Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-eluting Stent Research Articles

Comparison of the “Late Catch-Up” Phenomenon Between BuMA Supreme and XIENCE Stents Through Serial Optical Coherence Tomography at 1–2 Month and 2 Year Follow-Ups: A Multicenter Study

Objectives: This study was aimed at comparing the “late catch-up” phenomenon between the BuMA Supreme bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent and the XIENCE stent through serial optical coherence tomography (OCT) at within 2 months and 2 year follow-ups. Methods: A total of 49 of 75 patients from the PIONEER-II study were enrolled in a 2 year OCT follow-up study; 44 patients with 50 lesions were included in the statistical analysis. The primary endpoints were neointimal thickness and late luminal loss (LLL) after stent implantation. Results: The stenosis diameter, and minimum in-stent or in-segment diameter, did not significantly differ between the BuMA Supreme and XIENCE arms at within 2 months and 2 year follow-ups. The strut neointimal coverage and thickness were greater in the BuMA group than the XIENCE group at the 1 and 2 month follow-ups (P = 0.044 and P = 0.010, respectively) but not at the 2 year OCT follow-up. Neither early luminal loss at the within 2 months follow-up (P = 0.849) nor LLL at the 2 year OCT follow-up (P = 0.613) showed differences between device arms. No significant differences in imaging and clinical endpoints were observed between device arms at follow-up. Conclusions: The BuMA Supreme stent’s faster re-endothelization with no “late catch-up” phenomenon has potential advantages over the XIECE stent for patients with coronary artery disease and high bleeding risk because it decreases the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy.

Safe and effective profile of the VSTENT bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: a prospective, cohort, multicenter study.

The drug-eluting stent was a significant stride forward in the development of enhanced therapeutic therapy for coronary intervention, with three generations of increased advancement. VSTENT is a newly developed stent manufactured in Vietnam that aims to provide coronary artery patients with a safe, effective, and cost-efficient option. The purpose of this trial was to determine the efficacy and safety of a new bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent called VSTENT. This is a prospective, cohort, multicenter research in 5 centers of Vietnam. A prespecified subgroup received intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) or optical coherence tomography (OCT) imaging. We determined procedure success and complications during index hospitalization. We monitored all participants for a year. Six-month and 12-month rates of major cardiovascular events were reported. All patients had coronary angiography after 6 months to detect late lumen loss (LLL). Prespecified patients also had IVUS or OCT performed. The rate of device success was 100% (95% CI: 98.3-100%; P<0.001). Major cardiovascular events were 4.7% (95% CI: 1.9-9.4%; P<0.001). The LLL over quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) was 0.08±0.19 mm (95% CI: 0.05-0.10; P<0.001) in the in-stent segment and 0.07±0.31 mm (95% CI: 0.03-0.11; P=0.002) in 5 mm within the two ends of the stent segment. The LLL recorded by IVUS and OCT at 6 months was 0.12±0.35 mm (95% CI: 0.01-0.22; P=0.028) and 0.15±0.24 mm (95% CI: 0.02-0.28; P=0.024), respectively. This study's device success rates were perfect. IVUS and OCT findings on LLL were favorable at 6-month follow-up. One-year follow-up showed low in-stent restenosis (ISR) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates, reflecting few significant cardiovascular events. VSTENT's safety and efficacy make it a promising percutaneous intervention option in developing nations.

Patients with higher-atherothrombotic risk vs. lower-atherothrombotic risk undergoing coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials.

