两种药物洗脱支架在冠状动脉复杂弥漫病变中的疗效比较

目的比较雷帕霉素洗脱支架(SES)和紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES)对长度≥25mm复杂病变的疗效。方法入选138例患者(男124例,女14例)冠状动脉(冠脉)病变长度≥25mm,接受SES和PES介入治疗,并且在支架术后6个月左右接受冠脉造影随访。结果共147处病变在6个月后随访。其中2型糖尿病患者43例(31·2%),C型病变129处(87·8%)。SES组的支架内再狭窄率(5·9%,17·7%,P=0·023)、支架段再狭窄率(9·4%,21·0%,P=0·048)和支架段晚期腔径丢失[(0·16±0·52)mm比(0·45±0·65)mm,P=0·003)]、支架内晚期腔径丢失[(0·26±0·46)mm比(0·60±0·66)mm,P=0·001)]明显低于PES组。两组之间在随访期间靶病变血管重建率(7·1%比12·9%,P=0·223)差异无统计学意义。结论对于复杂弥漫病变SES在再狭窄率和晚期腔径丢失要优于PES,对于远期预后的影响还需要进一步的观察。SES更适合用于复杂小血管病变。     

Comparison of short- (one month) and long- (twelve months) term outcomes of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in 293 consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus (from the RESEARCH and T-SEARCH registries)

This study evaluated and compared the efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (n = 145 patients) with that of paclitaxel-eluting stents (n = 148 patients) in 293 consecutive unselected patients who had diabetes mellitus. Baseline clinical characteristics and presentations were similar: mean age of 64 years, 50% presented with unstable angina or myocardial infarction, and 66% had multivessel disease. Angiographic and procedural characteristics differed, with more complex lesions and more vein grafts managed in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group. Overall mean stented length was 46 +/- 32 mm. There were no differences in unadjusted outcomes by stent type (1-year major adverse cardiac event rates of 20.4% for sirolimus-eluting stents vs 15.6% for paclitaxel-eluting stents, p = 0.12) or when adjusted for multivariate predictors (adjusted hazard ratio 0.68, 95% confidence interval 0.37 to 1.24, p = 0.21). Independent predictors of outcome in patients who had diabetes mellitus were stenting of the left main artery, stenting of the left anterior descending artery, creatinine clearance, and female gender. Patients who required insulin had a significantly higher, crude major adverse cardiac event rate at 1 year compared with those who used oral agents, but this rate became nonsignificant when adjusted for independent predictors of outcome.     

Impact of platelet reactivity after clopidogrel administration on drug-eluting stent thrombosis.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to determine whether nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel as revealed by high in vitro post-treatment platelet reactivity is predictive of drug-eluting stent (DES) thrombosis. BACKGROUND: No data exist about the impact of nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel on the risk of DES thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a prospective observational cohort study from July 2005 to August 2006 in an academic hospital. A total of 804 patients who had successful sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation were assessed for post-treatment platelet reactivity after a loading dose of 600 mg of clopidogrel. Patients with platelet aggregation by 10 mumol adenosine 5'-diphosphate > or =70% were defined as nonresponders. All patients received chronic dual antiplatelet treatment (aspirin 325 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg daily) for 6 months. The primary end point was the incidence of definite/probable early, subacute, and late stent thrombosis at 6-month follow-up. RESULTS: The incidence of 6-month definite/probable stent thrombosis was 3.1%. All stent thromboses were subacute or late. Of 804 patients, 105 (13%) were not responsive to clopidogrel. The incidence of stent thrombosis was 8.6% in nonresponders and 2.3% in responders (p < 0.001). By multivariate analysis, the predictors of stent thrombosis were as follows: nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel (hazard ratio [HR] 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.32 to 7.16; p = 0.009), left ventricular ejection fraction (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.92 to 0.98; p = 0.001), total stent length (HR 1.01, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.02; p = 0.010), and ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.04 to 5.63; p = 0.041). CONCLUSIONS: Nonresponsiveness to clopidogrel is a strong independent predictor of stent thrombosis in patients receiving sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents.     

