Use of drug‐eluting stents for chronic total occlusions: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Aim: To perform a systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies reporting outcomes after drug‐eluting stent (DES) implantation in chronic total occlusions (CTOs). Methods: A review of publications and online databases in January 2010 retrieved 17 published studies that reported outcomes after DES implantation in CTOs: eight uncontrolled studies, seven nonrandomized comparative studies with bare‐metal stents (BMS), one post‐hoc analysis of a randomized trial, and one randomized trial. Data were pooled using random‐effects meta‐analysis models. Results: All published studies evaluated sirolimus‐ or paclitaxel‐eluting stents. All studies reporting comparative angiographic outcomes revealed less binary angiographic restenosis with DES implantation compared to BMS (odds ratio: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.08, 0.26). Over a mean follow‐up period of 18.9 ± 16.5 months, the cumulative incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis was similar between DES and BMS in all studies. Target lesion revascularization (odds ratio: 0.13, 95% CI: 0.06, 0.26) and target vessel revascularization (odds ratio 0.18, 95% CI: 0.11, 0.31) at 6–12 months were consistently lower among DES‐treated patients. Similar patterns of safety and efficacy event rates were also observed in studies reporting >12 month outcomes. Conclusions: Compared with BMS, treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions with DES is associated with significant reductions in angiographic and clinical restenosis with similar safety. The consistency and magnitude of treatment effect across both individual trials and the pooled analysis establish DES as the preferred therapy for percutaneous revascularization of CTOs. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Rotational atherectomy for fibro‐calcific coronary artery disease in drug eluting stent era: Procedural outcomes and angiographic follow‐up results

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine the binary re‐stenosis rates, procedural success, and in hospital outcomes following treatment of fibro‐calcified coronary lesion with rotational atherectomy in drug eluting stent era. Background: Binary restenosis rates have remained high with the use of bare metal stents following rotational atherectomy in calcified lesions. There is limited data available following rotational atherectomy in drug eluting stent era. Methods: We evaluated the procedural and angiographic outcomes following a consecutive series of 516 procedures treated with rotational atherectomy followed by stenting. We compared the results between Rota + Drug eluting stent (DES) and Rota + bare metal stent (BMS) groups. Results: Procedural success was achieved in 97.1% of the lesions with overall low in hospital adverse events (death in 1.1%, Q MI in 1.3%, Non Q MI in 5.3%, and urgent repeat PCI in 0.4%). There was significant reduction in the binary restenosis rates following Rota + DES use as compared to Rota + BMS use (11% vs. 28.1%, P < 0.001; OR = 3.17, 95% CI: 1.76–5.93) and similar reduction was seen in the target lesion revascularization (10.6% vs. 25%, P = 0.001; OR = 2.81, 95% CI: 1.53–5.14). We have identified ostial lesions, chronic total occlusion lesions, and use of bare metal stents as independent predictors of restenosis in this group of patients. Conclusions: Rotational atherectomy can be performed with high success rates and low complications, and rotational atherectomy followed by drug eluting stent implantation significantly reduces binary restenosis rates in fibrocalcific lesions as compared to rotational atherectomy and bare metal stents. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Review of randomized clinical trials of drug-eluting stents for the prevention of in-stent restenosis

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have shown significant promise at reducing rates of restenosis and subsequent revascularization compared with bare metal stents (BMSs). The purpose of this report is to provide a systematic review of the randomized clinical trials that have evaluated the efficacy and safety of DESs. A total of 28 randomized clinical trials were identified: 21 comparing a DES (sirolimus, paclitaxel, ABT-578, actinomycin, everolimus, or 7-hexanoyltaxol) with a BMS and 7 comparing a DES with another DES (sirolimus vs paclitaxel). Early sirolimus and polymeric paclitaxel studies in low-risk populations demonstrated marked reductions in restenosis according to angiographic and clinical parameters, compared with BMSs. These promising findings led to the more recent evaluations of DESs in higher risk patients in controlled and head-to-head comparisons. In these subsequent trials, sirolimus and paclitaxel DESs continued to exceed the therapeutic potential of BMSs, with a slight but consistent angiographic advantage being observed with the sirolimus DESs.     

