Percutaneous coronary interventional strategies for treatment of in-stent restenosis: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents is the standard of care for treatment of native coronary artery stenoses, but optimum treatment strategies for bare metal stent and drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (ISR) have not been established. We aimed to compare and rank percutaneous treatment strategies for ISR. METHODS We did a network meta-analysis to synthesise both direct and indirect evidence from relevant trials. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase for randomised controlled trials published up to Oct 31, 2014, of different PCI strategies for treatment of any type of coronary ISR. The primary outcome was percent diameter stenosis at angiographic follow-up. This study is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014014191. FINDINGS We deemed 27 trials eligible, including 5923 patients, with follow-up ranging from 6 months to 60 months after the index intervention. Angiographic follow-up was available for 4975 (84%) of 5923 patients 6-12 months after the intervention. PCI with everolimus-eluting stents was the most effective treatment for percent diameter stenosis, with a difference of -9·0% (95% CI -15·8 to -2·2) versus drug-coated balloons (DCB), -9·4% (-17·4 to -1·4) versus sirolimus-eluting stents, -10·2% (-18·4 to -2·0) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents, -19·2% (-28·2 to -10·4) versus vascular brachytherapy, -23·4% (-36·2 to -10·8) versus bare metal stents, -24·2% (-32·2 to -16·4) versus balloon angioplasty, and -31·8% (-44·8 to -18·6) versus rotablation. DCB were ranked as the second most effective treatment, but without significant differences from sirolimus-eluting (-0·2% [95% CI -6·2 to 5·6]) or paclitaxel-eluting (-1·2% [-6·4 to 4·2]) stents. INTERPRETATION These findings suggest that two strategies should be considered for treatment of any type of coronary ISR: PCI with everolimus-eluting stents because of the best angiographic and clinical outcomes, and DCB because of its ability to provide favourable results without adding a new stent layer. FUNDING None.

Effect of bone graft density on in vitro cell behavior with enamel matrix derivative

OBJECTIVES Bone replacement grafting materials play an important role in regenerative dentistry. Despite a large array of tested bone-grafting materials, little information is available comparing the effects of bone graft density on in vitro cell behavior. Therefore, the aim of the present study is to compare the effects of cells seeded on bone grafts at low and high density in vitro for osteoblast adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS The response of osteoblasts to the presence of a growth factor (enamel matrix derivative, (EMD)) in combination with low (8 mg per well) or high (100 mg per well) bone grafts (BG; natural bone mineral, Bio-Oss®) density, was studied and compared for osteoblast cell adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation as assessed by real-time PCR. Standard tissue culture plastic was used as a control with and without EMD. RESULTS The present study demonstrates that in vitro testing of bone-grafting materials is largely influenced by bone graft seeding density. Osteoblast adhesion was up to 50 % lower when cells were seeded on high-density BG when compared to low-density BG and control tissue culture plastic. Furthermore, proliferation was affected in a similar manner whereby cell proliferation on high-density BG (100 mg/well) was significantly increased when compared to that on low-density BG (8 mg/well). In contrast, cell differentiation was significantly increased on high-density BG as assessed by real-time PCR for markers collagen 1 (Col 1), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and osteocalcin (OC) as well as alizarin red staining. The effects of EMD on osteoblast adhesion, proliferation, and differentiation further demonstrated that the bone graft seeding density largely controls in vitro results. EMD significantly increased cell attachment only on high-density BG, whereas EMD was able to further stimulate cell proliferation and differentiation of osteoblasts on control culture plastic and low-density BG when compared to high-density BG. CONCLUSION The results from the present study demonstrate that the in vitro conditions largely influence cell behavior of osteoblasts seeded on bone grafts and in vitro testing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE These results also illustrate the necessity for careful selection of bone graft seeding density to optimize in vitro testing and provide the clinician with a more accurate description of the osteopromotive potential of bone grafts.