The effect of paclitaxel-eluting stents on restenosis]

OBJECTIVE: In our study we aimed to investigate the effects of paclitaxel-eluting stent on restenosis. METHODS: Sixteen porcine were randomly assigned to two groups (n=8 per group): control group animals received conventional stent implantation and study group animals -paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation. Both groups were treated with 300 mg acetylsalicylic acid and 75 mg clopidogrel daily. The degree of neointimal proliferation and effect of drug-eluting stent on restenosis were evaluated 6 weeks after by angiography and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). RESULTS: Angiographic in-stent restenosis was lower in paclitaxel-eluting stent group (12.50 +/- 7.07% versus 41.25 +/- 28.50%, p=0.001). The IVUS data demonstrated that paclitaxel group animals had larger minimal lumen area (8.76 +/- 1.09 mm2 versus 6.23 +/- 3.10 mm2, p=0.028), smaller mean neointimal proliferation area (1.03 +/- 0.75 mm2 versus 3.55 +/- 2.86 mm2, p=0.01) and mean percent stenosis (10.71 +/- 8.10% versus 36.85 +/- 30.93%, p=0.01). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that drug-eluting stents may also have a preventive effect for the in-stent restenosis.     

Angiographic and clinical outcome following paclitaxel-eluting stent (taxus) implantation: a single center experience

Coronary stents dramatically improve acute outcomes of percutaneous coronary interventions but also induce abundant intraluminal neointimal growth. Drug-eluting stents reduce intimal hyperplasia, the main cause of in-stent restenosis. The safety and beneficial effects of paclitaxel-eluting stents (Taxus) in patients treated in daily practice remains to be defined. The aim of this study was to report the late outcomes of Taxus implantation in patients with coronary artery disease. The study population consisted of 151 patients (202 stents) who had undergone coronary Taxus stent implantation between March 2003 and May 2005. Patients were eligible for enrollment if there was symptomatic coronary artery disease or positive functional testing, and angiographic evidence of single or multivessel disease with a target lesion stenosis of 70% in a 2.0 mm vessel. The control coronary angiographies were performed after stent deployment at 12 +/- 2.8 months, and approximately 2 years of follow-up was completed. The polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent has been shown to be effective in reducing restenosis. Patients were followed-up for 16.7 +/- 7.4 months. All patients survived after stent implantation, but 2 (1.3%) patients experienced acute myocardial infarction after 3 and 9 months following angioplasty. Recurrent angina pectoris was observed in 3 patients. Angiographic evidence of restenosis was observed in these 5 patients. Three patients underwent angioplasty because of re- stenosis, and coronary artery bypass grafting was conducted in the other 2 patients. The results indicate that Taxus stents can be implanted with a very high success rate and have encouraging long-term angiographic and clinical results.     

Clopidogrel for prevention of major cardiac events after coronary stent implantation: 30-day and 6-month results in patients with smaller stents

OBJECTIVES: We developed this study to assess the procedural outcome, complications, and clinical follow-up in patients treated with different antiplatelet regimens after intracoronary stent implantation with small stents. Three hundred sixty-one consecutive patients, in whom at least one 3.0-mm intracoronary stent was implanted, were studied. METHODS: The study was a prospective, observational registry of unselected consecutive patients treated in our institution. Patients who underwent stent implantation between December 1997 and July 1998 were treated with aspirin and ticlopidine; those who received stents between August 1998 and February 1999 were treated with aspirin and clopidogrel. RESULTS: In the group treated with ticlopidine, there were 190 patients who had 253 lesions treated with 274 stents. Mean age was 59.1 years, 72% were male, 31% had unstable angina, 64% had 1 stent, 36% had >1 stent, and 23% had multivessel intervention. In the group treated with clopidogrel, there were 171 patients who had 226 lesions treated with 245 stents. Mean age was 60.4 years, 79% were male, 26% had unstable angina, 70% had 1 stent, 30% had >1 stent, and 26% had multivessel intervention. Complications at 30 days in the ticlopidine group were death in 1 (0.5%), stent occlusion in 3 (1. 6%; all reopened with repeat angioplasty), non-Q-wave myocardial infarction in 2 (1%), and urgent revascularization in 4 (2%). Complications at 30 days in the clopidogrel group were noncardiac death in 1 (1.2%), cardiac death in 1 (1.2%), stent occlusion in 0, non-Q-wave myocardial infarction in 3 (1.8%), and urgent revascularization in 0. Follow-up was available in 100% of patients in both groups (mean 253 +/- 75 days in the ticlopidine group, 198 +/- 53 days in the clopidogrel group). Complications at >30 days in the ticlopidine group were death in 1 and clinical restenosis in 11 (5.8%); 1 additional patient had an admission with unstable angina to the local hospital. Hence, recurrent angina as a consequence of target lesion restenosis occurred in 5.8%. Complications at >30 days in the clopidogrel group were death in 0 and clinical restenosis in 8 (4.7%); 2 additional patients were admitted with unstable angina to the local hospital, and 1 patient had a myocardial infarction 164 days after stent implantation. Hence, recurrent angina as a consequence of target lesion restenosis occurred in 4.7%. There were no significant differences in complications between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations suggest that clopidogrel can be used instead of ticlopidine in patients treated with stents with a diameter of 相似文献   

