Randomized comparison of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary revascularization: Rationale and design of the BIOSCIENCE trial

Background Biodegradable polymers for release of antiproliferative drugs from metallic drug-eluting stents (DES) aim to improve long-term vascular healing and efficacy. We designed a large scale clinical trial to compare a novel thin strut, cobalt chromium DES with silicon carbide coating releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer (Orsiro, O-SES) with the durable polymer-based Xience Prime everolimus-eluting stent (X-EES) in an all-comers patient population. Design The multicenter BIOSCIENCE trial (NCT01443104) randomly assigned 2,119 patients to treatment with biodegradable polymer SES or durable polymer EES at 9 sites in Switzerland. Patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, including non-ST-elevation and ST-elevation myocardial infarction, were eligible for the trial if they had at least one lesion with a diameter stenosis >50% appropriate for coronary stent implantation. The primary endpoint target lesion failure (TLF) is a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-driven target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Assuming a TLF rate of 8% at 12 months in both treatment arms and accepting 3.5% as a margin for non-inferiority, inclusion of 2,060 patients would provide 80% power to detect non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer SES compared with the durable polymer EES at a one-sided type I error of 0.05. Clinical follow-up will be continued through five years. Conclusion The BIOSCIENCE trial will determine whether the biodegradable polymer SES is non-inferior to the durable polymer EES with respect to TLF.

Optimal Workflow and Process-Based Performance Measures for Endovascular Therapy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: Analysis of the Solitaire FR Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization Study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE We report on workflow and process-based performance measures and their effect on clinical outcome in Solitaire FR Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization (STAR), a multicenter, prospective, single-arm study of Solitaire FR thrombectomy in large vessel anterior circulation stroke patients. METHODS Two hundred two patients were enrolled across 14 centers in Europe, Canada, and Australia. The following time intervals were measured: stroke onset to hospital arrival, hospital arrival to baseline imaging, baseline imaging to groin puncture, groin puncture to first stent deployment, and first stent deployment to reperfusion. Effects of time of day, general anesthesia use, and multimodal imaging on workflow were evaluated. Patient characteristics and workflow processes associated with prolonged interval times and good clinical outcome (90-day modified Rankin score, 0-2) were analyzed. RESULTS Median times were onset of stroke to hospital arrival, 123 minutes (interquartile range, 163 minutes); hospital arrival to thrombolysis in cerebral infarction (TICI) 2b/3 or final digital subtraction angiography, 133 minutes (interquartile range, 99 minutes); and baseline imaging to groin puncture, 86 minutes (interquartile range, 24 minutes). Time from baseline imaging to puncture was prolonged in patients receiving intravenous tissue-type plasminogen activator (32-minute mean delay) and when magnetic resonance-based imaging at baseline was used (18-minute mean delay). Extracranial carotid disease delayed puncture to first stent deployment time on average by 25 minutes. For each 1-hour increase in stroke onset to final digital subtraction angiography (or TICI 2b/3) time, odds of good clinical outcome decreased by 38%. CONCLUSIONS Interval times in the STAR study reflect current intra-arterial therapy for patients with acute ischemic stroke. Improving workflow metrics can further improve clinical outcome. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01327989.

Incomplete Distal Renal Tubular Acidosis from a Heterozygous Mutation of the V-ATPase B1 Subunit

Congenital distal renal tubular acidosis (dRTA) from mutations of the B1 subunit of the V-ATPase is considered an autosomal recessive disease. We analyzed a dRTA kindred with a truncation-mutation of B1 (p.Phe468fsX487) previously shown to have failure of assembly into the V1 domain of the V-ATPase. All heterozygous carriers in this kindred have normal plasma bicarbonate concentrations, thus evaded the diagnosis of RTA. However, inappropriately high urine pH, hypocitraturia, and hypercalciuria are present either individually or in combination in the heterozygotes at baseline. Two of the heterozygotes studied also have inappropriate urinary acidification with acute ammonium chloride loading and impaired urine-blood pCO2 gradient during bicarbonaturia indicating presence of H+ gradient and flux defects. In normal human renal papillae, wild type B1 is located primarily on the plasma membrane but papilla from one of the heterozygote who had kidney stones had renal tissue secured from surgery showed B1 in both plasma membrane as well as a diffuse intracellular staining. Titrating increasing amounts of the mutant B1 subunit did not exhibit negative dominance over the expression, cellular distribution, or H+-pump activity of the wild type B1 in mammalian HEK293 cells and in V-ATPase-deficient S. cerevisiae. This is the first demonstration of renal acidification defects and nephrolithiasis in heterozygous carriers of mutant B1 subunit; which cannot be attributable to negative dominance. We propose that heterozygosity may lead to mild real acidification defects due to haploinsufficiency. B1 heterozygosity should be considered in patients with calcium nephrolithiasis and urinary abnormalities such as alkalinuria or hypocitraturia.

