Cardiopoietic cell therapy for advanced ischemic heart failure: results at 39 weeks of the prospective, randomized, double blind, sham-controlled CHART-1 clinical trial

Cardiopoietic cells, produced through cardiogenic conditioning of patients' mesenchymal stem cells, have shown preliminary efficacy. The Congestive Heart Failure Cardiopoietic Regenerative Therapy (CHART-1) trial aimed to validate cardiopoiesis-based biotherapy in a larger heart failure cohort

Drug‐eluting stent coatings

This paper reviews the development of coronary stents from a polymer scientist\u27s view point, and presents the first results of an interdisciplinary team assembled for the development of new stent systems. Poly(styrene-b-isobutylene-b-styrene) block copolymer (SIBS), a nanostructured thermoplastic elastomer, is used in clinical practice as the drug-eluting polymeric coating on the Taxus coronary stent (trademark of Boston Scientific Co.). Our group has been developing new architectures comprising of arborescent (dendritic) polyisobutylene cores (D_SIBS), which were shown to be as biocompatible as SIBS. ElectroNanospray (Nanocopoeia Inc.™) was used to coat test coupons and coronary stents with selected DSIBS polymers loaded with dexamethasone, a model drug. The surface topology varied from smooth to nanosized particulate coating. This paper will demonstrate how drug release profiles were influenced by both the molecular weight of the polyisobutylene core and spraying conditions of the polymer-drug mixture. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Inc

Correlation and Relative Prognostic Value of Fractional Flow Reserve and Pd/Pa of Nonculprit Lesions in ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND: The applicability of resting indices to guide noninfarct-related artery revascularization in ST-elevation myocardial infarction is unknown. METHODS: We analyzed the correlation and prognostic value of fractional flow reserve (FFR) and resting distal coronary to aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) in all patients of the Compare-Acute trial in whom, after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention, the noninfarct-related artery was interrogated by both and treated medically. The treating cardiologist was blinded to these values. The primary end point was the composite of target vessel (interrogated noninfarct-related artery) related nonfatal target vessel myocardial infarction and target vessel repeat revascularization at 36 months. RESULTS: Five hundred seventeen patients (665 vessels) were included. On receiver-operating characteristic analysis, the optimal Pd/Pa cut off for FFR≤0.80 was 0.905 (C statistic: 0.894). The diagnostic accuracy of Pd/Pa was 80.15% (95% CI, 76.91%-83.12%) with respect to FFR. During the 36-month follow-up, 130 target vessel revascularization and 14 target vessel myocardial infarction occurred. FFR and Pd/Pa had a diagnostic accuracy to predict these events of 62.86% (95% CI, 59.06%-66.54%) and 56.84% (95% CI, 52.98%-60.64%), respectively (P=0.20). When they were discrepant, FFR was significantly better than Pd/Pa in identifying which vessels could be safely deferred (P=0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Immediately after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention, resting Pd/Pa has a diagnostic accuracy of 80% with respect to FFR measured in the noninfarct-related artery. FFR is not significantly superior in predicting target vessel myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization during 36 months of follow-up but, in case FFR and Pd/Pa are discrepant, FFR is superior in identifying which nonculprit vessels can be safely deferred. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01399736

The Natural History of Nonculprit Lesions in STEMI: An FFR Substudy of the Compare-Acute Trial

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of fractional flow reserve (FFR) in non-infarct-related arteries (IRAs) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI). Background: Patients with ST-segment elevation MI often present with multivessel disease. The treatment of non-IRAs is debated. The applicability of FFR has not been widely proved. Methods: Outcomes were analyzed in all patients in the Compare-Acute (Comparison Between FFR Guided Revascularization Versus Conventional Strategy in Acute STEMI Patients With MVD) trial in whom, after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention, non-IRAs were interrogated using FFR and treated medically. The treating cardiologist was blinded to the FFR value. The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiovascular mortality, target vessel–related (non-IRA with FFR measurement at primary percutaneous coronary intervention) nonfatal MI, and target vessel revascularization: major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 24 months. Results: A total of 751 patients (963 vessels) were included. Target non-IRAs with MACE had lower FFR compared with those without (0.78 vs. 0.84, respectively; p < 0.001). The median FFR of non-IRAs with TVR was lower than that of those without (0.79 vs. 0.85, respectively; p < 0.001). The difference was significant in all vessels. The median FFR of target non-IRAs with MI was lower than that of those without (0.79 vs. 0.84, respectively; p = 0.016). The MACE rate was significantly (p < 0.001) higher in the lowest of FFR tertiles (<0.80) compared with the others (0.80 to 0.87 and ≥0.88). Conclusions: In patients with ST-segment elevation MI with multivessel disease, FFR measured in the medically treated non-IRA immediately after successful primary percutaneous coronary intervention shows a nonlinear and inverse risk continuum of MACE. Importantly, worsening prognosis is demonstrated around the cutoff of 0.80

