Biodegradable Polymer Drug-eluting Stents Research Articles

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes of Biodegradable- Versus Durable-Polymer-Coated Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Real-World Post-Marketing Study.

Long-term clinical data on biodegradable-polymer (BP) drug-eluting stents (DES) are limited. The objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the BP-DES SYNERGY compared to XIENCE V, a durable-polymer (DP)-DES. We compared patients treated with BP-DES or DP-DES at our center from 2008 to 2020. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of all-cause death, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR). Secondary endpoints were all-cause death, Q-wave MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis (ST). A total of 4255 patients underwent propensity-score matching, and 380 patients from each cohort were matched. There was no significant difference between BP-DES and DP-DES concerning MACE (5-year estimates: 21.6% vs. 26.6%, log-rank p = 0.259). Furthermore, there was no difference in the TLR rate (5-year estimates: 7.3% vs. 8.6%, log-rank p = 0.781). All-cause death (5-year estimates: 13.6% vs. 12.9%, log-rank p = 0.72) and Q-wave MI (5-year estimates: 0.53% vs. 1.7%, log-rank p = 0.427) were also comparable between the two groups. Of note, the rate of very late ST was very low and similar between the groups (5-year estimates: 0.26% vs. 0.64%, log-rank p = 0.698). BP-DES and DP-DES demonstrate similar safety and efficacy at 5-year follow-up. Both can be used for the effective treatment of coronary artery disease.

Cost-Effectiveness of Three Different New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in the Randomised BIO-RESORT Trial at 3 Years.

Evidence on health economic outcomes for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) comparing different contemporary drug-eluting stents (DES) with each other is scarce, as most previous randomised DES trials did not assess such aspects. This prespecified health economic evaluation of the Comparison of Biodegradable Polymer and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in an All Comers Population (BIO-RESORT) trial aimed to compare at 3-year follow-up both health effects and costs of PCI with one of three new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with obstructive coronary artery disease. The randomised BIO-RESORT trial assessed in 3514 patients the ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and very-thin-strut Synergy everolimus-eluting (EES) stent versus the thin-strut durable polymer Resolute Integrity zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES). In the current analysis, we used the perspective of a health insurer in the Netherlands. The main endpoints were quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and costs for each treatment strategy. Bootstrapping with 5000 resamples was performed to capture the uncertainty of results. Mean QALYs for each stent group were 2.566 for the SES, 2.551 for the EES, and 2.550 for the ZES. Mean costs per strategy were €14,670 for the SES, €14,946 for the EES, and €15,069 for the ZES. The SES had the highest probability of being cost-effective for every willingness-to-pay threshold up to €100,000 per QALY. Furthermore, in 79% of modelling scenarios, the SES was more effective and cheaper than ZES. At 3-year follow-up, PCI with the SES had the highest probability of being cost-effective due to greater effectiveness and lower costs compared with the ZES and EES. These findings suggest that, due to the overall high volume of coronary stenting in clinical practice, use of this SES could result in substantial cost savings, complemented by slight additional health benefits.

Impact of procedural and patient-related risks on 1-year outcomes for patients with 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stent implantation