Patients with atherothrombotic risk are at high hazard of ischemic events. Preventive medicine plays a major role in modifying their outcomes. Whether the choice of a BP-SES or DP-EES can contribute to the occurrence of events remains unclear. We sought to investigate the outcomes of patients with higher atherothrombotic risk (H-ATR) versus lower atherothrombotic risk (L-ATR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). Patients (n = 2361) from BIOFLOW-II, -IV, and -V randomized trials were categorized into H-ATR vs. L-ATR. L-ATR patients had ≤ 1 and H-ATR ≥ 2 of the following criteria: presentation in ACS, diabetes mellitus, previous myocardial infarction, previous PCI/CABG, or previous stroke. Endpoints were target lesion failure (TLF: cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction [TV-MI], target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and stent thrombosis (ST) at three years. H-ATR patients (n = 1023) were more morbid than L-ATR patients (n = 1338). TLF rate was significantly higher in H-ATR patients as compared with L-ATR (11.6% vs. 7.0%; HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.27-2.20, p < 0.0001). With BP-SES TLF rates were numerically lower as compared with DP-EES in H-ATR (10.5% vs. 13.5%; HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.54-1.14, p = 0.20) and significantly lower in L-ATR (5.6% vs. 9.8%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.38-0.85, p = 0.006). In the era of newer-generation DES, patients with H-ATR still are at hazard for ischemic events. Patients with BP-SES had lower TLF rates as compared with DP-EES, most consistent in L-ATR whereas in H-ATR patients most probably secondary preventive strategies are of higher value. Clinicaltrial.gov. NCT01356888, NCT01939249, NCT02389946. https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01356888 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01939249 , https://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT02389946 .

Ultrathin Bioresorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: BIOFLOW V Final 5-Year Outcomes.

Randomized trials have demonstrated the superiority of ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents compared with alternative stent designs. Whether these differences persist over late-term follow-up is uncertain. This study sought to compare late-term (5-year) clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin strut (60 µm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin strut (81 µm) durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES). BIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects with Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) was an international, 2:1 randomized trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin strut BP SES versus thin strut DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure (TLF). Prespecified outcomes through 5 years were assessed. Among 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 5-year rates of TLF were 12.3% for BP SES and 15.3% for DP EES (P = 0.108). Revascularization with BP SES was associated with a significantly lower target vessel-related myocardial infarction (6.6% vs 10.3%, P = 0.015) and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.3% vs 1.6%, P = 0.021). Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization was numerically but not significantly lower with BP SES (5.9% vs 7.7%, P = 0.202). Cardiac death rates were 2.6% versus 1.9% (P=0.495) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively. In a large, randomized trial, TLF and the individual outcomes of cardiac death and target lesion revascularization at 5 years were similar among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. Both target vessel-related myocardial infarction and late/very late definite/probable stent thrombosis were significantly lower with BP SES. These results confirm the durability of safety and the effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with ultrathin BP SES.

Can an ultrathin strut stent design and a polymer free, proendothelializing probucol matrix coating improve early strut healing? The FRIENDLY-OCT trial. An intra-patient randomized study with OCT, evaluating early strut coverage of a novel probucol coated polymer-free and ultra-thin strut sirolimus-eluting stent compared to a biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent

Backgroundincomplete strut coverage determines the risk of stent thrombosis in the first months after stent implantation. AimsTo evaluate the potential better early healing of a novel probucol coated polymer free ultra-thin strut sirolimus eluting stent (PF-SES). [Clinical trial unique identifier: NCT02785237]. MethodsPatients with two (angiographically similar) lesions with clinical indication for PCI were enrolled. The investigated stent was compared to a thin strut, bioresorbable polymer, sirolimus eluting stent (BP-SES). Every patient received both stents, one in each lesion, assigned in a randomized sequence. OCT was systematically performed at 3 months.Primary end point was the difference in the proportion of covered struts at 3 months (defined as ≥20 μm of tissue coverage). Secondary end points included differences in percentage of uncovered struts (0 μm coverage), mean strut coverage thickness, and malapposed struts' coverage proportion. Major adverse cardiac events (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and definite or probable stent thrombosis) at 12 months were also evaluated. Results70 patients were included. At 3 months, a consistent and significantly higher strut coverage rate (≥20 μm) was observed in PF-SES as compared to BP-SES, both for well apposed (87.3% versus 79.1%, p < 0.001) and malapposed struts (50.4% vs 37.8%, p 0.00). Uncoverage rate (0 μm) was also significantly lower for the PF-SES (3.1% vs 5.3%, p < 0.001). There were no differences in clinical endpoints. ConclusionThe probucol coated non-polymeric ultra-thin strut sirolimus eluting stent showed a significantly better early strut coverage at 3 months.

