Up Next
-
5m 9s
-
7m 18sPart 2 | Session 11 EuroPCR 22: Balloon Vs Self-Expanding Valves in Valve-in-Valve TAVI
-
5m 52sPart 2 | Session 12 EuroPCR 22: MitraClip in Atrial Functional Mitral Regurgitation
-
2m 15sPart 2 | Session 13 EuroPCR 22: SCB with Micro-Reservoir Technology in Coronary Lesions
-
4m 46sPart 2 | Session 14 EuroPCR 22: FORWARD PRO Study Shows No Durability Issues After 3 Years
-
4m 25sPart 2 | Session 15 EuroPCR 22: DEB & DES in the Treatment of Diffuse CAD
-
3m 16sPart 2 | Session 16 EuroPCR 22: EASTBOURNE Registry indicates Satefy of Sirolimus-Coated Balloon
-
4m 27sPart 2 | Session 17 EuroPCR 22: JenaValve TAVR System for the Treatment of Aortic Regurgitation
-
7m 7sPart 2 | Session 18 EuroPCR 22: Transcatheter Tricuspid Valve Repair with PASCAL System
-
6m 53s
-
20m 24sPart 1 | Session 1 EuroPCR 22 Late-breaking Science Preview
-
27m 14sPart 1 | Session 2 EuroPCR 22 Late-breaking Science Wrap-Up
-
3m 28sPart 2 | Session 1 EuroPCR 22: AQVA Study Shows Superiority in QFR-Based Virtual PCI Arm
-
5m 10s
-
7m 50s
-
5m 56s
-
3m 34sPart 2 | Session 5 EuroPCR 22: CRUZ-HBR Indicates Use Of Supraflux™ Cruz Stent Is Favourable
-
4m 49s
-
3m 53sPart 2 | Session 7 EuroPCR 22: Short-Term Clinical Outcomes of ACURATE neo2™
-
4m 20s
Overview
Our regular review series View from the Thoraxcenter hosted by Prof Nicolas Van Mieghem and Dr Joost Daemen (Thoraxcentre, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, NL) provide a concise analysis of the late-breaking science trials and spotlight questions that could change treatment strategies in interventional cardiology.
Short, accessible Expert Interviews will be available with select faculty focusing on the results, applicability, and impact on future research.
More from this programme
Part 1
View from the Thoraxcenter
Part 2
Expert Interviews
Faculty Biographies
Transcript
- My name is Michael Maeng. I'm an Interventional Cardiologist at Aarhus University Hospital, in Denmark. And I'm here to talk about the SORT-OUT VIII trial, with five years follow up.
Aim of This Study
The aim of the study is to compare two drug-eluting stents which both have bioabsorbable polymers. The first one is the synergy stent which is an everolimus eluting, drug-eluting stent. And the other one is the BioMatrix NeoFlex stent which eludes biolimus.
Study Design and Patient Population
The study design is an all-comer trial. It means that there were very few exclusion and inclusion criteria. Basically, we included all patients who were going to have a stent and who we thought would survive the first year. So we included two thousand seven hundred and sixty four patients, and they were randomised one to one to these two drug-eluting stents.
Key Findings
The key findings the study is that in synergy everolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the biolimus-eluting BioMatrix Neoflex stent at five years follow up. And importantly a key secondary endpoint was very late stent thrombosis and we saw very few events at one to five year follow up for both stent types.
Take-Home Messages
The take home message from this study is that both stent types that we examine in this study had very good results and the two stents were non-inferior to each other. So both stents can be used in our daily clinic practice and have very low rates of very late events, especially very late stent thrombosis.
Further Research Required and Next Steps
The future in, in this field is to make sure that the new stent types that comes out also have very low low rates of very late events and and have good results also in the long term. But I think another component in the future is to examine if these stents can also have very good results with lower time periods with dual antiplatelet therapy, like can we reduce the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy to six months or three months in, in with these stent types that will be the future questions.
Aim of This Study
The aim of the study is to compare two drug-eluting stents which both have bioabsorbable polymers. The first one is the synergy stent which is an everolimus eluting, drug-eluting stent. And the other one is the BioMatrix NeoFlex stent which eludes biolimus.
Study Design and Patient Population
The study design is an all-comer trial. It means that there were very few exclusion and inclusion criteria. Basically, we included all patients who were going to have a stent and who we thought would survive the first year. So we included two thousand seven hundred and sixty four patients, and they were randomised one to one to these two drug-eluting stents.
Key Findings
The key findings the study is that in synergy everolimus-eluting stent was non-inferior to the biolimus-eluting BioMatrix Neoflex stent at five years follow up. And importantly a key secondary endpoint was very late stent thrombosis and we saw very few events at one to five year follow up for both stent types.
Take-Home Messages
The take home message from this study is that both stent types that we examine in this study had very good results and the two stents were non-inferior to each other. So both stents can be used in our daily clinic practice and have very low rates of very late events, especially very late stent thrombosis.
Further Research Required and Next Steps
The future in, in this field is to make sure that the new stent types that comes out also have very low low rates of very late events and and have good results also in the long term. But I think another component in the future is to examine if these stents can also have very good results with lower time periods with dual antiplatelet therapy, like can we reduce the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy to six months or three months in, in with these stent types that will be the future questions.