Search

Objective: This study evaluated 1-year safety and effectiveness outcomes of the United States regulatory trial for the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft System (TriVascular Inc, Santa Rosa, Calif) for endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs)., Methods: This prospective, multicenter, single-arm trial was conducted at 36 sites in the United States, Germany, and Chile to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Ovation stent graft. From November 2009 to May 2011, 161 patients (88% males; mean age, 73 ± 8 years) with AAAs (mean diameter, 54 ± 9 mm) were treated with the Ovation stent graft. The main body is a modular two-docking limb device with a 14F outer diameter delivery system, active suprarenal fixation, and polymer-filled proximal rings that accommodate the aortic neck for seal. Main inclusion criteria included proximal aortic neck length ≥ 7 mm, inner neck diameter between 16 and 30 mm, distal iliac landing zones length ≥ 10 mm, and diameter between 8 and 20 mm. Patients were treated under a common protocol, including clinical and imaging follow-up at discharge, 30 days, 6 months, and annually through 5 years. A Clinical Events Committee adjudicated adverse events, an independent imaging core laboratory analyzed imaging, and a Data Safety and Monitoring Board provided study oversight. Complete 1-year follow-up data were available for this report., Results: The Ovation stent graft was implanted successfully in 161 patients (100%), including 69 (42.9%) by percutaneous access. General anesthesia was used in 106 patients (65.8%). Technical success was 100%, and mean procedure time was 110 minutes. Median procedural blood loss was 150 mL, and median hospital stay was 1 day. The 30-day major adverse event rate was 2.5%. At 1 year, AAA-related and all-cause mortality were 0.6% and 2.5%, respectively. Major adverse event and serious adverse event rates through 1 year were 6.2% and 38.5%, respectively. The 1-year treatment success rate was 99.3%. The imaging core laboratory reported no stent graft migration or type I, III, or IV endoleaks. At 1 year, type II endoleaks were identified in 34% of patients, and AAA enlargement was identified in one patient (0.7%). No AAA rupture or conversion to open surgery was reported. AAA-related secondary procedures were performed in 10 patients (6.2%) for 12 findings, including endoleak (six), aortic main body stenosis (three), and iliac limb stenosis or occlusion (three)., Conclusions: The 1-year results of the Ovation Abdominal Stent Graft System demonstrate excellent safety and effectiveness in treatment of patients with AAAs, particularly in patients with challenging anatomic characteristics, including short aortic necks and narrow iliac arteries. Longer-term follow-up is needed., (Copyright © 2014. Published by Mosby, Inc.)

Background: Comorbid and anatomic characteristics that portend higher procedural risk are well defined for carotid endarterectomy but less so for carotid artery stenting., Methods and Results: We pooled carotid stent data from 4 Cordis-sponsored trials (n=2104) with similar patient cohorts and end point determination to identify predictors of neurological death or stroke within 30 days of the procedure. Median age was 74 years (24% >80 years), 36% were women, and 24.2% were symptomatic in the previous 6 months. There were 88 (4.2%) neurological deaths or strokes at 30 days. Among symptomatic patients, the risk of adverse neurological outcome declined with increasing time between the incident neurological event and carotid stent procedure. In a logistic regression model that included preprocedural and procedural variables, significant multivariable predictors of 30-day neurological death or stroke were older age (continuous), black race, angiographically visible thrombus in symptomatic patients, procedural use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, procedural transient ischemic attack, final residual stenosis >30%, and periprocedural use of protamine or vasopressors., Conclusions: In this pooled analysis, a number of preprocedural and procedural factors predicted higher risk of stroke and neurological death within 30 days of a carotid stent procedure. Identification of such predictors may help to guide patient selection and further refine procedural technique.