Abstract Background While early de-escalation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy following short DAPT are becoming standard treatments for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the impact of procedural and patient-related risks on clinical outcomes of PCI for patients receiving the above DAPT regimen has never been established. Purpose To evaluate the impact of procedural and patient-related risk factors on 1-year cardiovascular and bleeding outcomes in patients with 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stent (BP-DES) implantation. Methods Using data from the multi-centre regional-wide REIWA registry, we assessed clinical outcomes according to each risk factor and compared between patients with and without either procedural or patient-related risk factors. The primary end point was net adverse clinical events (NACE), defined as a composite of cardiovascular outcomes (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke) and bleeding outcomes (TIMI major or minor bleeding), which was same with that for STOPDAPT-2 trial. Procedural risk was defined as a factor of complex PCI which was previously published and included the follows: treatment of three vessels, three or more lesions, three or more stents, bifurcation with two stents, long stenting (total stent length >60 mm) and target of chronic total occlusion. Additionally, patient-related risk factors were defined as chronic kidney disease, anaemia, peripheral vascular disease, heart failure and advanced age (≧75 years). Results Among 1,202 patients treated BP-DES with 1-month DAPT, 276 patients (23.0%) had at least one procedural factors and 510 patients (42.4%) had one or more patient-related risks. Compared with each risk factor, patients with patient-related risk factor were more likely to have higher NACE rates, whereas low NACE rates were observed in patients with each procedural risk factor (Figure 1). In addition, during 1-year follow-up, patients with patient-related risk factors had a significantly higher incidence of NACE compared with patients without such risks (4.90 % vs. 1.73 %, p = 0.002) (Figure 2). However, no significant differences in NACE rates was observed between patients with and without procedural risk factors (2.54% vs. 3.24%, p = 0.555). Conclusion In patients undergoing BP-DES implantation and 1 month DAPT followed by P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy, patient-related risk factors had an impact on 1-year clinical outcomes, while procedural risk factors no longer had small impact on those outcomes.

TCT-431 Durable Polymer Versus Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients With High Ischemic Risk: Three-Year Post Hoc Analysis of the HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS Trial

TCT-431 Durable Polymer Versus Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients With High Ischemic Risk: Three-Year Post Hoc Analysis of the HOST-REDUCE-POLYTECH-ACS Trial

TCT-424 Pathologic Analysis of Fibrin Deposition Around Stent Struts Within 1 Month After Placement of Circumferentially Coated Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents and Abluminally Coated Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents for Acute Coronary Syndrome

TCT-424 Pathologic Analysis of Fibrin Deposition Around Stent Struts Within 1 Month After Placement of Circumferentially Coated Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents and Abluminally Coated Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents for Acute Coronary Syndrome

Long-term effect of biodegradable vs durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents on neoatherosclerosis in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the CONNECT trial.

Neoatherosclerosis is a leading cause of late (>1 year) stent failure following drug-eluting stent implantation. The role of biodegradable (BP) versus durable polymer (DP) drug-eluting stents on long-term occurrence of neoatherosclerosis remains unclear. Superiority of biodegradable against durable polymer current generation thin-strut everolimus-eluting stent (EES) was tested by assessing the frequency of neoatherosclerosis 3 years after primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) among patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). The randomized controlled, multicentre (Japan and Switzerland) CONNECT trial (NCT03440801) randomly (1:1) assigned 239 STEMI patients to pPCI with BP-EES or DP-EES. The primary endpoint was the frequency of neoatherosclerosis assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT) at 3 years. Neoatherosclerosis was defined as fibroatheroma or fibrocalcific plaque or macrophage accumulation within the neointima. Among 239 STEMI patients randomized, 236 received pPCI with stent implantation (119 BP-EES; 117 DP-EES). A total of 178 patients (75%; 88 in the BP-EES group and 90 in the DP-EES group) underwent OCT assessment at 3 years. Neoatherosclerosis did not differ between the BP-EES (11.4%) and DP-EES (13.3%; odds ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval 0.33-2.04, p=0.69). There were no differences in the frequency of fibroatheroma (BP-EES 9.1% vs DP-EES 11.1%, p=0.66) or macrophage accumulation (BP-EES 4.5% vs DP-EES 3.3%, p=0.68), and no fibrocalcific neoatherosclerosis was observed. Rates of target lesion failure did not differ between groups (BP-EES 5.9% vs DP-EES 6.0%, p=0.97). Use of BP-EES for primary PCI in patients presenting with STEMI was not superior to DP-EES regarding frequency of neoatherosclerosis at 3 years.

Adverse Events in Patients Implanted With Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents, Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents, and Bare-Metal Stents: A Retrospective Analysis of Registry Data

Adverse Events in Patients Implanted With Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents, Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents, and Bare-Metal Stents: A Retrospective Analysis of Registry Data

Durable-polymer versus biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents in acute coronary syndromes: three-year outcomes of the HOST REDUCE POLYTECH RCT Trial.

