Clinical outcomes with thin versus thick strut polymer-free biolimus-coated stents at 3 years.

BACKGROUND: For high bleeding-risk patients (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the LEADERS FREE (LF) and LEADERS FREE II (LF II) trials established the safety and efficacy of a stainless steel polymer-free biolimus-coated stent (SS-BCS) with 30 days of dual antiplatelet treatment (DAPT). The LEADERS FREE III (LF III) trial investigated clinical outcomes after PCI with the next-generation cobalt-chromium thin-strut polymer-free biolimus-coated stent (CoCr-BCS) in HBR patients. AIMS: To report the final 3-year results of the LF III trial and compare them to LF II. METHODS: LF III was a prospective, multicentre, open-label single-arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the CoCr-BCS stent. The primary safety endpoint was the composite of cardiac death (CD), myocardial infarction(MI) or definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST). The primary efficacy endpoint was clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (cd-TLR). We performed a propensity-matched comparison to the 3-year outcomes of LF II. RESULTS: After 3 years, CD/MI/ST had occurred in 57 patients (15%, 95% CI 11.8% to 19%) and cd-TLR in 23 (6.2%, 95% CI 4.1% to 9.2%) patients. In a propensity-matched comparison of patients treated with the CoCr-BCS versus the SS-BCS, there were similar rates of CD (6.6% vs 7.8%, p=0.50), MI (7.1% vs 8.3%, p=0.47) and definite/probable ST (1.1% vs 2%, HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.16 to 1.93, p=0.35). The rates of cd-TLR were 5.3% with CoCr-BCS versus 9.8% with SS-BCS (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.96, p=0.03). CONCLUSION: LF III confirms the long-term safety and efficacy of the CoCr-BCS in HBR patients treated with 1 month of DAPT. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02843633, NCT03118895.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1•5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2­4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10•44% and assuming an event rate of 26•10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80•0 years (SD 5•7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80•4 years (5•4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2•6% [IQR 1•7­4•0] vs contemporary 2•6% [1•7­4•0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of ­2•3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3•8, pnon-inferiority<0•0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days.

LANDMARK comparison of early outcomes of newer-generation Myval transcatheter heart valve series with contemporary valves (Sapien and Evolut) in real-world individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis: a randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is an established, guideline-endorsed treatment for severe aortic stenosis. Precise sizing of the balloon-expandable Myval transcatheter heart valve (THV) series with the aortic annulus is facilitated by increasing its diameter in 1·5 mm increments, compared with the usual 3 mm increments in valve size. The LANDMARK trial aimed to show non-inferiority of the Myval THV series compared with the contemporary THVs Sapien Series (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) or Evolut Series (Medtronic, Minneapolis, MN, USA). METHODS: In this prospective, multinational, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority trial across 31 hospitals in 16 countries (Germany, France, Sweden, the Netherlands, Italy, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Estonia, and Brazil), 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned (1:1) to the Myval THV or a contemporary THV. Eligibility was primarily decided by the heart team in accordance with 2021 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. As per the criteria of the third Valve Academic Research Consortium, the primary endpoint at 30 days was a composite of all-cause mortality, all stroke, bleeding (types 3 and 4), acute kidney injury (stages 2-4), major vascular complications, moderate or severe prosthetic valve regurgitation, and conduction system disturbances resulting in a permanent pacemaker implantation. Non-inferiority of the study device was tested in the intention-to-treat population using a non-inferiority margin of 10·44% and assuming an event rate of 26·10%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04275726, and EudraCT, 2020-000137-40, and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between Jan 6, 2021, and Dec 5, 2023, 768 participants with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis were randomly assigned, 384 to the Myval THV and 384 to a contemporary THV. 369 (48%) participants had their sex recorded as female, and 399 (52%) as male. The mean age of participants was 80·0 years (SD 5·7) for those treated with the Myval THV and 80·4 years (5·4) for those treated with a contemporary THV. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons scores were the same in both groups (Myval 2·6% [IQR 1·7-4·0] vs contemporary 2·6% [1·7-4·0]). The primary endpoint showed non-inferiority of the Myval (25%) compared with contemporary THV (27%), with a risk difference of -2·3% (one-sided upper 95% CI 3·8, pnon-inferiority<0·0001). No significant difference was seen in individual components of the primary composite endpoint. INTERPRETATION: In individuals with severe symptomatic native aortic stenosis, the Myval THV met its primary endpoint at 30 days. FUNDING: Meril Life Sciences.

