药物洗脱支架治疗冠状动脉小血管病变的疗效分析

目的通过分析比较裸金属支架(BMS)与药物洗脱支架[DES,包括雷帕霉素(Cypher)支架和紫杉醇(TAXUS)支架]治疗冠状动脉小血管病变疗效的差异,为DES治疗多支及单支小血管病变冠心病提供依据。方法连续入选2002年12月至2005年5月沈阳军区总医院首次接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)、靶血管为小血管病变且达到完全血运重建的486例患者,其中多支小血管病变(多支)150例。分为BMS组214例(多支63例)、Cypher组140例(多支46例)和TAXUS组132例(多支41例),对比分析各组患者住院期间及随访6个月的临床情况。结果3组患者冠脉病变特点、PCI成功率及住院期间主要不良心脏事件(MACE)发生率等指标差异均无显著性(P>0·05)。冠脉造影随访显示,两个DES组再狭窄率均明显低于BMS(Cypher组4·9%,TAXUS组7·5%对BMS组29·2%,P<0·05),随访期间MACE发生率亦明显低于BMS(Cypher组2·9%,TAXUS组3·9%对BMS组12·0%,P<0·01)。进一步分析多支小血管病例,发现两个DES组的再狭窄率及随访期间MACE发生率仍然明显低于BMS组(再狭窄率Cypher组6·7%,TAXUS组7·1%对BMS组37·5%,P<0·05;MACE发生率Cypher组4·1%,TAXUS组4·8%对BMS组21·0%,P<0·05)。结论Cypher和TAXUS支架治疗小血管病变安全可行,疗效显著,治疗多支小血管病变可得到相同的疗效。     

Two-year clinical outcomes after large coronary stent (4.0 mm) placement: comparison of bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent

Background:

The absolute benefit of drug‐eluting stents (DES) in low‐risk patients and lesions is not well established.

Hypothesis:

The long term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in a single coronary artery disease may not be affected by the type of stent.

Methods:

This study assessed and compared 2‐year clinical outcomes of 304 consecutive patients (147 BMS patients and 157 DES patients) treated with a single coronary stent (4.0 mm) for single de novo large coronary artery disease in 3 referral cardiac centers. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiac events at 2 years after the index procedure.

Results:

The reference vessel diameter was similar in both groups (3.92 ± 0.29 mm in BMS vs 3.95 ± 0.24 mm in DES, P = 0.50). Late loss was larger in the BMS group (1.04 ± 0.83 mm vs 0.73 ± 0.91 mm in DES, P = 0.03). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events at the 2‐year clinical follow‐up was very low, 24 of 304 patients (7.9%), regardless of stent type deployed (7.5% in BMS vs 8.3% in DES, P = 0.83). The rate of target vessel revascularization was also similar in both groups (4.8% in BMS vs 5.7% in DES, P = 0.80).

Conclusions:

Two‐year clinical outcomes after PCI with a single large coronary stent (4.0 mm) were excellent. The clinical outcomes were not affected by the type of stent used. Copyright © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.     

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

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

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.     

药物洗脱支架和金属裸支架治疗弥漫病变的比较研究

目的比较冠心病患者弥漫病变采用药物洗脱支架和金属裸支架治疗的近期和远期预后,分析影响这类病变介入治疗预后的危险因素。方法研究对象为我院2004年4月至2005年8月接受置入单个长度>25.0mm支架治疗并且进行冠状动脉造影随访的205例患者,排除支架置入失败及支架置入位置不理想者。分为置入药物洗脱支架(DES)组(n=128)和置入金属裸支架(BMS)组(n=77)。所有的患者术后均接受阿司匹林300mg、氯吡格雷75mg等规范药物治疗。手术成功判定标准为至少用相互垂直的两个投照体位行冠状动脉造影,肉眼判定残余狭窄<20%和前向血流TIMI3级。再狭窄判定标准以复查冠状动脉造影定量分析支架内或支架邻近血管管腔直径狭窄程度≥50%。患者在支架术后6个月左右接受冠状动脉造影随访。结果共205例患者(男性181例,女性24例)227个靶病变置入382枚支架完成造影随访。其中C型病变占总数的93.8%,B2型病变为6.2%。双支或双支以上血管病变的患者比例达到86.8%。平均术前参考血管直径(2.88±0.43)mm。平均每个病变支架长度(40.09±12.94)mm,54.2%的病变接受了重叠置入支架。比较置入DES组和置入BMS组,两组的患者基本条件差异无统计学意义,在病变基本条件方面,DES组术前参考血管直径明显小于BMS组[(2.80±0.37)mm比(3.10±0.48)mm,P=0.005]。6个月随访结果显示再狭窄率DES组(15.4%)小于BMS组(48.4%),P<0.001。晚期支架内腔径丢失BMS组明显大于DES组[(0.94±0.76)mm比(0.39±0.53)mm,P<0.001]。靶病变血管重建率DES要明显好于BMS(11.6%比38.5%,P<0.001)。支架内再狭窄在置入DES组的局限性再狭窄比例大于置入BMS组(33.3%比18.2%,P=0.029)。对影响复杂弥漫病变支架再狭窄因素的多元logistic回归分析发现,采用支架重叠置入(OR=2.82,P=0.017)和支架类型(OR=5.71,P<0.001)是对复杂弥漫病变支架内再狭窄影响最大的危险因素。结论我们的研究发现对于复杂弥漫病变的治疗,药物洗脱支架有着良好的治疗效果,较金属裸支架能明显减低再狭窄率。对于弥漫病变,我们应该使用长支架,尽可能减少支架重叠置入的数量。     

