Coronary Endothelium‐Dependent Vasomotor Function After Drug‐Eluting Stent and Bioresorbable Scaffold Implantation

Infarto de miocardio; Disfunción endotelial; Tomografía de coherencia ópticaMyocardial infarction; Endothelial dysfunction; Optical coherence tomographyInfart de miocardi; Disfunció endotelial; Tomografia de coherència òpticaBackground Early generation drug‐eluting stents (DESs) showed a high grade of coronary endothelial dysfunction that was attributed to lack of stent reendothelialization. Endothelium‐dependent vasomotor response of current DESs and bioresorbable scaffolds (BRSs) remains unknown. This study sought to assess the device‐related endothelial function of current devices and to correlate neointima healing with endothelial function. Methods and Results A total of 206 patients from 4 randomized trials treated with the durable‐polymer everolimus‐eluting Xience (n=44), bioresorbable‐polymer sirolimus‐eluting Orsiro (n=35), polymer‐free biolimus‐eluting Biofreedom (n=24), bioactive endothelial‐progenitor cell‐capturing sirolimus‐eluting Combo DES (n=25), polymer‐based everolimus‐eluting Absorb (n=44), and Mg‐based sirolimus‐eluting Magmaris BRS (n=34) underwent endothelium‐dependent vasomotor tests and optical coherence tomography imaging, as per protocol, at follow‐up. Crude vasomotor responses of distal segments to low‐dose acetylcholine (10−6 mol/L) were different between groups: bioresorbablepolymer DEShad the worst (−8.4%±12.6%) and durable‐polymer DES had the most physiologic (−0.4%±11.8%; P=0.014). High‐dose acetylcholine (10−4 mol/L) showed similar responses between groups (ranging from −10.8%±11.6% to −18.1%±15.4%; P=0.229). Device healing was different between devices. Uncovered struts ranged from 6.3%±7.1% (bioresorbable‐polymer DES) to 2.5%±4.5% (bioactive DES; P=0.056). In multivariate models, endothelium‐dependent vasomotor response was associated with age, bioresorbable‐polymer DES, and angiographic lumen loss, but not with strut coverage nor plaque type. Endothelial dysfunction (defined as ≥4% vasoconstriction) was observed in 46.6% of patients with low‐dose and 68.9% with high‐dose acetylcholine, without differences between groups. Conclusions At follow‐up, endothelial dysfunction was frequently observed in distal segments treated with current stents without remarkable differences between devices. Although neointima healing was different between devices, poor healing was not associated with endothelial dysfunction.The source funding of the 4 randomized trials included in this study is the following. The BVS‐FLOW trial (Coronary vasomotor function and myocardial flow with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds or everolimus‐eluting metallic stents: a randomised trial) was funded by a grant of “La Marato” Foundation. The Spanish Heart Foundation funded the RE‐TROFI2 (Long‐Term Coronary Functional Assessment of the Infarct‐Related Artery Treated With Everolimus‐Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds or Everolimus‐Eluting Metallic Stents: Insights of the TROFI II Trial) and MAGSTEMI (Magnesium‐Based Resorbable Scaffold Versus Permanent Metallic Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent in Patients With ST‐Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trials. The FUNCOMBO (Coronary endothelial and microvascular function distal to polymer‐free and endothelial cell‐capturing drug‐eluting stents) trial was funded by OrbusNeich and was promoted by the Spanish Heart Foundation

072 Five-year outcome of patients with bifurcation lesions treated with provisional side branch T-stenting using drug-eluting stents

BackgroundCoronary bifurcation lesions remain a challenge, as lower success rates and higher reintervention rates persist in this lesion subset. The ideal strategy to treat such lesions is still debated and data regarding long-term efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents in this setting are sparse.ObjectivesWe sought to determine the long-term efficacy and safety of a provisional side branch T-stenting (PTS) strategy for bifurcation lesions in an unselected population.Methods477 consecutive Pts were treated for bifurcation lesions with DES (Paclitaxel or Sirolimus-eluting stents) between 2003 and 2005. Data were entered prospectively into a single-center registry. The PTS strategy was employed in 92%, with a side-branch stent in 28% and final kissing balloon inflation in 95%. Five-year follow-up, at a median of 61 months, is available for 93.5% of patients.ResultsAngiographic success was achieved in 99%, with 2.5% in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE, defined as any cardiac death, early reintervention, Q – or non-Q-wave MI or target vessel revascularisation). The cumulative rate of MACE was 10.7% at 1 year, 13.6% at 2 years and 19.7% at 5 years, including target vessel revascularisation rates of 6.9%, 8.9% and 13%, and cardiac death rates of 3%, 3.7% and 6.7%, respectively. Ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation at 5 years is 7.3%. The cumulative rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis at long-term is 3.1%, most cases occurring within the first year (2.5%). The need for reintervention in the long-term was not predicted by any procedural variable, and not significantly related to the use of 1 or 2 stents or to the type of stent deployed.ConclusionsA PTS strategy with first generation drug-eluting stents, was applicable to over 90% of real-world patients with bifurcation lesions with a target lesion revascularisation < 10% at 5 years. The rate of very-late stent thrombosis in this complex lesion subset remains low