Long-term follow-up is essential to evaluate the impact of polymer degradation in drug-eluting stents (DES). We aimed to compare durable-polymer DES (DP-DES) and biodegradable-polymer DES (BP-DES) during a 3-year follow-up to evaluate the entire period of polymer resolution (before, during, and after degradation). The HOST REDUCE POLYTECH RCT Trial was a randomised clinical trial enrolling patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and comparing the efficacy and safety of DP-DES and BP-DES. The primary outcome was a patient-oriented composite outcome (POCO), and the key secondary outcome was a device-oriented composite outcome (DOCO). A total of 3,413 ACS patients were randomised to either the DP-DES (1,713 patients) or BP-DES (1,700 patients) group. During the 3-year follow-up, the risk of the POCO was similar between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (14.8% vs 15.4%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.80-1.14; p=0.613). However, the risk of the DOCO was lower in the DP-DES group (6.0% vs 8.0%, HR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.57-0.95; p=0.020). In a landmark analysis, the lower risk of the DOCO for the DP-DES group was evident during the transition from the early to the late period after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (from 8 to 16 months post-PCI; 1.8% vs 3.3%, HR 0.54, 95% CI: 0.34-0.84; p=0.007), which was mainly driven by a risk reduction of target lesion revascularisation. In ACS patients, DP-DES showed similar results to BP-DES regarding the POCO up to 3 years. For the DOCO, DP-DES were superior to BP-DES; this was due to the higher event rate during the period of polymer degradation.

One-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Followed by P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy After Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation - The REIWA Region-Wide Registry.

The safety and feasibility of using 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy for patients after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with thin-strut biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) in daily clinical practice remain uncertain.Methods and Results: The REIWA region-wide registry is a prospective study conducted in 1 PCI center and 9 local hospitals in northern Japan. A total of 1,202 patients who successfully underwent final PCI using BP-DES (Synergy: n=400; Ultimaster: n=401; Orsiro: n=401), were enrolled in the registry, and received 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12inhibitor (prasugrel 3.75 mg/day or clopidogrel 75 mg/day) monotherapy. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular and bleeding events at 12 months, including cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST), ischemic or hemorrhagic stroke, and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) major or minor bleeding. Based on the results of a previous study, we set the performance goal at 5.0%. Over the 1-year follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 3.08% of patients, which was lower than the predefined performance goal (Pnon-inferiority<0.0001). Notably, definite ST occurred in only 1 patient (0.08%) within 1 year (at 258 days). No differences were observed in the primary endpoint between stent types. The REIWA region-wide registry suggests that 1-month DAPT followed by P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy is safe and feasible for Japanese patients with BP-DES.

Efficacy and safety of durable versus biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock

The clinical impact of different polymer technologies in newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) for patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) complicated by cardiogenic shock (CS) remains poorly understood. We investigated the efficacy and safety of durable polymer DESs (DP-DESs) compared with biodegradable polymer DESs (BP-DESs). A total of 620 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with newer-generation DESs for AMI complicated by CS was divided into two groups based on polymer technology: the DP-DES group (n = 374) and the BP-DES group (n = 246). The primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF) during a 12-month follow-up, defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Both the DP-DES and BP-DES groups exhibited low stent thrombosis rates (1.3% vs. 1.6%, p = 0.660). The risk of TVF did not significantly differ between the two groups (34.2% vs. 28.5%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.69–1.29, p = 0.721). This finding remained consistent after adjustment with inverse probability of treatment weighting (28.1% vs. 25.1%, HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.77–1.27, p = 0.899). In AMI patients complicated by CS, the risk of a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization was not significantly different between those treated with DP-DESs and those treated with BP-DESs.Trial registration: RESCUE registry, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02985008, NCT02985008.

