Prevalence and Impact of High Bleeding Risk in Patients Undergoing Left Main Artery Disease PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and prognostic impact of high bleeding risk (HBR), as determined by the Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria, in real-world patients undergoing left main (LM) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundLM PCI is often reserved for patients at increased risk for periprocedural adverse events. Patients at HBR represent a relevant percentage of this cohort, but their outcomes after LM PCI are still poorly investigated.MethodsAll patients undergoing LM PCI between 2014 and 2017 at a tertiary care center were prospectively enrolled. Patients were defined as having HBR if they met at least 1 major or 2 minor Academic Research Consortium HBR criteria. The primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke at 12 months.ResultsAmong 619 enrolled patients, 55.3% were at HBR. The rate of the primary endpoint was 4-fold higher in patients at HBR compared with those without HBR (20.5% vs 4.9%; HR: 4.43; 95% CI: 2.31-8.48), driven by an increased risk for all-cause death (HR: 3.88; 95% CI: 1.88-8.02) and MI (HR: 6.18; 95% CI: 1.83-20.9). Rates of target vessel or lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable in the 2 groups. Bleeding occurred more frequently in patients at HBR (HR: 3.77; 95% CI: 1.83-7.76). Consistent findings were observed after Cox multivariable regression adjustment.ConclusionsAmong patients undergoing LM PCI, those with HBR are at increased risk for all-cause death, MI, and bleeding. Conversely, rates of repeat revascularization and stent thrombosis were comparable, suggesting frailty and comorbidities as primary causes of worse outcomes in patients at HBR.     

Clopidogrel Monotherapy After 1-Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients With Diabetes Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundDiabetes was reported to be associated with an impaired response to clopidogrel.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of clopidogrel monotherapy after very short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with diabetes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsA subgroup analysis was conducted on the basis of diabetes in the STOPDAPT-2 (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2) Total Cohort (N = 5,997) (STOPDAPT-2, n = 3,009; STOPDAPT-2 ACS [Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 for the Patients With ACS], n = 2,988), which randomly compared 1-month DAPT followed by clopidogrel monotherapy with 12-month DAPT with aspirin and clopidogrel after cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent implantation. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiovascular (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, or stroke) or bleeding (TIMI [Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction] major or minor) endpoints at 1 year.ResultsThere were 2,030 patients with diabetes (33.8%) and 3967 patients without diabetes (66.2%). Regardless of diabetes, the risk of 1-month DAPT relative to 12-month DAPT was not significant for the primary endpoint (diabetes, 3.58% vs 4.12% [HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.56-1.37; P = 0.55]; nondiabetes, 2.46% vs 2.49% [HR: 0.99; 95% CI: 0.67-1.48; P = 0.97]; P_interaction = 0.67) and for the cardiovascular endpoint (diabetes, 3.28% vs 3.05% [HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 0.67-1.81; P = 0.70]; nondiabetes, 1.95% vs 1.43% [HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 0.85-2.25; P = 0.20]; P_interaction = 0.52), while it was lower for the bleeding endpoint (diabetes, 0.30% vs 1.50% [HR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.06-0.68; P = 0.01]; nondiabetes, 0.61% vs 1.21% [HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.25-1.01; P = 0.054]; P_interaction = 0.19).ConclusionsClopidogrel monotherapy after 1-month DAPT compared with 12-month DAPT reduced major bleeding events without an increase in cardiovascular events regardless of diabetes, although the findings should be considered as hypothesis generating, especially in patients with acute coronary syndrome, because of the inconclusive result in the STOPDAPT-2 ACS trial. (Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 [STOPDAPT-2], NCT02619760; Short and Optimal Duration of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Everolimus-Eluting Cobalt-Chromium Stent–2 for the Patients With ACS [STOPDAPT-2 ACS], NCT03462498)     

1-Month Dual-Antiplatelet Therapy Followed by Aspirin Monotherapy After Polymer-Free Drug-Coated Stent Implantation: One-Month DAPT Trial

