MAGnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold and vasomotor function in patients with acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction: The MAGSTEMI trial: Rationale and design

Biodegradable magnesium materials regulate ROS-RNS balance in pro-inflammatory macrophage environment

The relationship between reactive oxygen and nitrogen species (ROS-RNS) secretion and the concomitant biocorrosion of degradable magnesium (Mg) materials is poorly understood. We found that Mg foils implanted short term in vivo (24 h) displayed large amounts of proinflammatory F4/80+/iNOS + macrophages at the interface. We sought to investigate the interplay between biodegrading Mg materials (98.6% Mg, AZ31 & AZ61) and macrophages (RAW 264.7) stimulated with lipopolysaccharide (RAW 264.7^LPS) to induce ROS-RNS secretion. To test how these proinflammatory ROS-RNS secreting cells interact with Mg corrosion in vitro, Mg and AZ61 discs were suspended approximately 2 mm above a monolayer of RAW 264.7 cells, either with or without LPS. The surfaces of both materials showed acute (24 h) changes when incubated in the proinflammatory RAW 264.7^LPS environment. Mg discs incubated with RAW 264.7^LPS macrophages showed greater corrosion pitting, while AZ61 showed morphological and elemental bulk product changes via scanning electron microscopy-energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM-EDX). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis showed a reduction in the Ca/P ratio of the surface products for AZ61 disc incubated with RAW 264.7^LPS, but not the Mg discs. Moreover, RAW 264.7^LPS macrophages were found to be more viable in the acute biodegradative environment generated by Mg materials, as demonstrated by calcein-AM and cleaved (active) caspase-3 staining (CC3). LPS stimulation caused an increase in ROS-RNS, and a decrease in antioxidant peroxidase activity. Mg and AZ61 were found to change this ROS-RNS balance, independently of physiological antioxidant mechanisms. The findings highlight the complexity of the cellular driven acute inflammatory responses to different biodegradable Mg, and how it can potentially affect performance of these materials.

Magnesium Bioresorbable Scaffold (BRS) Magmaris vs Biodegradable Polymer DES Ultimaster in NSTE-ACS Population-12-Month Clinical Outcome

Background

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the acute coronary syndrome (ACS) setting is associated with a greater probability of device failure. The currently ongoing development of new scaffold technologies has concentrated an effort on improving the PCI outcomes, including the use of new biodegradable materials. This pilot study evaluates the performance of a magnesium bioresorbable scaffold (Magmaris, Biotronik, Germany) in comparison to the sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable polymer stents (BP-SES) (Ultimaster, Terumo, Japan) in the NSTE-ACS setting.

Methods

The population of this pilot comprised 362 patients assigned to one of two arms (193-Magmaris vs 169-Ultimaster). The data regarding the primary outcome comprised of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, along with target-lesion failure (TLF) and other clinical events was collected in the 1-yearfollow-up.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes in the short term (30 days) or in the 1-yearfollow-up between both groups.

Conclusion

At 12 months, there were no statistically significant differences between the Magmaris and Ultimaster for composed endpoints or the TLF.

Magnesium-based resorbable scaffold vs permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 3-year results of the MAGSTEMI randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The long-term safety and performance of magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffolds (MgBRS) in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients are uncertain.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to report the 3-year clinical outcomes of the MAGSTEMI trial.

METHODS

This investigator-driven, multicentre, randomised, single-blind, controlled trial randomised STEMI patients 1:1 to MgBRS or to permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) at 11 academic centres. The main secondary endpoints included device-oriented composite endpoints (DoCE) and patient-oriented composite endpoints (PoCE), their individual components, any bleeding, and device thrombosis rate. All endpoints were defined according to the Academic Research Consortium. Events were adjudicated by an independent committee.