Comparison of drug-eluting versus bare metal stents on later frequency of acute myocardial infarction and death

In clinical trials of highly selected patients, drug-eluting stents (DESs) decreased restenosis but not the rate of acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or death. Whether DES use has an affect on the rate of AMI or death in unselected patients is uncertain. Bare metal stents (BMSs) were placed in 1,164 consecutive patients in the year before the introduction of DESs. DESs were subsequently placed in 1,285 consecutive comparable patients at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center. Early and late clinical outcomes were compared. Propensity score analysis was used to adjust outcomes for baseline differences. Patient and procedural characteristics of the 2 groups were similar, with an overall incidence of 72% for acute coronary syndromes (p = NS). At 9 months, target vessel revascularization (2.8% vs 8.6%, p <0.001), AMI (3.7% vs 4.7%, p = 0.257), and death (4.9% vs 7.1%, p = 0.030) were lower in the DES group than in the BMS group. Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios for DES versus BMS at 9 months were 0.71 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 1.19) for AMI, 0.56 (95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.87) for death, and 0.60 (95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.86) for the combined end point of AMI or death. In conclusion, in this single-center observational study, use of DESs in consecutive unselected patients, most of whom would not have been eligible for inclusion in the randomized trials of DES versus BMS, was associated with lower AMI and death rates than in a comparable group of patients treated with BMSs in mid-term (9-month) follow-up.     

Meta-analysis of randomized trials of drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for restenosis in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting stents (DESs) with bare metal stents (BMSs) showed a marked decrease in in-stent restenosis and target lesion revascularization with DESs in the total patient population enrolled in the studies, including patients with diabetes. However, it remains unclear whether the antirestenotic benefit of DESs is preserved in the high-risk diabetic subgroup. MEDLINE, EMBASE, ISI Web of Knowledge, Current Contents, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, and recent Scientific Sessions databases were searched to identify relevant clinical trials comparing DESs with BMSs. A randomized controlled trial was included if it provided outcome data for patients with diabetes for > or =1 of the following: late lumen loss, in-stent restenosis, or target lesion revascularization. Data were combined using fixed-effects models, and standard tests for heterogeneity were performed. Eight studies with 1,520 patients with diabetes were identified that reported > or =1 outcome of interest. Mean late lumen losses (7 studies) were 0.93 mm (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.510 to 1.348) with BMSs and 0.18 mm (95% CI -0.088 to +0.446) with DESs. For patients receiving a DES, this translated into a marked decrease in in-stent restenosis (7 studies, RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.22, p <0.001) and target lesion revascularization (8 studies, RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.45, p <0.001). DES use is associated with a marked decrease in in-stent restenosis and target lesion revascularization in patients with diabetes. In conclusion, the analysis supports the current widespread use of DESs in these high-risk patients.     

Drug-eluting stent-supported percutaneous coronary intervention for chronic total coronary occlusion.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to determine the clinical and angiographic outcomes after drug-eluting stent (DES)-supported percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO). BACKGROUND: There are few data about the efficacy of DES-supported PCI for CTO. METHODS: All consecutive patients who had a sirolimus-eluting stent or a paclitaxel-eluting stent implanted for CTO from December 2003 to December 2004 were analyzed. Clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients treated with DES were compared with a case-matched control group of patients treated with bare metal stents (BMS) in the 12 months before the routine use of DES. RESULTS: Successful DES-supported PCI was performed in 92 patients and 104 CTO. The case-matched control group consisted of 26 patients and 27 CTO successfully treated with BMS. There were no differences between groups in baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Stent length in the DES group was higher as compared with that of BMS group (51+/-28 mm vs. 40+/-19 mm, P=0.073). The 6-month major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate was lower in the DES group as compared with that of BMS group (9.8% vs. 23%, P=0.072). The angiographic follow-rate was 80% in the DES group and 81% in the BMS group. The 6-month restenosis rate was 19% in the DES group and 45% in the BMS group (P<0.001). By multivariate analysis, it was found that in the DES group, the only predictors of restenosis were stented segment length (OR 1.031, 95% CI 1.01-1.06, P=0.009) and a target vessel reference diameter<2.5 mm (OR 6.48, 95% CI 1.51-27.83, P=0.012), while the only predictor of MACE was stent length (OR 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08, P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: DES implantation for CTO decreases the risk of mid-term restenosis and MACE. Small vessels and diffuse disease requiring the implantation of multiple stents and very long stents for full coverage of the target lesion are still associated with a relatively high risk of restenosis.     

