Comparison of effects of drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents on plasma C-reactive protein levels

After coronary stenting, inflammatory mechanisms play a crucial role in the pathogenesis of neointimal proliferation and in-stent restenosis. Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have been shown to decrease in-stent restenosis in different studies. We compared plasma C-reactive protein (CRP) levels after DES implantation with levels after bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. We performed percutaneous coronary intervention with a single stent in 67 patients (54 men; 59 +/- 9 years of age; n = 21 in the BMS group, n = 46 in the DES group) who had stable angina. Plasma CRP levels were determined before intervention and at 48 hours, 72 hours, and 2 weeks after coronary stenting. There was no difference in clinical and angiographic baseline characteristics except that the DES group had more patients with diabetes (34.8% vs 9.5%, p = 0.04), smaller reference vessels (2.95 +/- 0.53 vs 3.29 +/- 0.53 mm, p = 0.02), and smaller stent diameters (3.0 +/- 0.4 mm vs 3.4 +/- 0.5 mm, p <0.01). Plasma CRP levels at 48 hours (13.4 +/- 14.7 vs 5.9 +/- 4.9 mg/L, p <0.01) and 72 hours (16.7 +/- 19.8 vs 5.4 +/- 3.9 mg/L, p <0.01) after stent implantation were significantly higher in the BMS than in the DES group. In conclusion, DESs showed significantly lower plasma CRP levels after coronary stenting compared with BMSs. This may reflect the potent effects of DESs on acute inflammatory reactions induced by coronary intervention.     

Limitation on efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in patients on hemodialysis

BACKGROUND: Patients receiving chronic hemodialysis develop complicated coronary lesions with tortuosity and calcification, which make stent delivery or expansion difficult. Restenosis rates are also higher than in patients without hemodialysis. Furthermore, there is a risk of polymer rubbing from the surface of a sirolimus-eluting stent(SES)placed across a calcified lesion. This study investigated the efficacy of SES for patients on hemodialysis compared with bare metal stent (BMS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-two patients on hemodialysis underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for 46 de novo lesions treated with SES (SES group). Seventy-four patients with 78 de novo lesions were treated with BMS (BMS group). The mean age was 65.8 +/- 9.3 yr in the SES group, and 65.0 +/- 8.7 yr in the BMS group. The mean hemodialysis period was significantly longer in the SES group (9.2 +/- 7.9 vs 6.5 +/- 7.7 yr, p < 0.01). Angiographic characteristics and acute results showed no significant difference between the two groups. At 6 months follow-up, late loss was significantly smaller in the SES group (0.60 +/- 0.97 vs 1.60 +/- 1.15 mm, p < 0.05). Binary restenosis and target lesion revascularization were similar (34% vs 43%, 25% vs 36%, respectively, p = NS). Major adverse cardiac events, composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization were also similar (23% vs 36%, p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Our study could not demonstrate the superiority of SES implantation in patients with hemodialysis compared to BMS implantation, which suggests the limitations of using SES.     

Sirolimus-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction Lesson from a case-controlled comparison of bare metal versus drug-eluting stents in thrombus-laden lesions

BACKGROUND: Given the encouraging results on early restenosis rate with drug-eluting coronary stents, both safety and 6 months outcomes of PCI with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in acute myocardial infarction are scarce. METHODS AND RESULTS: Fifty consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction were subjected to acute PCI with SES and compared to 50 matched control patients who received a bare metal stent (BMS). All patients were followed over 6 months; in addition repeat angiography was obtained in 88.0% of SES and 92.0% of BMS patients. As a result of matching both groups were similar with regard to demographic, clinical, and infarction characteristics, as well as procedural data and adjunctive medication. SES diameter was 3.0 +/- 0.1 versus 3.3 +/- 0.5 mm with BMS, while the length of stented segment was 24 +/- 11 mm with SES versus 16 +/- 8 mm with BMS (p<0.05). No subacute stent thrombosis occurred in either group. At 6 months, all-cause mortality was 2.0% with SES, and 4.0% with BMS (n. s.); reinfarction rate was 2.0% in both groups, but binary restenosis rate (4.0 versus 18.0%; p<0.05) and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were improved with SES (2.0 versus 16.0%; p<0.05) resulting in lower MACE rate of 6.0 versus 22.0% with BMS (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Placement of SES with PCI for myocardial infarction is feasible and as safe as BMS; 6-month outcome is superior with SES due to the lower rate of both angiographic restenosis and TVR.     

