Comparison of one-year cardiac events with drug-eluting versus bare metal stent implantation in rescue coronary angioplasty

Rescue percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stent (BMS) implantation is useful in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and failed thrombolysis. Drug-eluting stent (DESs) are more effective in reducing restenosis compared to BMS. No data are available comparing the clinical outcomes between the 2 types of stents nor has information ever been provided about the predictors of events in patients treated with rescue PCI in the current era. The aims of the present study were to evaluate the outcomes of patients undergoing rescue PCI with DES implantation compared to BMS implantation and to determine the independent predictors of events during 1 year of follow-up. The study population consisted of 311 consecutive patients with ST-segment elevation AMI and evidence of failed fibrinolysis undergoing successful revascularization with DES (n = 134) or BMS (n = 177) implantation. The end point of the present study was the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as death, recurrent AMI, and target vessel revascularization. No differences were found in the number of MACE at 1 year of follow-up between the DES and BMS groups (n = 10 and 19, respectively, p = 0.29). The Cox proportional hazards model identified cardiogenic shock (adjusted hazard ratio 7.05, 95% confidence interval 2.08 to 23.9, p = 0.001), age (hazard ratio 1.51, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.08, p = 0.011), and final minimal lumen diameter (hazard ratio 0.42, 95% confidence interval 0.21 to 0.83, p = 0.013) as independent predictors of MACE at 1 year of follow-up. After propensity score adjustments, the predictors did not change. In conclusion, we found no differences between DESs and BMSs with respect to MACE at 1 year of follow-up in patients with AMI treated with rescue PCI. Cardiogenic shock, age, and final minimal luminal diameter were identified as predictors of MACE.     

Frequency of coronary arterial late angiographic stent thrombosis (LAST) in the first six months: outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents

Concerns have been raised about the long-term safety of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation due to late angiographic stent thrombosis (LAST). We investigated the incidence and 6-month clinical and angiographic outcomes of LAST after DES versus bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. This study comprised 6,551 patients treated with BMSs (n = 4,104) or DESs (n = 2,447). LAST was defined as angiographically proved stent thrombotic occlusion with acute ischemic symptoms >30 days after stenting. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization. Patients treated with DESs had a significantly higher risk profile than did patients treated with BMSs. There were 8 cases (0.33%) of LAST in the DES group and 7 (0.17%) in the BMS group, showing similar event rates after risk adjustment (adjusted hazard ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 0.1 to 18.4, p = 0.9). Four patients with LAST treated with DESs (50%) and 1 treated with BMSs (14%) were associated with discontinuation of antiplatelet therapy. Two cases (25%) of LAST with DESs occurred in patients on aspirin monotherapy and another 2 cases (25%) occurred in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy. There was no case of in-hospital death associated with LAST events. At 6-month follow-up after LAST events, major adverse cardiac events occurred in only 3 patients (43%) in the BMS group. In conclusion, the incidence of LAST was similar after DES and BMS implantations. LAST treated with DESs was associated with antiplatelet therapy discontinuation in a significant number of patients, and LAST events also developed on dual antiplatelet therapy. Patients with LAST and DESs showed favorable outcomes during follow-up.     

Usefulness of preprocedure high-sensitivity C-reactive protein to predict death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis according to stent type in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction randomized to bare metal or drug-eluting stenting during primary percutaneous coronary intervention

It is unknown whether high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) predicts outcome depending on implanted stent type. We investigated the prognostic value of hs-CRP in relation to type of stent implanted in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Immediately before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), 301 patients had blood drawn. Patients were categorized according to hs-CRP levels and combination of hs-CRP (≤2 vs >2 mg/L) and stent type (bare metal stent [BMS] vs drug-eluting stent [DES]). Hs-CRP >2 mg/L (median, hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 5.6, p = 0.007) and the combined variable of hs-CRP >2 mg/L and BMS (hazard ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 4.5, p = 0.006) independently predicted the composite end point of death and MI at 36-month follow-up. There was a significant interaction (p = 0.006) for hs-CRP and stent type. Survival analysis demonstrated significant differences for occurrence of death and MI: 4.8% in BMS + CRP ≤2 mg/L, 11.9% in DES + CRP ≤2 mg/L, 17.6% in DES + CRP >2 mg/L, and 27.9% in BMS + CRP >2 mg/L. None of the 14 stent thromboses occurred in patients with BMS + CRP ≤2 mg/L. In conclusion, preprocedure hs-CRP predicts outcome after pPCI in patients with STEMI. Our hypothesis-generating data indicate that BMS implantation should be preferred when hs-CRP is ≤2 mg/L and DES when hs-CRP is >2 mg/L to decrease long-term adverse outcomes including stent thrombosis in patients with STEMI treated with pPCI. These findings need confirmation in larger randomized clinical trials.     

