Percutaneous coronary intervention for unprotected left main disease in very high risk patients: safety of drug-eluting stents

Percutaneous treatment of unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) stenosis using drug-eluting stents (DES) has been suggested as the best approach for patients who are poor surgical candidates. Some concerns have recently been raised regarding the risk of stent thrombosis following DES implantation. This study was performed in order to evaluate the safety of DES, as compared to bare metal stents (BMS), for ULMCA stenosis treatment in very high risk patients with a high likelihood of stent thrombosis. Forty-two consecutive patients were treated with either BMS (20) or DES (22) for ULMCA critical stenosis. Inclusion criteria were: ST elevation myocardial infarction, non-ST elevation myocardial infarction, cardiogenic shock, or logistic European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation ≥ 13%. At 1 year, one case of late thrombosis and three cases of restenosis were reported in the BMS group and none in the DES group, leading to a significantly inferior rate of target lesion revascularization (20.0 vs. 0%, p = 0.048) and major adverse cardiac events (65.0 vs. 19%, p = 0.004). DES placement for ULMCA stenosis also appears to be a safe therapeutic choice in very high-risk patients, as it provides the benefit of a reduction in restenosis without increasing the risk of early or late stent thrombosis.     

Safety and efficacy with drug-eluting stent in ST-segment elevation and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to reduce the need for repeat revascularization compared with bare metal stents (BMS). However, there is little information regarding the safety and long-term efficacy of DES in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). HYPOTHESIS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DES in patients with AMI. METHODS: Data from 211 consecutive patients with AMI treated with DES were compared with those from 228 consecutive patients with AMI treated with BMS. All patients were treated within 7 days of symptom onset. The incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events ([MACE]: death, reinfarction, and target vessel revascularization) was evaluated at 30 days and 1 year. RESULTS: Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar for both stent groups. However, patients who received DES had longer lesion lengths (23.0 +/- 12.7 vs. 18.8 +/- 10.6 mm, respectively; p < 0.001) and smaller reference diameters (2.97 +/- 0.52 vs. 3.19 +/- 0.63 mm, respectively, p < 0.001). At 30 days, the incidence rates of MACE (DES vs. BMS: 2.2 vs. 1.9%, p = 1.000) and stent thrombosis (BMS vs. DES: 0.9 vs. 1.7%; p = 0.434) did not differ significantly between the groups. At 1 year, patients with DES had a lower rate of MACE (BMS vs. DES: 14.0 vs. 6.6%; p = 0.011) primarily due to a lower target vessel revascularization rate (BMS vs. DES: 9.6 vs. 4.8%; p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: The DES appear to be superior to the BMS in reducing the risk of MACE in patients with AMI.     

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.     

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.     

Simultaneous multivessel acute drug-eluting stent thrombosis

Stent thrombosis (ST) in the era of bare metal stents (BMS) using high-pressure stent deployment and combined anti-platelet therapy is an uncommon but feared complication. There is concern for an elevated risk of stent thrombosis (ST) with drug-eluting stents (DES). We describe a case of simultaneous multivessel drug-eluting stent thrombosis 8 h after deployment of paclitaxel-eluting stents in the right coronary (RCA) and left anterior descending (LAD) arteries.     

Pathology of drug-eluting stents in humans: delayed healing and late thrombotic risk.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined human drug-eluting stents (DES) to determine the long-term effects of these stents on coronary arterial healing and identified mechanisms underlying late stent thrombosis (LST). BACKGROUND: Although DES reduce the need for repeat revascularization compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), data suggest the window of thrombotic risk for Cypher (Cordis Corp., Miami Lakes, Florida) and Taxus (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) DES extends far beyond that for BMS. METHODS: From a registry of 40 autopsies of DES (68 stents), 23 DES cases of >30 days duration were compared with 25 matched autopsies of BMS implantation. Late stent thrombosis was defined as an acute thrombus within a stent >30 days old. RESULTS: Of 23 patients with DES >30 days old, 14 had evidence of LST. Cypher and Taxus DES showed greater delayed healing characterized by persistent fibrin deposition (fibrin score 2.3 +/- 1.1 vs. 0.9 +/- 0.8, p = 0.0001) and poorer endothelialization (55.8 +/- 26.5%) compared with BMS (89.8 +/- 20.9, p = 0.0001). Moreover, DES with LST showed more delayed healing compared with patent DES. In 5 of 14 patients suffering LST, antiplatelet therapy had been withdrawn. Additional procedural and pathologic risk factors for LST were: 1) local hypersensitivity reaction; 2) ostial and/or bifurcation stenting; 3) malapposition/incomplete apposition; 4) restenosis; and 5) strut penetration into a necrotic core. CONCLUSIONS: The Cypher and Taxus DES result in delayed arterial healing when compared with BMS of similar implant duration. The cause of DES LST is multifactorial with delayed healing in combination with other clinical and procedural risk factors playing a role.     

