Rationale and design of the randomized, multicenter, open-label, controlled POLBOS 3 trial aimed to compare regular drug-eluting stents versus the dedicated coronary bifurcation sirolimus-eluting BiOSS LIM C stent.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Gil RJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6455659 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Rationale and design of the randomized, multicenter, open-label, controlled POLBOS 3 trial aimed to compare regular drug-eluting stents versus the dedicated coronary bifurcation sirolimus-eluting BiOSS LIM C stent.
Gil Robert J RJ Pawłowski Tomasz T Legutko Jacek J Lesiak Maciej M Witkowski Adam A Gąsior Mariusz M Kern Adam A Bil Jacek J
Medicine 20190401 14
<h4>Introduction</h4>Coronary bifurcations are encountered in about 15% to 20% of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). They are considered technically challenging and associated with worse clinical outcomes than nonbifurcation lesions. The BiOSS LIM C is a dedicated bifurcation balloon expandable stent made of cobalt-chromium alloy (strut thickness 70 μm) releasing sirolimus (1.4 μg/mm) from the surface of a biodegradable coating comprised of a copolymer of lactic and glycolic acids.<h4>C ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:AimThe marked variation in bifurcation anatomy has brought about an ongoing search for stents specifically constructed for coronary bifurcations. This study aimed to analyze the angiographic restenosis prevalence and patterns and predictors of different patterns in dedicated bifurcation BiOSS® vs. current generation drug-eluting stents implanted in coronary bifurcation lesions based on data from two clinical trials POLBOS I and II.MethodsDedicated bifurcation BiOSS® stents were compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or nonST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) (POLBOS I: paclitaxel eluting BiOSS® Expert vs. DES; POLBOS II: sirolimus eluting BiOSS® LIM vs. DES). Provisional T-stenting was the default treatment. Morphological pattern of in-stent restenosis according to the modified Mehran classification adopted for bifurcation lesions was assessed with bifurcation dedicated quantitative coronary angiographic software (CAAS 5.11, Pie Medical Imaging BV, the Netherlands).ResultsIn total, 445 patients (222 patients in BiOSS group and 223 patients in DES group) were included into the analysis. In BiOSS group 24 cases of angiographic restenosis (10.8%) were recorded, and in DES group-17 cases (7.6%) at 12 months follow-up (angiographic control rate at follow-up-90.3%). In the BiOSS group most frequent medina classification in restenotic cases was 0.0.1 (25%), whereas in DES-0.0.1 and 0.1.1 (23.5% each). In multivariate regression analysis proximal optimization technique was associated with the lowest chance for restenosis (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.33), whereas diabetes on insulin was associated with the highest risk of restenosis (OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.48-11.44).ConclusionsThe angiographic restenosis pattern and rate was similar between BiOSS stents and DES in coronary bifurcation lesions.
| S-EPMC7204374 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSirolimus-eluting stents have recently been shown to reduce the risk of restenosis among patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Given that sirolimus-eluting stents cost about 4 times as much as conventional stents, and considering the volume of PCI procedures, the decision to use sirolimus-eluting stents has large economic implications.MethodsWe performed an economic evaluation comparing treatment with sirolimus-eluting and conventional stents in patients undergoing PCI and in subgroups based on age and diabetes mellitus status. The probabilities of transition between clinical states and estimates of resource use and health-related quality of life were derived from the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease (APPROACH) database. Information on effectiveness was based on a meta-analysis of randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) comparing sirolimus-eluting and conventional stents.ResultsCost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained in the baseline analysis was Can58,721 dollars. Sirolimus-eluting stents were more cost-effective in patients with diabetes and in those over 75 years of age, the costs per QALY gained being 44,135 dollars and 40,129 dollars, respectively. The results were sensitive to plausible variations in the cost of stents, the estimate of the effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents and the assumption that sirolimus-eluting stents would prevent the need for cardiac catheterizations in the subsequent year when no revascularization procedure was performed to treat restenosis.InterpretationThe use of sirolimus-eluting stents is associated with a cost per QALY that is similar to or higher than that of other accepted medical forms of therapy and is associated with a significant incremental cost. Sirolimus-eluting stents are more economically attractive for patients who are at higher risk of restenosis or at a high risk of death if a second revascularization procedure were to be required.
