Drug-eluting stents vs. bare metal stents in patients with cardiogenic shock: a comparison by propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND In patients with cardiogenic shock, data on the comparative safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DESs) vs. bare metal stents (BMSs) are lacking. We sought to assess the performance of DESs compared with BMSs among patients with cardiogenic shock undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS Out of 236 patients with acute coronary syndromes complicated by cardiogenic shock, 203 were included in the final analysis. The primary endpoint included death, and the secondary endpoint of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs) included the composite of death, myocardial infarction, any repeat revascularization and stroke. Patients were followed for a minimum of 30 days and up to 4 years. As stent assignment was not random, we performed a propensity score analysis to minimize potential bias. RESULTS Among patients treated with DESs, there was a lower risk of the primary and secondary endpoints compared with BMSs at 30 days (29 vs. 56%, P < 0.001; 34 vs. 58%, P = 0.001, respectively) and during long-term follow-up [hazard ratio 0.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.29-0.65, P < 0.001; hazard ratio 0.49, 95% CI 0.34-0.71, P < 0.001, respectively]. After propensity score adjustment, all-cause mortality was reduced among patients treated with DESs compared with BMSs both at 30 days [adjusted odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.11-0.62; P = 0.002] and during long-term follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio 0.40, 95% CI 0.22-0.72; P = 0.002). The rate of MACCE was lower among patients treated with DESs compared with those treated with BMSs at 30 days (adjusted OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.19-0.95; P = 0.036). The difference in MACCEs between devices approached significance during long-term follow-up (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60, 95% CI 0.34-1.01; P = 0.052). CONCLUSION DESs appear to be associated with improved clinical outcomes, including a reduction in all-cause mortality compared with BMSs among patients undergoing PCI for cardiogenic shock, possibly because of a pacification of the infarct-related artery by anti-inflammatory drug. The results of this observational study require confirmation in an appropriately powered randomized trial.

The impact of prolonged lower limb ischemia on amputation, mortality, and functional status: the FRIENDS registry.

BACKGROUND Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a major cause of cardiovascular ischemic events and amputation. Knowledge gaps exist in defining and measuring key factors that predict these events. The objective of this study was to assess whether duration of limb ischemia would serve as a major predictor of limb and patient survival. METHODS The FReedom from Ischemic Events: New Dimensions for Survival (FRIENDS) registry enrolled consecutive patients with limb-threatening peripheral artery disease at a single tertiary care hospital. Demographic information, key clinical care time segments, functional status and use of revascularization, and pharmacotherapy data were collected at baseline, and vascular ischemic events, cardiovascular mortality, and all-cause mortality were recorded at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS A total of 200 patients with median (interquartile range) age of 76 years (65-84 years) were enrolled in the registry. Median duration of limb ischemia was 0.75 days for acute limb ischemia (ALI) and 61 days for chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI). Duration of limb ischemia of <12, 12 to 24, and >24 hours in patients with ALI was associated with much higher rates of first amputation (P = .0002) and worse amputation-free survival (P = .037). No such associations were observed in patients with CLI. CONCLUSIONS For individuals with ischemic symptoms <14 days, prolonged limb ischemia is associated with higher 30-day and 1-year amputation, systemic ischemic event rates, and worse amputation-free survival. No such associations are evident for individuals with chronic CLI. These data imply that prompt diagnosis and revascularization might improve outcomes for patients with ALI.

Long-term safety and feasibility of three-vessel multimodality intravascular imaging in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: the IBIS-4 (integrated biomarker and imaging study) substudy.

We assessed the feasibility and the procedural and long-term safety of intracoronary (i.c) imaging for documentary purposes with optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary PCI in the setting of IBIS-4 study. IBIS4 (NCT00962416) is a prospective cohort study conducted at five European centers including 103 STEMI patients who underwent serial three-vessel coronary imaging during primary PCI and at 13 months. The feasibility parameter was successful imaging, defined as the number of pullbacks suitable for analysis. Safety parameters included the frequency of peri-procedural complications, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and any clinically-indicated revascularization at 2 years. Clinical outcomes were compared with the results from a cohort of 485 STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI without additional imaging. Imaging of the infarct-related artery at baseline (and follow-up) was successful in 92.2 % (96.6 %) of patients using OCT and in 93.2 % (95.5 %) using IVUS. Imaging of the non-infarct-related vessels was successful in 88.7 % (95.6 %) using OCT and in 90.5 % (93.3 %) using IVUS. Periprocedural complications occurred <2.0 % of OCT and none during IVUS. There were no differences throughout 2 years between the imaging and control group in terms of MACE (16.7 vs. 13.3 %, adjusted HR1.40, 95 % CI 0.77-2.52, p = 0.27). Multi-modality three-vessel i.c. imaging in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI is consistent a high degree of success and can be performed safely without impact on cardiovascular events at long-term follow-up.

