Search

In this study we randomly compared the estradiol eluting stent (17-beta-E) with phosphorylcholine (PC)-coated stents in native coronary arteries. The incidence of angiographic restenosis was 23% in the 17-beta-E group and 31% in the PC group (p = 0.34). The major adverse cardiovascular event rates were also similar in the 2 groups (17% in the 17-beta-E group vs 22% in the PC group, p = 0.47). The mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes did not indicate superiority of the 17-beta-E eluting stent over the control PC stent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study reports the results of directional atherectomy with an 8Fr guiding catheter-compatible atherectomy catheter in a series of 31 in-stent restenotic lesions. This preliminary experience indicates a favorable safety profile, with events limited to non-Q-wave myocardial infarction occurring in 3.6% of patients. The secondary end point regarding the incidence of angiographic restenosis at 6 months showed a high restenosis rate (65%). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

From January 1996 to December 1998, 90 consecutive patients with true bifurcation lesions underwent percutaneous coronary angioplasty with Wiktor stent implantation in our centers. In 1 group (group I, n = 45), a simple approach (main vessel stenting and balloon angioplasty of the side branch) was pursued. In the other group (group II, n = 45), both the main vessel and the side branch were stented ("T" technique). There was no significant difference in clinical and angiographic characteristics between the 2 groups. Angiographic and procedural successes were 100% and 95.6%, respectively, in both groups. Angiographic results for the side branch were better in group II than in group I. In-hospital and long-term (12 month) major cardiac events were similar in the 2 groups. Target lesion revascularization was 15.5% in group I and 35.5% in group II (p = 0.12). In the main vessel, restenosis rate was 12.5% in group I and 25% in group II (p = 0.15). In the side branch, restenosis rate was 37.5% in group II and 12.5% in group I (p = <0.05; odds ratio 2.42; 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 6.26). Event-free probability at 12 months was 61% in group II and 80% in group I (p = 0.10). When dealing with true bifurcation lesions, a simple strategy is associated with a lower risk of restenosis in the side branch. In contrast, a complex approach does not appear to give any benefit in terms of early or long-term outcome or restenosis rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The functional significance of coronary artery stenoses of intermediate severity is important in determining strategy in patient care. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) is often used to evaluate coronary stenosis severity. However, at present, few data are available about the role IVUS in the assessment of functional significance of intermediate lesions. Myocardial fractional flow reserve (FFR) <0.75 is a reliable index of a functionally severe coronary stenosis. In 53 lesions we assessed (1) by pressure wire: FFR (index of functional significance), and (2) by IVUS: minimal lumen cross-sectional area (MLA, square millimeters), minimal lumen diameter (MLD, millimeters), lesion length (millimeters), and percent area stenosis at the lesion site. By regression analysis, percent area stenosis and lesion length had a significant inverse correlation with FFR (r = -0.58, p <0.001, r = -0.41, p <0.004, respectively). MLD and MLA showed a significant positive relation with FFR (r = 0.51, p <0.001, r = 0.41, p <0.004, respectively). By using a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, we identified a percent area stenosis > 70% (sensitivity 100%, specificity 68%), a MLD < or = 1.8 mm (sensitivity 100%, specificity 66%), a MLA < or =4.0 mm2 (sensitivity 92%, specificity 56%), and a lesion length of >10 mm (sensitivity 41%, specificity 80%) to be the best cut-off values to fit with a FFR <0.75. The combined evaluation of both percent area stenosis and MLD made the IVUS examination more specific (sensitivity 100%, specificity 76%). In 53 intermediate coronary lesions found by angiography, IVUS area stenosis >70%, MLD < or =1.8 mm, MLA < or =4.0 mm2, and lesion length > 10 mm reliably identified functionally critical intermediate coronary stenoses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To characterize in-stent restenosis after the implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), tacrolimus-eluting stents (TES), and zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), 25 patients treated with drug-eluting stents (DES; 9 PES, 10 SES, 4 TES, and 2 ZES) and 19 with bare-metal stents (BMS) underwent directional coronary atherectomy for in-stent restenosis 4 to 36 months after implantation. Restenosis after DES implantation was more frequently focal and associated with smaller specimens compared to that after BMS implantation. Light and confocal microscopy were used. Histologic features were similar in DES and BMS. In-stent restenotic lesions were composed mainly of neointima containing proteoglycan-rich smooth muscle cells and fibrolipidic regions. Small inflammatory infiltrates were observed, mostly in patients with unstable angina; CD18- and/or CD3(+) cells were detected in patients with BMS and DES. Different smooth muscle cell phenotypes were observed: synthetic was more frequent with BMS and PES, intermediate with ZES, contractile or intermediate with SES, and contractile with TES. The mean proliferation index was low and comparable among stent types; cyclins B1 and D1 were expressed in all DES. In conclusion, intra-DES and intra-BMS restenotic tissue was composed mainly of smooth muscle cells with different phenotypes, proliferating at a low rate. The different smooth muscle cell phenotypes within the stent types might suggest different mechanisms of restenosis.

