Non-adherence has been well recognized for years to be a common issue that significantly impacts clinical outcomes and health care costs. Medication adherence is remarkably low even in the controlled environment of clinical trials where it has potentially complex major implications. Collection of non-adherence data diverge markedly among cardiovascular randomized trials and, even where collected, is rarely incorporated in the statistical analysis to test the consistency of the primary endpoint(s). The imprecision introduced by the inconsistent assessment of non-adherence in clinical trials might confound the estimate of the calculated efficacy of the study drug. Hence, clinical trials may not accurately answer the scientific question posed by regulators, who seek an accurate estimate of the true efficacy and safety of treatment, or the question posed by payers, who want a reliable estimate of the effectiveness of treatment in the marketplace after approval. The Non-adherence Academic Research Consortium is a collaboration among leading academic research organizations, representatives from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and physician-scientists from the USA and Europe. One in-person meeting was held in Madrid, Spain, culminating in a document describing consensus recommendations for reporting, collecting, and analysing adherence endpoints across clinical trials. The adoption of these recommendations will afford robustness and consistency in the comparative safety and effectiveness evaluation of investigational drugs from early development to post-marketing approval studies. These principles may be useful for regulatory assessment, as well as for monitoring local and regional outcomes to guide quality improvement initiatives.

OBJECTIVES:This study sought to explore the association between biomarker elevation, with creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) or cardiac troponin (cTn), following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and mortality in patients undergoing PCI for stable angina with normal baseline values. BACKGROUND:Several studies have shown a strong association between post-PCI CK-MB elevation and subsequent mortality. However, the prognostic significance of troponin elevation following coronary intervention is still debated. METHODS:Patient-level data from 5 contemporary coronary stent trials and 1 large registry were pooled. Mortality of patients with stable angina, with normal baseline biomarkers, was compared between patients with and those without different cutoff values of cTn and CK-MB. RESULTS:A total of 13,452 patients were included in this pooled analysis. The overall percentage of patients with elevated biomarkers following PCI was 23.9% for CK-MB and 68.4% for cTn. In the patient cohort for whom both assays were available (n = 8,859), 2.4% had both CK-MB ≥5 × the upper limit of normal (ULN) and cTn ≥35 × ULN, while 92% had both CK-MB <5 × ULN and cTn <35 × ULN. Among patients with CK-MB ≥5 × ULN (n = 315), 212 (67.3%) also had cTn ≥35 × ULN. Conversely, 390 of patients (64.8%) who had cTn ≥35 × ULN did not have CK-MB ≥5 × ULN. A total of 259 patients (1.9%) died at 1 year; 20 (7.7%) had CK-MB ≥5 × ULN, and 23 (8.8%) had cTn ≥35 × ULN. In the Cox multivariate analysis, in which the CK-MB and cTn ratios post-procedure were forced into the model, age, prior myocardial infarction, lesion complexity, hyperlipidemia, and CK-MB ratio (≥10) post-procedure were associated with increased 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS:Following elective PCI in patients in stable condition treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent, CK-MB and cTn elevations remain common. After multivariate adjustment, there was an increased mortality rate with elevation of CK-MB after PCI, whereas cTn elevation was not independently associated with mortality at 1 year.

Aims: The aim of this study is to compare the SUPRAFLEX sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) with the XIENCE everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with respect to target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months in a noninferiority trial in a "real-world" patient population. Methods and results: This is a prospective, randomised, 1:1 balanced, controlled, single-blind, multicentre study comparing clinical outcomes at 12 months between SUPRAFLEX and XIENCE in an "all-comers" patient population, comprising a total of 1,430 enrolled subjects with symptomatic coronary artery disease who qualify for percutaneous coronary interventions at 23 centres in Europe. The primary endpoint is a non-inferiority comparison of the device-oriented composite endpoint target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and clinically indicated target lesion revascularisation) of the SUPRAFLEX group to the XIENCE group at 12 months post procedure. Secondary endpoints include the patient-oriented composite endpoint, target vessel failure, mortality, myocardial infarction, revascularisation and stent thrombosis rates (ARC classification). Conclusions: The TALENT trial aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of the thin-strut SUPRAFLEX compared to the current standard of care (XIENCE EES) in patients with atherosclerotic lesions. This will provide valuable information on the impact of this thin-strut device in an all-comers population.

