Sirolimus-eluting stent treatment at high-volume centers confers lower mortality at 6-month follow-up: results from the prospective multicenter German Cypher Registry

BACKGROUND: Studies continue to identify percutaneous coronary intervention procedural volume both at the institutional level and at the operator level as being strongly correlated with outcome. High-volume centers have been defined as those that perform >400 percutaneous coronary intervention procedures per year. The relationship between drug-eluting stent procedural volume and outcome is unknown. We investigated this relationship in the German Cypher Registry. METHODS AND RESULTS: The present analysis included 8201 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents between April 2002 and September 2005 in 51 centers. Centers that recruited >400 sirolimus-eluting stent patients in this time period were considered high-volume centers; those with 150 to 400 patients were considered intermediate-volume centers; and those with <150 patients were designated as low-volume centers. The primary end point was all death, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization at 6 months. This end point occurred in 11.3%, 12.1%, and 9.0% of patients in the low-, intermediate-, and high-volume center groups, respectively (P=0.0001). There was no difference between groups in the rate of target-vessel revascularization (P=0.2) or cerebrovascular accidents (P=0.5). The difference in death/myocardial infarction remained significant after adjustment for baseline factors (odds ratio 1.85, 95% confidence interval 1.31 to 2.59, P<0.001 for low-volume centers; odds ratio 1.69, 95% confidence interval 1.29 to 2.21, P<0.001 for intermediate-volume centers). Patient and lesion selection, procedural features, and postprocedural medications differed significantly between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of sirolimus-eluting stent procedures performed on an institutional level was inversely related to death and myocardial infarction but not to target-vessel revascularization at 6-month follow-up. Safety issues are better considered in high-volume centers. These findings have important public health policy implications.

Long-term outcomes of biodegradable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with diabetes a pooled analysis of individual patient data from 3 randomized trials

BACKGROUND There is ongoing debate on the optimal drug-eluting stent (DES) in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) may potentially improve clinical outcomes in these high-risk patients. We sought to compare long-term outcomes in patients with diabetes treated with biodegradable polymer DES vs. durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). METHODS We pooled individual patient-level data from 3 randomized clinical trials (ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4 and LEADERS) comparing biodegradable polymer DES with durable polymer SES. Clinical outcomes out to 4years were assessed. The primary end point was the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularization. Secondary end points were target lesion revascularization and definite or probable stent thrombosis. RESULTS Of 1094 patients with diabetes included in the present analysis, 657 received biodegradable polymer DES and 437 durable polymer SES. At 4years, the incidence of the primary end point was similar with BP-DES versus SES (hazard ratio=0.95, 95% CI=0.74-1.21, P=0.67). Target lesion revascularization was also comparable between the groups (hazard ratio=0.89, 95% CI=0.65-1.22, P=0.47). Definite or probable stent thrombosis was significantly reduced among patients treated with BP-DES (hazard ratio=0.52, 95% CI=0.28-0.96, P=0.04), a difference driven by significantly lower stent thrombosis rates with BP-DES between 1 and 4years (hazard ratio=0.15, 95% CI=0.03-0.70, P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS In patients with diabetes, biodegradable polymer DES, compared to durable polymer SES, were associated with comparable overall clinical outcomes during follow-up to 4years. Rates of stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP-DES.

Impact of stent overlap on long-term clinical outcomes in patients treated with newer-generation drug-eluting stents