Prolonged periods of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAT), i.e., aspirin plus a thienopyridine, are currently recommended to prevent late drug-eluting stent (DES) thrombosis. The aim of our study was to determine the risk and predictors of bleeding and compliance associated with such prolongation of DAT. In this observational study we examined 2,355 consecutive patients undergoing successful DES implantation at 4 hospitals in Italy from June 2002 to December 2004. Bleeding events occurring on DAT and warfarin or in the first 30 days after stent implantation were excluded. Median duration of DAT was 209 days (interquartile range 178 to 444) and only 158 patients (6.7%) prematurely discontinued DAT. The overall bleeding rate was 1.9% (45), with major bleeding in 19 (0.8%) and minor bleeding in 26 (1.1%). Independent predictors of bleeding were DAT (hazard ratio 19.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.69 to 106.34, p <0.001) and age >65 years (hazard ratio 2.15, 95% CI 1.16 to 4.00, p = 0.02). In patients on DAT, the incidence rate (30 days to 18 months) of any bleeding event was 2.57 per 100 person-years (95% CI 1.85 to 3.48) and major bleeding was 1.10 per 100 person-years (95% CI 0.65 to 1.74). In conclusion, DAT after DES implantation is well tolerated and associated with a very low risk of major bleeding.

Several randomized trials have shown that sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) are effective in reducing restenosis in respect to bare-metal stents, including the subset of small vessels. The objective of this study was to evaluate "real world" angiographic and clinical outcomes of a large series of patients enrolled in the TRUE registry and treated with PES for both small vessel and very small vessel lesions. A consecutive series of 675 patients (926 lesions) with reference vessel diameter <2.75 mm measured by quantitative coronary angiography analysis were analyzed. The primary end point was the rate of angiographic in-stent restenosis and 1-year major adverse cardiac events. In this study 390 lesions were identified as small vessel (reference vessel diameter >or=2.25 and <2.75 mm) and 536 lesions as very small vessel (reference vessel diameter <2.25 mm). Overall in-stent restenosis was 15.5% (n = 96). Compared with small vessel, the very small vessel lesions had more in-stent restenosis (21.7% vs 11.4%, p <0.001) and in-segment restenosis (29.3% vs 22.5%, p = 0.055). The majority of the restenotic lesions (n = 125) were focal (57%, n = 71). At 1 year, cardiac death was 1.6% (n = 11), acute myocardial infarction 0.5% (n = 4.), and the target lesion revascularization 12.8% (n = 86). Cumulative major adverse cardiac events rate was 17.3% (n = 119). The rate of definite and probable stent thrombosis was 0.9% (n = 8). In conclusion, in comparison with historical bare-metal stent controls, this large series of small vessel lesions treated with PES confirms previous results reporting the efficacy of PES in small vessels. The rate of subacute and late stent thrombosis was low in this subgroup of patients.

