Risk Of Target Lesion Revascularization Research Articles

Outcomes With Drug-Coated Balloons vs. Drug-Eluting Stents in Small-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease

BackgroundThe use of drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in small-vessel coronary artery disease (SVD) remains controversial. MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) reporting the outcomes of DCB vs. DES in de-novo SVD. We included a total of 5 RCTs (1459 patients), with (DCB n = 734 and DES n = 725). ResultsOver a median follow-up duration of 6 months, DCB was associated with smaller late lumen loss (LLL) compared with DES (mean difference −0.12 mm) (95% confidence intervals (CI) [−0.21, −0.03 mm], p = 0.01). Over a median follow-up of 12 months, both modalities had similar risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (8.7% vs. 10.2%; odds ratio (OR): 0.94, 95% CI [0.49–1.79], p = 084), all-cause mortality (1.17% vs. 2.38%; OR: 0.53, 95% CI [0.16–1.75], p = 0.30), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7.9% vs. 3.9%; OR: 1.26, 95% CI [0.51–3.14], p = 0.62), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (8.2% vs. 7.8%; OR: 1.06, 95% CI [0.40–2.82], p = 0.91). DCBs were associated with lower risk of myocardial infarction (MI) compared with DES (1.55% vs. 3.31%; OR: 0.48, 95% CI [0.23–1.00], p = 0.05, I2 = 0%). ConclusionPCI of SVD with DCBs is associated with smaller LLL, lower risk of MI, and similar risk of MACE, death, TLR, and TVR compared with DES over one year. DCB appears as an attractive alternative to DES in patients with de-novo SVD, but long-term clinical data are still needed.

A neural system dynamics modeling platform and its applications in randomized controlled trial data analysis

Conventional statistical methods used in clinical trials lack the ability to predict patient specific risk and very often do not consider the effects of time varying interventions. The aim of this study is to test a novel artificial neural network based model for clinical trial analysis to represent the continuous time evolution of risk. The novel methodology tested utilizes system dynamics and artificial neural networks. This methodology was applied to analyze data from 2,221 patients with acute myocardial infarction enrolled in a well characterized randomized study, the HORIZONS-AMI trial. Outcomes analyzed included: (1) target lesion revascularization (TLR) and (2) stent thrombosis. The proposed neural system dynamics (NSD) model was compared against traditional Cox Proportional Hazards (Cox PH) and Cox neural network (NN) models. Model performance was evaluated using C-statistic at 1, 2 -and 3- years follow-up and model-based simulation studies were performed to examine the effect of different variables on the predicted risk of TLR and stent thrombosis. The NSD model achieved comparable performance to Cox models for TLR. For stent thrombosis, the NSD model outperformed Cox models (1-year C-statistic: Stent thrombosis – Cox PH: 0.60, Cox NN: 0.66, neural SD model: 0.69). The neural SD model identified clinically relevant variables such as stent count, stent type and multiple lesions treated as significant predictors for TLR; and stent count and peak platelet count for stent thrombosis. Simulations illustrated change in predicted TLR risk maximal for the neural SD model, compared to other models. For stent thrombosis, simulation scenario illustrated predicted event rate doubling when clopidogrel is discontinued at 6 months compared to extended use. We have demonstrated an alternative analytical methodology that combines system dynamics and artificial neural networks to analyze results from a randomized trial. This novel approach can incorporate patient-specific longitudinal data and provide personalized risk prediction. • Incorporation of non-linear interactions and time-varying data improves personalized risk prediction. • Neural System Dynamics (NSD) model combines neural networks with system dynamics. • NSD model represents continuous time evolution of risk. • NSD model captures clinically relevant risk predictors of Target Lesion Revascularization and Stent Thrombosis. • NSD model based simulations provide more personalized risk trajectories with actionable insights using follow-up intervention information.

