Search

Objectives This study sought to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug-filled stent (DFS) (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) in the treatment of patients with coronary artery disease. Background Polymer-free drug-eluting stents have the potential to improve clinical outcomes and facilitate shorter durations of dual antiplatelet therapy. The polymer-free DFS is made from a trilayered continuous wire with an outer cobalt chromium layer, a middle tantalum layer, and an inner lumen coated with sirolimus. Small laser-drilled holes on the abluminal stent surface control drug elution. Methods The RevElution trial enrolled 100 patients with de novo coronary lesions 2.25 to 3.50 mm in diameter and length <=27 mm in 2 cohorts of 50 patients for angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical assessment at 9 or 24 months, with optical coherence tomography performed in a subset of 30 patients at each time period. The primary endpoint was angiographic in-stent late lumen loss at 9 months compared with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (Medtronic) historical control data. Results Fifty patients with 56 lesions were treated with DFS in the 9-month cohort. In-stent late lumen loss was 0.26 +/- 0.28 mm for DFS and 0.36 +/- 0.52 mm for Resolute (pnoninferiority <0.001). The binary angiographic restenosis rate was 0%. Median stent strut coverage by optical coherence tomography was 91.4%, 95.6%, and 99.1% at 1, 3, and 9 months, respectively. One non-Q-wave myocardial infarction occurred, with a 9-month target lesion failure rate of 2.1%. No stent thrombosis occurred. Conclusions At 9 months, the polymer-free DFS was safe and effective with high rates of early strut coverage and noninferior late lumen loss compared to Resolute. (Medtronic RevElution Trial [RevElution]; NCT02480348)Copyright © 2017 The Authors

Objectives This study sought to compare rates of stent thrombosis and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) (composite of death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) after coronary stenting with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients who participated in the DAPT (Dual Antiplatelet Therapy) study, an international multicenter randomized trial comparing 30 versus 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy in subjects undergoing coronary stenting with either DES or BMS. Background Despite antirestenotic efficacy of coronary DES compared with BMS, the relative risk of stent thrombosis and adverse cardiovascular events is unclear. Many clinicians perceive BMS to be associated with fewer adverse ischemic events and to require shorter-duration dual antiplatelet therapy than DES. Methods Prospective propensity-matched analysis of subjects enrolled into a randomized trial of dual antiplatelet therapy duration was performed. DES- and BMS-treated subjects were propensity-score matched in a many-to-one fashion. The study design was observational for all subjects 0 to 12 months following stenting. A subset of eligible subjects without major ischemic or bleeding events were randomized at 12 months to continued thienopyridine versus placebo; all subjects were followed through 33 months. Results Among 10,026 propensity-matched subjects, DES-treated subjects (n = 8,308) had a lower rate of stent thrombosis through 33 months compared with BMS-treated subjects (n = 1,718, 1.7% vs. 2.6%; weighted risk difference -1.1%, p = 0.01) and a noninferior rate of MACCE (11.4% vs. 13.2%, respectively, weighted risk difference -1.8%, p = 0.053, noninferiority p < 0.001). Conclusions DES-treated subjects have long-term rates of stent thrombosis that are lower than BMS-treated subjects. (The Dual Antiplatelet Therapy Study [DAPT study]; NCT00977938)Copyright © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation.