Infection is the commonest adverse effect in patients implanted with contemporary continuous-flow pumps with most such events presenting as events unrelated to the pump components. Whether mechanical circulatory devices confer an immunosuppressive effect leading to propensity for infection warrants closer scrutiny to understand and ameliorate this morbidity. (Funded by Abbott; MOMENTUM 3 NCT02224755).

BACKGROUND:In a randomized controlled trial (MOMENTUM 3), the HeartMate 3 (HM3) fully magnetically levitated centrifugal-flow left ventricular assist device (LVAD) demonstrated superiority over the HeartMate II (HMII) axial-flow LVAD. These findings were driven by hemocompatibility-related outcomes, but infection-related outcomes were not altered by device choice. In this trial-level analysis, we analyzed the clinical patterns of infection-related outcomes over 2 years of support. METHODS:In MOMENTUM 3, 1,020 patients were implanted with either the HM3 (n = 515) or HMII (n = 505) pump. Clinical characteristics and morbidity- and mortality-related outcomes were evaluated to identify predictors associated with major infectious complications, using univariable and multivariable models. RESULTS:The cumulative number of infections at 2 years was 1,213 (634 HM3 and 579 HMII), and major infection occurred in 58% of patients with the HM3 and 56% of patients with the HMII (p = 0.57). Infections of a local nature unrelated to pump components were most common (n = 681/1,213; 56%), followed by driveline-associated infection (n = 329/1,213; 27%), sepsis (n = 194/1,213; 16%), and other events (n = 9/1,213; 0.7%). Bacterial pathogens were implicated in 806 of 1,213 events (66%); significant predictors of infection included sex (women vs men; hazard ratio [HR]: 1.38, p = 0.003), pre-implant use of intra-aortic balloon pump (HR: 1.33, p = 0.02), pre-implant history of cardiac surgery (HR: 1.28, p = 0.01), and body mass index ≥ 30 (HR: 1.40, p < 0.0001). Most deaths in those with infection occurred owing to non-infectious causes. CONCLUSION:Infection is the most common adverse effect in patients implanted with contemporary continuous-flow LVADs, with most such events unrelated to the pump or its peripheral components. Whether chronic mechanical circulatory devices confer an immunomodulatory effect pre-disposing to infection warrants closer scrutiny to understand and ameliorate this morbidity.

Aims: Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) and XIENCE cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES) had comparable angiographic and clinical outcomes up to one year in patients enrolled in the ABSORB China randomised trial. Whether these favourable results with BVS continue beyond one year up to three years is unknown. In this study we sought to analyse the outcomes from the trial up to three-year follow-up. Methods and results: ABSORB China was a prospective, open-label, multicentre trial in which 480 patients with one or two native coronary artery lesions were randomised 1:1 to BVS (N=241) vs. CoCr-EES (N=239). Clinical endpoints included target lesion failure (TLF; cardiac death, target vesselrelated myocardial infarction or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation), its components, and definite/probable stent/scaffold thrombosis (ST). There were no significant differences in clinical outcomes in patients treated with BVS and CoCr-EES up to three years, including TLF (5.5% vs. 4.7%, p=0.68) and definite/probable ST (0.9% vs. 0.0%, p=0.50). STs in the BVS arm consisted of one probable subacute event at 15 days and one definite very late event at 622 days. Among 32 BVS patients with a reference vessel diameter between 2.25 and 3.75 mm by quantitative coronary angiography and in whom post-dilatation was performed at >16 atm with a balloon:scaffold diameter >1:1 and balloon ≤scaffold diameter 0.5 mm, no TLF or ST events occurred within three years. Conclusions: In the ABSORB China trial, BVS and CoCr-EES had similar results up to three-year follow-up, the time at which the scaffold has completely resorbed. BVS outcomes may be further optimised by appropriate lesion selection and implantation technique.

