Two-year angiographic and intravascular ultrasound follow-up after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents in human coronary arteries

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stenting have been demonstrated, but the outcome of patients treated with this novel technology beyond the first year remains unknown. We sought to evaluate the angiographic, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), and clinical outcomes of patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents 2 years after implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: This study included 30 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting Bx Velocity stenting (slow release [SR], n=15, and fast release [FR], n=15) in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Twenty-eight patients underwent 2-year angiographic and IVUS follow-up. No deaths occurred during the study period. In-stent late loss was slightly greater in the FR group (0.28+/-0.4 mm) than in the SR group (-0.09+/-0.23 mm, P=0.007). No patient had in-stent restenosis. At 2-year follow-up, only 1 patient (FR group) had a 52% diameter stenosis within the lesion segment, which required repeat revascularization. The target-vessel revascularization rate for the entire cohort was 10% (3/30) at 2 years. All other patients had < or =35% diameter stenosis. Angiographic lumen loss at the stent edges was also minimal (in-lesion late loss was 0.33+/-0.42 mm [FR] and 0.13+/-0.29 mm [SR]). In-stent neointimal hyperplasia volume, as detected by IVUS, remained minimal after 2 years (FR= 9.90+/-9 mm3 and SR=10.35+/-9.3 mm3). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting Bx Velocity stents 2 years after implantation in humans. In-stent lumen dimensions remained essentially unchanged at 2-year follow-up in the 2 groups, although angiographic lumen loss was slightly higher in the FR group. Restenosis "catch-up" was not found in our patient population

Lack of Neointimal Proliferation After Implantation of Sirolimus-Coated Stents in Human Coronary Arteries: A Quantitative Coronary Angiography and Three-Dimensional Intravascular Ultrasound Study

BACKGROUND: Restenosis remains an important limitation of interventional cardiology. Therefore, we aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of sirolimus (a cell-cycle inhibitor)-coated BX Velocity stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty patients with angina pectoris were electively treated with 2 different formulations of sirolimus-coated stents (slow release [SR], n=15, and fast release [FR], n=15). All stents were successfully delivered, and patients were discharged without clinical complications. Independent core laboratories analyzed angiographic and 3D volumetric intravascular ultrasound data (immediately after procedure and at 4-month follow-up). Eight-month clinical follow-up was obtained for all patients. There was minimal neointimal hyperplasia in both groups (11.0+/-3.0% in the SR group and 10.4+/-3.0% in the FR group, P:=NS) by ultrasound and quantitative coronary angiography (in-stent late loss, 0.09+/-0.3 mm [SR] and -0.02+/-0.3 mm [FR]; in-lesion late loss, 0.16+/-0.3 mm [SR] and -0.1+/-0.3 mm [FR]). No in-stent or edge restenosis (diameter stenosis >or=50%) was observed. No major clinical events (stent thrombosis, repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction, or death) had occurred by 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: The implantation of sirolimus-coated BX Velocity stents is feasible and safe and elicits minimal neointimal proliferation. Additional placebo-controlled trials are required to confirm these promising results

Sirolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of in-stent restenosis: a quantitative coronary angiography and three-dimensional intravascular ultrasound study

BACKGROUND: We have previously reported the safety and effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. The present investigation explored the potential of this technology to treat in-stent restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five patients with in-stent restenosis were successfully treated with the implantation of 1 or 2 sirolimus-eluting Bx VELOCITY stents in Sao Paulo, Brazil. Nine patients received 2 stents (1.4 stents per lesion). Angiographic and volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) images were obtained after the procedure and at 4 and 12 months. All vessels were patent at the time of 12-month angiography. Angiographic late loss averaged 0.07+/-0.2 mm in-stent and -0.05+/-0.3 mm in-lesion at 4 months, and 0.36+/-0.46 mm in-stent and 0.16+/-0.42 mm in-lesion after 12 months. No patient had in-stent or stent margin restenosis at 4 months, and only one patient developed in-stent restenosis at 1-year follow-up. Intimal hyperplasia by 3-dimensional IVUS was 0.92+/-1.9 mm(3) at 4 months and 2.55+/-4.9 mm(3) after 1 year. Percent volume obstruction was 0.81+/-1.7% and 1.76+/-3.4% at the 4- and 12-month follow-up, respectively. There was no evidence of stent malapposition either acutely or in the follow-up IVUS images, and there were no deaths, stent thromboses, or repeat revascularizations. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the safety and the potential utility of sirolimus-eluting Bx VELOCITY stents for the treatment of in-stent restenosis