Clinical outcomes with biodegradable versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction

BackgroundCoronary drug-eluting stents (DES) built with either durable (DP) or biodegradable (BP) polymeric coatings have been largely tested and are extensively available for routine use. However, their comparative performance remains an open question, particularly in more complex subsets of patients. AimsWe evaluated the outcomes of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) using DP-DES versus BP-DES in a large multicenter real-world registry. MethodsThe population comprised patients with STEMI treated with pPCI within 12 h of symptoms onset. Those treated with more than one DES who received different polymer types were excluded. The final cohort for analysis was selected after propensity score matching (PSM), computed to generate similar groups of DP DES versus BP DES. Primary endpoint was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as the composite of total death, myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization at 2 years. ResultsFrom January 2017 to April 2022, a total of 1527 STEMI patients underwent pPCI with a single DES type (587 DP-DES; 940 BP-DES). After PSM, 836 patients (418 patients in the DP-DES and 418 patients in the BP-DES groups), comprised the final study population. Both study groups had a similar baseline profile. Patients treated with BP-DES group had similar rates of MACE (15.3 % vs. 19.4 %, HR 0.69, 95 % CI 0.50–0.94, p = 0.022). Rates of target lesion revascularization was lower in BP DES group (0.7 % vs. 3.8 %, HR 0.17, 95 % CI 0.05–0.51, p = 0.006). ConclusionIn a cohort of STEMI patients submitted to pPCI, BP and DP DES had similar rates of the primary outcome. Patients treated with BP DES, however, had a decreased incidence of TLR at after 2-year follow-up.

Second-generation everolimus-eluting intracoronary stents: a comprehensive review of the clinical evidence.

Percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) has emerged as a mainstay for the treatment of obstructive coronary artery disease given its beneficial impact on clinical outcomes in these patients. Everolimus-eluting stents (EES) are one of the most frequently implanted second-generation DES; their use for the treatment of a wide range of patients including those with complex coronary lesions is supported by compelling evidence. Although newer stent platforms such as biodegradable polymer DES may lower local vessel inflammation, their efficacy and safety have not yet surpassed that of Xience stents. This articlesummarizes the properties of theXience family of EES and the evidence supporting their use across diverse patient demographics and coronary lesion morphologies.

Rationale and design of the PARTHENOPE trial: A two-by-two factorial comparison of polymer-free vs biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents and personalized vs standard duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in all-comers undergoing PCI

BackgroundOver the past few decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has undergone significant advancements as a result of the combination of device-based and drug-based therapies. These iterations have led to the development of polymer-free drug-eluting stents. However, there is a scarcity of data regarding their clinical performance. Furthermore, while various risk scores have been proposed to determine the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), none of them have undergone prospective validation within the context of randomized trials. DesignThe PARTHENOPE trial is a phase IV, prospective, randomized, multicenter, investigator-initiated, assessor-blind study being conducted at 14 centers in Italy (NCT04135989). It includes 2,107 all-comers patients with minimal exclusion criteria, randomly assigned in a 2-by-2 design to receive either the Cre8 amphilimus-eluting stent or the SYNERGY everolimus-eluting stent, along with either a personalized or standard duration of DAPT. Personalized DAPT duration is determined by the DAPT score, which accounts for both bleeding and ischemic risks. Patients with a DAPT score <2 (indicating higher bleeding than ischemic risk) receive DAPT for 3 or 6 months for chronic or acute coronary syndrome, respectively, while patients with a DAPT score ≥2 (indicating higher ischemic than bleeding risk) receive DAPT for 24 months. Patients in the standard DAPT group receive DAPT for 12 months. The trial aims to establish the noninferiority between stents with respect to a device-oriented composite end point of cardiovascular death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically-driven target-lesion revascularization at 12 months after PCI. Additionally, the trial aims to demonstrate the superiority of personalized DAPT compared to a standard approach with respect to a net clinical composite of all-cause death, any myocardial infarction, stroke, urgent target-vessel revascularization, or type 2 to 5 bleeding according to the Bleeding Academic Research Consortium criteria at 24-months after PCI. SummaryThe PARTHENOPE trial is the largest randomized trial investigating the efficacy and safety of a polymer-free DES with a reservoir technology for drug-release and the first trial evaluating a personalized duration of DAPT based on the DAPT score. The study results will provide novel insights into the optimizing the use of drug-eluting stents and DAPT in patients undergoing PCI.

