Comparison of outcomes in patients with or without ARC-HBR criteria undergoing PCI with polymer-free biolimus coated stents: The BioFreedom France study

BACKGROUND

The polymer-free biolimus coated stent (BioFreedom) was shown to be superior to bare metal stents in the LEADERS FREE randomized trial in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients treated with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). However, there is limited outcome data with this device in an all-comers' population.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective single-arm study of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with the polymer-free biolimus coated stent in 25 centers in France with wide inclusion criteria including multivessel disease, complex lesions, and acute coronary syndromes. The primary endpoint was the incidence of target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of cardiac death or target-vessel myocardial infarction (MI) or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization (ci-TLR) at 1-year. The patient population was classified according to the presence (or not) of HBR criteria according to the recent ARC-HBR definition.

RESULTS

Between April 2019 and April 2020, 1497 patients were enrolled. TLF occurred in 101 (6.9%) patients, including cardiac death in 35 (2.4%), target vessel MI in 20 (1.4%) and ci-TLR in 65 (4.5%) of them. There were 491 HBR patients (32.8%) and 1006 non-HBR patients. The median duration of DAPT was 74 days in the HBR group versus 348 days in the non-HBR group (p < 0.0001). TLF occurred in 44 (9.2%) of the HBR group and in 57 (5.8%) of the non-HBR group (relative risk 1.62 [95% confidence interval: 1.10-2.41], p = 0015). Compared to the non-HBR group, HBR patients had higher rates of cardiac death (4.4% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.0005) and target vessel MI (2.9% vs. 0.6%, p = 0.0003), but similar rates of ci-TLR. BARC 3-5 bleeding occurred in 6.2% of the HBR group versus 1.4% of the non-HBR group (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

In this multicenter all-comers study, HBR patients treated with a polymer-free biolimus coated stent had, compared to non-HBR patients, an increased risk of cardiac death and MI, and despite a shorter duration of DAPT, continued to have higher rates of BARC 3-5 bleeding.

Five-year clinical outcomes using the bioresorbable vascular scaffold: Insights from the FRANCE ABSORB registry

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials comparing the first-generation absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) with a drug-eluting stent showed a moderate but significant increase in the rate of 3-year major adverse cardiac events and scaffold thrombosis, followed by a decrease in adverse events after 3 years.

AIM

The objective of this study was to assess the 5-year outcomes of patients treated with at least one absorb BVS and included in the FRANCE ABSORB registry.

METHODS

All patients treated in France with an absorb BVS were prospectively included in a large nationwide multicentre registry. The primary efficacy outcome was the occurrence of 5-year major adverse cardiac events. Secondary efficacy outcomes were the rates of 5-year target vessel revascularization and definite/probable scaffold thrombosis.

RESULTS

Between September 2014 and April 2016, 2,070 patients were included in 86 centres (mean age 55±11 years; 80% men; 49% with acute coronary syndrome). The rates of 1-, 3- and 5-year major adverse cardiac events were 3.9%, 9.4% and 12.1%, respectively (including cardiac death in 2.5% and target vessel revascularization in 10.4%). By multivariable analysis, diabetes, oral anticoagulation, the use of multiple Absorb BVSs and the use of a 2.5mm diameter absorb BVS were associated with 5-year major adverse cardiac events. The rates of 1-, 3- and 5-year definite/probable scaffold thrombosis were 1.5%, 3.1% and 3.6%, respectively. By multivariable analysis, older age, diabetes, anticoagulation at discharge and the use of a 2.5mm diameter absorb BVS were associated with 5-year scaffold thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Absorb BVS implantation was associated with low rates of 1-year major adverse cardiac events, which increased significantly at 3-year follow-up. There was a clear decrease in the rates of scaffold thrombosis and major adverse cardiac events after 3 years.

Fractional Flow Reserve to Guide Treatment of Patients With Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence that fractional flow reserve (FFR) is effective in guiding therapeutic strategy in multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) beyond prespecified percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary graft surgery candidates.

OBJECTIVES

The FUTURE (FUnctional Testing Underlying coronary REvascularization) trial aimed to evaluate whether a treatment strategy based on FFR was superior to a traditional strategy without FFR in the treatment of multivessel CAD.

METHODS

The FUTURE trial is a prospective, randomized, open-label superiority trial. Multivessel CAD candidates were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment strategy based on FFR in all stenotic (≥50%) coronary arteries or to a traditional strategy without FFR. In the FFR group, revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention or surgery) was indicated for FFR ≤0.80 lesions. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events at 1 year.

RESULTS

The trial was stopped prematurely by the data safety and monitoring board after a safety analysis and 927 patients were enrolled. At 1-year follow-up, by intention to treat, there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events rates between groups (14.6% in the FFR group vs 14.4% in the control group; hazard ratio: 0.97; 95% confidence interval: 0.69-1.36; P = 0.85). The difference in all-cause mortality was nonsignificant, 3.7% in the FFR group versus 1.5% in the control group (hazard ratio: 2.34; 95% confidence interval: 0.97-5.18; P = 0.06), and this was confirmed with a 24 months' extended follow-up. FFR significantly reduced the proportion of revascularized patients, with more patients referred to exclusively medical treatment (P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with multivessel CAD, we did not find evidence that an FFR-guided treatment strategy reduced the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events or death at 1-year follow-up. (Functional Testing Underlying Coronary Revascularisation; NCT01881555).