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to determine whether 1 month of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by aspirin monotherapy after polymer-free drug-coated stent (PF-DCS) implantation is noninferior to 6 to 12 months of DAPT after biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stent (BP-DES) implantation.BackgroundIt is necessary to determine the optimal minimal duration of DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).MethodsIn this trial, 3,020 patients with coronary artery disease considered for PCI for noncomplex lesions were randomized to 1-month DAPT after PF-DCS (n = 1,507) or 6- to 12-month DAPT after BP-DES (n = 1,513). The primary endpoint was the 1-year composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, stroke, or major bleeding (noninferiority hypothesis margin of 3%).ResultsThe primary endpoint occurred in 88 patients (5.9%) in the 1-month DAPT after PF-DCS group and 98 patients (6.5%) in the 6- to 12-month DAPT after BP-DES group (absolute difference −0.7%; upper limit of 1-sided 97.5% confidence interval: 1.33%; P < 0.001 for noninferiority). The occurrence of major bleeding was not different (1.7% vs 2.5%; P = 0.136). There was no difference in the occurrence of stent thrombosis (0.7% vs 0.8%; P = 0.842).ConclusionsAmong patients who underwent PCI for noncomplex lesions, 1-month DAPT followed by aspirin monotherapy after PF-DCS implantation was noninferior to 6- to 12-month DAPT after BP-DES implantation for the 1-year composite of cardiovascular events or major bleeding. The present findings need to be interpreted in the setting of different types of stents according to antiplatelet strategy. (A Randomized Controlled Comparison Between One Versus More Than Six Months of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Biolimus A9-Eluting Stent Implantation; NCT02513810)     

Validation of the Academic Research Consortium High Bleeding Risk Definition in Contemporary PCI Patients

BackgroundBleeding following percutaneous coronary intervention has important prognostic implications. The Academic Research Consortium (ARC) recently proposed a list of clinical criteria to define patients at high bleeding risk (HBR).ObjectivesThis study sought to validate the ARC definition for HBR patients in a contemporary real-world cohort.MethodsPatients undergoing coronary stenting between 2014 and 2017 at a tertiary-care center were defined as HBR if they met at least 1 major or 2 minor ARC-HBR criteria. To account for the presence of multiple criteria, patients were further stratified by the number of times they fulfilled the ARC-HBR definition. The primary endpoint was a composite of peri-procedural in-hospital or post-discharge bleeding at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included individual components of the primary bleeding endpoint, myocardial infarction, and all-cause mortality.ResultsAmong 9,623 patients, 4,278 (44.4%) qualified as HBR. Moderate or severe anemia was the most common major criterion (33.2%); age ≥75 years was the most frequent minor criterion and the most common overall (46.8%). The rate of the primary bleeding endpoint at 1 year was 9.1% in HBR patients compared with 3.2% in non-HBR patients (p < 0.001), with a stepwise increase in bleeding risk corresponding to the number of times the ARC-HBR definition was fulfilled. HBR patients also experienced significantly higher rates of all secondary endpoints.ConclusionsThis study validates the ARC-HBR definition in a contemporary group of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention. The ARC-HBR definition identified patients at increased risk not only for bleeding but also for thrombotic events, including all-cause mortality. Coexistence of multiple ARC-HBR criteria showed additive prognostic value.     

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.     

Ultrathin,Biodegradable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent vs Thin,Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent

BackgroundPrevious trials suggested the superiority of ultrathin- over thin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) concerning target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year after index percutaneous coronary intervention.ObjectivesThe aim of this randomized comparison study of ultrathin-strut and thin-strut DES (CASTLE [Randomized Comparison All-Comer Study of Ultrathin Strut and Thin Strut Drug-Eluting Stent]; jRCTs032180084) was to examine the impact of differences in strut thickness of DES on clinical outcomes when implanted with angiography and intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomographic guidance.MethodsCASTLE was a multicenter, prospective, noninferiority study conducted at 65 institutions in Japan. Percutaneous coronary intervention patients were assigned (1:1) to an ultrathin, biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting stent (BP-SES) or a thin, durable-polymer everolimus-eluting stent (DP-EES). The primary endpoint was TLF, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up.ResultsBetween May 2019 and March 2020, 1,440 patients were randomly assigned to BP-SES (n = 722) or DP-EES (n = 718). TLF occurred in 6.0% and 5.7% of patients, respectively. Noninferiority (P = 0.040) was met because the upper limit (2.67%) of the 1-sided 95% CI between the groups was lower than the prespecified noninferiority margin (3.3%). No significant interactions were observed in the relative rates of TLF between prespecified subgroups.ConclusionsThe BP-SES was noninferior to the DP-EES regarding 1-year TLF. This demonstrates that strut thickness differences among DES have little impact on clinical outcomes when implanted with intravascular imaging guidance.     

Polymer-Based Versus Polymer-Free Stents in High Bleeding Risk Patients: Final 2-Year Results From Onyx ONE

BackgroundResolute Onyx polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) were noninferior in safety and effectiveness to BioFreedom polymer-free biolimus A9-coated stents (DCS) in high-bleeding-risk (HBR) patients treated with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) followed by single antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) at 1 year.ObjectivesThis study reports the final 2-year results of the randomized Onyx ONE trial.MethodsThe Onyx ONE (A Randomized Controlled Trial With Resolute Onyx in One Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy (DAPT) for High-Bleeding Risk Patients) trial randomly assigned HBR patients to treatment with ZES or DCS. Following 1-month DAPT, event-free patients received SAPT (either aspirin or a P2Y₁₂ inhibitor at physician discretion). The primary safety endpoint, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year, was determined at 1 year. Rates of primary and secondary endpoints were calculated after final follow-up at 2 years.ResultsA total of 1,003 patients were randomly allocated to ZES and 993 patients to DCS. Follow-up was complete in 980 (97.7%) ZES patients and 962 (96.9%) DCS patients at 2 years. The primary safety endpoint occurred in 208 (21.2%) patients in the ZES group and 199 (20.7%) patients in the DCS group (risk difference: 0.5%; 95% CI: ?3.1% to 4.2%; P = 0.78) at 2 years without significant differences in individual components of the composite endpoint. The secondary effectiveness endpoint occurred in 217 (22.1%) patients in the ZES group and 202 (21.0%) patients in the DCS group (risk difference: 1.1%; 95% CI: ?2.5% to 4.8%; P = 0.54).ConclusionsAmong patients at HBR treated with 1-month DAPT followed by SAPT, the Resolute Onyx polymer-based ZES had similar 2-year outcomes for the primary safety and secondary effectiveness endpoint compared with the BioFreedom polymer-free DCS. (A Randomized Controlled Trial With Resolute Onyx in One Month Dual Antiplatelet Therapy [DAPT] for High-Bleeding Risk Patients [Onyx ONE]; NCT03344653)     

Randomized Comparison Between Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffold and Metallic Stent: Multimodality Imaging Through 3 Years