The CTGF gene -945 G/C polymorphism is associated with target lesion revascularization for in-stent restenosis

Background and aimsPrevious studies have shown that transforming growth factor β (TGF-β) and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) pathways are involved in the in-stent restenosis (ISR) process. The present study aimed to assess the relationship between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding downstream proteins of TGF-β and VEGF-A pathways and the risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) for in-stent restenosis. MethodsA total of 657 patients (with 781 treated lesions) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with stent implantation at our center between 2007 and 2012 and completed a 4-year follow-up for clinically-driven TLR, were included. SNPs in CTGF (rs6918698), TGFBR2 (rs2228048), SMAD3 (rs17293632), KDR (rs2071559), CCL2 (rs1024610) were genotyped using TaqMan assay. ResultsMajor allele carriers of CTGF gene -945 G/C polymorphism (rs6918698) were significantly less likely to underwent clinically-driven TLR during follow-up than minor allele carriers. After adjustment for clinical, angiographic, and procedural covariates, CTGF polymorphism was significantly associated with TLR, and minor allele (C) carriers had nearly two times higher risk of developing ISR requiring TLR (HR of 1.93, 95%CI 1.15–3.24) compared to patients with major (GG) genotype. No significant relationship was found between other analyzed polymorphisms and cumulative incidence of TLR at 4-years. ConclusionsOur results suggest that functional -945 G/C polymorphism in the gene encoding connective tissue growth factor is associated with the need for TLR in patients who underwent PCI for stable coronary artery disease.

Cardiac outcomes in patients with acute coronary syndrome attributable to calcified nodule

Background and aimsCalcified nodule (CN) is an eruptive calcified mass causing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Since coronary calcification is associated with an elevated cardiac event's risk, ACS attributable to CN may exhibit worse clinical outcome following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 657 ACS patients receiving PCI with newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation under intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) guidance. CN was defined as (1) protruding calcification with its irregular surface and (2) the presence of calcification at adjacent proximal and distal segments. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac event [MACE = cardiac death + ACS recurrence + target lesion revascularization (TLR)]. ResultsCN was identified in 5.3% (=35/657) of the study subjects. CN patients were more likely to have coronary risk factors including hypertension (p = 0.005), chronic kidney disease (p < 0.001), maintenance hemodialysis (p < 0.001) and a history of PCI (p < 0.001). During the observational period (median = 1304 days), CN was associated with an increased risk of MACE (HR = 7.68, 95%CI = 4.61–12.80, p < 0.001), ACS recurrence (HR = 12.32, 95%CI = 6.05–25.11, p < 0.001) and TLR (HR = 10.48, 95%CI = 5.80–18.94, p < 0.001). These cardiac risks related to CN were consistently observed by Cox proportional hazards model (MACE: p < 0.001, ACS recurrence: p < 0.001, TLR: p < 0.001) and a propensity score–matched cohort analysis (MACE: p = 0.002, ACS recurrence: p = 0.01, TLR: p = 0.005). Of note, over 80% of TLR at the CN lesion was driven by its re-appearance within the implanted DES. ConclusionsACS patients attributable to CN have an increased risk of ACS recurrence and TLR, mainly driven by the continuous growth and protrusion of the calcified mass.

Clinical outcomes with unselected use of an ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent: a report from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR).

The aim of this study was to assess the real-world clinical performance of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stent (DES) (Orsiro) in a large nationwide cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). From the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, the two-year outcomes of 4,561 patients implanted with Orsiro (Orsiro group) and 69,570 receiving other newer-generation DES (n-DES group) were analysed. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was low in both groups (0.67% and 0.83% for Orsiro and n-DES, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.46, p-value 0.66). Restenosis was also infrequent (1.5% vs 2.0% with Orsiro and n-DES, adjusted HR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.63-1.03, p-value=0.09). The risk of target lesion revascularisation by PCI was lower in the Orsiro group (1.6% vs 2.3%, adjusted HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.60-0.94, p-value=0.013). All-cause mortality and myocardial infarction did not show a statistically significant difference between the two groups (mortality of 7.5% in both groups, adjusted HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.72-1.35, p-value=0.94; 6.0% vs 5.2% for myocardial infarction, adjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.00-1.43, p-value=0.06). In a nationwide scenario, the use of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut DES portended favourable clinical outcomes.

Is transradial access the way to go to prevent post PCI readmission?

