Search

Background: The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients at high risk of bleeding or thrombosis has not been prospectively studied; limited data are available in patients who have a low restenosis risk., Objectives: This study sought to compare a hydrophilic polymer-based, second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with a unique drug fast-release profile versus bare-metal stents (BMS) under similar durations of dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)., Methods: We randomly assigned 1,606 patients with stable or unstable symptoms, and who on the basis of thrombotic bleeding or restenosis risk criteria, qualified as uncertain candidates for DES, to receive ZES or BMS. DAPT duration was on the basis of patient characteristics, rather than stent characteristics, and allowed for a personalized 1-month dual antiplatelet regimen. The primary endpoint was the risk of 1-year major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), which included death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR)., Results: Median DAPT duration was 32 days (interquartile range [IQR]: 30 to 180 days) and did not differ between the groups. In the ZES group, 140 patients (17.5%) reached the primary endpoint, compared with 178 patients (22.1%) in the BMS group (hazard ratio: 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.61 to 0.95; p = 0.011) as a result of lower MI (2.9% vs. 8.1%; p < 0.001) and TVR rates (5.9% vs.10.7%; p = 0.001) in the ZES group. Definite or probable stent thrombosis was also significantly reduced in ZES recipients (2.0% vs. 4.1%; p = 0.019)., Conclusions: Compared with BMS, DES implantation using a stent with a biocompatible polymer and fast drug-eluting characteristics, combined with an abbreviated, tailored DAPT regimen, resulted in a lower risk of 1-year MACE in uncertain candidates for DES implantation. (Zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates [ZEUS] Study; NCT01385319)., (Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Although large clinical trials have shown that everolimus-eluting stents (EES) significantly reduce target vessel revascularisation (TVR), myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis (ST) compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in diverse populations, there is a paucity of data comparing EES and PES in patients presenting with MI., Methods and Results: We performed a post hoc subgroup analysis on COMPARE, an all-comer trial comparing EES to PES. We identified 863 patients (EES=434, PES=429 treated for MI: 452 ST-elevation MI (STEMI) and 411 non ST-elevation MI (NSTEMI). EES was associated with a significant reduction in the primary endpoint, a composite of all-cause mortality, MI, and TVR, at two years (RR=0.57; 95% CI: 0.40-0.83, p=0.002). While the effect was more marked in the STEMI (RR=0.51; 95% CI: 0.30-0.87, p=0.01) than the NSTEMI subgroup (RR=0.65; 95% CI: 0.39-1.08, p=0.09), the interaction p-value (0.5) suggests that a difference in treatment effect between presentations is unlikely. ST rates were significantly lower with EES (RR=0.30; 95% CI: 0.12-0.73, p=0.005)., Conclusions: At two years, EES results are superior to PES in terms of safety and efficacy endpoints in treatment of MI.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the safety and efficacy of the Xience V (Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, California) everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with the Taxus Liberté (Boston Scientific, Natick, Massachusetts) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) at 2-year follow-up., Background: COMPARE (Comparison of the everolimus eluting XIENCE-V stent with the paclitaxel eluting TAXUS LIBERTÉ stent in all-comers: a randomized open label trial) demonstrated a superior clinical outcome of EES over PES at 1 year in all comers. Whether this superiority is maintained after discontinuation, at 12 months, of dual antiplatelet therapy is unclear., Methods: Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with limited exclusion criteria were randomly allocated to EES or PES. The 2-year pre-specified endpoints are composites of safety and efficacy and stent thrombosis., Results: Follow-up was completed in 1,795 of 1,800 patients (99.7%). The groups had similar baseline characteristics. At 2 years, significantly fewer EES patients took dual antiplatelet therapy (11.4% vs. 15.4%, p = 0.02). The primary composite