Outcomes of a dedicated stent in coronary bifurcations with large side branches: A subanalysis of the randomized TRYTON bifurcation study

Objectives: To examine the benefit of the Tryton dedicated side branch (SB) stent compared with provisional stenting in the treatment of complex bifurcation lesions involving large SBs. Background: The TRYTON Trial was designed to evaluate the utility of a dedicated SB stent to treat true bifurcation lesions involving large ( 652.5 mm by visual estimation) SBs. Patient enrolled in the trial had smaller SB diameters than intended (59% SB 642.25 mm by Core Lab QCA). The TRYTON Trial did not meet its primary endpoint due to an increased rate of peri-procedural myocardial infarctions (MIs). Methods: The TRYTON Trial randomized 704 patients to the Tryton SB stent with main vessel DES versus provisional SB treatment with main vessel DES. The rates of the primary end point of target vessel failure and the secondary powered end point of angiographic percent diameter stenosis in the SB at 9 months were assessed and compared between the two treatment strategies among patients with a SB 652.25 mm diameter at baseline determined by Core Lab QCA. Results: Among the 704 patients enrolled in the TRYTON Trial, 289 patients (143 provisional and 146 Tryton stent; 41% of entire cohort) had a SB 652.25 mm. The primary end point of TVF was numerically lower in the Tryton group compared with the provisional group (11.3% vs. 15.6%, P = 0.38), and was within the non-inferiority margin. No difference among the rates of clinically driven target vessel revascularization (3.5% vs. 4.3% P = 0.77) or cardiac death (0% both groups) were seen. In-segment percent diameter stenosis of the SB was significantly lower in the Tryton group compared with the provisional group (30.4% vs. 40.6%, P = 0.004). Conclusions: Analysis of the TRYTON Trial cohort of SB 652.25 mm supports the safety and efficacy of the Tryton SB stent compared with a provisional stenting strategy in the treatment of bifurcation lesions involving large SBs

Comparative Methodological Assessment of the Randomized GLOBAL LEADERS Trial Using Total Ischemic and Bleeding Events

Background: Time-to-first-event analysis considers only the first event irrespective of its severity. There are several methods to assess trial outcomes beyond time-to-first-event analysis, such as analyzing total events and ranking outcomes. In the GLOBAL LEADERS study, time-to-first-event analysis did not show superiority of ticagrelor monotherapy following one-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention to conventional 12-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy in the reduction of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality or new Q-wave myocardial infarction. This study sought to explore various analytical approaches in assessing total ischemic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. Methods and Results: Total ischemic and bleeding events were defined as all-cause mortality, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, any revascularization, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium grade 2 or 3 bleeding. We used various analytical approaches to analyze the benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy over conventional DAPT. For ischemic and bleeding events at 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy demonstrated a 6% risk reduction, compared with conventional 12-month DAPT in time-to-first-event analysis (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88-1.01]; log-rank P=0.10). In win ratio analysis, win ratio was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.97-1.13; P=0.20). Negative binomial regression and Andersen-Gill analyses which include repeated events showed statistically significant advantage for ticagrelor monotherapy (rate ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99; P=0.020] and hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99; P=0.028], respectively), although in weighted composite end point analysis, the hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84-1.04; log-rank P=0.22). Conclusions: Statistical analyses considering repeated events or event severity showed that ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced ischemic and bleeding events by 5% to 8%, compared with conventional 1-year DAPT. Applying multiple statistical methods could emphasize the multiple facets of a trial and result in accurate and more appropriate analyses. Considering the recurrence of ischemic and bleeding events, ticagrelor monotherapy appeared to be beneficial after percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01813435

A Randomized Trial of a Dedicated Bifurcation Stent Versus Provisional Stenting in the Treatment of Coronary Bifurcation Lesions