| S-EPMC545758 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSecond generation drug-eluting stents were developed to improve the safety and efficacy of first generation stents. So far, limited long term randomized data exist comparing the second generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with first generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES).MethodsA prospective, open-label, randomized, single center trial comparing EES and SES in all-comer patients. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. Secondary endpoints included individual components of the composite, along with target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis.ResultsIn total, 977 patients were randomized, of which 498 patients to EES and 479 to SES. Average age was 65.2 ± 11.2 years and 71.6% of the population was male. Fifty percent of patients were treated for acute coronary syndrome, more often for ST-elevation myocardial infarctions in EES patients (13.7% vs. 9.2% in SES). In contrast, SES patients more often had prior interventions and showed more calcified lesions. Two-year follow-up was available in 98% of patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 10.7% of EES patients compared to 10.6% of SES patients (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68-1.48). Additionally, secondary endpoints were similar between groups. The rate of stent thrombosis was low for both stent types.ConclusionIn this all-comer population, there were no differences in endpoints between EES and SES during two-year follow-up. Stent thrombosis rates were low, supporting the safety of drug-eluting stent appliance in clinical practice.Trial registrationTrialRegister.nl NTR3170.
| S-EPMC3670908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: There are limited data regarding differences in vascular responses between first-generation sirolimus-eluting stents (1G-SES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) >10 years after implantation. Methods and Results: We retrospectively investigated 223 stents (105 1G-SES, 118 BMS) from 131 patients examined by optical coherence tomography (OCT) >10 years after implantation. OCT analysis included determining the presence or absence of a lipid-laden neointima, calcified neointima, macrophage accumulation, malapposition, and strut coverage. Neoatherosclerosis was defined as having lipid-laden neointima. OCT findings were compared between the 1G-SES and BMS groups, and the predictors of neoatherosclerosis were determined. The median stent age at the time of OCT examinations was 12.3 years (interquartile range 11.0-13.2 years). There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the 1G-SES and BMS groups. On OCT analysis, there was no difference in the prevalence of neoatherosclerosis and calcification between 1G-SES and BMS. Multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that stent size, stent length, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker use were significant predictors of neoatherosclerosis. In addition, uncovered and malapposed struts were more prevalent with 1G-SES than BMS. Conclusions: After >10 years since implantation, the prevalence of neoatherosclerosis was no different between 1G-SES and BMS, whereas uncovered struts and malapposition were significantly more frequent with 1G-SESs.
| S-EPMC8024020 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background The choice of optimal drug-eluting stent therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with DM. Methods and Results In a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization) trial (NCT01443104), patients randomly assigned to ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES were stratified according to diabetic status. The primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, at 5 years. Among 2119 patients, 486 (22.9%) presented with DM. Compared with individuals without DM, patients with DM were older and had a greater baseline cardiac risk profile. In patients with DM, target lesion failure at 5 years occurred in 74 patients (cumulative incidence, 31.0%) treated with BP-SES and 57 patients (25.8%) treated with DP-EES (risk ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.87-1.73 [P=0.24]). In individuals without DM, target lesion failure at 5 years occurred in 124 patients (16.8%) treated with BP-SES and 132 patients (16.8%) treated with DP-EES (risk ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.77-1.26 [P=0.90; P for interaction=0.31]). Cumulative 5-year incidence rates of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, and definite stent thrombosis were similar among patients with DM treated with BP-SES or DP-EES. There was no interaction between diabetic status and treatment effect of BP-SES versus DP-EES. Conclusions In a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, we found no difference in clinical outcomes throughout 5 years between patients with DM treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.
