Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 6/2022

Open Access 10-09-2021 | Acute Coronary Syndrome | Original Article

Comparison of a Bioresorbable, Magnesium-Based Sirolimus-Eluting Stent with a Permanent, Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent for Treating Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: the PRAGUE-22 Study

Authors: Petr Toušek, Tomáš Lazarák, Ivo Varvařovský, Markéta Nováčková, Marek Neuberg, Viktor Kočka

Published in: Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy | Issue 6/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Magnesium-based bioresorbable Magmaris stents are rapidly resorbed. Few randomized studies have evaluated the efficacy of such stents in patients with acute coronary syndrome.

Aim

To investigate late lumen loss as assessed via quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) and optical coherence tomography (OCT) in patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with Magmaris stents or permanent, everolimus-eluting metallic Xience stents.

Methods and Results

This PRAGUE-22 study was a two-centre, investigator-initiated, randomized study. Fifty patients were randomized based on the inclusion criteria for acute coronary syndrome and the anatomical suitability to receive Magmaris or Xience stents. The patient characteristics did not differ between the Magmaris group (n = 25) and Xience group (n = 25). The mean ages were 57.0 ± 10.5 vs. 55.5 ± 9.2 years (p = 0.541) and the total implanted stent length was 24.6 ± 10.7 mm vs. 27.6 ± 11.1 mm (p = 0.368), respectively. Four clinical events occurred in the Magmaris group and one in the Xience group during 12 months of follow-up. The extent of late lumen loss (assessed via QCA) at 12 months was greater in the Magmaris group than in the Xience group (0.54 ± 0.70 vs. 0.11 ± 0.37 mm; p = 0.029). The late lumen loss diameter (measured via OCT) in the Magmaris group was also significantly larger than that in the Xience group (0.59 ± 0.37 vs. 0.22 ± 0.20 mm; p = 0.01).

