Comparison of the slow-release polymerbased paclitaxel-eluting Taxus-Express stent with the bare-metal Express stent for saphenous vein graft interventions

In-Stent Restenosis in Saphenous Vein Grafts (from the DIVA Trial)

Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) have high rates of in-stent restenosis (ISR). We compared the baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics of patients and lesions that did develop ISR with those who did not develop ISR during a median follow-up of 2.7 years in the DIVA study (NCT01121224). We also examined the ISR types using the Mehran classification. ISR developed in 119 out of the 575 DIVA patients (21%), with similar incidence among patients with drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents (BMS) (21% vs 21%, p = 0.957). Patients in the ISR group were younger (67 ± 7 vs 69 ± 8 years, p = 0.04) and less likely to have heart failure (27% vs 38%, p = 0.03) and SVG lesions with Thrombolysis In Myocardial Infarction 3 flow before the intervention (77% vs 83%, p <0.01), but had a higher number of target SVG lesions (1.33 ± 0.64 vs 1.16 ± 0.42, p <0.01), more stents implanted in the target SVG lesions (1.52 ± 0.80 vs 1.31 ± 0.66, p <0.01), and longer total stent length (31.37 ± 22.11 vs 25.64 ± 17.42 mm, p = 0.01). The incidence of diffuse ISR was similar in patients who received drug-eluting-stents and BMS (57% vs 54%, p = 0.94), but BMS patients were more likely to develop occlusive restenosis (17% vs 33%, p = 0.05).

A randomized comparison of a novel iopromide-based paclitaxel-coated balloon Shenqi versus SeQuent Please for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

BACKGROUND

Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) remains challenging in contemporary clinical applications. Drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty offers an effective treatment for ISR. Shenqi is a novel iopromide-based paclitaxel-coated balloon and its clinical safety, effectiveness and angiographic efficacy in patients with ISR have not been investigated.

METHODS

A total of 216 subjects with the first occurrence of ISR at 11 investigational sites in China were randomly allocated in a 1:1 fashion to treatment with DCB SeQuent Please or Shenqi. Clinical follow-up was planned at 1, 6, 9 and 12 months, and angiographic follow-up was planned at 9 months. The study was powered for the primary endpoint of 9-month in-segment late loss.

RESULTS

At 9-month follow-up, the in-segment late loss was 0.29 ± 0.43 mm with Shenqi versus 0.30 ± 0.46 mm with SeQuent Please, and the one-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was 0.14 mm, achieving noninferiority of Shenqi compared with SeQuent Please (P = 0.002). In total, 12 patients developed target lesion failure (TLF) in the Shenqi group compared with 16 patients in the SeQuent Please group (10.91% versus 15.09%; P = 0.42) within 1 year. TLF was mainly driven by target lesion revascularization (9.09%) followed by target vessel-related myocardial infarction (1.82%) and cardiovascular death (0.91%) in the Shenqi group.

CONCLUSIONS

Shenqi DCB was noninferior to SeQuent Please DCB for the primary endpoint of 9-month in-segment late loss. Shenqi DCB may become an attractive alternative treatment for patients with coronary ISR, withholding the need for additional stent implantation.

Clinical characteristics of early and late drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis and mid-term prognosis after repeated percutaneous coronary intervention

Background:

The mechanism and characteristics of early and late drug-eluting stent in-stent restenosis (DES-ISR) have not been fully clarified. Whether there are different outcomes among those patients being irrespective of their repeated treatments remain a knowledge gap.

Methods:

A total of 250 patients who underwent initial stent implantation in our hospital, and then were readmitted to receive treatment for the reason of recurrent significant DES-ISR in 2016 were involved. The patients were categorized as early ISR (<12 months; E-ISR; n = 32) and late ISR (≥12 months; L-ISR; n = 218). Associations between patient characteristics and clinical performance, as well as clinical outcomes after a repeated percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were evaluated. Primary composite endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) included cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR).

