Polymer‐free drug‐eluting stents for coronary artery disease

Polymer‐free drug‐eluting stents (PF‐DES) were designed with the expectation of avoiding late restenosis and thrombosis related to the polymer used in traditional DES platforms. Furthermore, due to similarities with bare metal stents after drug elution, PF‐DES has been considered as particularly suitable for patients at high bleeding risk. A variety of PF‐DES platforms have been clinically tested. Despite their theoretical advantages, PF platforms showed comparable clinical outcomes with modern permanent‐ or biodegradable polymer‐based DES up to 5 years after implantation. Use of more biocompatible polymers on the modern DES platforms is one of the reasons therefore. Their improved safety profile allows already less intensive antithrombotic regimes after DES. Hence, nowadays PF‐DES platforms can be considered as one of many DES options for percutaneous treatment of coronary artery disease.

     

Outcomes of diabetics receiving bare‐metal stents versus drug‐eluting stents

Objectives : We sought to determine if differences existed in in‐hospital outcomes, long‐term rates of target vessel revascularization (TVR), and/or long‐term mortality trends between patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with either a drug‐eluting stent(s) (DES) or a bare metal stent(s) (BMS). Background : Short‐ and long‐term clinical outcomes of patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing PCI with DES versus BMS remain inconsistent between randomized‐controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies. Methods : Data were collected prospectively on diabetics undergoing PCI with either DES or BMS from January 2000 to June 2008. Demographic information, medical histories, in‐hospital outcomes, and long‐term TVR and mortality trends were obtained for all patients. Results : A total of 1,319 patients were included in the study. Diabetics receiving DES had a significant reduction in index admission MACE compared to diabetics receiving BMS. Using multivariable adjustment, after a mean follow‐up of 2.5 years (maximum 5 years), diabetics who received DES had a 38% decreased risk of TVR compared to diabetics with BMS [HR 0.62 (95% CI: 0.43–0.90)]; diabetics with DES had an insignificant adjusted improvement in long‐term survival compared to diabetics with BMS [HR 0.72 (95% CI: 0.52–1.00)]. These long‐term survival and TVR rates were confirmed using propensity scoring. Conclusions : The use of DES when compared with BMS among diabetics undergoing PCI is associated with significant improvement in long‐term TVR, with an insignificant similar trend in all‐cause mortality. The long‐term results of this observational study are consistent with prior RCTs after adjusting for confounding variables. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Decreased risk of stent fracture‐related restenosis between paclitaxel‐eluting stents and sirolimus eluting stents: Results of long‐term follow‐up

Objective: To compare the outcomes between paclitaxel‐eluting stents (PES) and sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES) for the treatment of drug‐eluting stent (DES) fracture. Background: DES fracture is considered as an important predictor of in‐stent restenosis (ISR). However, little data are available evaluating the optimal treatment for this complication of coronary stenting. Methods: From January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2008, patients with DES ISR treated with a second DES were identified and evaluated for stent fracture. Stent fracture was defined by the presence of strut separation in multiple angiographic projections, assessed by two independent reviewers. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 6 and 12 months were the primary end points. Results: Of 131 lesions with DES ISR treated with a second DES, we found 24 patients (24 lesions, 18.2%) with angiographically confirmed stent fracture. Of these, 20 patients (20 lesions) treated with either PES (n = 11/55%) or SES (n = 9/45%) were included in the study. TLR at 6 months occurred in 9% of patients treated with PES and 22% of those treated with SES (P = 0.41). After 12 months, TLR was 9% and 55.5%, respectively (P = 0.024). Conclusions: This study demonstrates a high incidence of stent fracture in patients presenting with DES ISR in need of further treatment with another DES. The suggested association between treatment of stent fracture‐associated DES ISR with PES as compared with SES, and better long‐term outcomes, is in need of confirmation by larger prospective registries and randomized trials. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Kissing drug eluting balloons for in‐stent restenosis complicating bifurcations treated with drug‐eluting stents

