Thin Composite-Wire-Strut Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Ultrathin-Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in BIONYX at 2 Years

Safety and Performance of the MOZEC Sirolimus-Eluting Coronary Balloon in the Treatment of Stenotic Coronary Artery Lesions: A Real-World, Multicenter, Post-Marketing Surveillance Study

Background

Drug-eluting balloons, surface-coated with antiproliferative agents such as sirolimus or paclitaxel, have emerged as an alternative therapeutic option for coronary stenosis. This study evaluated safety and effectiveness of the MOZEC sirolimus-eluting percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) balloon dilation catheter (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., India) across diverse clinical scenarios in coronary artery stenosis treatment.

Methods

A prospective, single-arm, multicenter, real-world, post-marketing surveillance study evaluated the safety and performance of the MOZEC sirolimus-eluting balloon (SEB) in treating native coronary artery disease in daily clinical practice. Patients were followed for 24 months, with clinical visits or telephonic calls at 1, 6, 12, and 24 months after the index procedure. Safety endpoints included major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), and performance endpoints include change in late lumen loss, clinical success, and device success.

Results

A total of 141 patients were enrolled in the study. The MOZEC SEB was used in 127 (70.17%) de novo lesions, 40 (22.1%) in-stent restenosis lesions, and 14 (7.73%) bifurcations lesions. Over the 24-month follow-up period (n = 134), six cumulative MACEs (4.47%) were observed, comprising two cardiac deaths (1.49%), five myocardial infarctions (3.73%), and four target lesion revascularizations (2.99%). Late lumen loss analysis included 17 patients who underwent additional coronarography at the 6-month follow-up. In-segment and in-device late lumen loss at 6-month follow-up was 0.14 ± 0.37 mm.

Conclusions

The application of MOZEC SEB in various clinical scenarios demonstrated safety and efficacy over long-term follow-up. These findings align with the favorable vessel healing observed during the 6-month imaging follow-up.

Safety and Efficacy of BioMime Sirolimus-Eluting Stent System in All-Comers Real-World Population With Coronary Artery Stenosis: MILES Global Registry

Background

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of BioMime sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) system, with an ultra-low strut thickness (65 µm), in real-world all-comers population with coronary artery stenosis (CAD).

Methods

This was a post-marketing, multicenter, single-arm, observational clinical registry among patients undergoing intervention for CAD. Patients were clinically followed up at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months after the index percutaneous coronary intervention. Four major indications, namely long stents of > 30 mm, stents with diameters of 4 and 4.5 mm, bifurcation subgroup, and chronic total occlusion (CTO) were evaluated as pre-specified subsets.

Results

A total of 771 patients (1,079 treated lesions) from 23 sites were included in this study. The mean length and diameter of the implanted stents were 25.57 ± 9.35 mm and 3.00 ± 0.44 mm, respectively. The mean minimum lumen diameter before and after the procedure was 1.00 ± 1.69 mm and 2.96 ± 1.35 mm, respectively. The cumulative rates of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and stent thrombosis (ST) at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months were 1.05%, 3.13%, 4.04%, 5.64% and 0%, 0.13%, 0.28%, 0.28%, respectively. In a subset with > 30 mm long stents, the cumulative rate of MACEs was 0.4%, 4.6%, 5.12%, and 7.01% at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months, respectively. The corresponding rates of ST were 0%, 0.42%, 0.43%, and 0.44%, indicating constant rate of ST after 9 months. In a subset of 4 and 4.5 mm diameter stents, the cumulative rate of MACEs was high (0%, 6.25%, 6.25%, and 10.41%) at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months, respectively. However, there was no case of ST until 24 months. In patients with bifurcation lesions, the cumulative rates of MACEs and ST were 2.46%, 6.32%, 11.53%, 16.21% and 0%, 1.27%, 1.28%, 1.35% at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months follow-up. In patients with chronic total occlusion, the cumulative rates of MACEs and ST were 0.79%, 5.04%, 6.83%, 7.07% and 0%, 0.84%, 0.85%, 0.88% at 1, 9, 12, and 24 months, respectively, indicating constant rate of ST after 9 months.

Conclusions

The BioMime SES demonstrated good safety and efficacy outcomes at 24-month follow-up, with low rates of MACEs and ST in patients with CAD in the real-world setting.