The Academic Research Consortium (ARC)-2 initiative revisited the clinical and angiographic end point definitions in coronary device trials, proposed in 2007, to make them more suitable for use in clinical trials that include increasingly complex lesion and patient populations and incorporate novel devices such as bioresorbable vascular scaffolds. In addition, recommendations for the incorporation of patient-related outcomes in clinical trials are proposed. Academic Research Consortium-2 is a collaborative effort between academic research organizations in the United States and Europe, device manufacturers, and European, US, and Asian regulatory bodies. Several in-person meetings were held to discuss the changes that have occurred in the device landscape and in clinical trials and regulatory pathways in the last decade. The consensus-based end point definitions in this document are endorsed by the stakeholders of this document and strongly advocated for clinical trial purposes. This Academic Research Consortium-2 document provides further standardization of end point definitions for coronary device trials, incorporating advances in technology and knowledge. Their use will aid interpretation of trial outcomes and comparison among studies, thus facilitating the evaluation of the safety and effectiveness of these devices.

Surgical and catheter-based cardiovascular procedures and adjunctive pharmacology have an inherent risk of neurological complications. The current diversity of neurological endpoint definitions and ascertainment methods in clinical trials has led to uncertainties in the neurological risk attributable to cardiovascular procedures and inconsistent evaluation of therapies intended to prevent or mitigate neurological injury. Benefit-risk assessment of such procedures should be on the basis of an evaluation of well-defined neurological outcomes that are ascertained with consistent methods and capture the full spectrum of neurovascular injury and its clinical effect. The Neurologic Academic Research Consortium is an international collaboration intended to establish consensus on the definition, classification, and assessment of neurological endpoints applicable to clinical trials of a broad range of cardiovascular interventions. Systematic application of the proposed definitions and assessments will improve our ability to evaluate the risks of cardiovascular procedures and the safety and effectiveness of preventive therapies.

Previous studies suggesting the impact of post-procedural minimal stent area (MSA) evaluated by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) on long-term clinical outcomes after PCI in three-vessel (3VD) coronary artery disease are limited. The SYNTAX II study is a multicentre, all-comers, open-label, single

OBJECTIVES This study sought to investigate the differences in detecting (e.g., triggering) periprocedural myocardial infarction (PMI) among 3 current definitions.BACKGROUND PMI is a frequent component of primary endpoints in coronary device trials. Identification of all potential suspected events is critical for accurate event ascertainment. Automatic triggers based on study databases prevent underreporting of events.METHODS We generated automated algorithms to trigger PMI based on each definition and compared results using data from the RESOLUTE all comers trial.RESULTS The operationalization of current PMI definitions was achieved by defining programmable algorithms used to interrogate the study database. From a total of 636 PMI triggers, we identified 234 for the World Health Organization extended definition, 382 for the Third Universal definition, and 216 for the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions definition. Differences among the biomarkers used, different cutoff values, and in the hierarchy among biomarkers within definitions, yielded a different number of triggers, and identified unique triggers for each definition. Only 38 triggers were consistently identified by all definitions. Availability of ECG data, eCRF data on clinical presentation, and the reporting of >2 post-procedural values of the same biomarker influenced considerably the number of PMI triggers identified.CONCLUSIONS PMI definitions are not interchangeable. The number of triggers identified and consequently the potential number of events varies significantly, highlighting the importance of rigorous methodology when PMI is a component of a powered endpoint. Emphasis on collection of biomarkers, ECG data, and clinical status at baseline may improve the correct identification of PMI triggers. (C) 2017 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

BACKGROUND The EXCEL (Evaluation of Xience Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization) trial compared outcomes in patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD) treated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using everolimus-eluting stents. Whereas rates of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction were similar at 36 months, event timing and repeat revascularization rates differed by treatment group. OBJECTIVES To understand the effects of revascularization strategy from the patient's perspective, a prospective quality of life (QoL) substudy was performed alongside the EXCEL trial. METHODS Between September 2010 and March 2014, 1,905 patients with LMCAD were randomized to undergo CABG or PCI, of whom 1,788 participated in the QoL substudy. QoL was assessed at baseline and 1, 12, and 36 months using the Seattle Angina Questionnaire, the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey, the Rose Dyspnea Scale, the Patient Health Questionnaire-8, and the EQ-5D. Differences between PCI and CABG were assessed using longitudinal random-effect growth curve models. RESULTS Over 36 months, both PCI and CABG were associated with significant improvements in QoL compared with baseline. At 1 month, PCI was associated with better QoL than CABG. By 12 months though, these differences were largely attenuated, and by 36 months, there were no significant QoL differences between PCI and CABG. CONCLUSIONS Among selected patients with LMCAD, both PCI and CABG result in similar QoL improvement through 36 months, although a greater early benefit is seen with PCI. Taken together with the 3-year clinical results of EXCEL, these findings suggest that PCI and CABG provide similar intermediate-term outcomes for patients with LMCAD. (Evaluation of Xience Versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization [EXCEL]; NCT01205776) (c) 2017 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.

Surgical and catheter-based cardiovascular procedures and adjunctive pharmacology have an inherent risk of neurological complications. The current diversity of neurological endpoint definitions and ascertainment methods in clinical trials has led to uncertainties in the neurological risk attributable to cardiovascular procedures and inconsistent evaluation of therapies intended to prevent or mitigate neurological injury. Benefit-risk assessment of such procedures should be on the basis of an evaluation of well-defined neurological outcomes that are ascertained with consistent methods and capture the full spectrum of neurovascular injury and its clinical effect. The Neurologic Academic Research Consortium is an international collaboration intended to establish consensus on the definition, classification, and assessment of neurological endpoints applicable to clinical trials of a broad range of cardiovascular interventions. Systematic application of the proposed definitions and assessments will improve our ability to evaluate the risks of cardiovascular procedures and the safety and effectiveness of preventive therapies.

Aims: Coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery is the standard of care for revascularisation of patients with left main coronary artery disease (LMCAD). Recent studies have suggested that percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) may provide comparable outcomes in selected patients with LMCAD without extensive CAD. We therefore designed a trial to investigate whether PCI with XIENCE cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES) would result in non-inferior or superior clinical outcomes to CABG in selected patients with LMCAD. Methods and results: The Evaluation of XIENCE versus Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery for Effectiveness of Left Main Revascularization (EXCEL) trial is a prospective, open-label, multicentre, international study of 1,900 randomised subjects. Patients with significant LMCAD with a SYNTAX score <= 32 and local Heart Team consensus that the subject is appropriate for revascularisation by both PCI and CABG are consented and randomised 1:1 to undergo PCI using CoCr-EES or CABG. All patients undergo follow-up for five years. The primary endpoint is the three-year composite rate of death, stroke or myocardial infarction, assessed at a median follow-up of at least three years (with at least two-year follow-up in all patients), powered for sequential non-inferiority and superiority testing. Conclusions: The EXCEL study will define the contemporary roles of CABG and PCI using XIENCE CoCr-EES in patients with LMCAD disease with low and intermediate SYNTAX scores.

Background Optimal antithrombotic treatment after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) is unknown and determined empirically. The direct factor Xa inhibitor rivaroxaban may potentially reduce TAVR-related thrombotic complications and premature valve failure.Design GALILEO is an international, randomized, open-label, event-driven, phase III trial in more than 1,520 patients without an indication for oral anticoagulation who underwent a successful TAVR (ClinicalTrials. gov NCT02556203). Patients are randomized (1: 1 ratio), 1 to 7 days after a successful TAVR, to either a rivaroxaban-based strategy or an antiplateletbased strategy. In the experimental arm, subjects receive rivaroxaban (10 mg once daily [ OD]) plus acetylsalicylic acid (ASA, 75-100 mg OD) for 90 days followed by rivaroxaban alone. In the control arm, subjects receive clopidogrel (75 mg OD) plus ASA (as above) for 90 days followed by ASA alone. In case new-onset atrial fibrillation occurs after randomization, full oral anticoagulation will be implemented with maintenance of the original treatment assignment. The primary efficacy end point is the composite of all-cause death, stroke, myocardial infarction, symptomatic valve thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, and systemic embolism. The primary safety end point is the composite of life-threatening, disabling, and major bleeding, according to the Valve Academic Research Consortium definitions.Conclusions GALILEO will test the hypothesis that a rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic strategy reduces the risk of thromboembolic complications post-TAVR with an acceptable risk of bleeding compared with the currently recommended antiplatelet therapy-based strategy in subjects without need of chronic oral anticoagulation.

Aims:The Lotus and SAPIEN3 are second-generation transcatheter heart valves, which are designed to minimize paravalvular aortic regurgitation (PAR) after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). We sought to compare both devices for valve performance and with emphasis on PAR by independent core laboratory analysis.Methods and results:A total of 162 (79 Lotus and 83 SAPIEN3) consecutive patients (51% female, 80 ± 8 years, Logistic EuroSCORE 14.8 ± 9.4%) who underwent TAVR because of aortic stenosis were included. Patients with aortic valve-in-valve treatment were excluded. Pre-discharge echocardiograms were analysed by an independent core laboratory using the Valve Academic Research Consortium 2 criteria. There were no differences in baseline and procedural characteristics, except for a larger aortic annulus and sizing indices in SAPIEN3-treated patients and frequency of post-dilatation (0% in Lotus and 13.1% in SAPIEN3). Both valves have similar mean residual gradient, indexed effective orifice area and Doppler velocity index when adjusted to valve size. The frequency of mild (13.9% vs. 31.3%) and at least moderate (1.3% vs. 3.6%) PAR was less after Lotus than after SAPIEN3 implantation (P = 0.02). Multi-slice computed tomography-based annulus and left ventricular outflow tract diameters, calcification and percentage of oversizing were not different between those with or without mild or more PAR. On multivariate analysis, the use of Lotus valve was associated with less (odds ratio OR, 0.41, P = 0.03) occurrence of PAR.Conclusion:Overall, haemodynamic performance was comparable between the Lotus and SAPIEN3 valves. Lotus valve required less oversizing and was associated with less PAR than SAPIEN3.