Small vessel diameter is associated with higher risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The COMBO sirolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer stent has a proprietary anti-CD34 antibody layer to enhance homogeneous endothelialization, which may be advantageous in treating small vessels.We examined for differences in 1-year clinical outcomes after PCI by maximum implanted stent diameter from the COMBO collaboration.The COMBO collaboration (n = 3614) is a patient-level pooled dataset of patients undergoing PCI with COMBO stents in the MASCOT and REMEDEE multicenter registries. Stent diameter was available in 3590 (99.3%) patients. We compared patients receiving COMBO stents <3 mm versus ≥3 mm. The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI) or clinically driven TLR. Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). Adjusted outcomes were assessed using Cox regression methods.The study included 792 (22%) patients with small stents <3 mm and 2798 (78%) patients with large stents ≥3 mm. Small stent patients included more women with lower body mass index and higher prevalence of diabetes but similar prevalence of acute coronary syndrome. Risk of 1-year TLF was similar in small and large stent groups (4.4% vs. 3.8%, HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74–1.72, p = 0.58). There were no differences in the rates of cardiac death (1.7% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.74), TV-MI (1.4% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.58) or TLR (2.7% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.31). Definite or probable ST occurred in 1.3% of the small stent and 0.7% of the large stent PCI patients, p = 0.14, HR 2.13, 95% CI 0.93–5.00, p = 0.07.One-year ischemic outcomes after COMBO PCI were similar irrespective of stent diameter in this all-comers international cohort.

One- and 3-year outcomes of percutaneous bifurcation left main revascularization with modern drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Optimal percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for coronary left main (LM) bifurcation lesions remains controversial. We performed systematic review and meta-analysis comparing one and 3-year clinical outcomes of 1- and 2- stent strategies using modern drug eluting stents (DESs) for revascularization of LM bifurcation disease. We systematically identified all investigations published between January 2015 and February 2020 comparing the use of single versus double-stent strategies for the revascularization of LM bifurcation lesions. The primary endpoint was 1- and 3-years all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included target lesion revascularization (TLR), target lesion failure (TLF), major adverse cardiovascular vents (MACEs) and cardiovascular (CV) mortality while the tertiary outcome was overall occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST) at 1- and 3-years. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of all-cause mortality rate both at 1 and 3-year follow-up. Single stent strategy was associated with a significantly lower risk of TLR (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62- 0.97, p = 0.03, I2 = 61%) as well as of MACEs (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.63-0.97, I2 = 24%) compared to 2-stent strategy. Conversely no significant differences between the two groups were observed in terms of TLF, CV mortality and ST during the same follow-up period. In patients with LM bifurcation disease, single stent strategy demonstrated lower rate of MACEs and TLR but was not superior to 2-stent strategy in terms of CV mortality, TLF and ST at 1 and 3-year follow-up.

Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty Versus Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Coronary Stent Restenosis

BackgroundIn patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) requiring reintervention, it is unclear if the choice of treatment should depend on whether the restenotic stent was a bare-metal stent (BMS) or a drug-eluting stent (DES). ObjectivesThis study aimed to assess the comparative efficacy and safety of the 2 most frequently used treatments — angioplasty with drug-coated balloon (DCB) and repeat stenting DES — in patients with BMS-and DES-ISR. MethodsThe DAEDALUS (Difference in Antirestenotic Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stent and Drug-Coated Balloon Angioplasty for the Occurrence of Coronary In-Stent Restenosis) study was a pooled analysis of individual patient data from all 10 existing randomized clinical trials comparing DCB angioplasty with repeat DES implantation for the treatment of coronary ISR. In this pre-specified analysis, patients were stratified according to BMS- versus DES-ISR and treatment assigned. The primary efficacy endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 3 years. The primary safety endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis at 3 years. Primary analysis was performed by mixed-effects Cox models accounting for the trial of origin. Secondary analyses included nonparsimonious multivariable adjustment accounting also for multiple lesions per patient and 2-stage analyses. ResultsA total of 710 patients with BMS-ISR (722 lesions) and 1,248 with DES-ISR (1,377 lesions) were included. In patients with BMS-ISR, no significant difference between treatments was observed in terms of primary efficacy (9.2% vs. 10.2%; hazard ratio [HR]: 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 1.37) and safety endpoints (8.7% vs. 7.5%; HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.65 to 1.96); results of secondary analyses were consistent. In patients with DES-ISR, the risk of the primary efficacy endpoint was higher with DCB angioplasty than with repeat DES implantation (20.3% vs. 13.4%; HR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.16 to 2.13), whereas the risk of the primary safety endpoint was numerically lower (9.5% vs. 13.3%; HR: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.00); results of secondary analyses were consistent. Regardless of the treatment used, the risk of TLR was lower in BMS- versus DES-ISR (9.7% vs. 17.0%; HR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.74), whereas safety was not significantly different between ISR types. ConclusionsAt 3-year follow-up, DCB angioplasty and repeat stenting with DES are similarly effective and safe in the treatment of BMS-ISR, whereas DCB angioplasty is significantly less effective than repeat DES implantation in the treatment DES-ISR, and associated with a nonsignificant reduction in the primary composite safety endpoint. Overall, DES-ISR is associated with higher rates of treatment failure and similar safety compared with BMS-ISR.