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the vascular responses and fates of the scaffold after bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation using multimodality imaging.BackgroundSerial comprehensive image assessments after BVS implantation in the context of a randomized trial have not yet been reported.MethodsIn the ABSORB Japan trial, 400 patients were randomized to a BVS (n = 266) or a cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (n = 134). Through 3 years, patients underwent serial angiography and intravascular ultrasound or optical coherence tomography (OCT).ResultsLuminal dimension at 3 years was consistently smaller with the BVS than with the cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (mean angiographic minimal luminal diameter 2.04 ± 0.63 mm vs. 2.40 ± 0.56 mm, mean difference −0.37 mm [95% confidence interval: −0.50 to −0.24 mm]; p < 0.001), mainly because of smaller device area (6.13 ± 2.03 mm² vs. 7.15 ± 2.16 mm², mean difference −1.04 mm² [95% confidence interval: −1.66 to −0.42 mm²]; p < 0.001), and larger neointimal area (2.10 ± 0.61 mm² vs. 1.86 ± 0.64 mm², mean difference 0.24 mm² [95% confidence interval: 0.06 to 0.43 mm²]; p = 0.01) by OCT. BVS-treated vessels did not show previously reported favorable vessel responses, such as positive vessel remodeling, late luminal enlargement, and restoration of vasomotion, although the OCT-based healing score was on average zero (interquartile range: 0.00 to 0.00). At 3 years, intraluminal scaffold dismantling (ISD) was observed in 14% of BVS. On serial OCT, ISD was observed in 6 lesions at 2 years, where the struts had been fully apposed at post-procedure, while ISD was observed in 12 lesions at 3 years, where 8 lesions were free from ISD on 2-year OCT. In 5 cases of very late scaffold thrombosis, strut discontinuities were detected in all 4 cases with available OCT immediately before reintervention.ConclusionsIn this multimodality serial imaging study, luminal dimension at 3 years was smaller with the BVS than with the cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent. ISD, suspected to be one of the mechanisms of very late BVS thrombosis, was observed in a substantial proportion of cases at 3 years, which developed between post-procedure and 2 years and even beyond 2 years. (AVJ-301 Clinical Trial: A Clinical Evaluation of AVJ-301 [Absorb™ BVS] in Japanese Population [ABSORB JAPAN]; NCT01844284)     

Role of Post-Stent Physiological Assessment in a Risk Prediction Model After Coronary Stent Implantation

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to develop a risk model incorporating clinical, angiographic, and physiological parameters to predict future clinical events after drug-eluting stent implantation.BackgroundPrognostic factors after coronary stenting have not been comprehensively investigated.MethodsA risk model to predict target vessel failure (TVF) at 2 years was developed from 2,200 patients who underwent second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation and post-stent fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement. TVF was defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. A random survival forest model with automatic feature selection by minimal depth analysis was used for risk model development.ResultsDuring 2 years of follow-up, the cumulative incidence of TVF was 5.9%. From clinical, angiographic, and physiological parameters, 6 variables were selected for the risk model in order of importance within the model as follows: total stent length, post-stent FFR, age, post-stent percentage diameter stenosis, reference vessel diameter, and diabetes mellitus. Harrell’s C index of the random survival forest model was 0.72 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62 to 0.82). This risk model showed better prediction ability than models with clinical risk factors alone (Harrell’s C index = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.59; p for comparison = 0.005) and with clinical risk factors and angiographic parameters (Harrell’s C index = 0.65; 95% CI: 0.52 to 0.77; p for comparison = 0.045). When the patients were divided into 2 groups according to the median of total stent length (30 mm), post-stent FFR and total stent length showed the highest variable importance in the short- and long-stent groups, respectively.ConclusionsA risk model incorporating clinical, angiographic, and physiological predictors can help predict the risk for TVF at 2 years after coronary stenting. Total stent length and post-stent FFR were the most important predictors. (International Post PCI FFR Registry; NCT04012281)     

COAPT-Like Profile Predicts Long-Term Outcomes in Patients With Secondary Mitral Regurgitation Undergoing MitraClip Implantation

