Longest available clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery disease: the DELFT (Drug Eluting stent for LeFT main) Registry

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. BACKGROUND: Long-term clinical outcomes after DES implantation for ULMCA disease have not yet been ascertained. METHODS: From April 2002 to April 2004, 358 consecutive patients who underwent PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA were retrospectively selected and analyzed in 7 European and U.S. tertiary care centers. No patients were excluded from the analysis, and all patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. RESULTS: Technical success rate was 100%. Procedural success rate was 89.6%. After 3 years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival in the whole population was 73.5%. According to the Academic Research Consortium definitions, cardiac death occurred in 9.2% of patients, and reinfarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 8.6%, 5.8%, and 14.2% of patients, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (specifically at 0 and 439 days). In elective patients, the 3-year MACE-free survival was 74.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 6.2%, 8.3%, 6.6%, and 16%, respectively. In the emergent group the 3-year MACE-free survival was 68.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 21.4%, 10%, 2.8%, and 7.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Routine DES implantation in ULMCA disease seems encouraging, with favorable long-term clinical results.

Improved safety and reduction in stent thrombosis associated with biodegradable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer-based sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: final 5-year report of the LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) randomized, noninferiority trial

OBJECTIVES This study sought to report the final 5 years follow-up of the landmark LEADERS (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating) trial. BACKGROUND The LEADERS trial is the first randomized study to evaluate biodegradable polymer-based drug-eluting stents (DES) against durable polymer DES. METHODS The LEADERS trial was a 10-center, assessor-blind, noninferiority, "all-comers" trial (N = 1,707). All patients were centrally randomized to treatment with either biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BES) (n = 857) or durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (n = 850). The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically indicated target vessel revascularization within 9 months. Secondary endpoints included extending the primary endpoint to 5 years and stent thrombosis (ST) (Academic Research Consortium definition). Analysis was by intention to treat. RESULTS At 5 years, the BES was noninferior to SES for the primary endpoint (186 [22.3%] vs. 216 [26.1%], rate ratio [RR]: 0.83 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.68 to 1.02], p for noninferiority <0.0001, p for superiority = 0.069). The BES was associated with a significant reduction in the more comprehensive patient-orientated composite endpoint of all-cause death, any MI, and all-cause revascularization (297 [35.1%] vs. 339 [40.4%], RR: 0.84 [95% CI: 0.71 to 0.98], p for superiority = 0.023). A significant reduction in very late definite ST from 1 to 5 years was evident with the BES (n = 5 [0.7%] vs. n = 19 [2.5%], RR: 0.26 [95% CI: 0.10 to 0.68], p = 0.003), corresponding to a significant reduction in ST-associated clinical events (primary endpoint) over the same time period (n = 3 of 749 vs. n = 14 of 738, RR: 0.20 [95% CI: 0.06 to 0.71], p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS The safety benefit of the biodegradable polymer BES, compared with the durable polymer SES, was related to a significant reduction in very late ST (>1 year) and associated composite clinical outcomes. (Limus Eluted From A Durable Versus ERodable Stent Coating [LEADERS] trial; NCT00389220).

Clinical outcomes of the resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent in patients with in-stent restenosis: 2-year results from a pooled analysis

