Bifurcation treatment with novel, highly flexible drug-eluting coronary stents in all-comers: 2-year outcome in patients of the DUTCH PEERS trial

Background: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in bifurcated lesions with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) was associated with increased myocardial infarction (MI) rates. Flexible stent designs that accommodate well to vessel tapering may be of benefit in challenging anatomies such as bifurcated target lesions, but so far data are scarce.Methods: We analyzed the 2-year follow-up data of the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) trial, which randomized 1811 all-comer patients to PCI with newer generation resolute integrity zotarolimus-eluting (Medtronic) or promus element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific). In bifurcated lesions, provisional stenting was generally performed. Target vessel failure is a composite endpoint, consisting of cardiac death, target vessel MI, or target vessel revascularization.Results: Patients with at least one bifurcated lesion (n = 465, 25.7 %) versus patients with non-bifurcated target lesions only (n = 1346, 74.3 %) showed similar rates of clinical endpoints including target vessel failure (9.2 versus 7.9 %, p = 0.36) and definite stent thrombosis (0.4 versus 1.0 %, p = 0.38). Target vessel MI was more common in patients with bifurcated lesions (3.4 versus 1.6 %, p = 0.02); but after multivariate analysis with propensity score adjustment, bifurcation treatment was found not to be an independent predictor of target vessel MI (HR 1.40, 95 % CI 0.71–2.76; p = 0.34). Among patients with bifurcated lesions, DES type and side-branch size did not affect outcome, but periprocedural MI occurred more often after two-stent approaches (9.0 versus 2.1 %; p = 0.002).Conclusion: All-comer patients treated for bifurcated and non-bifurcated target lesions showed similar and low rates of clinical endpoints, suggesting that the DES used are efficacious and safe for treating bifurcated target lesions

Cost Effectiveness of a CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided Strategy in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction:Results from the POPular Genetics Trial

INTRODUCTION: The POPular Genetics trial demonstrated that a CYP2C19 genotype-guided P2Y12 inhibitor strategy reduced bleeding rates compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel without increasing thrombotic event rates after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). OBJECTIVE: In this analysis, we aimed to evaluate the cost effectiveness of a genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel. METHODS: A 1-year decision tree based on the POPular Genetics trial in combination with a lifelong Markov model was developed to compare costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) between a genotype-guided and a standard P2Y12 inhibitor strategy in patients with myocardial infarction undergoing primary PCI. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a Dutch healthcare system perspective. Within-trial survival and utility data were combined with lifetime projections to evaluate lifetime cost effectiveness for a cohort of 1000 patients. Costs and utilities were discounted at 4 and 1.5%, respectively, according to Dutch guidelines for health economic studies. Besides deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, several scenario analyses were also conducted (different time horizons, different discount rates, equal prices for P2Y12 inhibitors, and equal distribution of thrombotic events between the two strategies). RESULTS: Base-case analysis with a hypothetical cohort of 1000 subjects demonstrated 8.98 QALYs gained and €725,550.69 in cost savings for the genotype-guided strategy (dominant). The deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis confirmed the robustness of the model and the cost-effectiveness results. In scenario analyses, the genotype-guided strategy remained dominant. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing primary PCI, a CYP2C19 genotype-guided strategy compared with standard treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel resulted in QALYs gained and cost savings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT01761786, Netherlands trial register number: NL2872

TCT-588 2-Year Clinical Outcome of the Randomized, Multicenter DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) Trial, Comparing Cobalt-Chromium Zotarolimus-Eluting Resolute Integrity Stents and Platinum-Chromium Everolimus-Eluting Promus Element Stents in “All-Comer” Patients