Clinical outcomes with biodegradable versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND

Coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) built with either durable (DP) or biodegradable (BP) polymeric coatings have been largely tested and are extensively available for routine use. However, their comparative performance remains an open question, particularly in more complex subsets of patients.

AIMS

We evaluated the outcomes of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) using DP-DES versus BP-DES in a large multicenter real-world registry.

METHODS

The population comprised patients with STEMI treated with pPCI within 12 h of symptoms onset. Those treated with more than one DES who received different polymer types were excluded. The final cohort for analysis was selected after propensity score matching (PSM), computed to generate similar groups of DP DES versus BP DES. Primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of total death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization at 2 years.

RESULTS

From January 2017 to April 2022, a total of 1527 STEMI patients underwent pPCI with a single DES type (587 DP-DES; 940 BP-DES). After PSM, 836 patients (418 patients in the DP-DES and 418 patients in the BP-DES groups), comprised the final study population. Both study groups had a similar baseline profile. Patients treated with BP-DES group had similar rates of MACE (15.3 % vs. 19.4 %, HR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.50-0.94, p = 0.022). Rates of target lesion revascularization was lower in BP DES group (0.7 % vs. 3.8 %, HR 0.17, 95 % CI 0.05-0.51, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

In a cohort of STEMI patients submitted to pPCI, BP and DP DES had similar rates of the primary outcome. Patients treated with BP DES, however, had a decreased incidence of TLR at after 2-year follow-up.

Comparative effectiveness of ultrathin vs. standard strut drug-eluting stents: insights from a large-scale meta-analysis with extended follow-up

BACKGROUND

Newer generation ultrathin strut stents are associated with less incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the short term. However, its long-term effect on different cardiovascular outcomes remains unknown.

OBJECTIVES

We aim to identify the effects of newer-generation ultrathin-strut stents vs. standard thickness second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) on long-term outcomes of revascularization in coronary artery disease.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registries that compare newer-generation ultrathin-strut (< 70 mm) with thicker strut (> 70 mm) DES to evaluate cardioprotective effects over a period of up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary outcomes included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death were pooled as the standardized mean difference between the two groups from baseline to endpoint.

RESULTS

We included 19 RCTs and two prospective registries (103,101 patients) in this analysis. The overall effect on the primary outcome was in favor of second-generation ultrathin struts stents in terms of TLF at ≥ 1 year, ≥ 2 years, and ≥ 3 years (P value = 0.01, 95% CI [0.75, 0.96]), P value = 0.003, 95% CI [0.77, 0.95]), P value = 0.007, 95% CI [0.76, 0.96]), respectively. However, there was no reported benefit in terms of TLF when we compared the two groups at ≥ 5 years (P value = 0.21), 95% CI [0.85, 1.04]). Some of the reported components of the primary and secondary outcomes, such as TLR, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and TVMI, showed the same pattern as the TLF outcome.

CONCLUSION

Ultrathin-strut DES showed a beneficial effect over thicker strut stents for up to 3 years. However, at the 5-year follow-up, the ultrathin strut did not differ in terms of TLF, TLR, TVR, and TVMI compared with standard-thickness DES, with similar risks of patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.

Final 5-year report of BIONYX comparing the thin-composite wire-strut zotarolimus-eluting stent versus ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent

BACKGROUND

The BIONYX randomized trial is the first study to evaluate the Resolute Onyx durable polymer-coated zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in all-comers. Furthermore, it is the first trial to assess safety and efficacy of this stent versus the Orsiro biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers, paying particular attention to patients with diabetes. It has previously shown promising results until 3 years of follow-up.

AIMS

We aimed to assess long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with Onyx ZES versus Orsiro SES at 5-year follow-up.

METHODS

The main composite endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF): cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Time to primary and secondary endpoints was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods, applying the log-rank test for between-group comparison.

RESULTS

Follow-up was available in 2414/2488 (97.0%) patients. After 5 years, TVF showed no significant difference between Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES (12.7% vs. 13.7%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] [0.75-1.17], plog-rank = 0.55). Landmark analysis between 3- and 5-year follow-up found a lower target lesion revascularization rate for Onyx ZES (1.1% vs. 2.4%, HR 0.47, 95% CI [0.24-0.93], plog-rank = 0.026). A prespecified subgroup analysis showed no significant between-stent difference in clinical outcome among patients with diabetes. After treatment with Onyx ZES, patients aged ≥75 years had significantly lower rates of TVF (13.8% vs. 21.9%, HR 0.60, 95% CI [0.39-0.93], plog-rank = 0.023).