Impact of Elective, Uncomplicated Target Lesion Revascularization on Cardiac Mortality After Elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery Disease

This study sought to investigate the impact of elective, uncomplicated target lesion revascularization (TLR) on long-term cardiac mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. Consecutive patients undergoing PCI for ULMCA disease between January 2003 and December 2015 in 1 interventional center in Northern Italy were included. Patients presenting with cardiogenic shock, ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI), as well as those undergoing urgent or complicated TLR were excluded. The primary endpoint of the study was cardiac mortality. Among the 418 patients fulfilling the study criteria, 79 (18.46%) underwent elective, uncomplicated TLR. After a median follow-up of 5.5 years, there were 23 cardiac deaths among patients undergoing elective, uncomplicated TLR versus 50 in patients not undergoing TLR. After adjusting for possible confounders, TLR was an independent predictor of cardiac mortality (Hazard ratio [HZ] = 1.92, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.05 to 3.49; p = 0.03). Patients undergoing TLR had also significantly higher rates of the composite of cardiac death, MI and stroke compared with the no TLR group (adjusted HR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.72). In conclusion, elective, uncomplicated TLR after PCI of ULMCA disease is associated with increased risk of long-term cardiac mortality. Reducing the risk of TLR after PCI of ULMCA disease may potentially improve the survival of these patients.

1-Year Outcomes with COMBO Stents in Small-Vessel Coronary Disease: Subgroup Analysis From the COMBO Collaboration

BackgroundSmall vessel diameter is associated with higher risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The COMBO sirolimus-eluting biodegradable-polymer stent has a proprietary anti-CD34 antibody layer to enhance homogeneous endothelialization, which may be advantageous in treating small vessels. ObjectiveWe examined for differences in 1-year clinical outcomes after PCI by maximum implanted stent diameter from the COMBO collaboration. MethodsThe COMBO collaboration (n = 3614) is a patient-level pooled dataset of patients undergoing PCI with COMBO stents in the MASCOT and REMEDEE multicenter registries. Stent diameter was available in 3590 (99.3%) patients. We compared patients receiving COMBO stents <3 mm versus ≥3 mm. The primary endpoint was 1-year target lesion failure (TLF), composite of cardiac death, target vessel-myocardial infarction (TV-MI) or clinically driven TLR. Secondary outcomes included stent thrombosis (ST). Adjusted outcomes were assessed using Cox regression methods. ResultsThe study included 792 (22%) patients with small stents <3 mm and 2798 (78%) patients with large stents ≥3 mm. Small stent patients included more women with lower body mass index and higher prevalence of diabetes but similar prevalence of acute coronary syndrome. Risk of 1-year TLF was similar in small and large stent groups (4.4% vs. 3.8%, HR 1.12, 95% CI 0.74–1.72, p = 0.58). There were no differences in the rates of cardiac death (1.7% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.74), TV-MI (1.4% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.58) or TLR (2.7% vs. 2.1%, p = 0.31). Definite or probable ST occurred in 1.3% of the small stent and 0.7% of the large stent PCI patients, p = 0.14, HR 2.13, 95% CI 0.93–5.00, p = 0.07. ConclusionsOne-year ischemic outcomes after COMBO PCI were similar irrespective of stent diameter in this all-comers international cohort.