85岁及以上老年冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉支架治疗的临床观察

目的 探讨85～94岁冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉支架治疗的疗效和预后.方法 回顾性分析90例85岁以上冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉支架治疗的临床和造影特点、住院期间和长期疗效.结果 90例中,21例应用金属裸支架(BMS),69例应用药物洗脱支架(DES).三支病变41例,2支病变21例,单支病变28例.手术成功率为94.4%,术前与术后TIMI-3级血流比例分别为72.2%和94.4%.手术相关并发症为15.6%,主要为冠脉夹层(11.1%).住院期间主要心血管不良事件(MACE)为7.8%,其中DES组住院期间MACE为5.8%,BMS组为14.3%.DES组出现2例严重出血.86例患者随访1年时,总的MACE为4.6%,其中DES组为6.0%,BMS组没有任何MACE.DES组出现]例脑卒中和1例严重出血.47例患者随访2年时,总的MACE为14.9%,其中DES组MACE为19.4%,BMS组无任何MACE.DES组1例发生严重出血,BMS组1例发生脑卒中.多因素COX回归分析表明,肌酐水平和高血压是影响长期预后的重要因素.结论 85岁以上冠心病患者经皮冠状动脉支架治疗手术成功牢较高,住院期间和长期的MACE事件发生率较低,并存高血压和严重.肾功能不全的患者MACE的发生率相对较高.     

冠心病合并2型糖尿病患者置入药物洗脱支架的疗效评价

目的 评价冠心病合并2型糖尿病患者冠状动脉病变置入药物洗脱支架后的疗效。方法 选择我院2004年4月至2005年8月连续接受置入药物洗脱支架（DES）或金属裸支架（BMS）治疗并且进行了冠状动脉造影随访的139例的冠心病合并2型糖尿病患者。所有患者在支架术后6个月后接受冠状动脉造影随访。结果共139例患者（男性114例,女性25例）221处病变完成随访。其中C型病变94处（42．5％）,完全闭塞病变42处（19．0％）,平均每个病变支架长度（26．53±14．72）mm,平均参考血管直径（2．80±0．43）mm。两组患者在性别比例和年龄方面差异无统计学意义。两组在冠心病的危险因素如：高血压病、高脂血症、吸烟等方面差异无统计学意义。两组病变的复杂程度基本相当。DES组的参考血管直径比BMS组小[（2．71±0．41）mm比（2．98±0．53）mm,P〈0．001]。6个月后随访,DES组的支架内再狭窄率（10．6％比38．6％,P〈0．001）和病变内晚期腔径丢失[（0．24±0．56）mm比（0．91±0．77）mm,P〈0．001]明显低于BMS组。DES组的靶病变血管重建率显著低于BMS组（8．6％比30．0％,P〈0．001）。DES组有4例晚期支架内血栓。结论 本研究显示药物洗脱支架对于冠心病合并2型糖尿病患者冠状动脉病变的介入治疗有着良好的治疗效果,明显优于金属裸支架。     

Percutaneous coronary intervention in small coronary vessels: from balloon angioplasty to drug eluting stent era

Small vessel (< 3 mm) coronary artery disease is common and has been identified as independent predictor of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. It remains controversial whether bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in small vessels has an advantage over balloon angioplasty in terms of angiographic and clinical outcomes. Introduction of drug-eluting stent (DES) has resulted in significant reduction in restenosis and the need for repeat revascularisation. Several DESs have been introduced resulting in varying reduction in outcomes as compared to BMS. However, their impact on outcomes in small vessels is not clearly known. It is expected that DES could substantially reduce restenosis in smaller vessels. Large, randomised studies are warranted to assess the impact of different DES on outcomes in patients with small coronary arteries.     