OBJECTIVES This study sought to assess the clinical safety and effectiveness of the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) in patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) from 2 large trials. BACKGROUND ISR treatment is associated with higher rates of subsequent cardiac events compared with treatment of de novo lesions. Although drug-eluting stents (DES) are an option, second-generation DES are largely untested in the treatment of ISR. METHODS A total of 3,489 patients were pooled from the RAC (RESOLUTE All Comers) trial and the RESOLUTE International (RINT) registry. Two-year clinical endpoints included clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion failure (TLF), cardiac death (CD), target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), combined CD or TVMI (CD/TVMI), and Academic Research Consortium definite and probable stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS Overall, 281 patients (8.1%) received an R-ZES for ISR. Two-year TLR and TLF rates were significantly higher in ISR patients than in non-ISR patients (TLR: 12.7% vs. 4.3%, p = 0.003; TLF: 17.4% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.007); however, the CD/TVMI rate was not (6.9% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.711). Seven ISR patients had ST. Two-year outcomes by ISR stent type were similar: bare-metal stent (BMS)-ISR TLR was 12.5% and TLF was 17.2%; DES-ISR TLR was 13.0% and TLF was 18.8%. CD/TVMI was 7.3% and 7.2% for BMS-ISR and DES-ISR, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Using R-ZES to treat ISR appears equally safe in BMS-ISR and DES-ISR, with CD/TVMI rates comparable to 2-year outcomes in other clinical trials. Although revascularization rates are still higher in ISR lesions, the R-ZES offers an effective alternative for treatment of BMS-ISR and DES-ISR. (Randomized, Two-Arm, Non-inferiority Study Comparing Endeavor-Resolute Stent With Abbot Xience-V Stent [RESOLUTE-AC]; NCT00617084; and RESOLUTE International Registry: Evaluation of the Resolute Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent System in a 'Real-World' Patient Population [RINT]; NCT00752128).

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation and bleeding: incidence, predictors and prognosis

Peri-procedural bleeding complications are feared adverse events in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Little is known about the implications of peri-procedural bleeding on clinical outcome. In a prospective single-center registry of consecutive patients undergoing TAVI, we investigated incidence, predictors and clinical consequences of life-threatening and major bleeding as defined by the Valve Academic Research Consortium. Among 389 consecutive patients undergoing TAVI by a transfemoral (79.2%), transapical (19.6%) or trans-subclavian (1.3%) approach between July 2007 and October 2011, life-threatening or major peri-procedural bleeding events occurred in 64 (16.4%) and 125 patients (32.1%), respectively. Patients with peri-procedural bleeding events had a higher logistic EuroSCORE, more advanced renal disease, and were more symptomatic as assessed by New York Heart Association functional class at baseline as compared to patients with no bleeding. Life-threatening bleeding was associated with a higher all-cause (17.2 vs. 5.6 vs. 3.0%, p < 0.001) and cardiovascular mortality (10.9 vs. 5.6 vs. 2.5%, p = 0.02) at 30 days compared to patients with major bleeding or no bleeding. Multivariate analysis identified transapical access (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.4-4.8; p = 0.002), glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.1-4.7, p = 0.031), and diabetes (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.001-3.2, p = 0.049) as independent predictors of life-threatening, peri-procedural bleeding. Life-threatening bleeding complications in patients undergoing TAVI are associated with increased mortality. Renal impairment, diabetes, and transapical approach were identified as independent risk factors for life-threatening bleeding events.

Ten year clinical follow-up after Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation

BACKGROUND: Little is known on the "very" long-term incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), target-lesion revascularization (TLR), target-vessel revascularization and stent thrombosis after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation. We present the first study to provide a 10-year clinical follow-up in an unselected patient population who underwent SES implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: We ran a systematic 10-year clinical follow-up in a series of 200 consecutive patients treated with unrestricted SES implantation between April 2002 and April 2003 in two Swiss hospitals. Outcomes and follow-up were obtained in all 200 patients. The cumulative 10-year MACE rate was 47% with all-cause death of 20%, cardiac death of 9%, myocardial infarction of 7%, TLR and target-vessel revascularization of 8% and 11% respectively. Academic Research Consortium-defined "definite and probable" stent thrombosis-rate was 2.5%. TLR risk was maximal between 3 to 6 years. New lesion revascularization increased throughout the study period. CONCLUSION: Incidence of TLR was maximal 3 to 6 years after SES implantation and decreased thereafter. MACE and non-TLR revascularization rates steadily increased during the complete follow-up underlining the progression of coronary artery disease.

Clinical results with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent in total coronary occlusions.