CONCLUSIONS

The final 5-year analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial showed favorable and similar long-term outcomes of safety and efficacy for Onyx ZES and Orsiro SES in both all-comers and patients with diabetes.

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting versus primary stenting for the treatment of de novo coronary artery lesions: REC-CAGEFREE I trial rationale and design

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with primary stenting, which stands for stent implantation regardless of obtaining satisfactory results with balloon angioplasty, has superseded conventional plain old balloon angioplasty with provisional stenting. With drug-coated balloon (DCB), primary DCB angioplasty with provisional stenting has shown non-inferiority to primary stenting for de novo coronary small vessel disease. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of such a strategy to the primary stenting on clinical endpoints in de novo lesions without vessel diameter restrictions remain uncertain.

STUDY DESIGN

The REC-CAGEFREE I is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, open-label trial aimed to enroll 2270 patients with acute or chronic coronary syndrome from 43 interventional cardiology centers in China to evaluate the non-inferiority of primary paclitaxel-coated balloons angioplasty to primary stenting for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. Patients who fulfill all the inclusion and exclusion criteria and have achieved a successful lesion pre-dilatation will be randomly assigned to the two arms in a 1:1 ratio. Protocol-guided DCB angioplasty and bailout stenting after unsatisfactory angioplasty are mandatory in the primary DCB angioplasty group. The second-generation sirolimus-eluting stent will be used as a bailout stent in the primary DCB angioplasty group and the treatment device in the primary stenting group. The primary endpoint is the incidence of Device-oriented Composite Endpoint (DoCE) within 24 months after randomization, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically and physiologically indicated target lesion revascularization.

DISCUSSION

The ongoing REC-CAGEFREE I trial is the first randomized trial with a clinical endpoint to assess the efficacy and safety of primary DCB angioplasty for the treatment of de novo, non-complex lesions without vessel diameter restrictions. If non-inferiority is shown, PCI with primary DCB angioplasty could be an alternative treatment option to primary stenting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registered on clinicaltrial.gov (NCT04561739).

A technology evaluation of the Onyx Frontier drug-eluting stent

INTRODUCTION

Onyx FrontierTM represents the latest iteration within the family of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), designed for the treatment of coronary artery disease. Approval by the Food and Drug Administration was granted in May 2022, and Conformité Européenne marking followed in August 2022.

AREAS COVERED

We hereby review the principal design features of Onyx Frontier, highlighting differences and similarities with other currently available drug-eluting stents. In addition, we focus on the refinements of this newest platform as compared with previous ZES versions, including the attributes yielding its exceptional crossing profile and deliverability. The clinical implications related to both its newest and inherited characteristics will be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The nuances of the latest Onyx Frontier, together with the continuous refinement previously witnessed throughout the development of ZES, lead to a latest generation device ideal for a diverse spectrum of clinical and anatomical scenarios. In particular, its peculiarities will be of benefit in the settings often offered by a progressively aging population, such as high bleeding risk patients and complex coronary lesions.

Association between diet quality scores and risk of overweight and obesity in children and adolescents

BACKGROUND

This study examined the associations of diet quality assessed by Healthy Eating Index 2015 (HEI-2015), Alternative Healthy Eating Index 2010 (AHEI-2010), Mediterranean Diet (MedDiet) and overweight/obesity in children and adolescents.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used data of participants aged 2-19 years from National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2005-2018. The weighted logistic regression model was adopted to explore the association between diet quality scores and overweight, obesity in children and adolescents. Subgroup analysis was also performed based on sex.

RESULTS

A total of 9,724 participants were included in children group (2-11 years old), and 5,934 were adolescent group (12-19 years old). All participants were divided into based on the BMI-for-age: underweight and normal, overweight and obesity groups. After adjusting for age, race, poverty-income ratio, maternal smoking during pregnancy and total energy, HEI-2015 and MedDiet scores were related to the risk of overweight in children, and only MedDiet scores remained associated with a decreased risk of obesity in children. MedDiet scores were associated with a decreased risk of overweight, obesity in adolescents, respectively, after adjusting age, sex, race, poverty-income ratio, cotinine, total energy and physical activity. The similar results in male participants were also found.