Randomized double-blind comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent implantation in diseased saphenous vein grafts: six-month angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical follow-up of the RRISC Trial.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare, in a randomized fashion, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs). BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-eluting stents reduce restenosis and repeated revascularization in native coronary arteries compared with BMS. However, randomized data in SVG are absent. METHODS: Patients with SVG lesions were randomized to SES or BMS. All were scheduled to undergo 6-month coronary angiography. The primary end point was 6-month angiographic in-stent late lumen loss. Secondary end points included binary angiographic restenosis, neointimal volume by intravascular ultrasound and major adverse clinical events (death, myocardial infarction, target lesion, and vessel revascularization). RESULTS: A total of 75 patients with 96 lesions localized in 80 diseased SVGs were included: 38 patients received 60 SES for 47 lesions, whereas 37 patients received 54 BMS for 49 lesions. In-stent late loss was significantly reduced in SES (0.38 +/- 0.51 mm vs. 0.79 +/- 0.66 mm in BMS, p = 0.001). Binary in-stent and in-segment restenosis were reduced, 11.3% versus 30.6% (relative risk [RR] 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15 to 0.97, p = 0.024) and 13.6% versus 32.6% (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.97, p = 0.031), respectively. Median neointimal volume was 1 mm(3) (interquartile range 0 to 13) in SES versus 24 (interquartile range 8 to 34) in BMS (p < 0.001). Target lesion and vessel revascularization rates were significantly reduced, 5.3% versus 21.6% (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.0, p = 0.047) and 5.3% versus 27% (RR 0.19; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.83, p = 0.012), respectively. Death and myocardial infarction rates were not different. CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduce late loss in SVG as opposed to BMS. This is associated with a reduction in restenosis rate and repeated target lesion and vessel revascularization procedures. (The RRISC Study; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show; NCT00263263).     

Clinical outcomes after heterogeneous overlap stenting with drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents for de novo coronary artery narrowings

When it is difficult to deliver multiple drug-eluting stents (DES) or when size constraints limit DES implantation, bare-metal stents (BMS) may be implanted contiguous to DES. However, the clinical outcomes after overlapping DES and BMS implantation are not known. From September 2004 to June 2006, 4,872 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention consented to be enrolled in a prospective registry. Of these patients, 44 (0.9%) with de novo lesions were treated with DES and BMS overlap stenting. All patients were followed to 12 months for the assessment of clinical outcomes. The average implanted stent diameter was 2.68 +/- 0.30 mm for DES and 2.35 +/- 0.38 mm for BMS. Overlapping BMS were implanted distal to DES in all but 1 case. One patient (2.3%) experienced acute stent thrombosis and died 2 days after the procedure. No other patient died or had a myocardial infarction during 12 months. The target vessel revascularization rate at 12 months, however, was 31.8%, mainly driven by diffuse in-stent restenosis in the BMS segments. In conclusion, the incidence of DES and BMS overlap stenting is rare in daily practice, but this procedure is associated with a high rate of target vessel revascularization.     

Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison with bare metal stent implantation

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of SES implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis have not been ascertained. METHODS: Elective SES implantation for de novo unprotected LMCA stenosis was performed in 102 consecutive patients with preserved left ventricular function from March 2003 to March 2004. Data from this group were compared to those from 121 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years. RESULTS: Compared to the BMS group, the SES group received more direct stenting, had fewer debulking atherectomies, had a greater number of stents, had more segments stented, and underwent more bifurcation stenting. The procedural success rate was 100% for both groups. There were no incidents of death, stent thrombosis, Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI), or emergent bypass surgery during hospitalization in either group. Despite less acute gain (2.06 +/- 0.56 mm vs. 2.73 +/- 0.73 mm, p < 0.001) in the SES group, SES patients showed a lower late lumen loss (0.05 +/- 0.57 mm vs. 1.27 +/- 0.90 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower six-month angiographic restenosis rate (7.0% vs. 30.3%, p < 0.001) versus the BMS group. At 12 months, the rate of freedom from death, MI, and target lesion revascularization was 98.0 +/- 1.4% in the SES group and 81.4 +/- 3.7% in the BMS group (p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for unprotected LMCA stenosis appears safe with regard to acute and midterm complications and is more effective in preventing restenosis compared to BMS implantation.     

A randomized comparison of sirolimus‐eluting versus bare metal stents in the treatment of diabetic patients with native coronary artery lesions: The DECODE study

Objective: To compare the effects of sirolimus‐eluting (SES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) on 6‐month in‐stent late luminal loss (LLL) and 1‐year major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in diabetics undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions. Background: In studies of unselected patients, coronary restenosis rates have been lower with SES than with BMS. Comparisons of SES versus BMS in diabetics with more than one stenosis or more than one vessel disease are few. Methods: This open‐label trial randomly assigned 200 diabetics with de novo coronary artery stenoses to receive up to three SES versus BMS in a 2:1 ratio. The patients underwent repeat coronary angiography at 6 months after the index procedure and were followed‐up for 1 year. The primary study endpoint was in‐stent LLL at 6 months. Results: Between August 2002 and May 2004, 83 patients (mean age = 60 years) with 128 lesions (mean = 1.5 per patient) were enrolled at four U.S. and seven Asian medical centers. Enrollment was terminated early by the Safety Monitoring Board because of a statistically significant difference in rates of clinical endpoints. The mean in‐stent LLL at 6 months was 0.23 mm in SES versus 1.10 mm in BMS recipients (P < 0.001). At 12 months, 8 patients (15%) assigned to SES had experienced MACE versus 12 patients (41%) assigned to BMS (P = 0.006). Conclusions: In diabetics, the mean 6‐month in‐stent LLL was significantly smaller, and 12‐month MACE rate significantly lower, after myocardial revascularization with SES than with BMS. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Predictive factors of cardiac events after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of in-stent restenosis

BACKGROUND: The factors associated with recurrent restenosis after SES implantation for in-stent restenosis are unknown. This study aimed to assess the clinical outcome and to analyse predictive factors of cardiac events in patients with in-stent restenosis treated with Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). METHODS: In 3 centers, consecutive patients (n = 100) with elective indication to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for in-stent restenosis (n = 110) were treated with SES: 28 lesions were focal, 40 diffuse, 17 proliferative, and 15 showed total occlusion. RESULTS: SES implantation was successful in all patients, without complication during the first hospital stay. The mean follow-up was 15 (10-24) months. A cardiac event related to the target vessel occurred in 24 (24%) patients, and was associated with dialysis status (p < 0.05), lower ejection fraction (p < 0.05) and revascularization without SES in another site (p < 0.0001). A cardiac event related to the SES occurred in 11 (11%) patients, secondary to an acute or sub-acute thrombosis of the SES (2%), to a late occlusion of the target vessel (4%) or to a non-occlusive restenosis of the SES (5%), and was associated with unstable angina (p < 0.01), multivessel disease (p < 0.03) and revascularization without SES in another site (p < 0.03). No cardiac event related to the SES occurred in patients with direct stenting. Target lesion revascularization for in-SES restenosis or occlusion of the target vessel was performed in 7 (7%) patients, and was associated with unstable angina (p < 0.01) and revascularization without SES in another site (p < 0.01). Target vessel revascularization was needed in 20 patients (20%), related to dialysis status (p < 0.01) and a revascularization without SES in another site (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: SESs are effective in the treatment of high risk patients with complex in-stent restenosis. Most of cardiac events during follow-up are related to a revascularization without SES in another site.     

