Thin Composite-Wire-Strut Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Ultrathin-Strut Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in BIONYX at 2 Years

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to assess 2-year safety and efficacy of the current-generation thin composite-wire-strut durable-polymer Resolute Onyx zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES), compared with the ultrathin-strut biodegradable-polymer Orsiro sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in all-comers and a pre-specified small-vessel subgroup analysis.BackgroundThe Resolute Onyx ZES is widely used in clinical practice, but no follow-up data beyond 1 year have been published. The randomized BIONYX (Bioresorbable Polymer-Coated Orsiro Versus Durable Polymer-Coated Resolute Onyx Stents) trial (NCT02508714) established the noninferiority of ZES versus SES regarding target vessel failure (TVF) rates.MethodsA total of 2,488 all-comer patients were treated at 7 coronary intervention centers in Belgium, Israel, and the Netherlands. The main endpoint, TVF, was a composite of safety (cardiac death or target vessel–related myocardial infarction) and efficacy (clinically indicated target vessel revascularization). Two-year follow-up data were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods.ResultsTwo-year follow-up data were available for 2,460 of 2,488 patients (98.9%). TVF occurred in 93 of 1,243 patients (7.6%) assigned to ZES versus 87 of 1,245 patients (7.1%) assigned to SES (log-rank p = 0.66). There was no significant between-stent difference in individual components of this endpoint. The incidence of definite-or-probable stent thrombosis was low for both treatment arms (0.4% vs. 1.1%; log-rank p = 0.057). In patients stented in small vessels, there was no between-stent difference (TVF 8.2% vs. 8.7% [log-rank p = 0.75], target lesion revascularization 4.0% vs. 4.4% [log-rank p = 0.77]).ConclusionsAt 2-year follow-up, the novel thin composite-wire-strut durable-polymer Resolute Onyx ZES showed in all-comers similar safety and efficacy compared with the ultrathin cobalt-chromium-strut biodegradable-polymer Orsiro SES. The analysis of patients who were treated in small vessels also suggested no advantage for either stent.     

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)     

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)     

3- or 1-Month DAPT in Patients at High Bleeding Risk Undergoing Everolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate 2 abbreviated dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimens in patients at high bleeding risk (HBR) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).BackgroundCurrent-generation drug-eluting stents are preferred over bare-metal stents for HBR patients, but their optimal DAPT management remains unknown.MethodsThe XIENCE Short DAPT program included 3 prospective, multicenter, single-arm studies enrolling HBR patients who underwent successful PCI with a cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent. After 1 month (XIENCE 28 USA and XIENCE 28 Global) or 3 months (XIENCE 90) of DAPT, event-free patients discontinued the P2Y₁₂ inhibitor. The postmarketing approval XIENCE V USA study was used as historical control in a propensity score–stratified analysis.ResultsA total of 3,652 patients were enrolled. The propensity-adjusted rate of the primary endpoint of all-cause mortality or myocardial infarction was 5.4% among 1,693 patients on 3-month DAPT versus 5.4% in the 12-month DAPT historical control (P_{noninferiority} = 0.0063) and 3.5% among 1,392 patients on 1-month DAPT versus 4.3% in the 6-month DAPT historical control (P_{noninferiority} = 0.0005). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) types 2 to 5 bleeding was not significantly lower with 3- or 1-month DAPT, while BARC types 3 to 5 bleeding was reduced in both experimental groups. The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis was 0.2% in XIENCE 90 (P < 0.0001 for the performance goal of 1.2%) and 0.3% in XIENCE 28.ConclusionsAmong HBR patients undergoing PCI with cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents, DAPT for 1 or 3 months was noninferior to 6 or 12 months of DAPT for ischemic outcomes and may be associated with less major bleeding and a low incidence of stent thrombosis.     

P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy or Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Complex Percutaneous Coronary Interventions