Gender-Associated Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With a Third-Generation, Ultrathin-Strut Drug-Eluting Stent: A Real-World, Single-Center Experience.

IntroductionIn recent years, the new third-generation ultrathin bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES), characterized by some of the thinnest struts among commercially available devices (60–80 μm) and an amorphous silicon carbide coating, has been introduced for the treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). The present study aimed to assess different clinical outcomes and safety of this drug-eluting stent in male and female patients in a real-world setting.MethodsThe present study is a retrospective analysis including all patients treated with BP-SES between January 2017 and December 2019 at a single high-volume center. Follow-up data, including stress test results and clinical setting, were collected during outpatient visits or by telephone contact. Patients symptomatic for angina or with a positive stress test were addressed to CT scan/coronary angiogram. The main study outcome was target lesion failure (TLF), defined as a composite of cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.ResultsOverall, 66 (15.9%) female and 349 (84.1%) male patients were included; women were older (median age 70 vs. 66, P = 0.003) and with a lower body mass index (BMI) (25.0 vs. 26.1, P = 0.010) compared to men, with no other relevant differences in baseline characteristics. Indication for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) was acute coronary syndrome in 86 (20.7%) of the cases, with no significant differences between male and female patients. A total of 558 lesions were treated with BP-SES stents, 90 in women and 468 in men (1.36 vs. 1.34 lesions per patient, P = 0.83); cumulative stent length (33.6 vs. 38.4 mm, P = 0.078), and mean stent diameter (2.92 vs. 3.0 mm, P = 0.39) did not differ in women compared to men. Technical and clinical successes were achieved in all patients. Stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 2 (0.5%) patients, both men. TLF occurred in 10 (2.9%) men and 2 (3.0%) women after a median follow-up of 402 days, without significant differences at log-rank analysis (2.34 events per 100 patient-years in men, 2.53 in women; P = 0.80).ConclusionUltrathin struts BP-SES showed to be a safe and effective option for the treatment of CAD in both women and men, with a very low ST rate and favorable long-term outcomes.

Clinical outcomes of an ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent in all-comers population: Thailand Orsiro registry

BackgroundDespite numerous studies supporting the outperformance of ultrathin-strut bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (Orsiro SES, Biotronik AG), the generalizability of the study results remains unclear in the Asian population. We sought to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the Orsiro SES in unselected Thai population.MethodsThe Thailand Orsiro registry was a prospective, open-label clinical study evaluating all patients with obstructive coronary artery disease implanted with Orsiro SES. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months. TLF is defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI), emergent coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Patients with diabetes, small vessels (≤ 2.75 mm), chronic total occlusions (CTOs), and acute myocardial infarction (AMI) were pre-specified subgroups for statistical analysis.ResultA total of 150 patients with 235 lesions were included in the analysis. Half of the patients (53.3%) presented with AMI, and 24% had diabetes. Among 235 lesions, 93(39.4%) were small vessels, and 24(10.2%) were chronic total occlusions. The primary endpoint, TLF at 12 months, occurred in eight patients (5.3%), predominately caused by cardiac death. By contrast, the incidences of TVMI and CD-TLR were null. The outcomes in pre-specified subgroup were not different from the overall population (all p > 0.05). One definite late stent thrombosis(0.7%) was incidentally observed during primary percutaneous coronary intervention to the non-target vessel.ConclusionThe safety and efficacy of the ultrathin strut sirolimus-eluting stent in unselected cases are confirmed in the Thailand Orsiro registry. Despite the high proportion of pre-specified high-risk subgroups, the excellent stent performance was consistent with the overall population.Trial Registration TCTR20190325001.

Predictors and outcomes of acute recoil after ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents implantation: an intravascular ultrasound in native coronary arteries.

Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SESs) may easily lead to acute recoil. This study investigated acute recoil after BP-SES implantation on the basis of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). We enrolled 40 consecutive stents. Absolute acute recoil by quantitative coronary angiography was defined as the difference between the mean diameter of the last inflated balloon (X) and mean lumen diameter of the BP-SES immediately after balloon deflation (Y). Percent (%) acute recoil was defined as (X-Y)×100/X. IVUS was performed within the culprit lesion. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and calcification grade score were assessed using IVUS. Calcification grade was scored on the basis of quadrants. On the basis of the median acute recoil value of 5.0%, the stents were divided into two groups: low (LAR, n = 20) and high % acute recoil (HAR, n = 20). Mean % acute recoil was 5.8 ± 5.3%. Plaque eccentricity, % plaque burden and stent/artery ratio were significantly higher in the HAR group than in the LAR group. Significant differences in % acute recoil were not observed regarding the types of stent diameter. In multivariate logistic regression and multiple linear regression analysis, plaque eccentricity and % plaque burden in the culprit plaque were significant positive predictors for the occurrence of % acute recoil. No significant differences, including clinical outcomes, were found between both groups at follow-up. Acute recoil of BP-SESs may be influenced by an eccentric plaque with a large burden, which did not affect long-term outcomes. However, the present study might suggest the proper strategy (e.g. a more exhaustive plaque preparation) before BP-SES implantation in a case with these IVUS characteristics.

PRospective Observational Registry Evaluating the Safety and Effectivenessof Orsiro Stent in Chilean Patients – ROSES Registry

BackgroundThere is little information on the performance of the new generation of stents with bioabsorbable polymers in the Latin American population. This registry aimed to further validate the safety and efficacy of the Orsiro bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BPSES) in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Chilean centers. MethodsWe prospectively enrolled patients undergoing PCI with BPSES in 6 Chilean centers. The primary endpoint was defined as the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. ResultsFrom April 2017 to February 2019, 520 patients were enrolled in the registry, more frequently male (74.6%), with a mean age of 62.7 ± 10.8 years and a high prevalence of diabetes (40.2%). The clinical presentation was stable angina in 41.1% (n = 214), acute MI in 52.5% (n = 167 [32.1%] ST-elevation MI and n = 106 [20.4%] non-ST-elevation MI), and unstable angina in 6.3% (n = 33). Of 610 treated lesions, 425 (69.7%) were American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association type B or C lesions. Device and procedural success were achieved in 99.4% and 98.7% of the patients, respectively. The primary endpoint of the study occurred in 4%, primarily driven by cardiac death. ConclusionsThe results of the ROSES multicenter registry indicated good clinical outcomes of BPSES Orsiro in all-comers Latin Americann patients undergoing PCI, despite the high-risk patients and treated lesions.

A serial optical frequency-domain imaging study of early and late vascular responses to bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction and stable coronary artery disease patients: results of the MECHANISM-ULTIMASTER study

The purpose of this study was to assess early and late vascular healing in response to bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SESs) for the treatment of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD). A total of 106 patients with STEMI and 101 patients with stable-CAD were enrolled. Optical frequency-domain images were acquired at baseline, at 1- or 3-month follow-up, and at 12-month follow-up. In the STEMI and CAD cohorts, the percentage of uncovered struts (%US) was significantly and remarkably decreased during early two points and at 12-month (the STEMI cohort: 1-month: 18.75 ± 0.78%, 3-month: 10.19 ± 0.77%, 12-month: 1.80 ± 0.72%; p < 0.001, the CAD cohort: 1-month: 9.44 ± 0.78%, 3-month: 7.78 ± 0.78%, 12-month: 1.07 ± 0.73%; p < 0.001 respectively). The average peri-strut low-intensity area (PLIA) score in the STEMI cohort was significantly decreased during follow-up period (1.90 ± 1.14, 1.18 ± 1.25, and 1.01 ± 0.72; p ≤ 0.001), whereas the one in the CAD cohort was not significantly changed (0.89 ± 1.24, 0.67 ± 1.07, and 0.64 ± 0.72; p = 0.59). In comparison with both groups, differences of %US and PLIA score at early two points were almost disappeared or close at 12 months. The strut-coverage and healing processes in the early phase after BP-SES implantation were significantly improved in both cohorts, especially markedly in STEMI patients. At 1 year, qualitatively and quantitatively consistent neointimal coverage was achieved in both pathogenetic groups.