Objectives: This study was designed to compare long-term clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease in the "real world.", Background: The safety and efficacy of DES versus BMS in SVG remains uncertain due to contradictory reports of either lower revascularization rates with DES; or clinical equivalence to BMS; or even an excess of clinical events associated with DES use., Methods: We identified consecutive patients who underwent stent placement within a de novo SVG lesion between May 1, 2003 and July 31, 2007. Follow-up was obtained at regular intervals. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to produce actuarial survival estimates. Cox regression analysis was used to predict the risk associated with stent type, and propensity scores were generated to risk-adjust the results., Results: The study group included 379 stent recipients (284 DES; 95 BMS) with 410 stented lesions. BMS were placed more frequently in current smokers, acute myocardial infarctions, larger vessels, and longer lesions. In-hospital mortality was higher in BMS recipients than in their DES counterparts (3.2% vs. 0, respectively; P = 0.015). At 3 years, there was no significant difference in clinical adverse event rates between DES and BMS recipients, even after risk adjustment., Conclusions: Three-year adverse event rates are similar among patients treated with DES or BMS in SVG lesions. Therefore, while DES are safe, they do not appear to offer an advantage in terms of long-term graft patency., (Copyright 2009 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: We previously reported that, in a randomized trial, carotid stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device is not inferior to carotid endarterectomy for the treatment of carotid artery disease at 30 days and at 1 year. We now report the 3-year results., Methods: The trial evaluated carotid artery stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device as compared with endarterectomy in 334 patients at increased risk for complications from endarterectomy who had either a symptomatic carotid artery stenosis of at least 50% of the luminal diameter or an asymptomatic stenosis of at least 80%. The prespecified major secondary end point at 3 years was a composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction within 30 days after the procedure or death or ipsilateral stroke between 31 days and 1080 days (3 years)., Results: At 3 years, data were available for 260 patients (77.8%), including 85.6% of patients in the stenting group and 70.1% of those in the endarterectomy group. The prespecified major secondary end point occurred in 41 patients in the stenting group (cumulative incidence, 24.6%; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 26.2%) and 45 patients in the endarterectomy group (cumulative incidence, 26.9%; Kaplan-Meier estimate, 30.3%) (absolute difference in cumulative incidence for the stenting group, -2.3%; 95% confidence interval, -11.8 to 7.0). There were 15 strokes in each of the two groups, of which 11 in the stenting group and 9 in the endarterectomy group were ipsilateral., Conclusions: In our trial of patients with severe carotid artery stenosis and increased surgical risk, no significant difference could be shown in long-term outcomes between patients who underwent carotid artery stenting with an emboli-protection device and those who underwent endarterectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00231270 [ClinicalTrials.gov].)., (Copyright 2008 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: Randomized trials of drug-eluting stents (DES) excluded patients with severe renal insufficiency. We sought to evaluate the impact of baseline renal function on clinical outcomes in recipients of coronary DES., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed our hospital databases to identify consecutive patients who underwent DES implantations between May 2003 and December 2004, subgrouped among 4 ranges of glomerular filtration rate (GFR) between > or = 90 ml per minute and < 30 ml per minute, in 30 ml per minute decrements, and 1 group treated with long-term dialysis. Clinical follow up was obtained at 6 months, 1 year and annually thereafter., Results: Our study group included 2,758 patients with long-term outcomes recorded over a mean follow up of 706 +/- 273 days. The rates of in-hospital adverse events increased significantly as GFR decreased, though no major adverse event occurred among the dialyzed patients. Actuarial survival analyses up to 2 years revealed significant between-groups differences in rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and death (both p < 0.001), while the differences in target vessel revascularization (TVR) rates did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.069). By Cox regression analysis, a GFR < 60 ml per minute remained a significant predictor of 2-year mortality (p < 0.001) and MACE (p < 0.001), but not TVR (p = 0.839)., Conclusions: In conclusion, low rates of TVR were observed over 2 years in DES recipients with a wide range of renal function. Low rates of TVR were countered by high rates of death and MACE among renally insufficient patients over the long term.