AIMS The applicability of the results of the SYNTAX trial comparing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery for the treatment of patients with complex coronary artery disease (CAD) has been challenged by recent major technical and procedural developments in coronary revascularisation. Functional assessment of coronary lesions has contributed to marked improvements in both safety and efficacy of DES implantation. In addition, the recent development of the SYNTAX score II, a clinical tool based on anatomical and clinical factors, allows individualised objective decision making regarding the optimal revascularisation modality in patients with complex CAD. The ongoing SYNTAX II trial is currently evaluating the effectiveness of the clinical and technological advances in the treatment of patients with complex (de novo three-vessel) CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS The SYNTAX II trial is a multicentre, all-comers, open-label, single-arm trial aiming to recruit 450 patients with de novo three-vessel CAD in approximately 25 European interventional cardiology centres. All patients will be selected and treated following the SYNTAX II strategy, which includes: a) establishing the appropriateness of revascularisation utilising the SYNTAX score II as a clinical tool to allow objective decision making by the Heart Team, b) ischaemia-driven revascularisation based on functional intracoronary assessment, c) implantation of the new-generation everolimus-eluting platinum chromium coronary stent with thin struts and abluminal bioabsorbable polymer coating to promote rapid vessel healing, d) intravascular ultrasound-guided DES implantation, and e) treatment at centres with expertise in CTO recanalisation. The primary endpoint is a composite of the major adverse cardiac and cerebral events (MACCE) rate at one-year follow-up compared to the historical PCI arm of the SYNTAX trial. An exploratory endpoint will be MACCE at five-year follow-up compared to the historical surgical arm of the SYNTAX trial. CONCLUSIONS The SYNTAX II trial will provide valuable information on outcomes of state-of-the-art PCI for the contemporary management of complex (de novo three-vessel) CAD. SYNTAX II will be of critical value in the design of future trials in this arena.

Post-dilatation (PD) of Absorb BVS has been proposed to improve post-procedural angiographic and subsequent device related clinical outcomes. Whether this recommendation is also applicable among patients undergoing BVS implantation in the setting of primary PCI (PPCI) remains unknown. In the ABSORB

Background Coexistence of moderate aortic stenosis (AS) in patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction is not uncommon. Moderate AS increases afterload, whereas pharmacologic reduction of afterload is a pillar of contemporary HF management.Hypothesis Unloading the left ventricle by reducing the transaortic gradient with transfemoral transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) may improve clinical outcomes in patients with moderate AS and HF with reduced ejection fraction.Study design The TAVR UNLOAD (NCT02661451) is an international, multicenter, randomized, open-label, clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of TAVR with the Edwards SAPIEN 3 Transcatheter Heart Valve in addition to optimal heart failure therapy (OHFT) vs OHFT alone in patients with moderate AS (defined by a mean transaortic gradient >= 20 mm Hg and <40 mm Hg, and an aortic valve area > 1.0 cm(2) and <= 1.5 cm(2) at rest or after dobutamine stress echocardiography) and reduced ejection fraction. A total of 600 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 fashion. Clinical follow-up is scheduled at 1, 6, and 12 months, and 2 years after randomization. The primary end point is the hierarchical occurrence of all-cause death, disabling stroke, hospitalizations related to HF, symptomatic aortic valve disease or nondisabling stroke, and the change in the Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire at 1 year. Secondary end points capture effects on clinical outcome, biomarkers, echocardiographic parameters, and quality of life.Summary The TAVR UNLOAD trial aims to test the hypothesis that TAVR on top of OHFT improves clinical outcomes in patients with moderate AS and HF with reduced ejection fraction.