BackgroundIt remains unclear whether P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy preserves ischemic protection while limiting bleeding risk compared with dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after complex percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).ObjectivesWe sought to assess the effects of P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after 1-month to 3-month DAPT vs standard DAPT in relation to PCI complexity.MethodsWe pooled patient-level data from randomized controlled trials comparing P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy and standard DAPT on centrally adjudicated outcomes after coronary revascularization. Complex PCI was defined as any of 6 criteria: 3 vessels treated, ≥3 stents implanted, ≥3 lesions treated, bifurcation with 2 stents implanted, total stent length >60 mm, or chronic total occlusion. The primary efficacy endpoint was all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. The key safety endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium (BARC) 3 or 5 bleeding.ResultsOf 22,941 patients undergoing PCI from 5 trials, 4,685 (20.4%) with complex PCI had higher rates of ischemic events. The primary efficacy endpoint was similar between P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy and DAPT among patients with complex PCI (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.64-1.19) and noncomplex PCI (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.76-1.09; P_interaction = 0.770). The treatment effect was consistent across all the components of the complex PCI definition. Compared with DAPT, P2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy consistently reduced BARC 3 or 5 bleeding in complex PCI (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.31-0.84) and noncomplex PCI patients (HR: 0.49; 95% CI: 0.37-0.64; P_interaction = 0.920).ConclusionsP2Y₁₂ inhibitor monotherapy after 1-month to 3-month DAPT was associated with similar rates of fatal and ischemic events and lower risk of major bleeding compared with standard DAPT, irrespective of PCI complexity. (PROSPERO [P2Y12 Inhibitor Monotherapy Versus Standard Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Coronary Revascularization: Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials]; CRD42020176853)     

Randomized Comparison of Ridaforolimus-Eluting and Zotarolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents: 2-Year Clinical Outcomes From the BIONICS and NIREUS Trials

ObjectivesThis study sought to determine clinical outcomes between treatment groups over long-term follow-up.BackgroundThe safety and efficacy of a ridaforolimus-eluting stent (RES) was evaluated in the BIONICS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System in Coronary Stenosis) and NIREUS (BioNIR Ridaforolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [BioNIR] European Angiography Study) trials, demonstrating noninferiority of RES in comparison with a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) regarding 1-year target lesion failure (TLF) and 6-month angiographic late lumen loss, respectively.MethodsPatient-level data from the BIONICS (N = 1,919) and NIREUS (N = 302) randomized trials were pooled, and outcomes in patients implanted with RES and ZES compared. Broad inclusion criteria allowed enrollment of patients with acute coronary syndromes and complex lesions. The primary endpoint was the 2-year rate of TLF or clinically driven target lesion revascularization.ResultsA total of 2,221 patients (age 63.2 ± 10.3 years; 79.7% men) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES (n = 1,159) or ZES (n = 1,062) were included. Clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups. At 2 years, the primary endpoint of TLF was similar among patients implanted with RES and ZES (7.0% vs. 7.2%; p = 0.94). Rates of target lesion revascularization (4.8% RES vs. 4.1% ZES; p = 0.41) and target vessel–related myocardial infarction (3.1% RES vs. 3.8% ZES; p = 0.52) did not differ between groups. The overall rate of stent thrombosis was also similar (0.5% RES vs. 0.9% ZES; p = 0.39).ConclusionsIn a pooled analysis of 2 randomized trials, 2-year clinical outcomes were similar between patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with RES and ZES. These results support the long-term safety and efficacy of RES for the treatment of a broad population of patients with coronary artery disease.     

No Antithrombotic Therapy After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: Insight From the OCEAN-TAVI Registry

BackgroundSeveral trials demonstrated that aspirin monotherapy compared with aspirin plus clopidogrel is associated with a lower incidence of bleeding without an increased risk of ischemic events in patients after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR); however, there remains a paucity of data to prove the necessity of even aspirin monotherapy.ObjectivesThis study aimed to compare clinical outcomes and valve performance of the 3 different antithrombotic strategies post-TAVR from the OCEAN-TAVI (Optimized transCathEter vAlvular iNtervention) registry.MethodsPatients who received anticoagulation or had procedural complications were excluded. The remaining patients were classified into 3 groups according to the antithrombotic regimen at discharge: 1) nonantithrombotic therapy (None); 2) single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT); and 3) dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). The primary outcome was the incidence of net adverse clinical events (NACEs) (ie, cardiovascular death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and life-threatening or major bleeding).ResultsOverall, 3,575 TAVR patients were included (None, 293; SAPT, 1,354; DAPT, 1,928). The median follow-up period was 841 days (IQR: 597-1,340 days). The incidence of NACEs did not differ between the groups (None vs SAPT: adjusted HR [aHR]: 1.18; P = 0.45; None vs DAPT: aHR: 1.09; P = 0.67). There was a lower incidence of all bleeding in patients with no antithrombotics (None vs SAPT: aHR: 0.63; P = 0.12; None vs DAPT: aHR: 0.51; P = 0.04). The valve performance was similar among the groups. Leaflet thrombosis was detected in 8.5% of the nonantithrombotic group.ConclusionsCompared with SAPT/DAPT, the nonantithrombotic strategy was not associated with an increased risk of NACEs and potentially reduced the risk of bleeding events. The nonantithrombotic strategy may be an acceptable alternative to SAPT/DAPT in selected patients with TAVR.     

