Impact of drug-eluting stents among insulin-treated diabetic patients: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry

Short- and long-term cardiovascular outcomes in insulin-treated versus non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

This study aims to assess differences in severity of short-term (<1 year) and long-term (≥1 year) adverse CV outcomes after PCI in insulin-treated vs. non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (DM) patients.

Methods

A systematic search on Pubmed and Embase led to the incorporation of 29 studies that compared post-percutaneous coronary interventional outcomes in insulin-treated and non-insulin-treated diabetes mellitus. Diabetes mellitus (type 2) was defined as fasting blood glucose (FBG) level of >7.0 mmol/L or with an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) level of >11.1 mmol/L at least on two separate occasions. Adverse CV outcomes were assessed in insulin-treated and non-insulin-treated DM after the PCI procedure considered for the analyses were mortality, MACE, TLR, TVR, MI, stent thrombosis, target lesion failure (TLF), and need for-post PCI CABG. Data were pooled and analyzed using Review Manager 5.3, and risk ratios (RR) with respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.The statistical analyses were carried out by Review Manager v.5.3, and the data were pooled using a random-effects model. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were reported along with forest plots. The chi-square test was performed to assess for differences between the subgroups. Heterogeneity across studies was evaluated using Higgins I² statistics. Visual inspection of the funnel plot and Begg's regression test were used to assess publication bias.

Results

A total of 40,527 patients (11742 in the Insulin-treated diabetes mellitus group and 28785 in the non-insulin-treated DM group) who underwent PCI were included. The pooled analysis of short-term follow up outcomes preceding PCI demonstrated a significantly higher risk of mortality (RR = 1.75 [1.24,2.47]; p = 0.002), MI (RR = 1.81[1.14,2.87]; p = 0.01], stent thrombosis (RR = 1.63[1.13, 2.35]; p = 0.009) and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (RR = 1.29[1.02,1.63]; p = 0.03) in insulin-treated DM patients. Similarly, analysis of long-term follow-up studies depicted a significantly higher risk mortality (RR = 1.55 [1.22, 1.97]; p = 0.0003), MI (RR = 1.63 [1.35, 1.97]; p=<0.00001), MACE (R = 1.47 [1.31, 1.65]; p=<0.00001), stent thrombosis (RR = 1.54 [1.19,1.99]; p = 0.001), TLR (RR = 1.40 [1.18, 1.66]; p = 0.0001), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (RR = 1.35 [1.11, 1.64]; p = 0.003) in insulin-treated DM group after PCI versus non-insulin-treated DM patients.

Conclusion

Despite a tremendous technical success rate of multi-vessel stenting, people living with diabetes who were being treated with insulin had higher long-term, and short-term mortality rates, MI, TLR, TVR, and stroke compared to people living with diabetes who were being treated with means other than insulin and are more prone to detrimental cardiovascular outcomes.

Percutaneous coronary intervention in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting: a propensity score matching study

Background

The target of this study was to explore the outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic versus non-diabetic patients with prior coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery.

Methods

Seven hundred and twenty four patients who had previously received CABG and had been treated using PCI combined with drug-eluting stents (DES) between 2009 and 2017 were selected for a retrospective study and allocated into either a diabetes mellitus (DM) or non-diabetes mellitus (No DM) group. A 1:1 propensity score-matched evaluation was conducted and risk adjusted for analysis. The primary outcomes were cardiac death, myocardial infarction, heart failure and revascularization, with a median follow-up duration of 5.13 years.