| S-EPMC6915288 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundHead to head trials of clinical outcomes of sirolimus eluting polymer free vs. biodegradable polymer stents are lacking.MethodsSingle centre prospective open labeled randomised controlled clinical trial. Basis for sample size calculation was the rate of MACE from the ISAR TEST 3 trial in which the absolute difference was 10.25% with a standard deviation of 0.24. Assuming null hypothesis, 80% power and 5% alpha error, to detect a 10% difference, adjusting for 10% loss of follow up, sample size was 204.Inclusion criteriaPatients with stable coronary artery disease or recent acute coronary syndrome ( >1 week from the date of STEMI), being taken up for elective angioplasty.End pointsPrimary end point was MACE at 1 year and secondary end points at the end of 1 year were cardiac death, urgent target lesion revascularization, acute coronary syndrome, stroke and in-stent re-stenosis.Results204 patients were enrolled between January 2013 to July 2014, 91 in the polymer-free group and 113 in the biodegradable polymer group. Baseline characteristics were comparable between both groups. 21 patients (10.29%), were lost to follow up. MACE at 1 year were comparable in both the groups 3 of 85(3.52%) in the polymer-free group and 3 of 98(3.06%) in the biodegradable polymer group, p = 0.859. The secondary end points were also comparable between the two groups- Death- 1 of 85(1.17%) vs. 2 of 98(2.04%), p = 0.646, Stroke 0 of 85 vs. 2 of 98(2.04%), p = 0.185 and acute coronary syndrome - 2 of 85(2.35%) vs. 1 of 98(1.02%), p = 0.204. There were no instances of urgent target lesion re-vascularisation or definite stent thrombosis in either groups. In stent re-stenosis was found in 7 of 85(8.2%) in the polymer-free group vs. 6 of 98(6.12%) in the biodegradable polymer group.ConclusionThe 1 year MACE rates are comparable in patients who underwent elective coronary revascularization using sirolimus eluting polymer-free and biodegradable polymer stents.
| S-EPMC6310072 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Stent designs with ultrathin struts may further increase the procedural success of challenging lesion subsets. The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of ultrathin strut, polymer-free sirolimus eluting stent (PF-SES) implantations in a large scale, unselected patient population.Adult patients underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with a thin-strut PF-SES. Data from two all-comers observational studies having the same protocol (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT02629575 and NCT02905214) were pooled. The accumulated target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate at 9-12 months was the primary endpoint. All dual antiplatelet therapy strategies according to the applicable guidelines were permissible.In total, 7243 patients were prospectively enrolled for PCI with PF-SES in stable coronary artery disease or acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Major risk factors in the overall cohort were diabetes (37.3%), ST elevation myocardial infarction (18.1%) and non-ST myocardial infarction (24.6%). The follow-up rate was 88.6% in the overall population. The TLR rate in the overall cohort was 2.2% whereas definite/probable stent thrombosis (ST) occurred in 0.7%. In patients with in-stent restenosis lesions, the major adverse cardiac events rate was 6.4% whereas the corresponding rate for isolated left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease was highest with 6.7% followed by patients with culprit lesions in vein bypasses (VB, 7.1%). The mortality rate in patients treated in VB lesions was highest with 5.4%, followed by the isolated LMCA subgroup (3.4%) and ACS (2.6%).PCI with PF-SES in an unselected patient population, is associated with low clinical event and ST rates. Furthermore, PF-SES angioplasty in niche indications demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy outcomes with high procedural success rates.