Aims: Early-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) overlap (OL) is associated with impaired long-term clinical outcomes whereas the impact of OL with newer-generation DES is unknown. Our aim was to assess the impact of OL on long-term clinical outcomes among patients treated with newer-generation DES. Methods and results: We analysed the three-year clinical outcomes of 3,133 patients included in a prospective DES registry according to stent type (sirolimus-eluting stents [SES; N=1,532] versus everolimus-eluting stents [EES; N=1,601]), and the presence or absence of OL. The primary outcome was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularisation (TVR). The primary endpoint was more common in patients with OL (25.1%) than in those with multiple DES without OL (20.8%, adj HR=1.46, 95% CI: 1.03-2.09) and patients with a single DES (18.8%, adj HR=1.74, 95% CI: 1.34-2.25, p<0.001) at three years. A stratified analysis by stent type showed a higher risk of the primary outcome in SES with OL (28.7%) compared to other SES groups (without OL: 22.6%, p=0.04; single DES: 17.6%, p<0.001), but not between EES with OL (22.3%) and other EES groups (without OL: 18.5%, p=0.30; single DES: 20.4%, p=0.20). Conclusions: DES overlap is associated with impaired clinical outcomes during long-term follow-up. Compared with SES, EES provide similar clinical outcomes irrespective of DES overlap status.

Coronary evaginations are associated with positive vessel remodelling and are nearly absent following implantation of newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an optical coherence tomography and intravascular ultrasound study

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to assess the occurrence, predictors, and mechanisms of optical coherence tomography (OCT)-detected coronary evaginations following drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. BACKGROUND Angiographic ectasias and aneurysms in stented segments have been associated with a risk of late stent thrombosis. Using OCT, some stented segments show coronary evaginations reminiscent of ectasias. METHODS Evaginations were defined as outward bulges in the luminal contour between struts. They were considered major evaginations (MEs) when extending ≥3 mm along the vessel length, with a depth ≥10% of the stent diameter. A total of 228 patients who had sirolimus (SES)-, paclitaxel-, biolimus-, everolimus (EES)-, or zotarolimus (ZES)-eluting stents implanted in 254 lesions, were analysed after 1, 2, or 5 years; and serial assessment using OCT and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was performed post-intervention and after 1 year in 42 patients. RESULTS Major evaginations occurred frequently at all time points in SES (∼26%) and were rarely seen in EES (3%) and ZES (2%, P = 0.003). Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation was the strongest independent predictor of ME [adjusted OR (95% CI) 9.1 (1.1-77.4), P = 0.008]. Malapposed and uncovered struts were more common in lesions with vs. without ME (77 vs. 25%, P < 0.001 and 95 vs. 20%, P < 0.001, respectively) as was thrombus [49 vs. 14%, OR 7.3 (95% CI: 1.7-31.2), P = 0.007]. Post-intervention intra-stent dissection and protrusion of the vessel wall into the lumen were associated with an increased risk of evagination at follow-up [OR (95% CI): 2.9 (1.8-4.9), P < 0.001 and 3.3 (1.6-6.9), P = 0.001, respectively]. In paired IVUS analyses, lesions with ME showed a larger increase in the external elastic membrane area (20% area change) compared with lesions without ME (5% area change, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION Optical coherence tomography-detected MEs are a specific morphological footprint of early-generation SES and are nearly absent in newer-generation ZES and EES. Evaginations appear to be related to vessel injury at baseline; are associated with positive vessel remodelling; and correlate with uncoverage, malapposition, and thrombus at follow-up.

Impact of overlapping newer generation drug-eluting stents on clinical and angiographic outcomes: pooled analysis of five trials from the international Global RESOLUTE Program