Nitinol Stent Oversizing in Patients Undergoing Popliteal Artery Revascularization: A Finite Element Study

Nitinol stent oversizing is frequently performed in peripheral arteries to ensure a desirable lumen gain. However, the clinical effect of mis-sizing remains controversial. The goal of this study was to provide a better understanding of the structural and hemodynamic effects of Nitinol stent oversizing. Five patient-specific numerical models of non-calcified popliteal arteries were developed to simulate the deployment of Nitinol stents with oversizing ratios ranging from 1.1 to 1.8. In addition to arterial biomechanics, computational fluid dynamics methods were adopted to simulate the physiological blood flow inside the stented arteries. Results showed that stent oversizing led to a limited increase in the acute lumen gain, albeit at the cost of a significant increase in arterial wall stresses. Furthermore, localized areas affected by low Wall Shear Stress increased with higher oversizing ratios. Stents were also negatively impacted by the procedure as their fatigue safety factors gradually decreased with oversizing. These adverse effects to both the artery walls and stents may create circumstances for restenosis. Although the ideal oversizing ratio is stent-specific, this study showed that Nitinol stent oversizing has a very small impact on the immediate lumen gain, which contradicts the clinical motivations of the procedure.

Supplemental cardioplegia immediately before graft implantation may improve early post-transplantation outcome

Gebiet: Chirurgie Abstract: Background: Preservation of cardiac grafts for transplantation is not standardized and most centers use a single administration of crystalloid solution at the time of harvesting. We investigated possible benefits of an additional dose of cardioplegia dispensed immediately before implantation. – – Methods: Consecutive adult cardiac transplantations (2005?2012) were reviewed. Hearts were harvested following a standard protocol (Celsior 2L, 4?8°C). In 2008, 100 ml crys-talloid cardioplegic solution was added and administered immediately before implanta-tion. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were used to investigate risk factors for post-operative graft failure and mid-term outcome. – – Results: A total of 81 patients, 44 standard (?Cardio???) vs. 37 with additional cardiople-gia (?CardioC?) were analyzed. Recipients and donors were comparable in both groups. CardioC patients demonstrated a reduced need for defibrillation (24 vs. 48%, p D0.03), post-operative ratio of CK-MB/CK (10.1_3.9 vs. 13.3_4.2%, p D0.001), intubation time (2.0_1.6 vs. 7.2_11.5 days, p D0.05), and ICU stay (3.9_2.1 vs. 8.5_7.8 days, p D0.001). Actuarial survival was reduced when graft ischemic time was >180 min in Cardio?? but not in CardioC patients (p D0.033). Organ ischemic time >180 min (OR: 5.48, CI: 1.08?27.75), donor female gender (OR: 5.84, CI: 1.13?33.01), and recipient/donor age >60 (OR: 6.33, CI: 0.86?46.75), but not the additional cardioplegia or the observation period appeared independent predictors of post-operative acute graft failure. – – Conclusion: An additional dose of cardioplegia administered immediately before implan-tation may be a simple way to improve early and late outcome of cardiac transplantation, especially in situations of prolonged graft ischemia.A large, ideally multicentric, randomized study is desirable to verify this preliminary observation.

Long-term ticagrelor monotherapy versus standard dual antiplatelet therapy followed by aspirin monotherapy in patients undergoing biolimus-eluting stent implantation: rationale and design of the GLOBAL LEADERS trial

