Outcomes in Valve-in-Valve Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

The use of valve-in-valve transcatheter aortic valve implantation (ViV-TAVI) is increasing, but studies evaluating clinical outcomes in these patients are scarce. Also, there are limited data to guide the choice of valve type in ViV-TAVI. Therefore, this CENTER-study evaluated clinical outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI compared to patients with native valve TAVI (NV-TAVI). In addition, we compared outcomes in patients with ViV-TAVI treated with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable valves. A total of 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 11333 patients with NV-TAVI were matched 1:2 using propensity score matching, resulting in 256 patients with ViV-TAVI and 512 patients with NV-TAVI. Mean age was 81±7 years, 58% were female, and the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Predicted Risk of Mortality was 6.3% (4.0% to 12.8%). Mortality rates were comparable between ViV-TAVI and NV-TAVI patients at 30 days (4.1% vs 5.9%, p = 0.30) and 1 year (14.2% vs 17.3%, p = 0.34). Stroke rates were also similar at 30 days (2.8% vs 1.8%, p = 0.38) and 1 year (4.9% vs 4.3%, p = 0.74). Permanent pacemakers were less frequently implanted in patients with ViV-TAVI (8.8% vs 15.0%, relative risk 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.92, p = 0.02). Patients with ViV-TAVI were treated with self-expandable valves (n = 162) and balloon-expandable valves (n = 94). Thirty-day major bleeding was less frequent in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 13%, odds ratio 5.12, 95% CI 1.42 to 18.52, p = 0.01). Thirty-day mortality was numerically lower in patients with self-expandable valves (3% vs 7%, odds ratio 3.35, 95% CI 0.77 to 14.51, p = 0.11). In conclusion, ViV-TAVI seems a safe and effective treatment for failing bioprosthetic valves with low mortality and stroke rates comparable to NV-TAVI for both valve types.

10-Year Follow-Up of Patients With Everolimus-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents After ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

BACKGROUND: Outcomes data for a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) at extended long-term follow-up in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the 10-year outcomes of patients enrolled in the EXAMINATION (A Clinical Evaluation of Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stents in the Treatment of Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial. METHODS: The EXAMINATION-EXTEND (10-Years Follow-Up of the EXAMINATION Trial) study is an investigator-driven 10-year follow-up of the EXAMINATION trial, which randomly assigned 1,498 patients with STEMI in a 1:1 ratio to receive either EES (n = 751) or bare-metal stents (n = 747). The primary endpoint was a patient-oriented composite endpoint of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization. Secondary endpoints included a device-oriented composite endpoint of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization; the individual components of the combined endpoints; and stent thrombosis. RESULTS: Complete 10-year clinical follow-up was obtained in 94.5% of the EES group and 95.9% of the bare-metal stent group. Rates of the patient-oriented composite endpoint and device-oriented composite endpoint were significantly reduced in the EES group (32.4% vs. 38.0% [hazard ratio: 0.81; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 0.96; p = 0.013] and 13.6% vs. 18.4% [hazard ratio: 0.72; 95% confidence interval: 0.55 to 0.93; p = 0.012], respectively), driven mainly by target lesion revascularization (5.7% vs. 8.8%; p = 0.018). The rate of definite stent thrombosis was similar in both groups (2.2% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.590). No differences were found between the groups in terms of target lesion revascularization (1.4% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.963) and definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.6% vs. 0.4%; p = 0.703) between 5 and 10 years. CONCLUSIONS: At 10-year follow-up, EES demonstrated confirmed superiority in combined patient- and device-oriented composite endpoints compared with bare-metal stents in patients with STEMI requiring primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Between 5- and 10-year follow-up, a low incidence of adverse cardiovascular events related to device failure was found in both groups. (10-Years Follow-Up of the EXAMINATION Trial; NCT04462315).

Does Large Vessel Size Justify Use of Bare-Metal Stents in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention?