BACKGROUND Overlapping first generation sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents are associated with persistent inflammation, fibrin deposition and delayed endothelialisation in preclinical models, and adverse angiographic and clinical outcomes--including death and myocardial infarction (MI)--in clinical studies. OBJECTIVES To establish as to whether there are any safety concerns with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES). DESIGN Propensity score adjustment of baseline anatomical and clinical characteristics were used to compare clinical outcomes (Kaplan-Meier estimates) between patients implanted with overlapping DES (Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) or R-ZES/other DES) against no overlapping DES. Additionally, angiographic outcomes for overlapping R-ZES and everolimus-eluting stents were evaluated in the randomised RESOLUTE All-Comers Trial. SETTING Patient level data from five controlled studies of the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Program evaluating the R-ZES were pooled. Enrollment criteria were generally unrestrictive. PATIENTS 5130 patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES 2-year clinical outcomes and 13-month angiographic outcomes. RESULTS 644 of 5130 patients (12.6%) in the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Program underwent overlapping DES implantation. Implantation of overlapping DES was associated with an increased frequency of MI and more complex/calcified lesion types at baseline. Adjusted in-hospital, 30-day and 2-year clinical outcomes indicated comparable cardiac death (2-year overlap vs non-overlap: 3.0% vs 2.1%, p=0.36), major adverse cardiac events (13.3% vs 10.7%, p=0.19), target-vessel MI (3.9% vs 3.4%, p=0.40), clinically driven target vessel revascularisation (7.7% vs 6.5%, p=0.32), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (1.4% vs 0.9%, p=0.28). 13-month adjusted angiographic outcomes were comparable between overlapping and non-overlapping DES. CONCLUSIONS Overlapping newer generation DES are safe and effective, with comparable angiographic and clinical outcomes--including repeat revascularisation--to non-overlapping DES.

Tissue coverage and neointimal hyperplasia in overlap versus nonoverlap segments of drug-eluting stents 9 to 13 months after implantation: in vivo assessment with optical coherence tomography

BACKGROUND Histologic experimental studies have reported incomplete neointimal healing in overlapping with respect to nonoverlapping segments in drug-eluting stents (DESs), but these observations have not been confirmed in human coronary arteries hitherto. On the contrary, angiographic and optical coherence tomography studies suggest that DES overlap elicits rather an exaggerated than an incomplete neointimal reaction. METHODS Optical coherence tomography studies from 2 randomized trials including sirolimus-eluting, biolimus-eluting, everolimus-eluting, and zotarolimus-eluting stents were analyzed at 9- to 13-month follow-up. Coverage in overlapping segments was compared versus the corresponding nonoverlapping segments of the same stents, using statistical pooled analysis. RESULTS Forty-two overlaps were found in 31 patients: 11 in sirolimus-eluting stents, 3 in biolimus-eluting stents, 17 in everolimus-eluting stents, and 11 in zotarolimus-eluting stents. The risk ratio of incomplete coverage was 2.35 (95% CI 1.86-2.98) in overlapping versus nonoverlapping segments. Thickness of coverage in overlaps was only 85% (95% CI 81%-90%) of the thickness in nonoverlaps. Significant heterogeneity of the effect was observed, especially pronounced in the comparison of thickness of coverage (I(2) = 90.31). CONCLUSIONS The effect of overlapping DES on neointimal inhibition is markedly heterogeneous: on average, DES overlap is associated with more incomplete and thinner coverage, but in some cases, the overlap elicits an exaggerated neointimal reaction, thicker than in the corresponding nonoverlapping segments. These results might help to understand why overlapping DES is associated with worse clinical outcomes, both in terms of thrombotic phenomena and in terms of restenosis and revascularization.

Long-term outcomes of biodegradable versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from three randomised trials

Aims: Arterial plaque rupture and thrombus characterise ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and may aggravate delayed arterial healing following durable polymer drug-eluting stent (DP-DES) implantation. Biodegradable polymer (BP) may improve biocompatibility. We compared long-term outcomes in STEMI patients receiving BP-DES vs. durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (DP-SES). Methods and results: We pooled individual patient-level data from three randomised clinical trials (ISAR-TEST-3, ISAR-TEST-4 and LEADERS) comparing outcomes from BP-DES with DP-SES at four years. The primary endpoint (MACE) comprised cardiac death, MI, or target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Secondary endpoints were TLR, cardiac death or MI, and definite or probable stent thrombosis. Of 497 patients with STEMI, 291 received BP-DES and 206 DP-SES. At four years, MACE was significantly reduced following treatment with BP-DES (hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, 95% CI: 0.39-0.90; p=0.01) driven by reduced TLR (HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.30-0.98; p=0.04). Trends towards reduction were seen for cardiac death or MI (HR 0.63, 95% CI: 0.37-1.05; p=0.07) and definite or probable stent thrombosis (3.6% vs. 7.1%; HR 0.49, 95% CI: 0.22-1.11; p=0.09). Conclusions: In STEMI, BP-DES demonstrated superior clinical outcomes to DP-SES at four years. Trends towards reduced cardiac death or myocardial infarction and reduced stent thrombosis require corroboration in specifically powered trials.

Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE): a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Refinements in stent design affecting strut thickness, surface polymer, and drug release have improved clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a novel, ultrathin strut cobalt-chromium stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer with a thin strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS We did a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial with minimum exclusion criteria at nine hospitals in Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents. Randomisation was via a central web-based system and stratified by centre and presence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians were not. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularisation at 12 months. A margin of 3·5% was defined for non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104. FINDINGS Between Feb 24, 2012, and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned 2119 patients with 3139 lesions to treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents (1063 patients, 1594 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (1056 patients, 1545 lesions). 407 (19%) patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Target lesion failure with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (69 cases; 6·5%) was non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (70 cases; 6·6%) at 12 months (absolute risk difference -0·14%, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·97%, p for non-inferiority <0·0004). No significant differences were noted in rates of definite stent thrombosis (9 [0·9%] vs 4 [0·4%], rate ratio [RR] 2·26, 95% CI 0·70-7·33, p=0·16). In pre-specified stratified analyses of the primary endpoint, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with improved outcome compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7 [3·3%] vs 17 [8·7%], RR 0·38, 95% CI 0·16-0·91, p=0·024, p for interaction=0·014). INTERPRETATION In a patient population with minimum exclusion criteria and high adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for the combined safety and efficacy outcome target lesion failure at 12 months. The noted benefit in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction needs further study. FUNDING Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, and Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland.

Comparison of everolimus- and biolimus-eluting stents with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold stents: study protocol of the randomized controlled EVERBIO II

BACKGROUND: Second-generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and third generation biolimus-eluting stents (BES) have been shown to be superior to first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) and second-generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). However, neointimal proliferation and very late stent thrombosis is still an unresolved issue of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation overall. The Absorb™ (Abbott Vascular, Abbott Park, IL, USA) is the first CE approved DES with a bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) thought to reduce long-term complication rates. The EVERBIO II trial was set up to compare the BVS safety and efficacy with both EES and BES in all patients viable for inclusion. METHODS/DESIGN: The EVERBIO II trial is a single-center, assessor-blinded, randomized trial. The study population consists of all patients aged≥18 years old undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Exclusion criterion is where the lesion cannot be treated with BVS (reference vessel diameter>4.0 mm). A total of 240 patients will be enrolled and randomly assigned into 3 groups of 80 with either BVS, EES or BES implantation. All patients will undergo a follow-up angiography study at 9 months. Clinical follow-up for up to 5 years will be conducted by telephone. The primary endpoint is in-segment late lumen loss at 9 months measured by quantitative coronary angiography. Secondary endpoints are patient-oriented major adverse cardiac event (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization), device-oriented MACE (cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target-lesion revascularization), stent thrombosis according to ARC and binary restenosis at follow-up 12 months angiography. DISCUSSION: EVERBIO II is an independent, randomized study, aiming to compare the clinical efficacy, angiographic outcomes and safety of BVS, EES and BES in all comer patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial listed in clinicaltrials.gov as NCT01711931.

Comparison of a Novel Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent With a Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent: Results of the Randomized BIOFLOW-II Trial.