of all death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization occurred in 9.0% of EES patients and 13.7% of PES patients (relative risk [RR]: 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.50 to 0.86) driven by a lower rate of myocardial infarction (3.9% vs. 7.5%; RR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.35 to 0.77) and target vessel revascularization (3.2% vs. 8.0%; RR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.27 to 0.62), in parallel with a lower rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.9% vs. 3.9%; RR: 0.23; 95% CI: 0.11 to 0.49). Differences significantly increased between 1- and 2-year follow-up for the primary composite endpoint (p = 0.04), target vessel revascularization (p = 0.02), and definite or probable stent thrombosis (p = 0.02)., Conclusions: The substantial clinical benefit of the EES over the PES with regard to measures of both safety and efficacy is maintained at 2 years in real-life practice with an increasing benefit in terms of safety and efficacy between 1 year and 2 years., (Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents, compared with bare metal stents, reduced the risk of restenosis in clinical trials with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. We compared the safety and efficacy of the second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice., Methods: We randomly assigned 1800 consecutive patients (aged 18-85 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at one centre to treatment with everolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety and efficacy (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation) within 12 months. Patients were not told which stent they had been allocated. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01016041., Findings: Follow-up was completed in 1797 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 56 (6%) of 897 patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 82 (9%) of 903 in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group (relative risk 0.69 [95% CI 0.50-0.95], p value for superiority=0.02). The difference was attributable to a lower rate of stent thrombosis (6 [<1%] vs 23 [3%], 0.26 [0.11-0-64], p=0.002), myocardial infarction (25 [3%] vs 48 [5%], 0.52 [0.33-0.84], p=0.007), and target vessel revascularisation (21 [2%] vs 54 [6%], 0.39 [0.24-0.64], p=0.0001). Cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularisation occurred in 44 [5%] patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 74 [8%] patients in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group, p value for superiority was 0.005., Interpretation: The everolimus-eluting stent is better than the second generation paclitaxel-eluting stent in unselected patients in terms of safety and efficacy. On the basis of our results, we suggest that paclitaxel-eluting stents should no longer be used in everyday clinical practice., Funding: Unrestricted grants from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific., (Copyright 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: Endothelial dysfunction has been related both to progression of atherosclerotic disease and to future cardiovascular events. We assessed local epicardial endothelial function 6 months after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) or bare metal stent (BS) implantation., Methods and Results: In 12 patients (seven SES, five BS), endothelium-dependent vasomotion of a coronary segment 15 mm in length, starting 2 mm distal to the stent, was assessed with quantitative coronary angiography immediately after the procedure and at 6 months follow-up, after intracoronary infusion of acetylcholine. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was performed and coronary flow reserve (CFR) assessed in all patients. At follow-up significant vasoconstriction was seen in SES (median 32% diameter reduction from baseline) but not in BS (median 2% reduction) patients after acetylcholine infusion (P=0.03 for SES vs. BS); endothelium-independent vasodilatation to nitrates did not differ significantly between groups (20% SES, 5% BS, P=0.14). IVUS revealed no late unhealed dissections and CFR was comparable between groups (SES 3.1 vs. BS 3.2, n.s.)., Conclusion: SES implantation may have an adverse effect on local endothelium-dependent vasomotor responses compared with BS implantation at 6 months. Long-term clinical consequences of this observation are still unknown.