Defining high bleeding risk in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation: a VARC-HBR consensus document.

The identification and management of patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) are of major importance, but the lack of standardised definitions is challenging for trial design, data interpretation, and clinical decision-making. The Valve Academic Research Consortium for High Bleeding Risk (VARC-HBR) is a collaboration among leading research organisations, regulatory authorities, and physician-scientists from Europe, the USA, and Asia, with a major focus on TAVI-related bleeding. VARC-HBR is an initiative of the CERC (Cardiovascular European Research Center), aiming to develop a consensus definition of TAVI patients at HBR, based on a systematic review of the available evidence, to provide consistency for future clinical trials, clinical decision-making, and regulatory review. This document represents the first pragmatic approach to a consistent definition of HBR evaluating the safety and effectiveness of procedures, devices and drug regimens for patients undergoing TAVI..

Risk Burden of Cancer in Patients Treated With Abbreviated Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After PCI: Analysis of Multicenter Controlled High-Bleeding Risk Trials.

BACKGROUND: Oncological patients with coronary artery disease face an elevated risk of hemorrhagic and ischemic events following percutaneous coronary intervention. Despite medical guidelines recommending minimal dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration for patients with cancer, dedicated data on abbreviated DAPT in this population is lacking. This study aims to evaluate the occurrence of ischemic and hemorrhagic events in patients with cancer compared with other high-bleeding risk individuals. METHODS: Patient-level data from 4 high-bleeding risk coronary drug-eluting stent studies (ONYX One, LEADERS FREE, LEADERS FREE II, and SENIOR trials) treated with short DAPT were analyzed. The comparison focused on patients with high-bleeding risk with and without cancer, assessing 1-year rates of net adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization, and Bleeding Academic Research Consortium [BARC] types 3 to 5 bleeding) and major adverse clinical events (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke). RESULTS: A total of 5232 patients were included, of whom 574 individuals had cancer, and 4658 were at high-bleeding risk without previous cancer. Despite being younger with fewer risk factors, patients with cancer had higher net adverse clinical event (HR, 1.25; P=0.01) and major adverse clinical event (HR, 1.26; P=0.02), primarily driven by all-cause mortality and major bleeding (BARC 3-5), but not myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization. Cancer was an independent predictor of net adverse clinical event (P=0.005), major adverse clinical event (P=0.01), and major bleeding (P=0.03). CONCLUSIONS: The present work is the first report on abbreviated DAPT dedicated to patients with cancer. Cancer is a major marker of adverse outcomes and these events had high lethality. Despite short DAPT, patients with cancer experienced higher rates of major bleeding compared with patients without cancer with high-bleeding risk, which occurred mainly after DAPT discontinuation. These findings reinforce the need for a more detailed and individualized stratification of those patients. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifiers: NCT03344653, NCT01623180, NCT02843633, NCT0284.

Incidence, Predictors, and Impact of Hospital Readmission After Revascularization for Left Main Coronary Disease.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of and relationship between hospital readmissions and outcomes after revascularization for left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to study the incidence, predictors, and clinical impact of readmissions following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) for LMCAD. METHODS: In the EXCEL (XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, 1,905 patients with LMCAD were randomized to PCI vs CABG. The cumulative incidence of readmissions was analyzed with multivariable Anderson-Gill and joint frailty models to account for recurrent events and the competing risk of death. The impact of readmission on subsequent mortality within 5-year follow-up was determined in a time-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Within 5 years, 1,868 readmissions occurred in 851 of 1,882 (45.2%) hospital survivors (2.2 ± 1.9 per patient with readmission[s], range 1-16), approximately one-half for cardiovascular causes and one-half for noncardiovascular causes (927 [49.6%] and 941 [50.4%], respectively). One or more readmissions occurred in 463 of 942 (48.6%) PCI patients vs 388 of 940 (41.8%) CABG patients (P = 0.003). After multivariable adjustment, PCI remained an independent predictor of readmission (adjusted HR: 1.22; 95% CI: 1.10-1.35; P < 0.0001), along with female sex, comorbidities, and the extent of CAD. Readmission was independently associated with subsequent all-cause death, with interaction testing indicating a higher risk after PCI than CABG (adjusted HR: 5.72; 95% CI: 3.42-9.55 vs adjusted HR: 2.72; 95% CI: 1.64-4.88, respectively; Pint = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: In the EXCEL trial, readmissions during 5-year follow-up after revascularization for LMCAD were common and more frequent after PCI than CABG. Readmissions were associated with an increased risk of all-cause death, more so after PCI than with CABG.