Sustained suppression of neointimal proliferation by sirolimus-eluting stents: one-year angiographic and intravascular ultrasound follow-up

BACKGROUND: We have previously reported a virtual absence of neointimal hyperplasia 4 months after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents. The aim of the present investigation was to determine whether these results are sustained over a period of 1 year. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-five patients with de novo coronary disease were successfully treated with the implantation of a single sirolimus-eluting Bx VELOCITY stent in Sao Paulo, Brazil (n=30, 15 fast release [group I, GI] and 15 slow release [GII]) and Rotterdam, The Netherlands (15 slow release, GIII). Angiographic and volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) follow-up was obtained at 4 and 12 months (GI and GII) and 6 months (GIII). In-stent minimal lumen diameter and percent diameter stenosis remained essentially unchanged in all groups (at 12 months, GI and GII; at 6 months, GIII). Follow-up in-lesion minimal lumen diameter was 2.28 mm (GIII), 2.32 mm (GI), and 2.48 mm (GII). No patient approached the >/=50% diameter stenosis at 1 year by angiography or IVUS assessment, and no edge restenosis was observed. Neointimal hyperplasia, as detected by IVUS, was virtually absent at 6 months (2+/-5% obstruction volume, GIII) and at 12 months (GI=2+/-5% and GII=2+/-3%). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates a sustained suppression of neointimal proliferation by sirolimus-eluting Bx VELOCITY stents 1 year after implantation

Prevalence, predictors, and prognostic implications of residual impairment of functional capacity after transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Background: Patients with degenerative aortic stenosis (AS) referred for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) typically have advanced cardiac and vascular adverse remodeling and multiple comorbidities and, therefore, might not recover a normal functional capacity after valve replacement. We sought to investigate the prevalence, the predictors, and the prognostic impact of residual impairment of functional capacity after TAVI. Methods and results: Out of 790 patients undergoing TAVI with impaired functional capacity (NYHA II–IV

Intravascular ultrasound findings in the multicenter, randomized, double-blind RAVEL (RAndomized study with the sirolimus-eluting VElocity balloon- expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery Lesions) trial

BACKGROUND: The goal of this intravascular ultrasound investigation was to provide a more detailed morphological analysis of the local biological effects of the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the RAVEL trial, 238 patients with single de novo lesions were randomized to receive either an 18-mm sirolimus-eluting stent (Bx VELOCITY stent, Cordis) or an uncoated stent (Bx VELOCITY stent). In a subset of 95 patients (sirolimus-eluting stent=48, uncoated stent=47), motorized intravascular ultrasound pullback (0.5 mm/s) was performed at a 6-month follow-up. Stent volumes, total vessel volumes, and plaque-behind-stent volumes were comparable. However, the difference in neointimal hyperplasia (2+/-5 versus 37+/-28 mm3) and percent of volume obstruction (1+/-3% versus 29+/-20%) at 6 months between the 2 groups was highly significant (P<0.001), emphasizing the nearly complete abolition of the proliferative process inside the drug-eluting stent. Analysis of the proximal and distal edge volumes showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in external elastic membrane or lumen and plaque volume at the proximal and distal edges. There was also no evidence of intrastent thrombosis or persisting dissection at the stent edges. Although there was a higher incidence of incomplete stent apposition

Mechanical performance and healing patterns of the novel sirolimus-eluting bioresorbable Fantom scaffold: 6-month and 9-month follow-up by optical coherence tomography in the FANTOM II study