抗CD34抗体优化雷帕霉素洗脱支架疗效的实验研究

目的 评价抗CD34抗体对雷帕霉素洗脱支架早期再内皮化以及远期抗再狭窄的影响.方法 将裸金属支架(BMS)、雷帕霉素洗脱支架(SES)和抗CD34抗体与雷帕霉素洗脱联合支架(ASES)随机置入到22头中华小型猪的冠状动脉内(共置入15枚BMS、17枚SES和16枚ASES).10头中华小型猪在置入支架(共置入6枚BMS、7枚SES和7枚ASES)后2周,另外12头中华小型猪在置入支架(共置入9枚BMS、10枚SES和9枚ASES)后3个月,进行冠状动脉造影及冠状动脉内光学相干断层成像( OCT)检查,并在处死动物后对支架段冠状动脉进行病理组织学检查及扫描电镜观察.结果 (1)支架术后2周,冠状动脉造影、OCT图像及支架段冠状动脉的病理组织学的观察均未发现支架内血栓及小的附壁血栓.对OCT图像的分析显示,ASES新生内膜覆盖率显著高于SES[ (55.56±35.27)％比(41.82±23.28)％,P＜0.05];ASES平均内膜覆盖厚度不但显著高于SES[(89.0±5.0)μm比(32.0±4.9) μm,P＜0.01],而且显著高于BMS[( 89.0±5.0) μ,m比(44.0±7.2)μm,P＜0.01].病理组织学观察及扫描电镜观察显示,ASES和BMS新生内膜覆盖水平及质量均优于SES.(2)支架术后3个月,定量冠状动脉造影显示ASES晚期支架内管腔丢失显著低于BMS [(0.18±0.06)mm比(0.35±0.06)mm,P＜0.05];对OCT图像的分析显示,ASES和SES新生内膜增生百分比均显著低于BMS[ (34.75±2.64)％和(35.63±2.07)％比(48.28±3.25)％,均P＜0.01];组织病理学分析显示,ASES和SES面积再狭窄百分比均显著低于BMS组[(28.65±5.64)％和(29.33±6.07)％比(46.18±8.25)％,均P＜0.05].结论 将抗CD34抗体联合应用到雷帕霉素洗脱支架上能够显著抵消后者在支架术后2周对再内皮化的抑制作用,同时没有削弱雷帕霉素洗脱支架术后3个月的抗再狭窄效能.     

Percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcations: lesion preparation before provisional bare metal stenting and subsequent immunosuppression with oral prednisone. The IMPRESS-Y study

Aim of the study was to assess the clinical and angiographic efficacy of oral treatment with prednisone at immunosuppressive dosage after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) in patients with bifurcation lesions treated with elective bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in the main-branch (MB) and provisional stenting in the side-branch (SB). Twenty-five patients were treated on 29 bifurcation lesions (58 vessel segments). Lesion preparation before stenting was performed with atherectomy in 7 cases, and balloon PCI over double wires in all other cases; none was treated directly with stents. The mean length of stents implanted in the MB was 19.6 +/- 4.9 mm (10-30 mm). Balloon PCI was successful in 23 of 29 SB and provisional stenting was needed in 6 SB (21%). All patients received oral prednisone according to the immunosuppressive protocol previously reported (1 mg/kg/day/10 days, 0.5 mg/kg/day/20 days, 0.25 mg/kg/day/15 days). At 12 months, one patient had recurrence of angina (4%) and two patients underwent repeated target lesion revascularization (8%). No patient died or had stent thrombosis. Quantitative coronary analysis was performed in all patients at 8 months. Global restenosis rate per vessel was 8.6% (5/58), and 17.2% (5/29) per lesion. The restenosis rate and late lumen loss were 3.4% and 0.36 +/- 0.6 mm, and 13.8% and 0.47 +/- 0.46 mm in the MB and the SB, respectively. Single stent implantation in the MB and provisional stenting of the SB is feasible in most cases after adequate lesion preparation. The systemic treatment with oral prednisone after BMS implantation offers good clinical and angiographic results even in the difficult setting of bifurcation lesions.     