Cost-effectiveness of stepwise provisional versus systematic dual stenting strategies in patients with distal bifurcation left main stem lesions: economic analysis of the EBC MAIN trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with distal bifurcation left main stem lesions requiring intervention, the European Bifurcation Club Left Main Coronary Stent Study trial found a non-significant difference in major adverse cardiac events (MACEs, composite of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation) favouring the stepwise provisional strategy, compared with the systematic dual stenting. AIMS: To estimate the 1-year cost-effectiveness of stepwise provisional versus systematic dual stenting strategies. METHODS: Costs in France and the UK, and MACE were calculated in both groups to estimate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Uncertainty was explored by probabilistic bootstrapping. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the healthcare provider with a time horizon of 1 year. RESULTS: The cost difference between the two groups was €-755 (€5700 in the stepwise provisional group and €6455 in the systematic dual stenting group, p value<0.01) in France and €-647 (€6728 and €7375, respectively, p value=0.08) in the UK. The point estimates for the ICERs found that stepwise provisional strategy was cost saving and improved outcomes with a probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirming dominance with an 80% probability. CONCLUSION: The stepwise provisional strategy at 1 year is dominant compared with the systematic dual stenting strategy on both economic and clinical outcomes.

Impact of left ventricular ejection fraction on 10-year mortality in the SYNTAX trial.

BACKGROUNDS: The impact of reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) on very long-term prognosis following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) has been debated. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of LVEF at baseline on 10-year mortality in the SYNTAX trial. METHODS: Patients (n = 1800) were categorized into three sub-groups: reduced (rEF ≤ 40 %), mildly reduced (mrEF 41-49 %), and preserved LVEF (pEF ≥ 50 %). The SYNTAX score 2020 (SS-2020) was applied in patients with LVEF<50 % and ≥ 50 %. RESULTS: Ten-year mortalities were 44.0 %, 31.8 %, and 22.6 % (P < 0.001) in patients with rEF (n = 168), mrEF (n = 179), and pEF (n = 1453). Although no significant differences were observed, the mortality with PCI was higher than with CABG in patients with rEF (52.9 % vs 39.6 %, P = 0.054) and mrEF (36.0 % vs. 28.6 %, P = 0.273), and comparable in pEF (23.9 % vs. 22.2 %, P = 0.275). Calibration and discrimination of the SS-2020 in patients with LVEF<50 % were poor, whilst they were reasonable in those with LVEF≥50 %. The proportion of patients eligible for PCI who had a predicted equipoise in mortality with CABG was estimated to be 57.5 % in patients with LVEF≥50 %. CABG was safer than PCI in 62.2 % of patients with LVEF<50 %. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced LVEF was associated with an increased risk of 10-year mortality in patients revascularized either surgically or percutaneously. Compared to PCI, CABG was safe revascularization in patients with LVEF≤40 %. In patients with LVEF≥50 % individualized 10-year all-cause mortality predicted by SS-2020 was helpful in decision-making whilst the predictivity in patients with LVEF<50 % was poor.

Prognostic Impact of Prefrailty and Frailty in Women Undergoing TAVR: Insights From the WIN-TAVI Registry.

