Neointimal hyperplasia of ultra-thin stents with microcrystalline sirolimus or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents: 6- and 24-month results of the DESSOLVE III OCT study.

AIMS: The DESSOLVE III OCT substudy aimed to compare serially neointimal hyperplasia volume obstruction (%VO) between the thin-strut MiStent with early polymer elimination and nine-month sustained drug release from microcrystalline sirolimus and the durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting XIENCE stent at six and 24 months after implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The efficacy endpoint was %VO, calculated as abluminal neointimal volume/stent volume. Thirty-six patients (MiStent 16 patients, 16 lesions; XIENCE 20 patients, 22 lesions) underwent serial OCT evaluation at both six and 24 months. At six months, mean abluminal %VO was significantly lower in the MiStent group than in the XIENCE group (14.54±3.70% vs 19.11±6.70%; p=0.011), whereas the difference in %VO between the two groups decreased at 24 months (20.88±5.72% vs 23.50±7.33%; p=0.24). There was no significant difference in percentage malapposed struts and percentage uncovered struts between the two groups at both time points. CONCLUSIONS: In the serial comparative OCT analysis of the MiStent versus the XIENCE, the MiStent showed a more favourable efficacy for preventing neointimal formation with comparable strut tissue coverage, as compared with the XIENCE at six months, but this difference in %VO decreased at 24 months so that the difference in neointima at 24 months was no longer significant.

Comparison of the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold to the Xience durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in routine clinical practice: a propensity score-matched analysis from a multicenter registry.

INTRODUCTION: Most clinical trials related to bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) technology are limited to a highly selected patient population. AIM: To evaluate early and long-term clinical outcomes of the Absorb everolimus-eluting BVS compared to the everolimus-eluting metallic XIENCE V stent in routine clinical practice. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective propensity score-matched comparative study, comprising 76 patients treated with a bare metal stents (BMS) and 501 with a XIENCE stent. Patients included in the study had stable and unstable angina and both types of myocardial infarction (STEMI and NSTEMI) as an indication for intervention and at least one significant de novo lesion in native coronary arteries. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). RESULTS: Median follow-up was 400 days in both groups. After propensity score matching for patient baseline characteristics, only higher rate of predilatation, predominantly treated left anterior descending artery (LAD) and lower number of used stents in the BVS group remained statistically significant. After adjustment there was no difference in type of treated lesions. The MACE rate did not differ between BVS and drug-eluting stents (DES) groups (7.2% vs. 11.15%, respectively; p = 0.17). The TVR was 2.9% in both groups. Except in the periprocedural period, there were no deaths or MI in the BVS group. There was no stent thrombosis in either studied group. CONCLUSIONS: In routine clinical practice throughout long-term follow-up, clinical outcomes of patients who successfully received the Absorb BVS did not differ from those of patients who received the Xience stent. Longer follow-up data are required to determine whether these findings will persist beyond one year.

Evaluation of safety and efficacy of NexGen - an ultrathin strut and hybrid cell design cobalt-chromium bare metal stent implanted in a real life patient population - the Polish NexGen Registry.

INTRODUCTION: Despite the dominance of drug-eluting stents in modern interventional cardiology, there is still a niche for bare metal stents. AIM: The aim of the Polish NexGen registry was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a new generation cobalt-chromium NexGen stent in a real life patient population. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective multi-center registry was conducted in five clinical sites of American Heart of Poland. Three hundred and eighty-three patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with NexGen stent implantation were included. Clinical follow-up was performed at 1, 6 and 12 months. Additionally, a group of 42 randomly selected patients underwent control angiography at 6 months (10.96% of study population). The primary endpoint was occurrence of target vessel revascularization (TVR) at 6-month follow-up. Angiographic endpoints included rates of binary restenosis and late lumen loss at 6-month follow-up based on QCA analysis. Multivessel disease was present in more than 70% of patients, and 52.4% of lesions were complex. The main indications for angiography were non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes (54.8%) and ST elevation myocardial infarction (34.99%). RESULTS: At 6-month follow-up 47 (12.7%) patients reached the primary endpoint of TVR. The composite of major acute cardiac event rates at 30-day and 6- and 12-month follow-up was 6.01% (n = 23), 18.5% (n = 69) and 25.21% (n = 92) respectively. Control angiography performed after 6 months showed in-stent late loss of 0.66 ±0.71 mm and a binary restenosis rate of 16.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that PCI with the NexGen stent is safe and effective at 6- and 12-month follow-up. Angiographic results showed a satisfactory restenosis rate and low late lumen loss.