Incidence and Potential Mechanism(s) of Post-Procedural Rise of Cardiac Biomarker in Patients With Coronary Artery Narrowing After Implantation of an Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold or Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent.

This study sought to evaluate the mechanism of post-procedural cardiac biomarker (CB) rise following device implantation. A fully bioresorbable Absorb scaffold, compared with everolimus-eluting metallic stents (EES), might be associated with a higher incidence of periprocedural myocardial injury. In 501 patients with stable or unstable angina randomized to either Absorb (335 patients) or EES (n = 166) in the ABSORB II trial, 3 types of CB (creatine kinase, creatine kinase-myocardial band, and troponin) were obtained before and after procedure. Per protocol, periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) was defined as creatine kinase rise >2× the upper limit of normal with creatine kinase-myocardial band rise. Incidence of side branch occlusion and any anatomic complications assessed by angiography was similar between the 2 treatment arms (side branch occlusion: Absorb: 5.3% vs. Xience: 7.6%, p = 0.07; any anatomic complication: Absorb: 16.4% vs. EES: 19.9%, p = 0.39). Fourteen patients who presented with recent myocardial infarction at entry with normalized creatine kinase-myocardial band according to the protocol were excluded for post-CB analysis. The overall compliance for CB was 97.8%. The CB rise subcategorized in 7 different ranges was comparable between the 2 treatment arms. PMI rate was numerically higher in the Absorb arm according to the per-protocol definitions, and treatment with overlapping devices was the only independent determinant of per-protocol PMI (odds ratio: 5.07, 95% confidence interval: 1.78 to 14.41, p = 0.002). There were no differences in the incidence of CB rise and PMI between Absorb and EES. Device overlap might be a precipitating factor of myocardial injury. (ABSORB II Randomized Clinical Trial: A Clinical Evaluation to Compare the Safety, Efficacy, and Performance of Absorb Everolimus Eluting Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold System Against Xience Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With Ischemic Heart Disease Caused by De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [ABSORB II]; NCT01425281).

Ishibashi Y ，Muramatsu T ，Nakatani S ，Sotomi Y ，Suwannasom P ，Grundeken MJ ，Cho YK ，Garcia-Garcia HM ，van Boven AJ ，Piek JJ ，Sabaté M ，Helqvist S ，Baumbach A ，McClean D ，de Sousa Almeida M ，Wasungu L ，Miquel-Hebert K ，Dudek D ，Chevalier B ，Onuma Y ，Serruys PW ... -  《-》

Incidence and short-term clinical outcomes of small side branch occlusion after implantation of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: an interim report of 435 patients in the ABSORB-EXTEND single-arm trial in comparison with an everolimus

The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and clinical sequelae of small side branch occlusion (SBO) after Absorb (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) implantation. The thicker strut of metallic stents potentially contributes to a higher incidence of SBO. We performed a post-hoc angiographic assessment of 1,209 side branches in 435 patients enrolled in the ABSORB-EXTEND single-arm trial (ABSORB EXTEND Clinical Investigation: A Continuation in the Clinical Evaluation of the ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold [BVS] System in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions), in comparison with 682 side branches in 237 patients treated with the everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in the SPIRIT (A Clinical Evaluation of an Investigational Device. The Abbott XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) first and II trials. Any visible side branches originating within the device implantation site or the 5-mm proximal and distal margins were included in the angiographic assessment. The SBO was defined as a reduction in Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction flow grade 0 or 1. Post-procedural SBO was observed in 73 side branches (6.0%) in BVS group and 28 side branches (4.1%) in EES group (p = 0.09). Patients with post-procedural SBO were significantly associated with an increased incidence of in-hospital myocardial infarction (6.5% in SBO group vs. 0.5% in non-SBO group, p < 0.01). Multivariable analysis revealed that BVS was an independent predictor of post-procedural SBO (odds ratio: 2.09; 95% confidence interval: 1.18 to 3.68). By stratified analysis, BVS demonstrated a higher incidence of post-procedural SBO compared with EES only in small side branches with a reference vessel diameter ≤0.5 mm (10.5% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.03 between the groups, p for interaction = 0.08). Bioresorbable vascular scaffold was associated with a higher incidence of post-procedural SBO compared with EES. This effect was more pronounced with small side branches with a reference vessel diameter ≤0.5 mm. (ABSORB EXTEND Clinical Investigation: A Continuation in the Clinical Evaluation of the ABSORB Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold [BVS] System in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions: NCT01023789).