Late (3 years) follow-up of successful versus unsuccessful revascularization in chronic total coronary occlusions treated by drug eluting stent

The success rate of recanalization of coronary chronic total occlusion (CTO) has improved in recent years, but the clinical benefit associated with successful CTO recanalization in the drug-eluting stent (DES) era is not well known. A cohort of 317 consecutive patients (mean age 65 ± 10, 84% men) with CTOs (defined as Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction [TIMI] flow grade 0 and duration >3 months) of native coronary vessels in which percutaneous coronary intervention was attempted was enrolled from June 2005 to March 2009. All successful procedures (196 patients) were performed by DES implantation. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs; a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization) was assessed during a mean follow-up period of 3 years. MACE predictors were assessed in clinical, angiographic, and procedural data, including procedural success. Patients with successful percutaneous coronary intervention experienced a significantly lower MACE rate compared to those with failed procedures (17 [9%] vs 32 [26%], p = 0.008). Patients with multivessel disease experienced MACEs more frequently than those with single-vessel disease (45 [22%] vs 4 [4%], p = 0.002). On multiple Cox regression analysis, the presence of multivessel disease and CTO opening failure were independent predictors of MACEs (hazard ratio 2.31, 95% confidence interval 1.17 to 4.96, p = 0.01, and hazard ratio 1.81, 95% confidence interval 1.33 to 4.12, p = 0.02, respectively). The worst prognosis was confined to patients with multivessel disease and failed procedures (hazard ratio 2.73, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 3.92, p = 0.03). In conclusion, successful recanalization of CTOs with DES translates into a reduction of the 3-year MACE rate compared to failed procedures, and the worst prognosis is observed in patients with failed procedures and multivessel disease, a notion that might be taken into account in the management of patients with coronary CTOs.     

Rates of stent thrombosis in bare-metal versus drug-eluting stents (from a large Australian multicenter registry)

Recent reports suggest that drug-eluting stents (DESs) may increase the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) relative to bare-metal stents (BMSs). Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare DES and BMS outcomes with a specific focus on ST. We analyzed 30-day and 1-year outcomes of 2,919 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation from the Melbourne Interventional Group registry. Academic Research Consortium definitions of ST were used: (1) definite ST (confirmed using angiography in patients with an acute coronary syndrome), (2) probable ST (unexplained death <30 days or target-vessel myocardial infarction without angiographic confirmation), and (3) possible ST (unexplained death >30 days). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of ST. The incidence of ST (early or late) was similar between BMSs and DESs (1.6% vs 1.4%; p=0.66), and DES use was not predictive of ST. Independent predictors of ST included the absence of clopidogrel therapy at 30 days (odds ratio [OR] 2.58, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.29 to 5.29, p<0.01), renal failure (OR 3.30, 95% CI 1.43 to 7.59, p<0.01), index procedure presentation with an acute coronary syndrome (OR 2.59, 95% CI 1.14 to 5.87, p=0.02), diabetes mellitus (OR 2.25, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.23, p=0.01), and total stent length >or=20 mm (OR 1.85, 95% CI 1.00 to 3.42, p=0.04). In conclusion, DESs were not associated with increased risk of ST compared with BMSs at 12 months in this large Australian registry that selectively used DESs for patients at high risk of restenosis.     