Aims: We conducted a pooled post hoc analysis (RESOLUTE All Comers and RESOLUTE International) of patients who had the Resolute® zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) implanted in revascularised total occlusions (TO) compared with patients treated with R-ZES for non-occluded lesions. Methods and results: Patients were divided into three groups: chronic TO (CTO; n=256), non-chronic TO (n=292), and no occlusion (n=2,941). Clinical and safety outcomes assessed through two years included target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularisation) and Academic Research Consortium definite or probable stent thrombosis. The rate of TLF at two years was not significantly different among patients in the CTO (9.1%), TO (9.8%), and no occlusion (10.4%) groups (log-rank p=0.800); neither were the components of TLF. Definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred more frequently in the TO group (2.8% vs. 1.2% in the CTO and 1.1% in the group with no occlusion, p=0.027). There were 10 late and six very late stent thrombosis events. Conclusions: Apart from a higher rate of stent thrombosis in patients with TO, patients with totally occluded coronary arteries who receive revascularisation with an R-ZES have clinical outcomes comparable to those who receive a similar stent in non-occluded lesions.

Treatment of aortic stenosis with a self-expanding transcatheter valve: the International Multi-centre ADVANCE Study.

AIM Transcatheter aortic valve implantation has become an alternative to surgery in higher risk patients with symptomatic aortic stenosis. The aim of the ADVANCE study was to evaluate outcomes following implantation of a self-expanding transcatheter aortic valve system in a fully monitored, multi-centre 'real-world' patient population in highly experienced centres. METHODS AND RESULTS Patients with severe aortic stenosis at a higher surgical risk in whom implantation of the CoreValve System was decided by the Heart Team were included. Endpoints were a composite of major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, or reintervention) and mortality at 30 days and 1 year. Endpoint-related events were independently adjudicated based on Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions. A total of 1015 patients [mean logistic EuroSCORE 19.4 ± 12.3% [median (Q1,Q3), 16.0% (10.3, 25.3%)], age 81 ± 6 years] were enrolled. Implantation of the CoreValve System led to a significant improvement in haemodynamics and an increase in the effective aortic valve orifice area. At 30 days, the MACCE rate was 8.0% (95% CI: 6.3-9.7%), all-cause mortality was 4.5% (3.2-5.8%), cardiovascular mortality was 3.4% (2.3-4.6%), and the rate of stroke was 3.0% (2.0-4.1%). The life-threatening or disabling bleeding rate was 4.0% (2.8-6.3%). The 12-month rates of MACCE, all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke were 21.2% (18.4-24.1%), 17.9% (15.2-20.5%), 11.7% (9.4-14.1%), and 4.5% (2.9-6.1%), respectively. The 12-month rates of all-cause mortality were 11.1, 16.5, and 23.6% among patients with a logistic EuroSCORE ≤10%, EuroSCORE 10-20%, and EuroSCORE >20% (P< 0.05), respectively. CONCLUSION The ADVANCE study demonstrates the safety and effectiveness of the CoreValve System with low mortality and stroke rates in higher risk real-world patients with severe aortic stenosis.

Feasibility and outcomes of combined transcatheter aortic valve replacement with other structural heart interventions in a single session: a matched cohort study

Background Concurrent cardiac diseases are frequent among elderly patients and invite simultaneous treatment to ensure an overall favourable patient outcome. Aim To investigate the feasibility of combined single-session percutaneous cardiac interventions in the era of transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). Methods This prospective, case–control study included 10 consecutive patients treated with TAVI, left atrial appendage occlusion and percutaneous coronary interventions. Some in addition had patent foramen ovale or atrial septal defect closure in the same session. The patients were matched in a 1:10 manner with TAVI-only cases treated within the same time period at the same institution regarding their baseline factors. The outcome was validated according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium (VARC) criteria. Results Procedural time (126±42 vs 83±40 min, p=0.0016), radiation time (34±8 vs 22±12 min, p=0.0001) and contrast dye (397±89 vs 250±105 mL, p<0.0001) were higher in the combined intervention group than in the TAVI-only group. Despite these drawbacks, no difference in the VARC endpoints was evident during the in-hospital period and after 30 days (VARC combined safety endpoint 32% for TAVI only and 20% for combined intervention, p=1.0). Conclusions Transcatheter treatment of combined cardiac diseases is feasible even in a single session in a high-volume centre with experienced operators.

