Search

Background: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation improves the outcome in simple coronary artery lesions compared with bare metal stents, but there is limited evidence of their safety and efficacy when implanted in complex lesions like coronary bifurcations. Methods: SCANDSTENT was a randomized controlled study comparing implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in patients with complex coronary artery disease. This substudy evaluates the angiographic and clinical outcome of 126 patients with lesions located in a coronary bifurcation. Results: The baseline characteristics of the patients were comparable: 15% had diabetes, and 1.7 stents were implanted per lesion. At follow-up, the minimum lumen diameter of the main branch was 2.35 mm in patients who received sirolimus-eluting stents compared with 1.68 mm in those who received bare-metal stents, and that of the side branch was 1.70 versus 1.19 mm (both P < .001). The late lumen loss in the main branch was 0.12 mm in the sirolimus-eluting stent group versus 0.99 mm in the bare-metal stent group and 0.03 versus 0.56 mm in the side branch (both P < .001). Thus, sirolimus-eluting stents reduced the restenosis rate from 28.3% to 4.9% in the main branch and from 43.4% to 14.8% in the side branches (both P < .001). Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 9% with sirolimus-eluting stents versus 28% with bare-metal stents (P = .01), and stent thrombosis was observed in 0% versus 9% (P = .02). Conclusion: Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation improves both the angiographic and clinical outcomes considerably compared with that of bare-metal stents in patients with stenoses located in coronary bifurcations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The widespread use of coronary stents has exposed a growing population to the risk of stent thrombosis, but the importance in terms of risk of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarctions (STEMIs) remains unclear. Methods: We studied five years follow-up data for 2,098 all-comer patients treated with coronary stents in the randomized SORT OUT II trial (mean age 63.6 yrs. 74.8% men). Patients who following stent implantation were readmitted with STEMI were included and each patient was categorized ranging from definite- to ruled-out stent thrombosis according to the Academic Research Consortium definitions. Multivariate logistic regression was performed on selected covariates to assess odds ratios (ORs) for definite stent thrombosis. Results: 85 patients (4.1%), mean age 62.7 years, 77.1% men, were admitted with a total of 96 STEMIs, of whom 60 (62.5%) had definite stent thrombosis. Notably, definite stent thrombosis was more frequent in female than male STEMI patients (81.8% vs. 56.8%, p = 0.09), and in very late STEMIs (p = 0.06). Female sex (OR 3.53 [1.01–12.59]) and clopidogrel (OR 4.43 [1.03–19.01]) was associated with increased for definite stent thrombosis, whereas age, time since stent implantation, use of statins, initial PCI urgency (STEMI [primary PCI], NSTEMI/unstable angina [subacute PCI] or stable angina [elective PCI]), and glucose-lowering agents did not seem to influence risk of stent thrombosis. Conclusion: In a contemporary cohort of coronary stented patients, stent thrombosis was evident in more than 60% of subsequent STEMIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. Millions of patients were treated with the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ and the paclitaxel-eluting Taxus™ coronary stents with potential late-occurring increase in event rates. Therefore, the long-term outcome follow-up is of major clinical interest. Design. In total, 2.098 unselected patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI, stable or unstable angina pectoris were randomized to receive Cypher™ ( n = 1.065) or Taxus™ ( n = 1.033) stents and were followed for 5 years. Results. The primary end-point; the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization (major adverse cardiac event, MACE), occurred in 467 patients (22.3%); Cypher™ n = 222 (20.8%), Taxus™ n = 245 (23.7%), ns. Definite and probable stent thrombosis occurred in 107 patients (5.1%); Cypher™ n = 51 (4.8%), Taxus™ n = 56 (5.4%), ns. No statistically significant differences were found in the elements of the primary end-point or in other secondary end-points between the two stent groups. After one year, the annual rates of stent thrombosis and MACE remained constant. Conclusions. During 5-year follow-up, the Cypher™ and the Taxus™ coronary stents had similar clinical outcome with no signs of increasing rates of adverse events over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study regarding the effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) in preventing restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. The study suggests that the restenosis rate was low when patients have higher rapamycin blood concentrations. It adds that such technique can be a convenient way of preventing bare-metal stent (BMS) restenosis than systematic drug administration.

Background: Although some studies found improved coronary flow and myocardial salvage when stent implantation was deferred, the DANAMI-3-DEFER (Third DANish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction) did not show any improvement in clinical outcome in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and deferred stenting.Objectives: This study sought to evaluate the effect of deferred stent implantation on infarct size, myocardial salvage, and microvascular obstruction (MVO) in patients with STEMI.Methods: In the present DANAMI-3 substudy, a total of 510 patients with STEMI were randomized to PCI with deferred versus immediate stent implantation. The patients underwent a cardiac magnetic resonance examination before discharge after the index procedure and again 3 months later. The primary endpoint was final infarct size.Results: Deferred stenting did not reduce final infarct size (9% left ventricle [LV]; interquartile range [IQR]: 3% to 18% vs. 10% LV; IQR: 3% to 18%; p = 0.67). Similarly, deferred stenting was not associated with myocardial salvage index (66%; IQR: 50% to 89% vs. 67%; IQR: 49% to 88%; p = 0.80) or presence of MVO (43% vs. 42%; p = 0.78). In a post hoc analysis, stent length was the only subgroup of 7 that had an effect on outcome. In patients with a stent length ≥24 mm, deferred stenting reduced the final infarct size (6% LV; IQR: 2% to 18% vs. 13% LV; IQR: 7% to 23%; p = 0.006; and p for interaction = 0.005).Conclusions: In the DANAMI-3-DEFER cardiac magnetic resonance substudy, routine deferred stenting did not reduce infarct size or MVO and did not increase myocardial salvage. These results do not support the use of routine deferred stenting in STEMI patients treated with primary PCI. (DANish Study of Optimal Acute Treatment of Patients With ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction [DANAMI-3]; NCT01435408). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is unknown whether high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) predicts outcome depending on implanted stent type. We investigated the prognostic value of hs-CRP in relation to type of stent implanted in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Immediately before primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI), 301 patients had blood drawn. Patients were categorized according to hs-CRP levels and combination of hs-CRP (≤2 vs >2 mg/L) and stent type (bare metal stent [BMS] vs drug-eluting stent [DES]). Hs-CRP >2 mg/L (median, hazard ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 1.3 to 5.6, p = 0.007) and the combined variable of hs-CRP >2 mg/L and BMS (hazard ratio 2.4, 95% confidence interval 1.2 to 4.5, p = 0.006) independently predicted the composite end point of death and MI at 36-month follow-up. There was a significant interaction (p = 0.006) for hs-CRP and stent type. Survival analysis demonstrated significant differences for occurrence of death and MI: 4.8% in BMS + CRP ≤2 mg/L, 11.9% in DES + CRP ≤2 mg/L, 17.6% in DES + CRP >2 mg/L, and 27.9% in BMS + CRP >2 mg/L. None of the 14 stent thromboses occurred in patients with BMS + CRP ≤2 mg/L. In conclusion, preprocedure hs-CRP predicts outcome after pPCI in patients with STEMI. Our hypothesis-generating data indicate that BMS implantation should be preferred when hs-CRP is ≤2 mg/L and DES when hs-CRP is >2 mg/L to decrease long-term adverse outcomes including stent thrombosis in patients with STEMI treated with pPCI. These findings need confirmation in larger randomized clinical trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Background: The evidence of long-term efficacy and safety after implantation of DES in patients with complex lesions is scarce. Methods: We randomly assigned 626 patients with STEMI referred within 12 h to have a DES or a BMS implanted in the infarct-related lesion with or without distal protection during primary percutaneous coronary intervention. Results: At 3 years, target lesion revascularization was 6.1% in the DES group compared with 16.3% in the BMS group (p < 0.001), and the rate of major adverse cardiac events was 11.5% versus 18.2%, respectively (p = 0.02). Whereas all-cause mortality did not differ significantly, the rate of cardiac death was higher in the DES group, 6.1% versus 1.9% for the BMS group (p = 0.01). The occurrence of reinfarction, stroke, and stent thrombosis was similar. Conclusions: Implantation of DES in patients with STEMI reduces the long-term rate of major adverse cardiac events compared with BMS, but patients with DES had a higher risk of cardiac death not attributed to myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. (Drug Elution and Distal Protection During Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction [DEDICATION]; NCT00192868) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Our purpose was to evaluate the long-term use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with complex coronary artery lesions. Background: Although the use of SES has proved to be effective in patients with simple coronary artery lesions, there are limited data of the long-term outcome of patients with complex coronary artery lesions. Methods: We randomly assigned 322 patients with total coronary occlusions or lesions located in bifurcations, ostial, or angulated segments of the coronary arteries to have SES or BMS implanted. Results: At 3 years, major adverse cardiac events had occurred in 20 patients (12%) in the SES group and in 59 patients (38%) in the BMS group (p < 0.001). Four versus 2 patients suffered a cardiac death (p = NS), and 5 versus 1 died of a noncardiac disease (p = NS) in the SES versus the BMS group. Six patients in the SES group versus 15 patients in the BMS group suffered a myocardial infarction (p < 0.05) during the 3-year observation period, and target lesion revascularization was performed in 8 patients (4.9%) versus 53 patients (33.8%), respectively (p < 0.001); of these, 4 in the SES versus 7 in the BMS group were performed between 1 and 3 years after the index treatment (p = NS). According to revised definitions, stent thrombosis occurred in 5 patients (3.1%) in the SES group and in 7 patients (4.4%) in the BMS group (p = NS); very late stent thrombosis was observed in 4 versus 1 patient. Conclusions: A continued benefit was observed up to 3 years after implantation of SES in patients with complex coronary artery lesions. The rate of late adverse events was similar in the 2 groups, and stent thromboses occurred rarely after 1 year. (Sirolimus Eluting Stents in Complex Coronary Lesions [SCANDSTENT]; NCT00151658) [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Objectives: The purpose of the SCANDSTENT study was to evaluate the use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in complex coronary lesions. Background: The use of SES improves angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in simple coronary artery lesions, but there is limited evidence of their safety and efficacy when implanted in complex lesions. Methods: We randomly assigned 322 patients with symptomatic complex coronary artery disease to receive either SES or BMS. The lesions were occluded (36%), bifurcational (34%), ostial (22%), or angulated (8%) in morphology. The primary end point was the difference in minimal lumen diameter six months after stent implantation. Results: The patients were well matched in terms of demographic and angiographic baseline characteristics; 18% had diabetes. The reference vessel diameter was 2.86 mm in mean, and the lesion length 18.0 mm. At follow-up, patients who received SES had a minimal lumen diameter of 2.48 mm compared with 1.65 mm in those who received BMS (p < 0.001), a diameter stenosis of 19.3% versus 43.8% (p < 0.001), and 2.0% versus 31.9% developed restenosis (p < 0.001). The rate of major adverse cardiac events was 4.3% with SES versus 29.3% with BMS (p < 0.001), and stent thrombosis was observed in 0.6% in the SES group versus 3.1% in the BMS group (p = 0.15). Conclusions: The use of SES markedly reduced restenosis and the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events in patients with complex coronary artery lesions without increasing the risk of stent thrombosis. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: Introduction: To investigate the efficacy of implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in the ostium of coronary arteries. Methods: We assigned 96 patients with lesions located in ostias of the coronary circulation to receive a SES or a bare-metal stent (BMS). Results: At follow-up the late lumen loss was 0.07mm in the SES versus 1.06mm in the BMS group (p <0.001); −0.04mm versus 0.11mm (p =0.12) in the neighbour ostium. The rate of target lesion revascularisation was 2% with SES and 39% with BMS (p <0.001), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) 6% versus 41% (p =0.001). Conclusions: In patients with ostial coronary lesions the angiographic outcome is improved and the long-term MACE rate is low after SES compared with BMS implantation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]