Results:

Most baseline characteristics are similar in both groups, except for the period of ISR, initial pre-procedure thrombolysis in myocardial infarction, and some serum biochemical indicators. The incidence of MACE (37.5% vs. 5.5%; P < 0.001) and TLR (37.5% vs. 5.0%; P < 0.001) is higher in the E-ISR group. After multivariate analysis, E-ISR (odds ratio [OR], 13.267; [95% CI 4.984–35.311]; P < 0.001) and left ventricular systolic dysfunction (odds ratio [OR], 6.317; [95% CI 1.145–34.843]; P = 0.034) are the independent predictors for MACE among DES-ISR patients in the mid-term follow-up of 12 months.

Conclusions:

Early ISR and left ventricular systolic dysfunction are associated with MACE during the mid-term follow-up period for DES-ISR patients. The results may benefit the risk stratification and secondary prevention for DES-ISR patients in clinical practice.

The efficacy and safety of drug-eluting balloons for the treatment of in-stent restenosis as compared with drug-eluting stents and with conventional balloon angioplasty

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR) is still associated with a high incidence of recurrence. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) for the treatment of ISR as compared with conventional balloon angioplasty (BA) and drug-eluting stents (DES).

METHODS

Between January 2006 and May 2012 a total of 177 patients (188 lesions, 64.1 ± 11.7 years old) who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for ISR were retrospectively enrolled. Clinical outcomes were compared between patients treated with DEB (n = 58, 32.8%), conventional BA (n = 65, 36.7%), or DES (n = 54, 30.5%). The primary end point was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization(TLR).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were not different except for a history of previous MI, which was more frequent in patients treated by conventional BA or DES than in patients treated by DEB (40.0% vs. 48.1% vs. 17.2%, respectively, p = 0.002). The total incidences of MACEs were 10.7%, 7.4%, and 15.4% in patients treated by DEB, DES, or conventional BA, respectively (p > 0.05). TLR was more frequent in patients treated by conventional BA than in patients treated by DEB or DES, but this was not statistically significant (10.8% vs. 6.9% vs. 3.7%, p > 0.05 between all group pairs, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that percutaneous coronary intervention using DEB might be a feasible alternative to conventional BA or DES implantation for treatment of coronary ISR. Further large-scaled, randomized study assessing long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes will be needed.

Everolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents for treatment of coronary in-stent restenoses

BACKGROUND

Everolimus-eluting stent (EES) implantation was superior to paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) implantation for treatment of de-novo coronary artery disease. We evaluated the outcome of EES compared with PES for treatment of restenosis in bare-metal and drug-eluting stents (DES).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

In a prospective observational study patients with in-stent restenosis (ISR) were treated with EES (N=91) or PES (N=107). Dual antiplatelet therapy was given for 6 months. Patients were scheduled for 6 months angiographic follow-up and 24 months clinical follow-up. Primary outcome measure was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as a composite of cardiac death, any myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization (TLR).

RESULTS

Baseline data showed some differences between groups including frequency of DES restenosis, length of stented segment and reference vessel diameter. For EES versus PES occurrence of MACE (18.7% vs. 15.0%, p=0.48) and need for TLR did not differ (13.2% vs. 9.3%, p=0.39). In-stent late loss was similar with 0.20±0.39 mm for EES and 0.18±0.31mm for PES (p=0.34). Binary angiographic restenosis rate for the total segment was 18.0% and 16.7% (p=0.85), respectively. In multivariable analysis the stented length (p=0.014), minimal lumen diameter post stenting (p<0.01) and repeated restenosis (p<0.001) were risk factors for a higher late loss but not type of DES or presence of diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational registry treatment of DES and BMS restenosis with EES versus PES implantation resulted in similar clinical and angiographic outcome.

Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of saphenous vein graft (SVG) is associated with higher adverse event rates, lower procedural success, and inferior longterm patency rates compared with native vessel PCI. The ability to comply with dual antiplatelet therapy, and whether the patient will need an interruption in dual antiplatelet therapy, should be considered when deciding whether to implant a drug-eluting stent (DES) or bare metal stent (BMS) in an SVG. DES should be used for SVG PCI because they seem to reduce target vessel revascularization. This article reviews the evolution and contemporary evidence regarding use of DES versus BMS in SVG PCI.

A randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial comparing paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty with plain balloon angioplasty in drug-eluting stent restenosis: the PEPCAD-DES study

OBJECTIVES

This study sought to define the impact of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty for treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis compared with uncoated balloon angioplasty alone.