CONCLUSION

Higher MedDiet scores were associated with lower the risk of overweight and obesity, respectively, particularly for male children and adolescents. The higher HEI-2015 scores were also related to the risk of overweight in children.

Association between very advanced maternal age women with gestational diabetes mellitus and the risks of adverse infant outcomes: a cohort study from the NVSS 2014-2019

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the association between gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and infant outcomes in women of very advanced maternal age (vAMA) (≥45 years).

METHODS

This cohort study utilized data from the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS) database (2014-2019) in the United States. Preterm birth was the primary outcome, which was subdivided into extremely preterm, very preterm, and moderate or late preterm. The secondary outcomes were neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admission, low birthweight and small for gestational age. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to explore the association between GDM and infant outcomes among vAMA women. Subgroup analyses were performed based on race and use of infertility treatment. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 52,544 vAMA pregnant women were included. All analysis made comparisons between women with vAMA and GDM and women with vAMA and no GDM. Women with GDM had a significantly higher risk of preterm birth than those without GDM (OR = 1.26, 95%CI = 1.18-1.36, P < 0.001). Compared with women without GDM, those with GDM had a significantly increased risk of moderate or late preterm birth (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.18-1.37, P < 0.001); no significant association of GDM with extremely preterm birth and very preterm birth was observed. Women with GDM had a significantly greater risk of NICU admission than those without (OR = 1.33, 95%CI = 1.23-1.43, P < 0.001). GDM was associated with a significantly lower risk of low birthweight (OR = 0.91, 95%CI = 0.84-0.98, P = 0.010), and no significant association was found between GDM and small for gestational age (OR = 0.95, 95%CI = 0.87-1.03, P = 0.200) in vAMA women.

CONCLUSION

vAMA women with GDM had an increased risk of preterm birth, especially moderate or late preterm birth. NICU admission and low birthweight were also associated with GDM among vAMA women.

Drug-Eluting Stents: Technical and Clinical Progress

Drug-eluting stents (DES) demonstrated superior efficacy when compared to bare metal stents and plain-old balloon angioplasty and are nowadays used in almost all percutaneous revascularization procedures. The design of the stent platforms is constantly improving to maximize its efficacy and safety. Constant development of DES includes adoption of new materials used for scaffold production, new design types, improved overexpansion abilities, new polymers coating and, finally, improved antiproliferative agents. Especially nowadays, with the immense number of available DES platforms, it is crucial to understand how different aspects of stents impact the effect of their implantation, as subtle differences between various stent platforms could impact the most important issue-clinical outcomes. This review discusses the current status of coronary stents and the impact of stent material, strut design and coating techniques on cardiovascular outcomes.

The factors influencing the efficiency of drug-coated balloons

The drug-coated balloon (DCB) is an emerging percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) device that delivers drugs to diseased vessels to decrease the rate of vascular stenosis. Recent clinical studies have demonstrated that DCBs tend to have both good safety and efficacy profiles, leading to extended application indications in the clinic, including in-stent restenosis (ISR) for metal stents such as drug-eluting stents (DESs), small vascular disease, bifurcation disease, large vascular disease, acute coronary syndrome (ACS), and high bleeding risk. However, some previous clinical data have suggested that DCBs performed less effectively than DESs. No studies or reviews have systematically discussed the improvement strategies for better DCB performance until now. Drug loss during the process of delivery to the target lesion and inefficient delivery of the coating drug to the diseased vascular wall are two key mechanisms that weaken the efficiency of DCBs. This review is the first to summarize the key influencing factors of DCB efficiency in terms of balloon structure and principles, and then it analyzes how these factors cause outcomes in practice based on current clinical trial studies of DCBs in the treatment of different types of lesions. We also provide some recommendations for improving DCBs to contribute to better DCB performance by improving the design of DCBs and combining other factors in clinical practice.