Background: The multicenter, prospective, randomized, single-blinded, investigator-initiated DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) “All Comers” Trial demonstrated at 1-year follow-up the non-inferiority of third-generation Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stents (Medtronic Vascular, Santa Rosa, CA) versus Promus Element everolimus-eluting stents (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA), based on a similar incidence of the primary endpoint target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel revascularization (TVR), or myocardial infarction (MI). No other follow-up data beyond 12 months have been published from a randomized head-to-head comparison of both stents. Methods: In 4 study centers in the Netherlands, 1,811 patients were 1:1 randomly assigned to treatment with one of both stents. Patients with any clinical syndrome, any lesion type, and any number of lesions or vessels to be treated were included. Study monitoring and clinical event adjudication were performed by two independent Dutch contract research organizations (Diagram, Zwolle, and Cardialysis, Rotterdam, respectively). Results: DUTCH PEERS examines an all-comer patient population that included 59% of patients with acute coronary syndromes (20% of all patients presented with an acute STEMI) and 66% of patients with complex target lesions. We will compare for both stent groups the 2-year incidence of TVF (primary endpoint) and various secondary endpoints, including individual components of the primary endpoint, the incidence of stent thrombosis, and other composite endpoints, such as target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac events, and the patient-oriented composite endpoint. In addition, we will report the outcome of patients with longitudinal stent deformation after discontinuation of dual anti-platelet therapy. Conclusions: Clinical outcome of the DUTCH PEERS trial at 2-year follow-up will be presented

Final 5-Year Report of the Randomized BIO-RESORT Trial Comparing 3 Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents in All-Comers

BACKGROUND: In a previous trial, higher 5‐year mortality was observed following treatment with biodegradable polymer Orsiro sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES). We assessed 5‐year safety and efficacy of all‐comers as well as patients with diabetes treated with SES or Synergy everolimus‐eluting stents (EES) versus durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus‐eluting stents (ZES). METHODS AND RESULTS: The randomized BIO‐RESORT (Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug‐Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population) trial enrolled 3514 all‐comer patients at 4 Dutch cardiac centers. Patients aged ≥18 years who required percutaneous coronary intervention were eligible. Participants were stratified for diabetes and randomized to treatment with SES, EES, or ZES (1:1:1). The main end point was target vessel failure (cardiac mortality, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization). Five‐year follow‐up was available in 3183 of 3514 (90.6%) patients. The main end point target vessel failure occurred in 142 of 1169 (12.7%) patients treated with SES, 130 of 1172 (11.6%) treated with EES, versus 157 of 1173 (14.1%) treated with ZES (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71–1.12], P (log‐rank)=0.31; and HR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.65–1.04], P (log‐rank)=0.10, respectively). Individual components of target vessel failure showed no significant between‐stent difference. Very late definite stent thrombosis rates were low and similar (SES, 1.1%; EES, 0.6%; ZES, 0.9%). In patients with diabetes, target vessel failure did not differ significantly between stent‐groups (SES, 19.8%; EES, 19.2%; versus ZES, 21.1% [P (log‐rank)=0.69 and P (log‐rank)=0.63]). CONCLUSIONS: Orsiro SES, Synergy EES, and Resolute Integrity ZES showed similar 5‐year outcomes of safety and efficacy, including mortality. A prespecified stent comparison in patients with diabetes also revealed no significant differences in 5‐year clinical outcomes. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01674803

Rationale and Design of the Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) Registry: Towards "Personalized Medicine" in Daily Clinical Practice

Diagnostic and treatment strategies for acute coronary syndrome have improved dramatically over the past few decades, but mortality and recurrent myocardial infarction rates remain high. An aging population with increasing co-morbidities heralds new clinical challenges. Therefore, in order to evaluate and improve current treatment strategies, detailed information on clinical presentation, treatment and follow-up in real-world patients is needed. The Future Optimal Research and Care Evaluation in patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome (FORCE-ACS) registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03823547) is a multi-center, prospective real-world registry of patients admitted with (suspected) acute coronary syndrome. Both non-interventional and interventional cardiac centers in different regions of the Netherlands are currently participating. Patients are treated according to local protocols, enabling the evaluation of different diagnostic and treatment strategies used in daily practice. Data collection is performed using electronic medical records and quality-of-life questionnaires, which are sent 1, 12, 24 and 36 months after initial admission. Major end points are all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, revascularization and all bleeding requiring medical attention. Invasive therapy, antithrombotic therapy including patient-tailored strategies, such as the use of risk scores, pharmacogenetic guided antiplatelet therapy and patient reported outcome measures are monitored. The FORCE-ACS registry provides insight into numerous aspects of the (quality of) care for acute coronary syndrome patients