Conclusion

Implantation of a magnesium-based bioresorbable stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome is associated with a greater extent of late lumen loss at the 12-month follow-up compared with implantation of a permanent, everolimus-eluting metallic stent.
Trial Registration: ISRCTN89434356
Literature
1.
go back to reference Ali ZA, Gao R, Kimura T, et al. Three-year outcomes with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold: individual-patient-data meta-analysis from the ABSORB randomized trials. Circulation. 2018;137(5):464–79.CrossRefPubMed Ali ZA, Gao R, Kimura T, et al. Three-year outcomes with the Absorb bioresorbable scaffold: individual-patient-data meta-analysis from the ABSORB randomized trials. Circulation. 2018;137(5):464–79.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Smits PC, Chang CC, Chevalier B, et al. Bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus metallic drug-eluting stent in patients at high risk of restenosis: The COMPARE-ABSORB randomised clinical trial. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(8):645–53.CrossRefPubMed Smits PC, Chang CC, Chevalier B, et al. Bioresorbable vascular scaffold versus metallic drug-eluting stent in patients at high risk of restenosis: The COMPARE-ABSORB randomised clinical trial. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(8):645–53.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Brugaletta S, Gori T, Tousek P, et al. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 5-year results of the BVS-EXAMINATION study. EuroIntervention. 2020;15(16):1436–43.CrossRefPubMed Brugaletta S, Gori T, Tousek P, et al. Bioresorbable vascular scaffolds versus everolimus-eluting metallic stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: 5-year results of the BVS-EXAMINATION study. EuroIntervention. 2020;15(16):1436–43.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Tousek P, Kocka V, Maly M, et al. Long-term follow-up after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in STEMI patients: PRAGUE-19 study update. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(1):23–9.CrossRefPubMed Tousek P, Kocka V, Maly M, et al. Long-term follow-up after bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in STEMI patients: PRAGUE-19 study update. EuroIntervention. 2016;12(1):23–9.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Kocka V, Tousek P, Kozel M, et al. Bioresorbable scaffold implantation in STEMI patients: 5 years imaging subanalysis of PRAGUE-19 study. J Transl Med. 2020;18(1):33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kocka V, Tousek P, Kozel M, et al. Bioresorbable scaffold implantation in STEMI patients: 5 years imaging subanalysis of PRAGUE-19 study. J Transl Med. 2020;18(1):33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
6.
go back to reference Verheye S, Wlodarczak A, Montorsi P, et al. BIOSOLVE-IV-registry: safety and performance of the Magmaris scaffold: 12-month outcomes of the first cohort of 1,075 patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;98(1):E1–8.CrossRefPubMed Verheye S, Wlodarczak A, Montorsi P, et al. BIOSOLVE-IV-registry: safety and performance of the Magmaris scaffold: 12-month outcomes of the first cohort of 1,075 patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;98(1):E1–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Haude M, Ince H, Kische S, et al. Sustained safety and performance of the second-generation sirolimus-eluting absorbable metal scaffold: pooled outcomes of the BIOSOLVE-II and -III trials at 3 years. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020;21(9):1150–4.CrossRefPubMed Haude M, Ince H, Kische S, et al. Sustained safety and performance of the second-generation sirolimus-eluting absorbable metal scaffold: pooled outcomes of the BIOSOLVE-II and -III trials at 3 years. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2020;21(9):1150–4.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Sabate M, Alfonso F, Cequier A, et al. Magnesium-based resorbable scaffold versus permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the MAGSTEMI Randomized Clinical Trial. Circulation. 2019;140(23):1904–16.CrossRefPubMed Sabate M, Alfonso F, Cequier A, et al. Magnesium-based resorbable scaffold versus permanent metallic sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the MAGSTEMI Randomized Clinical Trial. Circulation. 2019;140(23):1904–16.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Gomez-Lara J, Ortega-Paz L, Brugaletta S, et al. Bioresorbable scaffolds versus permanent sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: vascular healing outcomes from the MAGSTEMI trial. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(11):e913–21.CrossRefPubMed Gomez-Lara J, Ortega-Paz L, Brugaletta S, et al. Bioresorbable scaffolds versus permanent sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: vascular healing outcomes from the MAGSTEMI trial. EuroIntervention. 2020;16(11):e913–21.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Ortega-Paz L, Brugaletta B, Gomez-Lara J, et al. Target lesion revascularisation of bioresorbable metal scaffolds: a case series study and literature review. EuroIntervention. 2021;16(13):1100–3.CrossRefPubMed Ortega-Paz L, Brugaletta B, Gomez-Lara J, et al. Target lesion revascularisation of bioresorbable metal scaffolds: a case series study and literature review. EuroIntervention. 2021;16(13):1100–3.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Cerrato E, Barbero U, Gil Romero JA, et al. Magmaris resorbable magnesium scaffold: state-of-art review. Future Cardiol. 2019;15(4):267–79.CrossRefPubMed Cerrato E, Barbero U, Gil Romero JA, et al. Magmaris resorbable magnesium scaffold: state-of-art review. Future Cardiol. 2019;15(4):267–79.CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Schmidt W, Behrens P, Brandt-Wunderlich C, et al. In vitro performance investigation of bioresorbable scaffolds - standard tests for vascular stents and beyond. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016;17(6):375–83.CrossRefPubMed Schmidt W, Behrens P, Brandt-Wunderlich C, et al. In vitro performance investigation of bioresorbable scaffolds - standard tests for vascular stents and beyond. Cardiovasc Revasc Med. 2016;17(6):375–83.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Neumann F-J, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(2):87–165.CrossRefPubMed Neumann F-J, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2019;40(2):87–165.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Ielasi A, Cerrato E, Geraci S, et al. Sirolimus-eluting magnesium resorbable scaffold implantation in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Cardiology. 2019;142(2):93–6.CrossRefPubMed Ielasi A, Cerrato E, Geraci S, et al. Sirolimus-eluting magnesium resorbable scaffold implantation in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Cardiology. 2019;142(2):93–6.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Wlodarczak A, Lanocha M, Jastrzebski A, et al. Early outcome of magnesium bioresorbable scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndrome-the initial report from the Magmaris-ACS registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(5):E287–92.CrossRefPubMed Wlodarczak A, Lanocha M, Jastrzebski A, et al. Early outcome of magnesium bioresorbable scaffold implantation in acute coronary syndrome-the initial report from the Magmaris-ACS registry. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019;93(5):E287–92.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Comparison of a Bioresorbable, Magnesium-Based Sirolimus-Eluting Stent with a Permanent, Everolimus-Eluting Metallic Stent for Treating Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: the PRAGUE-22 Study
Authors
Petr Toušek
Tomáš Lazarák
Ivo Varvařovský
Markéta Nováčková
Marek Neuberg
Viktor Kočka
Publication date
10-09-2021
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy / Issue 6/2022
Print ISSN: 0920-3206
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10557-021-07258-z

Other articles of this Issue 6/2022

Cardiovascular Drugs and Therapy 6/2022 Go to the issue