Coronary revascularization and TAVI: before, during, after or never?

Aortic valve stenosis and coronary artery disease (CAD) frequently coexist in elderly patients selected for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Therapeutic strategies to manage concomitant obstructive CAD are therefore an important consideration in the overall management of patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing TAVI. Conventional surgical aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass grafting is the treatment of choice for low and intermediate risk patients with symptomatic severe AS and concomitant obstructive CAD. However, TAVI and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are viable alternative options for high-risk or inoperable patients presenting with symptomatic severe AS. PCI has been shown to be feasible and safe in selected high-risk or inoperable patients with symptomatic severe AS. However, the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure has been a subject of debate. The most frequent approch is staged PCI typically performed a few weeks prior to TAVI. However, concomitant PCI has also been shown to be a feasible and safe approach, particularly in patients with a low level of CAD complexity and an absence of severe renal impairment. Conversely, staged PCI should be considered in patients with higher degrees of CAD complexity, particularly in the presence of severe renal impairment. The aim of the present review is to discuss the safety and feasibility of performing PCI in elderly patients with severe AS and the optimal timing of PCI relative to the TAVI procedure using the most up-to-date available evidence.

4-year clinical outcomes and predictors of repeat revascularization in patients treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents: a report from the RESOLUTE All-Comers trial (A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention)

OBJECTIVES The aim of the study was to investigate 4-year outcomes and predictors of repeat revascularization in patients treated with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) (Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota) and XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent (EES) (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, Illinois) in the RESOLUTE (A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) All-Comers trial. BACKGROUND Data on long-term outcomes of new-generation drug-eluting stents are limited, and predictors of repeat revascularization due to restenosis and/or progression of disease are largely unknown. METHODS Patients were randomly assigned to treatment with the R-ZES (n = 1,140) or the EES (n = 1,152). We assessed pre-specified safety and efficacy outcomes at 4 years including target lesion failure and stent thrombosis. Predictors of revascularization at 4 years were identified by Cox regression analysis. RESULTS At 4 years, the rates of target lesion failure (15.2% vs. 14.6%, p = 0.68), cardiac death (5.4% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.44), and target vessel myocardial infarction (5.3% vs. 5.4%, p = 1.00), clinically-indicated target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7.0% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.62), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (2.3% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.23) were similar with the R-ZES and EES. Independent predictors of TLR were age, insulin-treated diabetes, SYNTAX (Synergy between PCI with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score, treatment of saphenous vein grafts, ostial lesions, and in-stent restenosis. Independent predictors of any revascularization were age, diabetes, previous percutaneous coronary intervention, absence of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, smaller reference vessel diameter, SYNTAX score, and treatment of left anterior descending, right coronary artery, saphenous vein grafts, ostial lesions, or in-stent restenosis. CONCLUSIONS R-ZES and EES demonstrated similar safety and efficacy throughout 4 years. TLR represented less than one-half of all repeat revascularization procedures. Patient- and lesion-related factors predicting the risk of TLR and any revascularization showed considerable overlap. (A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [RESOLUTE-AC]; NCT00617084).

Comparison of noninferiority margins reported in protocols and publications showed incomplete and inconsistent reporting.