Despite encouraging results from randomized trials, concerns exist about long-term results of sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. We sought to determine whether in-stent restenosis occurring >1 year ("late") after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation is a real clinical entity. We analyzed data on all sirolimus-eluting stents implanted in our institution before March 2003. During the study period 928 lesions in 433 patients were treated. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 306 patients (70.6%) with 679 lesions (73.2%). Angiography after 1 year was performed only in symptomatic patients. We considered restenosis "early" if it occurred during the first year and late if after 1 year. Late restenosis required demonstration of a widely patent stent at 6 to 9 months, with repeat angiography after 1 year demonstrating restenosis. Restenosis occurred in 160 lesions overall (23.5%). Of the 31 (4.6%) that were documented after 1 year, 13 were excluded from analysis due to absence of 6- to 9-month angiography; the remaining 18 (2.6%, 1.7 to 4.2) fulfilled our criteria for late restenosis (median time of documentation 607 days, interquartile range 511 to 923). In conclusion, late restenosis is an infrequent but real entity; its existence implies we should not discount the possibility of restenosis as the cause of symptoms that develop >1 year after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation.

Nitroprusside (NTP) is used for the treatment of slow coronary flow (SCF) after coronary interventions. The wide variation in dosage, route, and timing of its administration in the reported studies prevents an objective assessment of its efficacy. We report the incidence and response to a standardized NTP protocol of SCF after successful stent implantation. Selective intracoronary administration of incremental doses (initial bolus of 80 microg incremented by 40 microg) of NPT was assessed in 21 patients who developed SCF in a series of 2,212 consecutive patients who underwent successful stent placement from January to October 2005. SCF was observed only in patients treated for acute myocardial infarction (AMI; 11.5%, 12 of 105) or saphenous vein graft (SVG) stenosis (8.2%, 9 of 109). An intracoronary bolus of nitroglycerin did not restore normal Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow in any patient. The first 80-microg dose of NTP restored normal TIMI flow in 58% of patients (7 of 12) with AMI and in 44% of patients (4 of 9)with SVG stenosis. The maximal dose (120/160 microg) restored normal TIMI flow in all remaining patients with AMI but in only 1 additional patient with SVG stenosis. At the end of the procedure, the percent decrease in corrected TIMI frame count was significantly larger in patients with AMI (-44+/-10%) than in those with SVG stenosis (-24+/-16%, p=0.02). In a large consecutive series of successful stent procedures, SCF was found only in patients with ST-elevation AMI (11.5%) or with a stenosed SVG (8.2%). In conclusion, the standardized protocol of intracoronary NTP administration succeeded in normalizing SCF in all patients with AMI but in only 5 of 9 patients with SVG stenosis. This latter subgroup requires other therapeutic strategies.

We compared 1-year outcome after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation with off-pump bypass grafing (OPCABG) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal segment of the left anterior descending coronary artery. All consecutive diabetic patients treated by DES (DES group) or OPCABG (CABG group) in our institution from April 2002 to December 2004 because of de novo coronary lesions were included. Patients in the CABG group (n = 149) were older and had a higher rate of 3-vessel disease than those in the DES group (n = 69). At 12 months, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events occurred in 29% of the DES group and 20.5% of the CABG group (unadjusted analysis, odds ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93 to 1.54, p = 0.17). After propensity score analysis, adjusting for baseline differences between the 2 cohorts, DESs increased the risk of 12-month major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (hazard ratio 1.88, 95% CI 1.09 to 3.02, p = 0.020). This was due to the higher rate for repeat revascularization in the DES group (19% vs 5%, odds ratio 2.05, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.75, p = 0.001). In contrast, there was no difference in the rate of the composite end points of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke (DES group 13%, CABG group 12%; adjusted analysis, hazard ratio 0.80, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.35, p = 0.40). In conclusion, at 1 year in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease involving the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery, the advantage of OPCABG over DES implantation seems to be limited at a lower rate of repeat revascularization. No difference seems to exist in the rate of death, stroke, and myocardial infarction.