Thin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent use for an optimal result of rescue coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction failed thrombolytic therapy: the Bangladesh National Heart Foundation Annual Conference OCT-assisted live case.

Thin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent use for an optimal result of rescue coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction failed thrombolytic therapy: the Bangladesh National Heart Foundation Annual Conference OCT-assisted live case.

1-Year Safety of 3-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Followed by Aspirin or P2Y12 Receptor Inhibitor Monotherapy Using a Bioabsorbable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent.

This study evaluated the safety of 3-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after implantation of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) and compared P2Y12inhibitor with aspirin monotherapy 3 months after DAPT.Methods and Results:Patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention using BP-SES were enrolled and followed for 1 year. Patients with a history of stent thrombosis were excluded. The primary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, stroke (ischemic and hemorrhagic), definite or probable stent thrombosis, and severe bleeding at 12 months. The BP-SES arm of the CENTURY II trial was used as a conventional DAPT group for comparison. After DAPT, patients were maintained on either aspirin (n=846) or a P2Y12inhibitor (n=674 patients).In all, 1,695 patients were enrolled in the study across 65 centers. The primary endpoint occurred in 4.3% of patients at 1 year. After propensity score adjustment, the incidence of the primary endpoint was not inferior in those receiving DAPT for 3 months compared with conventional DAPT (5.5%; Pnon-inferiority<0.0001). The incidence of the primary endpoint and severe bleeding did not differ between the aspirin and P2Y12inhibitor monotherapy groups. After adjustment, 3-month DAPT was not inferior to longer DAPT after BP-SES implantation in terms of net adverse clinical events. There was no difference in bleeding and thrombotic events between P2Y12inhibitor and aspirin monotherapy after 3 months DAPT.

Cardiovascular outcomes associated with Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus eluting stents following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A meta-analysis of published studies.

Background:Percutaneous coronary intervention with the new generation drug eluting stents (DES) is 1 among the revascularization procedures required to treat patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Since late stent thrombosis and silent myocardial infarction are highly associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), an analysis comparing the newer generation DES in this specific subgroup of patients would be scientifically relevant.In this analysis, we aimed to systematically compare the cardiovascular outcomes observed with the ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stents (SES) versus thin, durable polymer everolimus eluting stents (EES) following percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with T2DM.Methods:Through online databases, relevant studies comparing ultrathin bioresorbable polymer SES versus the durable polymer EES were carefully searched. The cardiovascular outcomes were assessed during a follow-up time period of 1 year and more than 1 year (1–5 years) respectively. This meta-analysis was carried out by the latest version of the RevMan software. Following analysis, the results were represented by odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).Results:A total number of 1967 patients with T2DM were included in this analysis. During a 1 year follow-up time period, target lesion failure (TLF) (OR: 0.59, 95% CI: 0.34–1.02; P = .06, target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.55–1.70; P = .91) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.44–1.87; P = .79) were similarly observed with ultrathin bioresorbable polymer SES versus the thin, durable polymer EES in these patients with T2DM. Other cardiovascular outcomes including myocardial infarction (MI), major adverse cardiac events, all-cause mortality (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.37–1.40; P = .34), cardiac death and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.45–1.62; P = .63) were also similarly observed with these 2 types of new stents. During a follow-up time period above 1 year (1–5 years), still no significant difference was observed in TLF, TVR, TLR, major adverse cardiac events, MI, all-cause mortality, cardiac death and stent thrombosis (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.33–1.16; P = .14).Conclusions:The ultrathin bioresorbable polymer SES were similar to the durable polymer EES in these patients with T2DM. These 2 types of new generation stents were comparable in terms of cardiovascular outcomes. Hence, they might be recommended in patients with T2DM. Upcoming trials should be able to confirm this hypothesis.