BACKGROUND Bifurcation lesions are frequent among patients with symptomatic coronary disease treated by percutaneous coronary intervention. Current evidence recommends a conservative (provisional) approach when treating the side branch (SB). OBJECTIVES The TRYTON (Prospective, Single Blind, Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety & Effectiveness of the Tryton Side Branch Stent Used With DES in Treatment of de Novo Bifurcation Lesions in the Main Branch & Side Branch in Native Coronaries) bifurcation trial sought to compare treatment of de novo true bifurcation lesions using a dedicated bifurcation stent or SB balloon angioplasty. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with true bifurcation lesions to a main vessel stent plus provisional stenting or the bifurcation stent. The primary endpoint (powered for noninferiority) was target vessel failure (TVF) (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization). The secondary angiographic endpoint (powered for superiority) was in-segment percent diameter stenosis of the SB at 9 months. RESULTS We randomized 704 patients with bifurcation coronary lesions at 58 centers (30 from Europe and 28 from the United States). At 9 months, TVF was 17.4% in the bifurcation stent group compared with 12.8% in the provisional group (p = 0.11), mainly because of a higher periprocedural myocardial infarction rate (13.6% vs. 10.1%, p = 0.19). The TVF difference of +4.6% (2-sided 95% confidence interval: -1.0 to 10.3; upper limit of the 1-sided 95% confidence interval: 10.3) was not within the pre-specified noninferiority margin of 5.5% (p = 0.42 for noninferiority). The SB in-segment diameter stenosis among the angiographic cohort was lower in the bifurcation stent group compared with the provisional group (31.6% vs. 38.6%, p = 0.002 for superiority), with no difference in binary restenosis rates (diameter stenosis >= 50%) at 9 months follow-up (22.6% vs. 26.8%, p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS Provisional stenting should remain the preferred strategy for treatment of non-left main true coronary bifurcation lesions. (Prospective, Single Blind, Randomized Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety & Effectiveness of the Tryton Side Branch Stent Used With DES in Treatment of de Novo Bifurcation Lesions in the Main Branch & Side Branch in Native Coronaries [TRYTON]; NCT01258972) (C) 2015 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Comparative Methodological Assessment of the Randomized GLOBAL LEADERS Trial Using Total Ischemic and Bleeding Events

BACKGROUND Time-to-first-event analysis considers only the first event irrespective of its severity. There are several methods to assess trial outcomes beyond time-to-first-event analysis, such as analyzing total events and ranking outcomes. In the GLOBAL LEADERS study, time-to-first-event analysis did not show superiority of ticagrelor monotherapy following one-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after percutaneous coronary intervention to conventional 12-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy in the reduction of the primary composite end point of all-cause mortality or new Q-wave myocardial infarction. This study sought to explore various analytical approaches in assessing total ischemic and bleeding events after percutaneous coronary intervention in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. METHODS AND RESULTS Total ischemic and bleeding events were defined as all-cause mortality, any stroke, any myocardial infarction, any revascularization, or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium grade 2 or 3 bleeding. We used various analytical approaches to analyze the benefit of ticagrelor monotherapy over conventional DAPT. For ischemic and bleeding events at 2 years after percutaneous coronary intervention, ticagrelor monotherapy demonstrated a 6% risk reduction, compared with conventional 12-month DAPT in time-to-first-event analysis (hazard ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.88-1.01]; log-rank P=0.10). In win ratio analysis, win ratio was 1.05 (95% CI, 0.97-1.13; P=0.20). Negative binomial regression and Andersen-Gill analyses which include repeated events showed statistically significant advantage for ticagrelor monotherapy (rate ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99; P=0.020] and hazard ratio, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-0.99; P=0.028], respectively), although in weighted composite end point analysis, the hazard ratio was 0.93 (95% CI, 0.84-1.04; log-rank P=0.22). CONCLUSIONS Statistical analyses considering repeated events or event severity showed that ticagrelor monotherapy consistently reduced ischemic and bleeding events by 5% to 8%, compared with conventional 1-year DAPT. Applying multiple statistical methods could emphasize the multiple facets of a trial and result in accurate and more appropriate analyses. Considering the recurrence of ischemic and bleeding events, ticagrelor monotherapy appeared to be beneficial after percutaneous coronary intervention. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01813435