Impact of drug-eluting stents on clinical and angiographic outcomes in dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear whether sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) have an advantage over bare metal stents (BMS) in patients on dialysis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using SES was performed in 54 dialysis patients with 69 lesions. A control group for comparison comprised 54 consecutive dialysis patients with 58 lesions who underwent PCI using BMS. Angiographic and clinical follow-ups were scheduled at 9 months. After the procedure, minimum lumen diameter (MLD) was similar between the 2 groups. At follow-up, the SES group had a higher MLD than the BMS group (1.98+/-0.83 mm vs 1.50+/-0.78 mm, p<0.01). In-stent restenosis rate was lower in lesions treated with SES than in those with BMS (22% vs 40%, p=0.048). However, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups for in-segment restenosis (31% vs 43%, p=0.3). During follow-up, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death, myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization (TLR) (14% vs 21%, p=0.4) between the SES and BMS groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective study, SES, in comparison with BMS, reduced in-stent restenosis in patients on dialysis. However, in-segment restenosis and TLR were not statistically different between lesions treated with SES and those with BMS.     

Effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of ostial left anterior descending artery stenosis with intravascular ultrasound guidance

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for ostial left anterior descending (LAD) lesions compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation. BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of SES implantation for ostial LAD lesions is currently unknown. METHODS: Sirolimus-eluting stents were implanted in 68 consecutive patients with ostial LAD stenoses. The control group was composed of 77 patients treated with BMS during the preceding two years. In the SES group, for complete lesion coverage, stent positioning was intentionally extended into the distal left main coronary artery (LMCA) in 23 patients (34%) with intermediate LMCA narrowing. RESULTS: Compared with the BMS group, the SES group had more multivessel involvement, received fewer debulking atherectomies, underwent more direct stenting, had a greater number of stents, and had more segments stented. The procedural success rate was 100% in both groups. The six-month angiographic restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (5.1% vs. 32.3%, p < 0.001). During the one-year follow-up period, neither death nor myocardial infarction occurred in either group, but target lesion revascularization was less frequent in the SES group than in the BMS group (0% vs. 17%, p < 0.001). In the SES group, there were no restenoses in cases with LMCA coverage, compared with three restenoses (7.9%) in cases with precise stent positioning (p = NS). CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in ostial LAD lesions achieved excellent results regarding restenosis and clinical outcomes compared with BMS implantation. This finding may be associated with reduced neointimal hyperplasia and complete lesion coverage.     

Initial and long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents for calcified lesions compared with bare-metal stents

The aim of this study was to compare the initial and long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with calcified lesions without performing rotational atherectomy. The subjects were 79 consecutive lesions (38 in the SES group and 41 in the BMS group) which were confirmed to have superficially calcified lesions by intravascular ultrasound. In all lesions, the stent was implanted after predilatation with a balloon. The patient characteristics were not different between the 2 groups. All procedures were successfully performed in both groups. Vessel area was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (11.01 +/- 3.88 mm(2) versus 13.08 +/- 3.49 mm(2), P < 0.005), as was the lumen area (5.41 +/- 2.31mm(2) versus 6.48 +/- 2.04 mm(2), P < 0.005). Minimum stent area was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (5.61 +/- 1.54 mm(2) versus 6.69 +/- 1.74 mm(2), P < 0.01). In cases in whom angiographic follow-ups were performed, the late loss was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (0.19 +/- 0.49 mm versus 0.76 +/- 0.48 mm, P < 0.001). The restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (8.8% versus 33.3%, P < 0.05) and the TLR rate tended to be lower in the SES group (7.9% versus 19.5%). Stent thrombosis was not observed in either group. The results suggest that SES are more effective than BMS and can be used safely when treating calcified lesions if predilatation with a balloon is possible.     