High rate of uncovered struts in latest generation drug-eluting stents with durable, biodegradable polymer or lack of it 1 month after implantation

Introduction and objectives: Delayed vascular healing may induce late stent thrombosis. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) is useful to evaluate endothelial coverage. The objective of this study was to compare stent coverage and apposition in non-complex coronary artery lesions treated with durable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents (durable-polymer EES) vs biodegradable polymer-coated everolimus-eluting stents ( biodegradable-polymer EES) vs polymer-free biolimus-eluting stents (BES) 1 and 6 months after stent implantation. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, non-randomized study that compared the 3 types of DES. Follow-up angiography and OCT were performed 1 and 6 months later. The primary endpoint was the rate of uncovered struts as assessed by the OCT at 1 month. Results: A total of 104 patients with de novo non-complex coronary artery lesions were enrolled. A total of 44 patients were treated with polymer-free BES, 35 with biodegradable-polymer EES, and 25 with durable-polymer EES. A high rate of uncovered struts was found at 1 month with no significant differences reported among the stents (80.2%, polymer-free BES; 88.1%, biodegradable-polymer EES; 82.5%, durable-polymer EES; P =.209). Coverage improved after 6 months in the 3 groups without significant differences being reported (97%, 95%, and 93.7%, respectively; P =.172). Conclusions: In patients with de novo non-complex coronary artery lesions treated with durable vs biodegradable vs polymer-free DES, strut coverage and apposition were suboptimal at 1 month with significant improvement at 6 months

Amphilimus- vs. zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the SUGAR trial

Aim: Patients with diabetes mellitus are at high risk of adverse events after percutaneous revascularization, with no differences in outcomes between most contemporary drug-eluting stents. The Cre8 EVO stent releases a formulation of sirolimus with an amphiphilic carrier from laser-dug wells, and has shown clinical benefits in diabetes. We aimed to compare Cre8 EVO stents to Resolute Onyx stents (a contemporary polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent) in patients with diabetes. Methods and results: We did an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial at 23 sites in Spain. Eligible patients had diabetes and required percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 1175 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Cre8 EVO or Resolute Onyx stents. The primary endpoint was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. The trial had a non-inferiority design with a 4% margin for the primary endpoint. A superiority analysis was planned if non-inferiority was confirmed. There were 106 primary events, 42 (7.2%) in the Cre8 EVO group and 64 (10.9%) in the Resolute Onyx group [hazard ratio (HR) 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.96; pnon-inferiority <0.001; psuperiority = 0.030]. Among the secondary endpoints, Cre8 EVO stents had significantly lower rate than Resolute Onyx stents of target-vessel failure (7.5% vs 11.1%, HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.99; p = 0.042). Probable or definite stent thrombosis and all-cause death were not significantly different between groups. Conclusions: In patients with diabetes, Cre8 EVO stents were non-inferior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to target-lesion failure composite outcome. An exploratory analysis for superiority at 1 year suggests that the Cre8 EVO stents might be superior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to the same outcome

Amphilimus- vs. zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the SUGAR trial.