BACKGROUND

Drug-coated balloon angioplasty is associated with favorable results for treatment of bare-metal stent restenosis.

METHODS

In this prospective, single-blind, multicenter, randomized trial, the authors randomly assigned 110 patients with drug-eluting stent restenoses located in a native coronary artery to paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty or uncoated balloon angioplasty. Dual antiplatelet therapy was prescribed for 6 months. Angiographic follow-up was scheduled at 6 months. The primary endpoint was late lumen loss. The secondary clinical endpoint was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction attributed to the target vessel, or target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

There was no difference in patient baseline characteristics or procedural results. Angiographic follow-up rate was 91%. Treatment with paclitaxel-coated balloon was superior to balloon angioplasty alone with a late loss of 0.43 ± 0.61 mm versus 1.03 ± 0.77 mm (p < 0.001), respectively. Restenosis rate was significantly reduced from 58.1% to 17.2% (p < 0.001), and the composite clinical endpoint was significantly reduced from 50.0% to 16.7% (p < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty is superior to balloon angioplasty alone for treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis. (PEPCAD DES-Treatment of DES-In-Stent Restenosis With SeQuent® Please Paclitaxel Eluting PTCA Catheter [PEPCAD-DES]; NCT00998439).

Paclitaxel-eluting stents reduce neointimal hyperplasia compared to bare metal stents in saphenous vein grafts: intravascular ultrasonography analysis of the SOS (Stenting of Saphenous Vein Grafts) trial

AIMS

To compare the intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) findings between saphenous vein grafts (SVG) treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) in the Stenting Of Saphenous Vein Grafts (SOS) trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of the 80 SOS trial patients, 38 had both baseline and follow-up IVUS examination and were included in this substudy: 17 patients received 28 BMS in 26 lesions and 21 patients received 30 PES in 28 lesions. Quantitative IVUS analysis was performed to determine the volume of in-stent neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) - defined as the difference between stent volume and lumen volume in the stented segments. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients who did and did not undergo baseline and follow-up IVUS. Patients receiving BMS and PES had similar stent and lumen volumes immediately after stenting. At 12-month follow-up, compared to BMS, PES-treated lesions had significantly less NIH volume (3.4 vs. 21.9 mm³, p<0.001) and neointima hyperplasia progression (1.6 vs. 17.1 mm³, p<0.001). No significant differences were seen in the 5 mm segment proximal and distal to the stent.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to BMS, use of PES in SVG lesions is associated with significantly lower NIH formation, which may help explain the improved clinical outcomes with PES in these lesions.

Late outcomes of drug eluting and bare metal stents in saphenous vein graft percutaneous coronary intervention

AIMS

PCI with drug eluting stents (DES) has been shown to reduce restenosis and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared to bare metal stents (BMS) in native coronary vessels, although outcomes in saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions are less clear. We retrospectively studied 388 consecutive patients admitted to our centre for SVG PCI to assess mortality and MACE outcomes (defined as composite endpoint of all-death, stroke, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and target lesion (TLR)/vessel (TVR) revascularisation) associated with BMS and DES use.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Two hundred and nineteen (219) patients had BMS and 169 had DES (total 388 patients). Mean follow up was 41.9±23.5 months. No significant differences were observed in mortality (14.2% vs. 11.8%) or MACE (37.6% vs. 35.8%) between the BMS and DES groups at four years follow-up or at other intervening time points studied. Similarly, no differences in TVR/TLR rates were observed over a similar time period (19.8% vs. 21.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

We have observed that DES and BMS use in SVG PCI have comparable mortality and MACE rates, and that in contrast to PCI in native coronary arteries, DES do not reduce revascularisation rates in our study cohort.