The Absorb bioresorbable scaffold (BVS) provides comparable 12-month clinical outcomes to Xience everolimus-eluting stents in appropriately sized vessels. Differences in device structure (strut thickness and width) and resorption might impact outcomes in the setting of bailout (unplanned) device

BACKGROUND:Randomized trials have demonstrated progressive improvements in clinical and angiographic measures of restenosis with technologic iterations from balloon angioplasty to bare-metal stents and subsequently to drug-eluting stents (DES). However, the permanent presence of a metal stent prevents coronary vasomotion, autoregulation, and adaptive coronary remodeling. The limitations imposed by a permanent metal implant may be overcome with a bioresorbable scaffold. ABSORB III is a large-scale, multicenter, randomized trial designed to support US premarket approval of the ABSORB BVS platform and is the first study with sufficient size to allow valid examination of the relative clinical outcomes between metallic DES and bioresorbable scaffold.DESIGN:ABSORB III (ClincalTrials.gov NCT01751906) will register approximately 2,262 patients and includes a lead-in phase (n = 50), the primary randomized analysis group (n = 2,000), an imaging cohort (n = 200), and a pharmacokinetic substudy (n = 12). In the primary analysis group, approximately 2,000 patients with up to 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions in separate epicardial vessels will be prospectively assigned in a 2:1 ratio to ABSORB BVS versus XIENCE everolimus-eluting stents (EES). The primary end point is target lesion failure (the composite of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) at 1 year, powered for noninferiority of ABSORB BVS compared to XIENCE EES. Clinical follow-up will continue for 5 years. Enrollment has been completed, and the principal results will be available in the fall of 2015.CONCLUSIONS:The large-scale ABSORB III randomized trial will evaluate the safety and effectiveness of ABSORB BVS compared to XIENCE EES in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND:The everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) is designed to achieve results comparable to metallic drug-eluting stents at 1 year, with improved long-term outcomes. Whether the 1-year clinical and angiographic results of BVS are noninferior to current-generation drug-eluting stents has not been established. OBJECTIVES:This study sought to evaluate the angiographic efficacy and clinical safety and effectiveness of BVS in a randomized trial designed to enable approval of the BVS in China. METHODS:Eligible patients with 1 or 2 de novo native coronary artery lesions were randomized to BVS or cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES) in a 1:1 ratio stratified by diabetes and the number of lesions treated. Angiographic and clinical follow-up were planned at 1 year in all patients. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-segment late loss (LL), powered for noninferiority with a margin of 0.15 mm. RESULTS:A total of 480 patients were randomized (241 BVS vs. 239 CoCr-EES) at 24 sites. Acute clinical device success (98.0% vs. 99.6%; p = 0.22) and procedural success (97.0% and 98.3%; p = 0.37) were comparable in BVS- and CoCr-EES-treated patients, respectively. The primary endpoint of in-segment LL at 1 year was 0.19 ± 0.38 mm for BVS versus 0.13 ± 0.38 mm for CoCr-EES; the 1-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.14 mm, achieving noninferiority of BVS compared with CoCr-EES (pnoninferiority = 0.01). BVS and CoCr-EES also had similar 1-year rates of target lesion failure (cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization; 3.4% vs. 4.2%, respectively; p = 0.62) and definite/probable scaffold/stent thrombosis (0.4% vs. 0.0%, respectively; p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS:In the present multicenter randomized trial, BVS was noninferior to CoCr-EES for the primary endpoint of in-segment LL at 1 year. (A Clinical Evaluation of Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold [Absorb BVS] System in Chinese Population-ABSORB CHINA Randomized Controlled Trial [RCT]; NCT01923740).

AIMS To evaluate whether the improved outcomes with newer generation drug-eluting stents (DES) utilising thin-strut stents are consistent among different patient and angiographic subgroups. METHODS AND RESULTS Clinical outcomes over three years were collected in the SPIRIT III trial comparing the XIENCE V® everolimus-eluting stents (EES) (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) to the TAXUS® paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA). Potential predictors of adverse clinical outcomes were assessed using demographic, clinical, and procedural variables by logistic and Cox regression analyses. For three-year target vessel failure, the independent predictors identified by Cox regression were number of vessels treated (HR=2.19 [1.50, 3.19], p<0.0001), HbA1c (%) (HR=1.17 [1.05, 1.29], p=0.004), total cholesterol (>200 mg/dl) (HR=1.63 [1.13, 2.36], p=0.009), and female gender (HR=1.42 [1.01, 2.01], p=0.05). Logistic regression analysis identified the same predictors except for the female gender. The clinical results with EES compared to PES were consistent among the multiple subgroups examined with the possible exception of patients with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS Clinical factors and stent type were the most important multivariable predictors of adverse clinical outcomes in this contemporary trial of first versus second generation DES. The benefit of the EES compared to the PES was consistent across a wide range of patient and angiographic subgroups with the possible exception of patients with diabetes.