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) showed improved efficacy and safety compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), and international guidelines recommend their use as first line treatment. Yet, BMS are still widely used in practice, especially in large coronary vessels. We aimed to compare efficacy and safety of second-generation DES over BMS in large coronary culprit ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction lesions. METHODS: We evaluated impact of large coronary stents (maximum size ≥3.50 mm) or smaller stents (<3.50 mm), among 1498 patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, randomly allocated to everolimus-eluting DES or to an equivalent BMS platform in the EXAMINATION trial (Clinical Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial). Clinical events up to 5 years of follow-up were evaluated. RESULTS: Large coronary stents were used in 683 patients (45.9%). At 5-year follow-up, the crude rate of the primary end point, a composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization, was similar among patients treated with large or smaller coronary stents. The impact of DES versus BMS implantation was consistent irrespective of the stent size both for the primary end point (Pint=0.82) and other secondary ischemic end points. Within patients treated with bigger stents, DES implantation was associated to a trend toward a reduction of target lesion (hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.27-1.02; P=0.05) and target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.34-1.03; P=0.066). CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the preferential use of BMS for patients with large coronary vessels. DES may warrant improved efficacy irrespective of stent size among patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00828087.

Resultados inmediatos e impacto funcional y pronóstico tras la recanalización de oclusiones coronarias crónicas. Resultados del Registro Ibérico / Procedural, functional and prognostic outcomes following recanalization of coronary chronic total occlusions. Results of the Iberian Registry

Introducción y objetivos: El impacto de la intervención coronaria percutánea (ICP) sobre oclusiones coronarias crónicas totales (OCT) presenta controversias. Se analizan los resultados agudos y al seguimiento en nuestro entorno. Métodos: Registro prospectivo de ICP sobre OCT en 24 centros durante 2 años. Resultados: Se realizaron 1.000 ICP sobre OCT en 952 pacientes. La mayoría tenía síntomas (81,5%) y cardiopatía isquémica previa (59,2%), y hubo intentos de desobstrucción previos en un 15%. El SYNTAX anatómico fue 19,5 +/- 10,6 y tenía J-score > 2 el 17,3%. El procedimiento fue retrógrado en 92 pacientes (9,2%). La tasa de éxito fue del 74,9%, mayor en aquellos sin ICP previa (el 82,2 frente al 75,2%; p = 0,001), con J-score ≤ 2 (el 80,5 frente al 69,5%; p = 0,002) y con el uso de ecografía intravascular (el 89,9 frente al 76,2%; p = 0,001), que fue predictor independiente del éxito. Por el contrario, lesiones calcificadas, > 20 mm o con muñón proximal romo lo fueron de fracaso. El 7,1% tuvo complicaciones, como perforación (3%), infarto (1,3%) o muerte (0,5%). Al año de seguimiento, el 88,2% mejoró clínicamente en caso de ICP exitosa (frente al 34,8%; p < 0,001). Dicha mejoría se asoció con menor mortalidad. La tasa de mortalidad al año fue del 1,5%. Conclusiones: Los pacientes del Registro Ibérico con OCT tratados con ICP presentan complejidad clínico-anatómica, tasas de éxito y complicaciones similares a los de otros registros nacionales e importante impacto de la recanalización exitosa en la mejoría funcional, que a su vez se asoció con menor mortalidad

Introduction and objectives: There is current controversy regarding the benefits of percutaneous recanalization (PCI) of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO). Our aim was to determine acute and follow-up outcomes in our setting. Methods: Two-year prospective registry of consecutive patients undergoing PCI of CTO in 24 centers. Results: A total of 1000 PCIs of CTO were performed in 952 patients. Most were symptomatic (81.5%), with chronic ischemic heart disease (59.2%). Previous recanalization attempts had been made in 15%. The mean SYNTAX score was 19.5 +/- 10.6 and J-score was > 2 in 17.3%. A retrograde procedure was performed in 92 patients (9.2%). The success rate was 74.9% and was higher in patients without previous attempts (82.2% vs 75.2%; P = .001), those with a J-score ≤ 2 (80.5% vs 69.5%; P = .002), and in intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI (89.9% vs 76.2%, P = .001), which was an independent predictor of success. In contrast, severe calcification, length > 20mm, and blunt proximal cap were independent predictors of failed recanalization. The rate of procedural complications was 7.1%, including perforation (3%), myocardial infarction (1.3%), and death (0.5%). At 1-year of follow-up, 88.2% of successfully revascularized patients showed clinical improvement (vs 34.8%, P < .001), which was associated with lower mortality. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 1.5%. Conclusions: Compared with other national registries, patients in the Iberian registry undergoing PCI of a CTO showed similar complexity, success rate, and complications. Successful recanalization was strongly associated with functional improvement, which was related to lower mortality