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether fulfilling COAPT (Cardiovascular Outcomes Assessment of the MitraClip Percutaneous Therapy for Heart Failure Patients With Functional Mitral Regurgitation) criteria identifies patients with better outcomes after MitraClip treatment for secondary mitral regurgitation (SMR).BackgroundTo date, COAPT is the only trial showing a prognostic benefit of MitraClip implantation compared with conservative management.MethodsThree hundred four patients with SMR undergoing MitraClip placement in addition to optimal medical therapy at 3 European centers were analyzed. A COAPT-like profile was defined as absence of all the following criteria: severe left ventricular impairment, moderate to severe right ventricular dysfunction, severe tricuspid regurgitation, severe pulmonary hypertension, and hemodynamic instability. Freedom from all-cause death and from a composite endpoint (cardiovascular death and heart failure hospitalization) were evaluated at 2- and 5-year follow-up.ResultsA COAPT-like profile was observed in 65% of the population. Compared with non-COAPT-like patients, those fulfilling COAPT criteria had greater survival free from all-cause death and from the composite endpoint at both 2 year (75% vs. 55% and 67% vs. 47%; p < 0.001 for both) and 5-year (49% vs. 25% and 40% vs. 19%; p < 0.001 for both) follow-up. Among the non-COAPT-like patients, similar outcomes were observed in those fulfilling 1 or ≥1 criterion. Left ventricular impairment had a late impact on outcomes, while right ventricular impairment, pulmonary hypertension, and hemodynamic instability had early effects. COAPT-like profile was an independent predictor of long-term outcomes, as well as administration of neurohormonal antagonists, European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation II score, and previous heart failure hospitalization.ConclusionsA COAPT-like profile, including specific echocardiographic and clinical criteria, identifies patients with SMR who have a better prognosis after MitraClip implantation.     

Development and Validation of a Practical Model to Identify Patients at Risk of Bleeding After TAVR

ObjectivesNo standardized algorithm exists to identify patients at risk of bleeding after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). The aim of this study was to generate and validate a useful predictive model.BackgroundBleeding events after TAVR influence prognosis and quality of life and may be preventable.MethodsUsing machine learning and multivariate regression, more than 100 clinical variables from 5,185 consecutive patients undergoing TAVR in the prospective multicenter RISPEVA (Registro Italiano GISE sull’Impianto di Valvola Aortica Percutanea; NCT02713932) registry were analyzed in relation to Valve Academic Research Consortium-2 bleeding episodes at 1 month. The model’s performance was externally validated in 5,043 TAVR patients from the prospective multicenter POL-TAVI (Polish Registry of Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation) database.ResultsDerivation analyses generated a 6-item score (PREDICT-TAVR) comprising blood hemoglobin and serum iron concentrations, oral anticoagulation and dual antiplatelet therapy, common femoral artery diameter, and creatinine clearance. The 30-day area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.80 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75–0.83). Internal validation by optimism bootstrap-corrected AUC was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.75–0.83). Score quartiles were in graded relation to 30-day events (0.8%, 1.1%, 2.5%, and 8.5%; overall p <0.001). External validation produced a 30-day AUC of 0.78 (95% CI: 0.72–0.82). A simple nomogram and a web-based calculator were developed to predict individual patient probabilities. Landmark cumulative event analysis showed greatest bleeding risk differences for top versus lower score quartiles in the first 30 days, when most events occurred. Predictivity was maintained when omitting serum iron values.ConclusionsPREDICT-TAVR is a practical, validated, 6-item tool to identify patients at risk of bleeding post-TAVR that can assist in decision making and event prevention.     

2-Year Clinical Outcomes of an Abluminal Groove–Filled Biodegradable-Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Compared With a Durable-Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the 2-year clinical outcomes of the Firehawk stent (Shanghai MicroPort Medical Group, Shanghai, China), a novel abluminal groove–filled biodegradable-polymer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent, compared with XIENCE (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California), a durable-polymer everolimus-eluting coronary stent.BackgroundThe long-term outcomes of the Firehawk stent have not been evaluated beyond 1 year in a randomized all-comers clinical trial.MethodsThe TARGET All Comers study is a prospective, multicenter, all-comers, randomized, noninferiority trial conducted in Europe. A total of 1,653 patients were randomly assigned to undergo implantation of either the Firehawk or the XIENCE stent. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization.ResultsAt 2-year follow-up, the incidence of target lesion failure was 8.7% in the Firehawk group versus 8.6% in the XIENCE group (p = 0.92). The event rates of individual components of the primary endpoint were comparable for the 2 groups. Landmark analyses between 1- and 2-year follow-up revealed no statistically significant difference of TLF for the Firehawk versus the XIENCE stent. Beyond 1 year, very late definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred in 3 patients (0.4%) in the Firehawk group and in 7 patients (0.9%) in the XIENCE group (p = 0.34).ConclusionsThe 2-year follow-up of the TARGET All Comers study confirms comparable safety and efficacy profiles of the Firehawk and XIENCE stents.     