Vascular response to sirolimus-eluting stents delivered with a nonaggressive implantation technique: comparison of intravascular ultrasound results from the multicenter, randomized E-SIRIUS, and SIRIUS trials.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of SES to reduce the risk of restenosis was initially demonstrated in short lesions using stent implantation with routine pre-dilatation and post-dilatation. This intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) substudy of the E-SIRIUS trial sought to evaluate local arterial responses to sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) delivered with a stent implantation technique allowing direct stenting and only selectively applying high-pressure post-dilatation. METHODS AND RESULTS: IVUS was performed immediately after intervention and at 8-month follow-up in 51 patients randomised to either bare-metal stents (BMS; Bx-Velocitytrade mark; N=20) or SES (Cyphertrade mark N=31). Direct stenting was allowed (24%) and post-dilation was performed only selectively (32%). Lumen dimensions, intimal hyperplasia and vessel remodeling were compared between SES and BMS. Subsequently, results of SES in the E-SIRIUS IVUS substudy (N=31) were compared to those of SES in the IVUS substudy of the SIRIUS trial (N=137). SES in SIRIUS IVUS substudy were delivered with 100% pre-dilatation and 77% post-dilatation. Baseline stent and reference segment measurements were similar between BMS and SES in E-SIRIUS IVUS patients. Using SES there was a 96% reduction in intimal hyperplasia volume within the stented segment (1.8+/-4.9 vs 50.6+/-39.7 mm3, P<0.001) and a significantly larger minimal lumen cross sectional area at 8-month follow-up (4.5+/-1.1 vs 2.3+/-0.9 mm2, P<0.001). No vessel remodeling was observed with the use of SES. The applied stent implantation technique resulted in a minimal stent/reference vessel area ratio of 0.75+/-0.17 in E-SIRIUS SES as compared to 0.84+/-0.23 in SIRIUS SES (P=0.046). Mean intimal hyperplasia cross-sectional area at follow-up was 0.1+/-0.2 mm2 in the SES group of E-SIRIUS and 0.5+/-0.8 mm2 in the SES group of SIRIUS (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: An implantation technique of SES which includes direct stenting and minimizes the use of high-pressure post-dilatation results in less optimal stent expansion. However, follow-up results compare very favourable to those of BMS and are characterised by even less intimal hyperplasia than after a more forceful implantation of SES.     

光学相干断层成像在冠心病介入治疗中的应用价值

目的应用光学相干断层成像（OCT）技术评价冠状动脉内粥样硬化斑块、血管对置入支架后即刻和中远期的反应。方法20例冠心病患者,有22支血管在完成冠状动脉造影或介入治疗后进行OCT成像。同时获取23个支架OCT成像,在23个支架中有15个为支架术后4～35个月随访,其中7个为雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架,8个为金属裸支架,另外8个为支架置放后即刻成像。结果入选的20例患者均成功进行OCT检查,并获取22支血管和23个支架满意的图像。通过OCT成像清晰地显示8处纤维斑块、3处钙化斑块、9处富含脂质斑块、2处血栓形成、斑块破裂3处及血管壁上夹层、粥样硬化斑块微小裂口和夹层等。7个置入雷帕霉素药物洗脱支架后OCT随访,均未发现有明显再狭窄,支架表面有少量内膜覆盖,部分支架表面没有内膜覆盖,其中1个支架血管出现瘤样扩张、支架与血管壁分离、支架表面没有内膜覆盖,有1个支架没有充分扩张。8个金属裸支架后用OCT随访发现,所有置入金属裸支架后支架表面内膜增殖明显,其中有3个支架因为内膜过度增殖而出现再狭窄,并再次接受介入治疗。8个支架术后即刻OCT检查显示,与血管贴壁均良好、支架扩张充分有3个支架,4个支架充分扩张,但可见到斑块裂片通过支架网眼突入管腔,1个支架支撑杆分布不均,可见支架与血管壁分离,在8个支架中有2个为支架内套叠支架。结论OCT成像技术可清晰显示各种冠状动脉粥样斑块情况,并可用于评价冠状动脉介入治疗的效果。     