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Discontinuation,Platelet Reactivity,and Adverse Outcomes After Successful Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

ObjectivesThe purpose of this study was to assess the extent to which the association between premature dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) discontinuation and excess risk of thrombotic events varies according to the reason and timing of DAPT discontinuation and whether high on-treatment platelet reactivity (HPR) influences the risk of thrombotic events after premature DAPT discontinuation.BackgroundDAPT after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) suppresses platelet reactivity, and HPR on clopidogrel after PCI is associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events.MethodsADAPT-DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents) was a prospective, multicenter registry of 8,582 patients successfully treated with coronary drug-eluting stents that assessed HPR on clopidogrel. For patients who discontinued aspirin or clopidogrel at any time during the study, the reasons for discontinuation were systematically categorized.ResultsPlanned DAPT discontinuation occurred within 2 years in 3,203 (37.3%) patients. One thousand four hundred eighteen (16.5%) patients discontinued DAPT for unplanned reasons, including surgery or trauma (n = 768 [8.9%]), patient nonadherence (n = 321 [3.7%]), bleeding complications (n = 264 [3.1%]), and drug allergy or hypersensitivity (n = 113 [1.3%]). Unplanned but not planned DAPT discontinuation was associated with an increased risk of a major adverse cardiac event (MACE, defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis); with highest risk within 3 months after PCI (adjusted HR: 7.65, 95% CI: 2.77-21.10 vs adjusted HR: 2.47, 95% CI: 1.70-3.58 for unplanned DAPT discontinuation ≥3 months after PCI). MACE risk after DAPT discontinuation was not moderated by HPR (P_interaction = 0.91).ConclusionsIn this large-scale all-comers registry, premature DAPT discontinuation for unplanned reasons occurred in approximately 1 of 6 patients after DES implantation and was associated with a markedly increased risk of MACEs. (Assessment of Dual AntiPlatelet Therapy With Drug Eluting Stents [ADAPT-DES]; NCT00638794)     

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.     

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.     

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)     

DAPT Score and the Impact of Ticagrelor Monotherapy During the Second Year After PCI

ObjectivesThis study assessed the ability of the dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) score in stratifying ischemic and bleeding risk in a contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) population.BackgroundThe DAPT score is recommended by guidelines as a tool to stratify ischemic and bleeding risk. Its utility in contemporary PCI is unknown.MethodsThe study studied patients in GLOBAL LEADERS (A Clinical Study Comparing Two Forms of Anti-platelet Therapy After Stent Implantation) who were free of major ischemic and bleeding events and adhered to antiplatelet strategy during the first year after PCI. The primary ischemic endpoint was the composite of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. The primary bleeding endpoint was Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5. Outcomes from 12 to 24 months after PCI were compared according to the DAPT score.ResultsOf 11,289 patients that were event-free after the first year, 6,882 and 4,407 patients had low (<2) and high (≥2) DAPT scores, respectively. Compared with a low DAPT score, patients with a high DAPT score had a higher rate of the composites of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis (0.70% vs. 1.55%; p < 0.0001). The rate of Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 or 5 bleeding was 0.54% and 0.30% in the low and high DAPT score groups, respectively (p = 0.058). The effect of ticagrelor versus aspirin monotherapy on primary ischemic and bleeding endpoints during the second year were no different among the 2 groups.ConclusionsThe DAPT score can stratify ischemic but not bleeding risk in a contemporary PCI population during the second year. The score did not provide additional value for selection of antiplatelet strategy beyond the first year.     