Preliminary experience with stent-supported coronary angioplasty in long narrowings using the long freedom force stent: Acute and six-month clinical and angiographic results in a series of 27 consecutive patients

This report describes our preliminary experience with coronary stent-supported angioplasty in long narrowings using a long stent with an innovative design. Twenty-seven consecutive patients with target lesions >20 mm in length had a stenting procedure using the Freedom Force long coronary stent (Global Therapeutics, Inc., Broomfield, CO). Target lesion length ranged from 20.7–57.5 mm (mean, 27.66 ± 9.41 mm). A total of 35 stents was implanted with a mean stented length of 36.26 ± 12.36 mm. The stenting procedure was successful in all patients. Single long stent implantation was performed in 19 patients, while 8 patients had double stent implantation. No major cardiac adverse events occurred during hospital stay. The restenosis rate at the 6-mo angiographic follow-up was 38% (follow-up rate, 96%). During follow-up, no major cardiac events such as death, myocardial infarction, or coronary artery surgery occurred, while 3 patients (11%), all with recurrent angina and angiographic restenosis, underwent repeat coronary angioplasty. Potential advantages of this innovative stent in long narrowings relate to its high flexibility in passing through long tortuous diseased segments, and in treating long lesions using only 1 or 2 stents. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 43:163–167, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Reduction of subacute stent thrombosis (SAT) using heparin-coated stents in a large-scale, real world registry

PURPOSE: This study was designed to compare the rates of subacute stent thrombosis (SAT) among patients receiving heparin-coated stents to patients receiving bare-metal stents in real world, contemporary coronary interventions. BACKGROUND: Controlled trials with heparin-coated coronary stents have shown a trend toward decreased rates of SAT. METHODS AND RESULTS: The data in this study were collected from a single, large cardiac center over a period of 9 months. All patients who underwent coronary stent implantation during this 9-month period were included in the study (1,288 patients; 1,366 procedures; 2,231 stents). All patients were treated with aspirin and clopidogrel (or ticlopidine) after stenting. Primary thrombotic outcome was defined as angiographically documented SAT and/or sudden unexplained cardiac death (SCD) within 30 days of the procedure. Follow-up data (1,264/1,276 patients) were obtained in 99% of patients. A total of 337 patients received 543 heparin-coated stents (BX Velocity Hepacoat) and 939 patients received bare-metal stents (1,688 stents). SAT was seen in 25/1,024 procedures (2.44%) in the bare-metal stent group and 1/342 procedures (0.29%) in the heparin-coated stent group. Primary thrombotic outcomes (SAT or SCD) were observed in 31/1,024 procedures (3.03%) in the bare-metal stent cohort and in 2/342 procedures (0.58%) in the heparin-coated stent group. The vast majority (96%) of the patients who had SAT within 30 days had initial stent placement for an acute coronary syndrome (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: This large, single-center registry demonstrates a significant reduction of SAT using heparin-coated stents compared to bare-metal stents in real world coronary interventions.     