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.

Background: The efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) remains unknown. We evaluated the clinical outcomes after implantation of 2.25 mm diameter SES and PES., Methods and Results: PES have been used as the stent of choice for all percutaneous coronary interventions as part of the prospective Taxus-Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (T-SEARCH) Registry. Ninety consecutive patients received at least one 2.25 mm PES (PES group), and were compared with 107 patients who received at least one 2.25 mm SES as part of the RESEARCH registry. The overall population presented high-risk characteristics commonly excluded from most studies. Populations were well-matched. There were 2 (2.2%) incidents of subacute stent thrombosis in the PES group (in a 2.25 mm stent), and none in the SES group. At one year, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 5.6% in the SES group, and 17.8% in the PES group (p = 0.007). After adjustments for other significant univariate variables, presentation with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) (adjusted OR 5.2 [95% CI 1.8-15.0], p = 0.002) and PES utilization (adjusted OR 3.7 [95% CI 1.3-10.5], p = 0.013) were found to be significant independent predictors of major adverse cardiac events (MACE)., Conclusions: In an unselected population treated for very small vessel disease, SES were associated with better 12-month clinical outcomes and the use of PES was identified as an independent predictor of adverse events.

Background: Diabetes mellitus is a well-known risk factor for future adverse cardiac events after coronary intervention with conventional metal stents. In this study, the impact of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) were evaluated in a consecutive group of diabetic patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary treatment and compared to a population treated with bare metal stents., Methods and Results: From April 2002, a policy of routine SES implantation has been instituted in our hospital. During 1 year of enrollment, a total of 112 consecutive diabetic patients with de novo coronary lesions were electively treated with SES (SES group). A similar group for comparison comprised 118 consecutive patients treated with bare metal stents in the preceding period (the pre-SES group). After 1-year follow-up, the cumulative rate of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, and any repeat revascularization) was 17.3% in the SES group versus 30.2% in the pre-SES group (hazard ratio, 0.54 [95% confidence interval, 0.32-0.91]; p = 0.02), mainly due to a marked reduction in the need for repeat revascularization (10.2% versus 23.5%; hazard ratio, 0.40 [95% confidence interval, 0.21-0.78]; p = 0.007)., Conclusions: Routine utilization of SES for diabetic patients significantly reduces the rate of adverse cardiac events at 1 year compared to bare metal stents.

Background: The impact of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation on the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention for left main (LM) coronary disease is largely unknown., Methods and Results: From April 2001 to December 2003, 181 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for LM stenosis at our institution. The first cohort consisted of 86 patients (19 protected LM) treated with bare metal stents (pre-DES group); the second cohort comprised 95 patients (15 protected LM) treated exclusively with DES. The 2 cohorts were well balanced for all baseline characteristics. At a median follow-up of 503 days (range, 331 to 873 days), the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was lower in the DES cohort than in patients in the pre-DES group (24% versus 45%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88]; P=0.01). Total mortality did not differ between cohorts; however, there were significantly lower rates of both myocardial infarction (4% versus 12%, respectively; HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.65]; P=0.006) and target vessel revascularization (6% versus 23%, respectively; HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.10 to 0.65]; P=0.004) in the DES group. On multivariate analysis, use of DES, Parsonnet classification, troponin elevation at entry, distal LM location, and reference vessel diameter were independent predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events., Conclusions: When percutaneous coronary intervention is undertaken at LM lesions, routine DES implantation, which reduces the cumulative incidence of myocardial infarction and the need for target vessel revascularization compared with bare metal stents, should currently be the preferred strategy.

Objectives: We sought to determine the real-world incidence of angiographically confirmed and possible stent thrombosis (ST) in an unrestricted population during the first 30 days after bare-metal stent (BMS), sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation., Background: Current data on ST in drug-eluting stents (DES) have come from randomized trials with strict entry criteria, which limits their generalizability to daily practice., Methods: The study population comprised three sequential cohorts of 506 consecutive patients with BMS, 1,017 consecutive patients with SES, and 989 consecutive patients treated with PES., Results: In the first 30 days after stent implantation, 6 BMS (1.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.5% to 2.6%; p = 0.9), 10 SES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.5% to 1.8%), and 10 PES (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.9%) patients developed angiographically proven ST. Multiple potential risk factors were identified in most patients with ST. Bifurcation stenting in the setting of acute myocardial infarction was an independent risk factor for angiographic ST in the entire population (odds ratio [OR] 12.9, 95% CI 4.7 to 35.8, p < 0.001). In patients with DES who had angiographic ST, 30-day mortality was 15%, whereas another 60% suffered a nonfatal myocardial infarction; no further deaths occurred during six months of follow-up. Including possible cases, 7 BMS (1.4%, 95% CI 0.7% to 2.8%), 15 SES (1.5%, 95% CI 0.9% to 2.4%), and 16 PES (1.6%, 95% CI 1.0% to 2.6%) patients had ST., Conclusions: The unrestricted use of SES or PES is associated with ST rates in the range expected for BMS. Stent thrombosis was associated with a high morbidity and mortality. Bifurcation stenting, when performed in patients with acute myocardial infarction, was associated with an increased risk of ST.

Renal impairment is an important predictor of mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention and may increase the restenosis rate. However, the relation between restenosis and the risk of death in patients who have renal impairment remains unclear. We evaluated the incidences of repeat revascularization and mortality in patients who had renal impairment and those who did not and who received sirolimus-eluting stents or bare stents. A total of 1,080 consecutive patients treated for 1 year had available data to calculate baseline creatinine clearance. Patients received bare stents (first 6 months, n = 543) or sirolimus-eluting stents (last 6 months, n = 537) and were grouped according to the presence or absence of renal impairment (creatinine clearance <60 ml/min). Patients who had renal impairment had a higher mortality rate at 1 year (7.6% vs 2.5%, hazard ratio 3.14, 95% confidence interval 1.68 to 5.88, p <0.01), with no differences in mortality between patients who received bare stents and those who received sirolimus-eluting stents (hazard ratio 0.91, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 1.68, p = 0.8). The incidence of target vessel revascularization decreased significantly in patients who were treated with sirolimus-eluting stents and did not have renal impairment (hazard ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.90, p = 0.01) and in those who had decreased renal function (hazard ratio 0.37, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.90, p = 0.03). Thus, sirolimus-eluting stents compared with conventional stents decreased clinical restenosis in patients who had renal impairment. However, this benefit was not paralleled by a decrease in the risk of death in this population. It seems unlikely that restenosis could be a contributing factor that influenced the increased mortality of patients who had impaired renal function.

Background: Ostial atherosclerotic lesions are distinct from other lesion sites in terms of outcomes following percutaneous interventions. Despite aggressive lesion modification strategies, long-term outcome is hampered by restenosis. Various stent designs have failed to show significant improvement in target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates. The present study evaluates the clinical outcomes following sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for ostial lesions., Materials and Methods: The sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) was the device of choice at our institute for all coronary interventions from April 2002 to March 2003. This study population is comprised of 50 patients who received drug-eluting stents for atherosclerotic ostial lesions during this period. Sixty-eight percent of the patients were male and 24 patients (48%) had a history of previous revascularization. Indication for intervention were as follows: acute myocardial infarction, 7 patients (14%), stable angina, 23 patients (46%), unstable angina, 20 patients (40%). Angioplasty and stent implantations were done according to the standard protocol. All patients were prospectively followed up for major adverse cardiac events. The event-free survival was 90% at one year. There were 5 (10%) target vessel revascularization, 3 (6%) myocardial infarctions and 1 (2%) death during a mean follow-up of 414.5 +/- 54.5 days. TLR was required in 4 (8%) patients., Conclusions: SES implantation is feasible in ostial locations and is associated with low subsequent revascularization.

Introduction: The most effective strategy for bifurcation stenting is currently undefined. The Culotte technique was developed as a method that ensures complete bifurcation lesion coverage. However, it went out of favour due to a high rate of restenosis when utilizing bare metal stents. Drug-eluting stents reduce the rate of restenosis and need for repeat lesion revascularization compared with bare metal stents; we re-evaluated this technique with drug-eluting stent implantation., Methods: Between April 2002 and October 2003, 207 patients were treated for at least one bifurcation lesion with drug-eluting stent implantation to both the main vessel and side branch. Of these, 23 were treated with the Culotte technique (11.1%) for 24 lesions. Sirolimus-eluting stents were used in 8.3%, and paclitaxel-eluting stents in the remaining 92.7%., Results: Clinical follow-up was obtained in 100%. One patient had a myocardial infarction at 14 days (maximum rise in creatine kinase 872 IU/L) related to thrombosis occurring in another lesion, and underwent repeat revascularization. There were no episodes of stent thrombosis in the Culotte lesions. At eight months follow-up, there were no deaths and no further myocardial infarction. One patient required target lesion revascularization (TLR), and a second underwent target vessel revascularization. The cumulative rates of survival-free of TLR and major adverse cardiac events were 94.7% and 84.6% respectively. Angiographic follow-up was obtained in 16 patients (69.6%) at a mean period of 8.3+/-4.3 months. The late lumen loss for the main vessel and side branch were 0.48+/-0.56 mm and 0.53+/-0.33 mm respectively, with binary restenosis rates of 18.8% and 12.5%., Conclusions: In this small study of bifurcation stenting utilizing the Culotte technique with drug-eluting stent implantation, there was a low rate of major adverse events and need for target lesion revascularization at eight months, when compared with historical data of bifurcation stenting with bare metal stents. Further re-evaluation of this technique utilizing drug-eluting stents, is warranted in the setting of larger randomized studies.

From April 16, 2002 to October 16, 2002, 10 consecutive patients with coronary disease on chronic dialysis were treated with sirolimus-eluting stents. Diabetes was present in 30% and half of the patients had multivessel coronary disease. On average, patients had been on dialysis for 5 years prior to the procedure (range: 2-15 years). Five patients were on hemodialysis and 5 patients were on peritoneal dialysis. Overall, 18 lesions were treated with 1.9 +/- 1.1 sirolimus-eluting stents per patient. At a mean follow-up of 403 days, there were no cases of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation has been shown to reduce repeat revascularization in various randomized trials. The present study evaluated the outcomes after SES implantation in 46 octogenarian patients. SES implantation in octogenarians appears to be feasible and is associated with very small subsequent need for repeat target vessel revascularization at 1 year.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for patients with multivessel disease, which included left anterior descending artery (LAD) treatment. Since April 2002, SES has been utilized as the device of choice for all interventions in our institution as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. In the first 6 months of enrollment, 99 consecutive patients (17.6% of the total population) were treated for multivessel disease involving the LAD. The impact of SES implantation on major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was evaluated. All the patients received SES in the LAD. Additional stent implantation in the right coronary artery, the left circumflex, or in all three major vessels was attempted successfully in 32 (32%), 51 (52%), and 16 (16%) of the treated patients respectively. During a mean follow-up of 360 +/- 59 days (range, 297-472 days), we had one death, one non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, and eight patients required subsequent intervention. The event-free survival of MACE at 1 year was 85.6%. SES implantation for multivessel disease in a consecutive series of patients is associated with low incidence of adverse events. The reported results are related predominantly to the reduction in repeat revascularization.

The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in patients treated electively for left main (LM) stenoses has not been yet ascertained. The present study reports on the clinical and angiographic outcome of 16 consecutive patients treated electively for de novo stenoses in the LM. The impact of SES implantation on major adverse cardiac events was evaluated. Mean age was 65 +/- 11 years. Unprotected LM was present in nine (56%), and eight patients (50%) received stents extending into both the left anterior descending and circumflex arteries for stenoses of the distal left main bifurcation. In-house mortality and reintervention rate was zero. One patient developed a non-Q-wave myocardial infarction related to the index procedure. At 1-year clinical follow-up, there were no deaths or further myocardial infarctions; one (6%) patient required target lesion revascularization. A total of 12 patients (75%) underwent 6-month angiographic follow-up with a late lumen loss of 0.04 +/- 0.65 mm and one focal restenosis (8% of patients). Elective SES implantation for LM disease was associated with zero mortality and a very low incidence of additional major adverse events at 1 year.

The long-term efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention for mildly obstructive coronary narrowings is limited by the occurrence of restenosis, limiting the applicability of this therapy for these lesions. The present study reports on a consecutive series of 20 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for 23 angiographically mild de novo lesions (defined as a diameter stenosis <50% by quantitative coronary angiography). At a mean follow-up of 399 +/- 120 days, the survival-free of major adverse events was 95%, with no patient requiring target lesion revascularization.

The percutaneous treatment of coronary bifurcation stenoses is hampered by an increased rate of subsequent restenosis. The present study reports on the outcomes of a consecutive series of 58 patients with 65 de novo bifurcation stenoses treated with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in both the main vessel and side branch. At 6 months, the incidence of major adverse cardiac events was 10.3% (1 death and 5 target lesion revascularizations) with no episodes of acute myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions (CTO)., Background: Long-term results after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the treatment of CTOs is hindered by a significant rate of restenosis and reocclusion. In the treatment of relatively simple nonocclusive lesions, SESs have shown dramatically reduced restenosis rates compared with bare metal stents (BMS), but whether these results are more widely applicable is unknown., Methods: From April 2002, all patients at our institution were treated with SES as the device of choice during PCI. During the first six months, 563 patients were treated solely with SES, with treatment of a de novo CTO in 56 (9.9%). This CTO cohort was compared with a similar group of patients (n = 28) treated in the preceding six-month period with BMS., Results: At one year, the cumulative survival-free of major adverse cardiac events was 96.4% in the SES group versus 82.8% in the BMS group, p < 0.05. At six-month follow-up, 33 (59%) patients in the SES group underwent angiography with a binary restenosis rate (>50% diameter stenosis) of 9.1% and in-stent late loss of 0.13 +/- 0.46 mm. One patient (3.0%) at follow-up was found to have reoccluded the target vessel., Conclusions: The use of SESs in the treatment of chronic total coronary occlusions is associated with a reduction in the rate of major adverse cardiac events and restenosis compared with BMS.

Background: We evaluated the clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients presenting with restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation treated with repeated percutaneous intervention., Methods and Results: A total of 24 consecutive patients have undergone repeated percutaneous intervention to treat post-SES restenosis (27 lesions). The restenosis was located within the stent in 93% of lesions. From the 27 lesions, 1 (4%) was re-treated with a bare stent, 3 (11%) were treated with balloon dilatation, and the remaining 23 lesions (85%) were treated with repeated drug-eluting stent implantation (SES in 12 lesions [44%], paclitaxel-eluting stents in 11 lesions [41%]). The event-free survival rate was 70.8% after a median follow-up of 279 days from the post-SES treatment. The overall recurrent restenosis rate was 42.9%. The risk of recurrent restenosis was increased for patients with hypercholesterolemia, previous angioplasty, failed brachytherapy, post-SES restenosis needing early (<6 months) treatment, and post-SES restenosis treated with balloon dilatation. The recurrent restenosis rate of originally de novo lesions re-treated with drug-eluting stents was 18.2%., Conclusions: Even though de novo lesions treated with SES at baseline and re-treated with drug-eluting stents had reasonably better outcomes than other lesion types and strategies, our study shows that the treatment of post-SES restenosis is currently suboptimal and warrants further investigation.

The use of bare stents for the percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein bypass grafts (SVGs) is associated with a high subsequent rate of restenosis. To assess the impact of the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), we studied 19 consecutive patients who underwent de novo SVG intervention treated solely with SES. Mean graft age was 10 years. Clinical presentation was an acute coronary syndrome in 68%. In total, twenty-two de novo lesions were treated with 35 SESs (mean=1.6 stents per lesion). Use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor therapy and distal embolization protection device were at operator discretion and were 42% and 32%, respectively. The rate of in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was 11%, related to 2 patients with a creatine kinase rise consistent with peri-procedural acute myocardial infarction (AMI); a distal protection device was not utilized in either. Over a mean 12.5+/-2.6 month follow-up, one patient died from a non-cardiac cause, and there were no further AMIs. Target lesion revascularization was undertaken in 1 patient (5%); survival free of MACE was 84%. In conclusion, utilizing SESs for percutaneous intervention of degenerate SVGs is associated with a low rate of target vessel revascularization. Increased utilization of distal protection devices might reduce the peri-procedural rate of AMI.

Objective: Percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with a history of previous coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is associated with an increased rate of subsequent adverse events compared to those without prior CABG. We evaluated the impact of utilizing the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in this high-risk population., Methods: Since April 2002, SES implantation was utilized as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital. Consecutive patients with a history of previous CABG and de novo lesions (n=47) treated exclusively with SES, were compared to 66 patients who received bare stents in the 6-month period just before SES introduction., Results: There were no significant differences between the groups (SES and bare stent) with respect to baseline clinical or lesion characteristics. The only difference between the groups related to the nominal diameter of stent utilized, which was smaller in the SES group than the bare stent group. (The maximum diameter of SES available was 3.0 mm). At 1 year, the cumulative incidence of major adverse events (defined as death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was significantly lower in the SES group than the bare stent group [8.5 versus 30.3%, hazard ratio 0.37 (95% confidence interval 0.15-0.91); P=0.03]., Conclusions: The utilization of the sirolimus-eluting stent for percutaneous intervention in a high-risk population with a history of previous CABG surgery is associated with a significant reduction in the rate of major adverse cardiac events at 1 year.