Drug-eluting stents for the percutaneous treatment of the anastomosis of the left internal mammary graft to left anterior descending artery

BACKGROUND: Data on the treatment of left internal mammary to left anterior descending artery (LIMA-to-LAD) anastomotic disease are scarce and not homogeneous. Both surgery and percutaneous interventions (PCI) have been attempted, but the most effective treatment has not yet been established. In particular, should PCI be performed, the role of stenting seems to be limited by less favorable results than in other subsets of lesions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical impact of drug-eluting stent (DES) use in this particular subset of lesions. METHODS: We describe a cohort of patients treated with PCI on LIMA-to-LAD anastomoses, reporting acute 1-year clinical and angiographic outcomes. The clinical impact of DES use was evaluated as the requirement for target lesion revascularizations (TLR). RESULTS: Fifty-six consecutive patients were evaluated. Acute procedural success was achieved in 52 patients (92.8%). Plain balloon angioplasty allowed acute procedural success in 15 patients (28.8%), whereas stenting was required in 37 patients (71.2%) with suboptimal results or to treat complications. Bare-metal stents (BMS) were used in 17 and DES in 20 patients, without differences in acute results. One-year clinical follow-up was available in 96.1% of patients. TLR were needed in 17.3% of patients. No significant differences were detected in TLR rates after treatment with BMS and DES (26.6% vs. 25%; P=0.99). Two late stent thromboses were observed after DES deployment. CONCLUSION: PCI of the stenoses of LIMA-to-LAD anastomoses with DES did not provide any clinical improvement over BMS use in long-term outcomes; DES use was associated with some cases of late thrombosis.     

冠状动脉支架置入对分支血管的影响

目的 比较观察不同药物洗脱支架及普通支架置入术后分支血管的自然发展情况,探讨分支血管闭塞及再通的影响因素。方法回顾性分析在解放军总医院心内科接受支架置入术并进行造影随访的183例患的病例资料及术前、术中、术后的造影光盘资料,分析支架覆盖的所有分支血管。结果支架术后分支血管的闭塞率是8．9％,其中Cypher药物支架组为10．5％,Taxus药物支架组为11．1％,普通支架为7．8％,72．0％的闭塞分支在随访时再通,其中Cypher组是90．9％,Taxus组为66．7％,普通支架组为66．7％;三组间差异无统计学意义;分支开口狭窄和起始部位有病变是分支血管闭塞的独立危险因素;支架内再狭窄、病变类型及分支情况等都不会影响闭塞分支的再通。结论不同类型的药物支架和普通支架在对分支血管的影响方面基本一致;分支开口狭窄和分支起始部位病变是分支血管闭塞的独立危险因素;闭塞的分支血管自然预后良好,大部分会自行再通。     

Long-term effect of stenting in unprotected left main coronary artery disease in the elderly

Objective To evaluate the feasibility, safety and efficacy of percutaneous stent implantation for treating left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Methods Consecutive patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease treated by stent-based percutaneous intervention (PCI) at 6 medical centers in China were enrolled. Procedural data and clinical outcomes were obtained from all patients. Results From January 2001 to December 2004, 138 patients (79 males and 59 females; mean age: 69.7±5.8 years) underwent PCI for LMCA stenosis. Bare metal stents (BMS) were implanted in 51 patients with non-bifurcational lesions and in 5 patients with bifurcational lesions from January of 2001 to June of 2003 (BMS group);. drug eluting stents (DES) were used unselectively to cover both bifurcational and non-bifurcational lesions in 86 patients from July of 2003 to December of 2004 (DES group). Procedural success rate of the 138 cases was 98% (135/138). One patient (0.7%) with bifurcation lesion who was treated with DES died from severe heart failure 2 weeks after the procedure. During a mean follow up period of 21.3±5.6 months, one patient died from renal failure, one from sudden cardiac death, 4 underwent target lesion revascularization (TLR) in the BMS group, which all occurred in patients with bifurcational lesions; whereas in the DES group no deaths occurred and only one patient with bifurcational lesion had TLR. Conclusions (1) PCI is feasible and relatively safe to treat unprotected left main coronary artery disease in elderly patients at medical centers with experienced professionals. (2) BMS and DES have similar immediate and long-term efficacy in the treatment of ostium and shaft lesions of the LMCA. (3) DES are strongly suggested in the therapy of distal bifurcation lesion of unprotected LMCA.     

