Daniel Weilenmann

Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous coronary revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE): a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Refinements in stent design affecting strut thickness, surface polymer, and drug release have improved clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a novel, ultrathin strut cobalt-chromium stent releasing sirolimus from a biodegradable polymer with a thin strut durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS We did a randomised, single-blind, non-inferiority trial with minimum exclusion criteria at nine hospitals in Switzerland. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to treatment with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents or durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents. Randomisation was via a central web-based system and stratified by centre and presence of ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. Patients and outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation, but treating physicians were not. The primary endpoint, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically-indicated target lesion revascularisation at 12 months. A margin of 3·5% was defined for non-inferiority of the biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent compared with the durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01443104. FINDINGS Between Feb 24, 2012, and May 22, 2013, we randomly assigned 2119 patients with 3139 lesions to treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents (1063 patients, 1594 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (1056 patients, 1545 lesions). 407 (19%) patients presented with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Target lesion failure with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (69 cases; 6·5%) was non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (70 cases; 6·6%) at 12 months (absolute risk difference -0·14%, upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·97%, p for non-inferiority <0·0004). No significant differences were noted in rates of definite stent thrombosis (9 [0·9%] vs 4 [0·4%], rate ratio [RR] 2·26, 95% CI 0·70-7·33, p=0·16). In pre-specified stratified analyses of the primary endpoint, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with improved outcome compared with durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (7 [3·3%] vs 17 [8·7%], RR 0·38, 95% CI 0·16-0·91, p=0·024, p for interaction=0·014). INTERPRETATION In a patient population with minimum exclusion criteria and high adherence to dual antiplatelet therapy, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents were non-inferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents for the combined safety and efficacy outcome target lesion failure at 12 months. The noted benefit in the subgroup of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction needs further study. FUNDING Clinical Trials Unit, University of Bern, and Biotronik, Bülach, Switzerland.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Biodegradable-Polymer Biolimus-Eluting Stents: Main Results of the Basel Stent Kosten-Effektivitäts Trial- PROspective Validation Examination II (BASKET-PROVE II), A Randomized, Controlled Noninferiority 2-Year Outcome Trial

Background— Biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) were developed to be as effective as second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and as safe >1 year as bare-metal stents (BMS). Thus, very late stent thrombosis (VLST) attributable to durable polymers should no longer appear. Methods and Results— To address these early and late aspects, 2291 patients presenting with acute or stable coronary disease needing stents ≥3.0 mm in diameter between April 2010 and May 2012 were randomly assigned to biolimus-A9–eluting BP-DES, second-generation everolimus-eluting DP-DES, or thin-strut silicon-carbide–coated BMS in 8 European centers. All patients were treated with aspirin and risk-adjusted doses of prasugrel. The primary end point was combined cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization within 2 years. The combined secondary safety end point was a composite of VLST, myocardial infarction, and cardiac death. The cumulative incidence of the primary end point was 7.6% with BP-DES, 6.8% with DP-DES, and 12.7% with BMS. By intention-to-treat BP-DES were noninferior (predefined margin, 3.80%) compared with DP-DES (absolute risk difference, 0.78%; −1.93% to 3.50%; P for noninferiority 0.042; per protocol P=0.09) and superior to BMS (absolute risk difference, −5.16; −8.32 to −2.01; P=0.0011). The 3 stent groups did not differ in the combined safety end point, with no decrease in events >1 year, particularly VLST with BP-DES. Conclusions— In large vessel stenting, BP-DES appeared barely noninferior compared with DP-DES and more effective than thin-strut BMS, but without evidence for better safety nor lower VLST rates >1 year. Findings challenge the concept that durable polymers are key in VLST formation. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01166685.

Incidence, clinical predictors, and prognostic impact of worsening renal function in elderly patients with chronic heart failure on intensive medical therapy

BACKGROUND Incidence, predictors, and prognostic impact of worsening renal function (WRF) in elderly patients with chronic heart failure (HF) undergoing intensive contemporary medical therapy are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS In 566 patients (age 77 ± 8 years) included in the TIME-CHF, serum creatinine (sCr) was repeatedly measured up to 6 months. Worsening renal function was classified as increase in sCr by 0.2 to 0.3 (WRFI), 0.3 to 0.5 (WRFII), or ≥0.5 mg/dL (WRFIII) within the first 6 months. Outcome events were assessed for 18 months. RESULTS The incidence of WRF I, II, and III was 12%, 19%, and 22%, respectively. Worsening renal function III was associated with increased mortality (hazard ratio 1.98 [95% CI 1.27-3.07, P = .002] vs no WRF), whereas WRF I/II was not. History of renal failure, spironolactone treatment, higher baseline dose, and higher maximal increase in loop diuretic dose were independently associated with the occurrence of WRF III, whereas angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, and β-blocker use and allocation to N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide-guided management were not. Worsening renal function III was an independent predictor of death, death or hospitalization, and death or HF hospitalization also after adjusting for baseline characteristics. CONCLUSIONS One fifth of elderly patients with chronic HF experienced WRF III on 6-month intensive HF treatment. These patients had higher mortality, whereas patients with smaller sCr rises did not. Occurrence of WRF III was associated with high doses of loop diuretics and spironolactone use but not with other treatments.