3-Year Clinical Outcomes After Implantation of Permanent-Polymer Versus Polymer-Free Stent: ReCre8 Landmark Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this analysis was to assess long-term clinical outcomes of the polymer-free Amphilimus-eluting stent (PF-AES) compared with a latest generation permanent-polymer drug-eluting stent (DES) in an all-comers population.BackgroundPF-AES possess multiple properties improving targeted drug elution without the presence of polymers. Evaluation of long-term clinical performance of PF-AES versus latest generation permanent-polymer DES has not yet been performed in a large randomized trial introducing shortened dual-antiplatelet therapy.MethodsIn this physician-initiated, multicenter, randomized, all-comers trial, patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of DES were enrolled. Patients were stratified for diabetes and troponin status and randomized to implantation of a permanent-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent (PP-ZES) or a PF-AES. Dual-antiplatelet therapy duration was 12 months in troponin-positive patients and 1 month in troponin-negative patients. A noninferiority analysis was conducted to compare the 2 arms regarding target lesion failure (TLF) between 1 and 3 years.ResultsA total of 1,491 patients were randomized and treated. In this landmark analysis, between 1- and 3-year follow-up, TLF occurred in 35 patients (4.9%) in the PP-ZES arm and 37 PF-AES patients (5.1%). Clinical noninferiority of the PF-AES was confirmed, with a risk difference of 0.2% (upper limit 1-sided 95% CI: 2.2%; P_{noninferiority} = 0.0031).ConclusionsReCre8 (Randomized “All-Comer” Evaluation of a Permanent Polymer Resolute Integrity Stent Versus a Polymer Free Cre8 Stent) is the first randomized, multicenter trial with a head-to-head comparison of PP-ZES compared with PF-AES to investigate clinical outcomes of these new-generation DES in an all-comers population with long-term follow-up. On the basis of the present results, PF-AES are clinically noninferior to PP-ZES regarding TLF between 1 and 3 years. (Randomized “All-Comer” Evaluation of a Permanent Polymer Resolute Integrity Stent Versus a Polymer Free Cre8 Stent; NCT02328898)     

Prognostic Impact of Race in Patients Undergoing PCI: Analysis From 10 Randomized Coronary Stent Trials

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess race-based differences in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from a large pooled database of randomized controlled trials.BackgroundData on race-based outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention are limited, deriving mainly from registries and single-center studies.MethodsBaseline characteristics and outcomes at 30 days, 1 year, and 5 years were assessed across different races, from an individual patient data pooled analysis from 10 randomized trials. Endpoints of interest included death, myocardial infarction, and major adverse cardiac events (defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization). Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to assess associations between race and outcomes, controlling for differences in 12 baseline covariates.ResultsAmong 22,638 patients, 20,585 (90.9%) were white, 918 (4.1%) were black, 404 (1.8%) were Asian, and 473 (2.1%) were Hispanic. Baseline and angiographic characteristics differed among groups. Five-year major adverse cardiac event rates were 18.8% in white patients (reference group), compared with 23.9% in black patients (p = 0.0009), 11.2% in Asian patients (p = 0.0007), and 21.5% in Hispanic patients (p = 0.07). Multivariate analysis demonstrated an independent association between black race and 5-year risk for major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio: 1.28; 95% confidence interval: 1.05 to 1.57; p = 0.01).ConclusionsIn the present large-scale individual patient data pooled analysis, comorbidities were significantly more frequent in minority-group patients than in white patients enrolled in coronary stent randomized controlled trials. After accounting for these differences, black race was an independent predictor of worse outcomes, whereas Hispanic ethnicity and Asian race were not. Further research examining race-based outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention is warranted to understand these differences.     