AIMS The GLOBAL LEADERS trial is a superiority study in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, with a uniform use of Biolimus A9-eluting stents (BES) and bivalirudin. GLOBAL LEADERS was designed to assess whether a 24-month antithrombotic regimen with ticagrelor and one month of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA), compared to conventional dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), improves outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients (n >16,000) are randomised (1:1 ratio) to ticagrelor 90 mg twice daily for 24 months plus ASA ≤100 mg for one month versus DAPT with either ticagrelor (acute coronary syndrome) or clopidogrel (stable coronary artery disease) for 12 months plus ASA ≤100 mg for 24 months. The primary outcome is a composite of all-cause mortality or non-fatal, new Q-wave myocardial infarction at 24 months. The key safety endpoint is investigator-reported class 3 or 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) definitions. Sensitivity analysis will be carried out to explore potential differences in outcome across geographic regions and according to specific angiographic and clinical risk estimates. CONCLUSIONS The GLOBAL LEADERS trial aims to assess the role of ticagrelor as a single antiplatelet agent after a short course of DAPT for the long-term prevention of cardiac adverse events, across a wide spectrum of patients, following BES implantation.

Stent Thrombosis in Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents in Patients Receiving Dual Antiplatelet Therapy

OBJECTIVES This study sought to compare rates of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) after coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients who participated in the DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) study, an international multicenter randomized trial comparing 30 versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in subjects undergoing coronary stenting with either DES or BMS. BACKGROUND Despite antirestenotic efficacy of coronary DES compared with BMS, the relative risk of stent thrombosis and adverse cardiovascular events is unclear. Many clinicians perceive BMS to be associated with fewer adverse ischemic events and to require shorter-duration dual antiplatelet therapy than DES. METHODS Prospective propensity-matched analysis of subjects enrolled into a randomized trial of dual antiplatelet therapy duration was performed. DES- and BMS-treated subjects were propensity-score matched in a many-to-one fashion. The study design was observational for all subjects 0 to 12 months following stenting. A subset of eligible subjects without major ischemic or bleeding events were randomized at 12 months to continued thienopyridine versus placebo; all subjects were followed through 33 months. RESULTS Among 10,026 propensity-matched subjects, DES-treated subjects (n = 8,308) had a lower rate of stent thrombosis through 33 months compared with BMS-treated subjects (n = 1,718, 1.7% vs. 2.6%; weighted risk difference -1.1%, p = 0.01) and a noninferior rate of MACCE (11.4% vs. 13.2%, respectively, weighted risk difference -1.8%, p = 0.053, noninferiority p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS DES-treated subjects have long-term rates of stent thrombosis that are lower than BMS-treated subjects. (The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study [DAPT study]; NCT00977938).

DESyne novolimus-eluting coronary stent is superior to Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent at five-year follow-up: final results of the multicentre EXCELLA II randomised controlled trial

AIMS Newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to be superior to first-generation DES. Current-generation DES have zotarolimus, everolimus or biolimus as antiproliferative drugs. Novolimus, a metabolite of sirolimus, has been specifically developed to provide efficacy similar to currently available agents at a lower dose and thus requires a lower polymer load. We report the final five-year outcomes of the EXCELLA II trial comparing a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with a novolimus-eluting stent (NES). METHODS AND RESULTS EXCELLA II is a prospective, multicentre, single-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. Patients (n=210) with a maximum of two de novo lesions in two different epicardial vessels were randomised (2:1) to treatment with either NES (n=139) or ZES (n=71). At five-year follow-up, patients in the NES group had a significantly lower incidence of the patient-oriented (HR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87, p=0.013) and device-oriented (HR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.83, p=0.011) composite endpoints. There was no difference in cardiac death and definite/probable stent thrombosis between the two groups; however, there was a trend towards reduction in myocardial infarction and repeat revascularisation in the NES group at five-year follow-up. CONCLUSIONS At five-year follow-up, the incidence of device- and patient-oriented events was significantly lower in the NES group. Further studies, adequately powered for clinical outcomes, are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00792753.

Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable stent vs. durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: results of the randomized ABSORB ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction-TROFI II trial.