Objectives: The goal of this research was to assess non-inferiority of the next-generation TAXUS Liberté stent (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) versus the TAXUS Express stent (Boston Scientific Corp.)., Background: The introduction of drug-eluting stents (DES) has shifted clinical practice towards more complex lesion subsets, prompting the need for more deliverable DES. TAXUS Liberté was designed to combine the established polymer-based, paclitaxel-elution TAXUS technology with the more advanced Liberté stent platform., Methods: The TAXUS ATLAS study is a global, prospective, single-arm trial evaluating outcomes in de novo coronary lesions visually estimated to be 10 to 28 mm in length in vessels 2.5 to 4.0 mm in diameter. The control group is an entry-criteria-matched population of TAXUS Express patients from the TAXUS IV and V trials. The primary end point is non-inferiority of TAXUS Liberté versus TAXUS Express for 9-month target vessel revascularization., Results: Despite similar inclusion criteria, quantitative coronary angiography-determined baseline lesion characteristics were significantly more complex for TAXUS Liberté than TAXUS Express. The primary non-inferiority end point was met with the 1-sided 95% confidence bound of 2.98% less than the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of 3% (p = 0.0487)., Conclusions: Despite the treatment of more complex lesions with TAXUS Liberté, the primary end point was met, demonstrating that TAXUS Liberté is non-inferior to TAXUS Express. The successful transfer of the proven TAXUS technology to the more advanced TAXUS Liberté platform was demonstrated. (TAXUS ATLAS: TAXUS Liberté-SR Stent for the Treatment of De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions; http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00371709?order=1; NCT00371709).

Background: The use of bivalirudin in percutaneous coronary interventions has been shown to be clinically safe and effective, and may be associated with shorter hospital stays and lower costs than heparin + glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibition. This study compared the utilization, clinical outcomes and costs associated with the planned use of bivalirudin versus heparin + GP IIb/IIIa inhibition in drug-eluting stent (DES) patients without acute myocardial infarction (MI)., Methods: We retrospectively studied 1,842 patients who underwent DES placement between May 2003 and December 2004. Planned treatment with heparin + GP IIb/IIIa inhibition was administered to 1,305 and planned bivalirudin alone was administered to 537 patients. Clinical follow ups (mean = 782 +/- 204 days) were obtained via telephone or mailed surveys in 1,813 patients (98.4%). Propensity analysis was utilized to adjust for between-groups baseline differences., Results: The unadjusted data revealed similar in-hospital outcomes in both groups. After propensity adjustment, the rate of vascular complications was significantly lower in the bivalirudin-treated group (0.2% vs. 1.2%; p = 0.04). At 1 year, clinical outcomes were similar in both groups. The overall unadjusted and adjusted cost analysis revealed similar mean hospital costs (11,384 U.S. dollars vs. 11,018 U.S. dollars; p = ns) and length of stay (2.9 days vs. 2.8 days; p = ns) in both groups. The unadjusted and adjusted mean hospital costs were significantly lower in patients treated with bivalirudin versus patients who received heparin + abciximab., Conclusions: These observations suggest that bivalirudin is a safe, cost-effective alternative to heparin + GP IIb/IIIa inhibition in patients undergoing DES in the absence of acute MI.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of patients who developed coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) or stent thrombosis (STH) inside drug-eluting stents (DES)., Background: Drug-eluting stents have markedly reduced the incidence of restenosis. However, when restenosis occurs within a DES, its optimal management remains unclear., Methods: We retrospectively analyzed clinical and angiographic data from 92 patients who underwent revascularization for ISR (n = 84) or STH (n = 8) within a DES at our institution. Regular follow-ups were available up to 2 years. We recorded the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as deaths from all causes, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR), among patients treated by the "DES sandwich" technique or by other treatment methods., Results: In-hospital MACE included 1 periprocedural MI and 2 deaths. Over a mean follow-up of 15 +/- 6 months, the overall rates of death, MI, and TLR were 8.7%, 2.2%, and 30.6%, respectively. By actuarial analysis, the 12-month TLR and MACE rates were 28.2% and 42.9%, respectively., Conclusions: Current treatments of ISR or STH in DES are associated with a high long-term rate of MACE.