Randomized trial of paclitaxel- and sirolimus-eluting stents in small coronary vessels.

AIMS: Sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents effectively reduce restenosis in small coronary vessels. The relative efficacy of these drug-eluting stents in this high-risk subset is not known. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 360 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for de novo lesions in native coronary vessels with a diameter of <2.80 mm received randomly paclitaxel-eluting stents (n=180) or sirolimus-eluting stents (n=180). The primary endpoint was in-stent late luminal loss. Secondary endpoints were angiographic restenosis and need of target lesion revascularization. The study intended to show that the paclitaxel-eluting stent is not inferior to the sirolimus-eluting stent with respect to the primary endpoint. The non-inferiority margin was set at 0.16 mm. Follow-up angiography was performed in 87% of the patients. In-stent late luminal loss in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group was 0.32 mm (upper 95% boundary, 0.42 mm), which was greater than that in the sirolimus-eluting stent group, failing to show the non-inferiority of the paclitaxel-eluting stent to the sirolimus-eluting stent (P>0.99). Angiographic restenosis was found in 19.0% of the lesions in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group and 11.4% of the lesions in the sirolimus-eluting stent group (P=0.047). Target lesion revascularization was performed in 14.7% of the lesions treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents and 6.6% of the lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (P=0.008). CONCLUSION: The paclitaxel-eluting stent is associated with a greater late luminal loss and is less effective in reducing restenosis in small coronary vessels than the sirolimus-eluting stent.     

Twelve-month outcomes with a paclitaxel-eluting stent transitioning from controlled trials to clinical practice (the WISDOM Registry)

The WISDOM Registry tracked clinical outcomes in patients receiving a slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent during the transition from randomized trials to commercial use in everyday interventional cardiology practice. Although randomized trials of drug-eluting stents have demonstrated the safety and effectiveness of these devices in less complicated, de novo lesions, observation of long-term clinical outcomes is required to monitor safety as use of this revolutionary technology expands to broader patient populations. In total, 778 patients were enrolled at 22 sites in 9 countries where the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent first received market approval. Patients with de novo or restenotic coronary lesions eligible for stenting were enrolled. Clinical follow-up was conducted by telephone at 3, 6, 9, and 12 months after the procedure to capture reported stent thrombosis and major cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, and reintervention on the target lesion). Clinical follow-up at 12 months was completed for 92% of patients. The 12-month rate of physician-reported major cardiac events was 5.2%, with a target lesion reintervention rate of 2.0%. The low overall stent thrombosis rate of 0.6% included no stent thromboses >30 days after the index procedure. Low target lesion reintervention rates were also observed in the high-risk subgroups: patients with diabetes (4.0%), vessels <2.5 mm (2.5%), lesions >20 mm (3.6%), and multiple stents in a lesion (1.4%). In conclusion, the paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS slow-release stent exhibits long-term safety and efficacy in uncomplicated and higher risk patients and lesions seen in everyday clinical practice.     

Bailout coronary stenting without anticoagulation or intravascular ultrasound guidance: Acute and six-month angiographic results in a series of 120 consecutive patients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of bailout coronary stenting without anticoagulation or intravascular ultrasound guidance in patients with acute or unequivocal threatened closure after conventional angioplasty. One hundred twenty consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled according to the following criteria: 1) acute or threatened closure after balloon angioplasty; 2) reference vessel diameter ≥ 2.5 mm. All patients after stent implantation were on antiplatelet treatment with aspirin and ticlopidine. Four types of stents were used: Palmaz-Schatz (J&J), Gianturco-Roubin (Cook), Freedom (Global Therapeutics), and Microstent (AVE). Procedural results: a total of 206 stents were implanted in 134 target lesions with a stent deployment success rate of 100%; 44 target lesions were treated with multiple stent implantation; the mean luminal diameter after stenting was 3.14 ± 0.34 mm, and the mean final percent diameter stenosis was −2 ± 10%; the mean balloon to vessel ratio was 1.11 ± 0.15; the mean final pressure inflation was 13.9 ± 2.4 atm; an optimal angiographic result was achieved in 128 lesions (96%). In-hospital results: in-hospital recurrent ischemia occurred in 4 patients (3%); recurrent ischemia resulted directly in death in 1 patient, in nonfatal Q-waves infarction in 2 patients, and in emergency coronary artery surgery in 1 patient. Six-month clinical follow-up results: event free survival rate was 77%; 1 patient had non fatal infarction; the incidence of repeat revascularization procedures was 19%; there were no cardiac deaths. Angiographic follow-up results (follow-up rate 93%): the restenosis or reocclusion rate was 28%. Bailout coronary stenting without chronic anticoagulation treatment or intravascular ultrasound guidance may be considered a highly feasible and safe treatment for acute or threatened closure after failed angioplasty. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Diagn. 41:14–19, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Outcomes with the paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndromes: analysis from the TAXUS-IV trial