Ticagrelor With or Without Aspirin in High-Risk Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

BackgroundP2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy with ticagrelor after a brief period of dual antiplatelet therapy can reduce bleeding without increasing ischemic harm after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The impact of this approach among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remains unknown.ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to examine the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy versus ticagrelor plus aspirin among patients with DM undergoing PCI.MethodsThis was a pre-specified analysis of the DM cohort in the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients after Coronary Intervention) trial. After 3 months of ticagrelor plus aspirin, patients were maintained on ticagrelor and randomized to aspirin or placebo for 1 year. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The composite ischemic endpoint was all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.ResultsPatients with DM comprised 37% (n = 2,620) of the randomized cohort and were characterized by more frequent comorbidities and a higher prevalence of multivessel disease. The incidence of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium 2, 3, or 5 bleeding was 4.5% and 6.7% among patients with DM randomized to ticagrelor plus placebo versus ticagrelor plus aspirin (hazard ratio: 0.65; 95% confidence interval: 0.47 to 0.91; p = 0.012). Ticagrelor monotherapy was not associated with an increase in ischemic events compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin (4.6% vs. 5.9%; hazard ratio: 0.77; 95% confidence interval: 0.55 to 1.09; p = 0.14). In the overall trial population, there was no significant interaction between DM status and treatment group for the primary bleeding or ischemic endpoints.ConclusionsCompared with ticagrelor plus aspirin, the effect of ticagrelor monotherapy in reducing the risk of clinically relevant bleeding without any increase in ischemic events was consistent among patients with or without DM undergoing PCI. (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention [TWILIGHT]; NCT02270242)     

Prognostic Implications of Post-Intervention Resting Pd/Pa and Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Stent Implantation

ObjectivesThis study sought to investigate the prognostic implications of post–percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) nonhyperemic pressure ratios compared with that of post-PCI fractional flow reserve (FFR).BackgroundFFR measured after PCI has been shown to possess prognostic implications. However, the prognostic value of post-PCI nonhyperemic pressure ratios has not yet been clarified.MethodsA total of 588 patients who underwent PCI with available both post-PCI FFR and resting distal coronary pressure-to-aortic pressure ratio (Pd/Pa) were analyzed. Post-PCI FFR and Pd/Pa were measured after successful angiographic stent implantation. The primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF) up to 2 years, defined as a composite of cardiac death, target vessel–related myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. Prognosis of patients according to post-PCI Pd/Pa was compared with that of post-PCI FFR.ResultsDespite angiographically successful PCI, 18.5% had post-PCI FFR ≤0.80 and 36.9% showed post-PCI Pd/Pa ≤0.92. In post-PCI Pd/Pa >0.92 group, 93.8% of patients showed post-PCI FFR >0.80. Conversely, 60.4% of patients showed post-PCI FFR >0.80 in post-PCI Pd/Pa ≤0.92 group. Although there was significant difference in TVF according to post-PCI FFR (≤0.80 vs. >0.80: 10.3% vs. 2.5%; p < 0.001) and Pd/Pa (≤0.92 vs. >0.92: 6.2% vs. 2.5%; p = 0.029), the reclassification ability of model for TVF was increased only with post-PCI FFR (net reclassification index 0.627; p = 0.003; integrated discrimination index 0.019; p = 0.015), but not with post-PCI Pd/Pa, compared with model including clinical factors. Compared with patients with post-PCI Pd/Pa >0.92, patients with post-PCI Pd/Pa ≤0.92 and FFR ≤0.80 had significantly higher risk of TVF (10.4% vs. 2.5%; adjusted hazard ratio: 4.204; 95% confidence interval: 1.521 to 11.618; p = 0.006); however, those with post-PCI Pd/Pa ≤0.92 but FFR >0.80 showed similar risk of TVF (3.5% vs. 2.5%; adjusted hazard ratio: 1.327; 95% confidence interval: 0.398 to 4.428; p = 0.645).ConclusionsOver one-half of the patients with abnormal post-PCI Pd/Pa ≤0.92 showed post-PCI FFR >0.80. Compared with post-PCI FFR, post-PCI Pd/Pa showed limited reclassification ability for the occurrence of TVF. Among patients with abnormal post-PCI Pd/Pa, only patients with positive post-PCI FFR showed significantly higher risk of TVF than did those with post-PCI Pd/Pa >0.92. (Prognostic Perspective of Invasive Hyperemic and Non-Hyperemic Physiologic Indices Measured After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention [PERSPECTIVEPCI]; NCT04265443)     