Multivessel PCI Guided by FFR or Angiography for Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

In patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who have multivessel disease, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for nonculprit lesions (complete revascularization) is superior to treatment of the culprit lesion alone. However, whether complete revascularization that is guided by fractional flow reserve (FFR) is superior to an angiography-guided procedure is unclear.

METHODS

In this multicenter trial, we randomly assigned patients with STEMI and multivessel disease who had undergone successful PCI of the infarct-related artery to receive complete revascularization guided by either FFR or angiography. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization at 1 year.

RESULTS

The mean (±SD) number of stents that were placed per patient for nonculprit lesions was 1.01±0.99 in the FFR-guided group and 1.50±0.86 in the angiography-guided group. During follow-up, a primary outcome event occurred in 32 of 586 patients (5.5%) in the FFR-guided group and in 24 of 577 patients (4.2%) in the angiography-guided group (hazard ratio, 1.32; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 2.23; P = 0.31). Death occurred in 9 patients (1.5%) in the FFR-guided group and in 10 (1.7%) in the angiography-guided group; nonfatal myocardial infarction in 18 (3.1%) and 10 (1.7%), respectively; and unplanned hospitalization leading to urgent revascularization in 15 (2.6%) and 11 (1.9%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with STEMI undergoing complete revascularization, an FFR-guided strategy did not have a significant benefit over an angiography-guided strategy with respect to the risk of death, myocardial infarction, or urgent revascularization at 1 year. However, given the wide confidence intervals for the estimate of effect, the findings do not allow for a conclusive interpretation. (Funded by the French Ministry of Health and Abbott; FLOWER-MI ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02943954.).

EFFICACY OF AN ADDITIONAL MOBILE LEADED SHIELD ON OPERATOR RADIATION DURING PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY ANGIOGRAPHY

Operator radiation protection during percutaneous coronary angiography (CA) is a growing concern in the catheterisation laboratory (cath lab). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of an additional mobile leaded shield on operator radiation exposure during diagnostic CA. The study involved two operators from the same cath lab and patients scheduled for diagnostic coronary catheterisation over a period of 2 months. Procedures were performed with standard radiation equipment during the first month. An additional mobile lead shield was added during the second month. Radiation exposure was measured by three dosimeters positioned on the operator's left hand, on their chest under the lead apron and on lead glasses. The intra-operator results were compared. Ninety-nine per cent of the procedures were carried out by radial access. For Operators 1 and 2, the mobile shield, respectively, decreased the radiation dose to the eyes by 43 and 33 % and to the hands by 61 and 83 %. Thorax dose was less than the minimum measurable dose (<0.01 mSv) for each operator. There was no significant difference in total procedure duration, fluoroscopy time or contrast dose required between the two groups of patients. Improved operator radiation protection is an important issue in the face of increased occupational doses. Mobile leaded shield, combined with standard preventive measures, seems to be an effective additional option to reduce the radiation exposure during diagnostic CA.

[Idiopathic left ventricular aneurysm presenting with ventricular tachycardia. A case report]

Left ventricular aneurysm presenting with ventricular tachycardia was observed in a 48 year old man. Aetiological investigation was negative. The differences between aneurysm and diverticulum and the aetiologies of aneurysms are discussed. The treatment of the arrhythmias caused by this condition is discussed with the help of a review of the literature.

Percutaneous coronary mid-infra-red laser angioplasty

A pilot study was performed to determine the safety and efficacy of coronary pulsed mid-infra-red laser angioplasty. The laser was coupled with a novel 2.0 mm multifiber catheter consisting of 37 optical fibers of 150 microns each arranged concentrically around a 0.018-inch central lumen and a soft leading tapered distal tip to maintain coaxial alignment and position plaque in front of fibers. The laser was operated at 500 millijoules/pulse, 3.5 Hz, and 250 microseconds/pulse. Twenty-three patients with stenosis or occlusion of the left anterior descending or right coronary artery were selected for laser treatment. In three patients the catheter could not be positioned against the obstruction. In the 20 remaining patients laser angioplasty increased the diameter of the lumen from 0.3 +/- 0.3 mm to 1.4 +/- 0.3 mm and reduced the stenosis from 91 +/- 8% to 57 +/- 10%. In three patients "stand-alone" laser treatment was sufficient. In 17 patients balloon dilatation further reduced the stenosis to 20 +/- 18%. In two patients who had previously undergone unsuccessful balloon angioplasty with high inflation pressure, laser angioplasty allowed subsequent successful dilatation with low inflation pressure. There were no deaths, perforations, dissections, or arrhythmias. One patient had abrupt reclosure 24 hours after the procedure. Spasm occurred in four patients, and six patients had chest sensations during laser emission. Thus mid-infra-red pulsed coronary laser angioplasty is safe and effective for recanalization of stenosed and totally occluded arteries. The efficacy may be sufficient for "stand-alone" laser treatment. The technique may improve the efficacy of balloon angioplasty in cases of unsuccessful primary dilatation.