OBJECTIVES: We sought to investigate the outcomes of paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in patients with unstable angina or non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Whether the paclitaxel-eluting stent is safe and effective in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) is unknown. METHODS: In the TAXUS-IV trial, 1,314 patients with stable or unstable ischemic syndromes undergoing PCI were randomized to treatment with either the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or a bare-metal EXPRESS stent (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts). The results were stratified by the acuity of the presenting clinical syndrome. RESULTS: Acute coronary syndromes were present in 450 patients (34.2%), 237 of whom were assigned to paclitaxel-eluting stents and 213 to bare-metal stents. The baseline and procedural characteristics were well matched between the groups. Clinical outcomes at 30 days were similar with both stents. At one-year follow-up, patients with ACS assigned to the paclitaxel-eluting stent compared to the control stent had strikingly lower rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (3.9% vs. 16.0%, p < 0.0001) and major adverse cardiac events (11.1 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.002). By multivariate analysis, ACS was an independent predictor of in-stent restenosis in the cohort treated with bare-metal stents (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.03 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 3.92], p = 0.035), while among patients randomized to the paclitaxel-eluting stents, ACS was an independent predictor of freedom from restenosis (HR = 0.27 [95% CI 0.08 to 0.97], p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: The use of the paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent was safe in patients with unstable ischemic syndromes, and was associated with marked reduction of ischemia-driven TLR and adverse cardiac events at one year.     

Analysis of 36 reported cases of late thrombosis in drug-eluting stents placed in coronary arteries

Drug-eluting stents (DESs) have decreased the incidence of in-stent restenosis. Within the past 2 years several cases on late stent thrombosis (LST) have been reported. This study analyzed and reviewed all published cases of LST in DESs to explore possible trends not previously reported. We applied a Medline search using the key word "drug eluting stents." All 845 positive matches in March 2006 were screened for case reports of LST in DESs, defined as angiographic stent thrombosis >or=30 days after deployment. We included reported LSTs from randomized trials, observational registry reports, and letters to the editor if information regarding timing from stent deployment to clinical event, vessel, stent diameter and length, and antiplatelet regimen were available. There was no significant difference in the incidence of LST between sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. Median time from stent deployment to clinical event was 242 days (total range 39 to 927). If aspirin and clopidogrel were discontinued, median time to clinical event was 7 days (3 to 150). In comparison, if only clopidogrel was discontinued, median time to clinical event was 30 days (14 to 690, p <0.0001). There was no significant difference in stent diameter and length between sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. Forty-two percent of events occurred in relation to a surgical procedure for which the 2 antiplatelet agents or clopidogrel alone was discontinued. In conclusion, there was a strong association between occurrence of LST and cessation of dual antiplatelet therapy. Patients who continued on aspirin had a significant delay to the clinical event. Efforts should be made to maintain patients on aspirin during routine surgical procedures.     