Biodegradable or durable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: ten-year outcomes of the randomised NEXT Trial.

There are no randomised trials reporting clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents (BP-BES) and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) at 10years. We aimed to compare the 10-year clinical outcomes between BP-BES and DP-EES. The randomised NOBORI Biolimus-Eluting Versus XIENCE/PROMUS Everolimus-eluting Stent Trial (NEXT) was originally designed to evaluate the non-inferiority of BP-BES relative to DP-EES with the primary efficacy endpoint of target lesion revascularisation (TLR) at 1year and the primary safety endpoint of death or myocardial infarction (MI) at 3years. In this extended follow-up study, clinical outcomes were compared from 1year after stent implantation up to 10years between patients with BP-BES and DP-EES. From May to October 2011, NEXT enrolled atotal of 3,241patients from 98 centres in Japan. The current study population consisted of 2,417patients (1,204patients with BP-BES and 1,213 with DP-EES) from 66 centres that agreed to participate in the extended study. Complete 10-year follow-up was achieved in 87.5% of patients. The cumulative 10-year incidence of death or MI was 34.0% in the BP-BES group and 33.1% in the DP-EES group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.90-1.20; p=0.58). TLR occurred in 15.9% of patients in the BP-BES group and in 14.1% of the DP-EES group (HR 1.12, 95% CI: 0.90-1.40; p=0.32). In alandmark analysis at 1year, the cumulative incidences of death or MI and TLR were not significantly different between the 2 groups. The safety and efficacy outcomes for BP-BES were not significantly different from those for DP-EES at 1year and up to 10years after stent implantation.

Real-world five-year outcomes of FlexyRap® cobalt-chromium rapamycin-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer in patients with de-novo coronary artery disease.

The use of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) has been proven to minimize restenosis and stent thrombosis. The current post-marketing monitoring was observed at the 5-year clinical outcomes of individuals who had been treated with FlexyRap® DES in the real world. To assess the safety and effectiveness of FlexyRap® DES at the 5-year follow-up in real-world settings. Findings from a retrospective, multi-center, observational, post-market clinical follow-up study of patients treated with FlexyRap® DES for de novo coronary artery disease (CAD) were reported. During the 12-mo follow-up, the primary endpoint was target lesion failure, which was defined as the composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV-MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization. The data of 500 patients received with FlexyRap® DES was obtained at the completion of the surveillance timeline of 5-year. After the implantation of FlexyRap® DES, the device success rate was 100%. Adverse events that led to major bleeding, permanent disability, or death were not experienced in the patients. The major adverse cardiac event rate at 12-mo, 3-year, and 5-year follow-up was 1 (0.2%), 0 (0%), and 1 (0.2%) respectively with 0 (0%) cardiovascular death, 2 (0.4%) TV-MI, and 0 (0%) TLR compositely. Furthermore, late stent thrombosis was found in 2 (0.4%) patients at the follow-up of 12-mo, very late stent thrombosis was observed in 2 patients (0.4%) at 3-year follow-up. FlexyRap® DES was proved to be safe and efficacious in real-world patients with de novo CAD, indicating a lowered rate of cardiac events and stent thrombosis at 5-year follow-up.

Five-year outcomes of biodegradable versus second-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents used in complex percutaneous coronary intervention.