First Report of 3-Year Clinical Outcome After Treatment With Novel Resolute Onyx Stents in the Randomized BIONYX Trial

BACKGROUND

At 1 year, the international randomized BIONYX trial (ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02508714) established non-inferiority regarding safety and efficacy of the novel Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent (RO-ZES) vs. the Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (O-SES). Although the RO-ZES is used in daily practice, no clinical results have been published beyond 2 years.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We assessed 3-year clinical outcomes of 2,488 all-comers after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with RO-ZES vs. O-SES. The main endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization. Time-to-endpoints was assessed by Kaplan-Meier methods and between-group comparisons by log-rank tests. Follow-up was available in 2,433/2,488 (97.8%) patients. There was no significant between-stent difference in TVF (RO-ZES 112/1,243 [9.2%] vs. O-SES 109/1,245 [8.9%], hazard ratio [HR]: 1.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.79-1.34; Plog-rank=0.85) and its individual components. The all-cause mortality was significantly lower after PCI with RO-ZES (3.7% vs.5.4%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI 0.46-0.97; Plog-rank=0.034), but cardiac mortality did not differ significantly (1.1% vs.1.9%, HR: 0.56, 95% CI 0.28-1.11; Plog-rank=0.09). Definite-or-probable stent thrombosis rates were low for both groups (0.6% vs.1.2%, HR: 0.46, 95% CI 0.19-1.14; Plog-rank=0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

This first 3-year randomized assessment of the RO-ZES showed a favorable rate of TVF that matched the outcomes of patients treated with O-SES. We observed a lower rate of all-cause death in the RO-ZES group, but long-term clinical follow-up is of interest.

Ultrathin Biodegradable-Polymer Orsiro Drug-Eluting Stent Performance in Real Practice Challenging Settings

BACKGROUND

The Orsiro cobalt-chromium stent platform (Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland) is one of the first devices in the era of ultrathin struts. However, data regarding the efficacy of Orsiro stent in patients with challenging anatomical conditions obtained from daily clinical practice are scant.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the long-term outcomes, defined as target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality over a six years period, in 1161 consecutive patients (mean age 64.3 ± 11.2 years old, 681 males) treated with 2327 Orsiro stents in our institution who presented with challenging anatomic/angiographic features.

RESULTS

The mean number of implanted stents was 1.7 ± 2.1 whereas the mean stent diameter and length were 3.6 ± 1.1 and 32.7 ± 15.6 mm, respectively. Mean follow-up duration was 35.6 ± 17 months (range 1-77 months); 923 patients (79.5%) reached the 3-year follow-up. The global rates of TLR, TVR, ST and CV mortality were 0.1%, 1.37%, 0.002%, and 1.9%, respectively with scarce statistically significant differences in multivessel disease, severe calcification, and lesion length > 41 mm. Multivariate regression analysis revealed that age, stent dislodgement, early stent thrombosis (p = 0.001) and lesion length ≥ 41 mm (p = 0.001) were independent predictors of TVR. Similarly, the occurrence of TLR was independently predicted by age, severe calcification, use of IVUS and Rotablator (p = 0.002), early stent thrombosis, LM bifurcation and length ≥ 41 mm (p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The Orsiro stent confirmed a very high efficacy profile in all anatomical scenarios with very low rates of clinically driven TLR and TVR, CV mortality and ST at 3-years.

Ultrathin biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus contemporary durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary intervention: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

INTRODUCTION

Improvements in coronary drug-eluting stent technology has focused on reducing the long-term complications associated with the effects of the residual footprint on the vessel wall. Although many of the newer stents have exhibited noninferiority to the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES), they have yet to exhibit clear superiority. We compared the performance of the latest ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) to DP-EES.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases for randomized controlled trials comparing BP-SES to DP-EES. A random effect meta-analysis was performed using the Poisson regression model. The primary end point was target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), cardiac death and target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

There was no difference between the stents in stent thrombosis [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 0.79, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-1.06), TLR (IRR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.57-1.38), TVMI (IRR = 0.79, 95% CI 0.61-1.01), cardiac death (IRR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.76-1.29) and target vessel failure (IRR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.64-1.06). In addition, there was no difference in TLF (IRR = 0.82, 95% CI 0.64-1.06). There was evidence of reduced TLF in small vessels with BP-SES based on definition used (defined as ≤2.75 mm; IRR 0.64, 95% CI 0.46-0.91 versus ≤3 mm; IRR 1.11, 95% CI 0.90-1.36).

CONCLUSION

In our study, the performance of the latest generation BP-SES was comparable to DP-EES but failed to show superiority. The possible benefit in patients with small vessels should be explored future trials.