Long-term impact of diabetes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Insights from the EXAMINATION randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term outcomes of diabetic patients suffering from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent have been scarcely evaluated. The aim of this posthoc subanalysis of the EXAMINATION trial was to compare 5-year outcomes according to the presence of diabetes mellitus. METHODS: From a total of 1,497 patients included in the trial, 258 were diabetics (n = 137, received everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and n = 121 bare-metal stent (BMS); whereas 1,239 were nondiabetics (n = 613 treated with EES and n = 626 with BMS). Patient-oriented combined endpoint (POCE) defined as all-cause death, any MI or any revascularization, and other clinical parameters were collected up to 5-years. All results were adjusted for various potential confounders. RESULTS: At 5-years, patients with diabetes showed similar rates of POCE between diabetics treated with EES and those treated with BMS (32.8% vs. 32.2%; p = 0.88). However, rates of TLR were significantly lower in the EES group (4.4% vs. 9.9%; HR 0.52 (0.29-0.94); P = 0.03). In non-diabetics, the use of EES was associated with a significant improvement in all-clinical parameters except for MI rate: POCE: [10.0% vs. 12.6%; HR 0.78(0.62-0.98); P = 0.038], all cause death: [7.0% vs. 12.1%; HR 0.62(0.42-0.90); P = 0.014], and [TLR: 4.2 vs. 6.7; HR 0.60 (0.37-0.98); P = 0.04]. Overall, diabetics showed higher rate of POCE at 5-years (32.6% vs. 21.5% in nondiabetics HR1.45[1.03-2.04];p = 0.03) driven by increased rates of MI and the need for revascularization that occurred in coronary segments remote from target lesions [2.7% vs. 1.1%; HR: 2.27 (1.12-5.23); P = 0.02 and 14% vs. 6.2%; HR: 2.11 (1.38-3.22); P = 0.001, respectively]. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetics had worse clinical outcomes than nondiabetics after STEMI mainly due to atherosclerosis progression. At 5-years, the treatment with EES did not reduce the rate of POCE in diabetics but reduced the need for revascularization compared with BMS.

Association of acute kidney injury and bleeding events with mortality after radial or femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: In the Minimizing Adverse Haemorrhagic Events by TRansradial Access Site and Systemic Implementation of angioX (MATRIX) trial, adults with acute coronary syndrome undergoing coronary intervention who were allocated to radial access had a lower risk of bleeding, acute kidney injury (AKI), and all-cause mortality, as compared with those allocated to femoral access. The mechanism of the mortality benefit of radial access remained unclear. METHODS AND RESULTS: We used multistate and competing risk models to determine the effects of radial and femoral access on bleeding, AKI and all-cause mortality in the MATRIX trial and to disentangle the relationship between these different types of events. There were large relative risk reductions in mortality for radial compared with femoral access for the transition from AKI to death [hazard ratio (HR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-0.97] and for the pathway from coronary intervention to AKI to death (HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.26-0.92). Conversely, there was little evidence for a difference between radial and femoral groups for the transition from bleeding to death (HR 1.05, 95% CI 0.42-2.64) and the pathway from coronary intervention to bleeding to death (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.28-2.49). CONCLUSION: The prevention of AKI appeared predominantly responsible for the mortality benefit of radial as compared with femoral access in the MATRIX trial. There was little evidence for an equally important, independent role of bleeding.

Procedural, Functional and Prognostic Outcomes Following Recanalization of Coronary Chronic Total Occlusions. Results of the Iberian Registry.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: There is current controversy regarding the benefits of percutaneous recanalization (PCI) of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO). Our aim was to determine acute and follow-up outcomes in our setting. METHODS: Two-year prospective registry of consecutive patients undergoing PCI of CTO in 24 centers. RESULTS: A total of 1000 PCIs of CTO were performed in 952 patients. Most were symptomatic (81.5%), with chronic ischemic heart disease (59.2%). Previous recanalization attempts had been made in 15%. The mean SYNTAX score was 19.5 ± 10.6 and J-score was > 2 in 17.3%. A retrograde procedure was performed in 92 patients (9.2%). The success rate was 74.9% and was higher in patients without previous attempts (82.2% vs 75.2%; P = .001), those with a J-score ≤ 2 (80.5% vs 69.5%; P = .002), and in intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI (89.9% vs 76.2%, P = .001), which was an independent predictor of success. In contrast, severe calcification, length > 20mm, and blunt proximal cap were independent predictors of failed recanalization. The rate of procedural complications was 7.1%, including perforation (3%), myocardial infarction (1.3%), and death (0.5%). At 1-year of follow-up, 88.2% of successfully revascularized patients showed clinical improvement (vs 34.8%, P < .001), which was associated with lower mortality. At 1-year of follow-up, the mortality rate was 1.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with other national registries, patients in the Iberian registry undergoing PCI of a CTO showed similar complexity, success rate, and complications. Successful recanalization was strongly associated with functional improvement, which was related to lower mortality.