Frailty and Bleeding in Older Adults Undergoing TAVR or SAVR: Insights From the FRAILTY-AVR Study

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to examine the value of frailty to predict in-hospital major bleeding and determine its impact on mid-term mortality following transcatheter (TAVR) or surgical (SAVR) aortic valve replacement.BackgroundBleeding complications are harbingers of mortality and major morbidity in patients undergoing TAVR or SAVR. Despite the high prevalence of frailty in this population, little is known about its effects on bleeding risk.MethodsA post hoc analysis was performed of the multinational FRAILTY-AVR (Frailty Aortic Valve Replacement) cohort study, which prospectively enrolled older adults ≥70 years of age undergoing TAVR or SAVR. Trained researchers assessed frailty using a questionnaire and physical performance battery pre-procedure and ascertained clinical data from the electronic health record. The primary endpoint was major or life-threatening bleeding during the index hospitalization, and the secondary endpoint was units of packed red blood cells transfused.ResultsThe cohort consisted of 1,195 patients with a mean age of 81.3 ± 6.0 years. The incidence of life-threatening bleeding, major bleeding with a clinically apparent source, and major bleeding without a clinically apparent source was, respectively, 3%, 6%, and 9% in the TAVR group and 8%, 10%, and 31% in the SAVR group. Frailty measured using the Essential Frailty Toolset was an independent predictor of major bleeding and packed red blood cell transfusions in both groups. Major bleeding was associated with a 3-fold increase in 1-year mortality following TAVR (odds ratio: 3.40; 95% confidence interval: 2.22 to 5.21) and SAVR (odds ratio: 2.79; 95% confidence interval: 1.25 to 6.21).ConclusionsFrailty is associated with post-procedural major bleeding in older adults undergoing TAVR and SAVR, which is in turn associated with a higher risk for mid-term mortality.     

Impact of Age on the Safety and Efficacy of Ticagrelor Monotherapy in Patients Undergoing PCI

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess the impact of age on the safety and efficacy of ticagrelor monotherapy after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundAs the risk for bleeding and ischemic complications after PCI increases with age, the authors conducted a pre-specified analysis of the TWILIGHT (Ticagrelor With Aspirin or Alone in High-Risk Patients After Coronary Intervention) trial to evaluate the possible benefits of ticagrelor monotherapy according to age.MethodsThe TWILIGHT trial enrolled patients undergoing PCI with drug-eluting stents who fulfilled at least 1 clinical and 1 angiographic high-risk criterion. Age ≥65 years was a clinical entry criterion. After 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy with ticagrelor, event-free patients were randomized to ticagrelor plus placebo or ticagrelor plus aspirin for an additional 12 months. The primary endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding. The key secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, or stroke.ResultsA total of 3,113 patients (47.7%) were ≥65 years of age. At 1 year after randomization, ticagrelor monotherapy significantly reduced BARC type 2, 3, or 5 bleeding (4.5% vs. 8.2%; hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.40 to 0.71) without increasing ischemic events (4.2% vs. 4.4%; hazard ratio: 0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.68 to 1.35) compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin among patients ≥65 years of age. These findings were consistent in patients <65 years of age with respect to the primary (p_interaction = 0.62) and key secondary (p_interaction = 0.77) endpoints and across different age categories.ConclusionsA strategy of ticagrelor monotherapy following 3 months of dual-antiplatelet therapy significantly reduced clinically relevant bleeding compared with ticagrelor plus aspirin without an increase in ischemic events, irrespective of age.