OBJECTIVES To compare noninferiority margins defined in study protocols and trial registry records with margins reported in subsequent publications. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Comparison of protocols of noninferiority trials submitted 2001 to 2005 to ethics committees in Switzerland and The Netherlands with corresponding publications and registry records. We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library issue 01/2012), and Google Scholar in September 2013 to identify published reports, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform of the World Health Organization in March 2013 to identify registry records. Two readers recorded the noninferiority margin and other data using a standardized data-abstraction form. RESULTS The margin was identical in study protocol and publication in 43 (80%) of 54 pairs of study protocols and articles. In the remaining pairs, reporting was inconsistent (five pairs, 9%), or the noninferiority margin was either not reported in the publication (five pairs, 9%) or not defined in the study protocol (one pair). The confidence interval or the exact P-value required to judge whether the result was compatible with noninferior, inferior, or superior efficacy was reported in 43 (80%) publications. Complete and consistent reporting of both noninferiority margin and confidence interval (or exact P-value) was present in 39 (72%) protocol-publication pairs. Twenty-nine trials (54%) were registered in trial registries, but only one registry record included the noninferiority margin. CONCLUSION The reporting of noninferiority margins was incomplete and inconsistent with study protocols in a substantial proportion of published trials, and margins were rarely reported in trial registries.

Solitaire™ with the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke (SWIFT PRIME) trial: protocol for a randomized, controlled, multicenter study comparing the Solitaire revascularization device with IV tPA with IV tPA alone in acute ischemic stroke.

RATIONALE Early reperfusion in patients experiencing acute ischemic stroke is critical, especially for patients with large vessel occlusion who have poor prognosis without revascularization. Solitaire™ stent retriever devices have been shown to immediately restore vascular perfusion safely, rapidly, and effectively in acute ischemic stroke patients with large vessel occlusions. AIM The aim of the study was to demonstrate that, among patients with large vessel, anterior circulation occlusion who have received intravenous tissue plasminogen activator, treatment with Solitaire revascularization devices reduces degree of disability 3 months post stroke. DESIGN The study is a global multicenter, two-arm, prospective, randomized, open, blinded end-point trial comparing functional outcomes in acute ischemic stroke patients who are treated with either intravenous tissue plasminogen activator alone or intravenous tissue plasminogen activator in combination with the Solitaire device. Up to 833 patients will be enrolled. PROCEDURES Patients who have received intravenous tissue plasminogen activator are randomized to either continue with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator alone or additionally proceed to neurothrombectomy using the Solitaire device within six-hours of symptom onset. STUDY OUTCOMES The primary end-point is 90-day global disability, assessed with the modified Rankin Scale (mRS). Secondary outcomes include mortality at 90 days, functional independence (mRS ≤ 2) at 90 days, change in National Institutes of Health Stroke Scale at 27 h, reperfusion at 27 h, and thrombolysis in cerebral infarction 2b/3 flow at the end of the procedure. ANALYSIS Statistical analysis will be conducted using simultaneous success criteria on the overall distribution of modified Rankin Scale (Rankin shift) and proportions of subjects achieving functional independence (mRS 0-2).

Aspiration Thrombectomy for Treatment of ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction: a Meta-analysis of 26 Randomized Trials in 11 943 Patients.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES There is continued debate about the routine use of aspiration thrombectomy in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Our aim was to evaluate clinical and procedural outcomes of aspiration thrombectomy-assisted primary percutaneous coronary intervention compared with conventional primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS We performed a meta-analysis of 26 randomized controlled trials with a total of 11 943 patients. Clinical outcomes were extracted up to maximum follow-up and random effect models were used to assess differences in outcomes. RESULTS We observed no difference in the risk of all-cause death (pooled risk ratio = 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.74-1.04; P = .124), reinfarction (pooled risk ratio = 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.67-1.08; P = .176), target vessel revascularization (pooled risk ratio = 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.73-1.00; P = .052), or definite stent thrombosis (pooled risk ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.16; P = .202) between the 2 groups at a mean weighted follow-up time of 10.4 months. There were significant reductions in failure to reach Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 3 flow (pooled risk ratio = 0.70; 95% confidence interval, 0.60-0.81; P < .001) or myocardial blush grade 3 (pooled risk ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.89; P = .001), incomplete ST-segment resolution (pooled risk ratio = 0.72; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-0.84; P < .001), and evidence of distal embolization (pooled risk ratio = 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.81; P = .001) with aspiration thrombectomy but estimates were heterogeneous between trials. CONCLUSIONS Among unselected patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, aspiration thrombectomy-assisted primary percutaneous coronary intervention does not improve clinical outcomes, despite improved epicardial and myocardial parameters of reperfusion. Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en.