Cost-effectiveness of everolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: An analysis from the EXAMINATION randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) has proven to be clinically effective and safe in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction but it remains unclear whether it is cost-effective compared to bare-metal stents (BMS) in the long-term. We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of EES versus BMS based on the 5-year results of the EXAMINATION trial, from a Spanish health service perspective. METHODS: Decision analysis of the use of EES versus BMS was based on the patient-level clinical outcome data of the EXAMINATION trial. The analysis adopted a lifelong time horizon, assuming that long-term survival was independent of the initial treatment strategy after the end of follow-up. Life-expectancy, health-state utility scores and unit costs were extracted from published literature and publicly available sources. Non-parametric bootstrapping was combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis to co-assess the impact of patient-level variation and parameter uncertainty. The main outcomes were total costs and quality-adjusted life-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained. Costs and effects were discounted at 3%. RESULTS: The model predicted an average survival time in patients receiving EES and BMS of 10.52 and 10.38 undiscounted years, respectively. Over the life-long time horizon, the EES strategy was €430 more costly than BMS (€8,305 vs. €7,874), but went along with incremental gains of 0.10 quality-adjusted life-years. This resulted in an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over all simulations of €3,948 per quality-adjusted life-years gained and was below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000 per quality-adjusted life-years gained in 86.9% of simulation runs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher total costs relative to BMS, EES appeared to be a cost-effective therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients due to their incremental effectiveness. Predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below generally acceptable threshold values.

3-Year Clinical Follow-Up of the RIBS IV Clinical Trial: A Prospective Randomized Study of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis in Coronary Arteries Previously Treated With Drug-Eluting Stents.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) of drug-eluting stents (DES). BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with DES-ISR remains a challenge. METHODS: The RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloons vs Everolimus-Eluting Stents) trial is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial comparing DEB and EES in patients with DES-ISR. The pre-specified comparison of the 3-year clinical outcomes obtained with these interventions is the main objective of the present study. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients with DES-ISR were randomized to DEB (n = 154) or EES (n = 155). At angiographic follow-up, the in-segment minimal lumen diameter was larger in the EES arm (2.03 ± 0.7 mm vs. 1.80 ± 0.6 mm; p < 0.01). Three-year clinical follow-up was obtained in all enrolled patients (100%). The combined clinical outcome measure of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization was significantly reduced in the EES arm (19 [12.3%] vs. 31 [20.1%]; p = 0.04; hazard ratio: 0.57 [95% confidence interval: 0.34 to 0.96]), driven by a lower need for target lesion revascularization (11 [7.1%] vs. 24 [15.6%]; p = 0.015; hazard ratio: 0.43 [95% confidence interval: 0.21 to 0.87]). The need for "late" (>1 year) target lesion revascularization (2.6% vs. 4%) and target vessel revascularization (4% vs. 6.6%) was similar in the 2 arms. Rates of cardiac death (3.9% vs. 3.2%), myocardial infarction (2.6% vs. 4.5%), and stent thrombosis (1.3% vs. 2.6%) at 3 years were also similar in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: The 3-year clinical follow-up of this randomized clinical trial demonstrates that in patients with DES-ISR, EES reduce the need for repeat interventions compared with DEB. (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloons vs Everolimus-Eluting Stents [RIBS IV]; NCT01239940).

Role of ST-Segment Resolution in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction Treated With Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (from the 5-Year Outcomes of the EXAMINATION [Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction] Trial).