Long-term follow-up after ultrathin vs. conventional 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIMS

Contemporary 2nd-generation thin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A previous meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 11 658 patients demonstrated a 16% reduction in the 1-year risk of target lesion failure (TLF) with ultrathin-strut DES compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. Whether this benefit is sustained longer term is not known, and newer trial data may inform these relative outcomes. We therefore sought to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing clinical outcomes with ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 µm strut thickness) with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing ultrathin-strut DES to conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. The pre-specified primary endpoint was long-term TLF, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death. There were 16 eligible trials in which 20 701 patients were randomized. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 2.5 years. Ultrathin-strut DES were associated with a 15% reduction in long-term TLF compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES [relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.96, P = 0.008] driven by a 25% reduction in CD-TLR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences between stent types in the risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, or all-cause mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, ultrathin-strut DES reduced the risk of TLF, driven by less CD-TLR compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES, with similar risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.

Long term outcomes of ultrathin versus standard thickness second-generation drug eluting stents: Meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

Identify the effect of ultrathin drug eluting stents on long term outcomes in coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND

Although second-generation drug eluting stents (DES) are superior to first-generation DES, persistence of adverse outcomes has led to continued refinement in design. Ultrathin second-generation DES have been shown to improve outcomes at 1-year follow-up. Beyond 1-year their effect remains unknown.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Database were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared ultrathin (defined as <70 um) to standard thickness second-generation DES. Studies were chosen according to the PROSPERO protocol (CRD42020185374). Data from randomized controlled trials were pooled using random-effects model (Mantel-Haenszel). The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF) at 2 years, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes included TLF at 3 and 5 years, the components of TLF and definite or probable stent thrombosis. Differences in outcomes between groups were presented in Forest plots as risk ratios (RR) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each trial.

RESULTS

We identified 18 publications from 10 trials with14,649 patients. At 2-years there was a significant 12% reduction in TLF (RR, 0.88; 95% CI 0.78-0.99; p < 0.05) associated with the use of ultrathin DES. At 3-years, there was a significant 19% reduction in TLF with ultrathin DES (RR, 0.79; 95% CI 0.64-0.98; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, ultrathin DES improve long term clinical outcomes.

Thin Strut CoCr Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus A9-Eluting Stents versus Thicker Strut Stainless Steel Biodegradable Polymer Biolimus A9-Eluting Stents: Two-Year Clinical Outcomes

Background

While thinner struts are associated with improved clinical outcomes in bare-metal stents (BMS), reducing strut thickness may affect drug delivery from drug-eluting stents (DES) and there are limited data comparing otherwise similar thin and thick strut DES. We assessed 2-year outcomes of patients treated with a thin strut (84–88um) cobalt-chromium, biodegradable polymer, Biolimus A9-eluting stent (CoCr-BP-BES) and compared these to patients treated with a stainless steel, biodegradable polymer, Biolimus A9-eluting stent (SS-BP-BES).

Methods

In total, 1257 patients were studied: 400 patients from 12 centres receiving ≥1 CoCr-BP-BES in the prospective Biomatrix Alpha registry underwent prespecified comparison with 857 patients who received ≥1 Biomatrix Flex SS-BP-BES in the LEADERS study (historical control). The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE)—cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target vessel revascularization (cd-TVR). Propensity analysis was used to adjust for differences in baseline variables and a landmark analysis at day-3 to account for differences in periprocedural MI definitions.

Results

MACE at 2 years occurred in 6.65% CoCr-BP-BES versus 13.23% SS-BP-BES groups (unadjusted HR 0.48 [0.31–0.73]; P=0.0005). Following propensity analysis, 2-year adjusted MACE rates were 7.4% versus 13.3% (HR 0.53 [0.35–0.79]; P=0.004). Definite or probable stent thrombosis, adjudicated using identical criteria in both studies, occurred less frequently with CoCr-BP-BES (1.12% vs. 3.22%; adjusted HR 0.32 [0.11–0.9]; P=0.034). In day-3 landmark analysis, the difference in 2-year MACE was no longer significant but there was a lower patient-orientated composite endpoint (11.7% vs. 18.4%; HR 0.6 [0.43–0.83]; P=0.006) and a trend to lower target vessel failure (5.8% vs. 9.1%; HR 0.63 [0.4–1.00]; P=0.078).

Conclusion

At 2-year follow-up, propensity-adjusted analysis showed the thin strut (84–88um) Biomatrix Alpha CoCr-BP-BES was associated with improved clinical outcomes compared with the thicker strut (114–120um) Biomatrix Flex SS-BP-BES.