Drug-eluting or bare metal stents for the treatment of saphenous vein graft disease: a Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Observational studies and randomized, controlled trials have yielded uncertain results regarding the benefits of drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the cumulative evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of DES to treat SVG compared with bare metal stent (BMS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis of all randomized, controlled trials and observational studies that compared clinical outcomes after DES or BMS placement in SVG disease. Our search resulted in 25 studies, cumulating 5755 patients. DES implantation was not associated with an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% credible intervals (CrI) [CrI], 0.62 to 1.21) or myocardial infarction (OR, 0.83; 95% CrI, 0.56 to 1.32), but wide CrIs preclude definitive conclusions. Target vessel revascularization (OR, 0.55; 95% CrI, 0.39 to 0.76) and target lesion revascularization (OR, 0.58; 95% CrI, 0.37 to 0.87) were both reduced by approximately 45% with DES. When combining these outcomes, the OR for major adverse cardiac events was reduced in patients treated with DES (OR, 0.62; 95% CrI, 0.46 to 0.81). Finally, the relative risk of stent thrombosis appeared lower with DES, although again the CrIs were very wide (OR, 0.54; 95% CrI, 0.13 to 1.39).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study-level meta-analysis, the largest ever reported and the first using bayesian methods, the use of DES for the treatment of SVG disease reduces target vessel revascularization and target lesion revascularization procedures compared with BMS. Although there is no evidence to date to suggest increased rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis, further data are needed to address this safety issue.

Drug eluting stents versus bare metal stents in the treatment of saphenous vein graft disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease is still a matter of debate given the uncertainty of the available conflicting data. Our aim was to assess, by means of a meta-analytic approach, the risk/benefit profile of drug eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) in the treatment of SVG disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A search of relevant studies in several databases was performed. The endpoints of interest such as: major adverse events (MAE) (the combination of overall death and non-fatal myocardial infarction [AMI]), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), and target lesion revascularisation (TLR) have been calculated in-hospital and at the longest follow-up. Single endpoints and the rate of stent thrombosis (ST) were also assessed. Three randomised controlled trials and 15 registry studies were appraised, totalling 3,294 patients. During hospitalisation, there was no difference in the risk of MAE, overall death, AMI and TVR. No data were available to calculate the TLR rate. At a mean follow-up of 19.8 months, no significant differences were found in the risk of MAE and AMI. BMS were associated with a trend towards a higher risk of overall death (OR 1.32 [1,00-1.74], p=0.05, number needed to treat [NNT]=55). DES showed superiority in terms of TVR (OR 1.86 [1.33-2.61], p=0.0003, NNT=16), and TLR (OR 1.77 [1.27-2.48], p<0.0001, NNT=25). According to pre-specified subgroup analyses, these effects seem less evident at the long-term follow-up. DES were not associated with an increased risk of ST.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of DES in SVG substantially reduces both TVR and TLR. These data also demonstrate that using DES in SVG is safe and contradict previous reports of potential risks.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stent for treatment of saphenous vein grafts: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Saphenous vein grafts develop an aggressive atherosclerotic process and the efficacy of drug eluting stents (DES) in treating saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions has not been convincingly demonstrated. The aim of this study was to review and analyze the current literature for controlled studies comparing DES versus bare metal stents (BMS) for treatment of SVG stenoses.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

We searched several scientific databases and conference proceedings up to March 15, 2010 for controlled studies comparing target vessel revascularization (TVR) between DES and BMS. Summary odds ratios (OR) for the primary endpoint TVR and secondary endpoints infarction, stent thrombosis and death were calculated using random-effect models. A total of 29 studies (3 randomized controlled trials RCT) involving 7549 (202 in RCT) patients were included. The need for target vessel revascularization in the DES group tended to be lower compared to BMS for the 3 RCT (OR 0.50 [0.24-1.00]; p = 0.051) and for observational studies (0.62 [0.49-0.79]; p<0.001). There was no significant difference in the risk for myocardial infarction in the RCT (OR 1.25 [0.22-6.99]; p = 0.250) but a lower risk for DES based on the observational studies 0.68 [0.49-0.95]; p = 0.023. The risk for stent thrombosis was found to be non-different in the RCT (OR 0.78 [0.03-21.73], p = 0.885) while it was in favor of DES in the observational studies (0.58 [0.38 - 0.84]; p<0.001). The mortality was not significantly different between DES and BMS in the RCT's (OR 2.22 [0.17 - 29.50]; p = 0.546) while the observation studies showed a decreased mortality in the DES group (0.69 [0.55-0.85]; p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

DES may decrease TVR rate in treatment of SVG stenoses. No differences in reinfarction rate, stent thrombosis or mortality was found between the DES and BMS groups in the RCT's while the observational data showed lower risk for myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis and death in the DES group. This may be a result of patient selection bias in the observational studies or represent a true finding that was not the detected in the RCT analysis due to limited statistical power.