Long-length stenting has a poor outcome when bare metal stents are used. The safety and efficacy of the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in long lesions has not been evaluated. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the clinical and angiographic outcomes of SES implantation over a very long coronary artery segment. Since April 2002, all patients treated percutaneously at our institution received a SES as the device of choice as part of the Rapamycin Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. During the RESEARCH registry, stents were available in lengths of 8, 18, and 33 mm. The present report includes a predefined study population consisting of patients treated with >36-mm-long stented segments. Patients had a combination of >or=2 overlapping stents at a minimum length of 41 mm (i.e., one 33-mm SES overlapping an 8-mm SES) to treat native de novo coronary lesions. The incidence of major cardiac adverse events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization) was evaluated. The study group comprised 96 consecutive patients (102 lesions). Clinical follow-up was available for all patients at a mean of 320 days (range 265 to 442). In all, 20% of long-stented lesions were chronic total occlusions, and mean stented length per lesion was 61.2 +/- 21.4 mm (range 41 to 134). Angiographic follow-up at 6 months was obtained in 67 patients (71%). Binary restenosis rate was 11.9% and in-stent late loss was 0.13 +/- 0.47 mm. At long-term follow-up (mean 320 days), there were 2 deaths (2.1%), and the overall incidence of major cardiac events was 8.3%. Thus, SES implantation appears safe and effective for de novo coronary lesions requiring multiple stent placement over a very long vessel segment.

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) postdilatation with largely oversized balloons. We evaluated the clinical outcome of 68 consecutive patients enrolled in the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with SES implantation and further postdilatation with balloons > 1 mm larger than the stent nominal size. Angiographic follow-up was either scheduled for selected subgroups or clinically driven. Overall, 75 lesions were treated. The procedure was successful in 98.5% of the cases. One patient (1.5%) underwent emergency coronary bypass surgery for acute vessel occlusion. During 10.1 +/- 1.7 months of follow-up, three patients (4.5%) died, one (1.5%) had acute myocardial infarction, and four (6%) had target vessel revascularization. At angiographic follow-up, loss index was 0.13 +/- 0.34 and restenosis rate was 7.7%. Although not routinely recommended in every patient, SES postdilatation with largely oversized balloons appears a safe and effective strategy for selected patients., (Copyright 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: The factors associated with the occurrence of restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in complex cases are currently unknown., Methods and Results: A cohort of consecutive complex patients treated with SES implantation was selected according to the following criteria: (1) treatment of acute myocardial infarction, (2) treatment of in-stent restenosis, (3) 2.25-mm diameter SES, (4) left main coronary stenting, (5) chronic total occlusion, (6) stented segment >36 mm, and (7) bifurcation stenting. The present study population was composed of 238 patients (441 lesions) for whom 6-month angiographic follow-up data were obtained (70% of eligible patients). Significant clinical, angiographic, and procedural predictors of post-SES restenosis were evaluated. Binary in-segment restenosis was diagnosed in 7.9% of lesions (6.3% in-stent, 0.9% at the proximal edge, 0.7% at the distal edge). The following characteristics were identified as independent multivariate predictors: treatment of in-stent restenosis (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.63 to 11.01; P<0.01), ostial location (OR 4.84, 95% CI 1.81 to 12.07; P<0.01), diabetes (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.14 to 6.31; P=0.02), total stented length (per 10-mm increase; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.68; P<0.01), reference diameter (per 1.0-mm increase; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.87; P=0.03), and left anterior descending artery (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.69; P<0.01)., Conclusions: Angiographic restenosis after SES implantation in complex patients is an infrequent event, occurring mainly in association with lesion-based characteristics and diabetes mellitus.

Coronary stent implantation is currently performed in > 80% of percutaneous coronary interventions. Its main late complication is the development of in-stent restenosis (ISR), occurring in 10-80% of lesions treated in daily practice. The classification by Mehran et al. is most commonly used. Current therapeutic options to treat ISR include repeat balloon angioplasty, repeat stenting, cutting balloon angioplasty, directional coronary atherectomy, rotational coronary atherectomy, brachytherapy, and drug-eluting stents (DES). DES have been effective in reducing binary restenosis in de novo lesions in randomized controlled trials. The novel use of DES to treat ISR has been shown to be safe and effective in multiple studies involving sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. As DES implantation becomes more widespread, ISR in DES is emerging as a new problem. The use of debulking techniques to treat ISR in DES is to be cautioned against. In this new era, the optimal treatment of this new problem is currently unknown. We await further data to see whether repeat DES implantation may help solve this vexing clinical problem.