In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), lack of ST-segment resolution (STR) is associated with poor prognosis at short- and long-term follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of STR on very long-term outcomes in patients with STEMI treated with pPCI included in the EXAMINATION (Evaluation of the Xience-V Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial. Patients were stratified according to the presence of STR < 50% and STR < 70% at the 30-minute post-pPCI electrocardiogram. Primary end point was the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE) of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization at 5-year follow-up. Both baseline and post-PCI 30-minute electrocardiograms were available for STR assessment in 1,351 patients. Of these patients, 228 (16.9%) and 500 (37.0%) exhibited STR < 50% and STR < 70%, respectively. At 5-year follow-up, the POCE was observed more frequently in patients with STR < 50% (hazard ratio [HR] 1.556; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.194 to 2.027; p <0.001) and in patients with STR < 70% (HR 1.460, 95% CI 1.169 to 1.824, p <0.001) compared with patients with STR > 50% and STR ≥ 70%, respectively. In both cases, this difference was mainly driven by a significant increase in the rate of all-cause death and any revascularization. After multivariable adjustment, STR < 70%, but not STR < 50%, resulted as a 5-year independent predictor of POCE (adjusted HR 1.338, 95% CI 1.008 to 1.778, p = 0.044). In conclusion, in patients with STEMI, the evaluation of 70% STR after pPCI provides independent prognostic information at 5-year follow-up and it can be used to identify patients at high risk of very long-term cardiovascular events.

Correlates of non-target vessel-related adverse events in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from five-year follow-up of the EXAMINATION trial.

AIMS: The aim of this substudy was to determine the five-year correlates of non-TV-related adverse events (AE) in STEMI patients included in the EXAMINATION trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: The EXAMINATION trial randomised 1,498 STEMI patients to bare metal or everolimus-eluting stent implantation. In this substudy, patients were analysed according to non-TV-related AE, defined as the composite of either non-TV revascularisation (non-TVR) or non-TV-related myocardial infarction (MI). At five-year follow-up, 125 patients (8.3%) exhibited 136 non-TV-related AE (124 [8.3%] non-TVR, 12 [0.8%] non-TV-related MI), accounting for 47.1% of 289 non-fatal cardiac events overall. These patients had a higher incidence of diabetes mellitus (p<0.001), arterial hypertension (p=0.032), previous MI (p=0.073), multivessel disease (p<0.001), and incomplete revascularisation (p=0.049), and a lower rate of ST-segment resolution >70% (p=0.042) as compared to the rest. At Cox analysis, previous MI (HR 1.872, 95% CI: 1.004-3.489; p=0.048), incomplete revascularisation (HR 1.746, 95% CI: 1.029-2.963; p=0.039) and diabetes (HR 1.942, 95% CI: 1.292-2.919; p=0.001) were independent correlates of non-TV-related AE. CONCLUSIONS: In STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention, previous MI, incomplete revascularisation and diabetes resulted in being independent correlates of five-year non-TV-related AE.

Impact of Body Mass Index on 5-Year Clinical Outcomes in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction After Everolimus-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stent Implantation.

Patients with high body mass index (BMI) seem to have better outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention than normal-weight patients. However, contrasting results have been reported on the "obesity paradox" in patients presenting with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The aim of our study was to investigate the impact of BMI on mortality in the population enrolled in the Evaluation of the Xience-V stent in Acute Myocardial INfArcTION (EXAMINATION) trial. The EXAMINATION trial randomized 1,498 patients with STEMI to a bare-metal stent or an everolimus-eluting stent. In this substudy patients were stratified into 3 groups according to BMI values: normal (BMI < 25 kg/m2), overweight (BMI = 25 to 29.9 kg/m2), and obese (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2). The coprimary end points were the all-cause and cardiac deaths among the groups at the 5-year follow-up. BMI was available in 1,421 patients, divided in 401 (28.2%) normal, 702 (49.4%) overweight, and 318 (22.4%) obese. Obese patients were younger (p = 0.012) compared with the other groups, but with a worse cardiovascular risk profile. They were more frequently female (p <0.001) and with a higher rate of obesity-related co-morbidity conditions such as diabetes mellitus (p = 0.005), arterial hypertension (p <0.001), and hyperlipidemia (p = 0.001) compared with the other groups. At the 5-year follow-up, all-cause and cardiac deaths were less frequent in obese patients than in the other groups (p = 0.003 and p = 0.030, respectively). After adjustment for confounding variables, BMI was an independent predictor of all-cause death (hazard ratio 0.765, 95% confidence interval 0.599 to 0.979, p = 0.033), but not of cardiac death, without any interaction with the stent type. In conclusion, in patients with STEMI who underwent primary PCI, the long-term all-cause death rate decreased as BMI increased, confirming the obesity paradox, irrespective of the stent type.