药物洗脱支架在老年急性心肌梗死患者治疗中疗效观察

目的评价药物洗脱支架治疗老年ST段抬高型急性心肌梗死（AMI）患者的安全性和有效性。方法连续性收集2005年1月-12月行直接介入治疗的105例60岁及以上的老年ST段抬高型AMI患者，其中，49例接受药物洗脱支架植入，56例接受金属裸支架植入，对两组患者术后30d和240d的主要心血管不良事件（包括死亡、非致死性再梗死和靶血管血运重建）进行随访、分析。结果药物洗脱支架组和金属裸支架组的手术成功率差异无统计学意义（96％与95％，P〉0．05）。术后30d内，药物洗脱支架组和金属裸支架组的心脏不良事件发生率差异无统计学意义（8、2％与12．5％，P〉0.05），两组由冠状动脉造影证实的早期支架内血栓发生率差异无统计学意义（2．0％与1．8％，P〉0.05）。术后240d随访，与金属裸支架植入比较，药物洗脱支架植入能明显减少心脏不良事件发生率[12．2％与30、0％，相对危险比为0、38，95％可信限（CI）：0、12～0、96，P〈0.053，靶血管血运重建率显著降低[2.0％与25．0％，相对危险比为0．08（95％CI：0．01～0.63），P〈0．01]。术后30～240d，两组未发生晚期支架内血栓。结论与金属裸支架比较，药物洗脱支架应用于老年ST段抬高型AMI患者可能并不增加支架内血栓的中期发生率，同时可以降低患者8个月靶血管再次血运重建率。     

Meta-analysis comparison (nine trials) of outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus

In patients with diabetes mellitus, outcome after drug-eluting stent (DES) versus bare metal stent (BMS) implantation remains under investigation; although lower reintervention rates were reported, incidence of death and myocardial infarction (MI) during follow-up is not completely characterized. Thus, we performed a meta-analysis of available randomized studies evaluating follow-up events of DESs versus BMSs in patients with diabetes mellitus. Randomized trials reporting outcome of DES versus BMS in diabetic patients with a follow-up > or =6 months were included. Outcomes analyzed were (1) death, (2) MI, (3) in-stent restenosis (ISR) and target lesion revascularization (TLR), and (4) stent thrombosis. Data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers. A total of 9 trials, including 1,141 patients, were found. ISR occurred in 8% of patients with DESs versus 41% of those with BMSs (odds ratio [OR] 0.13, 95 confidence interval [CI] 0.09 to 0.20, p <0.00001) and TLR in 8% versus 27% (OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.33, p <0.00001). There was no difference in the incidence of stent thrombosis (1.1% vs 1.2%, p = 0.98) or death (2.4% vs 2.3%, p = 0.91). MI occurred in 3.5% of patients with DESs versus 7.2% of those with BMSs (52% risk decrease, p = 0.02). Decrease of ISR with DESs was observed in noninsulin-treated (OR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.26, p <0.00001) and insulin-treated (OR 0.22, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.37, p <0.00001) patients. In conclusion, diabetic patients receiving DESs have lower risk of ISR and TLR versus those treated with BMSs; use of DESs in patients with diabetes mellitus significantly decreases the incidence of MI during follow-up, without affecting mortality or stent thrombosis.     

Stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and death after drug-eluting and bare-metal stent coronary interventions.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to examine outcomes subsequent to implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Use of DES might be associated with increased risk of stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), and death. METHODS: From January 2002 through June 2005, data from all percutaneous coronary interventions in western Denmark were prospectively recorded in the Western Denmark Heart Registry; 12,395 consecutive patients (17,152 lesions) treated with stent implantation were followed for 15 months. Data on death and MI were ascertained from the national databases. The Academic Research Consortium definition of ST was used. RESULTS: The DES were implanted in 3,548 patients (5,422 lesions) and BMS were implanted in 8,847 patients (11,730 lesions). Definite, probable, or possible ST was found in 190 (2.15%) patients in the BMS group and in 64 (1.80%) patients in the DES. The risk of definite ST was similar in the 2 groups (DES: 0.65%; BMS: 0.61%). Very late definite ST (between 12 and 15 months after implantation) occurred more frequently in patients receiving DES (hazard ratio [HR] 10.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27 to 93.76). Also, the risk of MI between 12 and 15 months after implantation was higher in the DES group (HR 4.00, 95% CI 2.06 to 7.79). Mortality was similar in the 2 groups. Target lesion revascularization was reduced by 43% in patients treated with DES (HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.67). CONCLUSIONS: The minor risk of ST and MI within 15 months after implantation of DES seems unlikely to outweigh the benefit of these stents.     