Comparison of the Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Drug-Eluting and Bare-Metal Stent Implantation in Saphenous Vein Grafts

Background—

Concerns about the long-term safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) in saphenous vein grafts has become an area of controversy and uncertainty.

Methods and Results—

In this retrospective registry, we compared the outcomes in 127 patients (143 lesions) treated with DES from April 2002 to June 2006 (DES group) with 131 patients (160 lesions) treated with bare-metal stents in the preceding 36 months (bare-metal stent group). End points analyzed were cumulative death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 2 years after stent implantation. The DES group was significantly ( P <0.05) more complex with a greater frequency of diabetes (33.1%versus 15.3%), older grafts (11.6±5.3 years versus 9.6±5.2 years), restenotic lesions (23.8% versus 4.4%), total occlusions (7.7% versus 1.2%), and smaller grafts (3.16±0.66 mm versus 3.44±0.76 mm) treated with longer stents (34.1±25.1 mm versus 22.7±11.6 mm). At 2 years, there was no statistical difference in death (8.7% versus 7.8%), myocardial infarction (6.3% versus 9.4%), or target vessel revascularization (19.7% versus 24.2%) between DES and bare-metal stents, respectively. A propensity analysis to adjust for baseline differences suggested that there was no observed association between DES and increased mortality (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.21 to 2.44; P =0.60) but possibly an association with a reduction in target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.14 to 0.66; P =0.002).

Conclusions—

Despite being implanted in patients and lesions more complex than the bare-metal stent group, there was no observed association between DES implantation in saphenous vein grafts and an increase in late mortality. DES may maintain their efficacy in reducing revascularization rates in diseased saphenous vein grafts over a 2-year follow-up period.

Comparison by meta-analysis of drug-eluting stents and bare metal stents for saphenous vein graft intervention

This meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents (DESs) compared to bare metal stents (BMSs) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions. DESs decrease the risk of target vessel revascularization in native coronary arteries compared to BMSs. The ideal treatment strategy in patients with SVG disease is unknown. A search of the published reports was conducted to identify studies that compared DESs and BMSs in SVG intervention with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. A total of 19 studies (2 randomized trials and 17 registries), including 3,420 patients who had undergone SVG intervention (DESs, n = 1,489 and BMS, n = 1,931), met the selection criteria. The mean length of follow-up was 20 + or - 12 months. Using the fixed effect model, target vessel revascularization was less frequently performed in patients who had undergone SVG intervention with a DES than with a BMS (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 0.72). The incidence of myocardial infarction was lower in patients with a DES than in those with a BMS (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.99). No differences were found in the risk of death (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.02) or stent thrombosis (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.11) between the 2 groups. In conclusion, these findings support the use of DESs in SVG lesions.

Long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft disease: results from the Prairie "Real World" Stent Registry

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.

Effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents in vein grafts: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in degenerative vein grafts is currently an off-label indication. Recent studies have had conflicting results regarding the effectiveness and safety of this practice. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare DES to bare-metal stents for the treatment of vein graft stenosis.

METHODS

PubMed and the Cochrane clinical trials database were systematically searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining DES for vein graft stenosis published in English between 2003 and 2009. Inclusion criteria included follow-up duration > or =6 months. Data were stratified by study design and pooled using random effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were found to meet our inclusion criteria. Eighteen studies were observational and 2 were RCTs. In observational studies, DES were associated with a reduction in major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72), death (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.91), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.79), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.78). The incidence of myocardial infarction was similar between groups. In the RCTs, pooled results were inconclusive because of small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although data from observational studies suggest that the use of DES for vein graft stenosis has favorable effects on MACE, death, TVR, and TLR, these data should be interpreted with caution due to their observational nature. Corresponding RCT data are inconclusive. There remains a need for large multicenter RCTs to address the effectiveness and safety of DES for vein graft stenosis.