A direct coronary stenting technique using drug-eluting stents may decrease drug-eluting stent efficacy due to possible damage to the surface coating of the stent. The DIRECT is a multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized trial designed to evaluate the direct stenting strategy for the sirolimus-eluting Bx-Velocity stent compared with the historical control (SIRIUS trial, stenting with predilation). Volumetric and cross-sectional intravascular ultrasound analyses at 8-month follow-up were performed in 115 patients (DIRECT n= 64, control n = 51). Patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between groups. The DIRECT group achieved an equivalent uniform expansion index, defined as minimum stent area/maximum stent area x 100, compared with the control group (65.9 +/- 11.7 vs 63.1 +/- 12.7, p = NS). At 8-month follow-up, vessel, stent, lumen, and neointimal volume index (volume in cubic millimeters/length in millimeters) and percent neointimal volume were similar between the DIRECT and control groups (vessel volume index 13.9 +/- 4.40 vs 15.0 +/- 3.83; stent volume index 6.83 +/- 2.02 vs 6.94 +/- 2.04; lumen volume index 6.71 +/- 2.04 vs 6.81 +/- 2.07; neointimal volume index 0.14 +/- 0.24 vs 0.16 +/- 0.23; percent neointimal volume 3.73 +/- 6.97 vs 3.14 +/- 5.32, p = NS for all). In addition, in-stent neointimal hyperplasia distribution was significantly smaller near the distal stent edge (0.22 vs 0.098 mm(3)/mm, p = 0.01 for an average neointimal volume index within 3 mm from the distal stent edge). In conclusion, direct coronary stenting with the sirolimus-eluting Bx-Velocity stent is equally effective in terms of uniform stent expansion and long-term quantitative intravascular ultrasound results compared with conventional stenting using predilation. This strategy appears to be associated with less neointimal hyperplasia near the distal stent edge.

The effect of obesity on repeat coronary revascularization and restenosis in patients who undergo stent implantation has not been reported. We therefore examined the database from the multicenter randomized TAXUS-IV trial to determine the effect of body mass index (BMI) on outcomes after bare-metal and drug-eluting stent implantation. In TAXUS-IV, patients were randomized to receive a slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent or a bare-metal stent. Outcomes were stratified by baseline BMI. Of the 1,307 randomized patients who had documented BMI, 233 (17.8%) had normal weight (BMI <25 kg/m2), 531 (40.6%) were overweight (BMI < or =25 to 30 kg/m2), and 543 (41.5%) were obese (BMI > or =30 kg/m2). Patients who had been assigned to receive bare-metal stents and were overweight and obese compared with those who had normal weight had higher rates of 9-month binary restenosis (29.2% and 30.5% vs 9.3%, respectively; p = 0.01) and 1-year major adverse cardiac events (20.8% and 23.2% vs 11.1%, respectively; p = 0.02), whereas rates of these events did not differ significantly among those who received a paclitaxel-eluting stent (7.6% and 9.3% vs 4.9%, respectively for binary restenosis; p = 0.65; 11.3% and 10.4% vs 10.1%, respectively; p = 0.82 for major adverse cardiac events). By multivariate analysis, BMI > or =30.0 kg/m2 independently predicted binary restenosis (hazard ratio 4.26, p = 0.005), 1-year target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio 1.95, p = 0.04), and major adverse cardiac events (hazard ratio 1.95, p = 0.004) in patients who received bare-metal stents but not paclitaxel-eluting stents. In conclusion, obesity is an important risk factor for clinical and angiographic restenosis and for composite major adverse cardiac events in patients who receive bare-metal stents. Paclitaxel-eluting stents attenuate the increased risk associated with obesity, such that the intermediate-term prognosis after percutaneous coronary intervention is independent of weight.

