generation (G2) drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with first-generation (G1) DES. Objectives: This study sought to compare the long-term stent-related outcomes of G2-DES with those of G1-DES. Methods: The study group consisted of 15,009 patients who underwent their first coronary revascularization with DES from the CREDO-Kyoto PCI/CABG (Coronary Revascularization Demonstrating Outcome Study in Kyoto Percutaneous Coronary Intervention/Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting) Registry Cohort-2 (first-generation drug-eluting stent [G1-DES] period; n = 5,382) and Cohort-3 (second-generation drug eluting stent [G2-DES] period; n = 9,627). The primary outcome measures were definite stent thrombosis (ST) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: The cumulative 5-year incidences of definite ST and TVR were significantly lower in the G2-DES group than in the G1-DES group (0.7% vs 1.4%; P < 0.001; and 16.2% vs 22.1%; P < 0.001, respectively). The lower adjusted risk of G2-DES relative to G1-DES for definite ST and TVR remained significant (HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37-0.76; P < 0.001; and HR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.68-0.81; P < 0.001, respectively). In the landmark analysis that was based on the DAPT status at 1 year, the lower adjusted risk of on-DAPT status relative to off-DAPT was significant for definite ST beyond 1 year in the G1-DES stratum (HR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.24-0.76; P = 0.004) but not in the G2-DES stratum (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.26-1.68; P = 0.38) (P interaction = 0.14). Conclusions: G2-DES compared with G1-DES were associated with a significantly lower risk for stent-related adverse events, including definite ST and TVR. DAPT beyond 1 year was associated with a significantly lower risk for very late ST of G1-DES but not for that of G2-DES.

Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent for Small Coronary Vessel Disease: PICCOLETO II Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the performance of a novel drug-coated balloon (DCB) (Elutax SV, Aachen Resonance, Germany), with an everolimus-eluting stent (EES) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) in patients with de novo lesions. BACKGROUND: Small vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) represents one of the most attractive fields of application for DCB. To date, several devices have been compared with drug-eluting stents in this setting, with different outcomes. METHODS: The PICCOLETO II (Drug Eluting Balloon Efficacy for Small Coronary Vessel Disease Treatment) trial was an international, investigator-driven, multicenter, open-label, prospective randomized controlled trial where patients with de novo SVD lesions were randomized to DCB or EES. Primary study endpoint was in-lesion late lumen loss (LLL) at 6 months (independent core laboratory), with the noninferiority between the 2 arms hypothesized. Secondary endpoints were minimal lumen diameter, percent diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up, and the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events at 12 months. RESULTS: Between May 2015 and May 2018, a total of 232 patients were enrolled at 5 centers. After a median of 189 (interquartile range: 160 to 202) days, in-lesion LLL was significantly lower in the DCB group (0.04 vs. 0.17 mm; p = 0.001 for noninferiority; p = 0.03 for superiority). Percent diameter stenosis and minimal lumen diameter were not significantly different. At 12-month clinical follow-up, major adverse cardiac events occurred in 7.5% of the DES group and in 5.6% of the DCB group (p = 0.55). There was a numerically higher incidence of spontaneous myocardial infarction (4.7% vs. 1.9%; p = 0.23) and vessel thrombosis (1.8% vs. 0%; p = 0.15) in the DES arm. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter randomized clinical trial in patients with de novo SVD lesions, a new-generation DCB was found superior to EES in terms of LLL as the angiographic pattern and comparable in terms of clinical outcome. (Drug Eluting Balloon Efficacy for Small Coronary Vessel Disease Treatment [PICCOLETO II]; NCT03899818).

Scaffold underexpansion and late lumen loss after bioresorbable scaffold implantation: Insights from ABSORB JAPAN trial.