Evolving standard in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Drug-eluting stents

Coronary stent implantation is the predominant method of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). This is to be attributed to the ease of use beside the better short and long term clinical outcome as compared to balloon angioplasty. Nevertheless, improvements in operator skill and stent technology together with better use of adjunctive pharmacological therapy have contributed to the improvement in clinical outcome. However, the main limitation of coronary stenting is still represented by in-stent restenosis (ISR) with an estimated rate of 17-32%. Thus, compared to coronary bypass surgery, the major adverse cardiac events following stent implantation are still higher and mainly represented by the need for re-intervention. The advent of drug eluting stents (DES) has led the experts to predict that with DES there will be little or no difference between PCI and coronary bypass surgery in terms of long-term outcome leading to a further expansion of indications. The clinical trial programs of the 2 available DES for clinical use (sirolimus-eluting stent, SES - Cypher and paclitaxol-eluting stent - Taxus) have been able to demonstrate the safety and clinical efficacy of both. Nevertheless, off-label use in patients on high risk for restenosis confirmed these data. At least for SES as was demonstrated by 2 "real world" registries. Thus, the introduction of DES represents a remarkable evolution for new standards in coronary artery disease treatment and offers hope to those patients considered to be "high risk" such as diabetics, patients with ISR, diffuse disease in whom surgery was previously the only therapeutic option. This paper will discuss the main results of the clinical trial programs of the DES (mentioned above) available for clinical use in the present time and analyze technical and procedural aspects which could affect long term outcome.     

Comparison of coronary artery bypass surgery with percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the clinical outcomes of consecutive, selected patients treated with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. BACKGROUND: Although recent data suggest that PCI with DES provides better clinical outcomes compared to bare-metal stenting for ULMCA disease, there is a paucity of data comparing PCI with DES to CABG. METHODS: Since April 2003, when DES first became available at our institution, 123 patients underwent CABG, and 50 patients underwent PCI with DES for ULMCA disease. RESULTS: High-risk patients (Parsonnet score >15) comprised 46% of the CABG group and 64% of the PCI group (p = 0.04). The 30-day major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate for CABG and PCI was 17% and 2% (p < 0.01), respectively. The mean follow-up was 6.7 +/- 6.2 months in the CABG group and 5.6 +/- 3.9 months in the PCI group (p = 0.26). The estimated MACCE-free survival at six months and one year was 83% and 75% in the CABG group versus 89% and 83% in the PCI group (p = 0.20). By multivariable Cox regression, Parsonnet score, diabetes, and CABG were independent predictors of MACCE. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a higher percentage of high-risk patients, PCI with DES for ULMCA disease was not associated with an increase in immediate or medium-term complications compared with CABG. Our data suggest that a randomized comparison between the two revascularization strategies for ULMCA may be warranted.     

Safety and Effectiveness of Firebird Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in Patients With Multi-Vessel Coronary Artery Disease

Objective:This study sought to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of the Firebird sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.The main limitation of percutaneous coronary intervention(PCI)with bare metal stents(BMS)was the increased incidence of instent restenosis.Recently,DES are frequently implanted in patients with off-label indications such as multi-vessel coronary artery disease.However,the long-term safety and effectiveness of DES among patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease are not well understood.Methods:From January to December 2006,a total of 392 patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease,exclusively treated with Firedird stents at 12 centers from China,were enrolled in this prospective,multicenter registry.They were followed up clinically at 6,12,18 and 24 months after the procedure.Results:A core laboratory analyzed quantitative coronary angiography data immediately after stenting and at 6-month follow-up.Acute angiographic success was 100%.Angiographic restenosis rate was 2.80% at the sixth month.The percentage of acute major adverse cardiac events(MACE)was 4.86%,4.37% and 6.91%,and the percentage of secondary cardiac events was 5.62%,5.88% and 6.39% at 12,18 and 24 months,respectively.The incidence of death,myocardial infarction,or stent thrombosis during 24 month was 3.84%(15 of 392),1.02%(4 of 392)or 2.05%(8 of 392).Conclusion:This study indicates that Firebird sirolimus-eluting stent is safe and effective for patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease.     

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

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

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

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

Clinical and angiographic follow‐up after coronary drug‐eluting and bare metal stent implantation. Do drug‐eluting stents hold the promise?