Background: Carotid endarterectomy is more effective than medical management in the prevention of stroke in patients with severe symptomatic or asymptomatic atherosclerotic carotid-artery stenosis. Stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device is a less invasive revascularization strategy than endarterectomy in carotid-artery disease., Methods: We conducted a randomized trial comparing carotid-artery stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device to endarterectomy in 334 patients with coexisting conditions that potentially increased the risk posed by endarterectomy and who had either a symptomatic carotid-artery stenosis of at least 50 percent of the luminal diameter or an asymptomatic stenosis of at least 80 percent. The primary end point of the study was the cumulative incidence of a major cardiovascular event at 1 year--a composite of death, stroke, or myocardial infarction within 30 days after the intervention or death or ipsilateral stroke between 31 days and 1 year. The study was designed to test the hypothesis that the less invasive strategy, stenting, was not inferior to endarterectomy., Results: The primary end point occurred in 20 patients randomly assigned to undergo carotid-artery stenting with an emboli-protection device (cumulative incidence, 12.2 percent) and in 32 patients randomly assigned to undergo endarterectomy (cumulative incidence, 20.1 percent; absolute difference, -7.9 percentage points; 95 percent confidence interval, -16.4 to 0.7 percentage points; P=0.004 for noninferiority, and P=0.053 for superiority). At one year, carotid revascularization was repeated in fewer patients who had received stents than in those who had undergone endarterectomy (cumulative incidence, 0.6 percent vs. 4.3 percent; P=0.04)., Conclusions: Among patients with severe carotid-artery stenosis and coexisting conditions, carotid stenting with the use of an emboli-protection device is not inferior to carotid endarterectomy., (Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Objective: To assess costs and outcomes of coronary stenting and balloon angioplasty with and without adjunctive treatment with abciximab for 3758 consecutive elective percutaneous coronary interventions at a single community center over the 2.5-year period between 1 January 1995 and 30 June 1997., Results: Abciximab was more common among patients who had recently suffered myocardial infarction, patients with unstable angina, and patients with more complex coronary lesions. Use of abciximab in conjunction with balloon angioplasty or stenting and stenting alone was associated with significant reductions in incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in hospital. Multivariate analysis indicated that use of abciximab and stenting were associated with significant independent effects on risk of an event. Hospital costs were increased for patients administered abciximab, treated with stenting, or both. Total costs and costs inclusive of those incurred in catheterization laboratory and pharmacy increased significantly with increasing complexity of lesions. Multivariate regression analysis (baseline cost US$5621) identified death (US$16098), emergency revascularization (US$13678), usage of multiple stents (US$1423 for each stent), and use of abciximab (US$1269) as independent predictors of a greater cost. One-year follow-up revealed significant differences among treatment strategies in terms of risk of need for subsequent revascularization procedures. Lack of stenting but not use of abciximab was identified as a significant predictor of need for repeat revascularization procedures., Conclusions: Our findings are in general agreement with cost analyses of use of abciximab for populations in clinical trials and suggest that improvements of early clinical outcome with abciximab treatment and stenting justify the incremental cost of treatment in a community hospital setting.