Outcomes of Optimised Implantation Technique with Bioresorbable scaffolds: A Pooled Analysis of ABSORB-IV and COMPARE-ABSORB Trials

Randomised trials have demonstrated higher midterm rates of adverse events and device thrombosis with Absorb-BVS compared to contemporary drug-eluting-stents (DES). BVS failure was ascribed to the implantation technique and consequently two large randomised trials evaluated the clinical impact of an optimised scaffold-implant-procedure. However, pooling together data from ABSORB-IV and those of the COMPARE-ABSORB, the scaffold was still associated with a statistically significant increased risk of target-vessel myocardial-infarction (OR 1.5; 95% CI 1.04–2.17; P = 0.03) and thrombotic events (OR 2.85; 95% CI 1.33–6.11; P = 0.007) at 1-year. Such kind of results could be in part attributed to a lower radial force and the higher acute recoil of the BVS as observed in previous studies. Besides a painstaking implantation technique, future generations of bioresorbable stents should incorporate an excellent mechanical propriety in order to compete with the current-generation DES.     

Outcomes with Drug-Coated Balloons in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Diabetic Patients

BackgroundPercutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) remains associated with inferior clinical outcomes and an increased risk of restenosis compared with non-diabetics even in the era of drug-eluting stents (DES). The outcomes with drug-coated balloons (DCBs) in diabetic patients have received limited study.MethodsWe performed a meta-analysis of all studies published between January 2000 and January 2019 reporting the outcomes with DCB vs. DES after PCI of de-novo coronary lesions in diabetic patients. Outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), binary restenosis by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA), and late lumen loss (LLL).ResultsThree studies with 378 patients (440 lesions) were included in the meta-analysis. During 17.3 ± 11.3 months follow-up, DCB were associated with a similar risk of MACE (OR: 0.63, 95% CI [0.36, 1.12], p = 0.11), TLR (OR: 0.51, 95% CI [0.25, 1.06] p = 0.07), binary restenosis (OR: 0.42, 95% CI [0.09, 1.92], p = 0.26), and LLL (mean difference: −0.13 mm, 95% CI [−0.41, 0.14], p = 0.34) compared with DES.ConclusionIn diabetic patients with de-novo coronary lesions undergoing PCI, DCBs are associated with similar outcomes compared with first-generation DES, with a signal toward potential benefit in lowering target lesion revascularization. Further randomized studies are needed to compare the newer-generation DCBs and DES in this setting.     

Current status of drug-eluting stents and drug-eluting balloons in patients with stable coronary artery disease--an expert consensus document of the Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions and Polish Cardiac Society

Despite a dramatic reduction in restenosis and target vessel revascularisation rates by drug eluting stents (DES), conflicting concerns have been raised over the risk for late DES thrombosis when compared to bare metal stents. Certainly, the heterogeneity of DES results from the introduction of a great variety of new DES types with diverse efficacy and safety parameters. Furthermore, we observe a steady increase in DES availability without parallel and robust data from randomised clinical trials. Thus, the postulated class effect of DES should be regarded as non-obligatory. This article is based on 110 randomised DES trials performed on 72 305 patients. Current status of DES and guidelines for DES implantation in various clinical scenarios were discussed.     

Predictors of restenosis after placement of drug-eluting stents in one or more coronary arteries

