Background-Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have improved clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Nevertheless, adverse events related to previously treated lesion still occur. We sought to evaluate the incidence and predictors of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing contemporary DES implantation. Methods-Patient-level data from 6 prospective, randomized trials were pooled, and DES treatment outcomes were analyzed at up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF (cardiac death, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel myocardial infarction). Cox proportional-hazards model was used to identify predictors of TLF. Results-Overall, 10,072 patients were included in the analysis. TLF rate was 1.7%, 4.3%, and 11.

Drug-eluting stents (DES) have a major role in treating cardiovascular disease. The evolution of bare metal stents into 1st generation durable-polymer DES (DP-DES) reduced the rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) and the need for repeat-revascularization. However, clinical outcomes showed similar rates of late stent thrombosis (ST<1 year) and higher rates of very late stent thrombosis (ST>1 year) necessitating the advent of 2nd generation more biocompatible polymer DES and biodegradable-polymer DES (BP-DES) that reduced ST rates with shorter dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT). Despite the improvements in drugs and polymer biocompatibility for both durable and biodegradable polymers, stent thrombosis remains an issue. Doubts remain about the safety and efficacy of the more biocompatible 2nd generation durable polymers in respect to vessel inflammatory and thrombogenic response as compared to biodegradable polymers despite clinical trial and meta-analyses evidence indicating that 2nd generation DP-DES are non-inferior to BP-DES for stent thrombosis. A long-term presence of the polymer can cause inflammation and thrombogenesis. However, the cause of stent thrombosis is multi-factorial from a drug-in-polymer formulation perspective; e.g., drug release kinetics, drug physiochemical and pharmacological properties, degradation kinetics; polymer biocompatibility and hemocompatibility and coating properties. It appears that the focus should be on controlling burst release and developing more biocompatible, durable polymers, especially considering the cost of PCI utilizing biodegradable, polymer-free and bioresorbable scaffolds. This may give an insight into certain DP-DES effectiveness as compared to BP-DES for the existing clinical data and improve future stent development.

Objectives We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the dedicated Tryton side branch (SB) stent for the treatment of true bifurcations involving large SBs. Background Bifurcation lesions are associated with lower procedural success and a higher risk of adverse cardiac events. Provisional stenting (PS) is currently the default approach for the treatment of bifurcation lesions. The Tryton stent is a dedicated bifurcation stent system for the treatment of true bifurcation lesions. Methods We performed an individual‐patient‐data pooled post‐hoc analysis of the Tryton Pivotal randomized controlled trial and post‐approval Confirmatory Study. Only patients with true bifurcations involving a SB ≥ 2.25 mm in diameter were included. The primary endpoint was non‐inferiority of Tryton compared with PS for target vessel failure (TVF) at 1 year. Results Of the 411 patients meeting the criteria for enrolment, 287 patients were treated with the Tryton stent and 124 with PS. Procedural success was higher in the Tryton group (95.4 versus 82.3%, P < 0.0001). TVF at 1 year was 8.1% in the Tryton group and 9.7% in the PS group, meeting the pre‐specified criteria for non‐inferiority established for the randomized controlled trail (pnon‐inferiority = 0.02). At 9‐month angiographic follow‐up, SB diameter stenosis was significantly lower in the Tryton group (29.3 ± 21.9 versus 41.1 ± 17.5, P = 0.0008) and in‐segment binary restenosis (diameter stenosis ≥ 50%) was higher in the PS group (19.0 versus 34.2%, respectively, P = 0.052). Conclusions In patients with true bifurcations involving a large SB, treatment with the Tryton SD Stent was clinically non‐inferior to PS and showed favorable angiographic outcomes.

Background Diabetes mellitus and high platelet reactivity (HPR) on clopidogrel are both associated with increased risk of ischemic events after percutaneous coronary intervention, but whether the HPR‐associated risk of adverse ischemic events differs by diabetes mellitus status is unknown. Methods and Results ADAPT‐DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug‐Eluting Stents) was a prospective, multicenter registry of patients treated with coronary drug‐eluting stents. HPR was defined as P2Y12 reaction units >208 by the VerifyNow point‐of‐care assay. Cox multivariable analysis was used to assess whether HPR‐associated risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis) varied for patients with insulin‐treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM), non–ITDM, and no diabetes mellitus. Diabetes mellitus and HPR were included in an interaction analysis. Of 8582 patients enrolled, 2429 (28.3%) had diabetes mellitus, of whom 998 (41.1%) had ITDM. Mean P2Y12 reaction units were higher in patients with diabetes mellitus versus without diabetes mellitus, and HPR was more frequent in patients with diabetes mellitus. HPR was associated with consistently increased 2‐year rates of MACE in patients with and without diabetes mellitus ( P interaction =0.36). A significant interaction was present between HPR and non–insulin‐treated diabetes mellitus versus ITDM for 2‐year MACE (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] for non–ITDM, 2.28 [95% CI, 1.39–3.73] versus adjusted HR for ITDM, 1.02 [95% CI, 0.70–1.50]; P interaction =0.01). Conclusions HPR was more common in patients with diabetes mellitus and was associated with an increased risk of MACE in both patients with and without diabetes mellitus. In patients with diabetes mellitus, a more pronounced effect of HPR on MACE was present in lower‐risk non–ITDM patients than in higher‐risk patients with ITDM. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00638794 ; Unique identifier: NCT00638794. ADAPT‐DES (Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug‐Eluting Stents).

BackgroundThere is a paucity of data regarding the effect of inhibition of the renin-angiotensin system on outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). We sought to examine long-term outcomes of patients with left main coronary disease (LMCAD) randomized to PCI with fluoropolymer-based cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents or CABG according to treatment at discharge with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) in the large-scale, multicenter, randomized EXCEL trial. Methods EXCEL randomized 1905 patients with LMCAD of low and intermediate anatomical complexity (visually-assessed SYNTAX score ≤32) to PCI (n = 948) versus CABG (n = 957). Patients were categorized according to whether they were treated with ACEI/ARB at discharge; their outcomes from discharge to 5 years were examined using multivariable logistic regression with an offset for follow-up time. ResultsAmong 1775 patients discharged alive with known ACEI/ARB treatment status, 896 (50.5%) were treated with one of these agents. Among those treated with ACEI/ARB, the 5-year rate of all-cause death was similar after PCI or CABG (10.7% versus 9.8% respectively, adjOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.56-1.57) in contrast to patients not treated with ACEI/ARB (15.0% versus 7.8%, respectively, adjOR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.32-3.67) (P interaction = 0.02). Significant interactions between treatment arm (PCI versus CABG) and ACEI/ARB treatment status were also found for cardiovascular death (P interaction = 0.03), ischemiadriven revascularization (P interaction = 0.03), target vessel revascularization (P interaction = 0.007) and target vessel failure (P interaction = 0.0009). ConclusionIn the EXCEL trial, the postdischarge rates of death and revascularization after 5 years were similar after PCI and CABG in patients with LMCAD treated with ACEI/ARB at discharge. In contrast, event rates were higher after PCI versus CABG in those not so treated.