AIMS Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) feature thrombus-rich lesions with large necrotic core, which are usually associated with delayed arterial healing and impaired stent-related outcomes. The use of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (Absorb) has the potential to overcome these limitations owing to restoration of native vessel lumen and physiology at long term. The purpose of this randomized trial was to compare the arterial healing response at short term, as a surrogate for safety and efficacy, between the Absorb and the metallic everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients with STEMI. METHODS AND RESULTS ABSORB-STEMI TROFI II was a multicentre, single-blind, non-inferiority, randomized controlled trial. Patients with STEMI who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention were randomly allocated 1:1 to treatment with the Absorb or EES. The primary endpoint was the 6-month optical frequency domain imaging healing score (HS) based on the presence of uncovered and/or malapposed stent struts and intraluminal filling defects. Main secondary endpoint included the device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE) according to the Academic Research Consortium definition. Between 06 January 2014 and 21 September 2014, 191 patients (Absorb [n = 95] or EES [n = 96]; mean age 58.6 years old; 17.8% females) were enrolled at eight centres. At 6 months, HS was lower in the Absorb arm when compared with EES arm [1.74 (2.39) vs. 2.80 (4.44); difference (90% CI) -1.06 (-1.96, -0.16); Pnon-inferiority <0.001]. Device-oriented composite endpoint was also comparably low between groups (1.1% Absorb vs. 0% EES). One case of definite subacute stent thrombosis occurred in the Absorb arm (1.1% vs. 0% EES; P = ns). CONCLUSION Stenting of culprit lesions with Absorb in the setting of STEMI resulted in a nearly complete arterial healing which was comparable with that of metallic EES at 6 months. These findings provide the basis for further exploration in clinically oriented outcome trials.

Arterial healing following primary PCI using the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) versus the durable polymer everolimus-eluting metallic stent (XIENCE) in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the randomised TROFI II study

AIMS The Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Absorb BVS) provides similar clinical outcomes compared with a durable polymer-based everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in stable coronary artery disease patients. ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) lesions have been associated with delayed arterial healing and impaired stent-related outcomes. The purpose of the present study is to compare directly the arterial healing response, angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes between the Absorb BVS and metallic EES. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 191 patients with acute STEMI were randomly allocated to treatment with the Absorb BVS or a metallic EES 1:1. The primary endpoint is the neointimal healing (NIH) score, which is calculated based on a score taking into consideration the presence of uncovered and malapposed stent struts, intraluminal filling defects and excessive neointimal proliferation, as detected by optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) six months after the index procedure. The study will provide 90% power to show non-inferiority of the Absorb BVS compared with the EES. CONCLUSIONS This will be the first randomised study investigating the arterial healing response following implantation of the Absorb BVS compared with the EES. The healing response assessed by a novel NIH score in conjunction with results on angiographic efficacy parameters and device-oriented events will elucidate disease-specific applications of bioresorbable scaffolds.

Republished: Antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease

The choice and duration of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention of coronary artery disease (CAD) is determined by the clinical context and treatment strategy. Oral antiplatelet agents for secondary prevention include the cyclo-oxygenase-1 inhibitor aspirin, and the ADP dependent P2Y12 inhibitors clopidogrel, prasugrel and ticagrelor. Aspirin constitutes the cornerstone in secondary prevention of CAD and is complemented by clopidogrel in patients with stable CAD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Among patients with acute coronary syndrome, prasugrel and ticagrelor improve net clinical outcome by reducing ischaemic adverse events at the expense of an increased risk of bleeding as compared with clopidogrel. Prasugrel appears particularly effective among patients with ST elevation myocardial infarction to reduce the risk of stent thrombosis compared with clopidogrel, and offered a greater net clinical benefit among patients with diabetes compared with patients without diabetes. Ticagrelor is associated with reduced mortality without increasing the rate of coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)-related bleeding as compared with clopidogrel. Dual antiplatelet therapy should be continued for a minimum of 1 year among patients with acute coronary syndrome irrespective of stent type; among patients with stable CAD treated with new generation drug-eluting stents, available data suggest no benefit to prolong antiplatelet treatment beyond 6 months.