Search

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the optimal management of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stent (BMS) or drug-eluting stent (DES) implantations. We assessed the clinical presentation, the incidence, and prognosis of definite stent thrombosis or restenosis after DES implantation for treatment of restenosis. METHODS: From January 2002 to June 2005 all consecutive patients with restenosis

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients with ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) constitute a particular risk group in relation to primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI).OBJECTIVE: We examined the proportion of octogenarians and nonagenarians undergoing PPCI in Western Denmark, and their short- and long-term mortality rates.METHODS: From 2002 to 2009 all consecutive patients ≥ 80 years with STEMI treated with PPCI were identified in the population based Western Denmark Heart Registry. Cox regression analysis was used to compute hazard ratios, controlling for potential confounding.RESULTS: A total of 1,322 elderly (1,213 octogenarians and 109 nonagenarians), corresponding to 11.6% of the total PPCI treated STEMI population were treated with PPCI between 2002 and 2009. The annual proportion of octogenarians referred for PPCI increased from n = 52 (6.2%) in 2002 to n = 172 (11.8%) in 2009 (P < 0.01), while it remained unchanged in nonagenarians: n = 6 (0.6%) in 2002 to n = 13 (0.8%) in 2009 (P = ns). For octogenarians and nonagenarians, 30-day mortality was 17.2% versus 25.8% (log-rank P = 0.028), 1-year mortality was 27.6% versus 32.5% (log-rank P = 0.18) and 5-year mortality 53.6% versus 57.3% (log-rank P = 0.087), respectively. Adjusted 30-day hazard ratio (HR) = 1.59 (95% confidence interval = CI: 1.07-2.36), 1-year HR = 1.34 (CI: 0.95-1.90), and 5-year mortality HR = 1.39 (CI: 1.04-1.85) was higher in nonagenarians compared with octogenarians.CONCLUSION: The annual proportion of octogenarians with STEMI treated with PPCI doubled from 2002 to 2009, while the proportion of nonagenarians remained unchanged. Although nonagenarians had the highest short- and long-term mortality, we found the outcome acceptable with a 5-year survival of more than 40% in both groups.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to compare the long-term effects of drug-eluting stent (DES) compared with bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. BACKGROUND: The randomized DEDICATION (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in Acute Myocardial Infarction) trial evaluated the outcome after DES compared with BMS implantation in patients with STEMI undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention. METHODS: Patients with a high-grade stenosis/occlusion of a native coronary artery presenting with symptoms

Eur J Clin Invest 2012 ABSTRACT: Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in the SORT OUT III trial. Background: Currently, only limited data allow direct comparison of clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with a second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) eluting zotarolimus vs. a first-generation DES eluting sirolimus. Methods: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (n = 1052) were randomized to treatment with zotarolimus-eluting (n = 506) or sirolimus-eluting (n = 546) stents and followed for 18 months. The primary composite endpoint, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization. Results: Zotarolimus-eluting stent treatment compared to sirolimus-eluting stent treatment was associated with increased rates of MACE (8·7% vs. 5·0%; hazard ratio (HR), 1·78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1·10-2·88; P = 0·02) and TVR (6·8% vs. 3·9%; HR, 1·77; 95% CI, 1·03-3·04; P = 0·04), while all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction and definite stent thrombosis did not differ significantly. In the same trial, stable angina pectoris patients (n = 1206) were randomized to zotarolimus-eluting (n = 614) and sirolimus-eluting (n = 592) stents with similar results. Conclusions: With and without acute coronary syndromes, patients treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent had better clinical outcomes than those treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent.

BACKGROUND: Among drug-eluting stents released to date, the sirolimus-eluting stent has demonstrated the least amount of late lumen loss, but its efficacy and safety have not been compared head-to-head with the next-generation everolimus-eluting stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: The Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials with Clinical Outcome IV trial was a randomized multicenter, single-blind, all-comer, two-arm, non-inferiority trial comparing the everolimus-eluting stent with the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. The primary end point was a composite of safety (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis) and efficacy (target vessel revascularization) parameters. The non-inferiority criterion was a risk difference of 0.015. Intention-to-treat analyses were done at 9-month and 18-month follow-up. 1,390 patients were assigned to receive the everolimus-eluting stent, and 1,384 patients were assigned to receive the sirolimus-eluting stent. At 9-month follow-up, 68 [4.9%] patients treated with the everolimus-eluting stent versus 72 [5.2%] patients treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent experienced the primary end point (hazard ratio (HR) =0.94; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.31) (p for non-inferiority=0.01). At 18-month follow-up, this differential remained: 99 [7.2%] patients treated with the everolimus-eluting stent versus 105 [7.6%] (HR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.71-1.23). At 9-month follow-up, rate of definite stent thrombosis was higher in the sirolimus-eluting group (2 [0.1%] patients versus 9 [0.7%] patients, (HR=0.22, 95% CI:0.05-1.02)).At 18-monthfollow-up, this difference was sustained (3 [0.2%] patients versus 12 [0.9%] patients; (HR=0.25, 95% CI:0.07-0.88). CONCLUSIONS: The everolimus-eluting stent was found to be non-inferior to the sirolimus-eluting stent. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT00552877.