There are few data comparing clinical outcomes of complex percutaneous coronary intervention (CPCI) when using biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) or second-generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES). The purpose of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of BP-DES and compare that with DP-DES in patients with and without CPCI during a 5-year follow-up. Patients who exclusively underwent BP-DES or DP-DES implantation in 2013 at Fuwai Hospital were consecutively enrolled and stratified into two categories based on CPCI presence or absence. CPCI included at least one of the following features: unprotected left main lesion, ≥2 lesions treated, ≥2 stents implanted, total stent length >40 mm, moderate-to-severe calcified lesion, chronic total occlusion, or bifurcated target lesion. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and total coronary revascularization (target lesion revascularization, target vessel revascularization [TVR], and non-TVR) during the 5-year follow-up. The secondary endpoint was total coronary revascularization. Among the 7712 patients included, 4882 (63.3%) underwent CPCI. Compared with non-CPCI patients, CPCI patients had higher 2- and 5-year incidences of MACE and total coronary revascularization. Following multivariable adjustment including stent type, CPCI was an independent predictor of MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 1.151; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.017-1.303, P = 0.026) and total coronary revascularization (aHR: 1.199; 95% CI: 1.037-1.388, P = 0.014) at 5 years. The results were consistent at the 2-year endpoints. In patients with CPCI, BP-DES use was associated with significantly higher MACE rates at 5 years (aHR: 1.256; 95% CI: 1.078-1.462, P = 0.003) and total coronary revascularization (aHR: 1.257; 95% CI: 1.052-1.502, P = 0.012) compared with that of DP-DES, but there was a similar risk at 2 years. However, BP-DES had comparable safety and efficacy profiles including MACE and total coronary revascularization compared with DP-DES in patients with non-CPCI at 2 and 5 years. Patients underwent CPCI remained at a higher risk of mid- to long-term adverse events regardless of the stent type. The effect of BP-DES compared with DP-DES on outcomes was similar in CPCI and non-CPCI patients at 2 years but had inconsistent effects at the 5-year clinical endpoints.

Geographic Variations on the Safety and Efficacy of the Supreme Biodegradable Polymer DES: Results From PIONEER III.

The PIONEER III trial showed the 12-month safety and efficacy of the Supreme drug-eluting stent (DES) vs the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. We sought to assess whether the characteristics and clinical outcomes of the Supreme DES in PIONEER III were consistent among patients by enrollment location. This subgroup analysis of the PIONEER III trial compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients recruited from North America, Europe, and Japan and the relative differences in patient outcomes according to the site recruitment volume. From October 2017 to July 2019, 1629 patients were recruited in North America (816, 50.1%), Europe (650, 39.9%), and Japan (163, 10%). Procedural success was achieved in 1556 of 1611 procedures (96.6%), with no difference by the geographic location. Target lesion failure at 12 months for combined groups was observed in 84 of 1629 patients (5.2%), with no significant geographic differences (4.7%, 6.5%, and 2.5%, respectively; P =.08), with similar results in the Supreme DES group alone (4.4%, 6.8%, and 3.7%, respectively, P =.20). Cardiac death at 12 months occurred in 0.4%, 0.2%, and 0.0% (P =.79), target vessel-related myocardial infarction occurred in 2.2%, 4.7%, and 3.7%, (P =.10), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization was required in 2.1%, 3.1%, and 0%, respectively (P =.15). Compared with those from high-recruiting sites, results from low-recruiting sites were similar for target lesion failure, major adverse cardiac events, stent thrombosis, and mortality, with a nonsignificant trend for higher rates of myocardial infarction. Despite regional differences in patient characteristics, the clinical outcomes between Supreme DES and durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in the PIONEER III trial were not different, supporting the generalizability and robustness of the findings from this multicenter controlled trial.

A Randomized Controlled Trial of a Biodegradable Polymer, Microcrystalline Sirolimus-Eluting Stent (MiStent) versus Another Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent (TIVOLI): The DESSOLVE-C Trial