BACKGROUND:A consensus definition for periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) in coronary stent trials has not been established. Differences between a historic definition, based on modified World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, and a proposed universal definition have not been compared in a prospective clinical trial.METHODS AND RESULTS:We randomly assigned 3687 patients with stable coronary artery disease to undergo stenting with either everolimus-eluting stents (2458 patients) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (1229 patients). Serial creatine kinase (CK) and CKMB or troponin measurements were obtained before and after stenting. MI was classified by protocol according to the WHO definition (total CK >2× normal with elevated CKMB) and post hoc according to the Universal/Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition (CKMB or troponin >3× normal). Protocol MI was determined in 58 (1.6%) and universal/ARC MI in 287 (7.8%) patients within 48 hours post index procedure. There were substantial differences in frequency of universal/ARC MI if only CKMB (5.4%) or troponin (18.7%) data were included for evaluation. Total stent length was a strong predictor of both protocol and universal/ARC MI. Mortality at 2 years was low (2.3%) and was not different for either MI definition. The mortality rates did not increase with elevations of CKMB or troponin to >10× normal.CONCLUSIONS:There was a marked difference in periprocedural MI rates according to protocol or universal/ARC MI definitions. No association was present between periprocedural MI and mortality up to 2 years by either definition.CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00307047.

A photoresponsive fluorinated azobenzene homopolymer is synthesized via TERP. UV irradiation of the surface based on a fluorinated azobenzene homopolymer with micro/nanostructures induces a tunable/switchable water droplet mobility. Water droplets can easily roll off the pristine surface at a small tilt angle (14 degrees). The apparent water CA changes from 150 to 135 degrees after UV illumination of the surface. Thus, water drops stick on the surface when the substrate is turned vertically or even upside down, indicating a very high adhesion force. Interestingly, the water droplet rolls off again under visible-light irradiation. The as-prepared surface may be useful for applications requiring switchable mobility of water droplets.

Women treated with the XIENCE V have improved 1-year clinical outcomes compared to women treated with TAXUS; whether benefits in women are sustained at 3 years is unknown. Three-year follow-up of the SPIRIT III trial revealed improved clinical outcomes of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent compared to the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent. One thousand two patients with coronary artery lesions ≤28 mm in length in 2.5- to 3.75-mm diameter vessels were prospectively randomized to receive XIENCE V or TAXUS stents. A post hoc gender subset analysis was performed. Six hundred sixty-nine patients (30% women) received XIENCE V and 332 patients (34% women) received TAXUS. In the overall population, women had higher 3-year rates of major adverse cardiac events (16.0% vs 10.0%, p = 0.01) and target lesion revascularization (10.2% vs 5.3%, p = 0.008) compared to men. In women, those with XIENCE V continued to have lower major adverse cardiac event rates than those with TAXUS at 2 years (9.5% vs 18.3%, p = 0.03) and 3 years (12.2% vs 22.6%, p = 0.03). Although 1-year target vessel failure rates were similar, at 2- and 3-year follow-up women treated with XIENCE V had approximately 40% relative decreases in target vessel failure rates compared to those treated with TAXUS (12.7% vs 22.0%, p = 0.05; 16.0% vs 26.4%, p = 0.03, respectively). Stent thrombosis and bleeding complication rates were similar between treatment arms in the gender subgroups through 3 years. In conclusion, women in the SPIRIT III trial have sustained clinical benefits from XIENCE V implantation compared to TAXUS without increases in long-term complications.