Muramatsu T ，Onuma Y ，García-García HM ，Farooq V ，Bourantas CV ，Morel MA ，Li X ，Veldhof S ，Bartorelli A ，Whitbourn R ，Abizaid A ，Serruys PW ，ABSORB-EXTEND Investigators ... -  《-》

The Impact of Post-Procedural Asymmetry, Expansion, and Eccentricity of Bioresorbable Everolimus-Eluting Scaffold and Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stent on Clinical Outcomes in the ABSORB II Trial.

The study sought to investigate the relationship between post-procedural asymmetry, expansion, and eccentricity indices of metallic everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and their respective impact on clinical events at 1-year follow-up. Mechanical properties of a fully BVS are inherently different from those of permanent metallic stent. The ABSORB II (A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions) trial compared the BVS and metallic EES in the treatment of a de novo coronary artery stenosis. Protocol-mandated intravascular ultrasound imaging was performed pre- and post-procedure in 470 patients (162 metallic EES and 308 BVS). Asymmetry index (AI) was calculated per lesion as: (1 - minimum scaffold/stent diameter/maximum scaffold/stent diameter). Expansion index and optimal scaffold/stent expansion followed the definition of the MUSIC (Multicenter Ultrasound Stenting in Coronaries) study. Eccentricity index (EI) was calculated as the ratio of minimum and maximum scaffold/stent diameter per cross section. The incidence of device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE) was collected. Post-procedure, the metallic EES group was more symmetric and concentric than the BVS group. Only 8.0% of the BVS arm and 20.0% of the metallic EES arm achieved optimal scaffold/stent expansion (p < 0.001). At 1 year, there was no difference in the DoCE between both devices (BVS 5.2% vs. EES 3.1%; p = 0.29). Post-procedural devices asymmetry and eccentricity were related to higher event rates while there was no relevance to the expansion status. Subsequent multivariate analysis identified that post-procedural AI >0.30 is an independent predictor of DoCE (hazard ratio: 3.43; 95% confidence interval: 1.08 to 10.92; p = 0.037). BVS implantation is more frequently associated with post-procedural asymmetric and eccentric morphology compared to metallic EES. Post-procedural devices asymmetry were independently associated with DoCE following percutaneous coronary intervention. However, this approach should be viewed as hypothesis generating due to low event rates. (ABSORB II Randomized Controlled Trial [ABSORB II]; NCT01425281).

Suwannasom P ，Sotomi Y ，Ishibashi Y ，Cavalcante R ，Albuquerque FN ，Macaya C ，Ormiston JA ，Hill J ，Lang IM ，Egred M ，Fajadet J ，Lesiak M ，Tijssen JG ，Wykrzykowska JJ ，de Winter RJ ，Chevalier B ，Serruys PW ，Onuma Y ... -  《-》

1-Year Outcomes of Everolimus-Eluting Bioresorbable Scaffolds Versus Everolimus-Eluting Stents: A Propensity-Matched Comparison of the GHOST-EU and XIENCE V USA Registries.