Impact of stent overlapping on long-term clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: insights from the five-year follow-up of the EXAMINATION trial.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of STEMI patients treated with overlap vs. no-overlap stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the one- and five-year clinical outcomes of 1,498 STEMI patients according to overlapping stent implantation. The primary endpoint was a patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation. Stent thrombosis data were also analysed. Four hundred and four (27.0%) patients were treated with overlapping stents, whereas the remaining 1,094 (73.0%) were not. At one and five years, there was no difference in PoCE between the overlap vs. no-overlap group, even after adjustment (14.9% vs. 12.4%; HR 1.20, 95% CI: 0.76-1.90; p=0.44, and 26.3% vs. 22.3%; HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.80-1.62; p=0.47, respectively). At five years, within the overlap group, patients who received BMS had a trend towards a higher rate of PoCE and DoCE as compared to those who received EES. At one year, there was a trend towards a higher rate of definite/probable stent thrombosis in the overlap compared to the no-overlap group (2.2% vs. 1.6%; HR 2.35, 95% CI: 0.95-5.90; p=0.06). This difference was driven by a higher rate for BMS compared to EES (4.4% vs. 0%, p for interaction=0.03) in the overlap group. At five years, the absolute risk difference for overlap (3.5% vs. 2.2%, p=0.99) and interaction for BMS (p=0.03) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting with STEMI, the long-term PoCE was similar for the overlap and no-overlap groups. Overlap among patients receiving BMS appears to be associated with a higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes and stent thrombosis.

Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With Bare-Metal and Drug-Eluting In-Stent Restenosis: Results From a Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of the RIBS IV and V Trials.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) is more challenging than that of patients with bare-metal stent ISR. However, the results of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in these distinct scenarios remain unsettled. METHODS AND RESULTS: A pooled analysis of the RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) and RIBS V (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) randomized trials was performed using patient-level data to compare the efficacy of EES in bare-metal stent ISR and DES-ISR. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both trials. Results of 94 patients treated with EES for bare-metal stent ISR were compared with those of 155 patients treated with EES for DES-ISR. Baseline characteristics were more adverse in patients with DES-ISR, although they presented later and more frequently with a focal pattern. After intervention, minimal lumen diameter (2.22±0.5 versus 2.38±0.5 mm, P=0.01) was smaller in the DES-ISR group. Late angiographic findings (89.3% of eligible patients), including minimal lumen diameter (2.03±0.7 versus 2.36±0.6 mm, P<0.001) and diameter stenosis (23±22 versus 13±17%, P<0.001) were poorer in patients with DES-ISR. Results were consistent in the in-segment and in-lesion analyses. On multiple linear regression analysis, minimal lumen diameter at follow-up remained significantly smaller in patients with DES-ISR. Finally, at 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), mortality (2.6 versus 0%, P<0.01) and need for target vessel revascularization (8 versus 2%, P=0.03) were higher in the DES-ISR group. CONCLUSIONS: This patient-level pooled analysis of the RIBS IV and RIBS V randomized clinical trials suggests that EES provide favorable outcomes in patients with ISR. However, the results of EES are less satisfactory in patients with DES-ISR than in those with bare-metal stent ISR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifiers: NCT01239953 and NCT01239940.

Puncture Versus Surgical Cutdown Complications of Transfemoral Aortic Valve Implantation (from the Spanish TAVI Registry).

Vascular complications in transcatheter aortic valve implantation using transfemoral approach are related to higher mortality. Complete percutaneous approach is currently the preferred technique for vascular access. However, some centers still perform surgical cutdown. Our purpose was to determine complications related to vascular access technique in the population of the Spanish TAVI National Registry. From January 2010 to July 2015, 3,046 patients were included in this Registry. Of them, 2,465 underwent transfemoral approach and were treated with either surgical cutdown and closure (cutdown group, n = 632) or percutaneous approach (puncture group, n = 1,833). Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 definitions were used to assess vascular and bleeding complications. Propensity matching resulted in 615 matched pairs. Overall, 30-day vascular complications were significantly higher in the puncture group (109 [18%] vs 42 [6.9%]; relative risk [RR] 2.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.85 to 3.64, p <0.001) due mostly by minor vascular events (89 [15%] vs 25 [4.1%], RR 3.56, 95% CI 2.32 to 5.47, p <0.001). Bleeding rates were lower in the puncture group (18 [3%] vs 40 [6.6%], RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.78, p = 0.003) mainly driven by major bleeding (9 [1.5%] vs 21 [3.4%], RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.93, p = 0.03). At a mean follow-up of 323 days, complication rates remained significantly different between groups (minor vascular complications 90 [15%] vs 31 [5.1%], hazard ratio 2.99, 95% CI 1.99 to 4.50, p <0.001 and major bleeding 10 [1.6%] vs 21 [3.4%], hazard ratio 0.47, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.0, p = 0.04, puncture versus cutdown group, respectively). In conclusion, percutaneous approach yielded higher rates of minor vascular complications but lower rates of major bleeding compared with the surgical cutdown, both at 30-day and at mid-term follow-up in our population.