Comparison of stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and mortality following drug-eluting versus bare-metal stent coronary intervention in patients with diabetes mellitus

The aim of this study was to examine outcomes subsequent to implantation of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare-metal stents (BMSs) in patients with diabetes. From January 2002 to June 2005, data from all percutaneous coronary interventions performed in Western Denmark were prospectively recorded. A total of 1,423 consecutive diabetic patients treated with stent implantation (2,094 lesions) were followed up for 15 months. Of these, 871 patients (1,180 lesions) were treated with a BMS, and 552 patients (914 lesions) were treated with a DES. Dual antiplatelet therapy was recommended for 12 months in both treatment groups. Data for death and myocardial infarction (MI) were ascertained from national health care databases. Use of DESs was not associated with increased risk of definite stent thrombosis (adjusted relative risk [RR] 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.10 to 3.26) or MI (adjusted RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.52). In the DES group compared with the BMS group, adjusted RRs of target-lesion revascularization (adjusted RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.71), total mortality (adjusted RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.99), and cardiac mortality (adjusted RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.90) decreased by 52%, 34%, and 47%, respectively. In conclusion, use of DESs reduced target-lesion revascularization in diabetic patients receiving routine clinical care. This result was obtained without increased risk of death, stent thrombosis, or MI.     

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.     

Treatment of saphenous vein graft lesions with drug-eluting stents: immediate and midterm outcome

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of the present report was to evaluate clinical and angiographic outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions. BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of DES implantation for the treatment SVG lesions remains uncertain. METHODS: We evaluated in-hospital and six-month outcomes in 61 consecutive patients treated with DES in SVG lesions from March 2002 to March 2004 (DES group), as compared to 89 consecutive patients treated with bare-metal stents (BMS) in the 24 months immediately before the introduction of DES (BMS group). Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) were recorded in-hospital and at six-month follow-up. RESULTS: The rate of in-hospital MACE was similar between the two groups (6.6% vs. 5.6%, p = 1.0). Cumulative MACE at six months was 11.5% in the DES group and 28.1% in the BMS group (p = 0.02). The DES group had a significantly lower incidence of in-segment restenosis (10.0% vs. 26.7%, p = 0.03), TLR (3.3% vs. 19.8%, p = 0.003), and TVR (4.9% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.003). By Cox regression analysis, diabetes (hazard ratio [HR]: 3.03; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.33 to 6.90; p = 0.008), usage of BMS (HR: 2.53; 95% CI: 1.07 to 5.97; p = 0.03), and age of SVG (HR: 1.10; 95% CI: 1.02 to 1.19; p = 0.02) were identified as predictors of MACE at six-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to BMS implantation, DES implantation in SVG lesions appears safe with favorable and improved mid-term outcomes.     

Comparison of late (3-year) registry data outcomes using bare metal versus drug-eluting stents for treating ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarctions

Clinical trial data have supported the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) in the treatment of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMIs), but contemporary "real-world" registry data regarding the late safety profiles of DES are limited. This prospective registry-based study included 1,569 consecutive unselected patients with STEMIs who underwent emergency primary percutaneous coronary intervention from January 2001 to December 2009. Of the study cohort, 200 patients (12.7%) received DES, while 1,369 patients (87.3%) underwent bare-metal stent (BMS) placement. The primary end points of the study were all-cause mortality and target vessel revascularization at 1, 2, and 3 years. Survival status was assessed by municipal civil registries. Repeat revascularization procedures were prospectively collected in the hospital database. All-cause mortality was significantly lower in the DES group at 3 years (4.2% vs 13.5%, p = 0.007) compared to BMS-treated patients, but DES use was not an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (adjusted odds ratio 0.5, 95% confidence interval 0.2 to 1.2, p = 0.10). Target vessel revascularization was significantly lower in the DES group compared to the BMS group at 3 years (10.5% vs 21%, p = 0.001). DES use was an independent predictor of reduced target vessel revascularization (adjusted odds ratio 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.25 to 0.77, p = 0.004). Late definite stent thrombosis occurring after 1 year occurred in 4 (2.5%) patients in the DES group compared to 6 (0.7%) in the BMS group (p = 0.05). DES use was an independent predictor of late stent thrombosis (adjusted odds ratio 8.6, 95% confidence interval 1.9 to 38, p = 0.004). In conclusion, this contemporary registry-based study of patients who underwent primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI demonstrated improved revascularization rates without increased 3-year hazard of adverse clinical outcomes in DES-treated patients.     