Drug-eluting stents in saphenous vein graft interventions: a systematic review

AIMS

A systematic review of the outcomes after drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) was performed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The majority of the 33 published studies were retrospective with only two prospective randomised trials. Late loss and binary restenosis was reduced compared to bare metal stents (BMS) in all seven studies with angiographic follow-up. With the exception of one study there was no difference in mortality, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis between BMS and DES. The need for repeat target vessel or lesion revascularisation was lower in the DES arm in approximately half the published studies and similar in the remaining studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Until data from large, prospective, randomised-controlled studies become available, DES implantation in SVGs appears to be safe and, although not yet definitively proven, likely to reduce angiographic restenosis and the need for repeat target lesion revascularisation.

Comparison of Plaque Sealing With Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents Versus Medical Therapy for the Treatment of Moderate Nonsignificant Saphenous Vein Graft Lesions

Background— The presence of moderate saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions is a major predictor of cardiac events late after coronary artery bypass grafting. We determined the effects of sealing moderate nonsignificant SVG lesions with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) on the prevention of SVG atherosclerosis progression.

Methods and Results— Patients with at least 1 moderate SVG lesion (30% to 60% diameter stenosis) were randomized either to stenting the moderate SVG lesion with a PES (n=30, PES group) or to medical treatment alone (n=27, medical treatment group). Patients had an angiographic and intravascular ultrasound evaluation of the SVG at baseline and at 12-month follow-up. The primary end points were (1) the ultrasound SVG minimal lumen area at follow-up and (2) the changes in ultrasound atheroma volume in an angiographically nondiseased SVG segment. Mean time from coronary artery bypass grafting was 12±6 years, and mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 73±31 mg/dL. A total of 70 moderate SVG lesions (39±7% diameter stenosis) were evaluated. Significant disease progression occurred in the medical treatment group at the level of the moderate SVG lesion (decrease in minimal lumen area from 6.3±3.0 to 5.6±3.1 mm 2 ; P <0.001), leading to a severe flow-limiting lesion or SVG occlusion in 22% of the patients compared with none in the PES group ( P =0.014). In the PES group, mean minimal lumen area increased ( P <0.001) from 6.1±2.2 to 8.6±2.9 mm 2 at follow-up ( P =0.001 compared with the medical treatment group at 12 months). There were no cases of restenosis or stent thrombosis. No significant atherosclerosis progression occurred at the nonstented SVG segments. At 12-month follow-up, the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events related to the target SVG was 19% in the medical treatment group versus 3% in the PES group ( P =0.091).

Conclusions— Stenting moderate nonsignificant lesions in old SVGs with PES was associated with a lower rate of SVG disease progression and a trend toward a lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 1-year follow-up compared with medical treatment alone, despite very low low-density lipoprotein cholesterol values. This pilot study supports further investigation into the role of plaque sealing in SVGs.

Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT002289835.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents for treating saphenous vein grafts

BACKGROUND

Current data show conflicting results regarding safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) for treating saphenous vein grafts (SVG). Our objective was to compare DES with BMS for SVG intervention.

METHODS

Patients undergoing stenting with DES or BMS to SVG from January 2000 to June 2007 were included. To eliminate any unobserved bias regarding stent selection, the BMS cohort was divided into pre- and post-2003 when DES became available. Adjusted Cox analysis compared DES with pre- and post-2003 BMS patients. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

Of the total 566 patients, 217 (38%) received DES, 110 (20%) received BMS post-2003, and 239 (42%) received BMS pre-2003. Median follow-up was 2.9 years (interquartile range 1.4-4.9 years). There was a trend toward lower primary end point with DES compared to post-2003 BMS (91 events, adjusted hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.35-1.07, P = .08). However, despite 179 events, DES use was not associated with lower primary end point compared with pre-2003 BMS (adjusted hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.28-1.35, P = .23).

CONCLUSIONS

Although DES showed a trend toward a lower primary end point when compared with BMS post-2003, this association was no longer present when DES was compared to pre-2003 BMS. These results are consistent with the preponderance of available data and indicate that unobserved bias in observational registries may explain the reported benefit of DES over BMS for treating SVG.

Effect of a novel drug-eluted balloon coated with genistein before stent implantation in porcine coronary arteries

BACKGROUND

The major drawback of stent implantation in native human coronary vessels is the occurrence of restenosis. Drug-eluting stents significantly reduce restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but may be associated with persistent local inflammation involved in the restenosis mechanisms. In this setting coating coronary devices with anti-inflammatory agents represents an intriguing alternative to stent-based local drug delivery. The aim of the present study was to test in a porcine model the safety and efficacy of a novel Genistein-eluting balloon preceding coronary stenting.