We performed a pooled analysis based on patient-level data from the TITAX-AMI and BASE-ACS trials to evaluate the outcome of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents vs drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction at 2-year follow-up.The TITAX-AMI trial compared bioactive stents with paclitaxel-eluting stents in 425 patients with acute myocardial infarction. The BASE-ACS trial compared bioactive stents with everolimus-eluting stents in 827 patients with acute coronary syndrome. The primary endpoint for the pooled analysis was major adverse cardiac events: a composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 2-year follow-up.The pooled analysis included 501 patients; 245 received bioactive stents, and 256 received drug-eluting stents. The pooled bioactive stent group was associated with a risk ratio of 0.85 for major adverse cardiac events (95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.35; P = .49) compared to the pooled drug-eluting stent group. Similarly, the pooled bioactive stent group was associated with a risk ratio of 0.71 for cardiac death (95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.95; P = .51), 0.44 for recurrent myocardial infarction (95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.97; P = .04), and 1.39 for ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (95% confidence interval, 0.74-2.59; P = .30), compared to the pooled drug-eluting stent group. These results were confirmed by propensity-score adjusted analysis of the combined datasets.In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, bioactive stents were associated with lower rates of recurrent myocardial infarction compared to drug-eluting stents at 2-year follow-up; yet, the rates of cardiac death and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization were similar.Análisis combinado basado en los datos de pacientes de los ensayos TITAX-AMI y BASE-ACS para evaluar los resultados clínicos obtenidos con stents bioactivos con recubrimiento de titanio-óxido nítrico comparados con los stents liberadores de fármacos en pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST tras un seguimiento de 2 años.El ensayo TITAX-AMI comparó los stents bioactivos con los liberadores de paclitaxel en 425 pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio. El ensayo BASE-ACS comparó stents bioactivos con stents liberadores de everolimus en 827 pacientes con síndrome coronario agudo. El objetivo principal para el análisis combinado fueron los eventos adversos cardiacos mayores: muerte cardiaca, infarto de miocardio recurrente o revascularización de la lesión diana por causa isquémica tras un seguimiento de 2 años.El análisis combinado incluyó a 501 pacientes; se trató a 245 con stents bioactivos y se implantó stent liberador de fármacos a 256. En el análisis conjunto, el grupo de stents bioactivos presentó un cociente de riesgos de eventos adversos cardiacos mayores de 0,85 (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,53-1,35; p = 0,49) comparado con el grupo de stents liberadores de fármacos. De igual modo, el grupo conjunto de stents bioactivos mostró un cociente de riesgos de muerte cardiaca de 0,71 (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,26-1,95; p = 0,51); de infarto de miocardio recurrente, 0,44 (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,20-0,97; p = 0,04), y de revascularización de la lesión diana por causa isquémica, 1,39 (intervalo de confianza del 95%, 0,74-2,59; p = 0,30), en comparación con el grupo conjunto tratado con stents liberadores de fármacos. Estos resultados se confirmaron por un análisis de puntuación de propensión ajustado respecto a la serie de datos conjunta.En pacientes con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST, los stents bioactivos, comparados con los stents liberadores de fármacos, se asociaron a menores tasas de infarto de miocardio recurrente tras un seguimiento de 2 años; no obstante, las tasas de muerte cardiaca y de revascularización de la lesión diana por causa isquémica fueron similares.

The development of anhydrous proton exchange membrane is critical for the polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell (PEMFC) operating at intermediate temperature (100–200°C). In the present work, H3PO4-doped 1,2,4-triazole-polysiloxane proton conducting membrane is successfully prepared by sol–gel reaction. The molecular structure of the PGA-xH3PO4 is confirmed via Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR). Thermogravimetry (TG) analysis shows that the samples were thermally stable up to approximately 250°C. The fracture surface morphology of the materials is characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The temperature dependence of proton conductivity of all the membranes exhibits an Arrhenius behavior. The proton conductivities of these membranes increase with dopant concentration and the temperature. In an anhydrous state, the proton conductivity of PGA-1H3PO4, PGA-2H3PO4 and PGA-3H3PO4 is 1.48×10−3, 1.07×10−2,1.43×10−2 S cm−1 at 200°C, respectively. According to FTIR results, the added H3PO4 is presumed to break up the hydrogen-bonding network of pure PGA, facilitating ring-reorientation and thus Grotthus mechanism proton transport. In PGA-2H3PO4, the extra H3PO4 may act as a bridge providing effective proton conduction. Therefore the proton conductivity of PGA-2H3PO4 is greatly improved compared with PGA-1H3PO4.