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the influence of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation on clinical and angiographic restenosis. DESIGN: Registry study of data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry with a coronary angiographic substudy. SETTING: Multi-centre study. SUBJECTS: During October 2002 to May 2004 a total of 23 590 percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) procedures were performed at 25 hospitals. After selection, to achieve comparable groups, a total of 5068 patients of whom 4111 had a bare metal stent (BMS) implanted and 957 had a DES implanted, remained. End-point in the registry follow-up was >50% diameter restenosis at clinically driven reangiography within 12 months after index PCI. The primary end-point in the angiographic substudy was late loss in patients' DES at 6-month angiographic follow-up. RESULTS: The rate of clinically driven restenosis, within 12 months, in patients receiving DES was less (3.9%) compared with those who received BMS (7.0%). In multivariate analysis the risk of clinical restenosis was one-third for DES compared with BMS (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.25-0.52). In the angiographic substudy late loss was 0.07+/-0.53 mm (range -0.88 to 1.62). The amount of late loss was related to the presence of diabetes mellitus or not (0.19+/-0.45 mm vs. -0.12+/-0.58 mm), and lack of postdilatation of the stent or not (0.23+/-0.51 mm vs. -0.09+/-0.50 mm). CONCLUSIONS: The use of DES in the Swedish 'real world' is effective in reducing the clinically driven restenosis rate, when compared with patients with BMS treatment. In the angiographic follow-up the average late loss was as low as observed in recent randomized multi-centre trials.     

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

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

Simultaneous drug-eluting and bare-metal stent implantation: long-term clinical outcome and findings of clinically indicated coronary angiography

Background:

Simultaneous drug‐eluting stent (DES) and bare‐metal stent (BMS) implantation is occasionally employed in clinical practice, but its long‐term clinical and angiographic outcome is not clear.

Hypothesis:

We aimed to describe the long‐term clinical outcome and the findings of clinically indicated coronary angiography in patients subjected to simultaneous DES and BMS implantation (“hybrid stenting”).

Methods:

We identified 236 patients (mean age 62.9 ± 11.4 years, 76.7% men) who had undergone percutaneous coronary intervention with at least 1 DES and 1 BMS. At a median follow‐up of 42 months (range, 6–89 months) available in 222 patients, 13 (5.9%) patients died from cardiac causes, 13 (5.9%) experienced nonfatal acute myocardial infarction, and 24 (10.8%) experienced unstable angina. Clinically indicated repeat coronary angiography was performed in 64 patients (28.8%).

Results:

Thirty‐one patients (14%) had target lesion revascularization (TLR). The DES demonstrated lower TLR rates (15.9% vs 36.9%, P = 0.002) and lower late loss (0.44 ± 0.5 mm vs 0.68 ± 0.7 mm, P = 0.009) compared with BMS. Use of DES was independently associated with lower risk for binary restenosis (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.41, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.19–0.89, P = 0.03) and TLR (HR: 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12–0.54, P<0.001).

Conclusions:

Although a hybrid stenting strategy demonstrates a reasonable long‐term prognosis even in high‐risk patients, DES have a better angiographic outcome compared with BMS under the influence of common patient‐related restenosis risk factors. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.     

Percutaneous coronary intervention for acute coronary syndrome due to graft failure

Objectives : To describe clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) due to graft failure. Background : Limited data are available on outcome after PCI for graft failure‐induced ACS in the drug‐eluting stent (DES) era. Methods : Patients were identified who underwent PCI either with DES or BMS for ACS due to graft failure between January 2003 and December 2008. Follow‐up was performed at 1 year and April 2011. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Kaplan–Meier estimates were calculated at 1 and 5‐year follow‐up. Predictors were identified by backward selection in Cox proportional hazards models. Results : A total of 92 patients underwent PCI, of which 77 were treated with bare metal stents (BMS) and 15 with DES. Patient and procedural characteristics were similar in both groups. Mean follow‐up was 3.2 years. Five‐year composite event rate was 65.9% after BMS vs. 43.4% after DES implantation (P = 0.17). Individual endpoints were comparable in both groups. Recurrence of angina, hospitalization, and repeat interventions were similar. After multivariable adjustment, the use of DES was not associated with a significant reduction in the primary endpoint (HR = 0.44, 0.18–1.04, p = 0.06). Conclusion : In patients presenting with ACS due to acute graft failure, long‐term outcomes remain poor. In a nonrandomized comparison with BMS, DES use was not associated with significant improved long‐term clinical outcomes. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.