Outcomes of paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in patients with stenosis of the left anterior descending coronary artery

OBJECTIVES: We sought to examine the efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD). BACKGROUND: Restenosis and recurrent cardiac events after percutaneous intervention are more common for lesions in the LAD than other native coronary arteries, and often necessitate bypass surgery. Drug-eluting stents may improve the long-term prognosis of this high-risk group. METHODS: In the TAXUS-IV trial, 1,314 patients with single de novo coronary lesions were assigned to implantation of the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or an identical bare-metal stent; 536 (41%) randomized patients had LAD lesions. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of patients with LAD lesions were well-matched between the randomized groups. Late lumen loss at nine months after paclitaxel-eluting and control stent implantation were 0.28 +/- 0.51 mm and 0.54 +/- 0.57 mm, respectively (p = 0.0004), and binary restenosis rates were 11.3% and 26.9%, respectively (p = 0.004). At one year, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) occurred in 13.5% of TAXUS-treated patients versus 21.2% treated with the control stent (p = 0.01). The need for bypass surgery at one year was reduced among patients randomized to the TAXUS stent (2.6% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.02). In the proximal LAD subgroup (n = 126), the one-year target vessel revascularization rate was 7.9% with the TAXUS stent and 18.6% with the bare-metal stent (p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to bare-metal stents, implantation of polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stents in LAD lesions is safe, and reduces angiographic restenosis and MACE one year. Notably, the need for bypass graft surgery due to restenosis is reduced after TAXUS stent implantation in LAD lesions.     

Is provisional stenting the effective option? The WIDEST study (Wiktor stent in de novo stenosis)

AIM—To compare the immediate and late outcomes of patients treated by a policy of routine stent implantation with routine balloon angioplasty and the use of stents only when an ideal result has not been obtained.
METHODS—A nine centre, multinational, randomised study of 300 patients with coronary artery disease thought suitable for treatment of a single lesion by balloon angioplasty or stent implantation. Only new lesions in patients who had not undergone previous bypass surgery were included, and totally occluded vessels were excluded.
RESULTS—The initial procedure was considered successful in 96% of patients. There was more complete angiographic restoration of luminal diameter in patients treated by elective stent (minimum lumen diameter (MLD) 2.68 mm for stent v 2.27 mm for balloon; p < 0.007), but analysis of the subgroup of balloon angioplasty patients who crossed over to stenting showed that they achieved similar results to the elective stent group. Late luminal loss was greater in stented patients than in those undergoing balloon angioplasty only, and by six months the angiographic benefit of stenting had disappeared (MLD 1.90 mm for stent group v 2.00 mm for balloon angioplasty). Angiographic and clinical results in the balloon angioplasty group were assisted by the high crossover rate (30.1%). Both groups had similar symptom relief, with 58.9% of patients improving by two or more angina grades. The need for further revascularisation was also similar in the two groups at one year (18.2% in the stented group v 17.1% in the balloon angioplasty group). Haemorrhagic complications at the local arterial entry site were more common than expected and were distributed equally between the patients receiving full anticoagulation and those receiving antiplatelet treatment only. The results of both Wiktor stent placement and balloon angioplasty were similar to the findings in the stent group in previous randomised studies (Benestent II, STRESS).
CONCLUSIONS—Provisional stenting appears to offer the same longer term outcome as elective stenting in this selected group of patients. Improvement in the results of conventional balloon angioplasty in the past 10 years means that a policy of obtaining an ideal result without the use of stents appears to be practicable in many of these patients, with consequent cost savings.


Keywords: stent; balloon angioplasty; coronary angioplasty     

One-Week and Six-Month Angiographic Controls of Stent Implantation After Occlusive and Nonocclusive Dissection During Primary Balloon Angioplasty for Acute Myocardial Infarction

We prospectively assessed in 124 consecutive patients by means of 1-week and 6-month follow-up angiograms the rate of reocclusion and restenosis of coronary stenting with Palmaz-Schatz stents after occlusive and nonocclusive dissection during primary balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Patients were further evaluated clinically at 1 year. Stenting was performed on large (>3.2 mm) coronary arteries for suboptimal results (47%), occlusive (8%), or nonocclusive dissections (45%) after balloon angioplasty. Stents were delivered using the bare stent technique and high pressure inflations (>12 atm). All patients received ticlopidine 250 mg (500 mg if weight was >80 kg) and aspirin 100 mg for 1 month. No patient received warfarin. At 1 week, 6 patients died of cardiogenic shock and 2 of right ventricular infarction. One subacute occlusion occurred at day 14. At 6 months, in 95 patients, the angiographic restenosis rate (>50% diameter stenosis) was 19%. One-year clinical follow-up, available in 55 patients, indicated cardiac death in 5, and repeat revascularization in 3. Thus, coronary stenting on large (>3.2 mm) coronary arteries after occlusive and nonocclusive dissection during primary balloon angioplasty for AMI using bare Palmaz-Schatz stents, high pressures, ticlopidine, and aspirin is safe. Our reocclusion and restenosis rates are similar to those of trials on elective stenting in stable patients.