RESULTS

Three-year clinical follow-up was obtained in 142 (90.0%) patients. At 3-year follow-up, MgBRS were associated with a higher rate of DoCE than SES (13 [17.6%] vs 5 [6.6%], diff -11.0 [95% CI: -21.3 to -0.7]; p=0.038). This difference was driven by an increased incidence of DoCE within the first year of follow-up. In the landmark analysis, there was no difference between 1 and 3 years (0 [0.0%] vs 1 [1.4%]; p=1.000). The difference in the rate of DoCE was driven by a higher incidence of target lesion revascularisation (TLR) in the MgBRS group compared to SES (12 [16.2%] vs 4 [5.3%]; diff -10.9% [95% CI: -20.7 to -1.2]; p=0.030). The difference in TLR was observed during the first year, with no further differences observed between 1 and 3 years (0 [0.0%] vs 1 [1.4%]; p=1.000).

CONCLUSIONS

At 3-year follow-up, MgBRS were associated with a higher rate of TLR, which was clustered within the first year, compared to SES.

Optical coherence tomography versus angiography guided magnesium bioresorbable scaffold implantation in NSTEMI patients

BACKGROUND

The purpose of a bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) is to provide radial support during coronary healing. In this study, coronary artery healing after optical coherence tomography (OCT)- versus angiography-guided magnesium BRS (MBRS) implantation in patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) is compared.

METHODS

75 patients were randomized 1:1 to OCT- or angiography-guided implantation of a MBRS with protocolled pre- and post-dilation. In the OCT-guided group, prespecified criteria indicating additional intervention were (1) scaffold under-expansion, (2) strut malapposition, (3) edge dissection, and (4) residual stenosis at distal or proximal reference segments. The primary endpoint was OCT-derived healing stage at 6 months.

RESULTS

At 6 months, there was no difference in average healing stage between OCT- and angiography-guided intervention (4.6 [interquartile range (IQR): 4.5-4.7] versus 4.5 [IQR: 4.3-4.7]; p = 0.54). The MBRSs were completely resolved in 77.0% [IQR: 68.5-85.5] versus 76.5% [IQR: 67.9-85.5]; (p = 0.97). Minimal lumen area (MLA) was reduced at 6 months in both the OCT- (32.3%; p < 0.01) and the angiography-guided group (21.3%; p < 0.01), however OCT-guided implantation was associated with a greater reduction of total lumen volume (-27.1 ± 32.5 mm³ versus -5.0 ± 32.9 mm³; p < 0.01) and MLA (-2.3 ± 1.6 mm² vs. -1.4 ± 1.4 mm²; p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In NSTEMI patients, OCT-guidance with protocolled pre- and post-dilation of MBRS implantation showed similar healing pattern at 6 months compared to angiography-guidance alone.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Coronary Artery Healing Process after Optical Coherence Tomography Guided Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Magmaris Bioresorbable Scaffold in Patients with Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: (HONEST) trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03016624.

Endothelial Dysfunction and Coronary Vasoreactivity - A Review of the History, Physiology, Diagnostic Techniques, and Clinical Relevance

The fervency for advancement and evolution in percutaneous coronary intervention has revolutionised the treatment of coronary artery disease. Historically, the focus of the interventional cardiologist was directed at the restoration of luminal patency of the major epicardial coronary arteries, yet whilst this approach is evolving with much greater utilisation of physiological assessment, it often neglects consideration of the role of the coronary microcirculation, which has been shown to clearly influence prognosis. In this review, we explore the narrative of the coronary circulation as more than just a simple conduit for blood but an organ with functional significance. We review organisation and physiology of the coronary circulation, as well as the current methods and techniques used to examine it. We discuss the studies exploring coronary artery endothelial function, appreciating that coronary artery disease occurs on a spectrum of disorder and that percutaneous coronary intervention has a latent effect on the coronary circulation with long-term consequences. It is concluded that greater recognition of the coronary artery endothelium and mechanisms of the coronary circulation should further guide revascularisation strategies.

Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 5-year results of the BVS-EXAMINATION study

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare five-year clinical outcomes between an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) and an everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in STEMI patients.

METHODS AND RESULTS

This observational and retrospective study included 235 consecutive STEMI patients treated with BRS, compared with 235 STEMI patients treated with EES from the EXAMINATION trial, by applying propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented endpoint (DOCE), including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularisation at five-year follow-up. Device thrombosis, according to the ARC criteria, was also evaluated. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) analysis was also performed at five years in event-free BRS patients. The cumulative incidence of five-year DOCE was higher in the BRS group as compared to the EES group (13.2% vs 7.6%, HR 1.87, 95% CI: 0.94-3.44, p=0.071), mainly driven by a higher rate of TLR (7.6% vs 1.7%, HR 1.15, 95% CI: 0.44-2.30, p=0.004). The five-year definite BRS thrombosis rate was also higher as compared to EES (4.2% vs 1.2%, HR 3.49, 95% CI: 0.95-12.82, p=0.054). OCT analysis showed a high incidence of neoatherosclerosis in the BRS group.