In-stent restenosis in bare metal stents versus sirolimus-eluting stents after primary coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction and subsequent transcoronary transplantation of autologous stem cells

BACKGROUND: Following stenting for acute myocardial infarction, transcoronary transplantation of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) mobilized autologous stem cells (ASC) has been shown to result in an increased in-stent restenosis rate of bare metal stents (BMS). HYPOTHESIS: This study sought to compare the extent of neointimal growth in BMS and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) after primary implantation, and subsequent transcoronary transplantation of G-CSF mobilized stem cells. METHODS: Patients with stenting of the left anterior descending coronary artery for acute anterior myocardial infarction were randomly assigned to receive a BMS or SES. Intracoronary stem cell injection was performed after G-CSF application for at least 4 d and cell apheresis. The angiograms obtained after cell transplantation and after 6 mo were analyzed by quantitative coronary angiography. RESULTS: We performed primary stenting and stem cell transplantion in 16 patients who received a BMS (n = 8) or an SES (n = 8). In 2 patients with a BMS, late stent thrombosis occurred after 58 d and 177 d, respectively. In the remaining patients, control angiography after 6 mo revealed in-stent restenosis of >50% in no patients with SES but in 4 patients with BMS (67%). Late lumen loss and in-stent plaque volume were significantly higher in patients with BMS compared with patients with SES. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BMS, SES impair in-stent intima hyperplasia after stenting for acute myocardial infarction and transcoronary transplantation of G-CSF mobilized ASC. Copyright (c) 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Impact of sirolimus-eluting stent on the outcome of patients with chronic total occlusions

Several randomized trials have demonstrated that stent implantation after successful recanalization of long-term total occlusions decreases restenosis and reocclusion rates. The sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) has recently proved its efficacy to decrease restenosis in selected patients. However, the efficacy of SES implantation in patients who have chronic total occlusions is currently unknown. Therefore, we investigated procedural and 6- and 12-month angiographic outcomes (analyzed by quantitative coronary angiography) and left ventricular function in 60 patients who received SESs and 120 patients who received bare metal stents (BMSs). Minimum luminal diameter did not differ immediately after recanalization (SES group 3.04 +/- 0.50 mm vs BMS group 3.12 +/- 0.48 mm). After 6 months, the SES group still had significantly larger luminal diameters (3.04 +/- 0.44 mm vs 1.94 +/- 0.98 mm) and significantly lower restenosis and reocclusion rates (2% and 0%, respectively) than did the BMS group (32% and 6%, respectively). Late loss was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group. At follow-up, the SES group had fewer cardiac events, including target lesion revascularization (p <0.001), than did the BMS group. In conclusion, SES implantation after recanalization of chronic total occlusion provides a better clinical outcome with less restenosis and target lesion revascularization after 6 months than does BMSs.     

Long-term outcome of simultaneous kissing stenting technique with sirolimus-eluting stent for large bifurcation coronary lesions.

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to evaluate the outcomes of simultaneous kissing stenting with sirolimus-eluting stent (SES). BACKGROUND: Percutaneous intervention for bifurcation coronary lesions is still challenging. METHODS: This study was designed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of 36 consecutive patients with large bifurcation coronary lesions who underwent simultaneous kissing stenting with SES. RESULTS: Lesion location was unprotected left main in 29 patients (81%) and anterior descending artery in 7 (19%). The patients received a combination of aspirin and clopidogrel for 6 months and cilostazol for 1 month. Mean proximal reference diameter was 4.05 +/- 0.68 mm. Compared with the side branch (SB), the main vessel (MV) involved longer lesions (25.8 +/- 17.0 mm vs. 10.2 +/- 10.8 mm, P < 0.001) and smaller preprocedural minimal lumen diameters (1.02 +/- 0.53 mm vs. 1.46 +/- 0.78 mm, P = 0.006) and was treated with larger stents (3.1 +/- 0.3 mm vs. 3.0 +/- 0.3 mm, P = 0.006). Angiographic success rate was 100%. Over the follow-up of 26.7 +/- 8.6 months, no deaths, myocardial infarctions or stent thromboses occurred. Target lesion revascularization was performed in five patients (14%). Overall angiographic restenosis occurred in 5/30 patients (17%), consisting of 4 (13%) at MV and 3 (10%) at SB. At follow-up angiography, a membranous diaphragm at the carina was identified in 14 patients (47%), but only one of whom was associated with angiographic restenosis. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous kissing stenting with SES appears a feasible stenting technique in large bifurcation coronary lesions. However, a new angiographic structure of carinal membrane developed in a half of patients at follow-up and its influence needs to be further investigated.     