Long-term outcomes following coronary drug-eluting- and bare-metal-stent implantation

Background

Although drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce restenosis rates relative to bare-metal stents (BMS), recent reports have indicated that the use of DES may be associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis. Our study focused on the effect of stent type on clinical outcomes in a “real world” setting.

Methods

889 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either DES (Cypher or Taxus; n = 490) or BMS (n = 399) were enrolled in a prospective single center registry. The outcome analysis covered a period of up to 3.2 years (mean 2.7 years ± 0.5 years) and was based on 65 deaths, 27 myocardial infarctions, 76 clinically driven target lesion revascularizations (TLR), and 15 angiographically confirmed cases of definite stent thrombosis and was adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics.

Results

In total 1277 stents (613 BMS and 664 DES) were implanted in 1215 lesions. Despite a significantly different unadjusted death rate (10.1% and 5.1% in BMS and DES patients, respectively; p < 0.05), the patient groups did not differ significantly in the risk of myocardial infarction during 2.7 years of follow-up. After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics between groups, the difference in the cumulative incidence of death did not remain statistically significant (p = 0.22). Target lesion revascularizations occurred significantly less frequently in patients with DES compared to individuals after BMS implantation (5.9% and 11.8% in patients with DES and BMS, respectively; p < 0.05). The rate of angiographically confirmed stent thrombosis was 2.1% in patients with DES and 1.1% in BMS patients (p = 0.31).There was a significantly lower unadjusted event rate (including deaths, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis) in patients with drug-eluting stents than in those with bare-metal stents (16.4% and 25.8%, respectively), with 9.4 fewer such events per 100 patients (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.46 to 0.87). After adjustment, the relative risk for all outcome events in patients with drug-eluting stents was 0.79 (95% CI, 0.67 to 0.95). However, the adjusted relative risk for death and myocardial infarction did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted relative risk in patients with drug-eluting stents 0.94 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.37)).

Conclusions

In this real-world population, the beneficial effect of first generation DES in reducing the need for new revascularization compared with BMS extends to more than 2.5 years without evidence of a worse safety profile. The minor risk of stent thrombosis and myocardial infarction within this period after implantation of DES seems unlikely to outweigh the benefit of these stents.     

Characterization of plaque prolapse after drug-eluting stent implantation in diabetic patients: a three-dimensional volumetric intravascular ultrasound outcome study.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this research was to evaluate the plaque prolapse (PP) phenomenon after bare-metal (BMS) and drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients with diabetes mellitus using 3-dimensional volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). BACKGROUND: Plaque prolapse has been observed in up to 22% of patients treated with BMS. Diabetic patients have a larger atherothrombotic burden and may be more prone to have PP. However, the incidence of PP and its clinical impact after DES implantation is unknown. METHODS: Three-dimensional IVUS was performed after intervention and at 9-month follow-up in 168 patients with diabetes (205 lesions) treated with bare BX Velocity stents ((BX Velocity/Sonic, Cordis, Johnson & Johnson) (BMS, n = 65), sirolimus-eluting stents (Cypher, Cordis) (SES, n = 69), and paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus, Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) (PES, n = 71). Intravascular ultrasound data at the sites of PP were compared with stented segments without PP in each lesion. Outcomes were evaluated at 9- and 12-month follow-up. RESULTS: There were 42 sites of PP (BMS = 11, SES = 11, PES = 20, p = NS) in 34 stented segments of 205 (16.6%) lesions. Plaque prolapse was more frequent in the right coronary artery and in chronic total occlusion lesions. Post-procedure PP volume was 1.95 mm3 in BMS, 2.96 mm3 in SES, and 4.53 mm3 in PES. At follow-up, tissue volume increased at PP sites in both BMS and PES, but not after SES. Neointimal proliferation was similar between PP and non-PP sites. Stent thrombosis and restenosis rates were similar between PP and non-PP lesions. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of PP after implantation of new generation tubular stents in patients with diabetes remains high. Drug-eluting stent implantation was not associated with increased risk of PP. Plaque prolapse was not associated with stent thrombosis or increased neointimal proliferation.     