OBJECTIVES: There are limited head-to-head randomized data on patient-related versus stent-related outcomes for everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). BACKGROUND: In the SORT OUT IV (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV) trial, comparing the EES with the SES in patients with coronary artery disease, the EES was noninferior to the SES at 9 months. METHODS: The primary endpoint was a composite: cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis, or target vessel revascularization. Safety and efficacy outcomes at 2 years were further assessed with specific focus on patient-related composite (all death, all MI, or any revascularization) and stent-related composite outcomes (cardiac death, target vessel MI, or symptom-driven target lesion revascularization). A total of 1,390 patients were assigned to receive the EES, and 1,384 patients were assigned to receive the SES. RESULTS: At 2 years, the composite primary endpoint occurred in 8.3% in the EES group and in 8.7% in the SES group (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.94, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73 to 1.22). The patient-related outcome: 15.0% in the EES group versus 15.6% in the SES group, (HR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.78 to 1.15), and the stent-related outcome: 5.2% in the EES group versus 5.3% in the SES group (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.70 to 1.35) did not differ between groups. Rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower in the EES group (0.2% vs. 0.9%, (HR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.07 to 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: At 2-year follow-up, the EES was found to be noninferior to the SES with regard to both patient-related and stent-related clinical outcomes. (Scandinavian Organization for Randomized Trials With Clinical Outcome IV [SORT OUT IV]; NCT00552877).

Patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (pPCI) or fibrinolysis. pPCI is superior to fibrinolysis when initiated timely. However, geography and weather sometimes become obstacles for transporting the patient to a PCI centre. In this case story teamwork between hospital instances and the military enabled transport to a PCI centre for a PCI intervention even though the weather conditions were unfavourable.

This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD).

Udgivelsesdato: 2010-Aug-17 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

Udgivelsesdato: 2010-Mar-2 OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term effects of distal protection during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). BACKGROUND: The use of distal filter protection during primary PCI increases procedure complexity and may influence lesion treatment and stent implantation. METHODS: The STEMI patients were assigned to distal protection (DP) (n = 312) or conventional treatment (CT) (n = 314). Clinical follow-up was performed after 1, 6, and 15 months, and angiographic follow-up after 8 months. All target lesion revascularizations (TLRs) were clinically driven. We report the pre-specified end points of stent thrombosis according to the criteria of the Academic Research Consortium, TLR, and reinfarction after 15 months. RESULTS: The total number of stent thrombosis was 11 in the DP group and 4 in the CT group (p = 0.06). The rate of definite stent thrombosis was significantly increased in the DP group as compared with the CT group, with 9 cases versus 1 (p = 0.01). Clinically driven TLRs (31 patients vs. 18 patients, p = 0.05) and clinically driven target vessel revascularizations (37 patients vs. 22 patients, p = 0.04) were more frequent in the DP group. CONCLUSIONS: In primary PCI for STEMI, the routine use of DP increased the incidence of stent thrombosis and clinically driven target lesion/vessel revascularization during 15 months of follow-up. (Drug Elution and Distal Protection in ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction Trial [DEDICATION]; NCT00192868).

Mortality in untreated pulmonary embolism is high and short-term outcome depends on a timely diagnosis. In this case telemedicine involving 12-lead ECG and GSM-based communication between the patient in the ambulance and the telemedical staff resulted in remote pre-hospital suspicion of acute pulmonary embolism. The ambulance was referred directly to the nearest department of cardiology where acute CT and echocardiography confirmed the diagnosis. Acute trombolysis was successful. Telemedicine may be beneficial in other medical emergencies than acute myocardial infarction. Udgivelsesdato: 2008-Feb-25