Safety profile of prasugrel and clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE To assess safety up to 1 year of follow-up associated with prasugrel and clopidogrel use in a prospective cohort of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS). METHODS Between 2009 and 2012, 2286 patients invasively managed for ACS were enrolled in the multicentre Swiss ACS Bleeding Cohort, among whom 2148 patients received either prasugrel or clopidogrel according to current guidelines. Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) preferentially received prasugrel, while those with non-STEMI, a history of stroke or transient ischaemic attack, age ≥75 years, or weight <60 kg received clopidogrel or reduced dose of prasugrel to comply with the prasugrel label. RESULTS After adjustment using propensity scores, the primary end point of clinically relevant bleeding events (defined as the composite of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium, BARC, type 3, 4 or 5 bleeding) at 1 year, occurred at a similar rate in both patient groups (prasugrel/clopidogrel: 3.8%/5.5%). Stratified analyses in subgroups including patients with STEMI yielded a similar safety profile. After adjusting for baseline variables, no relevant differences in major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events were observed at 1 year (prasugrel/clopidogrel: cardiac death 2.6%/4.2%, myocardial infarction 2.7%/3.8%, revascularisation 5.9%/6.7%, stroke 1.0%/1.6%). Of note, this study was not designed to compare efficacy between prasugrel and clopidogrel. CONCLUSIONS In this large prospective ACS cohort, patients treated with prasugrel according to current guidelines (ie, in patients without cerebrovascular disease, old age or underweight) had a similar safety profile compared with patients treated with clopidogrel. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER SPUM-ACS: NCT01000701; COMFORTABLE AMI: NCT00962416.

Radial versus femoral access in patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management: a randomised multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND It is unclear whether radial compared with femoral access improves outcomes in unselected patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing invasive management. METHODS We did a randomised, multicentre, superiority trial comparing transradial against transfemoral access in patients with acute coronary syndrome with or without ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were about to undergo coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to radial or femoral access with a web-based system. The randomisation sequence was computer generated, blocked, and stratified by use of ticagrelor or prasugrel, type of acute coronary syndrome (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, troponin positive or negative, non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome), and anticipated use of immediate percutaneous coronary intervention. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation. The 30-day coprimary outcomes were major adverse cardiovascular events, defined as death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, and net adverse clinical events, defined as major adverse cardiovascular events or Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The analysis was by intention to treat. The two-sided α was prespecified at 0·025. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01433627. FINDINGS We randomly assigned 8404 patients with acute coronary syndrome, with or without ST-segment elevation, to radial (4197) or femoral (4207) access for coronary angiography and percutaneous coronary intervention. 369 (8·8%) patients with radial access had major adverse cardiovascular events, compared with 429 (10·3%) patients with femoral access (rate ratio [RR] 0·85, 95% CI 0·74-0·99; p=0·0307), non-significant at α of 0·025. 410 (9·8%) patients with radial access had net adverse clinical events compared with 486 (11·7%) patients with femoral access (0·83, 95% CI 0·73-0·96; p=0·0092). The difference was driven by BARC major bleeding unrelated to coronary artery bypass graft surgery (1·6% vs 2·3%, RR 0·67, 95% CI 0·49-0·92; p=0·013) and all-cause mortality (1·6% vs 2·2%, RR 0·72, 95% CI 0·53-0·99; p=0·045). INTERPRETATION In patients with acute coronary syndrome undergoing invasive management, radial as compared with femoral access reduces net adverse clinical events, through a reduction in major bleeding and all-cause mortality. FUNDING The Medicines Company and Terumo.

Dicto: Keeping Software Architecture Under Control

Dicto is a declarative language for specifying architectural rules using a single uniform notation. Once defined, rules can automatically be validated using adapted off-the-shelf tools.