Comparison of paclitaxel-eluting stent and sirolimus-eluting stent expansion at incremental delivery pressures

OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare the adequacy of paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) expansion based on intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) imaging criteria at conventional delivery pressures. METHODS: Forty-six patients underwent SES implantation and 42 patients underwent PES implantation for de novo native coronary lesions<33 mm in length with reference lumen diameters of 2.5-3.5 mm. Stents were serially expanded with gradual balloon inflations at 14 and 20 atm. IVUS imaging was performed prior to intervention and after each balloon inflation. Stent expansion (minimal stent cross-sectional area/reference lumen cross-sectional area) was measured. Inadequate stent expansion was defined using the MUSIC criteria (all struts apposed, no tissue protrusion, and final lumen cross-sectional area>80% of the reference or >90% if minimal lumen cross-sectional area was <9 mm2). RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar except for shorter lesion length, larger mean lumen cross-sectional area, larger lumen diameter, and lower plaque burden in the PES group. Stent expansion was inadequate in 80% of patients with SES versus 63% of patients with PES at 14 atm, although this was not statistically significant. After 20 atm, 48% of patients with SES remained underexpanded as compared with 35% of patients with PES. CONCLUSION: Drug-eluting stents showed significant underexpansion by MUSIC criteria at conventionally used inflation pressures. Higher balloon inflations are required especially during deployment of a SES. IVUS guidance is recommended to ensure optimal results and outcomes with both stents.     

Comparison of effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents versus vascular brachytherapy for saphenous vein graft in-stent restenosis

We investigated the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DESs) for the treatment of patients who presented with in-stent restenosis (ISR) of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) and compared the in-hospital and 6-month clinical outcomes of DESs with those of intravascular brachytherapy and balloon angioplasty alone. Records of 187 patients who presented with ISR of SVGs were analyzed. Of these, 34 consecutive patients were treated with DES implantation, 93 were treated with intravascular brachytherapy (n = 60 with gamma-radiation, n = 33 with beta-radiation), and 60 patients underwent conventional treatment with balloon angioplasty alone. Clinical and angiographic characteristics at baseline were comparable between groups. The DES group had less non-Q-wave myocardial infarction than did the intravascular brachytherapy and balloon angioplasty groups (0%, 20%, and 26%, p = 0.003 and <0.001, respectively). At 6 months, death occurred in 0% of the DES group, 2% of the intravascular brachytherapy group, and 5% of the balloon angioplasty group (p = 0.36 and <0.18, respectively). Target lesion revascularization/major adverse cardiac events were similar in the intravascular brachytherapy and DES groups (12% and 3%, p = 0.13) and significantly decreased compared with patients who were treated with balloon angioplasty alone (55%, p <0.001 for the 2 comparisons). The results of this retrospective analysis suggest that DES implantation is at least as effective and safe as intravascular brachytherapy for the treatment of SVG ISR and that these treatment modalities are superior to balloon angioplasty alone.     

Intravascular brachytherapy versus drug-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis

Drug-eluting stents (DESs), although promising technology, still are associated with restenosis; therefore, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravascular radiation therapy for the treatment of DES in-stent restenosis (ISR). Treatment of DES ISR has not been established, although intravascular radiation therapy is an effective treatment for patients with ISR of bare metal stents. Other modalities are conventional percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), including restenting with DES. Radiation for Eluting Stents in Coronary FailUrE (RESCUE) is an international, Internet-based registry of 61 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to intravascular radiation therapy with commercially available systems after PCI. Outcomes of these patients were compared with those of a consecutive series of 50 patients who presented with ISR of a DES and were assigned to repeat DES (r-DES) treatment. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between groups, except for more Cypher stents as the initial DES that restenosed in the r-DES group than in the intravascular radiation therapy group (88.5% vs 69%, p = 0.01). At 8 months there were fewer overall major adverse cardiac events in the intravascular radiation therapy group compared with the r-DES group (9.8% vs 24%, p = 0.044). The need for target vessel and target lesion revascularizations was similar in the 2 groups at 8 months. There has been no report of subacute thrombosis in either group. In conclusion, intravascular radiation therapy as adjunct therapy to PCI for patients presenting with ISR of a DES is safe and should be considered an alternative therapeutic option for this difficult subset of patients.     

Failure or success of complex catheter-based interventional procedures assessed by intravascular ultrasound.

Intravascular ultrasound provides high resolution cross-sectional images of vessel walls and may help to characterize atherosclerotic plaque morphology subtypes. This new imaging modality may have an important role in assessing the results of standard and investigational interventional therapeutic procedures. Four case histories of patients with coronary artery disease treated with different catheter-based therapies are presented. In each case, intravascular ultrasound added diagnostic information unobtainable from standard radiographic imaging techniques. These cases, involving PTCA (balloon dilatation), directional coronary atherectomy, high-speed rotational ablation, and balloon-expandable stent implantation, each represent an interesting example of procedure success or failure that could not be fully discerned without the use of intravascular ultrasound. Specifically, the distribution of intramural dissection, the presence and magnitude of intracoronary calcification, and morphologic patterns of intimal hyperplasia leading to restenosis, were accurately identified by ultrasound images. Thus intracoronary ultrasound imaging significantly enhances the understanding of failure modes, success, and complications after therapeutic interventions in patients with complex coronary disease.     