Tratamiento antiagregante de muy corta duración tras la ICP y nuevos SLF: metanálisis de 5 estudios aleatorizados

Introduction and objectivesVery early (1-3 months) discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) has been recently proposed in percutaneous coronary interventions with modern drug-eluting stents (DES), with contrasting results. The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the prognostic impact of very short DAPT regimens vs the standard 12-month regimen in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with new DES.MethodsLiterature and main scientific session abstracts were searched for randomized clinical trials (RCT). The primary efficacy endpoint was mortality, and the primary safety endpoint was major bleeding events. A prespecified analysis was conducted according to the long-term antiplatelet agent.ResultsWe included 5 RCTs, with a total of 30 621 patients; 49.97% were randomized to very short (1-3 months) DAPT, followed by aspirin or P2Y₁₂I monotherapy. Shorter DAPT duration significantly reduced the rate of major bleeding (2% vs 3.1%, OR, 0.62; 95%CI, 0.46-0.84; P = .002; Phet = .02), but did not significantly condition overall mortality (1.3% vs 2%, OR, 0.97; 95%CI, 0.73-1.29; P = .84; Phet = .18). The reduction in bleeding events was even more significant in trials randomizing event-free patients at the time of DAPT discontinuation. The occurrence of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis was similar between shorter vs standard 12-month DAPT.ConclusionsBased on the current meta-analysis, a very short (1-3 months) period is associated with a significant reduction in major bleeding compared with the standard 12-month therapy, with no increase in major ischemic events and comparable survival.Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org/en     

Target Lesion Failure With Current Drug-Eluting Stents: Evidence From a Comprehensive Network Meta-Analysis

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of currently used drug-eluting stents (DES).BackgroundHead-to-head comparisons among newer DES have shown conflicting results.MethodsFor this network meta-analysis, randomized controlled trials comparing different types of currently used DES were searched in PubMed, Scopus, and proceedings of international meetings. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) at 1 year and at long-term follow-up.ResultsSeventy-seven trials with 99,039 patients were selected for this network meta-analysis. Among the 10 DES included in the meta-analysis, 4 received the most extensive investigation: Orsiro, XIENCE, Nobori/BioMatrix, and Resolute. At 1 year, the Orsiro stent was associated with lower rates of TLF compared with XIENCE (odds ratio [OR]: 0.84; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.71 to 0.98; p = 0.03), Resolute (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.95; p = 0.01), and Nobori/BioMatrix (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.67 to 0.98; p = 0.03). Orsiro had the highest probability to be the best (70.8%), with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve value of 95.9%. However, after a median follow-up period of 50 months (range: 24 to 60 months), no significant difference was apparent in the rates of TLF between any DES, although Orsiro still ranked as the best stent (58.6% probability to be the best). In addition, Orsiro had a lower rate of long-term definite stent thrombosis compared with Nobori/BioMatrix (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.98; p = 0.04) and lower rates of definite and probable stent thrombosis compared with Resolute (OR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45 to 0.99; p = 0.04). No differences in cardiac mortality between any DES were observed.ConclusionsOrsiro is associated with a lower 1-year rate of TLF compared with XIENCE, Resolute, and Nobori/BioMatrix but with an attenuation of the efficacy signal at long-term follow-up.     

Balloon-Expandable Cheatham-Platinum Stents Versus Self-Expandable Nitinol Stents in Coarctation of Aorta: A Randomized Controlled Trial

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare the safety and efficacy of the balloon-expandable stent (BES) and the self-expandable stent (SES) in the endovascular treatment of coarctation of aorta.BackgroundCoarctoplasty with stents has conferred promising results. Although several nonrandomized studies have approved the safety and efficacy of the BES and the SES, no high-quality evidence exists for this comparison.MethodsIn the present open-label, parallel-group, blinded endpoint randomized pilot clinical trial, adult patients with de novo native aortic coarctation were randomized into Cheatham-platinum BES and uncovered nitinol SES groups. The primary outcome of the study was a composite of procedural and vascular complications. The secondary outcomes of the study consisted of the incidence of aortic recoarctation, thoracic aortic aneurysm/pseudoaneurysm formation, and residual hypertension at a 12-month follow-up.ResultsAmong 105 patients who were screened between January 2017 and December 2019, 92 eligible patients (32 women [34.8%]) with a median age of 30 years (IQR: 20-36 years) were randomized equally into the BES and SES groups. The composite of procedural and vascular complications occurred in 10.9% of the BES group and 2.2% of the SES group (odds ratio: 0.18; 95% CI: 0.02-1.62; P = 0.20). Aortic recoarctation occurred in 5 patients (5.4%), 3 patients (6.5%) in the BES group and 2 patients (4.3%) in the SES group (odds ratio: 0.65; 95% CI: 0.10-4.09; P = 0.64). Only 1 patient (1.1%) was complicated by aortic pseudoaneurysm. Hypertension control was achieved in 50% of the study population, with an equal distribution in the 2 study groups at the 12-month follow-up.ConclusionsBoth the BES and the SES were safe and effective in the treatment of native coarctation.     

