Biodegradable Polymer Drug-eluting Stents Research Articles

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 when comparing with non-CPCI patients. 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 between 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

<h2>Abstract</h2><h3>Background</h3> 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. <h3>Methods</h3> 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. <h3>Results</h3> 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; <i>P</i> =.08), with similar results in the Supreme DES group alone (4.4%, 6.8%, and 3.7%, respectively, <i>P</i> =.20). Cardiac death at 12 months occurred in 0.4%, 0.2%, and 0.0% (<i>P</i> =.79), target vessel–related myocardial infarction occurred in 2.2%, 4.7%, and 3.7%, (<i>P</i> =.10), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization was required in 2.1%, 3.1%, and 0%, respectively (<i>P</i> =.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. <h3>Conclusions</h3> 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.

TCT-51 Assessment of Durable Polymer and Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

TCT-51 Assessment of Durable Polymer and Biodegradable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Comparative Clinical Performance of Two Types of Drug-Eluting Stents with Abluminal Biodegradable Polymer Coating: Five-Year Results of the DESTINY Randomized Trial

Introduction and Objectives: The Stents Coated with the Biodegradable Polymer on Their Abluminal Faces and Elution of Sirolimus versus Biolimus Elution for the Treatment of de Novo Coronary Lesions - DESTINY Trial is a non-inferiority randomized study that compared the InspironTM sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with the control BiomatrixTM Flex biolimus-eluting stent (BES). Previous reports in the first year showed similar outcomes for both stents, in clinical, angiographic, optical coherence tomography, and intravascular ultrasound assessments. The present analysis aims to compare the clinical performance of these two biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents five years after the index procedure. Methods: A total of 170 patients (194 lesions) were randomized in a 2:1 ratio for treatment with SES or BES, respectively. The primary endpoint for the present study was the five-year rate of combined major adverse cardiac events, defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. Results: At five years, the primary endpoint occurred in 12.5% and 17.9% of the SES and BES groups, respectively (p=0.4). There was no definite or probable stent thrombosis among patients treated with the novel SES stent during the five years of follow-up, and no stent thrombosis after the first year in the BES group. Conclusions: The novel InspironTM stent had similar good clinical performance in long-term follow-up when compared head-to-head with the control latest-generation BiomatrixTM Flex biolimus-eluting stent.

Impact of one-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention according to clinical presentation: a post hoc analysis of the randomised One-Month DAPT trial.

The impact of 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by aspirin monotherapy according to clinical presentation has not been elucidated. This study aimed to compare the impact of 1-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy after polymer-free drug-coated stent (PF-DCS) implantation (1-month DAPT after PF-DCS) vs 6-12-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy after biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stent (BP-DES) implantation (6-12-month DAPT after BP-DES) according to clinical presentation. This is a post hoc analysis of the One-Month DAPT trial. The primary outcome was the composite of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularisation, and stroke) and major bleeding. Among 1,828 patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD), 1-month DAPT after PF-DCS resulted in lower rates of the primary outcome than 6-12-month DAPT after BP-DES (3.9% vs 6.5%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.39-0.90; p=0.012). However, among 1,192 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS), the rates of the primary outcome were not significantly different between the two therapy groups (5.6% vs 3.6%; HR 1.57, 95% CI: 0.91-2.70; p=0.102) and a significant interaction was observed between therapy and clinical presentation regarding the primary outcome (Pint=0.005). A significant interaction was observed in MACCE (Pint=0.016), but not in major bleeding (Pint=0.276). In patients undergoing drug-eluting stent implantation for non-complex lesions, the benefits of 1-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy for a composite of ischaemic and bleeding outcomes were found in patients with stable CAD, but not in those with ACS. gov: NCT02513810.

Comparison of biodegradable and durable polymer drug-eluting stents in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis

ObjectiveTo compare the safety and effectiveness between biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) and durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).DesignMeta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Primary...

Long-Term Clinical Outcomes Between Biodegradable and Durable Polymer Drug-Eluting Stents: A Nationwide Cohort Study.

BackgroundDespite the theoretical benefits of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES), clinical benefits of BP-DES over durable polymer DES (DP-DES) have not been clearly demonstrated. Using data from a large-volume nationwide cohort, we compared long-term clinical outcomes between BP-DES- and DP-DES-treated patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study that enrolled all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation DES between 2010 and 2016 in Korea was conducted by using the National Health Insurance Service database. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and myocardial infarction (MI).ResultsA total of 127,731 patients treated with new-generation DES with thin struts (<90 μm) were enrolled for this analysis. After stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, the incidence of all-cause death was significantly lower in patients treated with BP-DES (n = 19,521) at 5 years after PCI (11.3 vs. 13.0% in those treated with DP-DES [n = 108,067], hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88–0.96, p < 0.001), while showing no statistically significant difference at 2 years after PCI (5.7 vs. 6.0%, respectively, HR 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89–1.01, p = 0.238). Similarly, use of BP-DES was associated with a lower incidence of cardiovascular death (7.4 vs. 9.6% in those treated with DP-DES, HR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.77–0.87, p < 0.001), and MI (7.4 vs. 8.7%, respectively, HR 0.90, 95% CI, 0.86–0.94, p = 0.006) at 5 years after PCI. There was no statistically significant difference of cardiovascular death (4.6 vs. 4.9%, respectively, HR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.85–1.01, p = 0.120) and MI (5.0 vs. 5.1%, respectively, HR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.92–1.05, p = 0.461) at 2 years after PCI.ConclusionsImplantation of BP-DES was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and MI compared with DP-DES implantation. This difference was clearly apparent at 5 years after DES implantation.Clinical Trial RegistrationClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04715594.