Weighing the potential late benefits versus early hazard associated with bioresorbable vascular scaffolds in percutaneous coronary interventions: a Markov decision analytic model.

Use of poly-L-lactic acid-based bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS) has been associated with increased risk of device thrombosis during the first 3 years after implantation as compared to metallic everolimus-eluting stents (EES). The long-term performance of BRS relative to EES remains unknown. We used a Markov decision analysis model to evaluate the effectiveness of BRS vs. EES over a lifetime horizon. In addition to one-way sensitivity analyses of key variables, we evaluated the impact of optimal implantation technique and limiting procedures to larger vessels (>2.6 mm in diameter) on model results. Assuming no risk of target lesion revascularization for BRS after 3 years, we found a small increment in quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of 0.02 with the use of BRS relative to EES, with benefit being observed after 21.8 years. Optimal implantation technique and limiting to larger vessels resulted in larger gains in QALE (0.08 and 0.06, respectively) with BRS and shorter times to equipoise (6.7 and 8.3 years, respectively). Model results were highly sensitive to variations in the relative risk of stent thrombosis (BRS vs. EES). Based on currently available data, it would take approximately 21.8 years for the presumed late benefits of current BRS relative to EES to overcome the early hazard associated with their use under favorable assumptions. Optimal implantation technique and limiting procedures to larger vessels improved BRS performance and reduced time to equipoise. Eliminating the higher BRS thrombosis risk is necessary in developing future generations of BRS as an acceptable alternative to EES.

Modern Stents: Where Are We Going?

Coronary artery stenting is the treatment of choice for patients requiring coronary angioplasty. We describe the major advancements with this technology. There have been significant developments in the design of stents and adjunctive medical therapies. Newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have almost negligible restenosis rates and, when combined with proper anti-platelet treatment and optimal deployment, a low risk of stent thrombosis. The introduction of newer-generation DES with thinner stent struts, novel durable or biodegradable polymer coatings, and new antiproliferative agents has further improved the safety profile of early-generation DES. In parallel the effectiveness has been kept, with a significant reduction in the risk of target lesion revascularization compared with the early-generation DES. However, to date, the development of completely bioresorbable vascular scaffolds has failed to achieve further clinical benefits and has been associated with increased thrombosis. Newer-generation DES—including both durable polymer as well as biodegradable polymer—have become the standard of care in all patient and lesion subsets, with excellent long-term results.

Mid-term outcomes of bioresorbable vascular scaffolds vs second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndromes: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS), which have the characteristics of scaffold absorption and vascular function recovery, are the latest innovation in the treatment of coronary artery disease. This new concept has become a hot topic in the field of interventional cardiology. Data regarding mid-term clinical outcomes of BVS in acute coronary syndromes are currently scarce. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to compare mid-term outcome data for BVS and second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) in the treatment of acute coronary syndromes. We searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and relevant web sites for studies with a follow-up of ≥ 1 years that studied percutaneous coronary interventions with BVS vs second-generation DES in acute coronary syndromes. A meta-analysis was performed with the software RevMan following the standards of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0. Five studies, 2 randomized controlled trials, and 3 observational studies, with a total of 1758 patients (BVS n = 917; DES n = 841) and a median follow-up duration of 24 months, were included. BVS, when compared with DES, resulted in higher rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.12-3.64; P = .02) and stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST/ScT) (OR = 2.35, 95% CI: 1.13-4.89, P = .02). When TLR due to device thrombosis were excluded, the difference in risk estimates between the 2 groups was no longer significant (OR: 1.67, 95% CI: 0.73-3.82, P = .22). The risk for all-cause death (OR = 1.32 95% CI: 0.61-2.88, P = .48), cardiac death (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.58-2.86 P = .52), target vessel myocardial infarction (OR = 1.50, 95% CI: 0.86-2.61, P = .15), and target lesion failure (OR = 1.34, 95% CI: 0.76-2.35, P = .31) did not differ between BVS and DES groups. At mid-term follow-up, BVS had a higher risk of TLR and ST/ScT than the second-generation DES in patients with acute coronary syndromes. ST/ScT was the key factor indicating the decreased safety and effectiveness of BVS relative to DES.