Novel Approaches to Myocardial Perfusion: 3D First-Pass CMR Perfusion Imaging and Oxygenation-Sensitive

This article reviews technical aspects and the current status of novel cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) approaches to assessing myocardial perfusion, specifically oxygenation-sensitive magnetic resonance imaging, comparing their diagnostic targets and clinical role with those of other imaging approaches. The paper includes discussions of relevant pathophysiological aspects of myocardial ischemia and the clinical context of revascularization in patients with suspected or known coronary artery disease. Research using oxygenation-sensitive CMR may play an important role for a better understanding of the interplay of coronary artery stenosis, blood flow reduction, and their impact on actual myocardial ischemia.

Safety and efficacy of resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents compared with everolimus-eluting stents: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Although new-generation drug-eluting stents represent the standard of care among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, there remains debate about differences in efficacy and the risk of stent thrombosis between the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) and the everolimus-eluting stent (EES). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the R-ZES compared with EES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS A systematic literature search of electronic resources was performed using specific search terms until September 2014. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed comparing clinical outcomes between patients treated with R-ZES and EES up to maximum available follow-up. The primary efficacy end point was target-vessel revascularization. The primary safety end point was definite or probable stent thrombosis. Secondary safety end points were cardiac death and target-vessel myocardial infarction. Five trials were identified, including a total of 9899 patients. Compared with EES, R-ZES had similar risks of target-vessel revascularization (risk ratio [RR], 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-1.24; P=0.50), definite or probable stent thrombosis (RR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.86-1.85; P=0.24), cardiac death (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79-1.30; P=0.91), and target-vessel myocardial infarction (RR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89-1.36; P=0.39). Moreover, R-ZES and EES had similar risks of late definite or probable very late stent thrombosis (RR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.53-2.11; P=0.87). No evidence of significant heterogeneity was observed across trials. CONCLUSIONS R-ZES and EES provide similar safety and efficacy among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

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.

The association between in-stent neoatherosclerosis and native coronary artery disease progression: a long-term angiographic and optical coherence tomography cohort study.

AIMS The purpose of the present study was to investigate the relationship between in-stent neoatherosclerosis (NA) and native atherosclerosis progression of untreated coronary segments. METHODS AND RESULTS In-stent NA was assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) among patients included in the SIRTAX-LATE OCT study 5 years after drug-eluting stent (DES) (sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents) implantation. Neoatherosclerosis was defined as the presence of fibroatheroma or fibrocalcific plaque within the neointima of stented segments with a longitudinal extension >1.0 mm. Atherosclerosis progression in untreated native coronary segments was evaluated by serial quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). The change in minimal lumen diameter (MLD) was serially assessed within matched segments at baseline and 5-year angiographic follow-up. The key clinical endpoint was non-target lesion (non-TL) revascularization throughout 5 years. A total of 88 patients with 88 lesions were available for OCT analysis 5 years after DES implantation. In-stent NA was observed in 16% of lesions with the majority of plaques being fibroatheromas (11.4%) followed by fibrocalcific plaques (5.7%). A total of 704 non-TL segments were serially evaluated by QCA. Between baseline and 5-year follow-up, the reduction in MLD was significantly more pronounced in patients with NA (-0.25 mm, 95% CI -0.36 to -0.17 mm) when compared with patients without NA (-0.13 mm, 95% CI -0.17 to -0.10 mm, P = 0.002). Similarly, non-TL revascularization was more frequent in patients with NA (78.6%) when compared with patients without NA (44.6%, P = 0.028) throughout 5 years. CONCLUSIONS In-stent NA is more common among patients with angiographic and clinical evidence of native atherosclerosis progression suggesting similar pathophysiological mechanisms.SIRTAX trial is registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00617084.