Late Catch-up In-Stent Restenosis and Stent Thrombosis for 2nd Generation Biodegradable Polymer Drug Eluting Stents

Second generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have reduced the rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) to &lt; 10% [1, 2] in patients undergoing PCI. However, late catch-up in-stent restenosis remains an issue despite the advent in drug-eluting stent technology from 1st to 2nd generation drug eluting stents. The late catch-up phenomenon has been associated with serious consequences and adverse events and remains an important issue in modern practice, despite medical advances with more biocompatible and biodegradable polymers, as well as new therapeutic agents and thinner scaffolds in the development of 2nd generation DES polymer systems. The idea behind biodegradable polymers has been to provide a more controlled elution profile for DES drugs, allowing for long-term therapeutic, but sub-toxic, drug levels in the arterial tissue to prevent ISR and stent thrombosis. However, the late catch-up phenomenon remains an issue resulting in 2ndary revascularization beyond the first year of primary PCI, as it is defined as ISR &gt;1 year. Late stent thrombosis (&lt;1 year) and very late stent thrombosis (&gt;1 year) also remain an issue for biodegradable polymer systems. A long-term presence of the polymer can cause inflammation and thrombogenesis, which is dependent upon polymer degradation kinetics in case of biodegradable polymer DES systems. However, the cause of late catch-up restenosis and stent thrombosis is multi-factorial from a drug-in-polymer formulation perspective of drug release kinetics, e.g., drug elution profile, drug physiochemical properties, and polymer degradation kinetics. It appears that the focus should be on controlling burst release for both late catch-up restenosis and stent thrombosis phenomena.

Safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy according to drug-eluting stent type: the TWILIGHT-STENT study.

In the TWILIGHT trial, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short course of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) was shown to be a safe bleeding avoidance strategy in high-risk patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of ticagrelor monotherapy after three-month DAPT in patients undergoing PCI, according to DES type. In the current sub-analysis from TWILIGHT, patients were stratified into three groups based on DES type: durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES), durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents (DP-ZES), and biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES). Bleeding and ischaemic outcomes were assessed at one year after randomisation. Out of 5,769 patients, 3,014 (52.2%) had DP-EES, 1,350 (23.4%) had DP-ZES and 1,405 (24.4%) had BP-DES. Compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy had significantly lower BARC type 2, 3 or 5 bleeding compared with DAPT; DP-EES (3.8% vs 6.7%; HR 0.56, 95% CI: 0.41-0.78), DP-ZES (4.6% vs 6.9%; HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.42-1.04) and BP-DES (4.2% vs 7.9%; HR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.33-0.81; pinteraction=0.76). Ticagrelor monotherapy resulted in similar rates of death, MI, or stroke: DP-EES (4.2% vs 4.3%; HR 0.97; 95% CI: 0.68-1.37); DP-ZES (4.1% vs 3.1%; HR 1.32; 95% CI: 0.75-2.33); BP-DES (3.9% vs 4.2%; HR 0.92; 95% CI: 0.54-1.55; pinteraction=0.60). In both unadjusted and covariate-adjusted analyses, DES type was not associated with any differences in ischaemic or bleeding complications. As compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, ticagrelor monotherapy after a short DAPT duration lowered bleeding complications without increasing the ischaemic risk, irrespective of DES type. We observed no significant differences among DES types.

Comparison of biodegradable and newer generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents with short-term dual antiplatelet therapy: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials comprising of 43,875 patients.

Newer generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) have similar efficacy with dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration of > 6months. However, this difference in outcomes have not been well studied in shorter DAPT regime. This study compares the safety and efficacy profiles of DP-DES and BP-DES based on short-term (1-3months), intermediate-term (4-6months) and standard DAPT (6-12months) durations. A search was conducted on Embase and Medline for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) comparing stent types, and DAPT durations. Primary endpoints include cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, stroke, target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major bleeding. Network analysis was conducted to summarize the evidence. A total of 15 RCTs involving 43,875 patients were included. DP-DES was associated with significantly lower major bleeding rates compared to BP-DES (RR 0.44, Crl 0.22-0.83) in short-term DAPT. Among DP-DES patients, short-term DAPT was associated with lower major bleeding risk compared to standard DAPT (RR 0.47, CrI 0.32-0.69). This favorable bleeding profile with short DAPT was not found in BP-DES patients. Cardiacdeath, MI, definite stent thrombosis, stroke and TVR rateswere similar across the various DAPT durations and stent types. Our preliminary findings demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety outcomes between BP-DES and newer generation BP-DES across various DAPT durations. In patients requiring short DAPT, DP-DES had more favourable major bleeding profile compared to BP-DES, without compromising anti-thrombotic efficacy.