Per Thayssen

Randomized Study on Simple Versus Complex Stenting of Coronary Artery Bifurcation Lesions: The Nordic Bifurcation Study

Background— The optimal stenting strategy in coronary artery bifurcation lesions is unknown. In the present study, a strategy of stenting both the main vessel and the side branch (MV+SB) was compared with a strategy of stenting the main vessel only, with optional stenting of the side branch (MV), with sirolimus-eluting stents. Methods and Results— A total of 413 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized. The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target-vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months, there were no significant differences in rates of major adverse cardiac events between the groups (MV+SB 3.4%, MV 2.9%; P=NS). In the MV+SB group, there were significantly longer procedure and fluoroscopy times, higher contrast volumes, and higher rates of procedure-related increases in biomarkers of myocardial injury. A total of 307 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The combined angiographic end point of diameter stenosis >50% of main vessel and occlusion of the side branch after 8 months was found in 5.3% in the MV group and 5.1% in the MV+SB group (P=NS). Conclusions— Independent of stenting strategy, excellent clinical and angiographic results were obtained with percutaneous treatment of de novo coronary artery bifurcation lesions with sirolimus-eluting stents. The simple stenting strategy used in the MV group was associated with reduced procedure and fluoroscopy times and lower rates of procedure-related biomarker elevation. Therefore, this strategy can be recommended as the routine bifurcation stenting technique.

Efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting coronary stents in routine clinical care (SORT OUT III): a randomised controlled superiority trial.

BACKGROUND In low-risk patients, the zotarolimus-eluting stent has been shown to reduce rates of restenosis without increasing the risk of stent thrombosis. We compared the efficacy and safety of the zotarolimus-eluting stent versus the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease who were receiving routine clinical care with no direct follow-up. METHODS We did a single-blind, all-comer superiority trial in adult patients with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and at least one target lesion. Patients were treated at one of five percutaneous coronary intervention centres between January, 2006, and August, 2007. Computer-generated block randomisation and a telephone allocation service were used to randomly assign patients to receive the zotarolimus-eluting or the sirolimus-eluting stent. Data for follow-up were obtained from national Danish administrative and health-care registries. The primary endpoint was a composite of major adverse cardiac events within 9 months: cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation. Intention-to-treat analyses were done at 9-month and 18-month follow-up. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00660478. FINDINGS 1162 patients (1619 lesions) were assigned to receive the zotarolimus-eluting stent, and 1170 patients (1611 lesions) to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent. 67 patients (72 lesions) had stent failure, and six patients were lost to follow-up. All randomly assigned patients were included in analyses at 9-month follow-up; 2200 patients (94%) had completed 18-month follow-up by the time of our assessment. At 9 months, the primary endpoint had occurred in a higher proportion of patients treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent than in those treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent (72 [6%] vs 34 [3%]; HR 2.15, 95% CI 1.43-3.23; p=0.0002). At 18-month follow-up, this difference was sustained (113 [10%] vs 53 [5%]; 2.19, 1.58-3.04; p<0.0001). For patients receiving the zotarolimus-eluting stent and those receiving the sirolimus-eluting stent, all cause-mortality was similar at 9-month follow-up (25 [2%] vs 18 [2%]; 1.40, 0.76-2.56; p=0.28), but was significantly different at 18-month follow-up (51 [4%] vs 32 [3%]; 1.61, 1.03-2.50; p=0.035). INTERPRETATION The sirolimus-eluting stent is superior to the zotarolimus-eluting stent for patients receiving routine clinical care. FUNDING Cordis and Medtronic.