BACKGROUND: The risks of prefrail and frail women undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) have not been fully examined. The aim of the analysis was to assess the prognostic impact of prefrailty and frailty in women undergoing TAVR. METHODS: Women at intermediate or high surgical risk with severe aortic stenosis undergoing TAVR from the prospective multicentre WIN-TAVI (Women's International Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) registry were stratified based on the number of Fried frailty criteria (weight loss, exhaustion, low physical activity, slow gait, weakness) met: nonfrail (no criteria), prefrail (1 or 2 criteria), or frail (3 or more criteria). The primary outcome at 1 year was the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 (VARC-2) efficacy end point, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalisation for valve-related symptoms or heart failure, and valve-related dysfunction; secondary outcomes included the composite of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding. RESULTS: Out of 1019 women, 297 (29.1%) met at least 1 frailty criterion: 264 (25.9%) had prefrailty and 33 (3.2%) frailty. The 1-year risk of the primary outcome was significantly higher in prefrail and frail (20.2%) than in nonfrail (14.9%) women (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-2.12). The risk of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding was higher in prefrail or frail (19.9%) than in nonfrail (10.0%) women (aHR 2.06, 95% CI 1.42-2.97). These risks were consistently increased in the prefrail and frail groups assessed separately. CONCLUSIONS: In women undergoing TAVR, the presence of prefrailty or frailty conferred an increased risk of the VARC-2 efficacy end point and of VARC-2 life-threatening or major bleeding.

First randomised controlled trial comparing the sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with the zotarolimus-eluting drug-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: 12-month clinical and imaging data from the multi-centre, international, BIODAPTOR-RCT.

Background: The DynamX™ bioadaptor is the first coronary implant technology with a unique mechanism of unlocking the bioadaptor frame after polymer resorption over 6 months, uncaging the vessel while maintaining a dynamic support to the vessel. It aims to achieve the acute performance of drug-eluting stents (DES) with the advantages of restoration of vessel function. Methods: This international, single blinded, randomised controlled (1:1) trial compared a sirolimus-eluting bioadaptor with a contemporary zotarolimus-eluting stent (DES) in 34 hospitals in Europe, Japan and New Zealand. Patients with de novo coronary lesions and absence of acute myocardial infarction were enrolled from January 2021 to Feburary 2022. The implantation of the bioadaptor followed the standards of DES. An imaging subset of 100 patients had angiographic and intravascular ultrasound assessments, and 20 patients additionally optical coherence tomography. Data collection will continue through 5 years, we herein report 12-month data based on an intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04192747). Findings: 445 patients were randomised between January 2021 and February 2022. Device, lesion and procedural success rates, and acute gain were similar amongst the groups. The primary endpoint, 12-month target lesion failure, was 1.8% [95% CI: 0.5; 4.6] (n = 4) versus 2.8% [95% CI: 1.0; 6.0] (n = 6), pnon-inferiority < 0.001 for the bioadaptor and the DES, respectively (Δ-1.0% [95% CI: -3.3; 1.4]). One definite or probable device thrombosis occurred in each group. The 12-month imaging endpoints showed superior effectiveness of the bioadaptor such as in-device late lumen loss (0.09 mm [SD 0.34] versus 0.25 mm [SD 0.39], p = 0.04), and restored compliance and cyclic pulsatility (%mid in-device lumen area change of 7.5% versus 2.7%, p < 0.001). Interpretation: This is the first randomised controlled trial comparing the novel bioadaptor technology against a contemporary DES. The bioadaptor demonstrated similar acute performance and 12-month clinical outcomes, and superior imaging endpoints including restoration of vessel function. Funding: The study was funded by Elixir Medical.

Bifurcation left main stenting with or without intracoronary imaging: Outcomes from the EBC MAIN trial.

BACKGROUND: The impact of intracoronary imaging on outcomes, after provisional versus dual-stenting for bifurcation left main (LM) lesions, is unknown. OBJECTIVES: We investigated the effect of intracoronary imaging in the EBC MAIN trial (European Bifurcation Club LM Coronary Stent study). METHODS: Four hundred and sixty-seven patients were randomized to dual-stenting or a stepwise provisional strategy. Four hundred and fifty-five patients were included. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) was undertaken at the operator's discretion. The primary endpoint was death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization at 1-year. RESULTS: Intracoronary imaging was undertaken in 179 patients (39%; IVUS = 151, OCT = 28). As a result of IVUS findings, operators reintervened in 42 procedures. The primary outcome did not differ with intracoronary imaging versus angiographic-guidance (17% vs. 16%; odds ratio [OR]: 0.92 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51-1.63) p = 0.767), nor for reintervention based on IVUS versus none (14% vs. 16%; OR: 0.88 [95% CI: 0.32-2.43] p = 0.803), adjusted for syntax score, lesion calcification and ischemic symptoms. With angiographic-guidance, primary outcome events were more frequent with dual versus provisional stenting (21% vs. 10%; adjusted OR: 2.11 [95% CI: 1.04-4.30] p = 0.039). With intracoronary imaging, there were numerically fewer primary outcome events with dual versus provisional stenting (13% vs. 21%; adjusted OR: 0.56 [95% CI: 0.22-1.46] p = 0.220). CONCLUSIONS: In EBC MAIN, the primary outcome did not differ with intracoronary imaging versus none. However, in patients with angiographic-guidance, outcomes were worse with a dual-stent than provisional strategy When intracoronary imaging was used, there was a trend toward better outcomes with the dual-stent than provisional strategy.