Results

After matching, two-, 5- and 8-year event rate of overall major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were found to be higher in the DM group (No DM vs DM:15.3, 30.9, 38.5% vs 19.8, 37.8, 52.2%, respectively), although no significant difference was found in the event rate of overall MACEs (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.00 to 1.83 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.052), cardiac death (HR: 0.94; 95% CI: 0.45 to 1.95; P = 0.871), MI (HR: 1.49; 95% CI: 0.95 to 2.32; P = 0.080), HF (HR: 1.54; 95% CI: 0.90 to 2.63 for; P = 0.120) or revascularization (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.72 to 1.59; P = 0.747). Subgroup analysis of PCI in only the NCA showed MACEs (adjusted HR: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.85 to 1.49 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.325), cardiac death (adjusted HR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.41 to 1.78 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.781), MI (adjusted HR: 1.32; 95% CI: 0.84 to 2.01 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.069), HF (adjusted HR: 1.41; 95% CI: 0.87 to 2.27 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.211) or repeated revascularization (adjusted HR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.37 for DM vs No DM; P = 0.836).

Conclusions

Compared with non-diabetic patients with prior CABG, subsequent implantation of DES in the native coronary artery of diabetic patients resulted in apparently similar outcomes.

Trial registration

This study was not registered in an open access database.

Impact of Insulin-Treated and Noninsulin-Treated Diabetes Mellitus in All-Comer Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Interventions With Polymer-Free Biolimus-Eluting Stent (from the RUDI-FREE Registry)

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have worse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Recent evidences suggest a differential impact of insulin-treated and noninsulin-treated DM on prognosis. We evaluated the clinical outcome of diabetic patients after PCI with polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent from the RUDI-FREE Registry, investigating a possible different prognostic impact of insulin-treated and noninsulin-treated DM. A total of 1,104 consecutive patients who underwent PCI with polymer-free biolimus-eluting stent, enrolled in the RUDI-FREE observational, multicenter, single-arm registry, were stratified by diabetic status; diabetic population was further divided on the basis of insulin treatment. Primary end points of the study were target lesion failure (TLF; composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (composite of cardiac death, stroke, and myocardial infarction). Multiple ischemic adverse events were also single-handedly considered as secondary end points. At 1 year, TLF was significantly higher in the diabetic cohort, as compared with nondiabetic patients (6.0% vs 3.1%, p 0.022). None of the end points resulted significantly different between nondiabetics and noninsulin-treated diabetic patients. Divergently, compared with nondiabetic, insulin-treated diabetic patients faced significant higher rates of TLF (10.8% vs 3.1%, p 0.003), major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (10.8% vs 3.4%, p 0.004), and of most of the analyzed adverse events. In conclusion, patients with DM had a higher risk of TLF compared with nondiabetics; nonetheless, the worse outcome of the diabetic population seems to be driven by the insulin-treated diabetic subpopulation. This finding suggests a different risk profile of insulin-treated and noninsulin-treated diabetic patients in the modern era of PCI.

Clinical outcomes of complex real-world diabetic patients treated with amphilimus sirolimus-eluting stents or zotarolimus-eluting stents: A single-center registry

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical outcomes of Amphilimus Sirolimus-Eluting Stents (A-SES) as compared to Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents (ZES) in complex real-world diabetic patients.

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes mellitus represent one of the most challenging scenarios with high rates of restenosis and stent thrombosis in the current era of drug-eluting stents. Hence, we assessed the safety of A-SES versus ZES in complex diabetic patients.

METHODS

In this observational study, we analyzed all consecutive patients with diabetes mellitus referred to our center from November 2012 to November 2014. The primary outcome was target-lesion failure at 1-year follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 165 consecutive diabetic patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with A-SES or ZES for stable coronary artery disease in our tertiary center. Using the Kaplan Meier method the cumulative incidence of target-lesion failure was 6.7% (5.9% A-SES versus 7.5% ZES, p=0.19) at 1-year follow-up. Event-free survival at 1year follow-up was similar (89.4% A-SES vs. 83.3% ZES, p=0.29). Interestingly, we did not find any cases of definite-, and only one case of probable stent thrombosis in this high risk cohort.

CONCLUSION

In this real-world registry, A-SES and ZES seems to be associated with promising 1-year clinical safety outcomes following PCI in a contemporary cohort of high-risk diabetic patients. Our results should be considered hypothesis generating, as the clinical safety of A-SES has to be confirmed in a large trial.