Objectives: We examined the procedural and 30-day clinical outcomes among patients receiving aspirin and either ticlopidine or clopidogrel during coronary stenting., Background: Ticlopidine-plus-aspirin has become standard antiplatelet therapy for the prevention of thrombotic complications after coronary stenting. Clopidogrel has a similar mechanism of action as ticlopidine, but both its efficacy and its safety as a pharmacologic adjunct to coronary stenting have not been well described., Methods: This single-center, prospective analysis examined the in-hospital procedural and 30-day clinical outcomes among 875 consecutive patients undergoing coronary stenting who received adjunctive aspirin and either clopidogrel (n = 514; 58.7%) or ticlopidine (n = 361; 41.3%) therapy., Results: Procedural success rates were similar among the clopidogrel- (99.6%) and ticlopidine-treated patients (99.4%). Subacute stent thrombosis (i.e., >24 h < or =30 days) occurred in one clopidogrel-treated (0.2%) and in one ticlopidine-treated (0.3%) patient (p = 0.99). By 30 days following the index procedure, the combined rates of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction and need for target vessel revascularization were similar among patients who received either clopidogrel (2.1%) or ticlopidine (1.4%; p = 0.57) therapy., Conclusions: In this analysis the antiplatelet combination therapy of aspirin-plus-clopidogrel was an effective regimen for preventing thrombotic complications and major adverse cardiovascular events among a broad spectrum of patients undergoing coronary artery stenting.

To assess the implications of coronary stenting with several IIb/IIIa receptor antagonists, total hospital cost and adverse events were reviewed for 674 elective stent procedures from June 1998 through December 1998. The use of IIb/IIIa receptor antagonism and the agent selected were at the discretion of the interventional cardiologist. In-hospital, 30-day and 6-month adverse cardiac events were similar among the treatment strategies. Target vessel revascularization at six months was similar among the treatment strategies. Patients who received a IIb/IIIa receptor blocker with their stent procedure were less likely to be rehospitalized within 30 days. Multivariate regression analysis identified specific factors responsible for prolongation of hospital stay including adverse cardiac events, physician practice pattern and age greater than 70 years (all p < 0.002). Overall hospital cost for patients receiving tirofiban as an adjunct to coronary stenting was approximately $1,000 less than patients receiving abciximab. Total cath lab expenditures were similar for these groups and the savings in hospital cost was directly attributable to a lower pharmacy cost in the tirofiban group. Multivariate regression analysis identified adverse cardiac events, left ventricular systolic dysfunction, multiple stent placement, physician practice and abciximab as significant contributors to increased hospital cost (all p < 0.002). Tirofiban as an adjunct to coronary stenting was not identified by multivariate analysis as a significant contributor to hospital cost. Bleeding rates were similar among the treatment strategies. Thus, coronary stenting in our community hospital is associated with acceptable outcomes regardless of treatment strategy and hospital cost is significantly influenced by the use of IIb/IIIa blockade with stenting and the type of agent selected.

Despite a high procedural success rate, long-term blood pressure control after successful renal artery stenting of hypertensive patients has been inconsistent. This most likely reflects the absence of clinical guidelines for the selection of patients likely to benefit from renal revascularization. A cohort of 150 consecutive hypertensive patients (mean age, 66.7 years; 86 women) with 180 renal artery lesions (> or =75%) underwent primary Palmaz stent deployment. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), serum creatinine, and antihypertensive medication requirements were monitored prospectively. Specific definitions of blood pressure cure, improvement, or treatment failure were followed. Renal artery duplex Doppler or angiography was performed to assess stent patency at a mean 13 months (range, 7-15 months). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to select clinical variables that best related to a beneficial blood pressure control at follow-up. The procedural success rate was 97.3% (146 patients) and major in-laboratory complications were infrequent (1.3%). Late MAP values in 127 patients (91%) fell from 110 +/- 13.7 to 97.6 +/- 10.6 mm Hg (P < 0.001); antihypertensive medication requirements decreased from 2.9 +/- 1.2 to 1.9 +/- 1.1 (P < 0.01). The 13-month stent restenosis rate defined by duplex Doppler or angiography was 12%. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified a preprocedure MAP of >110 mm Hg (odds ratio, 2.9; P = 0.003) and bilateral renal stenoses (odds ratio, 4.6; P = 0.009) as predictors of a beneficial blood pressure response at follow-up. This study provides general preprocedure guidelines for the selection of hypertensive patients with atherosclerotic renal lesions likely to benefit from primary Palmaz stenting and confirms a high procedural success and low stent restenosis rate.