| S-EPMC7034709 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to assess the safety and efficacy of a polymer-free sirolimus coated, ultrathin strut drug-eluting stent (PF-SES) in an unselected patient population with a focus on acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Furthermore, stable coronary artery disease (CAD) with short (?6 months) versus long (>6 months) dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) were also studied. METHODS:Patients who received PF-SES were investigated in an unselected large-scale international, single-armed, multicenter, 'all comers' observational study. The primary endpoint was the 9-month target lesion revascularisation (TLR) rate, whereas secondary endpoints included the 9-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and procedural success rates. A priori defined subgroups such as patients with ACS, diabetes, lesion subsets and procedural characteristics relative to DAPT were investigated. RESULTS:A total of 2877 patients of whom 1084 had ACS were treated with PF-SES (1.31±0.75 stents per patient). At 9 months, the accumulated overall TLR rate was 2.3% (58/2513). There was no significant difference between ACS and stable CAD (2.6% vs 2.1%, p=0.389). However, the overall MACE rate was 4.3% (108/2513) with a higher rate in patients with ACS when compared with the stable CAD subgroup (6.1%, 58/947 vs 3.2%, 50/1566, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS:PF-SES angioplasty is safe and effective in the daily clinical routine with low rates of TLR and MACE in an unselected patient population. Our data are in agreement with prior clinical findings that extended DAPT duration beyond 6 months do not improve clinical outcomes in patients with stable CAD (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02629575). TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT02629575.
| S-EPMC5515132 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCoronary artery aneurysms after drug eluting stents are rare. We present a case series of type II coronary aneurysms after implantation of Everolimus eluting stents including patients developing giant aneurysms with a toxic course.Case presentationOver a span of 3.5 years at our center 2572 patients were implanted Everolimus eluting stents out of which 4 patients developed coronary type II aneurysms an incidence of 0.00156 whereas 5838 patients were implanted Sirolimus eluting 2nd generation stents out of which 2 patients developed similar aneurysms with an incidence of 0.00034. The slight increase in incidence in Everolimus stents does not reach statistical significance (p = 0.054) and is limited by single centre non randomized study. We also propose a hypothesis that the slight increase in the incidence maybe due to allergy to Methacrylate present in Everolimus eluting Xience stent's primer which is absent in other Sirolimus eluting stents used at our center but that needs to be further investigated. We also found some patients who developed giant aneurysms including Left main aneurysms. In our series operative repair of these patients had better outcomes than covered stent deployment but larger trials maybe needed to confirm the same.ConclusionsCoronary artery aneurysms after stent implantation are rare but occasionally giant aneurysms are formed with a toxic course. The incidence and morphology of aneurysms after Everolimus and Sirolimus eluting stent deployment do not differ much.
| S-EPMC8851791 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe relative short-, long- and overall-term efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES, Cypher) compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES, Taxus) in large head-to-head comparisons still remain to be defined.MethodsWe searched Pubmed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for articles comparing outcomes of interest between SES and PES without language restriction. Short- (≤ 1 year), long- (>1 year), and overall-term (the longest follow-up of each study) outcomes were evaluated. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR). Other outcomes of interest were target vessel revascularization (TVR), myocardial infarction, all-cause death, cardiac death, stent thrombosis, major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), restenosis and late lumen loss.ResultsSeventy-six studies including more than 15000 patients in randomized controlled trials and over 70000 patients in adjusted observational studies were included. At overall-term follow-up, SES significantly reduced TLR (relative risk [RR]: 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49-0.76), TVR (RR: 0.67; 95% CI: 0.54-0.83), MACE (RR: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.72-0.87), myocardial infarction (RR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.73-0.99), in-segment restenosis (RR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.38-0.65), and in-segment late lumen loss (weighted mean difference [WMD]: -0.19; 95% CI: -0.24--0.14) in randomized controlled trials compared with PES. In addition, lower rates of death (RR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.83-1.00), any stent thrombosis (RR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.45-0.86), definite stent thrombosis (RR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.45-0.77) were found in patients receiving SES in adjusted observational studies. Largely similar results were found at short- and long-term follow-up, and in patients with diabetes, acute myocardial infarction or long lesions.ConclusionsSES significantly reduced the short-, long- and overall-term risk of TLR/TVR, MACE, and restenosis, and overall-term risk of myocardial infarction in randomized controlled trials, as compared with PES. Lower rates of death and stent thrombosis were also observed in observational studies in SES-treated patients.
| S-EPMC4028235 | biostudies-literature