Acute myocardial infarction treated with novel Resolute Onyx and Orsiro stents in the randomized BIONYX trial

Objectives

To compare 2‐year outcome following treatment with drug‐eluting stents (DES) for acute myocardial infarction (MI) versus non‐MI clinical syndromes. In acute MI patients, a stent‐level comparison was performed, comparing Resolute Onyx versus Orsiro stents.

Background

In patients presenting with acute MI, higher adverse event rates have been reported. So far, no clinical results >1 year have been published of acute MI patients treated with Resolute Onyx.

Methods

This post‐hoc analysis of the randomized BIONYX trial(NCT02508714) assessed the main outcome target vessel failure (TVF: cardiac death, target vessel MI, or target vessel revascularization) with Kaplan–Meier methods.

Results

Of all 2,488 trial participants, acute MI patients (n = 1,275[51.2%]) were significantly younger and had less comorbidities than non‐MI patients (n = 1,213[48.8%]). TVF rates were lower in acute MI patients (77/1,275[6.1%] vs. 103/1,213[8.6%], HR:0.70, 95%‐CI 0.52–0.94; p_log‐rank = 0.02), mainly driven by target vessel revascularization (4.1 vs. 6.1%, p_log‐rank = 0.03). Multivariate analysis showed no independent association of clinical syndrome with TVF (adjusted‐HR: 0.81, 95%‐CI 0.60–1.10; p = .17). In MI patients treated with Resolute Onyx (n = 626) versus Orsiro (n = 649), there was no difference in TVF (6.2 vs. 6.1%; p_log‐rank = 0.97) and its components. There was only 1(0.2%) definite‐or‐probable stent thrombosis in RO‐ZES and 8(1.2%) in O‐SES (p = .053).

Conclusions

Two years after treatment with thin‐strut DES in this randomized trial, patients treated for acute MI had lower adverse event rates than non‐MI patients. Yet, these findings were mainly attributable to between‐group differences in patient and lesion characteristics. In patients who underwent PCI for acute MI, both Resolute Onyx and Orsiro showed favorable and similar 2‐year outcomes.

Coronary revascularization in patients with stable coronary disease and diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE OF STUDY

Diabetes mellitus accelerates the development of atherosclerosis. Patients with diabetes mellitus have higher incidence and mortality rates from cardiovascular disease and undergo a disproportionately higher number of coronary interventions compared to the general population. Proper selection of treatment modalities is thus paramount. Treatment strategies include medical management and interventional approaches including coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). The purpose of this review is to assimilate emerging evidence comparing CABG to PCI in patients with diabetes and present an outlook on the latest advances in percutaneous interventions, in addition to the optimal medical therapies in patients with diabetes.

KEY METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science and EMBASE was performed to identify prospective, randomized trials comparing outcomes of CABG and PCI, and also PCI with different generations of stents used in patients with diabetes. Additional review of bibliography of selected studies was also performed.

MAIN CONCLUSIONS

Most of the trials discussed above demonstrate a survival advantage of CABG over PCI in patients with diabetes. However, recent advances in PCI technology are starting to challenge this narrative. Superior stent designs, use of specific drug-eluting stents, image-guided stent deployment, and the use of contemporary antiplatelet and lipid-lowering therapies are continuing to improve the PCI outcomes. Prospective data for such emerging interventional technologies in diabetes is however lacking currently and is the need of the hour.

Clinical outcomes of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease

BACKGROUND

Evermine 50™ (Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., India) everolimus-eluting stent system (EES) is a novel ultrathin strut (50 µm) cobalt-chromium coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) platform with biodegradable polymer coating. The Evermine 50 EES-KLES study aimed to evaluate the Evermine 50 EES in terms of 24-month clinical safety and performance in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

METHODS

This retrospective study consisted of 171 patients (258 lesions) implanted with Evermine 50 EES for managing CAD. We analyzed the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) incidence, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (ID-TLR) at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 171 patients were included with a mean age of 57.85 ± 10.05 years, of which, 139 (81.29%) were men, 69 (40.35%) were hypertensive, and 70 (40.94%) were diabetic. The incidence of MACE was 1 (0.58%), 3 (1.81%), and 4 (2.42%) at 6-, 12-, and 24-month follow-up, respectively. There were three cases (1.82%) of cardiac death and one case (0.61%) of ID-TLR up to 24 months. None of the patients was presented with definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that implantation of ultrathin strut Evermine 50 EES resulted in a low rate of incidence of MACE, indicating a favourable clinical safety and performance profile of Evermine 50 EES in patients with CAD [Clinical Trials Registry-India (CTRI) Number: CTRI/2017/09/009939)].

Ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis

Objectives

Determine whether an ultrathin biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (‘Orsiro’—BP-SES) has clinical benefits over second-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES).

Methods

We conducted a prospective systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials comparing Orsiro BP-SES against DP-DES (PROSPERO Registration: CRD42019147136). The primary outcome was target lesion failure (TLF): composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation (TLR)) evaluated at the longest available follow-up.

Results

Nine trials randomised 11 302 patients to either Orsiro BP-SES or DP-DES. At mean weighted follow-up of 2.8 years, the primary outcome (TLF) occurred in 501 of 6089 (8.2%) participants with BP-SES compared with 495 of 5213 (9.5%) participants with DP-DES. This equates to an absolute risk reduction of 1.3% in TLF in favour of Orsiro BP-SES (OR 0.82; 95% CI 0.69 to 0.98; p=0.03). This was driven by a reduction in TVMI (OR 0.80; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.98; p=0.03). There were no significant differences in other clinical endpoints: cardiac death, TLR and stent thrombosis.

Conclusion

The Orsiro BP-SES shows promising clinical outcomes in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention compared with contemporary second-generation DES at a short to medium term follow-up. More research is warranted to evaluate performance over a longer follow-up period and in different clinical and lesion subsets.

Treating diabetic all-comers with contemporary drug-eluting stents: Prespecified comparisons from the BIO-RESORT and the BIONYX randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes have more extensive coronary disease, resulting in higher risks of adverse clinical events following stenting. In all-comer patients, contemporary DES have shown excellent safety and efficacy, but data on diabetic patients are scarce. Separately for the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX trials, we assessed the 2-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients, treated with various contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES).

METHODS

We performed two prespecified secondary analyses of two randomized DES trials, which both stratified for diabetes. The main endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Follow-up was finished before the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

In BIO-RESORT, 624/3514 (17.8%) had diabetes: 211 received Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), 203 Synergy everolimus-eluting stents (EES), and 210 Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (RI-ZES). TVF did not differ between SES (10.2%) and EES (10.0%) versus RI-ZES (12.7%) (SES vs. RI-ZES HR:0.78, 95%-CI [0.44-1.40]; p = 0.40, EES vs. RI-ZES HR:0.79, 95%-CI [0.44-1.40]; p = 0.42). In BIONYX, 510/2488 (20.5%) patients had diabetes: 250 received SES and 260 Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stents (RO-ZES). There was no difference in TVF between SES (10.7%) versus RO-ZES (12.2%) (HR:0.88, 95%-CI [0.52-1.48]; p = 0.63).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in 2-year clinical outcome among patients with diabetes, who were treated with SES, or EES, versus RI-ZES. In addition there was no difference in clinical outcome in diabetic patients, who were treated with SES versus RO-ZES. These findings may be considered as a signal of safety and efficacy of the studied DES in patients with diabetes.

Thin, very thin, or ultrathin-strut biodegradable or durable polymer-coated drug-eluting stents

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current article will review recently published clinical studies that evaluate very thin or ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES), focusing on major randomized clinical trials in broad patient populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple randomized trials recently assessed the clinical performance of novel very thin to ultrathin-strut DES. Most randomized trials established noninferiority of the novel device. To date, only one major randomized clinical trial (i.e., BIOFLOW V) showed superiority of an ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent over a very thin-strut durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stent in a relatively broad patient population. There are signals that the same ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent may improve clinical outcome in specific patient populations. For example, in the randomized BIOSTEMI trial, 1-year superiority of the ultrathin-strut DES was found in patients presenting with an acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Yet, substudies of large randomized trials that assessed patients with small-vessel treatment showed equivocal results.

SUMMARY

Although two randomized trials showed advantages for ultrathin-strut DES, other clinical trials provided no significant evidence that ultrathin-strut DES improve clinical outcome. The question whether ultrathin-strut DES may reduce the repeat revascularization risk following implantation in small vessels is a matter of further debate and future research.