DESIGN

Female piglets underwent PCI in a randomized fashion with either a Genistein-eluting or a standard balloon angioplasty, followed in all vessels by bare-metal stent implantation. Pigs were sacrificed at different time points to appraise safety (i.e. endothelialization) and efficacy (i.e. anti-inflammatory and anti-proliferative effects): 1, 4, and 6-8 weeks following PCI.

RESULTS

Overall analysis was conducted on 14 piglets. Twenty-five bare-metal stents were implanted preceded by angioplasty with a conventional balloon in 13 vessels and by the Genistein-eluted balloon in 12. No untoward effects were reported in either group. Healing and endothelialization appeared universal within 4 weeks. The Genistein-eluted balloon group disclosed a significant reduction, at four weeks from implantation, of the peri-stent inflammatory cells count (mononucleocytes 39 +/- 32 Vs. 96 +/- 29 per square millimetre, P = 0.019). This effect did not clearly translate into a trend towards a reduced neointimal hyperplasia at 6-8 weeks (0.13 +/- 0.11 Vs. 0.14 +/- 0.09, P = 0.835).

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first in vivo demonstration of the anti-inflammatory effects of a Genistein-eluting balloon in PCI, warranting further research including the combination of a Genistein-eluting balloon with standard drug-eluting stent.

The Paclitaxel-Eluting Coroflex™ Please Stent Pilot Study (PECOPS I)

BACKGROUND

The alleged superiority of drug-eluting stents over bare metal devices and those with passive coatings is diminished by a higher incidence of late target vessel thrombosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Therefore, the one-year clinical outcome of the paclitaxel-eluting Coroflex Please stent in patients with denovo coronary lesions was evaluated in the single-arm PECOPS I pilot study. The clinical data of 96/97 (99%) of the patients included per protocol and of 86/87 (98.9%) of those treated per protocol were available 13.1 +/- 1.8 months following stent deployment. In the inclusion and treatment per protocol groups the incidence of cardiac deaths was 1/96 (1%) and 1/86 (1.2%), of myocardial infarction 3/96 (3.1%) and 1/86 (1.2%), and of target lesion revascularization 9/96 (9.4%) and 8/86 (9.3%). In patients enrolled per protocol two early thromboses (2.1%) occurred one of which two days after premature discontinuation of clopidogrel. In patients treated per protocol one thrombosis was observed after 10 hours. The one-year event-free survival was 83/96 (86.5%) in patients enrolled per protocol and 75/86 (87.2%) in those treated per protocol.

CONCLUSION

The one-year clinical outcome of PECOPS I was within the range of other paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. The relative small number of patients enrolled in PECOPS I precludes to infer any further conclusions.

Clinical Follow-Up of Paclitaxel-Eluting (TAXUS?) Stents for the Treatment of Saphenous Vein Graft Disease

BACKGROUND

Randomized trials in selected patient populations have demonstrated dramatic reductions in the incidence of in-stent restenosis (ISR) following implantation of paclitaxel-eluting (PE) coronary stents compared with bare metal stents in native coronary disease. The clinical outcome following implantation of PE stents for saphenous vein graft (SVG) stenosis is largely unknown.

AIM

To assess the safety and efficacy of PE coronary stents for the treatment of SVG stenosis in an unselected population.

METHODS

All patients who received PE stents for the treatment of SVG disease from May 1, 2003, to May 1, 2005, were entered into a prospectively collected database. Fifty-five patients were identified with 69 lesions. In-hospital and late major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) were recorded as well as the rate of target vessel revascularization (TVR).

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 13 months with 54 of the 55 patients contacted. The number of stents implanted was 1.12 +/- 0.37 per lesion and 1.38 +/- 0.59 per patient. Clinically significant procedural MACE was 0%. The late MACE rate was 9% with a 2% clinically driven TLR, a 4% coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), and a 4% TVR rate. There were four deaths, two cardiac and two noncardiac.

CONCLUSION

PE stents appear safe and effective in the treatment of SVG disease at a mean follow-up time of 13 months. Randomized studies are needed to further delineate the optimal management of this high-risk group.