The management of in‐stent restenosis (ISR) complicating bifurcation lesions is technically challenging and implant of further stents may not be feasible. The use of drug‐eluting balloons provides an attractive option for treatment of such lesions allowing a technically simple procedure without the need for further complex stenting. The SeQuent Please paclitaxel‐eluting balloon (B. Braun, Berlin, Germany) has been shown to be superior to a paclitaxel eluting stent or balloon angioplasty for ISR complicating a bare‐metal stent. However, there is no data on the efficacy of the SeQuent Please in ISR complicating drug‐eluting stents or bifurcation lesions. We report two cases where the SeQuent Please was used in this setting with angiographic success and freedom from target vessel failure and angina at 24 months. In both cases the Sheathless Eau Cath guide (Asahi Intecc, Japan) was employed to perform a kissing‐balloon dilatation with the SeQuent Please, so allowing treatment via radial access. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Comparison between imported versus domestic drug‐eluting stents in China: A large single‐center data

Background

In recent years, most drug‐eluting stents (DESs) were domestically produced in China, but how domestic DESs perform compared to imported DESs was still unknown.

Methods

A total of 9011 consecutive cases with DESs implantation in a single center throughout 2013 were prospectively collected. Two‐year clinical outcomes were evaluated between patients implanted with imported and domestic DESs.

Results

During 2‐year follow‐up, the rates of all‐cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, and stent thrombosis were not significantly different between two groups. However, the rate of revascularization was significantly higher in domestic DES group, shown as higher rates of overall revascularization, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (9.7% vs 6.4%, P < 0.001; 5.6% vs 3.2%, P < 0.001; 4.5% vs 2.2%, P < 0.001, respectively). Accordingly, major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate was significantly higher in domestic DES group (12.1% vs 8.5%, P < 0.001). Multivariable Cox regression analysis indicated that domestic DES was an independent risk factor of MACE (HR [95%CI]: 1.22 [1.05‐1.41]), overall revascularization (HR [95%CI]: 1.29 [1.09‐1.53]), TVR (HR [95%CI]: 1.54 [1.22‐1.94]), and TLR (HR [95%CI]: 1.85 [1.41‐2.42]). After propensity score matching, the rates of overall revascularization, TVR, and TLR were still significantly higher in domestic DES group, and domestic DES was still predictive of overall revascularization, TVR, and TLR in multivariate Cox regression analysis.

Conclusions

Domestic DESs showed the same safety as imported DESs in this real‐world cohort. But, patients implanted with domestic DESs had a higher risk of revascularization than imported DESs.

     

Five‐year clinical outcomes of sirolimus‐eluting versus paclitaxel‐eluting stents in high‐risk patients

Objectives and Background : First generation drug‐eluting stents have shown differential efficacy in high‐risk patient subsets at one year. It is unclear whether these differences endure over the medium‐ to long‐term. We compared the five‐year clinical efficacy and safety of sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel‐eluting stents (PES) in a population of high‐risk patients. Methods : The patient cohorts of the ISAR‐DESIRE, ISAR‐DIABETES, and ISAR‐SMART‐3 randomized trials were followed up for five years and data were pooled. The primary efficacy endpoint of the analysis was the need for target lesion revascularization (TLR) during a five‐year follow‐up period. The primary safety endpoint was the combination of death or myocardial infarction (MI) after five years. Results : A total of 810 patients (405 patients in the SES group and 405 patients in the PES group) was included. Over five years TLR was reduced by 39% with SES compared with PES stent (hazard ratio [HR] 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.44–0.85; P = 0.004). No difference was observed according to death or MI rates between the two groups (HR 1.10; 95% CI 0.80–1.50; P = 0.57). Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 0.2% (n = 1) in the SES group and in 1.6% (n = 6) in the PES group (HR 0.16; 95% CI 0.02–1.34; P = 0.12). Conclusions : In high‐risk patient subsets the lower rate of 12‐month TLR observed with SES in comparison PES is maintained out to five years. In terms of safety, although there was no difference in the overall incidence of death or MI, there was a trend towards more frequent stent thromboses with PES. © 2011 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Comparison of zotarolimus‐ versus everolimus‐eluting stents in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions

Objectives : To compare zotarolimus‐eluting stent (Endeavor Sprint®; ZES‐S) and the everolimus‐eluting stent (Xience V®; EES) in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions Background : Both these stents have demonstrated good outcomes in the treatment of coronary lesions. However, the outcomes with respect to treatment of bifurcation lesions have yet to be conclusively demonstrated. Methods : In this single centered, nonrandomized, open label study, we treated, between August 2006 and December 2008, 110 bifurcations with ZES‐S and, in a second stage of the study, 129 bifurcations with EES. The primary end point was to compare the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction, and new target lesion revascularization) in‐hospital and at 12 months of follow‐up. Provisional T stenting was the strategy used in the majority of cases. Angiographic follow‐up was performed only in patients who presented signs or symptoms suggestive of angina or ischemia. Results : There were no significant differences in in‐hospital MACE between the groups (ZES‐S: 8.1%; EES: 6.2%; P = 0.5). At 12 months, the ZES‐S group had significantly more MACE than the EES group (23.1% vs. 4.5%; P < 0.001) and an elevated index of new revascularization of the bifurcation (17.5% vs. 3.2%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (four patients in ZES‐S vs. one in EES; P = 0.14). Conclusion : The treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions using everolimus‐eluting stents results in better outcomes at 12 months of follow‐up than zotarolimus‐eluting stents. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Stent fracture associated with drug‐eluting stents: Clinical characteristics and implications

Objective : To evaluate the clinical characteristics and implications of stent fracture in drug‐eluting stents. Background : Approximately 2.5 million drug‐eluting stents are implanted every year worldwide. In 10 randomized controlled trials involving 2,602 patients, no incidence of stent fracture was recognized or reported. Methods : From April 2003 to December 2005, 2,728 patients underwent drug‐eluting stenting. The angiograms of all 530 patients who underwent repeat angiography were analyzed to identify the presence of stent fracture. We then documented the incidence of adverse events associated with drug‐eluting stent fracture and systematically analyzed the clinical, procedural, and structural factors, which might predispose to stent fracture. Results : Stent fracture was identified in 10 patients. None of these fractures were detectable at the time of stent placement. The median time interval from stent implantation to detection of fracture at repeat angiography was 226 days (range, 7–620 days). Adverse clinical outcomes associated with stent fracture occurred in 7 patients (6 patients had binary restenosis and 1 patient had stent thrombosis), all necessitating repeat intervention. Analysis of potential predisposing clinical, procedural, and structural factors revealed that 4 patients had excessive tortuosity in the proximal segment, and overlapping stents were used in 5 cases. All fractures occurred in sirolimus‐eluting stents. Conclusions : Stent fracture may represent a new potential mechanism of restenosis and stent thrombosis in drug‐eluting stents. Predisposing clinical and procedural factors may be vessel tortuosity and use of overlapping stents. The most important predisposing factor, however, may be stent structure, since all fractures occurred in sirolimus‐eluting stents. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Long‐term clinical outcomes of real‐world experience using sirolimus‐eluting stents in saphenous vein graft disease