Drug-coated balloons for the treatment of in-stent restenosis in diabetic patients: A review of currently available scientific data

After the introduction of drug eluting stent (DES) the rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) has decreased if compared to the BMS era; however, treatment of patients with ISR remained a major issue for the interventional cardiologist. DES has been largely used with good results also as second layer for the treatment of ISR, but the overall percentage of patients suffering from restenosis still remains high, especially in some subgroups of patients as ones with diabetes mellitus (DM). In this clinical scenario, drug coated balloon (DCB) has been gaining an important role for the treatment of ISR. In fact, it allows to release an antiproliferative drug, namely paclitaxel, without the addition of a second metallic strut, which can lead to a persistent inflammatory stimulus and further narrow the vessel. This could be an advantage in patients with an already increased systemic inflammatory burden and stiffer vessels as those with DM. Despite differences in terms of efficacy and safety between DES and DCB have already been evaluated in different clinical trials, just few of these focused on diabetic patients. The aim of this paper is to review the available data for treatment of ISR both with DES, DCB, and a comparison between these two devices, in patients affected by DM. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The impact of diabetes mellitus on long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary saphenous vein graft interventions in the drug-eluting stent era

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to compare early and late clinical outcomes in diabetic and nondiabetic patients who underwent saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with the use of drug-eluting stents (DES).

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes mellitus are shown to have less favorable outcomes after SVG intervention with the use of bare metal stents. In the DES era, the impact of diabetes mellitus on restenosis and clinical outcomes post-SVG intervention is not clearly defined.

METHODS

From our institutional PCI registry database, we retrospectively analyzed 477 consecutive patients with prior coronary artery bypass graft surgery undergoing SVG PCI with the implantation of DES stratified by the presence or absence of diabetes mellitus. The primary end-point was 1-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rate, defined as death, Q wave myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

Baseline clinical characteristics, including mean graft age (120 ± 77 vs. 131 ± 86 months, P = 0.14), were similar between groups, save for a higher prevalence of systemic hypertension and chronic renal insufficiency, and higher body mass index in the diabetic group. Among the 604 SVG lesions treated with DES, the angiographic and procedural characteristics were well matched between groups except for the higher rate of distal protection device use (32% vs. 29%, P = 0.007) in the diabetic group. The rates of 1-year MACE (21% vs. 15%, P = 0.12) and all-cause mortality (7.6% vs. 6.7%, P = 0.86) were similar between groups. After adjustment for the relevant clinical co-variables, diabetic status was not associated with the composite end-point.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, DES, when used for the treatment of vein graft lesions, equate the short- and long-term outcomes between diabetic and nondiabetic patients, suggesting that DES should be considered the default stent in diabetic populations undergoing PCI for the treatment of SVG lesions.

Adverse cardiovascular outcomes between insulin-treated and non-insulin treated diabetic patients after percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) patients have worse adverse cardiovascular outcomes after Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI). However, the adverse cardiovascular outcomes between insulin-treated and non-insulin treated DM patients have been a subject of debate. We sought to compare the short-term (<1 year) and long-term (≥1 year) cardiovascular outcomes between insulin-treated and non-insulin treated DM patients after PCI.

METHODS

Medline and Embase databases were searched for studies by typing 'diabetes and percutaneous coronary intervention/PCI' or 'insulin-treated and non-insulin treated diabetes mellitus and PCI'. Endpoints included adverse cardiovascular outcomes reported in these DM patients during the corresponding follow-up periods. Odd Ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used to express the pooled effect on discontinuous variables and the pooled analyses were performed with RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

21 studies have been included in this meta-analysis consisting of a total of 21,759 diabetic patients (6250 insulin-treated and 15,509 non-insulin treated DM patients). Short term mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, major adverse cardiac effects and, stent thrombosis were significantly higher in insulin-treated diabetic patients (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.40-2.04, p < 0.00001), (OR 1.40, 95% CI 1.16-1.70, p = 0.0005), (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.06-1.76, p = 0.02), (OR 1.46, 95% CI 1.22-1.76, p < 0.0001) and (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.16-2.38, p = 0.005) respectively. Long-term cardiovascular outcomes were also significantly higher in insulin-treated DM patients.