Regression of Coronary Atherosclerosis by Simvastatin A Serial Intravascular Ultrasound Study

Background—Angiography of the coronary arteries reflects only changes in luminal dimensions. With intravascular ultrasound, cross-sectional images can be obtained and area measurements can be added to calculate volumes of the external elastic membrane (EEM), plaque plus media (P+M), and lumen. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of lipid lowering by simvastatin on coronary atherosclerotic P+M as changes in volumes of EEM, P+M, and lumen. Methods and Results—In 40 male patients with hypercholesterolemia, ischemic heart disease, and a nonsignificant coronary artery lesion in a not previously revascularized coronary artery, serial intravascular ultrasound studies with an ECG-triggered pullback were performed at baseline, after 3 months on a lipid-lowering diet, and after another 12 months on simvastatin 40 mg/d. Mean length of the analyzed atherosclerotic segments was 5.9±3.3 mm. After 12 months on simvastatin, a significant reduction in P+M volume of 6.3% (P = 0.002) was observed, whereas only a nonsignificant reduction in EEM volume of 1.8% was seen without any concomitant change in lumen volume. A significant reduction in total cholesterol of 31.0% (6.1±0.8 versus 4.2±0.7 mmol/L, P <0.001) and LDL cholesterol of 42.6% (4.0±0.8 versus 2.2±0.6 mmol/L, P <0.001) was obtained. Conclusions—Lipid-lowering therapy with simvastatin for 12 months is associated with a significant P+M regression in coronary arteries measured as reduction in P+M and EEM volumes without any concomitant change in lumen volume.

Randomized Comparison of Final Kissing Balloon Dilatation Versus No Final Kissing Balloon Dilatation in Patients With Coronary Bifurcation Lesions Treated With Main Vessel Stenting The Nordic-Baltic Bifurcation Study III

Background— It is unknown whether the preferred 1-stent bifurcation stenting approach with stenting of the main vessel (MV) and optional side branch stenting using drug-eluting stents should be finalized by a kissing balloon dilatation (FKBD). Therefore, we compared strategies of MV stenting with and without FKBD. Methods and Results— We randomized 477 patients with a bifurcation lesion to FKBD (n=238) or no FKBD (n=239) after MV stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events: cardiac death, non–procedure-related index lesion myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis within 6 months. The 6-month major adverse cardiac event rates were 2.1% and 2.5% (P=1.00) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively. Procedure and fluoroscopy times were longer and more contrast media was needed in the FKBD group than in the no-FKBD group. Three hundred twenty-six patients had a quantitative coronary assessment. At 8 months, the rate of binary (re)stenosis in the entire bifurcation lesion (MV and side branch) was 11.0% versus 17.3% (P=0.11), in the MV was 3.1% versus 2.5% (P=0.68), and in the side branch was 7.9% versus 15.4% (P=0.039) in the FKBD versus no-FKBD groups, respectively. In patients with true bifurcation lesions, the side branch restenosis rate was 7.6% versus 20.0% (P=0.024) in the FKBD and no-FKBD groups, respectively. Conclusions— MV stenting strategies with and without FKBD were associated with similar clinical outcomes. FKBD reduced angiographic side branch (re)stenosis, especially in patients with true bifurcation lesions. The simple no-FKBD procedures resulted in reduced use of contrast media and shorter procedure and fluoroscopy times. Long-term data on stent thrombosis are needed. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00914199.

Comparison of Paclitaxel- and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Everyday Clinical Practice: The SORT OUT II Randomized Trial

CONTEXT Approval of drug-eluting coronary stents was based on results of relatively small trials of selected patients; however, in routine practice, stents are used in a broader spectrum of patients. OBJECTIVE To compare the first 2 commercially available drug-eluting stents-sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting-for prevention of symptom-driven clinical end points, using a study design reflecting everyday clinical practice. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized, blinded trial conducted August 2004 to January 2006 at 5 university hospitals in Denmark. Patients were 2098 men and women (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [10.8] years) treated with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and randomized to receive either sirolimus-eluting (n = 1065) or paclitaxel-eluting (n = 1033) stents. Indications for PCI included ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI or unstable angina pectoris, and stable angina. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was a composite clinical end point of major adverse cardiac events, defined as either cardiac death, acute myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, or target vessel revascularization. Secondary end points included individual components of the composite end point, all-cause mortality, and stent thrombosis. RESULTS The sirolimus- and the paclitaxel-eluting stent groups did not differ significantly in major adverse cardiac events (98 [9.3%] vs 114 [11.2%]; hazard ratio, 0.83 [95% confidence interval, 0.63-1.08]; P = .16) or in any of the secondary end points. The stent thrombosis rates were 27 (2.5%) and 30 (2.9%) (hazard ratio, 0.87 [95% confidence interval, 0.52-1.46]; P = .60), respectively. CONCLUSION In this practical randomized trial, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes between patients receiving sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00388934.