BACKGROUND Biodegradable polymers for release of antiproliferative drugs from drug-eluting stents aim to improve vascular healing. We assessed noninferiority of a novel ultrathin strut drug-eluting stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer (Orsiro, O-SES) compared with the durable polymer Xience Prime everolimus-eluting stent (X-EES) in terms of the primary end point in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 452 patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to treatment with O-SES (298 patients, 332 lesions) or X-EES (154 patients, 173 lesions) in a multicenter, noninferiority trial. The primary end point was in-stent late loss at 9 months. O-SES was noninferior to X-EES for the primary end point (0.10±0.32 versus 0.11±0.29 mm; difference=0.00063 mm; 95% confidence interval, -0.06 to 0.07; Pnoninferiority<0.0001). Clinical outcome showed similar rates of target-lesion failure at 1 year (O-SES 6.5% versus X-EES 8.0%; hazard ratio=0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.40-1.68; log-rank test: P=0.58) without cases of stent thrombosis. A subgroup of patients (n=55) underwent serial optical coherence tomography at 9 months, which demonstrated similar neointimal thickness among lesions allocated to O-SES and X-EES (0.10±0.04 mm versus 0.11±0.04 mm; -0.01 [-0.04, -0.01]; P=0.37). Another subgroup of patients (n=56) underwent serial intravascular ultrasound at baseline and 9 months indicating a potential difference in neointimal area at follow-up (O-SES, 0.16±0.33 mm(2) versus X-EES, 0.43±0.56 mm(2); P=0.04). CONCLUSIONS Compared with durable polymer X-EES, novel biodegradable polymer-based O-SES was found noninferior for the primary end point in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months. Clinical event rates were comparable without cases of stent thrombosis throughout 1 year of follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01356888.

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.

A Randomized Comparison of Reservoir-Based Polymer-Free Amphilimus-Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents With Durable Polymer in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: The RESERVOIR Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of amphilimus-eluting stents (AES) with that of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND The AES is a polymer-free drug-eluting stent that elutes sirolimus formulated with an amphiphilic carrier from laser-dug wells. This technology could be associated with a high efficacy in patients with DM. METHODS This was a multicenter, randomized, noninferiority trial. Patients with DM medically treated with oral glucose-lowering agents or insulin and de novo coronary lesions were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to AES or EES. The primary endpoint was the neointimal (NI) volume obstruction assessed by optical coherence tomography at 9-month follow-up. RESULTS A total of 116 lesions in 112 patients were randomized. Overall, 40% were insulin-treated patients, with a median HbA1c of 7.3% (interquartile range: 6.7% to 8.0%). The primary endpoint, NI volume obstruction, was 11.97 ± 5.94% for AES versus 16.11 ± 18.18% for EES, meeting the noninferiority criteria (p = 0.0003). Pre-specified subgroup analyses showed a significant interaction between stent type and glycemic control (p = 0.02), with a significant reduction in NI hyperplasia in the AES group in patients with the higher HbA1c (p = 0.03). By quantitative coronary angiography, in-stent late loss was 0.14 ± 0.24 for AES versus 0.24 ± 0.57 mm for EES (p = 0.27), with a larger minimal lumen diameter at follow-up for AES (p = 0.02), mainly driven by 2 cases of occlusive restenosis in the EES group. CONCLUSIONS AES are noninferior to EES for the coronary revascularization of patients with DM. These results suggest a high efficacy of the AES and may support the potential benefit of this stent in patients with DM. (A Randomized Comparison of Reservoir-Based Polymer-Free Amphilimus-Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents With Durable Polymer in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus [RESERVOIR]; NCT01710748).

Three-year efficacy and safety of new- versus early-generation drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease insights from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 trials.