The Effect of Drug-Eluting Stents on Target Lesion Revascularization in Native Coronary Arteries: Results from the NORSTENT Randomized Study

Background: The NORSTENT trial randomized 9,013 patients to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a drug-eluting stent (DES) or bare-metal stent (BMS) with 5-year follow-up. No difference was found in the composite primary outcome of death from any cause and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction after a median of 5 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included repeat revascularizations, which were reduced by DES. We report the occurrence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) in time and across demographic and clinical subgroups in patients with lesions in native coronary arteries (n = 8,782). Results: Clinically driven TLR was performed on 488 (5.6%) of the 8,782 patients during 5 years of follow-up. Male gender, older age, visible thrombus in the lesion, and larger stent diameter were associated with less TLR; multivessel disease and longer stents were associated with a higher risk of TLR. There was a substantial and highly significant reduction of the risk of any TLR after 5 years in the DES group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36–0.52], p < 0.001). The effect of DES on TLR was limited in time to the first 2 years in the study with no evidence of a later rebound effect. The reduction in TLR after DES insertion was consistent across subgroups defined by gender, age, diabetes status, renal function, and lesion and stent characteristics. The number needed to treat with DES (vs. BMS) to prevent 1 TLR ranged from 4 to 110 across clinically relevant subgroups. Conclusion: DES have a time-limited effect on the rate of TLR, but with a substantial and highly significant reduction in the first 2 years after the procedure. This effect was found to be consistent across all important clinical subgroups.

Nutritional status and outcomes of superficial femoral artery stenting due to intermittent claudication

The pathogenesis of in-stent restenosis is still not clear. The aim of this study was to determine the nutritional status of patients with lower limb ischemia and the risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) after superficial femoral artery (SFA) stenting. Numerous parameters of nutritional status assessment were compared between 70 patients undergoing SFA endovascular intervention with a self-expandable plane stent due to life-limiting intermittent claudication and 40 patients undergoing carotid artery stenting (CAS). All subjects were followed up for at least 1 year in relation to outcomes such as clinically driven TLR occurrence. Patients undergoing SFA stenting had a lower prevalence of overweight and obesity than those who underwent CAS (51.43% vs. 72.50%; P=0.031). An increase in Ankle-Brachial Index of >0.15 after SFA stenting (early end-point) was positively associated with greater handgrip strength (HGS), fat-free mass, skeletal muscle mass and waist-to-hip ratio. Freedom from TLR (late end-point) was significantly related to a higher waist-to-height ratio (WHtR), HGS and Geriatric Nutritional Risk Index (GNRI) Score. The 1-year risk of TLR for patients with a WHtR of ≥61.39 amounted to odds ratio; 95% confidence interval: 0.21; 0.05-0.25; P=0.021. Parameters of nutritional status assessment were associated with early and late outcomes of SFA stenting in patients with intermittent claudication. Abdominal fat distribution and higher HGS and GNRI scores lowered the 1-year risk of TLR. Further study is needed to determine the pathomechanism of the obesity paradox, sarcopenia and undernutrition in relation to outcomes of endovascular interventions.

Risk of Death and Amputation with Use of Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons in the Infrapopliteal Arteries for Treatment of Critical Limb Ischemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

A formal systematic review and study-level meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials investigating treatment of the infrapopliteal arteries with paclitaxel-coated balloons compared with conventional balloon angioplasty for critical limb ischemia (CLI) was conducted. Medical databases and online content were last screened in September 2019. The primary safety and efficacy endpoint was amputation-free survival defined as freedom from all-cause death and major amputation. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) constituted a secondary efficacy endpoint. Summary effects were synthesized with a random-effects model. Some 8 randomized controlled trials with 1,420 patients (97% CLI) were analyzed up to 1 year follow-up. Amputation-free survival was significantly worse in case of paclitaxel (13.7% crude risk of death or limb loss compared to 9.4% in case of uncoated balloon angioplasty; hazard ratio 1.52; 95% confidence interval: 1.12-2.07, p = .008). TLR was significantly reduced in case of paclitaxel (11.8% crude risk of TLR versus 25.6% in control; risk ratio 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.35-0.81, p = .004). The harm signal was evident when examining the high-dose (3.0-3.5μg/mm2) devices, but attenuated below significance in case of a low-dose (2.0 μg/mm2) device. Actual causes remain largely unknown, but non-target paclitaxel embolization is a plausible mechanism.