Early vascular healing following bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in comparison with durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent: sequential optical coherence tomography study

Abstract Background Orsiro ultrathin-strut bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) might facilitate early vascular healing responses that seems to be associated with improved long-term clinical outcomes. We compared the early vascular healing responses to BP-SES and Xience durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) using optical coherence tomography (OCT). Methods A total of 40 patients with CCS receiving OCT-guided PCI were included. 20 patients were assigned to BP-SES, and 20 to DP-EES. OCT was performed immediately after stent placement (post-procedure) and at 1 month follow-up. Struts were recorded as uncovered if any part was visibly exposed in the lumen or covered if a layer of tissue covered all reflecting surfaces. The incidence of intrastent thrombus (IS-Th) and irregular protrusion (IRP) were also assessed. Results At 1 month, the percentage of uncovered struts was significantly lower in the BP-SES compared with the DP-EES (2.8±1.6% vs. 5.8±1.8%, respectively; p&amp;lt;0.001), and that of malapposed struts was similar between both groups (2.5±3.1% vs. 2.4±2.2%; p=0.76). There were no differences in the incidence of IS-Th (65.0% vs. 55.0% at post-procedure; p=0.54, 30.0% vs. 35.0% at 1 month; p=0.75) and IRP (30.0% vs. 25.0% at post-procedure; p=0.74). IRP had completely resolved at 1 month in both groups. Conclusion Early vascular healing response to Orsiro BP-SES implantation was revealed in CCS patients at 1 month compared with Xience DP-EES. Orsiro BP-SES may have a potential to shorten the dual antiplatelet therapy duration. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: None

One year clinical outcomes of contemporary PCI in patients with chronic coronary syndrome: experience from large scale e-ULTIMASTER registry

Abstract Background The 2019 ESC guideline on chronic coronary syndromes (CCS) provided insights on the management of patients with stable angina. Purpose To explore one-year outcomes of CCS patients undergoing percutaneous revascularisation representing daily clinical practice. Methods We investigated CCS patients enrolled in e-Ultimaster registry (NCT02188355), which is a prospective, multicentre, worldwide, all-comers registry enrolled &amp;gt;36, 000 patients treated with a thin strut (80μm) bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (Ultimaster). The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year (defined as a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel related myocardial infarction (TV-MI) and clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). An independent Clinical Event Committee adjudicated all end-point related events. Results Our analysis included in total 15540 patients presented with stable angina (n=12300, 79.2%) or silent ischemia (n=3240, 20.9%) at enrolment. The mean age of CCS patients was 65.7±10.5 years and 76.1% were male. Regarding comorbidities, 69.9% of CCS patient were hypertensive, 30.9% had diabetes, 62.2% had high cholesterol, and 7.5% had renal impairment. The percentage of current smokers was 15.7%. Among CCS patients, 28.1% reported previous MI while 35.2% had history of PCI and 7.4% of CABG. Among CCS patients, 42.4% were diagnosed with multivessel disease. The average number of lesions identified per patient was 1.8±1.0, and the number of treated lesions was 1.5±0.8. The left main artery was treated in 4.1% of CCS patients, 8.1% for chronic total occlusion, 6.1% for instent restenosis, while 14% of the patients were treated in one or more bifurcation lesions. Approximately 80% of the procedures were preformed via radial access. The rate of TLF at one year was 2.9%, with 0.95% of cardiac death, 0.8% of TV-MI and 1.5% of CD-TLR. Definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST) rate was 0.42%, and any bleeding occurred in 1.8% of the patients. 71.3% of the patients were already on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) before procedure, 93.3% were on DAPT at 3 months follow up, while DAPT was continued in 64.9% of patients at 1 year. At 3 months after index PCI, 91.4% of the treated CCS patients were angina free, 7.6% reported stable angina, and 0.5% unstable angina. The similar result was observed at 1 year, with 90.9% of the patients remaining angina free, 7.5% of patients with stable angina, while only 0.6% reported unstable angina. In a stepwise regression model, we identified risk factors of TLF in CCS patients including age, body mass index, diabetes, renal failure, lesion complexity such as target vessel LM or bifurcation, and number of stents implanted. Conclusions In this large, international all-comers registry, more than 90% of CCS patients treated with PCI remain angina free at one year, with low rate of TLF and ST, adding further evidence to ongoing debate about CCS treatment strategy. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding source: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): Limted study funding by Terumo

Individual patient data analysis of the BIOFLOW study program comparing safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent.