The purpose of this study was to compare the 1-year outcomes of the ABSORB everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold (BRS) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) and the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) (Abbott Vascular) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Randomized studies of the ABSORB BRS have been performed in selected patient and lesion scenarios. The available registries of the ABSORB BRS reflect real-world practice more closely compared with randomized studies, but most of them are limited by the small sample size and the lack of comparative outcomes versus second-generation drug-eluting stents. A total of 1,189 consecutive patients treated with ABSORB BRS from the GHOST-EU (Gauging coronary Healing with bioresorbable Scaffolding plaTforms in EUrope) registry and 5,034 patients treated with XIENCE EES from the XIENCE V USA registry were analyzed. Clinical outcomes were compared with the use of propensity-score matching techniques and reported as Kaplan-Meier estimates and absolute risk difference (D) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite endpoint, including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up. After propensity score matching was performed for the entire population (N = 6,223), there were 905 matched pairs of patients. In the matched cohort (N = 1,810), there was no significant difference between ABSORB BRS and XIENCE EES in the risk of device-oriented composite endpoint at 1 year (5.8% vs. 7.6%, D = -1.8 [95% CI: -4.1 to 0.5]; p = 0.12). Cardiac death was less likely to occur in the ABSORB BRS group (0.7% vs. 1.9%, D = -1.2 [95% CI: -2.2 to 0.2]; p = 0.03), and a trend toward a reduction in myocardial infarction was noted with ABSORB BRS compared with XIENCE EES (2.4% vs. 4.0%, D = -1.6 [95% CI: -3.2 to 0.0]; p = 0.07). Conversely, no differences in ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (4.6% vs. 3.5%, D = 1.1 [95% CI: -0.7 to 2.9]; p = 0.22) and definite or probable device thrombosis (1.8% vs. 1.1%, D = 0.7 [95% CI: -0.4 to 1.8]; p = 0.23) were detected between ABSORB BRS and XIENCE EES. In a contemporary large cohort of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with ABSORB BRS, the combined rate of ischemic events at 1 year was low and nonsignificantly different compared with matched patients treated with XIENCE EES.

Tamburino C ，Capranzano P ，Gori T ，Latib A ，Lesiak M ，Nef H ，Caramanno G ，Naber C ，Mehilli J ，Di Mario C ，Sabaté M ，Münzel T ，Colombo A ，Araszkiewicz A ，Wiebe J ，Geraci S ，Jensen C ，Mattesini A ，Brugaletta S ，Capodanno D ... -  《-》

Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus everolimus-eluting metallic stent in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 1-year results of a propensity score matching comparison: the BVS-EXAMINATION Study (bioresorbable vascular scaffold-a clinical

The purpose of this study was to compare the 1-year outcome between bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and everolimus-eluting metallic stent (EES) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. The Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) is a polymeric scaffold approved for treatment of stable coronary lesions. Limited and not randomized data are available on its use in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. This study included 290 consecutive STEMI patients treated by BVS, compared with either 290 STEMI patients treated with EES or 290 STEMI patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMS) from the EXAMINATION (A Clinical Evaluation of Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stents in the Treatment of Patients With ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trial, by applying propensity score matching. The primary endpoint was a device-oriented endpoint (DOCE), including cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization, at 1-year follow-up. Device thrombosis, according to the Academic Research Consortium criteria, was also evaluated. The cumulative incidence of DOCE did not differ between the BVS and EES or BMS groups either at 30 days (3.1% vs. 2.4%, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.31 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.48 to 3.52], p = 0.593; vs. 2.8%, HR: 1.15 [95% CI: 0.44 to 2.30], p = 0.776, respectively) or at 1 year (4.1% vs. 4.1%, HR: 0.99 [95% CI: 0.23 to 4.32], p = 0.994; vs. 5.9%, HR: 0.50 [95% CI: 0.13 to 1.88], p = 0.306, respectively). Definite/probable BVS thrombosis rate was numerically higher either at 30 days (2.1% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.059; vs. 1.0%, p = 0.324, respectively) or at 1 year (2.4% vs. 1.4%, p = 0.948; vs. 1.7%, p = 0.825, respectively), as compared with EES or BMS. At 1-year follow-up, STEMI patients treated with BVS showed similar rates of DOCE compared with STEMI patients treated with EES or BMS, although rate of scaffolds thrombosis, mostly clustered in the early phase, was not negligible. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to confirm our findings.

Brugaletta S ，Gori T ，Low AF ，Tousek P ，Pinar E ，Gomez-Lara J ，Scalone G ，Schulz E ，Chan MY ，Kocka V ，Hurtado J ，Gomez-Hospital JA ，Münzel T ，Lee CH ，Cequier A ，Valdés M ，Widimsky P ，Serruys PW ，Sabaté M ... -  《-》