Objectives To compare the variability in the assessment of coronary stents among interventional cardiologists (readers) using optical coherence tomography (OCT) and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Background IVUS is established and validated in the evaluation of coronary stent. For cardiologists without core lab expertise, the utility of IVUS is limited by image quality. OCT yields higher image resolution; however, the consistency with which these readers interpret OCT images has not been fully evaluated or compared with IVUS. Methods OCT and IVUS image sets (five pairs) obtained after stent placement were reviewed by readers with clinical experience in both modalities. Parameters assessed included stent expansion and symmetry, reference vessel and in‐stent cross‐sectional area (CSA) and diameter, and stent strut apposition as well as Multicenter Ultrasound Stenting in Coronaries criteria. These interpretations were compared with core lab readings and examined for interobserver variability. Results The interobserver variability for measurement of in‐stent CSA was 1.34 mm 2 using IVUS compared with 0.85 mm 2 using OCT ( P = 0.024). Variation in the deviation from core lab measurement of in‐stent CSA for IVUS was 1.48 mm 2 compared with 0.87 mm 2 for OCT ( P = 0.042). The interobserver agreement for obtaining the Multicenter Ultrasound Stenting in Coronaries criteria using IVUS was 80.4% compared with 81.1% using OCT ( P = 0.78). Compared with the corelab measurement, the readers obtained an agreement of 72.7% using IVUS vs. 67.3% using OCT ( P = 0.43). Conclusion In the assessment of deployed coronary stents by practicing cardiologists, OCT images are interpreted more consistently compared with IVUS and can be used to assess stent deployment using IVUS‐validated metrics. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objective To investigate clinical outcomes of coronary intervention using a biolimus-eluting stent (BES) compared with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the Limus Eluted from A Durable versus ERodable Stent (LEADERS) coating trial at the final 5-year follow-up. Methods The LEADERS trial is a multicentre all-comer study, where patients (n=1707) were randomised to percutaneous intervention with either BES containing biodegradable polymer or SES containing durable polymer. Out of 1707 patients enrolled in this trial, 573 patients had percutaneous coronary intervention for AMI (BES=280, SES=293) and were included in the current analysis. Patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE, including all death, all myocardial infarction (MI) and all revascularisations), major adverse cardiac events (MACE, including cardiac death, MI and clinically indicated target vessel revascularisation) and stent thrombosis were assessed at 5-year follow-up. Results The baseline clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics were well matched between BES and SES groups. In all patients with AMI, coronary intervention with a BES, compared with SES, significantly reduced POCE (28.9% vs 42.3%; relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82, p=0.001) at 5-year follow-up. There was also a reduction in MACE rate in the BES group (18.2% vs 25.9%; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95, p=0.025); however, there was no difference in cardiac death and stent thrombosis. In patients with ST-elevation MI (STEMI), coronary intervention with BES significantly reduced POCE (24.4% vs 39.3%; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.85, p=0.006), MACE (12.6% vs 25.0%; RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83, p=0.008) and cardiac death (3.0% vs 11.4%; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.75, p=0.007), along with a trend towards reduction in definite stent thrombosis (3.7% vs 8.6%; RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.18, p=0.088), compared with SES. Conclusions BES, compared with SES, significantly improved safety and efficacy outcomes in patients with AMI, especially those with STEMI, at 5-year follow-up. Trial registration number NCT 00389220.

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is well established and validated in the evaluation of coronary stents. However, for the practicing interventionalist (PI) without core lab expertise, the utility of IVUS is often limited by difficulty interpreting images. Frequency Domain-Optical Coherence Tomography

Background:Quantitative light intensity analysis of the strut core by optical coherence tomography (OCT) may enable assessment of changes in the light reflectivity of the bioresorbable polymeric scaffold from polymer to provisional matrix and connective tissues, with full disappearance and integration of the scaffold into the vessel wall. The aim of this report was to describe the methodology and to apply it to serial human OCT images post procedure and at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months in the ABSORB cohort B trial.Methods and Results:In serial frequency-domain OCT pullbacks, corresponding struts at different time points were identified by 3-dimensional foldout view. The peak and median values of light intensity were measured in the strut core by dedicated software. A total of 303 corresponding struts were serially analyzed at 3 time points. In the sequential analysis, peak light intensity increased gradually in the first 24 months after implantation and reached a plateau (relative difference with respect to baseline [%Dif]: 61.4% at 12 months, 115.0% at 24 months, 110.7% at 36 months), while the median intensity kept increasing at 36 months (%Dif: 14.3% at 12 months, 75.0% at 24 months, 93.1% at 36 months).Conclusions:Quantitative light intensity analysis by OCT was capable of detecting subtle changes in the bioresorbable strut appearance over time, and could be used to monitor the bioresorption and integration process of polylactide struts. (Circ J 2014; 78: 1873–1881)