AIM: Patients with diabetes mellitus are at high risk of adverse events after percutaneous revascularization, with no differences in outcomes between most contemporary drug-eluting stents. The Cre8 EVO stent releases a formulation of sirolimus with an amphiphilic carrier from laser-dug wells, and has shown clinical benefits in diabetes. We aimed to compare Cre8 EVO stents to Resolute Onyx stents (a contemporary polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent) in patients with diabetes. METHODS AND RESULTS: We did an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial at 23 sites in Spain. Eligible patients had diabetes and required percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 1175 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Cre8 EVO or Resolute Onyx stents. The primary endpoint was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. The trial had a non-inferiority design with a 4% margin for the primary endpoint. A superiority analysis was planned if non-inferiority was confirmed. There were 106 primary events, 42 (7.2%) in the Cre8 EVO group and 64 (10.9%) in the Resolute Onyx group [hazard ratio (HR): 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.96; Pnon-inferiority < 0.001; Psuperiority = 0.030]. Among the secondary endpoints, Cre8 EVO stents had significantly lower rate than Resolute Onyx stents of target-vessel failure (7.5% vs. 11.1%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.042). Probable or definite stent thrombosis and all-cause death were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: In patients with diabetes, Cre8 EVO stents were non-inferior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to target-lesion failure composite outcome. An exploratory analysis for superiority at 1 year suggests that the Cre8 EVO stents might be superior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to the same outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03321032

Amphilimus- vs. zotarolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease: the SUGAR trial

Aim: patients with diabetes mellitus are at high risk of adverse events after percutaneous revascularization, with no differences in outcomes between most contemporary drug-eluting stents. The Cre8 EVO stent releases a formulation of sirolimus with an amphiphilic carrier from laser-dug wells, and has shown clinical benefits in diabetes. We aimed to compare Cre8 EVO stents to Resolute Onyx stents (a contemporary polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stent) in patients with diabetes. Methods and results: we did an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded trial at 23 sites in Spain. Eligible patients had diabetes and required percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 1175 patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive Cre8 EVO or Resolute Onyx stents. The primary endpoint was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. The trial had a non-inferiority design with a 4% margin for the primary endpoint. A superiority analysis was planned if non-inferiority was confirmed. There were 106 primary events, 42 (7.2%) in the Cre8 EVO group and 64 (10.9%) in the Resolute Onyx group [hazard ratio (HR): 0.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.44-0.96; Pnon-inferiority < 0.001; Psuperiority = 0.030]. Among the secondary endpoints, Cre8 EVO stents had significantly lower rate than Resolute Onyx stents of target-vessel failure (7.5% vs. 11.1%, HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.46-0.99; P = 0.042). Probable or definite stent thrombosis and all-cause death were not significantly different between groups. Conclusion: in patients with diabetes, Cre8 EVO stents were non-inferior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to target-lesion failure composite outcome. An exploratory analysis for superiority at 1 year suggests that the Cre8 EVO stents might be superior to Resolute Onyx stents with regard to the same outcome

Coronary Endothelium‐Dependent Vasomotor Function After Drug‐Eluting Stent and Bioresorbable Scaffold Implantation

Background Early generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) showed a high grade of coronary endothelial dysfunction that was attributed to lack of stent reendothelialization. Endothelium-dependent vasomotor response of current DESs and bioresorbable scaffolds (BRSs) remains unknown. This study sought to assess the device-related endothelial function of current devices and to correlate neointima healing with endothelial function. Methods and Results A total of 206 patients from 4 randomized trials treated with the durable-polymer everolimus-eluting Xience (n=44), bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting Orsiro (n=35), polymer-free biolimus-eluting Biofreedom (n=24), bioactive endothelial-progenitor cell-capturing sirolimus-eluting Combo DES (n=25), polymer-based everolimus-eluting Absorb (n=44), and Mg-based sirolimus-eluting Magmaris BRS (n=34) underwent endothelium-dependent vasomotor tests and optical coherence tomography imaging, as per protocol, at follow-up. Crude vasomotor responses of distal segments to low-dose acetylcholine (10-6 mol/L) were different between groups: bioresorbablepolymer DEShad the worst (-8.4%±12.6%) and durable-polymer DES had the most physiologic (-0.4%±11.8%; P=0.014). High-dose acetylcholine (10-4 mol/L) showed similar responses between groups (ranging from -10.8%±11.6% to -18.1%±15.4%; P=0.229). Device healing was different between devices. Uncovered struts ranged from 6.3%±7.1% (bioresorbable-polymer DES) to 2.5%±4.5% (bioactive DES; P=0.056). In multivariate models, endothelium-dependent vasomotor response was associated with age, bioresorbable-polymer DES, and angiographic lumen loss, but not with strut coverage nor plaque type. Endothelial dysfunction (defined as ≥4% vasoconstriction) was observed in 46.6% of patients with low-dose and 68.9% with high-dose acetylcholine, without differences between groups. Conclusions At follow-up, endothelial dysfunction was frequently observed in distal segments treated with current stents without remarkable differences between devices. Although neointima healing was different between devices, poor healing was not associated with endothelial dysfunction