Although drug-eluting stents (DESs) have been increasingly used in a wide variety of clinical and anatomic situations, limited data are available regarding the predictors of DES failure in unselected lesions. We investigated the incidence and predictors of restenosis after implantation of DESs in routine clinical practice. A total of 1,795 consecutive patients underwent successful implantation of sirolimus-eluting (1,374 patients, 1,788 lesions) or paclitaxel-eluting (421 patients, 517 lesions) stents. Of the 1,743 eligible patients (2,221 lesions), follow-up angiography at 6 months was obtained for 1,228 patients (70.5%, 1,577 lesions). All data were prospectively recorded and analyzed to predict the occurrence of restenosis, defined as a diameter stenosis of > or =50%. Restenosis was documented in 125 patients with 138 lesions (8.8%), and target lesion revascularization was required in 70 patients with 82 lesions (5.2%). The pattern of restenosis was 85 focal (62%), 29 diffuse (21%), 11 diffuse proliferative (8%), and 13 total (9%). Lesion length, stent length, postintervention minimal lumen diameter, preintervention minimal lumen diameter, reference artery size, complex lesions, and use of a paclitaxel-eluting stent were univariate predictors of restenosis. Multivariate analysis showed that the use of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (odds ratio [OR] 4.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.90 to 6.58, p <0.001), postintervention minimal lumen diameter (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.20 to 0.50, p <0.001), and lesion length (OR 1.02, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04, p <0.001) were independent predictors of restenosis. In conclusion, the rate of restenosis after DES implantation in routine clinical practice was similar to the rate reported in clinical trials, confirming the efficacy of DES in routine clinical practice.     

Drug-eluting stents vs. intracoronary brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis

Background:

It has been reported that drug‐eluting stents (DES) were superior to intracoronary brachytherapy (ICBT) in patients with in‐stent restenosis (ISR). However, it is unknown whether there might be differences between DES and ICBT in terms of efficacy and safety in large sample size and long‐term follow‐up.

Hypothesis:

The aim of this study was to determine whether DES implantation remains favorable in large sample size and long‐term follow‐up when compared with ICBT among patients with ISR.

Methods:

We conducted a search in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials without language restrictions. A meta‐analysis of 1942 cases from 12 controlled trials of DES vs ICBT for ISR was performed.

Results:

Drug‐eluting stents were significantly more effective in reducing target‐vessel revascularization (TVR) (odds ratio [OR]: 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.23–0.81, P = 0.009) and binary restenosis (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.26–0.46, P<0.00001) compared with ICBT at midterm follow‐up. There were no significant differences between DES and ICBT in cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and late stent thrombosis at midterm follow‐up. A statistical significance has been found between the 2 groups in TVR (OR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.43–0.86, P = 0.005) at long‐term follow‐up. There were no significant differences in cardiac death and MI between the 2 groups at long‐term follow‐up.

Conclusions:

These findings provide evidence that DES is superior to ICBT for the treatment of ISR in TVR and binary restenosis reduction, but not in cardiac death, MI, and late stent thrombosis reduction. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Yong‐Guang Lu, MD, and Yan‐Mei Chen, MD, contributed equally to this work. The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.     

Meta-analysis of long-term outcomes for drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in primary percutaneous coronary interventions for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

The use of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has shown early benefit over bare-metal stents (BMSs) in decreasing adverse cardiac events. However, there are concerns regarding the increased risk of late and very late stent thrombosis (ST) after DES use. With the paucity of ST events individual trials may have been underpowered to detect significant differences. We sought to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the available literature examining the outcomes of DESs and BMSs in PPCI after ≥3 years of follow-up. We analyzed 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 5 observational studies comparing DESs to BMSs in PPCI. Clinical end-point data were analyzed for RCTs and observational studies separately using random-effect models. RCTs included 5,797 patients in whom first-generation DESs (sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) were compared to BMS control arms. Patients receiving DESs had a significantly lower risk of target lesion revascularization (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.61), target vessel revascularization (OR 0.53, CI 0.42 to 0.66), and accordingly major adverse cardiac events (OR 0.69; CI 0.56 to 0.84). Incidence of ST was not different between groups (OR 1.02, CI 0.76 to 1.37). There was no significant difference in mortality (OR 0.88, CI 0.68 to 1.12) or recurrent myocardial infarction (OR 0.97; CI 0.61 to 1.54). Among observational studies (n = 4,650) fewer studies reported on target lesion revascularization and target vessel revascularization, but the trend remained in favor of DESs. A small but statistically significant increase in ST was noted with DES use (OR 1.62, CI 1.18 to 2.21) at ≥3 years of follow up, without evidence of recurrent myocardial infarction. Those receiving DESs had a significantly lower mortality compared to those receiving BMSs (OR, 0.65, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.80, p <0.001). In conclusion, this meta-analysis of RCTs examining the long-term outcomes of first-generation DESs versus BMSs in PPCI, DES use resulted in decreased repeat revascularization with no increase in ST, mortality, or recurrent myocardial infarction.     