The reocclusion and restenosis rates of coronary Palmaz-Schatz stenting after occlusive and nonocclusive dissection during primary balloon angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction were assessed in 124 consecutive patients by performing 1-week and 6-month angiographic controls. No reocclusion was noted at 1 week, 1 subacute occlusion occurred at day 14, and the angiographic 6-month restenosis rate was 19%.     

Coronary artery stenting in unstable angina pectoris: a comparison with stable angina pectoris

OBJECTIVE: To compare early complication rates in unselected cases of coronary artery stenting in patients with stable v unstable angina. SETTING: Tertiary referral centre. PATIENTS: 390 patients with stable angina pectoris (SAP) and 306 with unstable angina (UAP). Patients treated for acute myocardial infarction (primary angioplasty) or cardiogenic shock were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: 268 coronary stents were attempted in 211 patients (30.3%). Stents used included AVE (63%), Freedom (14%), NIR (7%), Palmaz-Schatz (5%), JO (5%), and Multilink (4%). Intravascular ultrasound was not used in any of the cases. All stented patients were treated with ticlopidine and aspirin together with periprocedural unfractionated heparin. RESULTS: 123 stents were successfully deployed in 99 SAP patients v 132 stents in 103 UAP patients. Failed deployment occurred with nine stents in SAP patients, v four in UAP patients (NS). Stent thrombosis occurred in four SAP patients and 11 UAP patients. Multivariate analysis showed no relation between stent thrombosis and clinical presentation (SAP v UAP), age, sex, target vessel, stent length, or make of stent. Stent thrombosis was associated with small vessel size (p < 0.001) and bailout stenting (p = 0.01) compared with elective stenting and stenting for suboptimal PTCA, with strong trends toward smaller stent diameter (p = 0.052) and number of stents deployed (p = 0.06). Most stent thromboses occurred in vessels < 3 mm diameter. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary artery stenting in unstable angina is safe in vessels >/= 3 mm diameter, with comparable initial success and stent thrombosis rates to stenting in stable angina.     

Comparison of stent versus balloon angioplasty for pulmonary vein stenosis complicating pulmonary vein isolation

Introduction: Pulmonary vein stenosis (PVS) is a rare but significant complication of pulmonary vein isolation (PVI). Dilation and stent angioplasty have been described but not compared.
Methods and Results: All percutaneous interventions for PVS complicating PVI between December 2000 and March 2007 were reviewed. Acute success, defined as post-intervention stenosis ≤30%, and long-term outcome of dilation versus stent angioplasty were compared. Freedom from restenosis was defined as freedom from repeat intervention. Overall outcome for all interventions was examined. We studied 34 patients with 55 stenotic veins followed for a mean of 25 months. Dilation was performed in 39 veins and stenting in 40 veins (16 primarily, 24 after dilation restenosis). Acute success and restenosis rates were 42% and 72% for dilation versus 95% (P < 0.001) and 33% for stenting. Time to restenosis was greater for stent angioplasty (P = 0.003). Stents ≥10 mm in diameter had lower restenosis than smaller stents. Risk factors for restenosis included small reference vessel diameter and longer time from PVI to intervention for PVS. All but two patients experienced improvement (n = 10) or resolution of symptoms (n = 22). The mean percent stenosis decreased from 82% to 21% for the entire cohort and mean flow to the lung quadrant increased from 10% to 17%.
Conclusion: Stent angioplasty results in less restenosis than dilation, particularly for stents ≥10 mm. Early referral may improve long-term patency by minimizing reference vessel atrophy. Most patients with PVS post-PVI can be improved symptomatically with catheter intervention.     