Long-term Outcomes of Drug-eluting versus Bare-metal stent for ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction

Background

Long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remain uncertain.

Objective

To investigate long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

Methods

We performed search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and ISI Web of Science (until February 2013) for randomized trials comparing more than 12-month efficacy or safety of DES with BMS in patients with STEMI. Pooled estimate was presented with risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects model.

Results

Ten trials with 7,592 participants with STEMI were included. The overall results showed that there was no significant difference in the incidence of all-cause death and definite/probable stent thrombosis between DES and BMS at long-term follow-up. Patients receiving DES implantation appeared to have a lower 1-year incidence of recurrent myocardial infarction than those receiving BMS (RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.00, p= 0.05). Moreover, the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) after receiving DES was consistently lowered during long-term observation (all p< 0.01). In subgroup analysis, the use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) was associated with reduced risk of stent thrombosis in STEMI patients (RR = 0.37, p=0.02).

Conclusions

DES did not increase the risk of stent thrombosis in patients with STEMI compared with BMS. Moreover, the use of DES did lower long-term risk of repeat revascularization and might decrease the occurrence of reinfarction.     

Stent thrombosis is a major concern in clinical practice: A single Saudi center experience

BackgroundDrug-eluting stents (DES) are used in the majority of patients who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and have reduced the rate of in-stent restenosis and repeated revascularization in comparison to bare metal stents. However, stent thrombosis (ST) is an uncommon but serious complication of coronary artery stents that is mostly fatal or presents as a large non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), usually with ST elevation.ObjectiveTo study the incidence of stent thrombosis in Middle Eastern Saudi patients who underwent PCI using both drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents (BMS). ST can occur acutely (within 24 h), sub acutely (within 30 days), or as late as one year (late) or even more than one year (very late).MethodsIn an observational, single center study in catheterization (cath) lab a total of 1386 patients underwent PCI between January 2008 and September 2010. The study included all patients in that period who had acute coronary syndrome and stable coronary artery disease (CAD).ResultsA total of 1386 patients had PCI and stent deployments; 19 (1.3%) patients had stent thrombosis, four patients (21%) received BMS and 15 patients (79%) received DES. Four patients had acute ST; five had subacute ST; eight patients had late ST; while two patients had very late ST. Nine patients (47%) had DM and eight patients (42%) had hypertension.ConclusionThe incidence of ST in Saudi patients who received DES at our center is similar to internationally reported numbers. Almost half of ST patients are diabetics and there is increasing concern that the risk for late stent thrombosis is slightly higher with DES than BMS.     

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.     

Thirty-day incidence and six-month clinical outcome of thrombotic stent occlusion after bare-metal, sirolimus, or paclitaxel stent implantation

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine the real-world incidence of angiographically confirmed and possible stent thrombosis (ST) in an unrestricted population during the first 30 days after bare-metal stent (BMS), sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation. BACKGROUND: Current data on ST in drug-eluting stents (DES) have come from randomized trials with strict entry criteria, which limits their generalizability to daily practice. METHODS: The study population comprised three sequential cohorts of 506 consecutive patients with BMS, 1,017 consecutive patients with SES, and 989 consecutive patients treated with PES. RESULTS: In the first 30 days after stent implantation, 6 BMS (1.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5% to 2.6%; p = 0.9), 10 SES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.5% to 1.8%), and 10 PES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.9%) patients developed angiographically proven ST. Multiple potential risk factors were identified in most patients with ST. Bifurcation stenting in the setting of acute myocardial infarction was an independent risk factor for angiographic ST in the entire population (odds ratio [OR] 12.9, 95% CI 4.7 to 35.8, p < 0.001). In patients with DES who had angiographic ST, 30-day mortality was 15%, whereas another 60% suffered a nonfatal myocardial infarction; no further deaths occurred during six months of follow-up. Including possible cases, 7 BMS (1.4%, 95% CI 0.7% to 2.8%), 15 SES (1.5%, 95% CI 0.9% to 2.4%), and 16 PES (1.6%, 95% CI 1.0% to 2.6%) patients had ST. CONCLUSIONS: The unrestricted use of SES or PES is associated with ST rates in the range expected for BMS. Stent thrombosis was associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Bifurcation stenting, when performed in patients with acute myocardial infarction, was associated with an increased risk of ST.     