Long-term clinical outcome after implantation of medium Palmaz (biliary) stents in very large native coronary arteries.

Intracoronary stenting has been shown to improve acute and long-term clinical results compared with coronary angioplasty. However, clinical outcome after medium Palmaz biliary (PB) stent implantation in very large native coronary arteries (> 4 mm in diameter) is unknown. This study evaluated restenosis and long-term clinical outcome after PB stenting in large native coronary arteries. Between June 1993 and December 1998, 55 patients with 56 lesions were treated with PB stents. Intracoronary stent deployment was successful in all 56 vessels attempted (100%). The mean stenosis was reduced from 65% +/- 10% to 4% +/- 14%. In 48 of the 56 vessels (86%), vessel size was greater than 4.0 mm in diameter and the mean reference vessel diameter was 4.73 +/- 0.7 mm after stenting. Angiographic success was achieved in 100%. Five patients had postprocedural cardiac enzyme elevation. There was no periprocedural death, emergency coronary artery bypass surgery, repeat target lesion revascularization, or acute stent thrombosis. Long-term clinical follow-up at mean of 28 +/- 15 months was obtained in 96% of the patients. Clinical restenosis rate occurred in 18% of ostial (6/34) and 0% of nonostial (0/22) lesions (P < 0.0001) with an overall clinical restenosis rate of 11%. Repeat angioplasty were performed in these six patients. There were three cardiac and three noncardiac deaths. The overall event-free survival at 1 and 3 years was 92% +/- 4% and 80% +/- 6%, respectively. PB stent implantation in very large native coronary arteries can be performed with a high degree of procedural success and low in-hospital complications. The long-term clinical outcome of patients undergoing PB stenting is associated with excellent event-free survival. However, stenting of ostial lesions remains as an important factor for restenosis even in very large coronary artery stenting.     

A randomized comparison of paclitaxel-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis.

OBJECTIVES: To optimize percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) strategy for unprotected left main (LM) disease, we performed a randomized study: intravascular ultrasound (IVUS)-guided bare-metal stent (BMS) or paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation after lesion pre-treatment with cutting balloon (CB) for unprotected LM lesions. BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown promising results in terms of safety and feasibility for patients with LM disease who underwent PCI with stent implantation. However, comparison of BMS and PES for LM lesions has not yet been evaluated. METHODS: One hundred three patients were randomly assigned to receive BMS (n = 50) or PES (n = 53) implantation. All interventions were IVUS guided, and CB pre-treatment before stenting was performed in all patients. All patients were scheduled for 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable in both cohorts. Stent implantation was successful in all lesions. Follow-up analysis showed binary restenosis in 11 (22%) BMS and in 3 (6%) PES patients (p = 0.021). By IVUS, percentage of neointimal volume obstruction at 6 months was reduced from 25.20 +/- 22.02% with BMS to 16.60 +/- 17.25% with PES (p = 0.02). At 6 months, the major adverse cardiac event-free survival rate was 70% in BMS and 87% in PES patients (p = 0.036). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that PCI of LM with IVUS guidance and CB pre-treatment is safe and effective. No serious procedure-related complications were observed, and clinical outcomes appeared to be good. Finally, the findings demonstrate that implantation of PES may be superior to BMS in the large-diameter LM vessel at 6 months, warranting the performance of a large-scale randomized trial.