Coronary stenting for unstable angina: predictors of 30-day and long-term clinical outcome

BACKGROUND: Unstable angina is usually caused by acute thrombosis superimposed on a fissured plaque. Coronary artery stenting has been shown to improve short- and long-term results of coronary angioplasty in mainly stable patients with one-vessel disease, but it is uncertain whether its use in an unstable clinical setting can be safe and useful. This study sought to evaluate the results of coronary stenting in unstable angina and to determine patient, lesion and procedure-related predictors of 30-day and long-term ischemic events. METHODS: We studied 266 consecutive patients (mean age 62 +/- 9 years) with unstable angina who underwent coronary artery stenting. The procedure was performed electively in 24%, in bailout situations in 11% and for a suboptimal result of conventional angioplasty in 65%. After stent implantation, patients were treated with anticoagulation (61) on combined antiplatelet therapy (200). Multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine 30-day and long-term predictive factors of ischemic complications. RESULTS: Procedural success was obtained in 261 patients (98.1%). During the first 30 days after stenting, one patient died from cardiogenic shock (0.3%) and six (22%) suffered a non-fatal Q-wave myocardial infarction. Patients with combined antiplatelet therapy had a significantly lower stent thrombosis rate (1.5% versus 11.4%, P = 0.002) than those treated with anticoagulant regimen. At long-term follow-up (17.7 +/- 9.4 months) cardiac mortality myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization rates were 0.4%, 1.5% and 9.3%, respectively. In multivessel and diabetic patients, a worse long-term event-free survival was observed. Logistic multivariate analysis revealed bailout stenting, anticoagulant therapy, implantation of stents longer than 15 mm as predictors of 30-day ischemic events. In addition, multivessel coronary artery disease and stent application with balloon size of less than 3 mm were predictive of long-term ischemic events. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that, either electively or after failure of conventional angioplasty, coronary stenting represents an effective therapy for patients with unstable angina. In the same clinical setting, combined antiplatelet therapy is associated with a lower 30-day stent thrombosis rate than anticoagulant therapy. Bailout stenting, anticoagulant therapy, implantation of stents longer than 15 mm were shown to be predictors of 30-day ischemic events, whereas multivessel coronary artery disease and stent application with small balloon size were predictive of long-term ischemic events.     

Stents liberadores de rapamicina sin polímero frente a stents liberadores de paclitaxel con polímero: un análisis de datos de pacientes procedentes de ensayos aleatorizados

Introduction and objectives

The angiographic and clinical efficacy of polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents vs polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents remain a matter of debate. We sought to investigate angiographic and clinical measures of efficacy of polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents vs polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents.

Methods

Patient data from the randomized intracoronary stenting and angiographic restenosis-test equivalence between the 2 drug-eluting stents (ISAR-TEST) clinical trial and the LIPSIA Yukon clinical trial (randomized comparison of a polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stent vs a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with diabetes mellitus) were pooled. The angiographic (primary) endpoint was in-stent late lumen loss at 6 months to 9 months. The clinical (secondary) endpoints were death or myocardial infarction, cardiac death or myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, and myocardial infarction.

Results

A total of 686 patients (polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents, n=345 vs polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents, n=341) and 751 lesions (polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents, n=383 vs polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents, n=368) were included in the study. Control angiography (606 lesions, 80.6%) showed comparable in-stent late lumen loss for polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents vs polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents (0,53 [0,59] mm vs 0,46 [0,57] mm; P=.15). Median follow-up was 34.8 months. Polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents and polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents were associated with comparable risk of death or myocardial infarction (relative risk=1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0,49-2.80; P=.71), cardiac death or myocardial infarction (relative risk=1.17; 95% confidence interval, 0,72-1.89; P=.50), target lesion revascularization (relative risk=0,98; 95% confidence interval, 0,65-1.47; P=.93), and myocardial infarction (relative risk=1.79; 95% confidence interval, 0,85-3.76; P=.12).

Conclusions

In this pooled analysis, polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents were comparable to polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents with respect to both angiographic and clinical efficacy.Full English text available from:www.revespcardiol.org.