Comparison of long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes following implantation of bare metal stents and drug-eluting stents in aorto-ostial lesions

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to aorto-ostial (AO) lesions is technically demanding and associated with high revascularization rates. The aim of this study was to assess outcomes after bare metal stent (BMS) compared to drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation after PCI to AO lesions. A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted of all consecutive patients who underwent PCI to AO lesions at 2 centers. Angiographic and clinical outcomes in 230 patients with DES from September 2000 to December 2009 were compared to a historical control group of 116 patients with BMS. Comparison of the baseline demographics showed more diabetics (32% vs 16%, p = 0.001), lower ejection fractions (52.3 ± 9.7% vs 55.0 ± 11.5%, p = 0.022), longer stents (17.55 ± 7.76 vs 14.37 ± 5.60 mm, p <0.001), and smaller final stent minimum luminal diameters (3.43 ± 0.53 vs 3.66 ± 0.63 mm, p = 0.001) in the DES versus BMS group. Angiographic follow-up (DES 68%, BMS 66%) showed lower restenosis rates with DES (20% vs 47%, p <0.001). At clinical follow-up, target lesion revascularization rates were lowest with DES (12% vs 27%, p = 0.001). Cox regression analysis with propensity score adjustment for baseline differences suggested that DES were associated with a reduction in target lesion revascularization (hazard ratios 0.28, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.52, p <0.001) and major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio 0.50, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.79, p = 0.003). There was a nonsignificantly higher incidence of Academic Research Consortium definite and probable stent thrombosis with DES (n = 9 [4%] vs n = 1 [1%], p = 0.131). In conclusion, despite differences in baseline characteristics favoring the BMS group, PCI with DES in AO lesions was associated with improved outcomes, with lower restenosis, revascularization, and major adverse cardiac event rates.     

Five-Year Outcomes in Patients With Chronic Total Coronary Occlusion Treated With Drug-Eluting vs Bare-Metal Stents: A Case-Control Study

Background

Limited data exist on long-term safety and effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in true chronic total coronary occlusion (CTO) settings. We evaluated 5-year clinical outcomes of patients with CTO treated successfully with DES vs bare-metal stent (BMS).

Methods

We compared the 5-year clinical outcomes of 156 patients treated with DES implantation with outcomes of a historical cohort of 159 patients treated with BMS. Primary end point was freedom from major adverse cardiac events (MACEs; defined as death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target lesion revascularization [TLR]); secondary end points were freedom from target vessel failure (TVF; combination of target vessel revascularization, MI, and cardiac death) and TLR at 5 years.

Results

After 5 years, the DES group had significantly superior event-free survival from MACE (84% vs 69%; log rank P < 0.001), TVF (71% vs 84%; P = 0.002), and TLR (77% vs 92%; P = 0.0001), compared with the BMS group. The Cox proportional hazards model identified BMS vs DES (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] = 3.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.85-6.17; P = 0.001), final minimal lumen diameter (HR, 0.27; 95% CI, 0.14-0.52; P = 0.0001), and stent length (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 1.00-1.03; P = 0.03) as independent predictors of MACE at 5-year follow-up. Twelve (7%) and 7 (4%) stent thromboses occurred in the DES and BMS groups (P = 0.23), respectively.

Conclusions

After 5 years, DESs were superior to BMSs in reducing MACE, TVF, and TLR in patients with CTO and should be the preferred strategy.     

Long-term follow-up of drug-eluting stents when inserted for on- and off-label indications