BACKGROUND: Device underexpansion is associated with late adverse outcomes after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. This study, representing official IVUS results of the ABSORB Japan trial, aimed to characterize IVUS findings, focusing specifically on acute device expansion, and to investigate its impact on late lumen loss (LLL) with Absorb-BVS compared with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES). METHODS: ABSORB Japan enrolled 148 patients (2:1 randomization) in the IVUS cohort. Serial IVUS was prescheduled at post-procedure and 3 years. Acute device expansion was evaluated with respect to the degree and uniformity of the implanted device. RESULTS: Overall, Absorb-BVS showed smaller and more nonuniform device expansion at post-procedure, compared with CoCr-EES, which was particularly prominent in small-vessel lesions. In serial analysis, Absorb-BVS showed unique associations of smaller device expansion (r = 0.40, p = 0.001) and more nonuniformity (r = 0.29, p = 0.007) at post-procedure with greater LLL at 3 years, primarily attributable to greater negative remodeling (r = 0.39, p = 0.006). In contrast, acute device expansion showed no relation with subsequent lumen change in CoCr-EES. In Absorb-BVS, ischemic-driven target lesion or vessel revascularization (ID-TLR or ID-TVR) at 3 years occurred more frequently in small- versus large-vessel lesions (12.5% vs. 0%, p = 0.04 for ID-TLR and 15.6% vs. 2.3%, p = 0.08 for ID-TVR). Conversely, Absorb BVS had no target lesion nor vessel failure, even in small-vessel lesions, when adequate device expansion was achieved at post-procedure. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike CoCr-EES, underexpansion was associated with greater negative remodeling and LLL in Absorb-BVS. This may in part account for the poorer outcomes of Absorb-BVS than CoCr-EES when under-expanded.

Comparison of Durable-Polymer- and Biodegradable-Polymer-Based Newer-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction and Prediabetes After Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Hyperglycemia is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The relative superiority of the long-term clinical outcomes of durable-polymer (DP) -based and biodegradable-polymer (BP) -based newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with AMI and prediabetes is not well established. We compared the clinical outcomes in such patients between DP-based and BP-based newer-generation DESs.A total of 4,377 patients with AMI and prediabetes were divided into the following two groups: the DP-DES group (n = 3,775; zotarolimus-eluting stents [ZES; n = 1,546] and everolimus-eluting stents [EES; n = 2,229]) and the BP-DES group (n = 602; biolimus-eluting stents [BES]). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST).The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of MACEs for ZES versus EES, ZES versus BES, EES versus BES, and ZES/EES versus BES (aHR: 1.125; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.834-1.518; P = 0.440) were similar. The cumulative incidence of ST was also comparable between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (aHR: 1.407; 95% CI, 0.476-4.158; P = 0.537). Moreover, the 2-year aHRs of all-cause death, CD, re-MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-TVR were similar.Patients with AMI and prediabetes who received DP-DES or BP-DES during PCI showed comparable safety and efficacy during the 2-year follow-up period.

Durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents: history, current status and future prospects.

INTRODUCTION: Coronary percutaneous interventions have evolved from plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) to stent implantation, which itself evolved from bare-metal stents (BMS) to the new biodegradable stents which try to restore endothelial function. Currently, the most commonly used stent is the everolimus-eluting stent. AREAS COVERED: This review will cover the current status of durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent, its history, and future perspectives. Nowadays, the everolimus-eluting stent is the most used device in the acute and chronic settings due to its safety and efficacy. EXPERT OPINION: Durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent, supported by much evidence, has demonstrated its efficacy and safety, not only in de novo artery lesions, but in multiples scenarios, such as the acute setting and diabetic population, becoming one of the most polyvalent stents available. Nowadays, research is focused on the reduction of antiplatelet treatment duration. Similar rates of stent thrombosis with short dual antiplatelet treatment regimens of 1 to 3 months compared to pronged treatment have been observed. However, specific studies should be performed to evaluate this possibility.

Treating Very Long Coronary Artery Lesions in the Contemporary Drug-Eluting-Stent Era: Single Long 48 mm Stent Versus Two Overlapping Stents Showed Comparable Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of diffuse coronary artery disease (CAD) is associated with higher adverse clinical events. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of patients treated with single long 48 mm contemporary drug eluting stents (SL-DES) versus two overlapping contemporary drug eluting stents (OL-DES) for very-long CAD. METHODS/MATERIALS: We analyzed the clinical outcome of 117 patients with SL-DES and 101 patients with OL-DES who underwent PCI between 1st July 2013 to 31st December 2016. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at two years, defined as a composite of cardiac mortality, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization. RESULTS: Mean age was 60.8 ±â€¯10.5 years for SL-DES group and 60.5 ±â€¯11.9 years in the OL-DES group. SL-DES has longer mean lesion length as compared to OL-DES (43.1 ±â€¯3.7 mm vs. 41.83 ±â€¯2.3 mm p = 0.003). There was no difference in TLF at two years between SL-DES and OL-DES (5.3% vs. 6.4%, adjusted odds ratio 1.43, 95% CI 0.50-4.11). There was one case of probable ST in each group. Contrast volume usage was lower for SL-DES than OL-DES in patients who underwent single vessel PCI. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of very-long CAD showed comparable TLF at two years for SL-DES versus OL-DES. Our results suggest that both strategies are reasonable treatment options for patients with diffuse CAD.