CONCLUSION

Insulin treatment in these DM patients was associated with a significantly higher short and long-term adverse cardiovascular outcomes after PCI compared to those DM patients not treated by insulin therapy.

Contemporary Outcomes of Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting Among Patients With Insulin-Treated and Non-Insulin-Treated Diabetes

BACKGROUND

More than 40% of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have diabetes. However, it is unknown how insulin treatment status influences cardiac surgical outcomes among patients with diabetes.

METHODS

All isolated CABG, CABG plus aortic valve replacement or plus mitral valve repair/replacement procedures performed in 2012 were extracted from the California CABG Outcomes Reporting Program database. Patients were grouped into three categories: (1) no diabetes, (2) non-insulin-treated diabetes (NITDM), and (3) insulin-treated diabetes (ITDM). Demographic and clinical baseline characteristics and observed postoperative major adverse events, including 30-day mortality, stroke, deep sternal wound infection, prolonged ventilation, new dialysis requirement, renal failure, and 30-day readmission were compared. Multivariable logistic regression models were developed for predicting the impact of NITDM and ITDM on postoperative major adverse events.

RESULTS

A total of 14,051 patients underwent isolated CABG or CABG plus aortic/mitral valve procedures in California during 2012; 6700 (47.7%) had no diabetes, 5165 (36.8%) had NITDM, and 2183 (15.6%) had ITDM. Compared with the nondiabetic and NITDM groups, the ITDM group was younger, more frequently women and nonwhite, and had a higher prevalence of preoperative comorbidities (all p < 0.05). After adjusting for baseline risk factors and surgery type compared with patients without diabetes, both NITDM and ITDM were associated with significantly increased risk of major adverse events [NITDM: adjusted odds ratio (AOR), 1.15, 95 % confidence interval (CI), 1.04 to 1.26, p = 0.005; ITDM: AOR, 1.49, 95% CI, 1.32 to 1.68, p < 0.0001]. A subgroup comparison indicated a similar gradient of risk for each category of cardiac surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with diabetes undergoing CABG have substantially increased risk of major adverse events. Patients with ITDM represent an especially high-risk group.

Full-metal jacket: A bad strategy

Although drug-eluting stents are increasingly used to treat coronary disease, restenosis remains the major limitation of these devices. We report a case of complete metal jacket using 17 stents for triple-vessel coronary disease in a 73-year-old man, for whom surgery would have been the best choice.

Intimal hyperplasia and vascular remodeling after everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in diabetic patients: the randomized Diabetes and Drug-Eluting Stent (DiabeDES) IV Intravascular Ultrasound trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of the everolimus-eluting Xience™/Promus™ stent (EES) and the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ stent (SES) on intimal hyperplasia (IH) in diabetic patients.

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes mellitus have increased risk of in-stent restenosis after coronary stent implantation due to intimal hyperplasia (IH).

METHODS

In a sub study of the Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Patients Treated with Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (SORT OUT IV trial), serial intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) 10-month follow-up data were available in 88 patients, including 48 EES and 40 SES treated patients. IVUS endpoints included IH volume, in-stent % volume obstruction and changes in external elastic membrane (EEM) volume.