Objectives: This study investigated the clinical outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (MI) treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) or with conventional bare stents., Background: The clinical impact of SES implantation for patients with ST-segment elevation MI is currently unknown., Methods: Primary angioplasty was performed with SESs in 186 consecutive patients with acute MI who were compared with 183 patients treated with bare stents. The incidence of death, reinfarction, and repeat revascularization was assessed at 30 and 300 days., Results: Postprocedure vessel patency, enzymatic release, and the incidence of short-term adverse events were similar in both the sirolimus and the bare stents (30-day rate of death, reinfarction, or repeat revascularization: 7.5% vs. 10.4%, respectively; p = 0.4). Stent thrombosis was not diagnosed in any patient in the sirolimus group and occurred in 1.6% of patients treated with bare stents (p = 0.1). At 300 days, treatment with SESs significantly reduced the incidence of combined adverse events (9.4% vs. 17%; hazard ratio [HR] 0.52 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.30 to 0.92]; p = 0.02), mainly due to a marked reduction in the risk of repeat intervention (1.1% vs. 8.2%; HR 0.21 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.74]; p = 0.01)., Conclusions: Compared to conventional bare stents, the SESs were not associated with an increased risk of stent thrombosis and were effective in reducing the incidence of adverse events at 300 days in unselected patients with ST-segment elevation acute MI referred for primary angioplasty.

Background: The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents in unselected patients treated in the daily practice is currently unknown., Methods and Results: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation has been used as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. Consecutive patients with de novo lesions (n=508) treated exclusively with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES group) were compared with 450 patients who received bare stents in the period just before (pre-SES group). Patients in the SES group more frequently had multivessel disease, more type C lesions, received more stents, and had more bifurcation stenting. At 1 year, the cumulative rate of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was 9.7% in the SES group and 14.8% in the pre-SES group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.89]; P=0.008). The 1-year risk of clinically driven target vessel revascularization in the SES group and in the pre-SES group was 3.7% versus 10.9%, respectively (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.57]; P<0.001)., Conclusions: Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents in the "real world" is safe and effective in reducing both repeat revascularization and major adverse cardiac events at 1 year compared with bare stent implantation.

Background: Sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) have recently been proven to reduce restenosis and reintervention compared with bare stents. Safety and effectiveness of SES in acute myocardial infarction remain unknown., Methods and Results: Since April 16, 2002, a policy of routine SES implantation has been instituted in our hospital, with no clinical or anatomic restrictions, as part of the RESEARCH (Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) registry. During 6 months of enrollment, 96 patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction underwent percutaneous recanalization and SES implantation; these patients comprise the study population. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, reintervention) was evaluated. Six-month angiographic follow-up was scheduled per protocol. At baseline, diabetes mellitus was present in 12.5% and multivessel disease in 46.9%. Primary angioplasty was performed in 89 patients (92.7%). Infarct location was anterior in 41 (42.7%) of the cases, and 12 patients (12.5%) had cardiogenic shock. Postprocedural TIMI-3 flow was achieved in 93.3% of the cases. In-hospital mortality was 6.2%. One patient (1.1%) had reinfarction and target lesion reintervention the first day as a result of distal dissection and acute vessel occlusion. During follow-up (mean follow-up of 218+/-75 days), 1 patient died (1.1%), no patient had recurrent myocardial infarction, and there were no additional reinterventions. No early or late stent thromboses were documented. At angiographic follow-up (70%), late loss was -0.04+/-0.25, and no patient presented angiographic restenosis., Conclusions: In this study, sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction was safe without documented angiographic restenosis at 6 months.

The present study reports on the clinical outcome of 31 consecutive patients with left main coronary artery disease treated with a sirolimus-eluting stent. The implantation of this stent was associated with abolition of post-discharge fatal events and percutaneous reintervention.

Background: We describe the clinical and morphological patterns of restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation., Methods and Results: From 121 patients with coronary angiography obtained >30 days after SES implantation, restenosis (diameter stenosis >50%) was identified in 19 patients and 20 lesions (located at the proximal 5-mm segment in 30% or within the stent in 70%). Residual dissection after the procedure or balloon trauma outside the stent was identified in 83% of the proximal edge lesions. Lesions within the stent were focal, and stent discontinuity was identified in some lesions evaluated by intravascular ultrasound., Conclusions: Sirolimus-eluting stent edge restenosis is frequently associated with local trauma outside the stent. In-stent restenosis occurs as a localized lesion, commonly associated with a discontinuity in stent coverage. Local conditions instead of intrinsic drug-resistance to sirolimus are likely to play a major role in post-SES restenosis.