Late loss is becoming an important end point to compare drug-eluting stents; however, little is known about its pattern of distribution. We analyzed the pattern of late loss distribution in sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) in a consecutive cohort of patients. From a cohort of 529 patients treated with drug-eluting stents in 1 year, we selected all patients who underwent angiographic follow-up. Three hundred fifty-nine patients with 592 de novo lesions received SESs (286 lesions) or PESs (306 lesions). Late loss and binary angiographic restenosis were analyzed. Binary restenosis occurred in 56 lesions (19.6%) treated with SESs compared with 53 (17.3%) treated with PESs (p = 0.48). The 2 late loss distributions were skewed to the right and were not normally distributed (p <0.001 for SES, p = 0.003 for PES). Late loss was significantly lower in the SES group (p = 0.03), with a median value of 0.29 mm (interquartile range -0.09 to 0.66) versus 0.41 mm (-0.02 to 0.85) in the PES group. When analyzing only restenotic lesions, late loss had a normal distribution in the SES and PES groups (p = 0.96 and 0.44, respectively) and was similar in the 2 groups (1.75 +/- 0.51 vs 1.82 +/- 0.62, p = 0.48). When evaluating nonrestenotic lesions, late loss was also normally distributed in the 2 groups (p = 0.75 for SES, p = 0.73 for PES) but was significantly lower (p = 0.002) after SES implantation (0.14 +/- 0.39) than after PES implantation (0.27 +/- 0.44). In conclusion, SESs and PESs have a bimodal pattern of late loss distribution. The observed difference in late loss between SES and PES seems to be partly explained by the decrease in late loss after SES implantation in nonrestenotic lesions (where SES approaches "zero late loss"). Thus, late loss may not be a reliable marker of the true efficacy of these devices due to its complex and nongaussian distribution.

Percutaneous coronary intervention in a patient's last remaining coronary conduit is perceived to be high risk, although there are no published data on outcomes in this lesion cohort. We report our experience with 16 patients who underwent intervention in their sole remaining vessel between 1998 and 2005. All patients had previously undergone coronary artery bypass grafting, had a history of myocardial infarction, had impaired left ventricular systolic function, and were symptomatic with unstable angina or minimal effort angina. There was 1 periprocedural death 10 hours after the procedure, and another patient died 4 months after the procedure. At 6-month follow-up, 2 patients had undergone target lesion revascularization. There was a significant and sustained improvement in symptom status, with 75% of patients being asymptomatic or in Canadian Cardiovascular Society class I after 6 months. Given the complexity of the patients and lesions treated in this cohort, periprocedural and long-term outcomes are acceptable with a notable improvement in symptomatic status. In conclusion, these data support percutaneous intervention as a realistic treatment option for this often highly symptomatic and difficult-to-treat patient cohort.

Randomized trials have shown that implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) compared with bare metal stents. We compared the impact of SESs and PESs on clinical outcome in medically treated diabetic patients with multivessel stents. In this study, the in-hospital and 9-month clinical outcomes of 260 consecutive diabetic patients who underwent implantation of SESs (147 patients) or PESs (113 patients) were compared. MACEs were defined as death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and clinically driven target vessel revascularization. The baseline demographic and angiographic characteristics were well matched. An average of 3.0 +/- 1.3 versus 2.8 +/- 1.2 lesions were treated in the SES and PES groups, respectively (p = 0.34), with a mean stented length per patient of 73 +/- 43 versus 61 +/- 36 mm (p = 0.08). No significant difference was observed between the SES and PES groups for in-hospital (6.1% vs 3.5%, p = 0.34) or 9-month MACE (24.5% vs 19.5%, p = 0.34) rates or for subacute (1.4% vs 0.9%, p = 0.72) or late (0.7% vs 0.9%, p = 0.85) stent thrombosis. Insulin-requiring diabetic patients treated with SESs and PESs also had similar demographic and angiographic characteristics and rates of in-hospital (4.7% vs 7.7%, p = 0.57) and 9-month (28.0% vs 38.4%, p = 0.44) MACEs. Insulin-dependent diabetes was the only independent predictor of MACEs (odds ratio 2.68, 95% confidence interval 1.46 to 4.89, p = 0.001). In conclusion, our results demonstrated a relatively high incidence of MACEs in a diabetic population with multivessel disease, despite treatment with drug-eluting stents. In addition, we could not find any clear advantage of 1 type of stent versus the other.

In patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) inside bare metal stents, drug-eluting stents reduce the recurrence of restenosis compared with balloon angioplasty. However, few data are available about this therapeutic modality in the case of diffuse restenosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate the immediate and mid-term outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in diffuse ISR and determine the predictors of clinical and angiographic restenosis recurrence. A series of 161 consecutive patients with 194 diffuse ISR lesions (>10 mm) treated with drug-eluting stent implantation were evaluated. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, myocardial infarction, and the need for target lesion revascularization. During a mean follow-up of 8.2 +/- 3.4 months, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 19% in the SES group and 24% in the PES group (p = 0.56). Angiographic follow-up was performed in 80% of the lesions. The overall restenosis rate was 22% and was not significantly different between lesions treated with sirolimus-eluting (20%) or paclitaxel-eluting (25%, p = 0.55) stents. The incidence of restenosis was higher in diabetics (32%) than in nondiabetics (16%, odds ratio 2.5, 95% confidence interval 1.1 to 5.5, p = 0.02). By multivariate analysis, diabetes was confirmed to be the only independent predictor of recurrent restenosis (odds ratio 3.53, 95% confidence interval 1.39 to 9.02, p = 0.008). In conclusion, drug-eluting stent implantation for diffuse ISR is associated with acceptable clinical and angiographic results. The association of diffuse restenosis and diabetes mellitus is an unfavorable condition leading to a high risk of recurrence.

We assessed (1) angiogenic factors in patients with stable angina and longstanding (> or =24 months) total occlusion of a single coronary artery and (2) the relation between plasma levels of angiogenic factors and the development of collateral vessels as evaluated by coronary angiography. Plasma concentrations of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF(165)), fibroblast growth factor, placenta-derived growth factors (PlGFs), and hepatocyte growth factor were assessed in 96 patients with stable angina and longstanding (> or =24 months) total occlusion of a single coronary artery. According to coronary angiographic results, 18 patients had no visible collaterals (group 0), 21 patients had visible collaterals but no filling of the recipient epicardial vessel (group 1), and 57 patients showed filling (partial or complete) of the recipient epicardial vessel by collaterals (group 2). Plasma VEGF(165) and PlGF concentrations were higher in group 1 than in groups 0 and 2 (VEGF(165) 75 pg/ml, range 24 to 105, vs 23 pg/ml, range 15 to 29, and 19 pg/ml, range 10 to 41, respectively, F = 5.53, p = 0.006; PlGF 35 pg/ml, range 3.5 to 105, vs 1 pg/ml, range 1 to 38, and 1 pg/ml, range 1 to 5, respectively, F = 7.09, p = 0.008). Plasma VEGF(165) and PlGF levels were similar in groups 0 and 2. There was no significant difference in plasma levels of fibroblast and hepatocyte growth factor concentrations across the 3 groups. In conclusion, plasma levels of angiogenic growth factors differ among patients with stable angina pectoris and longstanding total coronary occlusion.

We investigated early and mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients who had de novo ostial left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) lesions that were treated with drug-eluting stents (DESs) or bare metal stents (BMSs). We identified 43 consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous intervention for isolated de novo ostial LAD lesions with implantation of DESs and compared them with 43 patients who had similar lesions that were treated with BMSs. All stents were successfully implanted. There were no significant differences with respect to major in-hospital complications between the 2 groups. One patient in the BMS group died during hospitalization. Non-Q-wave myocardial infarction occurred in 2 patients (4.7%) in the DES and in 1 patient (2.3%) in the BMS group. At 9-month follow-up, 3 patients (7%) in the DES group and 11 (25.6%) in the BMS group underwent target lesion revascularization (p = 0.038); major adverse cardiac events were less frequent in the DES than in the BMS group (9.3% vs 32.6%, p = 0.015). Angiographic follow-up was available in 82% of patients in the DES group and 75% of those in the BMS group (p = 0.6) and showed lower binary restenotic rates (5.7% vs 31.3%, p = 0.01) and smaller late loss (0.30 +/- 0.81 vs 1.23 +/- 0.93 mm, p = 0.0001) in the DES group. In conclusion, DES implantation in de novo ostial LAD lesions appears safe and effective and is associated with a significant decrease in restenotic rates compared with historical experience with BMSs.