Clinical Outcomes According to Diabetic Status in Patients Treated With Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.

BACKGROUND Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS AND RESULTS BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27-2.56; P=0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67-2.10; P=0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58-1.33; P=0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49-3.41; P=0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39-1.25; P=0.23, in nondiabetics). CONCLUSIONS In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Stent placement vs. balloon angioplasty for popliteal artery treatment: two-year results of a prospective, multicenter, randomized trial.

PURPOSE To investigate the 2-year technical and clinical results of primary nitinol stent placement in comparison with percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA) in the treatment of de novo lesions of the popliteal artery. METHODS The ETAP study (Endovascular Treatment of Atherosclerotic Popliteal Artery Lesions: balloon angioplasty vs. primary stenting; www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00712309) is a prospective, randomized trial that enrolled 246 patients (158 men; mean age 72 years) who were randomly assigned to receive a nitinol stent (n=119) or PTA (n=127) for lesions averaging 42.3 mm in length. The results of the primary study endpoint were published. Secondary outcome measures and endpoints included primary patency (freedom from duplex-detected target lesion restenosis), target lesion revascularization (TLR), secondary patency, changes in ankle-brachial index and Rutherford class, and event-free survival (freedom from target limb amputation, TLR, myocardial infarction, and death). RESULTS In total, 183 patients (89 stent and 94 PTA) were available for the 2-year analysis. The primary patency rate was significantly higher in the stent group (64.2%) than in the PTA group (31.3%, p=0.0001). TLR rates were 22.4% and 59.5%, respectively (p=0.0001). When provisional stent placement in the PTA arm was not considered as TLR and loss in patency, the differences prevailed between the study groups but were not significant (64.2% vs. 56.1% for primary patency, respectively; p=0.44). A significant improvement in ABI and Rutherford category was observed at 2 years in both groups. CONCLUSION In treatment of obstructive popliteal artery lesions, provisional stenting reveals equivalent patency in comparison to primary stenting. However, the 2-year results of this trial suggest the possibility of a shift toward higher patency rates in favor of primary stenting.

Bivalirudin or Unfractionated Heparin in Acute Coronary Syndromes.

Background Conflicting evidence exists on the efficacy and safety of bivalirudin administered as part of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with an acute coronary syndrome. Methods We randomly assigned 7213 patients with an acute coronary syndrome for whom PCI was anticipated to receive either bivalirudin or unfractionated heparin. Patients in the bivalirudin group were subsequently randomly assigned to receive or not to receive a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion. Primary outcomes for the comparison between bivalirudin and heparin were the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and net adverse clinical events (a composite of major bleeding or a major adverse cardiovascular event). The primary outcome for the comparison of a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion with no post-PCI infusion was a composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events. Results The rate of major adverse cardiovascular events was not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with heparin (10.3% and 10.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.81 to 1.09; P=0.44), nor was the rate of net adverse clinical events (11.2% and 12.4%, respectively; relative risk, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.78 to 1.03; P=0.12). Post-PCI bivalirudin infusion, as compared with no infusion, did not significantly decrease the rate of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events (11.0% and 11.9%, respectively; relative risk, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.11; P=0.34). Conclusions In patients with an acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and net adverse clinical events were not significantly lower with bivalirudin than with unfractionated heparin. The rate of the composite of urgent target-vessel revascularization, definite stent thrombosis, or net adverse clinical events was not significantly lower with a post-PCI bivalirudin infusion than with no post-PCI infusion. (Funded by the Medicines Company and Terumo Medical; MATRIX ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01433627 .).