Effect of Intravascular Ultrasound–Guided Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation: 5-Year Follow-Up of the IVUS-XPL Randomized Trial

ObjectivesThe goal of this study was to evaluate whether the beneficial effect of use of intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is sustained for long-term follow-up. BackgroundThe use of IVUS promoted favorable 1-year clinical outcome in the IVUS-XPL (Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on the Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesions) trial. It is not known, however, whether this effect is sustained for long-term follow-up. MethodsThe IVUS-XPL trial randomized 1,400 patients with long coronary lesions (implanted stent length ≥28 mm) to receive IVUS-guided (n = 700) or angiography-guided (n = 700) everolimus-eluting stent implantation. Five-year clinical outcomes were investigated in patients who completed the original trial. The primary outcome was the composite of major adverse cardiac events, including cardiac death, target lesion–related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 5 years, analyzed by intention-to-treat. ResultsFive-year follow-up was completed in 1,183 patients (85%). Major adverse cardiac events at 5 years occurred in 36 patients (5.6%) receiving IVUS guidance and in 70 patients (10.7%) receiving angiographic guidance (hazard ratio: 0.50; 95% confidence interval: 0.34 to 0.75; p = 0.001). The difference was driven mainly by a lower risk for target lesion revascularization (31 [4.8%] vs. 55 [8.4%]; hazard ratio: 0.54; 95% confidence interval: 0.33 to 0.89; p = 0.007). By landmark analysis, major adverse cardiac events between 1 and 5 years occurred in 17 patients (2.8%) receiving IVUS guidance and in 31 patients (5.2%) receiving angiographic guidance (hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.29 to 0.95; p = 0.031). ConclusionsCompared with angiography-guided stent implantation, IVUS-guided stent implantation resulted in a significantly lower rate of major adverse cardiac events up to 5 years. Sustained 5-year clinical benefits resulted from both within 1 year and from 1 to 5 years post-implantation. (Impact of Intravascular Ultrasound Guidance on the Outcomes of Xience Prime Stents in Long Lesions [IVUS-XPL Study]: Retrospective and Prospective Follow-Up Study; NCT03866486)

P2690Safety and effectiveness of thin-strut DES for bifurcated coronary lesions not involving left main: a RAIN (veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life) sub-analysis

Abstract Background Thinner stent struts of new DES (drug eluting stent) are associated with shorter time of reendothelialization, a reduction of shear stress and inflammation of coronary walls. Despite this great innovations their clinical safety and efficacy in challenging scenarios as non left main bifurcation coronary lesions has not been tested. Methods RAIN is a multicenter registry enrolling patients treated on bifurcated coronary lesions and left main with thin-strut DES. Baseline characteristics and procedural data were recorded. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) was the primary endpoint, whereas major adverse clinical events (MACE; composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), TLR and stent thrombosis (ST)) along with its single components were the secondary endpoints. A multivariate analysis to identify predictors of TLR and sub-analysis according to stenting strategy (provisional vs 2-stent technique), use of final kissing balloon (FKB) and IVUS/OCT optimization were performed. Results Data from 1803 patients (59% ACS, 61% stable CAD) treated on bifurcations were retrospectively evaluated. Follow up was available for 1685 (94%) patients for a median of 12 months (IQR 7–18). TLR occurred globally in 2.5% of cases (2.2% in provisional stenting, 3.5% in 2-stent technique). The rate of MACE was 9.4%, whereas all-cause death and MI, occurred in 4.1% and 3.2% of cases respectively. TVR and definite ST incidence were 3.7% and 1.1%. At multivariate analysis, chronic kidney disease (CKD) negatively influenced the main endpoint (HR 1.95, 95% CI 1.06–3.6, p=0.03), whereas post-dilatation (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.3–0.93, p=0.04) and provisional stenting resulted being protective factors. FKB reduced TLR occurrence at FU only in 2-stent technique (p=0.03), whereas intracoronary imaging (performed in 29% of patients) were uninfluential. Conclusion Very thin-strut DES represents a highly effective solution in bifurcation lesions. The risk of TLR is reduced by post-dilatation and provisional stenting. FKB is recommended in 2-stent technique, whereas further studies are required to address the impact of intracoronary imaging in this setting.

Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty vs. drug-eluting stenting for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis: a comprehensive, collaborative, individual patient data meta-analysis of 10 randomized clinical trials (DAEDALUS study).

Consensus is lacking regarding the best treatment for coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). The two most effective treatments are angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) and repeat stenting with drug-eluting stent (DES) but individual trials were not statistically powered for clinical endpoints, results were heterogeneous, and evidence about comparative efficacy and safety in relevant subsets was limited. The Difference in Anti-restenotic Effectiveness of Drug-eluting stent and drug-coated balloon AngiopLasty for the occUrrence of coronary in-Stent restenosis (DAEDALUS) study was a comprehensive, investigator-initiated, collaborative, individual patient data meta-analysis comparing angioplasty with PCB alone vs. repeat stenting with DES alone for the treatment of coronary ISR. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017075007). All 10 available randomized clinical trials were included with 1976 patients enrolled, 1033 assigned to PCB and 943 to DES. At 3-year follow-up, PCB was associated with a significant increase in the risk of target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with DES [hazard ratio (HR) 1.32, 95% CI 1.02-1.70, P = 0.035; number-needed-to-harm 28.5]. There was a significant interaction between treatment effect and type of restenosed stent (P = 0.029) with a more marked difference in patients with DES-ISR and comparable effects in patients with bare-metal stent-ISR. At 3-year follow-up, the primary safety endpoint of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis was comparable between treatments (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58-1.09, P = 0.152). A pre-specified subgroup analysis indicated a significant interaction between treatment effect and type of DES used to treat ISR (P = 0.033), with a lower incidence of events associated with PCB compared with first-generation DES and similar effect between PCB and second-generation DES (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.71-1.60, P = 0.764). Long-term all-cause mortality was similar between PCB and DES (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.53-1.22, P = 0.310); results were consistent comparing PCB and non-paclitaxel-based DES (HR 1.42, 95% CI 0.80-2.54, P = 0.235). Myocardial infarction and target lesion thrombosis were comparable between treatments. In patients with coronary ISR, repeat stenting with DES is moderately more effective than angioplasty with PCB at reducing the need for TLR at 3 years. The incidence of a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion thrombosis was similar between groups. The rates of individual endpoints, including all-cause mortality, were not significantly different between groups.

Post-intervention minimal stent area as a predictor of target lesion revascularization after everolimus-eluting stent implantation for in-stent restenosis: a single-center observational study.

Everolimus-eluting stent (EES) is effective for treating in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the long-term incidence of target lesion revascularization (TLR) is unknown. Further, the role of post-intervention minimal stent area (MSA) measured by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in TLR is unknown in this setting. Overall, 223 ISR lesions (192 patients) that were treated with EES between 2010 and 2016 were analyzed retrospectively. Lesions were divided into two groups according to the post-intervention MSA [ ≤ 5.3 mm: 72 lesions (67 patients), and > 5.3 mm: 151 lesions (138 patients)]. The cut-off point was determined on the basis of receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. The cumulative 5-year incidence of TLR was significantly higher in the group with MSA of 5.3 mm or less than in the group with MSA more than 5.3 mm (15.8 and 7.2%, P = 0.01). After adjusting for confounders, the excess risk of the group with MSA of 5.3 mm or less relative to the group with MSA more than 5.3 mm for TLR remained significant [hazard ratio: 3.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.17-8.51, P = 0.02]. Using multivariate logistic regression analysis, we identified female sex (odds ratio: 2.39, 95% CI: 1.06-5.49, P = 0.04) and stent size of 3.0 mm or less (odds ratio: 13.43, 95% CI: 6.23-32.38, P < 0.0001) as independent predictors of MSA of 5.3 mm or less. EES implantation for ISR was associated with an acceptable rate of TLR through long-term follow-up. Postintervention MSA of 5.3 mm or less was associated independently with a higher risk for TLR.