Randomized Comparison of Coronary Bifurcation Stenting With the Crush Versus the Culotte Technique Using Sirolimus Eluting Stents The Nordic Stent Technique Study

Background—In a number of coronary bifurcation lesions, both the main vessel and the side branch need stent coverage. Using sirolimus eluting stents, we compared 2 dedicated bifurcation stent techniques, the crush and the culotte techniques in a randomized trial with separate clinical and angiographic end-points. Methods and Results—A total of 424 patients with a bifurcation lesion were randomized to crush (n=209) and culotte (n=215) stenting. The primary end point was major adverse cardiac events; cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis after 6 months. At 6 months there were no significant differences in major adverse cardiac event rates between the groups; crush 4.3%, culotte 3.7% (P=0.87). Procedure and fluoroscopy times and contrast volumes were similar in the 2 groups. The rates of procedure-related increase in biomarkers of myocardial injury were 15.5% in crush versus 8.8% in culotte group (P=0.08). A total of 324 patients had a quantitative coronary assessment at the index procedure and after 8 months. The angiographic end-points of in-segment and in-stent restenosis of main vessel and/or side branch after 8 months were found in 12.1% versus 6.6% (P=0.10) and in 10.5% versus 4.5% (P=0.046) in the crush and culotte groups, respectively. Conclusions—Both the crush and the culotte bifurcation stenting techniques were associated with similar and excellent clinical and angiographic results. Angiographically, there was a trend toward less in-segment restenosis and significantly reduced in-stent restenosis following culotte stenting.

Biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer-coated stent versus durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in unselected patients receiving percutaneous coronary intervention (SORT OUT V): a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND Third-generation biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents might reduce the risk of stent thrombosis compared with first-generation permanent polymer drug-eluting stents. We aimed to further investigate the effects of a biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent compared with a durable polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting stent in a population-based setting. METHODS This randomised, multicentre, all-comer, non-inferiority trial was undertaken at three sites across western Denmark. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with chronic stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndromes, and at least one coronary artery lesion (>50% diameter stenosis). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) using an independently managed computer-generated allocation sequence to receive either a biolimus-eluting biodegradable polymer stent (Nobori, Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) or a sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent (Cypher Select Plus, Cordis, Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ, USA). The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) at 9 months, analysed by intention to treat (non-inferiority margin of 0·02). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01254981. FINDINGS From July, 2009, to January, 2011, we assigned 1229 patients (1532 lesions) to receive the biolimus-eluting stent and 1239 (1555 lesions) to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent. One patient was lost to follow-up because of emigration. Intention-to-treat analysis showed that 50 (4·1%) patients who were assigned the biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3·1%) who were assigned the sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0·9% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2·1%]; p(non-inferiority)=0·06). Significantly more patients in the biolimus-eluting stent group had definite stent thrombosis at 12 months than did those in the sirolimus-eluting stent group (9 [0·7%] vs 2 [0·2%], risk difference 0·6% [95% CI 0·0-1·1]; p=0·034). Per-protocol analysis showed that 45 (3·8%) of 1193 patients who received a biolimus-eluting stent and 39 (3·2%) of 1208 who received a sirolimus-eluting stent met the primary endpoint (risk difference 0·5% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 1·8%]; p(non-inferiority)=0·03). INTERPRETATION At 1 year follow-up, the biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting Nobori stent did not improve clinical results compared with a first-generation sirolimus-eluting stent. We will need to obtain long-term data before we can make recommendations for the role of this biolimus-eluting stent in routine clinical practice. FUNDING Terumo and Cordis (Johnson & Johnson).