Mechanical Thrombectomy for Isolated M2 Occlusions: A Post Hoc Analysis of the STAR, SWIFT, and SWIFT PRIME Studies.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Mechanical thrombectomy is beneficial for patients with acute ischemic stroke and a proximal anterior occlusion, but it is unclear if these results can be extrapolated to patients with an M2 occlusion. The purpose of this study was to examine the technical aspects, safety, and outcomes of mechanical thrombectomy with a stent retriever in patients with an isolated M2 occlusion who were included in 3 large multicenter prospective studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS We included patients from the Solitaire Flow Restoration Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization (STAR), Solitaire With the Intention For Thrombectomy (SWIFT), and Solitaire With the Intention for Thrombectomy as Primary Endovascular Treatment (SWIFT PRIME) studies, 3 large multicenter prospective studies on thrombectomy for ischemic stroke. We compared outcomes and technical details of patients with an M2 with those with an M1 occlusion. All patients were treated with a stent retriever. Imaging data and outcomes were scored by an independent core laboratory. Successful reperfusion was defined as modified Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction score of 2b/3. RESULTS We included 50 patients with an M2 and 249 patients with an M1 occlusion. Patients with an M2 occlusion were older (mean age, 71 versus 67 years; P = .04) and had a lower NIHSS score (median, 13 versus 17; P < .001) compared with those with an M1 occlusion. Procedural time was nonsignificantly shorter in patients with an M2 occlusion (median, 29 versus 35 minutes; P = .41). The average number of passes with a stent retriever was also nonsignificantly lower in patients with an M2 occlusion (mean, 1.4 versus 1.7; P = .07). There were no significant differences in successful reperfusion (85% versus 82%, P = .82), symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhages (2% versus 2%, P = 1.0), device-related serious adverse events (6% versus 4%, P = .46), or modified Rankin Scale score 0-2 at follow-up (60% versus 56%, P = .64). CONCLUSIONS Endovascular reperfusion therapy appears to be feasible in selected patients with ischemic stroke and an M2 occlusion.

TICI and Age: What's the Score?

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Previous studies have suggested that advanced age predicts worse outcome following mechanical thrombectomy. We assessed outcomes from 2 recent large prospective studies to determine the association among TICI, age, and outcome. MATERIALS AND METHODS Data from the Solitaire FR Thrombectomy for Acute Revascularization (STAR) trial, an international multicenter prospective single-arm thrombectomy study and the Solitaire arm of the Solitaire FR With the Intention For Thrombectomy (SWIFT) trial were pooled. TICI was determined by core laboratory review. Good outcome was defined as an mRS score of 0-2 at 90 days. We analyzed the association among clinical outcome, successful-versus-unsuccessful reperfusion (TICI 2b-3 versus TICI 0-2a), and age (dichotomized across the median). RESULTS Two hundred sixty-nine of 291 patients treated with Solitaire in the STAR and SWIFT data bases for whom TICI and 90-day outcome data were available were included. The median age was 70 years (interquartile range, 60-76 years) with an age range of 25-88 years. The mean age of patients 70 years of age or younger was 59 years, and it was 77 years for patients older than 70 years. There was no significant difference between baseline NIHSS scores or procedure time metrics. Hemorrhage and device-related complications were more common in the younger age group but did not reach statistical significance. In absolute terms, the rate of good outcome was higher in the younger population (64% versus 44%, P < .001). However, the magnitude of benefit from successful reperfusion was higher in the 70 years of age and older group (OR, 4.82; 95% CI, 1.32-17.63 versus OR 7.32; 95% CI, 1.73-30.99). CONCLUSIONS Successful reperfusion is the strongest predictor of good outcome following mechanical thrombectomy, and the magnitude of benefit is highest in the patient population older than 70 years of age.

First generation versus second generation drug-eluting stents for the treatment of bifurcations: 5-year follow-up of the LEADERS all-comers randomized trial.

BACKGROUND Historically, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of bifurcation lesions was associated with worse procedural and clinical outcomes when compared with PCI of non-bifurcation lesions. Newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES) might improve long-term clinical outcomes after bifurcation PCI. METHODS AND RESULTS The LEADERS trial was a 10-center, assessor-blind, non-inferiority, all-comers trial, randomizing 1,707 patients to treatment with a biolimus A9(TM) -eluting stent (BES) with an abluminal biodegradable polymer or a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with a durable polymer (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00389220). Five-year clinical outcomes were compared between patients with and without bifurcation lesions and between BES and SES in the bifurcation lesion subgroup. There were 497 (29%) patients with at least 1 bifurcation lesion (BES = 258; SES = 239). At 5-year follow-up, the composite endpoint of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and clinically-indicated (CI) target vessel revascularization (TVR) was observed more frequently in the bifurcation group (26.6% vs. 22.4%, P = 0.049). Within the bifurcation lesion subgroup, no differences were observed in (cardiac) death or MI rates between BES and SES. However, CI target lesion revascularization (TLR) (10.1% vs. 15.9%, P = 0.0495), and CI TVR (12.0% vs. 19.2%, P = 0.023) rates were significantly lower in the BES group. Definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) rate was numerically lower in the BES group (3.1% vs. 5.9%, P = 0.15). Very late (>1 year) definite/probable ST rates trended to be lower with BES (0.4% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.057). CONCLUSIONS In the treatment of bifurcation lesions, use of BES led to superior long-term efficacy compared with SES. Safety outcomes were comparable between BES and SES, with an observed trend toward a lower rate of very late definite/probable ST between 1 and 5 years with the BES. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of New-Generation Versus Early-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents According to Complexity of Coronary Artery Disease: A Patient-Level Pooled Analysis of 6,081 Patients.