Objectives We aimed to evaluate the mechanical properties and healing patterns 6 and 9 months after implantation of the sirolimus-eluting Fantom bioresorbable scaffold (BRS). Background The Fantom BRS (Reva Medical, San Diego, USA) has differentiating properties including radiopacity, strut thickness of 125 µm, high expansion capacity and has demonstrated favourable mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes. Methods and results FANTOM II was a prospective, single arm study with implantation of the Fantom BRS in 240 patients with stable angina pectoris. Guidance by optical coherence tomography (OCT) was encouraged and was repeated at 6-month (cohort A) or 9-month follow-up (cohort B). Matched baseline and follow-up OCT recordings were available in 152 patients. In-scaffold mean lumen area in cohort A was 6.8±1.7mm2 and 5.7±1.4mm2 at baseline and follow-up (p<0.0001) and was 7.2±1.6mm2 and 5.6±1.4mm2 in cohort B (p<0.0001). Mean scaffold area remained stable from 7.1±1.5mm2 at baseline to 7.2±1.4mm2 at 6 months (p=0.12), and from 7.4±1.5mm2 to 7.3±1.4mm2 at 9 months. Strut malapposition was median 0.8 (IQR 0.0;3.5)% and 1.8 (IQR 0.3;6.0)% at baseline and was 0.0 (IQR 0.0;0.0)% in both groups at 6-month and 9-month follow-up. Strut tissue coverage was 98.1 (IQR 95.9;99.4)% at 6 months and 98.9 (IQR 98.3;100.0)% at 9 months. Conclusions The novel Fantom BRS had favourable healing patterns at 6-month and 9-month follow-up as malapposition was effectively resolved and strut coverage was almost complete. The scaffold remained stable through follow-up with no signs of systematic late recoil

Comparison of clinical outcomes between Magmaris and Orsiro drug eluting stent at 12 months: Pooled patient level analysis from BIOSOLVE II–III and BIOFLOW II trials

Background: The aim of this study was to compare the 12-month clinical outcomes of patients treated with Magmaris or Orsiro. Second generation drug-eluting absorbable metal scaffold Magmaris (Dreams 2G) has proved to be safe and effective in the BIOSOLVE-II study. Similarly, biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent, Orsiro has shown notable clinical results even in all-comer populations. Methods: Magmaris group patients were taken from the BIOSOLVE-II and BIOSOLVE-III trials, while the patients from Orsiro group were enrolled in BIOFLOW-II trial. The primary outcome was explored using a time-to-event assessment of the unadjusted clinical outcomes for target lesion failure (TLF) at 12 months, followed by a multivariate analysis adjusting for all the significantly different covariates between the groups. Results: The study population consisted of 482 patients (521 lesions), 184 patients (189 lesions) in Magmaris group and 298 patients (332 lesions) in Orsiro group. The mean age was 65.5 ± 10.8 and 62.7 ± 10.4 years in Magmaris and Orsiro groups, respectively (p = 0.005). Magmaris and Orsiro unadjusted TLF rates were 6.0 and 6.4% with no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.869). In the multivariate analysis, there were no meaningful differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups. Finally, none of the groups presented device thrombosis cases at 12 months. Conclusion: At 12 months there were no significant differences between Magmaris and Orsiro groups neither in the unadjusted assessment nor in the multivariate analysis for target lesion failure. These results should be taken as hypothesis generating and may warrant a head to head comparison on a randomized fashion

DESyne novolimus-eluting coronary stent is superior to Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent at five-year follow-up: Final results of the multicentre EXCELLA II randomised controlled trial

Aims: Newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to be superior to first-generation DES. Current-generation DES have zotarolimus, everolimus or biolimus as antiproliferative drugs. Novolimus, a metabolite of sirolimus, has been specifically developed to provide efficacy similar to currently available agents at a lower dose and thus requires a lower polymer load. We report the final five-year outcomes of the EXCELLA II trial comparing a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with a novolimus-eluting stent (NES). Methods and results: EXCELLA II is a prospective, multicentre, single-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial. Patients (n=210) with a maximum of two de novo lesions in two different epicardial vessels were randomised (2:1) to treatment with either NES (n=139) or ZES (n=71). At five-year follow-up, patients in the NES group had a significantly lower incidence of the patient-oriented (HR 0.53, 95% CI: 0.32-0.87, p=0.013) and device-oriented (HR 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17-0.83, p=0.011) composite endpoints. There was no difference in cardiac death and definite/probable stent thrombosis between the two groups; however, there was a trend towards reduction in myocardial infarction and repeat revascularisation in the NES group at five-year follow-up. Conclusions: At five-year follow-up, the incidence of device- and patient-oriented events was significantly lower in the NES group. Further studies, adequately powered for clinical outcomes, are warranted. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00792753