De plus en plus clairement, le contrôle locorégional de la maladie cancéreuse se confirme comme une étape indispensable dans l'obtention de la guérison. Cela est vrai dans le cancer du sein comme pour d'autres cancers, bien qu'il existe des formes ayant d'emblée un potentiel de dissémination métastatique. Dans les cancers canalaires in situ, l'irradiation réduit significativement le taux de récidives locales, dont la moitié environ sont invasives, et donc potentiellement à l'origine de métastases, comme l'ont confirmé les résultats de l'essai NSABP B17 (11,4 % de récidives avec irradiation et 25,8 % sans irradiation), et cela dans tous les sous-groupes. Pour les cancers infiltrants, l'irradiation s'avère un complément indispensable de la chirurgie conservatrice, et cinq essais randomisés ont confirmé la réduction très significative du taux de récidive locale et une légère augmentation de survie dans les bras de l'étude avec radiothérapie. Après mastectomie, l'irradiation locorégionale réduit d'un facteur 3 à 4 le taux de récidive pariétale et ganglionnaire en cas de présence de facteurs de risque, tels qu'une tumeur primitive de plus de 5 cm et présence d'un envahissement ganglionnaire axillaire histologique ou d'emboles endovasculaires étendus. Deux récents essais randomisés ont confirmé l'impact d'une irradiation locorégionale de dose au moins égale à 45 Gy délivrée avec une technique adaptée. Dans l'étude danoise, les femmes préménopausées qui ont reçu après la chirurgie une chimiothérapie, avaient des taux de récidives locorégionales de 32 % contre 9 % (p < 0,001) pour celles ayant eu en plus une irradiation locorégionale. De même, les taux de survie à 10 ans étaient respectivement de 45 et 54 % (p < 0,001). Dans l'essai canadien, les patientes qui ont seulement reçu après la chirurgie une chimiothérapie seule avaient des taux de rechute locorégionale et de survie spécifique à 10 ans de 25 et 56 %, alors que pour celles ayant eu une irradiation complémentaire, ces chiffres étaient respectivement de 13 et 65 %. Dans les deux études, le bénéfice était noté dans tous les sous-groupes, en particulier en cas d'atteinte ganglionnaire axillaire. Les résultats de la méta-analyse de l'EBCTCC de 1995 ne montraient qu'un bénéfice très modeste de l'irradiation de la survie; toutefois, en éliminant les essais comprenant moins de 400 patientes et ceux conduits avant 1970 qui avaient tous d'importants défauts méthodologiques et/ou une technique d'irradiation obsolète et inadaptée, voire dangereuse, ce bénéfice devenait évident chez les 7 840 patientes restantes ainsi sélectionnées. Une irradiation locorégionale optimale peut donc non seulement améliorer le contrôle locorégional, mais aussi la survie de certaines patientes. Ce traitement doit être parfaitement intégré dans le programme thérapeutique comprenant la chirurgie et la chimiothérapie. Il est indispensable que cette irradiation soit sans dommage pour les organes critiques, en particulier le cœur et le poumon, compte tenu par ailleurs de l'utilisation de doses croissantes d'anthracyclines dans le cadre du traitement adjuvant. En particulier, l'irradiation de la chaîne mammaire interne doit toujours être réalisée par un champ direct de photons et d'électrons, avec au moins 60 % de la dose délivrée par électrons.Locoregional control is a crucial step in the achievement of breast cancer cure. In ductal carcinoma in situ, breast irradiation significantly reduces the rates of local recurrence whatever the histological subtypes, as demonstrated by the NSABP-B17 trial (25.8% of local recurrences without radiotherapy vs. 11.4% with radiotherapy). In infiltrating breast carcinomas, complementary breast irradiation has been shown to significantly improve the local control and slightly the overall survival in five randomized trials. Following mastectomy, locoregional irradiation clearly reduces the chest wall and nodal relapse rates, especially in case of lesions more than 5 cm or with nodal involvement and/or large lymphatic or vascular emboli. Two recent randomized trials confirmed the benefit of well-adapted locoregional irradiation in all subgroups, especially in patients with one to three axillary involved nodes. In the Danish trial (including premenopausal high-risk women), radiotherapy reduced locoregional relapses from 32 to 9% (p < 0.001) and increased the 10-year survival rate from 45 to 54% (p < 0.001). In the Canadian trial, locoregional relapse rate decreased from 25 to 13% and the 10-year survival rate increased from 56 to 65%. The metaanalysis published in 1995 by the EBCTCG showed only a modest benefit due to locoregional irradiation in breast cancer. However, when small or old trials were excluded due to imperfect methodology or inadequate irradiation techniques, the benefit of modern radiotherapy became much more evident in a population of 7,840 patients. Locoregional irradiation appears to be able to reduce the risk of metastatic evolution occurring after local or nodal relapse and must be integrated in a multidisciplinary strategy. Treatment toxicity (especially toxicity due to irradiation of internal mammary nodes) is of special concern, as anthracycline-based chemotherapy is prescribed more often. The use of a direct field, with at least 60% of the dose delivered by electrons alternating with photons is recommended to protect the heart and lungs.

Objective: To evaluate whether an everolimus‐eluting stent (EES) with thinner stent struts and polymer results in less periprocedural myonecrosis and adverse outcomes. Background: Higher periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) rates have been reported with the TAXUS® EXPRESS 2 paclitaxel‐eluting stent (PES) compared to the bare metal EXPRESS 2 ® stent due to more frequent side branch compromise, presumably attributable to the thickness of the stent/polymer on the PES. Methods: In the SPIRIT III trial, we identified 113 patients in the XIENCE V® EES group and 63 patients in the TAXUS EXPRESS 2 PES group who met the criteria of having a lesion with a jailed side branch (<2 mm diameter, and <50% stenosis). Two‐year clinical outcomes were evaluated. Results: A periprocedural increase in Creatine Kinase‐MB >1× upper normal level occurred in 9.0% of EES compared to 29.7% of PES patients with jailed side branches, P = 0.01. Through 2 years, major adverse cardiac events (MACE; cardiac death, MI, or target lesion revascularization [TLR]) occurred in 6.8% of EES and 19.0% of PES jailed side branch patients ( P = 0.03), with numerically lower rates of MI (2.9% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.07) and TLR (3.9% vs. 10.3%, P = 0.17) in the EES group, with comparable rates of cardiac death (1.9% vs. 1.7%, P = 1.00). Conclusions: In this post‐hoc analysis of the SPIRIT III RCT, patients undergoing stenting of target lesions with jailed side branches with the thin strut and polymer XIENCE V EES compared to the thicker strut TAXUS PES had lower rates of MACE through 2 years due to fewer MIs and TLRs. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

AIMS:To examine the two year clinical outcomes in dual-vessel disease from the SPIRIT III trial comparing the XIENCE V(r) everolimus-eluting stent (EES) to the TAXUS Express2(tm) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES).METHODS AND RESULTS:From a total of 1,002 randomised subjects, 103 and 51 patients in the EES and PES groups respectively underwent stenting of two lesions in two vessels (one lesion per epicardial vessel). Two-year event rates were lower in one compared to two-vessel treated patients regardless of stent type. For EES vs. PES, major adverse cardiac events (MACE=cardiac death, MI or TLR) was clinically reduced 35.0% in the single vessel patients (6.5% vs. 9.6%, p=0.09) and was significantly reduced 64% in dual vessel patients (11.9% vs. 30.1%, p=0.006). There was no significant interaction between stent type (EES vs. PES) and the number of stented vessels (two vs. single) for either 2-year TVF and MACE (interaction p values were 0.69 and 0.16, respectively).CONCLUSIONS:In the SPIRIT III randomised trial, patients with both single and dual vessel treatment with EES showed improved clinical outcomes at two years compared to those treated with PES. Follow-up to five years is ongoing.