Meta-analysis of long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stent implantations for chronic total coronary occlusions

Background

In the treatment of chronic total occlusions (CTOs), some uncertainty exists regarding the effect of drug-eluting stents (DESs) compared with the effects of bare mental stents (BMSs). We reviewed outcomes of DES vs. BMS implantation for CTO lesions, to evaluate the risk-benefit ratio of DES implantation.

Methods

Relevant studies of long-term clinical outcomes or angiographic outcomes of both BMS and DES implantation were examined. The primary endpoint comprised major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including all-cause deaths, myocardial infarctions (MIs), and target lesion revascularizations (TLRs). A fixed-effect model and random-effect model were used to analyze the pooling results.

Results

Ten studies were included according to the selection criteria. Eight were nonrandomized controlled trials, and two consisted of a randomized controlled comparison between DES and BMS implantation. No significant difference was evident for in-hospital MACE rates between the two groups (odds ratio [OR], 1.07; 95% confidence interval [CI], .53 to 2.13), but the long-term MACE rates in the DES group were significantly lower than in the BMS group (OR, .22; 95% CI, .13 to .38; P < .00001). The rates of stent restenosis and reocclusions were also significantly lower in the DES group (OR, .14; 95% CI, .09 to .20; and OR, .23; 95% CI, .12 to .41, respectively).

Conclusion

Implantation of the DES improves long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with BMS in the treatment of CTO lesions.     

Drug-eluting stents: a critique

Despite advances in the design of balloons and stents, restenosis remains a major drawback of coronary angioplasty. Multiple randomised trials have demonstrated that drug-eluting stents (DES) can significantly reduce rates of restenosis by 60-75% across both lesion and patient subsets. In recent years there has been an exponential increase in the worldwide use of DES. This expansion has occurred as a result of an enthusiastic extrapolation of results from randomised trials leading to "off-label" use of DES in anatomical or clinical high-risk scenarios, or both. However, emerging medium- to long-term follow-up data have raised concerns about the safety of DES. A number of analyses have recently shown increased rates of late stent thrombosis in patients with DES. The exact mechanisms leading to stent thrombosis remain unclear. This article critically reviews the available efficacy and safety data on DES and discusses the factors influencing our current practice and perception of the net value of DES.     

Sirolimus-eluting versus bare stents after suboptimal infrapopliteal angioplasty for critical limb ischemia: enduring 1-year angiographic and clinical benefit.

PURPOSE: To report the 1-year angiographic and clinical outcome from a prospective single-center study investigating the infrapopliteal application of sirolimus-eluting versus bare metal stents in patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI) who underwent below-the-knee endovascular revascularization. METHODS: Stenting was performed as a bailout procedure for suboptimal angioplasty results (flow-limiting dissection, elastic recoil, or postangioplasty residual stenosis >30%). In the first 29 patients, infrapopliteal stenting was performed with bare metal stents (group B) and with sirolimus-eluting stents in the other 29 patients (group S). RESULTS: Below-the-knee angioplasty and stenting involved 65 lesions in 40 infrapopliteal arteries of 29 limbs in group B and 66 lesions in 41 infrapopliteal arteries of 29 limbs in group S. Baseline comorbidities (hyperlipidemia and symptomatic cardiac and carotid disease) were more pronounced in group S (p<0.05). At 6 months, sirolimus-eluting stents demonstrated significantly higher primary patency (OR 5.625, 95% CI 1.711 to 18.493, p = 0.004) and decreased in-stent binary restenosis (OR 0.067, 95% CI 0.021 to 0.017, p<0.001) and in-segment binary restenosis (OR 0.229, 95% CI 0.099 to 0.533, p = 0.001). After 1 year, sirolimus-eluting stents were steadily associated with increased primary patency (OR 10.401, 95% CI 3.425 to 31.589, p<0.001) and significantly less in-stent (OR 0.156, 95% CI 0.060 to 0.407, p<0.001) and in-segment (OR 0.089, 95% CI 0.023 to 0.349, p = 0.001) binary restenosis. In addition, sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with significantly fewer cumulative target lesion reinterventions at 6 months (OR 0.057, 95% CI 0.008 to 0.426, p = 0.005) and 1 year (OR 0.238, 95% CI 0.067 to 0.841, p = 0.026). No significant differences between groups B and S were noted at 1 year with respect to mortality (10.3% versus 13.8%, respectively), minor amputation (17.2% versus 10.3%), or limb salvage (100% versus 96%). CONCLUSION: The application of sirolimus-eluting stents reduces the restenosis rate in the infrapopliteal arteries and the rate of repeat endovascular procedures the first year after treatment.     