ObjectivesThis analysis of pooled individual patient data (IPD) aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a bioresorbable polymer sirolimus eluting stent system (BP‐SES; Orsiro) compared to a durable polymer everolimus eluting stent system (DP‐EES; Xience) in the pooled population as well as in subgroups.MethodsIPD with up to 12 months follow‐up of the randomized controlled trials BIOFLOW‐II (NCT01356888), ‐IV (NCT01939249), and ‐V (NCT02389946) as well as the all comers registry BIOFLOW‐III (NCT01553526) were pooled. A total of 3,717 subjects (2,923 in BP‐SES and 794 in DP‐EES) with 5,328 lesions (4,225 lesions in BP‐SES and 1,103 in DP‐EES) were included in the IPD. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months follow‐up. Subgroups analyzed included diabetes, age (≥65 years), gender, complex lesions (B2/C), small vessels (reference vessel diameter ≤2.75 mm), multivessel treatment, renal disease, and patients with acute coronary syndrome.ResultsOverall, TLF at 12 months was significantly lower with 5.2%in the BP‐SES group versus 7.6% in the DP‐EES group (p = .0098). Similarly, target vessel myocardial infarction (TV‐MI) was 3.1 versus 5.7% (p = .0005). The rate of stent thrombosis was similar in both groups (0.004%). By regression analysis, an independent stent effect in favor of BP‐SES was observed for TLF (p = .0043) and TV‐MI (p = .0364) in small vessels.ConclusionResults of this IPD analysis suggest that the BP‐SES with ultrathin struts is as safe as and more efficacious than DP‐EES in the overall cohort and especially in small vessels.

Early vascular response of ultra-thin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents assessed by optical frequency domain imaging: the EVALUATION study.

This study aimed to evaluate the early vascular response of ultra-thin strut bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) using optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI). Ultra-thin strut BP SES have superior outcomes in terms of efficacy and safety endpoints when compared to other thin strut new-generation stents. However, the factors contributing to the superiority of BP SES over other thin strut new-generation stents are unclear. A total of 32 patients with multivessel disease requiring staged procedures at 1month were enrolled from 3 cardiovascular institutions; of these, 31 were immediately assessed by OFDI (n = 31). All patients were assessed at 1month after ultra-thin strut BP SES implantation. The primary endpoint was % of uncovered struts. A total of 1723 cross sections(17,014 struts) were analyzed at baseline and 1month after percutaneous coronary intervention. The % uncovered struts at 1-month follow-up was 7.7% (4.0, 13.8). Furthermore, the covered strut % (88.4% and 80.4%, P = 0.013) and malapposition rate (2.7% and 4.3%, P = 0.012) were significantly different between the 60-μm and 80-μm stents. Ultra-thin strut BP SES implantation may feasibly achieve early vascular responses due to the ultra-thin struts. This may ultimately lead to lower stent thrombosis and target lesion failure rates.Clinical trial registration University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (No. UMIN000033406).

Ultrathin Bioresorbable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Thin Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization: 3-Year Outcomes From the Randomized BIOFLOW V Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare late-term clinical outcomes among patients treated with ultrathin-strut (60-μm) bioresorbable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) and thin-strut (81μm) durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP EES). BackgroundEmerging evidence from comparative studies of drug-eluting stents demonstrates improved safety and efficacy with ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents, but limited insight exists regarding late-term outcomes. MethodsBIOFLOW V (Biotronik Prospective Randomized Multicenter Study to Assess the Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With Up to Three De Novo or Restenotic Coronary Artery Lesions V) is an international randomized trial comparing coronary revascularization with BP SES and DP EES regarding the primary endpoint of 12-month target lesion failure. Analysis of pre-specified 3-year clinical outcomes was performed. ResultsAmong 1,334 patients randomized to treatment with BP SES (n = 884) or DP EES (n = 450), the 3-year rate of target lesion failure was 8.2% for BP SES and 13.6% for DP EES (p = 0.002), driven by differences in both target vessel myocardial infarction (MI) (5.0% vs. 9.2%; p = 0.003) and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (3.2% vs. 6.7%; p = 0.006). In landmark analysis, significant differences in target vessel MI and target lesion revascularization were observed favoring treatment with BP SES. Definite or probable late or very late stent thrombosis was significantly lower with BP SES (0.1% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.018). Cardiac death or MI rates were 7.7% and 11.7% (p = 0.017) for BP SES and DP EES, respectively. ConclusionsIn a large randomized trial, both target lesion failure and the outcomes of target vessel MI, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, and late or very late stent thrombosis at 3 years were significantly lower among patients treated with BP SES versus DP EES. The results endorse the continued superiority of ultrathin-strut BP SES compared with DP EES. (Safety and Effectiveness of the Orsiro Sirolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in Subjects With Coronary Artery Lesions [BIOFLOW-V]; NCT02389946)