Impact of chronic kidney disease and diabetes on clinical outcomes in women undergoing PCI.

BACKGROUND: For women undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, the individual and combined impact of chronic kidney disease (CKD) and diabetes mellitus (DM) on outcomes is uncertain. AIMS: We sought to assess the impact of CKD and DM on prognosis in women after DES implantation. METHODS: We pooled patient-level data on women from 26 randomised controlled trials comparing stent types. Women receiving DES were stratified into 4 groups based on CKD (defined as creatine clearance <60 mL/min) and DM status. The primary outcome at 3 years after percutaneous coronary intervention was the composite of all-cause death or myocardial infarction (MI); secondary outcomes included cardiac death, stent thrombosis and target lesion revascularisation. RESULTS: Among 4,269 women, 1,822 (42.7%) had no CKD/DM, 978 (22.9%) had CKD alone, 981 (23.0%) had DM alone, and 488 (11.4%) had both conditions. The risk of all-cause death or MI was not increased in women with CKD alone (adjusted hazard ratio [adj. HR] 1.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.88-1.61) nor DM alone (adj. HR 1.27, 95% CI: 0.94-1.70), but was significantly higher in women with both conditions (adj. HR 2.64, 95% CI: 1.95-3.56; interaction p-value <0.001). CKD and DM in combination were associated with an increased risk of all secondary outcomes, whereas alone, each condition was only associated with all-cause death and cardiac death. CONCLUSIONS: Among women receiving DES, the combined presence of CKD and DM was associated with a higher risk of the composite of death or MI and of any secondary outcome, whereas alone, each condition was associated with an increase in all-cause and cardiac death.

Defining Strategies of Modulation of Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease: A Consensus Document from the Academic Research Consortium.

Antiplatelet therapy is the mainstay of pharmacologic treatment to prevent thrombotic or ischemic events in patients with coronary artery disease treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and those treated medically for an acute coronary syndrome. The use of antiplatelet therapy comes at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding complications. Defining the optimal intensity of platelet inhibition according to the clinical presentation of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and individual patient factors is a clinical challenge. Modulation of antiplatelet therapy is a medical action that is frequently performed to balance the risk of thrombotic or ischemic events and the risk of bleeding. This aim may be achieved by reducing (ie, de-escalation) or increasing (ie, escalation) the intensity of platelet inhibition by changing the type, dose, or number of antiplatelet drugs. Because de-escalation or escalation can be achieved in different ways, with a number of emerging approaches, confusion arises with terminologies that are often used interchangeably. To address this issue, this Academic Research Consortium collaboration provides an overview and definitions of different strategies of antiplatelet therapy modulation for patients with coronary artery disease, including but not limited to those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and consensus statements on standardized definitions.

Design and rationale of a prospective, randomized, non-inferiority trial to determine the safety and efficacy of the Biolimus A9™ drug coated balloon for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: First-in-man trial (REFORM).

BACKGROUND: Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty with paclitaxel-eluting devices is an established treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). Biolimus A9™ (BA9), a sirolimus analogue with enhanced lipophilicity, may facilitate enhanced local drug delivery into vascular tissue. A novel DCB coated with Biolimus A9™ represents an alternative to traditional paclitaxel- and sirolimus-coated devices. Hence, we sought to investigate the safety and efficacy of this novel DCB in the treatment of coronary ISR. METHODS AND DESIGN: REFORM (NCT04079192) is a prospective, multicenter, single blind, randomized controlled trial comparing the BA9-DCB (Biosensors Europe SA, Morges, Switzerland) to the paclitaxel-coated SeQuent® Please DCB (Braun Melsungen AG, Germany) in the treatment of coronary ISR. A total of 201 patients with coronary artery disease and an indication for interventional treatment of ISR in a bare-metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES) have been randomized 2:1 to receive treatment with the BA9- or the paclitaxel-DCB comparator. Patients were enrolled across 24 investigational centers in Europe and Asia. The primary endpoint is percent diameter stenosis (%DS) of the target segment as assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) at 6 months. Key secondary endpoints are in-stent late lumen loss, binary restenosis, target lesion failure, target vessel failure, myocardial infarction and death at 6 months. Subjects will be followed for 24 months from enrolment. IMPLICATIONS: The REFORM trial will seek to prove that the BA9-DCB is non-inferior to the standard paclitaxel-DCB comparator in the treatment of coronary ISR with respect to %DS at 6 months and has similar safety characteristics.