A randomized comparison of novel bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndromes: The CENTURY II high risk ACS substudy.

BACKGROUND: To investigate clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention using a sirolimus-eluting stent with bioresorbable polymer, Ultimaster (BP-SES) compared with a permanent polymer everolimus-eluting stent, Xience (PP-EES) in patients with high risk (ST-segment elevation and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction) acute coronary syndromes (ACS) enrolled in the CENTURY II trial. METHODS: CENTURY II is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, single blind, controlled trial comparing BP-SES and PP-EES, with primary endpoint of target lesion failure (TLF) at 9month post-stent implantation. Out of 1123 patients enrolled in CENTURY II trial, 264 high risk ACS patients were included in this subgroup analysis, and the clinical outcomes including target lesion failure (TLF), target vessel failure (TVF), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were evaluated at 24months. RESULTS: The baseline clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics were similar between two groups. At 24months, TLF occurred in 6.3% of patients receiving a BP-SES and 6.5% of patients receiving a PP-EES (P=0.95); TVF was 6.3% in patients receiving a BP-SES and 9.4% in patients receiving a PP-EES (P=0.36). There were no significant differences in cardiac death, myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis rate. CONCLUSIONS: BP-SES achieved similar safety and efficacy outcomes as PP-EES in this ACS subgroup of CENTURY II study, at 24-month follow-up. This finding is hypothesis-generating and needs to be confirmed in larger trials with longer follow-up.

Evaluation of a 'color coding' system for the assessment of patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

AIMS: The reduction of delay times as well as the rate of false alarms (FA) have become some of the main points of the different infarction networks. We propose a simple way of classifying patients derived for primary PCI (pPCI) into well-defined simple groups by colors, where we can assess real delays of each clinical presentation, define the FA and, furthermore, establish their immediate and short term prognosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Prospective study of STEMI consecutive patients derived for pPCI during 2014. Patients were categorized into one of the 3 predesigned groups [(i) Green: diagnostic-ECG with compatible clinical presentation for pPCI; (ii) Yellow: LBBB, pacemaker rate or non-diagnostic ECG; and (iii) Red: very complex patients], always before performing the angiography in 518 patients. Delay times were highest in the Yellow group, with much longer first medical contact (FMC) to balloon time (median Green 118'; Yellow 163'; Red 130'; p<0.001) mainly due to higher times from the first medical contact to the diagnosis and team activation (median Green 30'; Yellow 70'; Red 39'; p<0.001). In the whole cohort, pPCI was performed in 80.2% of patients, with 11.9% of FA. The Green group had only a 2.5% FA rate, in contrast to the Yellow group where FA were 43.2%. CONCLUSIONS: This simple classification differentiates the 3 very clear groups in which delay times and prognosis are very different. This classification allows us to measure, evaluate and compare the performance of each of our pPCI networks with others and within different periods of times.