Objective: Data comparing the outcomes of MiStent (Micell Technologies, Durham, North Carolina, USA) microcrystalline biodegradable polymer (BP) drug-eluting stent (DES) and those of another post-marketing BP-DES, TIVOLI (EssenTech, Beijing, China) are rare. This study sought to compare the angiographic efficacy and clinical outcomes of the microcrystalline BP sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) system MiStent and those of TIVOLI BP-SES. Methods: The DESSOLVE-C trial was a prospective, single-blinded, multicenter, randomized trial (NCT02448524), which randomly assigned patients with de novo coronary lesions to receive MiStent or TIVOLI BP-SES by a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was a non-inferiority comparison of in-stent late lumen loss (LLL) by quantitative coronary angiography at 9 months. The secondary endpoint was device-related clinical cardiovascular composite events (target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization) and 1-year outcomes. Results: A total of 428 patients (216 patients in the MiStent group and 212 patients in the TIVOLI group) were enrolled and included in an intention-to-treat analysis. MiStent was not only non-inferior but superior to TIVOLI for in-stent LLL at 9 months ((0.23 ± 0.37) mm vs. (0.34 ± 0.48) mm, P for non-inferiority &lt;0.001, P for superiority = 0.02). Although without significant difference, the rate of TLF in MiStent was quantitatively lower than that in TIVOLI (3.70% vs. 6.60%; P = 0.17). Conclusion: Compared with TIVOLI BP-SES, the MiStent system was superior in in-stent LLL at 9 months and had a comparable clinical benefit at 1 year in de novo coronary lesions.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in CAD patients: A comparison of major adverse cardiovascular events of second- and third-generation drug-eluting stents.

Background: Biodegradable polymer (BP) drug-eluting stents (DES) have been introduced as a novel solution to the problems of durable polymer (DP) stents. In Pakistan, very few studies are available for the treatment intervention in post-primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) patients. Our study will compare the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) and their predictors in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing PPCI with second- or third-generation DES. Methodology: An observational, retrospective, cohort study was carried out on CAD patients undergoing PPCI with either second- (DP-XIENCE Prime/XIENCE Xpedition) or third-generation (BP-BioMatrix NeoFlex/BioMatrix Alpha) DES. MACEs were assessed after 1year of PPCI procedure in 341 patients and screened as per inclusion/exclusion criteria (167 in the second-generation group and 174 in the third-generation group). Results: The number of male patients (86.2%) was more than female patients in our study population. MACEs were reported in 4.19% patients after 1year duration, and the percentage of MACEs was more in the second-generation DES group (4.77%) than in the third-generation group (3.44%); however, statistical analysis has not found any significant difference (p = 0.534). The rate of myocardial infarction (1.19% vs. 0.57%) and stent thrombosis (1.8% vs. 1.15%) was more in the second-generation DES group. However, restenosis (1.19% vs. 1.15%) and cardiac death (0.59% vs. 0.57%) were almost same in both groups. A significant association was found between MACEs and diabetes mellitus (p = 0.025), hypertension (p = 0.035), smoking (p = 0.008), and a family history of CAD (p = 0.018). Conclusion: BP-BioMatrix and DP-XIENCE DES have comparable clinical outcomes. Findings of the current study will assist the policy makers and healthcare providers in the rationalization of scarce resources and evidence-based patient care. However, longer follow-up studies are required for convincing results.

Clinical Outcomes of Biodegradable versus Durable Polymer Drug Eluting Stents in Rotational Atherectomy: Results from ROCK Registry.

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer (BP) versus durable polymer (DP) drug eluting stents (DES) in patients with calcified coronary lesions who underwent rotational atherectomy (RA) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). This study was based on a multicenter registry which enrolled patients with calcified coronary artery disease who received PCI using RA during between January 2010 and October 2019 from 9 tertiary centers in Korea. The primary outcome was 3-year all-cause mortality, and the secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death and target-lesion failure. A total of 540 patients who underwent PCI using RA were enrolled with a follow-up period of median 16.1 months. From this registry, 272 patients with PCI using DP-DES and 238 patients with BP-SGDES were selected for analysis. PCI with BP-DES was associated with decreased all-cause mortality after propensity score matching (HR 0.414, CI 0.174-0.988) and multivariate Cox regression analysis (HR 0.458, HR 0.224-0.940). BP-DES was also associated with decreased cardiovascular mortality, but there was no difference in TLF between the two groups. BP-DES were associated with favorable outcomes compared to DP-DES in patients undergoing PCI using RA for calcified coronary lesions.