A prospective trial of a novel low-dose paclitaxel-coated balloon therapy in patients with restenosis in drug-eluting coronary stents Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Optimizing Treatment of Drug Eluting Stent In-stent REstenosis 3A (ISAR-DESIRE 3A)

Objectives: We investigated the clinical efficacy of a paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) with a novel matrix coating and reduced drug concentration in comparison with a widely used PCB with iopromide excipient. Methods: We prospectively enrolled patients with restenosis in drug-eluting stents. All patients were treated with a novel low-dose PCB with citrate-based excipient (Agent PCB). Angiographic follow-up was scheduled at 6-8 months. Outcomes were compared against those of patients treated with iopromide excipient PCB (SeQuent Please PCB) enrolled in a trial with identical inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary endpoint was percent diameter stenosis (%DS) at follow-up angiography. The primary hypothesis was that the investigational device would be non-inferior to the control device (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02367495). Results: One hundred twenty-five patients with 151 lesions were enrolled. Mean age was 68.1 ± 10.2 years, 40.8% had diabetes mellitus and 80.1% had focal morphology in-stent restenosis. Follow-up angiography data at 6-8 months was available for 102 (81.6%) patients. The Agent PCB was non-inferior to the SeQuent Please PCB in terms of the primary endpoint (38.9 ± 17.5 vs. 38.1 ± 21.5%; p non-inferiority = 0.0056). Late lumen loss was also comparable between the groups (0.35 ± 0.55 vs. 0.37 ± 0.59; p = 0.71). There was no difference between the groups in the incidence of TLR (27.7% vs. 22.1%; p = 0.31), death or myocardial infarction (4.2% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.92) or target lesion thrombosis (1.0% vs. 0.7%; p = 0.93). Conclusion: In patients with DES restenosis, angioplasty with a novel PCB with citrate-based excipient was non-inferior to PCB with iopromide excipient in terms of angiographic outcome.</p

10-Year outcomes from a randomized trial of polymer-free versus durable polymer drug-eluting coronary stents

Background: Outcome data after extended long-term follow-up of patients with coronary artery disease treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) in randomized clinical trials are scant.Objectives: Performance differences among devices may be expected to emerge over time depending on whether stenting is done with polymer-free or durable polymer DES. This study assessed the 10-year outcomes of patients enrolled in the ISAR-TEST-5 (Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents) trial.Methods: A total of 3,002 patients were randomized to treatment with either polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents (n = 2,002) or durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (n = 1,000). The primary endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (a device-oriented composite endpoint [DOCE]). Additional endpoints of interest were the patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), including all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, or any revascularization; individual components of the composite endpoints; and definite or probable stent thrombosis.Results: The median age of the patients at randomization was 67.8 years. At 10 years, 63.9% of patients were alive. The rates of DOCE and POCE were high in both groups with no difference in the incidence between polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents and durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DOCE: 43.8% vs. 43.0%, respectively; hazard ratio: 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.89 to 1.14; p = 0.90; POCE: 66.2% vs. 67.7%, respectively; hazard ratio: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.04; p = 0.22). The rates of the individual components of the composite endpoints were comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis over 10 years was low and comparable in both groups (1.6% vs. 1.9%; hazard ratio: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.46 to 1.54; p = 0.58).Conclusions: At 10 years, there were no measurable differences in outcomes between patients treated with polymer-free versus durable polymer DES. The incidence of stent thrombosis was low and comparable in both groups. High overall adverse clinical event rates were observed during extended follow-up. (Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents [ISAR-TEST-5]; NCT00598533).</p

Stent optimization using optical coherence tomography and its prognostic implications after percutaneous coronary intervention

Background Stent underexpansion has been known to be associated with worse outcomes. We sought to define optical coherence tomography assessed optimal stent expansion index (SEI), which associates with lower incidence of follow‐up major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). Methods and Results A total of 315 patients (involving 370 lesions) who underwent optical coherence tomography–aided coronary stenting were retrospectively included. SEI was calculated separately for equal halves of each stented segment using minimum stent area/mean reference lumen area ([proximal reference area+distal reference area]/2). The smaller of the 2 was considered to be the SEI of that case. Follow‐up MACE was defined as a composite of all‐cause death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target lesion revascularization. Average minimum stent area was 6.02 (interquartile range, 4.65–7.92) mm2, while SEI was 0.79 (interquartile range, 0.71–0.86). Forty‐seven (12.7%) incidences of MACE were recorded for 370 included lesions during a median follow‐up duration of 557 (interquartile range, 323–1103) days. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified 0.85 as the best SEI cutoff (P=0.02). Least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression identified SEI PP=0.05) as independent predictors of follow‐up MACE. Conclusions The present study identified SEI <0.85, associated with increased incidence of MACE, as the optimal cutoff in daily practice. Along with suboptimal SEI (<0.85), coronary calcification was also found to be a significant predictor of follow‐up MACE.</p