Comparison of clinical outcomes of overlapping sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention

Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation for the treatment of single coronary lesions has proved to be effective and durable. However, the safety and efficacy of overlapping drug-eluting stents for the treatment of long lesions have not been well established. In total, 114 patients who received overlapping drug-eluting stents were identified, 55 of whom received overlapping SESs and 59 received overlapping PESs. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were balanced. In-hospital complications were similar between the 2 groups. At 30-day and 6-month follow-ups, all clinical outcomes were also similar. In addition, the event-free survival rate was comparable (p = 0.71). Implantation of overlapping drug-eluting stents for the treatment of long, native coronary lesions is feasible and effective. In conclusion, in this observational study, clinical outcomes appeared similar in patients treated with overlapping SES implantation compared with those treated with overlapping PES implantation.     

Three-year follow-up after intravascular gamma-radiation for in-stent restenosis in saphenous vein grafts.

The Washington Radiation for In-Stent Restenosis Trial in Saphenous Vein Grafts (SVG WRIST) demonstrated safety and efficacy of intravascular radiation therapy (IRT) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) in SVG at 12 months. In this study, we aimed to examine whether the safety and efficacy of IRT is durable up to 36 months. One hundred twenty patients with diffuse ISR in SVG underwent balloon angioplasty, laser or atherectomy ablation, and/or additional stenting. After successful intervention, patients were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to intravascular treatment with a ribbon containing either iridium (Ir)-192 (n = 60) or nonradioactive seeds (n = 60). The prescribed dose at 2 mm from the source was either 14 or 15 Gy in vessels 2.5-4.0 mm or 18 Gy in vessels > 4.0 mm in diameter. At 36 months, target lesion revascularization (TLR; 43% vs. 66%; P = 0.02) and target lesion revascularization-major adverse cardiac event (TLR-MACE; 49% vs. 71%; P = 0.02) rates continued to be lower in the IRT group, but both target vessel revascularization (TVR; 59% vs. 71%; P = 0.17) and TVR-MACE (63% vs. 77%; P = 0.11) rates were not. In SVG WRIST, patients with ISR treated with IRT had a marked reduction in the need for repeat TLR at 36 months, with sustained clinical benefit at 3 years despite late recurrences, which were more pronounced in the radiation group.     

Angiographic and clinical outcomes of late total occlusion versus treatment failure without late total occlusion in patients after intracoronary radiation therapy for in-stent restenosis

This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients with late total occlusion (LTO) versus patients with recurrence in the absence of LTO after intracoronary radiation therapy for in-stent restenosis. LTO, especially in the context of acute myocardial infarction, after intracoronary radiation therapy for in-stent restenosis, is associated with negative clinical outcomes after 6 and 12 months compared with in-stent restenosis without LTO.     

Reduction in coronary heart disease: clinical and anatomical considerations

Coronary artery bypass surgery, percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and thrombolytic therapy in acute myocardial infarction have relieved symptoms, preserved myocardium, and prolonged life but have not modified the progression of atherosclerosis in the coronary arteries. In the last 10 years, however, progress has been made in establishing the cholesterol-atherogenesis hypothesis. Epidemiologic studies have demonstrated that the higher the total plasma cholesterol and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), the greater the risk that coronary artery disease will develop. Recently, clinical trials including the Coronary Drug Project, the Lipid Research Clinics Coronary Primary Prevention Trial (LRC-CPPT), and the Helsinki Heart Study provided evidence that lowering cholesterol reduces the frequency of fatal and nonfatal coronary events. In addition, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI) Type II Coronary Intervention Study and the Cholesterol Lowering Atherosclerosis Study demonstrated that lowering of cholesterol was associated with a decreased incidence of progression of coronary disease, as well as with the potential for reduction in the atherosclerotic plaque. Beneficial effects of diet and lifestyle changes also have an important effect on atherosclerosis. The impact of lowering cholesterol has been limited primarily by pharmacologic programs which lower cholesterol only 10-20% and are associated with a high incidence of intolerable side effects. With the recent introduction of the HmG co-A reductase inhibitors and their more profound effect on serum lipids, it may be possible to further promote plaque regression. The future of all these interventions, however, must still be assessed by overall mortality; studies to date have demonstrated beneficial effects on cardiovascular mortality but age-adjusted total mortality has remained unchanged. Future management of patients with acute and chronic coronary artery disease will involve a collaboration of cardiologists, endocrinologists, and epidemiologists to coordinate screening, recognition, and treatment of this disease.