Objective : To evaluate the long‐term clinical outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease. Specifically, we compared clinical endpoints of patients who received sirolimus‐eluting stents (SES) versus bare‐metal stents (BMS) for SVG disease. Background : A recent small randomized‐controlled trial (RCT) reported increased mortality with the use of SES in SVG disease. Methods : We retrospectively identified patients who underwent SES placement for a SVG lesion(s) at our institutions over a 4‐year period. The procedural and medical records were reviewed to identify predetermined clinical outcomes. Results : 318 patients who underwent SES placement for a SVG lesion were identified. 7 patients were lost to follow‐up. 141/311 patients (45%) received SES, while 170/311 (55%) received BMS. At a mean follow‐up of 34 months, there was a reduction in target lesion revascularization (TLR) (7% vs. 14%, P = 0.07) without an increased risk of mortality (6% vs. 12%, P = 0.06) in patients who received SES compared to patients who received BMS. When compared to the recent RCT's SES patients at long‐term follow‐up, our SES patients had significantly less mortality; rates of myocardial infarction, TLR, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events; and were more likely to be taking dual antiplatelet and statin medications. Conclusion : Our results support that SES used in SVG lesions result in a reduction in TLR without an increased risk of mortality, and therefore may be an equally safe and feasible technique for revascularization with excellent long‐term clinical outcomes. These patients may benefit from prolonged dual antiplatelet and statin medication regimens. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Outcomes of nonagenarians who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention with drug‐eluting stents

Background : Age is an important predictor of mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The safety and efficacy of PCI with drug‐eluting stents (DES) in nonagenarians have not been extensively studied. Methods : A retrospective analysis of 889 consecutive patients identified 28 (3.1%) nonagenarians who underwent PCI with DES from May 2003 to December 2005 at our institution. Results : The mean age was 92 ± 2 years, 39% were male, and 4% were diabetic. Sirolimus‐eluting stents were used in 79%. A mean of 1.5 ± 0.9 stents/patient were implanted with a total stent length of 31 ± 20 mm. Twenty‐nine percent presented with unstable angina and 39% with myocardial infarction. The angiographic success rate obtained was 100%. The 30‐day mortality rate was 21%. The 6 patients who died within 30 days included 3 patients who had cardiogenic shock and one patient with critical aortic stenosis who died due to complications during percutaneous aortic valvuloplasty. The cumulative survival rate for all nonagenarians at 1 year and 3 years was (68 ± 9)% and (61 ± 9)%. When the four patients who were in extremis on presentation were excluded, there were no in‐hospital deaths, the 30‐day mortality was 8%, and the 1 year and 3 year survival rate was (79 ± 8)% and (71 ± 9)% for the nonagenarians. No patient had definite stent thrombosis. Conclusions : The majority of the nonagenarians who underwent PCI with DES presented with acute coronary syndrome. Percutaneous coronary intervention with DES was safe in nonagenarians as there were no in‐hospital deaths and acceptable 3‐year survival rates when patients who were in extremis on presentation were excluded. The high‐risk profile of these patients and the expected attrition of nonagenarians may contribute to their mortality rates. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Drug‐eluting stents versus bare‐metal stents for treatment of bare‐metal in‐stent restenosis

Objectives : We compared the long‐term outcomes of drug‐eluting stents (DES) versus bare‐metal stents (BMS) for treatment of bare‐metal in‐stent restenosis (ISR). Background : There are no randomized trials or observational studies directly comparing the safety and efficacy of DES versus BMS for treatment of bare‐metal ISR. Methods : We examined data on all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ISR at Cleveland Clinic between 05/1999 and 06/2007. We compared the efficacy and safety of DES to BMS for treating bare‐metal ISR. The primary end point was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoints were individual components of the primary endpoint. Results : Of the 931 patients identified over 8 years, 706 had bare‐metal ISR and met our study criteria. Of the 706 patients with bare‐metal ISR, 362 were treated with DES and 344 with BMS. There were 230 cumulative events for a median follow‐up of 3.2 years. After adjusting for 27 variables, DES were associated with lower primary endpoint compared to BMS for treatment of bare‐metal ISR (21% vs. 45%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.63; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42–0.95; P = 0.03). The individual secondary endpoint of death (8% vs. 24%, P = 0.005) favored DES, but MI (3% vs. 8%, P = 0.31), and TLR (13% vs. 20%, P = 0.23) failed to reach statistical significance. Conclusions : In our multivariate analysis of patients with bare‐metal ISR, DES use was associated with significantly lower death, MI, or TLR when compared to BMS. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.