Overcoming professional barriers encountered by women in interventional cardiology: an EAPCI statement.

Despite the increasing proportion of female medical and nursing students, there is still a significant under-representation of women working as healthcare providers in interventional cardiology, with very few of them reaching senior leadership, academic positions, or acting principal investigators, as well as actively involved in company advisory boards. In this position paper, we will describe the current status of women working in interventional cardiology across Europe. We will also provide an overview of the most relevant determinants of the under-representation of women at each stage of the interventional cardiology career path and offer practical suggestions for overcoming these challenges.

Outcomes in Patients With Early Menopause Who Underwent Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation.

Early menopause is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases, including aortic stenosis (AS). We sought to investigate the prevalence and impact of early menopause on clinical outcomes in patients who underwent transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for severe symptomatic AS. Women's International TAVI is a multinational, prospective, observational registry of women who underwent TAVI for severe symptomatic AS (n = 1,019). Patients were divided into 2 groups based on age of menopause: early menopause (age ≤45 years) and regular menopause (age >45 years). The primary outcome of interest was Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 efficacy end point, a composite of mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for valve-related symptoms, or heart failure or valve-related dysfunction at 1-year follow-up. Of 732 patients with available data on menopause age, 173 (23.6%) were classified as having early menopause. These patients presented for TAVI at a younger age (81.6 ± 6.9 vs 82.7 ± 5.9, p = 0.05) and had a significantly lower Society of Thoracic Surgeons score (6.6 ± 4.8 vs 8.2 ± 7.1, p = 0.03) than those with regular menopause. However, the total valve calcium volume was smaller among patients with early versus regular menopause (731.8 ± 850.9 mm3 vs 807.6 ± 633.8 mm3, p = 0.002). Other co-morbidities were similar between the 2 groups. At 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients with early versus regular menopause (hazard ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 0.61 to 1.63, p = 1.00). In conclusion, despite presenting for TAVI at a younger age, patients with early menopause had a similar risk of adverse events as patients with regular menopause at 1 year after TAVI.

Impact of Periprocedural Adverse Events After PCI and CABG on 5-Year Mortality: The EXCEL Trial.

BACKGROUND: The relative risks for different periprocedural major adverse events (MAE) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) on subsequent mortality have not been described. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess the association between periprocedural MAE occurring within 30 days postprocedure and early and late mortality after left main coronary artery revascularization by PCI and CABG. METHODS: In the EXCEL (Evaluation of XIENCE Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial, patients with left main disease were randomized to PCI vs CABG. The associations between 12 prespecified nonfatal MAE and subsequent 5-year all-cause and cardiovascular death in 1,858 patients were examined using logistic regression. RESULTS: One or more nonfatal MAE occurred in 111 of 935 patients (11.9%) after PCI and 419 of 923 patients (45.4%) after CABG (P < 0.0001). Patients with MAE were older and had more baseline comorbidities. Within 5 years, all-cause death occurred in 117 and 87 patients after PCI and CABG, respectively. Experiencing an MAE was a strong independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both PCI (adjusted OR: 4.61; 95% CI: 2.71-7.82) and CABG (adjusted OR: 3.25; 95% CI: 1.95-5.41). These associations were present within the first 30 days and between 30 days and 5 years postprocedure. Major or minor bleeding with blood transfusion ≥2 U was an independent predictor of 5-year mortality after both procedures. Stroke, unplanned revascularization for ischemia, and renal failure were significantly associated with mortality only after CABG. CONCLUSIONS: In the EXCEL trial, nonfatal periprocedural MAE were strongly associated with early and late mortality after both PCI and CABG for left main disease.