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to compare the 2-year safety and effectiveness of new- versus early-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) according to the severity of coronary artery disease (CAD) as assessed by the SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) score. BACKGROUND New-generation DES are considered the standard-of-care in patients with CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. However, there are few data investigating the effects of new- over early-generation DES according to the anatomic complexity of CAD. METHODS Patient-level data from 4 contemporary, all-comers trials were pooled. The primary device-oriented clinical endpoint was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (TLR). The principal effectiveness and safety endpoints were TLR and definite stent thrombosis (ST), respectively. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated at 2 years for overall comparisons, as well as stratified for patients with lower (SYNTAX score ≤11) and higher complexity (SYNTAX score >11). RESULTS A total of 6,081 patients were included in the study. New-generation DES (n = 4,554) compared with early-generation DES (n = 1,527) reduced the primary endpoint (HR: 0.75 [95% CI: 0.63 to 0.89]; p = 0.001) without interaction (p = 0.219) between patients with lower (HR: 0.86 [95% CI: 0.64 to 1.16]; p = 0.322) versus higher CAD complexity (HR: 0.68 [95% CI: 0.54 to 0.85]; p = 0.001). In patients with SYNTAX score >11, new-generation DES significantly reduced TLR (HR: 0.36 [95% CI: 0.26 to 0.51]; p < 0.001) and definite ST (HR: 0.28 [95% CI: 0.15 to 0.55]; p < 0.001) to a greater extent than in the low-complexity group (TLR pint = 0.059; ST pint = 0.013). New-generation DES decreased the risk of cardiac mortality in patients with SYNTAX score >11 (HR: 0.45 [95% CI: 0.27 to 0.76]; p = 0.003) but not in patients with SYNTAX score ≤11 (pint = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS New-generation DES improve clinical outcomes compared with early-generation DES, with a greater safety and effectiveness in patients with SYNTAX score >11.

Comparison of zotarolimus- and everolimus-eluting coronary stents: final 5-year report of the RESOLUTE all-comers trial

BACKGROUND Newer-generation drug-eluting stents that release zotarolimus or everolimus have been shown to be superior to the first-generation drug-eluting stents. However, data comparing long-term safety and efficacy of zotarolimus- (ZES) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES) are limited. RESOLUTE all-comers (Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) trial compared these 2 stents and has shown that ZES was noninferior to EES at 12-month for the primary end point of target lesion failure. We report the secondary clinical outcomes at the final 5-year follow-up of this trial. METHODS AND RESULTS RESOLUTE all-comer clinical study is a prospective, multicentre, randomized, 2-arm, open-label, noninferiority trial with minimal exclusion criteria. Patients (n=2292) were randomly assigned to treatment with either ZES (n=1140) or EES (n=1152). Patient-oriented composite end point (combination of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and any revascularizations), device-oriented composite end point (combination of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization), and major adverse cardiac events (combination of all-cause death, all myocardial infarction, emergent coronary bypass surgery, or clinically indicated target lesion revascularization) were analyzed at 5-year follow-up. The 2 groups were well-matched at baseline. Five-year follow-up data were available for 98% patients. There were no differences in patient-oriented composite end point (ZES 35.3% versus EES 32.0%, P=0.11), device-oriented composite end point (ZES 17.0% versus EES 16.2%, P=0.61), major adverse cardiac events (ZES 21.9% versus EES 21.6%, P=0.88), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (ZES 2.8% versus EES 1.8%, P=0.12). CONCLUSIONS At 5-year follow-up, ZES and EES had similar efficacy and safety in a population of patients who had minimal exclusion criteria. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00617084.