Different vascular healing process between bioabsorbable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents versus bioresorbable vascular scaffolds via optical coherence tomography and coronary angioscopy (the ENHANCE study: ENdothelial Healing Assessment with Novel Coronary tEchnology).

Recent clinical trials have raised concerns about the safety and efficacy of ABSORB™ bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS). The difference in the vascular healing process between SYNERGY™ bioabsorbable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents (BP-EES) and BVS remains unclear. The aim of the ENHANCE study was to compare vascular healing on BP-EES versus BVS by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and coronary angioscopy (CAS) at 4- and 12-month follow-ups. This is a prospective, non-randomized, single center clinical trial. Thirteen eligible patients with multivessel disease were enrolled. BP-EES and BVS were simultaneously implanted in the same patients, but in different coronary vessels. Imaging follow-up with both OCT and CAS was completed in 11 patients at 12 months. Neointimal coverage rates were similar between the two groups based on OCT measurements. The neointimal thickness of BP-EES was significantly thicker at the 12th month than at the 4th month, whereas the neointimal thickness of BVS did not change between the measurements taken at the 4th and 12th month. Existence of intra-stent thrombus was significantly higher in the BVS group, compared to the BP-EES group. On the other hand, CAS revealed that red-thrombi and yellow-plaque were more frequently observed in BVS at 4 months and up to 12-month follow-ups than in BP-EES. These findings suggested that the evidence of instability remained up to 12 months in the vascular healing with BVS, compared to that with BP-EES. Vascular healing of the stented wall was recognized at the very early phase after BP-EES implantation. However, vascular healing with BVS was still incomplete after 12 months.

7-Year Outcomes of a Randomized Trial Comparing the First-Generation Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus the New-Generation Everolimus-Eluting Stent: The RESET Trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare 7-year outcomes between the first-generation sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and the new-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in a randomized clinical trial. BACKGROUND: There is a scarcity of very long-term (beyond 5 years) data from clinical trials investigating whether new-generation drug-eluting stents have clear clinical advantages over first-generation drug-eluting stents. METHODS: RESET (Randomized Evaluation of Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stent Trial) is the largest randomized trial comparing EES with SES (NCT01035450). Among a total of 3,197 patients in the original RESET population from 100 centers, the present extended 7-year follow-up study was conducted in 2,667 patients from 75 centers after excluding those patients enrolled from centers that denied participation. Complete 7-year follow-up was achieved in 91.5% of patients. RESULTS: The cumulative 7-year incidence of the primary efficacy endpoint of target lesion revascularization was not significantly different between EES and SES (10.2% vs. 11.7%; hazard ratio: 0.87; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.10; p = 0.24). The risk for the primary safety endpoint of death or myocardial infarction trended lower with EES than with SES (20.6% vs. 23.6%; hazard ratio: 0.85; 95% confidence interval: 0.72 to 1.005; p = 0.06). The cumulative 7-year incidence of definite stent thrombosis was very low and similar between EES and SES (0.9% vs. 1.0%; p = 0.82). The lower risk of EES relative to SES was significant for the composite secondary endpoint of target lesion failure (13.3% vs. 18.1%; hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.59 to 0.88; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: During 7 years of follow-up, the risk for target lesion revascularization was not significantly different between the new-generation EES and the first-generation SES.

Impact of chronic kidney disease on long-term clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent implantation: A subanalysis of the Tokyo-MD PCI registry.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) on the 5-year clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation. BACKGROUND: Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of EES. However, limited information exists on the long-term clinical outcomes associated with CKD. METHODS: The Tokyo-MD PCI study is a multi-center observational study designed to describe the clinical outcomes of unselected patients after EES implantation. In this subanalysis, patients on maintenance hemodialysis were excluded, and patients with (n = 316) or without (n = 1,424) CKD were evaluated for their 5-year incidence rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, ischemia driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR), and stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: The mean and median follow-up duration were 1,391 ± 557 days and 1,769 days (interquartile range, 1,012-1,800 days), respectively. Although the incidence of ID-TLR and ST was similar between patients with and without CKD (4.9% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.26, 0.5% vs. 1.0%, P = 0.20, respectively), cardiac death and MACE were significantly higher in patients with CKD than in those without CKD (6.5% vs. 2.9%, P = 0.007, 26.9% vs. 14.0%, P < 0.001, respectively). In multivariate analysis, CKD was an independent predictor of MACE (hazard ratio 1.22 [95% confidence interval 1.04-1.43], P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with CKD had similar ID-TLR and ST rates as those without CKD at 5 years after EES implantation. The risk of long-term MACEs appeared to be associated with CKD.