Cost and Mortality Implications of Lower Event Rates After Implantation of an Ultrathin-Strut Coronary Stent Compared With a Thin-Strut Stent Over Four Years

BackgroundThe recent BIOFLOW V trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02389946) showed that revascularization with an ultrathin strut, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP SES) was associated with lower rates of clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel-related myocardial infarction (TVMI) at 24-month follow-up than that with a thin strut, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP EES). We simulated the impact on cost and mortality. Methods and resultsWe projected the impact of the lower adverse event rates from a U.S. health system perspective over a 48-month horizon with a Markov model using event data from the BIOFLOW V trial and estimates for costs and excess mortality due to adverse events from published sources. All cost estimates were CPI-adjusted to 2018 US$ and future cost discounted by 3%.We estimated that use of BP SES compared to DP EES was associated with cumulative net reductions in medical cost of $2429 per patient over 48 months. Peri-procedural TVMI contributed $124 (5%), TLR in patients without TVMI $810 (33%) and spontaneous TVMI $1496 (62%) of cost. Use of BP SES compared to DP EES was associated with 2603 fewer deaths in one million patients over four years, corresponding to a relative risk reduction of 6%. ConclusionsLower adverse event rates associated with revascularization using BP SES translate into reductions in direct medical cost and mortality. Most of the cost reduction is attributed to reduction in spontaneous TVMI. Given the high volume of coronary procedures, such results are an important consideration for patients, clinicians and payers.

Comparison of efficacy and safety between ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents and thin durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature.

Ultrathin bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP SES) have been proposed as an alternative to thin durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP DES). Although BP SES show a significant decrease in target lesion failure rates, clear superiority with respect to efficacy and safety of BP SES in comparison to DP EES has not been consistently proven. A comprehensive search of several electronic databases identified studies that assessed efficacy and safety of BP SES, compared with DP EES. Relative risks (RRs) were pooled across studies using a fixed-effects model and a random-effect model, respectively, calculating pooled RRs and associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The I statistic was used to assess heterogeneity. We retrieved six studies enrolling >7000 patients. BP SES significantly reduced the risk of target vessel myocardial infarction (RR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.97; I = 0%; Test for overall effect: z = 2.24, P = 0.03) in comparison with DP EES using a random-effects model. Use of BP SES was associated with a significant reduction in any myocardial infarction (RR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70-0.98; I = 12%; Test for overall effect: z = 2.19, P = 0.03), using a fixed-effects model. The subgroup analyses demonstrated, following-up ≥2 years, a statistically significant 27% RR increase in the risk of all-case death for patients randomized to BP SES (RR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.01-1.60; I = 0%; Test for overall effect: z = 2.08, P = 0.04). No differences in cardiac death, stent thrombosis events (STE), target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) between BP SES and DP EES were observed. BP SES significantly reduced the risk of any myocardial infarction and target vessel myocardial infarction in comparison with DP EES. There were no differences in cardiac death, STE, TLR, TVR and all-cause death with its follow-up time <2 year between BP SES and DP EES. Following-up ≥2 years, a statistically significant 27% RR increase in the risk of all-case death for patients randomized to BP SES was observed.