We compared the clinical efficacy of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) in a contemporary cohort of patients who had complex lesions. We collected data on 9-month outcomes in 529 patients (281 in the PES group and 248 in the SES group) whose de novo lesions were treated with drug-eluting stents. The end point was per-patient in-hospital and follow-up major adverse cardiac events, which were defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization, including target lesion revascularization. There were no in-hospital deaths or repeat revascularizations; however, 5.7% of the PES group and 2% of the SES group developed a myocardial infarction (p = 0.04). At a median follow-up of 10.6 months, the rate of major adverse cardiac events was similar between groups (18.1% vs 21%, adjusted hazard ratio 0.85, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 1.25), without any difference in the occurrence of death or myocardial infarction. Diabetes and total stent length were independent predictors of major adverse cardiac events. Propensity analysis confirmed the similarity between devices (hazard ratio 0.87, 95% confidence interval 0.62 to 1.25). Most restenoses were focal and only 2 patients required surgical revascularization. In conclusion, implantation of drug-eluting stents in complex lesions was associated with favorable results and most patients remained free from surgical revascularization at follow-up. Overall, the 2 available stent platforms had similar performance characteristics.

Although predictors of acute intraprocedural stent thrombosis (IPST) in the drug-eluting stent era have been proposed, external validation is lacking. We thus analyzed the occurrence of IPST in the RECIPE study and found that, among 1,320 patients who underwent drug-eluting stent implantation, IPST occurred in 6 (0.5%), with in-hospital major adverse events in 4 (67%). IPST was predicted by number and total length of implanted stents, baseline minimal lumen diameter, and, in a pooled analysis that incorporated values from the present study and a previous study, use of elective glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. Such results may provide useful information to guide prevention of this complication.

Sixty in-stent restenotic lesions were treated with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation and retrospectively compared with a group of matched lesions treated with cutting balloon angioplasty. The results indicate a good safety profile of the procedure and a 57% reduction in the incidence of recurrent restenosis in comparison with cutting balloon angioplasty.

The impact of the use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) in the treatment of in-stent restenosis in previously irradiated sites has not been adequately evaluated. Fifteen consecutive patients who underwent percutaneous coronary interventions using SESs in lesion sites previously intervened with intracoronary radiation therapy were identified. All stents were implanted successfully, and there were no major in-hospital complications. At 30-day follow-up, there was 1 case of subacute thrombosis that led to target lesion revascularization (TLR). At 6 months, 2 patients underwent TLR because of recurrent angina with angiographic restenosis, and 1 patient underwent target vessel revascularization distally to the SES site; no other major adverse cardiac events occurred at long-term follow-up (mean 17 +/- 8 months).

We evaluated predictors of increased periprocedural creatine kinase-MB isoenzyme levels after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents with an intent to fully cover the diseased segment. The total stent length per patient (predisposing factor) and elective use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa (protective factor) were independent predictors of increased creatine kinase-MB isoenzyme levels.

Stainless steel (SS) and carbon-coated (CC) stents were randomly compared in 347 patients (520 lesions). No differences were observed in in-hospital major adverse cardiac events: 2.8% in the CC group and 4.5% in the SS group (p = 0.286). The 6-month follow-up showed similar rates of binary restenosis (31.8% in the CC group vs 35.9% in the SS group; p = 0.448) and of cumulative major adverse cardiac events (30.5% in the CC group vs 32.7% in the SS group; p = 0.675). In unselected patients and lesions, carbon coating does not provide significant improvements over SS stents with the same design.

We sought to determine the incidence of coronary perforations, predisposing factors, and in-hospital and late outcome of patients with coronary perforations. Perforations occurred in 0.84% of treated lesions and more frequently in patients with complex lesions after atheroablative procedures and who underwent intravascular ultrasound guided lumen optimization. The incidence of adverse events, emergency coronary artery bypass grafting and death significantly decreased over time.