Spontaneous Coronary Artery Dissection: Angiographic Follow-Up and Long-Term Clinical Outcome in a Predominantly Medically Treated Population.

We sought to assess the angiographic and long‐term clinical outcomes in a predominantly medically treated population with spontaneous coronary artery dissection (SCAD).

Atropine often results in complete atrioventricular block or sinus arrest after cardiac transplantation: An unpredictable and dose-independent phenomenon

Background. A paradoxic response to atropine with development of atrioventricular (AV) block has been described in patients after heart transplantation (HTx). We investigated further the incidence and dose-response relationship of this paradoxic atropine response and explored predictive factors. Methods. We investigated 25 clinically stable patients (age 55±2 years) 18 to 126 months after HTx. After endomyocardial biopsy, a temporary pacemaker was introduced and patients were monitored. Atropine was given in ascending doses (0.004 mg/kg body weight initially, total cumulative dose 0.035 mg/kg body weight). Physiologic tests were performed to evaluate the presence of reinnervation. Results. In 20% of the patients (5/25), a paradoxic response to atropine was observed. Four patients exhibited third degree AV block, one of whom also demonstrated sinus arrest. A fifth patient showed sinus arrest only. In all patients but one, there was no ventricular escape rhythm before ventricular pacing was commenced (10 sec after block). The observed adverse effect was not correlated with the applied atropine dosage, and predisposing factors could not be identified, apart from a slightly lower resting heart rate (80±5 vs. 90±2 beats/min, P = 0.07). Conclusion. A significant proportion of patients respond paradoxically to atropine after HTx, leading to asystole as the result of sinus arrest or AV block. Although a plausible explanation for this effect remains speculative, our data indicate that the use of atropine or other anticholinergic drugs in patients after HTx is contraindicated.

Long-Term Data from the Swiss Pulmonary Hypertension Registry

Background: Registries are important for real-life epidemiology on different pulmonary hypertension (PH) groups. Objective: To provide long-term data of the Swiss PH registry of 1998-2012. Methods: PH patients have been classified into 5 groups and registered upon written informed consent at 5 university and 8 associated hospitals since 1998. New York Heart Association (NYHA) class, 6-min walk distance, hemodynamics and therapy were registered at baseline. Patients were regularly followed, and therapy and events (death, transplantation, endarterectomy or loss to follow-up) registered. The data were stratified according to the time of diagnosis into prevalent before 2000 and incident during 2000-2004, 2005-2008 and 2009-2012. Results: From 996 (53% female) PH patients, 549 had pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), 36 PH due to left heart disease, 127 due to lung disease, 249 to chronic thromboembolic PH (CTEPH) and 35 to miscellaneous PH. Age and BMI significantly increased over time, whereas hemodynamic severity decreased. Overall, event-free survival was 84, 72, 64 and 58% for the years 1-4 and similar for time periods since 2000, but better during the more recent periods for PAH and CTEPH. Of all PAH cases, 89% had target medical therapy and 43% combination therapy. Of CTEPH patients, 14 and 2% underwent pulmonary endarterectomy or transplantation, respectively; 87% were treated with PAH target therapy. Conclusion: Since 2000, the incident Swiss PH patients registered were older, hemodynamically better and mostly treated with PAH target therapies. Survival has been better for PAH and CTEPH diagnosed since 2008 compared with earlier diagnosis or other classifications.

Clinical Characteristics, Sex Hormones, and Long-Term Follow-Up in Swiss Postmenopausal Women Presenting With Takotsubo Cardiomyopathy

The overwhelming majority of patients with stress cardiomyopathy (SC) are postmenopausal women, suggesting an important pathophysiologic role of the female sex hormones. Preliminary data suggest that myocardial stunning might be provoked by estrogen deficiency.

Clinical evaluation of a pacemaker algorithm that adjusts the pacing rate during sleep using activity variance.