RESULTS

Compared with the SES group, IH volume was increased in the EES group [median (interquartile range): 2.8 mm(3) (0.0-12.6) vs. 0.0 mm(3) (0.0-1.1), P = 0.001]. In-stent % volume obstruction was increased in EES compared to SES [median (interquartile range): 1.6% (0.0-8.2) vs. 0.0% (0.0-1.0), P = 0.001]. Peri-stent external elastic membrane (EEM) volume: (post procedure vs. follow-up EES [300 mm(3) (219-491) vs. 307 mm(3) (223-482), P = 0.73] and SES [316 mm(3) (235-399) vs. 323 mm(3) (246-404), P = 0.05]) and peri-stent plaque volume: EES [163 mm(3) (103-273) vs. 184 mm(3) (115-291), P = 0.18] and SES [186 mm(3) (139-248) vs. 175 mm(3) (153-243), P = 0.26]) were unchanged in both groups. In the proximal reference segment a significant increase in plaque area was seen in the EES group only, without vascular remodeling.

CONCLUSION

In diabetic patients, EES stent implantation was associated with increased IH volume obstruction without involvement of vascular remodeling.

Clinical outcome of patients with and without diabetes mellitus after percutaneous coronary intervention with the resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent: 2-year results from the prospectively pooled analysis of the international global RESOLUTE program

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to describe the process to obtain Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for the expanded indication for treatment with the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) (Medtronic, Inc., Santa Rosa, California) in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes.

BACKGROUND

The R-ZES is the first drug-eluting stent specifically indicated in the United States for percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

We pooled patient-level data for 5,130 patients from the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Program. A performance goal prospectively determined in conjunction with the FDA was established as a rate of target vessel failure at 12 months of 14.5%. In addition to the FDA pre-specified cohort of less complex patients with diabetes (n = 878), we evaluated outcomes of the R-ZES in all 1,535 patients with diabetes compared with all 3,595 patients without diabetes at 2 years.

RESULTS

The 12-month rate of target vessel failure in the pre-specified diabetic cohort was 7.8% (upper 95% confidence interval: 9.51%), significantly lower than the performance goal of 14.5% (p < 0.001). After 2 years, the cumulative incidence of target lesion failure in patients with noninsulin-treated diabetes was comparable to that of patients without diabetes (8.0% vs. 7.1%). The higher risk insulin-treated population demonstrated a significantly higher target lesion failure rate (13.7%). In the whole population, including complex patients, rates of stent thrombosis were not significantly different between patients with and without diabetes (1.2% vs. 0.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The R-ZES is safe and effective in patients with diabetes. Long-term clinical data of patients with noninsulin-treated diabetes are equivalent to patients without diabetes. Patients with insulin-treated diabetes remain a higher risk subset. (The Medtronic RESOLUTE Clinical Trial; NCT00248079; Randomized, Two-arm, Non-inferiority Study Comparing Endeavor-Resolute Stent With Abbot Xience-V Stent [RESOLUTE-AC]; NCT00617084; The Medtronic RESOLUTE US Clinical Trial (R-US); NCT00726453; RESOLUTE International Registry: Evaluation of the Resolute Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent System in a 'Real-World' Patient Population [R-Int]; NCT00752128; RESOLUTE Japan-The Clinical Evaluation of the MDT-4107 Drug-Eluting Coronary Stent [RJ]; NCT00927940).

The SPIRIT V diabetic study: a randomized clinical evaluation of the XIENCE V everolimus-eluting stent vs the TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent in diabetic patients with de novo coronary artery lesions

BACKGROUND

Diabetic patients respond less favorably to revascularization and have poorer long-term outcomes. Our main aim was to evaluate the angiographic efficacy of XIENCE V (everolimus-eluting stent, or EES) in diabetic patients compared with TAXUS Liberté (paclitaxel-eluting stent, or PES).

METHODS

The SPIRIT V Diabetic Study was a prospective, single-blind, randomized study that enrolled 324 diabetic (insulin and non-insulin dependent) patients at 28 sites in Europe and Asia Pacific. Randomization was 2:1 between EES (n = 218) and PES (n = 106). The primary end point was sequential noninferiority and superiority of EES for in-stent late loss at 9 months. Secondary clinical end points included stent thrombosis, death, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rates up to 1 year.