Clinical outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with everolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents (EXAMINATION): 5-year results of a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Data for the safety and efficacy of new-generation drug-eluting stents at long-term follow-up, and specifically in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, are scarce. In the EXAMINATION trial, we compared everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with bare-metal stents (BMS) in an all-comer population with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. In this study, we assessed the 5-year outcomes of the population in the EXAMINATION trial. METHODS: In the multicentre EXAMINATION trial, done in Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands, patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive EES or BMS. The random allocation schedule was computer-generated and central randomisation (by telephone) was used to allocate patients in blocks of four or six, stratified by centre. Patients were masked to treatment assignment. At 5 years, we assessed the combined patient-oriented outcome of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularisation. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00828087. FINDINGS: 1498 patients were randomly assigned to receive either EES (n=751) or BMS (n=747). At 5 years, complete clinical follow-up data were obtained for 731 patients treated with EES and 727 treated with BMS (97% of both groups). The patient-oriented endpoint occurred in 159 (21%) patients in the EES group versus 192 (26%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio 0·80, 95% CI 0·65-0·98; p=0·033). This difference was mainly driven by a reduced rate of all-cause mortality (65 [9%] vs 88 [12%]; 0·72, 0·52-0·10; p=0·047). INTERPRETATION: Our findings should be taken as a point of reference for the assessment of new bioresorbable polymer-based metallic stents or bioresorbable scaffolds in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. FUNDING: Spanish Heart Foundation.

A Prospective Randomized Trial of Drug-Eluting Balloons Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients With In-Stent Restenosis of Drug-Eluting Stents: The RIBS IV Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains a major challenge. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the comparative efficacy of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients presenting with DES-ISR. METHODS: The study design of this multicenter randomized clinical trial assumed superiority of EES for the primary endpoint, in-segment minimal lumen diameter at the 6- to 9-month angiographic follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 309 patients with DES-ISR from 23 Spanish university hospitals were randomly allocated to DEB (n = 154) or EES (n = 155). At late angiography (median 247 days; 90% of eligible patients), patients in the EES arm had a significantly larger minimal lumen diameter (2.03 ± 0.7 mm vs. 1.80 ± 0.6 mm; p < 0.01) (absolute mean difference: 0.23 mm; 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.38) [corrected], net lumen gain (1.28 ± 0.7 mm vs. 1.01 ± 0.7 mm; p < 0.01), and lower percent diameter stenosis (23 ± 22% vs. 30 ± 22%; p < 0.01) and binary restenosis rate (11% vs. 19%; p = 0.06), compared with patients in the DEB arm. Consistent results were observed in the in-lesion analysis. At the 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), the main clinical outcome measure (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization) was significantly reduced in the EES arm (10% vs. 18%; p = 0.04; hazard ratio: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.98), mainly driven by a lower need for target vessel revascularization (8% vs. 16%; p = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with DES-ISR, EES provided superior long-term clinical and angiographic results compared with DEB. (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Drug-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent [RIBS IV]; NCT01239940).

Comparison between diabetic and non-diabetic patients after successful percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total occlusions in the drug-eluting stent era.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes mellitus and chronic total occlusions are associated with unfavorable outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to assess the clinical and angiographic outcomes of diabetic and non-diabetic patients who underwent successful percutaneous revascularization of chronic total occlusions with drug-eluting stents. METHODS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics, procedural details, nine-month angiographic follow-up and clinical events at 12 months were compared between 75 diabetic and 132 non-diabetic patients included in a clinical trial that randomized successful recanalization of chronic total occlusions to receive sirolimus- or everolimus-eluting stents. RESULTS: In both diabetic and non-diabetic groups there was a favorable non-significantly different angiographic result at nine months, with low in-stent late loss (0.14±0.60 mm vs. 0.25±0.68 mm, p=0.305) and rates of binary restenosis (4.0% vs. 10.6%, p=0.180) and reocclusion (0.0% vs. 2.3%, p=0.334). During follow-up similar survival from death (97.3±1.9% vs. 99.2±0.8%, log-rank p=0.273), acute myocardial infarction (100.0±0.0% vs. 97.7±1.3%, log-rank p=0.192), target vessel revascularization (88.7±3.8% vs. 88.2±2.9%, log-rank p=0.899) and stent thrombosis (100.0±0.0% vs. 97.7±1.3%, log-rank p=0.192) was observed. Furthermore, the presence of more diffuse peripheral and coronary artery disease and higher frequency of calcified lesions in diabetic patients did not lead to significant differences in the approach (20.0% vs. 25.0% radial approach, p=0.413), strategy (6.7% vs. 3.8% retrograde strategy, p=0.353), total stent length (48.1±24.6 mm vs. 49.2±23.9 mm, p=0758) or contrast volume (261.3±116.4 ml vs. 297.4±135.9 ml, p=0.109) required for revascularization. CONCLUSIONS: In the drug-eluting stent era, diabetic and non-diabetic patients have comparable favorable clinical and angiographic outcomes after successful percutaneous revascularization of chronic total occlusions.