DURU, F., et al.: Clinical Evaluation of a Pacemaker Algorithm That Adjusts the Pacing Rate During Sleep Using Activity Variance. Even though rate responsive pacemakers are able to regulate pacing rates based on sensor activity, they are set with a minimum rate that is not adjusted to provide rate decreases during sleep. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the “Sleep Rate” feature, as compared to patient diaries and a validated method that identifies sleep from wrist actigraphy. In 19 patients (15 men; age 69 ± 8 years) with Pacesetter Trilogy DR+ pacemakers, the base rate and the sleep rate were set to 80 and 50 ppm, respectively. When the patients returned 2 days later, data recorded by the pacemaker and wrist actigraph were analyzed to find the agreement in corresponding sleep/wake periods. In 17 (89%) patients, the pacemaker went into the sleep mode. The total sleep time derived from actigraphy significantly exceeded the time during which the pacemaker was in sleep mode (1156.8 ± 83.4 vs 307.3 ± 77.2 minutes). Frequent reversions out of the sleep mode limited the total sleep time derived from the pacemaker. Cumulative analysis of the pacemaker data showed that the maximum time in the sleep mode was 78 minutes, and exceeded 1 hour in six instances, 30 minutes in 32 instances, and 15 minutes in 83 instances. Epoch by epoch comparisons revealed a good agreement (93.6 ± 1.8%) during wakefulness between the corresponding actigraph and pacemaker epochs. However, only 24.6 ± 3.7% of the corresponding epochs during sleep were identical, and the overall agreement was 54.4 ± 3.7%. Except for one patient who reported palpitations, patients did not suffer from a pacemaker rate change. The Sleep Rate feature provides rate reduction during sleep, while assuring rapid frequency response during physical activity. However, the current algorithm does not allow long periods of slow pacing rate during continuous sleep, possibly due to its conservative design and the presence of movement arousals, which has to be improved in future generation algorithms.

Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable‐Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization: 2‐Year Results of the BIOSCIENCE Trial

Background No data are available on the long‐term performance of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus‐eluting stents (BP‐SES). We reported 2‐year clinical outcomes of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus‐Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus‐Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation) trial, which compared BP‐SES with durable‐polymer everolimus‐eluting stents (DP‐EES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results A total of 2119 patients with minimal exclusion criteria were assigned to treatment with BP‐SES (n=1063) or DP‐EES (n=1056). Follow‐up at 2 years was available for 2048 patients (97%). The primary end point was target‐lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target‐vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target‐lesion revascularization. At 2 years, target‐lesion failure occurred in 107 patients (10.5%) in the BP‐SES arm and 107 patients (10.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (risk ratio [RR] 1.00, 95% CI 0.77–1.31, P=0.979). There were no significant differences between BP‐SES and DP‐EES with respect to cardiac death (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.62–1.63, P=0.984), target‐vessel myocardial infarction (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.60–1.39, P=0.669), target‐lesion revascularization (RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.81–1.71, P=0.403), and definite stent thrombosis (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.56–3.44, P=0.485). There were 2 cases (0.2%) of definite very late stent thrombosis in the BP‐SES arm and 4 cases (0.4%) in the DP‐EES arm (P=0.423). In the prespecified subgroup of patients with ST‐segment elevation myocardial infarction, BP‐SES was associated with a lower risk of target‐lesion failure compared with DP‐EES (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.23–0.99, P=0.043, P interaction=0.026). Conclusions Comparable safety and efficacy profiles of BP‐SES and DP‐EES were maintained throughout 2 years of follow‐up. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Clinical Outcomes According to Diabetic Status in Patients Treated With Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents Prespecified Subgroup Analysis of the BIOSCIENCE Trial

Background—Ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) proved noninferior to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) for a composite clinical end point in a population with minimal exclusion criteria. We performed a prespecified subgroup analysis of the Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularisation (BIOSCIENCE) trial to compare the performance of BP-SES and DP-EES in patients with diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results—BIOSCIENCE trial was an investigator-initiated, single-blind, multicentre, randomized, noninferiority trial comparing BP-SES versus DP-EES. The primary end point, target lesion failure, was a composite of cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization within 12 months. Among a total of 2119 patients enrolled between February 2012 and May 2013, 486 (22.9%) had diabetes mellitus. Overall diabetic patients experienced a significantly higher risk of target lesion failure compared with patients without diabetes mellitus (10.1% versus 5.7%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.27–2.56; P=0.001). At 1 year, there were no differences between BP-SES versus DP-EES in terms of the primary end point in both diabetic (10.9% versus 9.3%; HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.67–2.10; P=0.56) and nondiabetic patients (5.3% versus 6.0%; HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.58–1.33; P=0.55). Similarly, no significant differences in the risk of definite or probable stent thrombosis were recorded according to treatment arm in both study groups (4.0% versus 3.1%; HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.49–3.41; P=0.60 for diabetic patients and 2.4% versus 3.4%; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.39–1.25; P=0.23, in nondiabetics). Conclusions—In the prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, clinical outcomes among diabetic patients treated with BP-SES or DP-EES were comparable at 1 year. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.