RESULTS

Everolimus-eluting stent was superior to PES for in-stent late loss at 9 months (0.19 mm vs 0.39 mm, respectively; P(superiority) = .0001). The composite rate of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization was the same in the 2 groups at 1 year (16.3% vs 16.4%). No stent thromboses (Academic Research Consortium definite and probable) were seen through 1 year with EES compared with 2 of 104 (2%) with PES (P = .11).

CONCLUSION

In this prospective, randomized trial in a high-risk group of diabetic patients, implantation of EES compared with PES resulted in significantly better inhibition of intimal hyperplasia with a comparable safety outcome.

Consensus on: Screening and therapy of coronary heart disease in diabetic patients

The screening and best treatment for coronary heart disease in diabetic patients is still a matter of debate. For this reason the main Italian scientific societies dealing with diabetes and cardiovascular diseases have tried to finalize a document providing shared recommendations based on the available evidence on : 1) how and who to screen for coronary heart disease, 2) methodologies for the characterization of existing coronary heart disease 3) evaluation of the optimal treatment of cardiovascular risk factors and 4) appropriate revascularization procedures. For each of these points, the levels of evidence and strength of recommendations used in the Italian Standard of Care were adopted.

Comparison of outcomes for patients receiving drug-eluting versus bare metal stents for non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

The outcomes for patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare metal stents (BMSs) have been compared in many studies for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. However, little is known about the relative outcomes for patients with non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI). The aim of the present study was to compare the NSTEMI outcomes for PCI with DESs and BMSs. New York's PCI registry was used to propensity-match 4,776 pairs of patients with NSTEMI who had received DESs and BMSs from January 1, 2003 to December 31, 2007. These patients were followed up through December 31, 2008 to test for differences in mortality, target vessel revascularization, and total repeat revascularization. The outcomes were also compared for various patient subsets. At a median follow-up period of 3.68 years, the patients receiving DESs had significantly lower mortality (16.58% vs 14.52%, difference 2.06%, p<0.001), target vessel revascularization (13.08% vs 11.04%, p=0.009), and total repeat revascularization (22.16% vs 18.77%, p<0.001). The patients receiving paclitaxel-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents both experienced superior outcomes compared to patients receiving BMSs. The patients receiving DESs had significantly lower mortality rates than their propensity-matched counterparts receiving BMSs when they were ≥65 years (difference 2.29%, p=0.01) and male (difference 2.77%, p=0.003). In conclusion, patients with NSTEMI undergoing PCI experienced lower 4-year mortality, target vessel revascularization, and repeat revascularization rates when they had received DESs than when they had received BMSs, and patients who were >65 years old, and men received notable benefits.

Temporal changes in the outcomes of patients with diabetes mellitus undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute dynamic registry

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at higher risk for adverse outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS

To determine whether outcomes have improved over time, we analyzed data from 2,838 consecutive patients with medically treated DM, including 1,066 patients (37.6%) treated with insulin, in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry undergoing PCI registered in waves 1 (1997-1998), 2 (1999), 3 (2001-2002), 4 (2004), and 5 (2006). We compared baseline demographics and 1-year outcomes in the overall cohort and in analyses stratified by recruitment wave and insulin use.

RESULTS

Crude mortality rates by chronological wave were 9.5%, 12.5%, 8.9%, 11.6%, and 6.6% (P value(trend) = .33) among those treated with insulin and, respectively, 9.7%, 6.5%, 4.1%, 5.4%, and 4.7% (P value(trend) = .006) among patients treated with oral agents,. The adjusted hazard ratios of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and overall major adverse cardiovascular events (death, MI, revascularization) in insulin-treated patients with DM in waves 2 to 5 as compared with wave 1 were either higher or the same. In contrast, the similar adjusted hazard ratios for oral agent-treated patients with DM were either similar or lower.