Intravascular ultrasound assessed incomplete stent apposition and stent fracture in stent thrombosis after bare metal versus drug-eluting stent treatment the Nordic Intravascular Ultrasound Study (NIVUS)

Background

This prospective multicenter registry used intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in patients with definite stent thrombosis (ST) to compare rates of incomplete stent apposition (ISA), stent fracture and stent expansion in patients treated with drug-eluting (DES) versus bare metal (BMS) stents. ST is a rare, but potential life threatening event after coronary stent implantation. The etiology seems to be multifactorial.

Methods

124 patients with definite ST were assessed by IVUS during the acute ST event. The study was conducted in 15 high-volume percutaneous coronary intervention -centers in the Nordic–Baltic countries.

Results

In early or late ST there were no differences in ISA between DES and BMS. In very late ST, ISA was a more frequent finding in DES than in BMS (52% vs.16%; p = 0.005) and the maximum ISA area was larger in DES compared to BMS (1.1 ± 2.3 mm² vs. 0.1 ± 0.5 mm²; p = 0.004). Further, ISA was more prevalent in sirolimus-eluting than in paclitaxel-eluting stents (58% vs. 37%; p = 0.02). Stent fractures were found both in DES (16%) and BMS (24%); p = 0.28, and not related to time of stent thrombosis occurrence. For stents with nominal diameters ≥ 2.75 mm, 38% of the DES and 22% of the BMS had a minimum stent area of less than 5 mm²; p = 0.14.

Conclusions

Very late stent thrombosis was more prevalent and associated with more extensive ISA in DES than in BMS treated patients. Stent fracture was a common finding in ST after DES and BMS implantation.     

Drug-eluting stents are associated with similar cardiovascular outcomes when compared to bare metal stents in the setting of acute myocardial infarction

BACKGROUND: Recent randomized trials have demonstrated conflicting results regarding the use of drug-eluting stents (DESs) as compared to bare metal stents (BMSs) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We compared outcomes among patients presenting with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who received DES with those who received BMS. METHODS: In-hospital, 30-day, 6-month, and 1-year outcomes of a cohort of 122 patients who underwent primary or facilitated PCI and received a BMS were compared to 122 propensity-matched patients who received a DES. Seventy-two patients received sirolimus-eluting stents, and 50 received paclitaxel-eluting stents. RESULTS: Baseline demographics were similar among groups. One-, 6-, and 12-month outcomes, including reinfarction, death, stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization (TVR), were similar among groups. At 1 year, all-cause mortality was 13.3% in the BMS group and 9.2% in the DES group [P=not significant (ns)], recurrent MI was 5.3% in the BMS group vs. 4.4% in the DES group (P=ns), and TVR was 7% in the BMS group vs. 8.7% in the DES group (P=ns). CONCLUSIONS: Our data do not support the general use of DES in the setting of STEMI given similar cardiovascular outcomes among patients receiving BMS or DES, the need for long-term dual antiplatelet therapy with DES, and the possible repercussions of very late stent thrombosis.     

药物支架和裸支架治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者的随访研究

目的 评价药物支架和裸支架治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者疗效和预后方法217例接受了急诊经皮冠状动脉介入治疗急性ST段抬高心肌梗死患者纳入本研究,药物支架组92例、裸支架组125例,收集基线资料并随访6～38个月.结果 裸支架组的平均年龄(64.6±11.9)岁、Killip分级(2、3、4级)为25.9%和支架平均直径为(3.07±0.38)mm,均高于药物支架组(61.2±11.8)岁、12.2%和(2.91±0.40),差异有统计学意义(t=2.09,P=0.037;χ2=5.53,P=0.019;t=2.78,P=0.006),裸支架组平均左心室射血分数(55.4±11.9)%低于药物支架组(60.3±12.8)%,差异有统计学意义(t=-2.57,P=0.011).支架长度[(32.8±16.2)mm、(26.2±11.2)mm]、支架后扩张(45.7%、21.6%)、糖尿病(28.2%、16.0%)药物支架组高于裸支架组(t=-3.54,P=0.001;χ2=13.85,P=0.0002;χ2=4.77,P=0.030).随访期间,主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生36例,药物支架组6例(6.5%),裸支架组30例(24.0%)(χ2=11.70,P＜0.01).结论 急性ST段抬高心肌梗死急诊介入治疗是安全有效的,同裸支架相比药物支架明显降低随访期MACE发生率而改善预后.     

Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: an observational study of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to define the incidence of late clinical events and late stent thrombosis in patients treated with drug-eluting (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) after the discontinuation of clopidogrel as well as their timing and outcome. BACKGROUND: There is growing concern that delayed endothelialization after DES implantation may lead to late stent thrombosis and related myocardial infarction (MI) or death. However, event rates and outcomes after clopidogrel discontinuation versus BMS are unknown. METHODS: A consecutive series of 746 nonselected patients with 1,133 stented lesions surviving 6 months without major events were followed for 1 year after the discontinuation of clopidogrel. Patients were assigned randomly 2:1 to DES versus BMS in BASKET (Basel Stent Kosten Effektivit?ts Trial). The primary focus of this observation was cardiac death/MI. RESULTS: Rates of 18-month cardiac death/MI were not different between DES and BMS patients. However, after the discontinuation of clopidogrel (between months 7 and 18), these events occurred in 4.9% after DES versus 1.3% after BMS implantation. Target vessel revascularization remained lower after DES, resulting in similar rates of all clinical events for this time period (DES 9.3%, BMS 7.9%). Documented late stent thrombosis and related death/target vessel MI were twice as frequent after DES versus BMS (2.6% vs. 1.3%). Thrombosis-related events occurred between 15 and 362 days after the discontinuation of clopidogrel, presenting as MI or death in 88%. CONCLUSIONS: After the discontinuation of clopidogrel, the benefit of DES in reducing target vessel revascularization is maintained but has to be balanced against an increase in late cardiac death or nonfatal MI, possibly related to late stent thrombosis.     

What is the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention?: A meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) is relatively limited. There is concern that DES used for percutaneous coronary intervention may result in subsequent thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on eight trials (total of 13 study arms) in 3,817 patients with coronary artery disease who were randomized to either PES or BMS. RESULTS: As compared with BMS, PES do not increase the hazard for thrombosis up to 12 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 2.04, p = 0.86]). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square value for Q-statistic = 5.90 [10 degrees of freedom], p = 0.82). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to trials with a polymeric stent platform (Treatment of de novo coronary disease using a single pAclitaXel elUting Stent [TAXUS]-I, -II, -IV, and -VI) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.53, p = 0.99), trials with longer lesions (TAXUS-IV and -VI) (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.91, p = 0.41), and trials that used a higher dose of paclitaxel (ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Clinical trial [ASPECT], European evaLUaTion of paclitaxel Eluting Stents [ELUTES], and DELIVER-I) (RR = 1.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.81, p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that standard dose PES do not increase the hazard of stent thrombosis compared to BMS.     

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.     

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。     

Frequency of and risk factors for stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent implantation during long-term follow-up

Despite concerns regarding the long-term safety of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation because of late-onset stent thrombosis, the actual incidence of stent thrombosis after 1 year is unknown. We investigated the incidence, risk factors, and association of antiplatelet therapy interruption for the development of stent thrombosis after DES implantation during long-term follow-up. A total of 1,911 consecutive patients with DES implantation were enrolled (sirolimus-eluting stents in 1,545 patients, 2,045 lesions; paclitaxel-eluting stents in 366 patients, 563 lesions). During long-term follow-up (median 19.4 months, interquartile range 15.3 to 24.3), 15 patients (0.8%, 95% confidence interval 0.5% to 1.3%) developed stent thrombosis within 6 hours to 20.4 months. Eleven patients (0.6%, 95% confidence interval 0.3% to 1.0%) had late thrombosis (median 6.1 months). The incidence of stent thrombosis was 3.3% (4 of 121 patients) in patients with complete interruption of antiplatelet therapy (vs 0.6% in those without, p = 0.004) and 7.8% (5 of 64 patients) with premature interruption of aspirin or clopidogrel, or both (vs 0.5% in those without, p < 0.001). Independent predictors of stent thrombosis were premature antiplatelet therapy interruption, primary stenting in acute myocardial infarction, and total stent length. Stent thrombosis also developed while patients were on dual antiplatelet therapy (all patients with acute/subacute stent thrombosis and 36% of those with late stent thrombosis; 47% of total with stent thrombosis). In conclusion, stent thrombosis occurred in 0.8% after DES implantation during long-term follow-up. The incidence of late stent thrombosis was 0.6%, similar to that for bare metal stents. The predictors of stent thrombosis were premature antiplatelet therapy interruption, primary stenting in acute myocardial infarction, and total stent length.