SummaryBackgroundRemote ischaemic conditioning with transient ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm has been shown to reduce myocardial infarct size in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI). We investigated whether remote ischaemic conditioning could reduce the incidence of cardiac death and hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months.MethodsWe did an international investigator-initiated, prospective, single-blind, randomised controlled trial (CONDI-2/ERIC-PPCI) at 33 centres across the UK, Denmark, Spain, and Serbia. Patients (age >18 years) with suspected STEMI and who were eligible for PPCI were randomly allocated (1:1, stratified by centre with a permuted block method) to receive standard treatment (including a sham simulated remote ischaemic conditioning intervention at UK sites only) or remote ischaemic conditioning treatment (intermittent ischaemia and reperfusion applied to the arm through four cycles of 5-min inflation and 5-min deflation of an automated cuff device) before PPCI. Investigators responsible for data collection and outcome assessment were masked to treatment allocation. The primary combined endpoint was cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure at 12 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02342522) and is completed.FindingsBetween Nov 6, 2013, and March 31, 2018, 5401 patients were randomly allocated to either the control group (n=2701) or the remote ischaemic conditioning group (n=2700). After exclusion of patients upon hospital arrival or loss to follow-up, 2569 patients in the control group and 2546 in the intervention group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. At 12 months post-PPCI, the Kaplan-Meier-estimated frequencies of cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure (the primary endpoint) were 220 (8·6%) patients in the control group and 239 (9·4%) in the remote ischaemic conditioning group (hazard ratio 1·10 [95% CI 0·91–1·32], p=0·32 for intervention versus control). No important unexpected adverse events or side effects of remote ischaemic conditioning were observed.InterpretationRemote ischaemic conditioning does not improve clinical outcomes (cardiac death or hospitalisation for heart failure) at 12 months in patients with STEMI undergoing PPCI.FundingBritish Heart Foundation, University College London Hospitals/University College London Biomedical Research Centre, Danish Innovation Foundation, Novo Nordisk Foundation, TrygFonden.

BACKGROUNDSubclinical leaflet thickening and reduced leaflet motion of bioprosthetic aortic valves have been documented by four-dimensional computed tomography (CT). Whether anticoagulation can reduce these phenomena after transcatheter aortic-valve replacement (TAVR) is not known. METHODSIn a substudy of a large randomized trial, we randomly assigned patients who had undergone successful TAVR and who did not have an indication for long-term anticoagulation to a rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic strategy (rivaroxaban [10 mg] plus aspirin [75 to 100 mg] once daily) or an antiplatelet-based strategy (clopidogrel [75 mg] plus aspirin [75 to 100 mg] once daily). Patients underwent evaluation by four-dimensional CT at a mean (±SD) of 90±15 days after randomization. The primary end point was the percentage of patients with at least one prosthetic valve leaflet with grade 3 or higher motion reduction (i.e., involving >50% of the leaflet). Leaflet thickening was also assessed. RESULTSA total of 231 patients were enrolled. At least one prosthetic valve leaflet with grade 3 or higher motion reduction was found in 2 of 97 patients (2.1%) who had scans that could be evaluated in the rivaroxaban group, as compared with 11 of 101 (10.9%) in the antiplatelet group (difference, −8.8 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −16.5 to −1.9; P = 0.01). Thickening of at least one leaflet was observed in 12 of 97 patients (12.4%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 33 of 102 (32.4%) in the antiplatelet group (difference, −20.0 percentage points; 95% CI, −30.9 to −8.5). In the main trial, the risk of death or thromboembolic events and the risk of life-threatening, disabling, or major bleeding were higher with rivaroxaban (hazard ratios of 1.35 and 1.50, respectively). CONCLUSIONSIn a substudy of a trial involving patients without an indication for long-term anticoagulation who had undergone successful TAVR, a rivaroxaban-based antithrombotic strategy was more effective than an antiplatelet-based strategy in preventing subclinical leafletmotion abnormalities. However, in the main trial, the rivaroxaban-based strategy was associated with a higher risk of death or thromboembolic complications and a higher risk of bleeding than the antiplatelet-based strategy. (Funded by Bayer; GALILEO-4D ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02833948.

No abstract

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01435408.

I n percutaneous coronary interventions, drug-eluting stents (DESs) have reduced the risk of restenosis and repeat revascularization compared with bare-metal stents.1-3 The secondgeneration DESs with thinner stent struts 4,5 have improved safety and efficacy compared with the first-generation DESs [6][7][8] and has been associated with a reduced risk of late stent thrombosis. 6,8,9 The persistence of polymer material on first-and second-generation DESs after completion of drug release has been Background-Coronary drug-eluting stents with biodegradable polymers have been designed to improve safety and efficacy. Methods and Results-The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome (SORT OUT)VII trial-a large-scale registry-based randomized, multicenter, single-blind, 2-arm, noninferiority trial-compared 2 biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents: the thin-strut cobalt-chromium sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent and the stainless steel biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in an all-comer patient population. The primary end point target lesion failure was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (not related to other than index lesion), or target lesion revascularization within 1 year, analyzed by intention to treat (noninferiority margin of 3.0%). Clinically driven event detection based on Danish registries was used. A total of 1261 patients were assigned to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent (1590 lesions) and 1264 patients to the biolimus-eluting stent (1588 lesions). At 1 year, the composite end point target lesion failure occurred in 48 patients (3.8%) in the sirolimus-eluting group and in 58 patients (4.6%) in the biolimus-eluting group (absolute risk difference, −0.78% [upper limit of 1-sided 95% confidence interval, 0.61%]; P<0.0001). Rates of definite stent thrombosis occurred in 5 (0.4%) of the sirolimus-eluting group compared with 15 (1.2%) biolimus-eluting stent-treated patients (rate ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.92; P=0.034), which largely was attributable to a lower risk of subacute definite stent thrombosis: 0.1% versus 0.6% (rate ratio, 0.12; 95% confidence interval, 0.02-1.00; P=0.05). Conclusions-The thin-strut sirolimus-eluting Orsiro stent was noninferior to the biolimus-eluting Nobori stent in unselected patients for target lesion failure at 1 year. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01879358.(Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:e003610.