BACKGROUND In percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) patients new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) has reduced adverse events in comparison to early-generation DES. The aim of the current study was to investigate the long-term clinical efficacy and safety of new-generation DES versus early-generation DES for PCI of unprotected left main coronary artery (uLMCA) disease. METHODS The patient-level data from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 randomized trials were pooled. The clinical outcomes of PCI patients assigned to new-generation DES (everolimus- or zotarolimus-eluting stent) versus early-generation DES (paclitaxel- or sirolimus-eluting stent) were studied. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization and stroke (MACCE, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event). RESULTS In total, 1257 patients were available. At 3 years, the risk of MACCE was comparable between patients assigned to new-generation DES or early-generation DES (28.2 versus 27.5 %, hazard ratio-HR 1.03, 95 % confidence intervals-CI 0.83-1.26; P = 0.86). Definite/probable stent thrombosis was low and comparable between new-generation DES and early-generation DES (0.8 versus 1.6 %, HR 0.52, 95 % CI 0.18-1.57; P = 0.25); in patients treated with new-generation DES no cases occurred beyond 30 days. Diabetes increased the risk of MACCE in patients treated with new-generation DES but not with early-generation DES (P interaction = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS At 3-year follow-up, a PCI with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease shows comparable efficacy to early-generation DES. Rates of stent thrombosis were low in both groups. Diabetes significantly impacts the risk of MACCE at 3 years in patients treated with new-generation DES for uLMCA disease. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00133237; NCT00598637.

Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2-Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial.

BACKGROUND No data are available on the long-term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES). We reported 2-year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation) trial, which compared BP-SES with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS A total of 2119 patients with minimal exclusion criteria were assigned to treatment with BP-SES (n=1063) or DP-EES (n=1056). Follow-up at 2 years was available for 2048 patients (97%). The primary end point was target-lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. At 2 years, target-lesion failure occurred in 107 patients (10.5%) in the BP-SES arm and 107 patients (10.4%) in the DP-EES arm (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.77-1.31, P=0.979). There were no significant differences between BP-SES and DP-EES with respect to cardiac death (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62-1.63, P=0.984), target-vessel myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60-1.39, P=0.669), target-lesion revascularization (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81-1.71, P=0.403), and definite stent thrombosis (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.56-3.44, P=0.485). There were 2 cases (0.2%) of definite very late stent thrombosis in the BP-SES arm and 4 cases (0.4%) in the DP-EES arm (P=0.423). In the prespecified subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, BP-SES was associated with a lower risk of target-lesion failure compared with DP-EES (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23-0.99, P=0.043, Pinteraction=0.026). CONCLUSIONS Comparable safety and efficacy profiles of BP-SES and DP-EES were maintained throughout 2 years of follow-up. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Twelve-month Outcomes After Coronary Stenting With the Genous (TM) Bio-Engineered R Stent (TM) in Diabetic Patients from the e-HEALING Registry

Objectives: We compared 12-month outcomes, regarding ischemic events, repeat intervention, and ST, between diabetic and nondiabetic patients treated with the Genous (TM) EPC capturing R stent (TM) during routine nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using data from the multicenter, prospective worldwide e-HEALING registry. Background: Diabetic patients have an increased risk for restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST). Methods: In the 4,996 patient e-HEALING registry, 273 were insulin requiring diabetics (IRD), 963 were non-IRD (NIRD), and 3,703 were nondiabetics. The 12-month primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF), defined as target vessel-related cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes were the composite of cardiac death, MI or target lesion revascularization (TLR), and individual outcomes including ST. Cumulative event rates were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with a log-rank test. Results: TVF rates were respectively 13.4% in IRD, 9.0% in NIRD, and 7.9% in nondiabetics (P < 0.01). This was mainly driven by a higher mortality hazard in IRD (P < 0.001) and NIRD (P = 0.07), compared with nondiabetics. TLR rates were comparable in NIRD and nondiabetics, but significantly higher in IRD (P = 0.04). No difference was observed in ST. Conclusion: The 1-year results of the Genous stent in a real-world population of diabetics show higher TVF rates in diabetics compared with nondiabetics, mainly driven by a higher mortality hazard. IRD is associated with a significant higher TLR hazard. Definite or probable ST in all diabetic patients was comparable with nondiabetics. (J Interven Cardiol 2011;24:285-294)