CONCLUSIONS

Significant improvements over time in adverse events by 1 year were detected in patients with DM treated with oral agents. In insulin-treated diabetic patients, despite lower rates of repeat revascularization over time, death and MI following PCI have not significantly improved. These findings underscore the need for continued efforts at optimizing outcomes among patients with DM undergoing PCI, especially those requiring insulin treatment.

Comparison of outcomes in patients with insulin-dependent versus non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus receiving drug-eluting stents (from the first phase of the prospective multicenter German DES.DE registry)

Drug-eluting stents have been effective in randomized controlled trials, but their safety and efficacy in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes has not been well studied. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics and in-hospital and follow-up events were recorded for enrolled patients. From October 2005 and October 2006, 581 patients with insulin-dependent diabetes and 1,078 with non-insulin-dependent diabetes treated with sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents were enrolled at 98 sites. The composite of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, defined as major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events, as well as target vessel revascularization was used as the primary end point. Multiple logistic regression analysis was used to adjust for confounding parameters. Baseline clinical characteristics were more severe in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes, whereas descriptive characteristics were not unique. At 1-year follow-up, the comparison between the 2 groups revealed significantly higher rates of overall death (7.4% vs 4.6%, p <0.05), target vessel revascularization (15.1% vs 10.4%, p <0.05), and overall stent thrombosis (6.5% vs 4.1%, p <0.05) for insulin-dependent patients, while rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were not significantly different (12.8% vs 9.9%, p = 0.09). These results persisted even after risk adjustment for heterogenous baseline characteristics of the 2 groups. In conclusion, the data generated from the German Drug-Eluting Stent (DES.DE) registry revealed that even with drug-eluting stents, the annual risk for death, target vessel revascularization, and thrombotic events remains higher in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes compared to those with non-insulin-dependent diabetes.

Impact of insulin-treated diabetes and hemodialysis on long-term clinical outcomes following sirolimus-eluting stent deployment. Insights from a sub-study of the Cypher Stent Japan Post-Marketing Surveillance(Cypher J-PMS) Registry

BACKGROUND

Long-term clinical outcomes of diabetes mellitus (DM) patients who underwent drug-eluting stent deployment has not well investigated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 2,050 cases were enrolled consecutively from 50 sites in Japan into the Cypher stent Japan Post-Marketing Surveillance (Cypher J-PMS) registry, and the 3-year outcomes of DM patients were analyzed. Subjects were divided into 2 groups based on the treatment of DM (insulin-treated diabetes (IT) group, n=207; and non insulin-treated diabetes (NIT) group, n=682). Major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates in the IT group and the NIT group were 26.0% and 14.5% at 3 years, respectively (P<0.001). There were no significant differences in stent thrombosis rates (definite and probable by Academic Research Consortium (ARC) definition) (0% and 1.08%, respectively). Multivariate analysis suggested that hemodialysis and insulin-treated DM were independent predictors for MACE, and insulin-treated DM, hemodialysis and long lesions were strong independent predictors for target-lesion revascularization (TLR).

CONCLUSIONS

Hemodialysis and insulin-treated DM were strong independent predictors of mortality and TLR in DM patients. These results might suggest that special attention to patients with hemodialysis and insulin-treated DM is warranted in the setting of sirolimus-eluting stent deployment for DM patients.

Evolution of percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with diabetes: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored PTCA (1985-1986) and Dynamic (1997-2006) Registries

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of successive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) modalities with balloon angioplasty (BA), bare-metal stent (BMS), drug-eluting stents (DES), and pharmacotherapy over the last 3 decades with outcomes among patients with diabetes in routine clinical practice.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We examined outcomes in 1,846 patients with diabetes undergoing de novo PCI in the multicenter, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute-sponsored 1985-1986 Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty (PTCA) Registry and 1997-2006 Dynamic Registry. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate the adjusted risk of events (death/myocardial infarction [MI], repeat revascularization) over 1 year.