This study reports long-term follow-up of the on- and off-label implantation of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in a retrospective study of 1,044 patients. Off-label implantation of DESs was performed for left main coronary artery lesions, bifurcation lesions, bare metal stent restenosis, ostial disease, chronic total occlusions, saphenous vein graft lesions, internal mammary artery graft lesions, left ventricular ejection fraction <30%, and acute myocardial infarction. End points examined were procedural complications, in-hospital myocardial infarction, and acute stent thrombosis; end points examined at follow-up were subacute stent thrombosis, late stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, death, and major adverse clinical events (MACEs; a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization). The study included 364 patients who received a DES on an on-label basis and 680 patients who received a DES on an off-label basis. Patient characteristics were not significantly different between the 2 groups, and there was no difference in procedural complications or acute stent thrombosis (on-label, 0%; off-label, 0.3%; p=0.55). There were no significant differences in subacute stent thrombosis (0% vs 0.6%, p=0.3), late stent thrombosis (1.4% vs 1.2%, p=0.78), death at follow-up (4.9% vs 4.1%, p=0.53), or myocardial infarction (1.9% vs 2.4%, p=0.83). Off-label DES implantation was associated with higher rates of target vessel revascularization (13.2% vs 24.1%, p=0.0001) and MACEs (17.6% vs 28.2%, p=0.0001). Multivariate analysis showed associations between target vessel revascularization and MACEs (respective p values) with bare metal stent restenosis (p=0.001 and p=0.001), diabetes mellitus (p=0.002 and p=0.001), and previous coronary artery bypass grafting (p=0.04 and p=0.01), but not off-label DES implantation (p=1.36 and p=1.16). In conclusion, DES use in the off-label situations studied was safe and was not associated with increased stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, or death. Multivariate analysis showed that off-label DES implantation was not a risk factor for target vessel revascularization or MACEs.     

Results and predictors of angiographic restenosis and long-term adverse cardiac events after drug-eluting stent implantation for aorto-ostial coronary artery disease

The correlates of angiographic and clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for aorto-ostial lesions remain unknown. This study evaluated long-term results of DES implantation for aorto-ostial lesions and determined risk factors for restenosis and adverse cardiac events. In total, 184 consecutive patients who underwent DES implantation for aorto-ostial lesions were investigated (DES group) compared with 172 consecutive patients treated with bare metal stents before the introduction of DESs (pre-DES group). Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were defined as death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, and need for target lesion revascularization. The DES group had significantly higher risk clinical and procedural profiles than the pre-DES group. Procedural success rates were 99.5% in the DES group and 100% in the pre-DES group (p = 1.0). The DES group had a significantly lower incidence of in-segment restenosis (10.5% vs 26.0%, p = 0.001) and target lesion revascularization (4.3% vs 11.6%, p = 0.011). Cumulative MACE rates at 1 year were 6.5% in the DES group and 13.4% in the pre-DES group (p = 0.03). By multivariate analysis, treatment of bypass graft, treatment of in-stent restenosis, and reference vessel diameter were predictors of restenosis, and only reference vessel diameter (hazard ratio 0.20, 95% confidence interval 0.05 to 0.75, p = 0.017) inversely correlated with 1-year MACEs after DES implantation. In conclusion, DES implantation for aorto-ostial lesions is associated with a significant decrease in restenosis and MACEs compared with the pre-DES phase. Treatment of bypass graft and in-stent restenosis and reference vessel size were identified as predictors of restenosis and/or long-term MACEs after DES implantation.     

Unrestricted use of drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents in routine clinical practice: findings from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated the effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) as used in routine clinical practice. BACKGROUND: Randomized trials have shown that DES prevent target vessel revascularization in selected patients, but whether this translates into superior outcomes, compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), for the full spectrum of patients treated with DES in North America is unknown. METHODS: Patients in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry enrolled in 2004 who received at least 1 DES (n = 1,460) were compared with 1,763 patients enrolled in the recruitment period immediately preceding the approval of DES (2001 to 2002) who received at least 1 BMS. RESULTS: Patients receiving DES more often had diabetes mellitus and less often presented with an acute myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, cumulative death and MI was 7.6% in DES- and 8.7% in BMS-treated patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 1.15; p = 0.34). The 1-year rate of target vessel revascularization was 5.0% in DES and 9.2% in BMS patients (p < 0.001), and the risk of any repeat revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass was lower in DES patients (adjusted HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.60; p < 0.001). Patients with both simple and complex lesion characteristics benefited from DES with lower risk of repeat target vessel revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention compared with BMS (any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; absence of any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.71). The 1-year incidence of stent thrombosis was 1.0% in DES patients. CONCLUSIONS: The generalized use of DES resulted in better outcomes than BMS, with fewer clinically driven revascularization procedures and similar rates of death and MI at 1 year.     