Cardiac troponin T and CK-MB mass release after visually successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in stable angina pectoris

The incidence of cardiac troponin T (Tn-T) and creatine kinase (CK) isoenzyme MB mass release was studied in 23 patients with stable angina pectoris undergoing visually successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA). Serial blood samples were drawn for measurement of serum Tn-T, CK-MB mass, total CK activity, CK-MB activity, and lactate dehydrogenase isoenzyme (LD-1). ST segment monitoring was carried out during PTCA and for the following 24 hours. None of the patients showed electrocardiographic (ECG) evidence of myocardial infarction. However, Tn-T was elevated in three patients (0.23 to 1.32 micrograms/L), and in these three and an additional three patients CK-MB mass was also elevated (7.0 to 27.5 micrograms/L). Total CK activity and LD-1 were only elevated in one of these six patients. None had elevated CK-MB activity. ST segment depression on ECG recording was not predictive of Tn-T or CK-MB mass release. Patients with elevated Tn-T or CK-MB mass did not differ with respect to demographic data, stenosis characteristics, or in the PTCA procedure. We conclude that CK-MB mass uncovers clinically and ambulatory electrocardiographically inapparent severe myocardial ischemia/minor myocardial damage (microembolization) in 26% (6 of 23) of patients after visually successful PTCA; 13% (3 of 23) had elevated Tn-T, indicating minor myocardial damage. The application of these markers in the future could be of considerable value for determining the efficacy of coronary angioplasty and atherectomy, as well as for drug therapy in connection with such procedures.

Women with acute coronary syndrome are less invasively examined and subsequently less treated than men

AIMS To investigate if gender bias is present in todays setting of an early invasive strategy for patients with acute coronary syndrome in Denmark (population 5 million). METHODS AND RESULTS We identified all patients admitted to Danish hospitals with acute coronary syndrome in 2005-07 (9561 women and 16 406 men). Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the gender differences in coronary angiography (CAG) rate and subsequent revascularization rate within 60 days of admission. Significantly less women received CAG (cumulative incidence 64% for women vs. 78% for men, P < 0.05), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.68 (95% CI 0.65-0.70, P < 0.0001) compared with men. The difference was narrowed after adjustment for age and comorbidity, but still highly significant (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.80-0.85, P < 0.0001). Revascularization after CAG was less likely in women with an HR of 0.68 (95% CI 0.66-0.71, P < 0.0001) compared with men. More women (22%) than men (10%) (P < 0.0001) had no significant stenosis on their coronary angiogram. However, after adjustment for the number of significant stenoses, age, and comorbidity women were still less likely to be revascularized (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.87-0.95, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION Women with ACS are approached in a much less aggressively invasive way and receive less interventional treatment than men even after adjusting for differences in comorbidity and number of significant stenoses.

Danish multicenter randomized study on fibrinolytic therapy versus acute coronary angioplasty in acute myocardial infarction: rationale and design of the danish trial in acute myocardial infarction-2 (DANAMI-2)

BACKGROUND Randomized trials have indicated that primary coronary angioplasty performed in patients admitted directly to highly-experienced angioplasty centers offers certain advantages over intravenous fibrinolytic therapy. However, the large majority of patients with acute myocardial infarction are submitted to hospitals without a catheterization laboratory. This means that additional transportation will be necessary for many patients if a strategy of acute coronary angioplasty is to be introduced as routine treatment. The delay of treatment caused by transportation might negate (part of) the benefits of primary angioplasty compared to fibrinolytic therapy given immediately at the local hospital. STUDY DESIGN The DANish trial in Acute Myocardial Infarction-2 (DANAMI-2) is the first large-scale study to clarify, in a whole community, which of the 2 treatment strategies is best. A total of 1900 patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction are to be randomized: 800 patients will be admitted to invasive hospitals and 1100 patients will be admitted to referral hospitals. Half of the 1100 patients admitted to referral hospitals will immediately be transferred to an invasive center to be treated with primary angioplasty. IMPLICATIONS If acute transfer from a local hospital to an angioplasty center is the superior strategy, primary angioplasty should be offered to all patients as routine treatment on a community basis.