Subclinical Leaflet Thrombosis After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Meta-Analysis

This meta-analysis and systematic review was performed to evaluate the clinical relevance of subclinical leaflet thrombosis (SLT) following transcatheter aortic valve replacement. PubMed, Web of Science, and CENTRAL were searched for eligible randomized and nonrandomized studies until November 2020. Risk ratios (RRs) or odds ratios and 95% CIs were calculated, using a random-effects model. Overall, 25 studies were eligible for the analysis and comprised a total of 11,098 patients. The median incidence of SLT was 6% at a median follow-up of 30 days. Use of intra-annular valves was associated with 2-fold greater risk for the development of SLT compared with use of supra-annular valves. There was no difference in the risk for SLT (RR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.72-1.29; P = 0.83) between single-antiplatelet therapy (SAPT) and dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), whereas oral anticoagulation (OAC) was associated with a 58% relative risk reduction for SLT (RR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.29-0.61; P < 0.00001) compared with SAPT and DAPT. In patients with diagnosed leaflet thrombosis at follow-up, the risk for stroke or transient ischemic attack was increased by 2.6-fold (RR: 2.56; 95% CI: 1.60-4.09; P < 0.00001) compared with patients without leaflet thrombosis. In patients diagnosed with SLT, the odds of SLT resolution increased by 99% after switch from antiplatelet agents to OAC (odds ratio: 0.01; 95% CI: 0.00-0.06; P < 0.00001). To summarize, indication-based use of OAC after transcatheter aortic valve replacement is associated with a lower risk for SLT compared with SAPT and DAPT. Switching to OAC seems to be effective for SLT resolution. As SLT increased the odds of stroke or transient ischemic attack in the included population, further studies are needed to investigate whether screening tests for SLT and appropriate antithrombotic therapy improve long-term valve functionality and clinical prognosis.     

Prophylactic Rivaroxaban Therapy for Left Ventricular Thrombus After Anterior ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to investigate the effects of rivaroxaban on left ventricle thromboprophylaxis in patients with anterior ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).BackgroundAnterior STEMI is associated with an increased risk of left ventricular thrombus (LVT) formation. The contemporary role of prophylactic rivaroxaban therapy remains unclear.MethodsWe randomly assigned 279 patients with anterior STEMI who had undergone primary percutaneous coronary intervention to receive, in a 1:1 ratio, low-dose rivaroxaban (2.5 mg twice daily for 30 days) and dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or only DAPT. The primary efficacy outcome was the LVT formation within 30 days. Net clinical adverse events were assessed at 30 days and 180 days, including all-cause mortality, LVT, systemic embolism, rehospitalization for cardiovascular events, and bleeding.ResultsThe addition of low-dose rivaroxaban to DAPT reduced LVT formation within 30 days compared with only DAPT (0.7% vs 8.6%; HR: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.01-0.62; P = 0.015; P < 0.001 for superiority). Net clinical adverse events were lower within 30 days in the rivaroxaban group versus those in the only DAPT group and remained relatively low throughout the follow-up period. There were no significant differences in bleeding events between the 2 groups in 30 days and 180 days. However, 1 case of intracranial hemorrhage (major bleeding) occurred in the rivaroxaban group within 30 days.ConclusionsOur results supported that the short-duration addition of low-dose rivaroxaban to DAPT could prevent LVT formation in patients with anterior STEMI following primary percutaneous coronary intervention. A larger multiple-institution study is necessary to determine the generalizability.     

Titanium-Nitride-Oxide–Coated Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Acute Coronary Syndrome: The Randomized TIDES-ACS Trial