CONCLUSIONS

The five-year event risk was higher with BRS versus EES in STEMI. This suggests that the probability of obtaining favourable results at very long-term follow-up is low. Whether better results will be obtained with new-generation BVS remains to be determined.

Magnesium-Based Resorbable Scaffold Versus Permanent Metallic Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: The MAGSTEMI Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

The use of poly-l-lactide acid-based bioresorbable scaffolds is limited in daily clinical practice because of safety concerns and lack of physiological benefit. Magnesium-based bioresorbable scaffold (MgBRS) presents a short resorption period (<1 year) and have the potential of being thromboresistant and exhibiting early restoration of vasomotor function. To date, however, no randomized clinical trial has investigated the performance of MgBRS. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the in-stent/scaffold vasomotion between MgBRS and permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) at 12-month follow-up in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients.

METHODS

This investigator-driven, multicenter, randomized, single-blind, controlled trial randomized ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients 1:1 to SES or MgBRS at 11 academic centers. The primary end point was the rate of increase (≥3%) after nitroglycerin in mean lumen diameter of the in-stent/scaffold segment at 12 months with superiority of MgBRS over SES in the as-treated population. The main secondary end points included angiographic parameters of restenosis, device-oriented composite end point, their individual components, and device thrombosis rate. Besides, endothelial-dependent vasomotor response to acetylcholine (ie, endothelial function) was also assessed in a subgroup of patients (n=69).

RESULTS

Between June 2017 and June 2018, 150 ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction patients were randomized (MgBRS, n=74; SES, n=76). At 1 year, the primary end point was significantly higher in the MgBRS arm (56.5% versus 33.8%; P=0.010). Conversely, late lumen loss was significantly lower in the SES group (in-segment: 0.39±0.49mm versus 0.02±0.27mm, P<0.001; in-device: 0.61±0.55mm versus 0.06±0.21mm; P<0.001). The device-oriented composite end point was higher in the MgBRS arm driven by an increase in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization rate (12[16.2%] versus 4[5.2%], P=0.030). Definite thrombosis rate was similar between groups (1[1.4%] in the MgBRS arm versus 2[2.6%] in the SES group; P=1.0). Endothelial function assessment at device segment evidenced a more pronounced vasoconstrictive response to maximal dose of acetylcholine in the MgBRS arm (-8.3±3.5% versus -2.4±1.3% in the SES group, P=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

When compared to SES, MgBRS demonstrated a higher capacity of vasomotor response to pharmacological agents (either endothelium-independent or endothelium-dependent) at 1 year. However, MgBRS was associated with a lower angiographic efficacy, a higher rate of target lesion revascularization, without thrombotic safety concerns.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03234348.

Magmaris resorbable magnesium scaffold for the treatment of coronary heart disease: overview of its safety and efficacy

Introduction: Bioresorbable scaffold technology provides transient vessel support with drug-delivery capability without the long-term limitations of the permanent metallic drug-eluting stents (DES). The technology has the potential to overcome many of the safety concerns associated with metallic DES, such as hypersensitivity reactions, late stent thrombosis and progression of atherosclerosis within the stented segment (i.e. neoatherosclerosis). Areas covered: The sirolimus-eluting resorbable magnesium scaffold Magmaris is the only metallic CE-marked resorbable scaffold currently available. This magnesium scaffold is designed for providing a short-term lumen support (up to 3 months) before being completely bioresorbed, eliminating the permanent caging typical of the metallic DES. This review will focus on the device development and characteristics, currently available clinical efficacy and safety data, and potential future perspectives. Expert opinion: The first clinical studies testing this device in a small number of patients have shown promising results with good clinical and safety outcomes up to 3 years' clinical follow-up, supporting the use of Magmaris in simple coronary artery disease.