Sex differences in characteristics and outcome in acute coronary syndrome patients in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) have been reported, but little is known about the situation in the Netherlands. METHODS: This registry is a merge of available data on ACS patients in the electronic data capture systems of 11 centres with 24/7 interventional cardiology services. We included patients >18 years undergoing a cardiac catheterisation between 2010-2012. We evaluated sex differences in clinical and procedural characteristics and 1‑year mortality. RESULTS: A total of 29,265 ACS patients (8,720 women and 20,545 men) were registered. Women were on average 4.5 years older (68.5 vs 63.0 years, p < 0.001) and had a higher prevalence of hypertension (62.7 vs 49.8%, p < 0.001) and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (9.6 vs 6.8%, p < 0.001) than men. Women less often presented with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (43.7% vs 47.6%, p < 0.001) and appeared to have less extensive coronary artery disease than men. Women less often underwent coronary angiography by radial access (52.5 vs 55.9%, p < 0.001). One-year mortality was higher in women than in men (7.3% and 5.6%, p < 0.001). More specific, the relationship between sex and mortality was age-dependent and showed higher mortality in women ≤71 years, but lower mortality in older women compared with men (p-interaction <0.001). CONCLUSION: We found differences in clinical and procedural characteristics and outcome between women and men admitted for ACS, which are in line with other Western countries. The limitations of our registry, based on existing local databases, can be overcome by the use of the prospective Netherlands Heart Registry that is currently in development

Resultados de los stents Resolute Integrity y Promus Element en el infarto de miocardio: análisis del ensayo aleatorizado DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II)

Introduction and objectives In acute myocardial infarction (MI), novel highly deliverable drug-eluting stents (DES) may be particularly valuable as their flexible stent designs might reduce device-induced traumas to culprit lesions. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions with 2 novel durable polymer-coated DES in patients with acute MI. Methods The prospective, randomized DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) multicenter trial compares Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents in 1811 all-comer patients, of whom 817 (45.1%) were treated for ST-segment elevation MI or non—ST-segment elevation MI and the 2-year outcome is available in 99.9%. The primary clinical endpoint is target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel related MI, or target vessel revascularization. Results Of all 817 patients treated for acute MI, 421 (51.5%) were treated with Resolute Integrity and 396 (48.5%) with Promus Element stents. At the 2-year follow-up, the rates of TVF (7.4% vs 6.1%; P =.45), target lesion revascularization (3.1% vs 2.8%; P =.79), and definite stent thrombosis (1.0% vs 0.5%; P =.69) were low for both stent groups. Consistent with these findings in all patients with acute MI, outcomes for the 2 DES were favorable and similar in both, with 370 patients with ST-segment elevation MI (TVF: 5.1% vs 4.9%; P =.81) and 447 patients with non—ST-segment elevation MI (TVF: 9.0% vs 7.5%; P =.56). Conclusions Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents were both safe and efficacious in treating patients with acute MI. The present 2-year follow-up data underline the safety of using these devices in this particular clinical setting. Full English text available from: www.revespcardiol.org/e

Outcome After Myocardial Infarction Treated With Resolute Integrity and Promus Element Stents: Insights From the DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) Randomized Trial

Introduction and objectives: In acute myocardial infarction (MI), novel highly deliverable drug-eluting stents (DES) may be particularly valuable as their flexible stent designs might reduce device-induced traumas to culprit lesions. The aim of the study was to assess the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary interventions with 2 novel durable polymer-coated DES in patients with acute MI. Methods: The prospective, randomized DUTCH PEERS (TWENTE II) multicenter trial compares Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents in 1811 all-comer patients, of whom 817 (45.1%) were treated for ST-segment elevation MI or non—ST-segment elevation MI and the 2-year outcome is available in 99.9%. The primary clinical endpoint is target vessel failure (TVF), a composite of cardiac death, target vessel related MI, or target vessel revascularization. Results: Of all 817 patients treated for acute MI, 421 (51.5%) were treated with Resolute Integrity and 396 (48.5%) with Promus Element stents. At the 2-year follow-up, the rates of TVF (7.4% vs 6.1%; P = .45), target lesion revascularization (3.1% vs 2.8%; P = .79), and definite stent thrombosis (1.0% vs 0.5%; P = .69) were low for both stent groups. Consistent with these findings in all patients with acute MI, outcomes for the 2 DES were favorable and similar in both, with 370 patients with ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 5.1% vs 4.9%; P = .81) and 447 patients with non—ST-segment elevation MI (TVF, 9.0% vs 7.5%; P = .56). Conclusions: Resolute Integrity and Promus Element stents were both safe and efficacious in treating patients with acute MI. The present 2-year follow-up data underline the safety of using these devices in this particular clinical setting