Objectives The purpose of this study was to investigate long-term 3-year clinical outcomes of an everolimus-eluting stent (EES) versus a paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES).Background Compared with PES, EES reduced target vessel failure and major adverse cardiac events at 2 years. Whether the benefits of EES are sustained at 3 years has not been reported.Methods In the SPIRIT II (A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) and SPIRIT III (A Clinical Evaluation of the Investigational Device XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] in the Treatment of Subjects With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) trials, 1,302 patients were randomly assigned to EES (n = 892) or PES (n = 410). We report the 3-year clinical follow-up of this patient-level pooled analysis.Results At 3 years, EES compared with PES resulted in a significant reduction in myocardial infarction (3.8% vs. 6.7%; relative risk [RR]: 0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 to 0.94; p = 0.04), and target lesion revascularization (6.8% vs. 12.7%; RR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37 to 0.77; p = 0.001). Everolimus-eluting stents resulted in a significant reduction in target vessel failure (13.7% vs. 19.5%; RR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.54 to 0.92; p = 0.01), and major adverse cardiac events (9.1% vs. 16.3%; RR: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.41 to 0.76; p = 0.0004). The cumulative rates of Academic Research Consortium-defined definite or probable stent thrombosis were 1.2% in EES patients and 1.9% in PES patients (RR: 0.64; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.68; p = 0.43).Conclusions In this patient-level pooled analysis, EES compared with PES resulted in a significant and persistent reduction in target vessel failure and major adverse cardiac events at 3 years due to fewer myocardial infarction and ischemic target lesion revascularization events, which is consistent with superior safety and efficacy of the EES platform. (A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [SPIRIT III; NCT00180310) (SPIRIT III: A Clinical Evaluation of the Investigational Device XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] in the Treatment of Subjects With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [SPIRIT III]; NCT00180479) (J Am Coll Cardiol Intv 2010;3:1220-8) (C) 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

Objectives We compared the safety and efficacy of the XIENCE V (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with the TAXUS Express (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) among the large cohort of randomized diabetic patients enrolled in the SPIRIT IV (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System) trial.Background Diabetes mellitus remains a significant predictor of adverse clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents, and the comparative outcomes of different drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients remains ill-defined.Methods In the SPIRIT IV trial, 3,687 patients with up to 3 de novo native coronary artery lesions were prospectively randomized 2: 1 to receive EES or PES. Randomization was stratified by the presence of diabetes and lesion complexity. The primary end point was the occurrence of target lesion failure (TLF) (cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization) at 1 year. Clinical outcomes were evaluated in randomized diabetic (n = 1,185 [786 EES; 399 PES]) and nondiabetic patients (n = 2,498 [1,669 EES; 829 PES]).Results The EES compared with PES reduced TLF in nondiabetic patients (3.1% vs. 6.7%, p < 0.0001), with significant reductions in myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target lesion revascularization. In contrast, no difference in TLF (6.4% vs. 6.9%, respectively, p = 0.80) or any of its components was present among diabetic patients, regardless of insulin use. A significant interaction between the presence of diabetes and stent type on TLF (p(interaction) = 0.02) was observed.Conclusions In the SPIRIT IV randomized trial, EES compared with PES provided similar clinical outcomes in diabetic patients and superior clinical outcomes in nondiabetic patients at 1 year. (SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial: Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00307047) (J Am Coll Cardiol 2010;56:2084-9) (C) 2010 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation

We evaluated outcomes following XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent (EES) compared with the Taxus Express(2) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients undergoing multilesion and multivessel intervention.The optimal revascularization strategy for patients with multivessel disease is unknown.The SPIRIT III (A Clinical Evaluation of the Investigational Device XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] in the Treatment of Subjects With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) (n = 1,002) and SPIRIT IV (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions) (n = 3,690) trials enrolled patients with de novo lesions ≤ 28 mm in length and reference vessel diameter of 2.5 to 3.75 mm. The SPIRIT III trial enrolled patients with a single lesion in 1 or 2 coronary arteries, and the SPIRIT IV trial enrolled patients with up to 2 lesions in 3 different vessels (maximum 2 lesions per vessel). In both trials, patients were randomized 2:1 to EES vs. PES. Clinical outcomes to 1 year were analyzed in patients with single (n = 3,823) versus multiple (n = 765) treated vessels, and in those with single (n = 3,536) versus multiple (n = 1,052) treated lesions.Among patients with multivessel disease, EES compared with PES resulted in reduced rates of target vessel myocardial infarction (2.2% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.007) and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (4.2% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.04). Among patients undergoing multilesion stenting, EES compared with PES resulted in reduced rates of target vessel myocardial infarction (2.1% vs. 5.4%, p = 0.008) and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (3.7% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.01). The absolute benefits of EES versus PES in patients undergoing multivessel or multilesion intervention were greater than in those undergoing single-lesion, single-vessel intervention.The EES compared with PES provided significant improvements in clinical safety and efficacy outcomes. The absolute benefit provided by EES versus PES appears to be proportional to the complexity of coronary disease.