Comparing a strategy of sirolimus-eluting balloon treatment to drug-eluting stent implantation in de novo coronary lesions in all-comers: Design and rationale of the SELUTION DeNovo Trial.

BACKGROUND: Drug eluting stents (DES) are associated with a 2% to 4% annual rate of target lesion failure through 5-to-10-year follow-up. The presence of a metallic protheses is a trigger for neo-atherosclerosis and very late stent thrombosis. A "leave nothing behind" strategy using Drug Coated Balloons has been suggested; however, paclitaxel coated balloons are only recommended in selected indications. Recently a novel sirolimus eluting balloon, the SELUTION SLR TM 014 PTCA balloon (SEB) (M.A. MedAlliance SA, Nyon, Switzerland) has been developed. HYPOTHESIS: A strategy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with SEB and provisional DES is non-inferior to a strategy of systematic DES on target vessel failure (TVF) at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at 5 years, superiority will be tested. DESIGN: SELUTION DeNovo is a multi-center international open-label randomized trial. Subjects meeting eligibility criteria are randomized 1:1 to treatment of all lesions with either SEB and provisional DES or systematic DES. Major inclusion criteria are PCI indicated for ≥1 lesion considered suitable for treatment by either SEB or DES and clinical presentation with chronic coronary syndrome, unstable angina or non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). There is no limitation in the number of lesions to be treated. Target lesions diameters are between 2 and 5 mm. Major exclusion criteria are lesions in the left main artery, chronic total occlusions, ST segment elevation myocardial infarction and unstable non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Three thousand three hundred twenty six patients will be included in 50 sites in Europe and Asia. TVF rates and their components will be determined at 30 days, 6 months and annually up to 5 years post-intervention. Among secondary endpoints, bleeding events, cost-effectiveness data and net clinical benefits will be assessed. SUMMARY: SELUTION DeNovo trial is an open-label, multi-center international randomized trial comparing a strategy of PCI with SEB and provisional DES to a strategy of PCI with systematic DES on TVF at one and five years. Non-inferiority will be tested at one and five years. If non-inferiority is met at five years, superiority will be tested.

Impact of technique on bifurcation stent outcomes in the European Bifurcation Club Left Main Coronary Trial.

BACKGROUND: Techniques for provisional and dual-stent left main bifurcation stenting require optimization. AIM: To identify technical variables influencing procedural outcomes and periprocedural myocardial infarction following left main bifurcation intervention. METHODS: Procedural and outcome data were analyzed in 438 patients from the per-protocol cohort of the European Bifurcation Club Left Main Trial (EBC MAIN). These patients were randomized to the provisional strategy or a compatible dual-stent extension (T, T-and-protrude, or culotte). RESULTS: Mean age was 71 years and 37.4% presented with an acute coronary syndrome. Transient reduction of side vessel thrombolysis in myocardial infarction flow occurred after initial stent placement in 5% of procedures but was not associated with periprocedural myocardial infarction. Failure to rewire a jailed vessel during any strategy was more common when jailed wires were not used (9.5% vs. 2.5%, odds ratio [OR]: 6.4, p = 0.002). In the provisional cohort, the use of the proximal optimization technique was associated with less subsequent side vessel intervention (23.3% vs. 41.9%, OR: 0.4, p = 0.048). Side vessel stenting was predominantly required for dissection, which occurred more often following side vessel preparation (15.3% vs. 4.4%, OR: 3.1, p = 0.040). Exclusive use of noncompliant balloons for kissing balloon inflation was associated with reduced need for side vessel intervention in provisional cases (20.5% vs. 38.5%, OR: 0.4, p = 0.013), and a reduced risk of periprocedural myocardial infarction across all strategies (2.9% vs. 7.7%, OR: 0.2, p = 0.020). CONCLUSION: When performing provisional or compatible dual-stent left main bifurcation intervention, jailed wire use is associated with successful jailed vessel rewiring. Side vessel preparation in provisional patients is linked to increased side vessel dissection requiring stenting. Use of the proximal optimization technique may reduce the need for additional side vessel intervention, and noncompliant balloon use for kissing balloon inflation is associated with a reduction in both side vessel stenting and periprocedural myocardial infarction. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02497014.