Safety and efficacy of second‐generation drug‐eluting stents compared with bare‐metal stents: An updated meta‐analysis and regression of 9 randomized clinical trials

The efficacy of second‐generation drug‐eluting stents (DES; eg, everolimus and zotarolimus) compared with bare‐metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention was challenged recently by new evidence from large clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of second‐generation DES compared with BMS . Electronic databases were systematically searched for all RCTs comparing second‐generation DES with BMS and reporting clinical outcomes. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE); the primary safety outcome was definite stent thrombosis. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used for estimation of summary risk ratios (RR). A total of 9 trials involving 17 682 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with BMS, second‐generation DES were associated with decreased incidence of MACE (RR: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69‐0.88), driven by the decreased incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48‐0.95), target‐lesion revascularization (RR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.42‐0.53), definite stent thrombosis (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41‐0.78), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.38‐0.80). The incidence of all‐cause mortality was similar between groups (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79‐1.10). Meta‐regression showed lower incidences of MI with DES implantation in elderly and diabetic patients (P = 0.026 and P < 0.0001, respectively). Compared with BMS, second‐generation DES appear to be associated with a lower incidence of MACE, mainly driven by lower rates of target‐lesion revascularization, MI, and stent thrombosis. However, all‐cause mortality appears similar between groups.     

Drug-eluting stent restenosis the pattern predicts the outcome.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine if the angiographic pattern of in-stent restenosis in drug-eluting stents (DES) maintains its prognostic importance. BACKGROUND: The pattern of restenosis in the bare-metal stent era had a significant impact on therapeutic outcomes. METHODS: We identified a total of 250 consecutive restenotic lesions in 203 patients (66.4% sirolimus-eluting stents and 33.6% paclitaxel-eluting stents). We divided these lesions into two groups: focal, defined as < or =10 mm, 163 lesions (65.2%); and nonfocal, which were diffuse, proliferative, or obstructive, 87 lesions (34.8%). The end points analyzed were angiographic restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR). RESULTS: Diabetes was the only clinical variable associated with the pattern of restenosis (28.8% focal compared with 52.9% diffuse; p = 0.0001). Angiographic follow-up of the treatment of restenosis was available in 61.2% of the lesions and was similar between the two groups. The rate of angiographic restenosis was 17.8% in the focal group and 51.1% in the nonfocal group (p = 0.0001). The incidence of TLR also increased with the type of restenosis treated (9.8% and 23%, respectively; p = 0.007). An adjusted multivariate analysis revealed that the pattern of restenosis remained associated with both the occurrence of restenosis and TLR (odds ratio [OR] 5.1 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.1 to 23], p = 0.03; and OR 3.61 [95% CI 1.2 to 10.9], p = 0.02; respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to bare-metal stent data, the angiographic pattern of restenosis following DES implantation is prognostically important. Diabetes is a significant predictor of the pattern of restenosis in the DES era.     

Adjusted indirect comparison of intracoronary drug-eluting stents: evidence from a metaanalysis of randomized bare-metal-stent-controlled trials

AIMS: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been recently investigated, with favorable data for many devices, but comparative data are lacking. We thus performed an adjusted indirect comparison metaanalysis of DES. METHODS: Randomized trials comparing DES vs. bare-metal stents (BMS) were systematically searched, and random effect odds ratios (OR) were computed for target lesion revascularization (TLR) and binary in-stent restenosis rate (BRR) at 6-12 months. We then generated interaction OR for the comparison of different DES. RESULTS: We pooled data from 17 studies (allocating 3048 patients to BMS and 3392 to nine different DES). Indirect head-to-head comparison of sirolimus-eluting Cypher (N=1007) vs. polymeric paclitaxel-eluting Taxus (N=959) showed nonsignificant differences in TLR [OR=0.8 (0.5-1.4), p=0.45] but significant reductions in BRR favoring Cypher [OR=0.3 (0.1-0.6), p<0.001]. Everolimus-eluting stents appeared noninferior to Cypher or Taxus (p>0.50 for both TLR and BRR). Actinomycin-, mycophenolate-, and apolymeric paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) all proved significantly worse than Cypher or Taxus for TLR or BRR. CONCLUSION: Notwithstanding its inherent limitations, the present metaanalysis confirms the effectiveness of both Cypher and Taxus, supports the promising role of everolimus-eluting stents, and suggests the significant inferiority of most other devices. These post hoc findings, albeit intriguing, await prospective confirmation.     

Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Older Patients: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BackgroundDespite the high prevalence of ischemic heart disease in older patients, there is a substantial lack of evidence to guide clinical decision-making in this population. Hence, we performed a meta-analysis to determine the safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS).MethodsElectronic databases were searched for randomized trials comparing DES with BMS in patients ≥70 years-old. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Secondary outcomes included different ischemic and bleeding events. Subgroup analyses for dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) duration were conducted.ResultsWe included 7 trials with a total of 5449 patients. The use of DES compared with BMS was associated with a significant reduction in MACE (odds ratio [OR]:0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI]:0.62–0.93; P = 0.007) with no increased risk of bleeding events (OR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.89–1.27; P = 0.48). However, longer duration of DAPT (>6 months) for the DES group increased bleeding events (OR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.05–2.20; P = 0.03). In contrast, shorter DAPT showed persistent efficacy in reducing MACE in DES-treated patients with no increased bleeding events (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.60–0.87; P < 0.01 and OR: 1.01; 95% CI: 0.84–1.22; P = 0.89, respectively).ConclusionsIn older patients who had undergone PCI, DES showed superior efficacy in reducing MACE with no increased risk of bleeding compared with BMS. Persistent MACE reduction was evident with shorter DAPT durations in DES-treated patients.SummaryThis meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials demonstrated that drug-eluting stents were associated with a significant reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events with no increased risk of bleeding compared with bare-metal stents. The risk of bleeding was high with longer dual antiplatelet therapy duration for patients who underwent DES placement. However, short duration of dual antiplatelet therapy substantially reduced major adverse cardiovascular events with no increased bleeding risk.     

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous interventions in saphenous vein grafts using drug-eluting stents compared to bare-metal stents: a comprehensive meta-analysisof all randomized clinical trials

Background:

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remain poor despite the use of drug‐eluting stents (DES). There is a disparity in clinical outcomes in SVG PCI based on various registries, and randomized clinical data remain scant. We conducted a meta‐analysis of all existing randomized controlled trials (RCTS) comparing bare‐metal stents (BMS) and DES in SVGPCIs.

Hypothesis:

PCI in patients with SVG disease using DES may reduce need for repeat revascularization without an excess mortality when compared to BMS.

Methods:

An aggregate data meta‐analysis of clinical outcomes in RCTs comparing PCI with DES vs BMS for SVGs reporting at least 12 months of follow‐up was performed. A literature search between Janurary 1, 2003 and September 30, 2011 identified 4 RCTs (812 patients; DES = 416, BMS = 396). Summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the random‐effects model. The primary endpoint was all‐cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). These outcomes were assessed in a cumulative fashion at 30 days, 18 months, and 36 months.

Results:

There were no intergroup differences in baseline clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. At a median follow‐up of 25 months, patients in the DES and BMS group had similar rates of death (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 0.45–5.92), MI (OR; 0.83, 95% CI: 0.27‐2.60), and MACE (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.25–1.32). Patients treated with DES had lower rates of repeat revascularization (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.22–0.75).

Conclusions:

In this comprehensive meta‐analysis of all RCTs comparing clinical outcomes of PCI using DES vs BMS in patients with SVG disease, use of DES was associated with a reduction in rate of repeat revascularization and no difference in rates of all‐cause death and MI. Clin. Cardiol. 2012 DOI: 10.1002/clc.21984 Dr. Virani is supported by a Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service (HSR&D) Career Development Award (CDA‐09‐028), and has research support from Merck and National Football League Charities (all grants to the institution and not individual). The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The authors have no other funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.