Influence of diabetes mellitus on long-term (five-year) outcomes of drug-eluting stents and coronary artery bypass grafting for multivessel coronary revascularization

Diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for coronary artery disease (CAD) and for diffuse and progressive atherosclerosis. We evaluated the outcomes of drug-eluting stent (DES) placement and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in 891 diabetic patients (489 for DES implantation and 402 for CABG) and 2,151 nondiabetic patients (1,058 for DES implantation and 1,093 for CABG) with multivessel CAD treated from January 2003 through December 2005 and followed up for a median 5.6 years. Outcomes of interest included death; the composite outcome of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke; and repeat revascularization. In diabetic patients, after adjusting for baseline covariates, 5-year risk of death (hazard ratio 1.01, 95% confidence interval 0.77 to 1.33, p = 0.96) and the composite of death, MI, or stroke (hazard ratio 1.03, 95% confidence interval 0.80 to 1.31, p = 0.91) were similar in patients undergoing DES or CABG. However, rate of repeat revascularization was significantly higher in the DES group (hazard ratio 3.69, 95% confidence interval 2.64 to 5.17, p <0.001). These trends were consistent in nondiabetic patients (hazard ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.55 to 1.16, p = 0.23 for death; hazard ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.56 to 1.05, p = 0.10 for composite of death, MI, or stroke; hazard ratio 2.77, 95% CI 1.95 to 3.91, p <0.001 for repeat revascularization). There was no significant interaction between diabetic status and treatment strategy on clinical outcomes (p for interaction = 0.36 for death; 0.20 for the composite of death, MI, or stroke; and 0.40 for repeat revascularization). In conclusion, there was no significant prognostic influence of diabetes on long-term treatment with DES or CABG in patients with multivessel CAD.     

Gender-based outcomes in percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry)

Gender-based outcomes have not been evaluated in unselected patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs). We investigated whether gender influences the relative safety and efficacy of DESs compared with bare metal stents (BMSs) in routine clinical practice. Using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry, in-hospital and 1-year outcomes were stratified by gender in patients who received > or =1 DES (486 women, 974 men) or BMS (631 women, 1,132 men). There were significant baseline differences by gender, including older age and a higher prevalence of co-morbidities in women and more previous coronary artery disease in men. There were no gender-related differences in in-hospital myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass grafting, and death in those treated with BMSs or DESs. Antiplatelet use and stent thrombosis (1.3% of women vs 1.2% of men, p = 0.85) were similar at 1 year with DESs. At 1 year, patients with DESs had a lower rate of repeat PCI (14.1% in women vs 9.5%, p = 0.02; 12.0% in men vs 8.8%, p = 0.02). Adjusted 1-year outcomes in patients with BMSs and DESs, including death and myocardial infarction, were independent of gender. Use of DESs was the only factor, other than age, that conferred a lower risk for the need for repeat PCI in women (relative risk 0.61, 95% confidence interval 0.41 to 0.89, p = 0.01) and men (relative risk 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.51 to 0.91, p = 0.001). In conclusion, the widespread use of DESs is safe and has decreased clinically driven revascularization compared with BMSs equally in women and men.     

Comparison of bare-metal and drug-eluting stents in patients with chronic kidney disease (from the NHLBI Dynamic Registry)

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) have a disproportionate burden of coronary artery disease and commonly undergo revascularization. The role and safety of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using drug-eluting stents (DESs) verses bare-metal stents in patients with CKD not on renal replacement therapy has not been fully evaluated. This study investigated the efficacy and safety of DES in patients with CKD not on renal replacement therapy. Patients were drawn from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry and were stratified by renal function based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Of the 4,157 participants, 1,108 had CKD ("low GFR" <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)), whereas 3,049 patients had normal renal function ("normal GFR" ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). For each stratum of renal function we compared risk of death, myocardial infarction, or repeat revascularization between subjects who received DESs and bare-metal stents at the index procedure. Patients with low GFR had higher 1-year rates of death and myocardial infarction and a decreased rate of repeat revascularization compared to patients with normal GFR. Use of DESs was associated with a decreased need for repeat revascularization in the normal-GFR group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.63, 95% confidence interval 0.50 to 0.79, p <0.001) but not in the low-GFR group (hazard ratio 0.69, 95% confidence interval 0.45 to 1.06, p = 0.09). Risks of death and myocardial infarction were not different between the 2 stents in either patient population. In conclusion, presence of CKD predicted poor outcomes after PCI with high rates of mortality regardless of stent type. The effect of DES in decreasing repeat revascularization appeared to be attenuated in these patients.