ObjectivesThis study sought to compare next-generation cobalt-chromium–based titanium-nitride-oxide (TiNO)–coated stents with a platinum-chromium–based biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting stent (EES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).BackgroundPrevious generation TiNO-coated stents showed acceptable performance in patients with ACS.MethodsIn a multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned 1,491 ACS patients (2:1) to receive either a TiNO-coated stent (n = 989) or EES (n = 502). The primary endpoint was the rate of a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 12-month follow-up. The co-primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, MI, or major bleeding at 18 months.ResultsA primary endpoint event occurred in 6.3% of patients in the TiNO-coated stent group versus in 7.0% in the EES group (hazard ratio: 0.93; 95% confidence interval: 0.71 to 1.22; p = 0.66 for superiority; p < 0.001 for noninferiority). A co-primary endpoint event occurred in 3.7% of the patients in the TiNO group and in 7.8% in the EES group (hazard ratio: 0.64; 95% confidence interval: 0.51 to 0.80; p = 0.001). TiNO-coated stents were associated with lower rates of cardiac death (0.6% vs. 2.6%; p = 0.002) and MI (2.2% vs. 5.0%; p = 0.007) at 18 months of follow-up. Rates of target lesion revascularization were not significantly different at 18 months (5.8% vs. 4.4%; p = 0.27).ConclusionsIn patients with ACS, cobalt-chromium–based TiNO-coated stents were noninferior to platinum-chromium–based biodegradable polymer EES for major cardiac events at 12 months, and were superior for the co-primary endpoint of cardiac death, MI, and bleeding at 18 months. (Comparison of Titanium-Nitride-Oxide-Coated Bio-Active-Stent (Optimax™) to the Drug (Everolimus) -Eluting Stent (Synergy™) in Acute Coronary Syndrome [TIDES-ACS]; NCT02049229)     

6-Month Outcomes of the TricValve System in Patients With Tricuspid Regurgitation: The TRICUS EURO Study

BackgroundSevere tricuspid regurgitation (TR) is frequently associated with significant morbidity and mortality; such patients are often deemed to be at high surgical risk. Heterotopic bicaval stenting is an emerging, attractive transcatheter solution for these patients.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the 30-day safety and 6-month efficacy outcomes of specifically designed bioprosthetic valves for the superior and inferior vena cava.MethodsTRICUS EURO (Safety and Efficacy of the TricValve® Transcatheter Bicaval Valves System in the Superior and Inferior Vena Cava in Patients With Severe Tricuspid Regurgitation) is a nonblinded, nonrandomized, single-arm, multicenter, prospective trial that enrolled patients from 12 European centers between December 2019 and February 2021. High-risk individuals with severe symptomatic TR despite optimal medical therapy were included. The primary endpoint was quality-of-life (QOL) improvement measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire score and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class improvement at 6-month follow-up.ResultsThirty-five patients (mean age 76 ± 6.8 years, 83% women) were treated using the TricValve system. All patients at baseline were in NYHA functional class III or IV. At 30 days, procedural success was 94%, with no procedural deaths or conversions to surgery. A significant increase in QOL at 6 months follow-up was observed (baseline and 6-month Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire scores 42.01 ± 22.3 and 59.7 ± 23.6, respectively; P = 0.004), correlating with a significant improvement in NYHA functional class, with 79.4% of patients noted to be in functional class I or II at 6 months (P = 0.0006). The rates of 6-month all-cause mortality and heart failure hospitalization were 8.5% and 20%, respectively.ConclusionsThe dedicated bicaval system for treating severe symptomatic TR was associated with a high procedural success rate and significant improvements in both QOL and functional classification at 6 months follow-up.     

Short Duration of DAPT Versus De-Escalation After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute Coronary Syndromes

ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to compare short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and de-escalation in a network meta-analysis using standard DAPT as common comparator.BackgroundIn patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), shortening DAPT and de-escalating to a lower potency regimen mitigate bleeding risk. These strategies have never been randomly compared.MethodsRandomized trials of DAPT modulation strategies in patients with ACS undergoing PCI were identified. All-cause death was the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included net adverse cardiovascular events (NACE), major adverse cardiovascular events, and their components. Frequentist and Bayesian network meta-analyses were conducted. Treatments were ranked on the basis of posterior probability. Sensitivity analyses were performed to explore sources of heterogeneity.ResultsTwenty-nine studies encompassing 50,602 patients were included. The transitivity assumption was fulfilled. In the frequentist indirect comparison, the risk ratio (RR) for all-cause death was 0.98 (95% CI: 0.68-1.43). De-escalation reduced the risk for NACE (RR: 0.87; 95% CI: 0.70-0.94) and increased major bleeding (RR: 1.54; 95% CI: 1.07-2.21). These results were consistent in the Bayesian meta-analysis. De-escalation displayed a >95% probability to rank first for NACE, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, and minor bleeding, while short DAPT ranked first for major bleeding. These findings were consistent in node-split and multiple sensitivity analyses.ConclusionsIn patients with ACS undergoing PCI, there was no difference in all-cause death between short DAPT and de-escalation. De-escalation reduced the risk for NACE, while short DAPT decreased major bleeding. These data characterize 2 contemporary strategies to personalize DAPT on the basis of treatment objectives and risk profile.