RESULTS

Cumulative event rates for postdischarge (31-365 days) death/MI were 8% by BA, 7% by BMS, and 7% by DES use (P = 0.76) and for repeat revascularization were 19, 13, and 9% (P < 0.001), respectively. Multivariable analysis showed a significantly lower risk of repeat revascularization with DES use when compared with the use of BA (hazard ratio [HR] 0.41 [95% CI 0.29-0.58]) and BMS (HR 0.55 [95% CI 0.39-0.76]). After further adjustment for discharge medications, the lower risk for death/MI was not statistically significant for DES when compared with BA.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with diabetes undergoing PCI, the use of DES is associated with a reduced need for repeat revascularization when compared with BA or BMS use. The associated death/MI benefit observed with the DES versus the BA group may well be due to greater use of pharmacotherapy.

Predictors of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention using bare-metal stents: a comparison between patients with and without dysglycemia

The objective of this study was to identify intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), angiographic and metabolic parameters related to restenosis in patients with dysglycemia. Seventy consecutive patients (77 lesions) selected according to inclusion and exclusion criteria were evaluated by the oral glucose tolerance test and the determination of insulinemia after a successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a bare-metal stent. The degree of insulin resistance was calculated by the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Six-month IVUS and angiogram follow-up were performed. Thirty-nine patients (55.7%) had dysglycemia. The restenosis rate in the dysglycemic group was 37.2 vs 23.5% in the euglycemic group (P = 0.299). The predictors of restenosis using bivariate analysis were reference vessel diameter (RVD): pound2.93 mm (RR = 0.54; 95%CI = 0.05-0.78; P = 0.048), stent area (SA): <8.91 mm(2) (RR = 0.66; 95%CI = 0.24-0.85; P = 0.006), stent volume (SV): <119.75 mm(3) (RR = 0.74; 95%CI = 0.38-0.89; P = 0.0005), HOMA-IR: >2.063 (RR = 0.44; 95%CI = 0.14-0.64; P = 0.027), and fasting plasma glucose (FPG): < or =108.8 mg/dL (RR = 0.53; 95%CI = 0.13-0.75; P = 0.046). SV was an independent predictor of restenosis by multivariable analysis. Dysglycemia is a common clinical condition in patients submitted to PCI. The degree of insulin resistance, FPG, RVD, SA, and SV were correlated with restenosis. SV was inversely correlated with an independent predictor of restenosis in patients treated with a bare-metal stent.

Evidence-based management of patients undergoing PCI: stent controversies

Drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis, particularly in uncomplicated lesions. Despite limited on-label indications, drug-eluting stents have been universally adopted. However, there have been early sporadic reports of stent thrombosis. This article will review the risk factors for stent thrombosis and will briefly discuss recent trials comparing the safety, efficacy, and mortality for bare-metal and drug-eluting stents.

Paclitaxel-eluting versus sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetes mellitus: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is a powerful predictor of adverse events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis rates compared with bare metal stents; however, controversy remains regarding which drug-eluting stents provides greater benefit in patients with diabetes. Accordingly, we compared the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) among diabetic patients in a contemporary registry.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry, we evaluated 2-year outcomes of diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions with SES (n=677) and PES (n=328). Clinical and demographic characteristics, including age, body mass index, insulin use, left ventricular function, and aspirin/clopidogrel use postprocedure, did not differ significantly between the groups except that PES-treated patients had a greater frequency of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. At the 2-year follow-up, no significant differences were observed between PES and SES with regard to safety or efficacy end points. PES- and SES-treated patients had similar rates of death (10.7% versus 8.2%, P=0.20), death and myocardial infarction (14.9% versus 13.6%, P=0.55), repeat revascularization (14.8% versus 17.8%, P=0.36), and stent thrombosis (1.3% versus 1.3%, P=0.95). After adjustment, no significant differences between the 2 stent types in any outcome were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

PES and SES are equally efficacious and have similar safety profiles in diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions in clinical practice.