Sirolimus-eluting versus uncoated stents in acute myocardial infarction.

BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-eluting stents reduce rates of restenosis and reintervention, as compared with uncoated stents. Data are limited regarding the safety and efficacy of such stents in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. METHODS: We performed a single-blind, multicenter, prospectively randomized trial to compare sirolimus-eluting stents with uncoated stents in primary PCI for acute myocardial infarction with ST-segment elevation. The trial included 712 patients at 48 medical centers. The primary end point was target-vessel failure at 1 year after the procedure, defined as target-vessel-related death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or target-vessel revascularization. A follow-up angiographic substudy was performed at 8 months among 174 patients from selected centers. RESULTS: The rate of the primary end point was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group than in the uncoated-stent group (7.3% vs. 14.3%, P=0.004). This reduction was driven by a decrease in the rate of target-vessel revascularization (5.6% and 13.4%, respectively; P<0.001). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the rate of death (2.3% and 2.2%, respectively; P=1.00), reinfarction (1.1% and 1.4%, respectively; P=1.00), or stent thrombosis (3.4% and 3.6%, respectively; P=1.00). The degree of neointimal proliferation, as assessed by the mean (+/-SD) in-stent late luminal loss, was significantly lower in the sirolimus-stent group (0.14+/-0.49 mm, vs. 0.83+/-0.52 mm in the uncoated stent group; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Among selected patients with acute myocardial infarction, the use of sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced the rate of target-vessel revascularization at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00232830 [ClinicalTrials.gov].)

Aortic valvuloplasty of calcific aortic stenosis with monofoil and trefoil balloon catheters: practical considerations

In order to evaluate the relation between balloon design (monofoil, trefoil) and valvular configuration, experimental aortic valvuloplasty was performed in four post-mortem hearts with calcific aortic sten

Modifying effect of dual antiplatelet therapy on incidence of stent thrombosis according to implanted drug-eluting stent type

Aim To investigate the putative modifying effect of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) use on the incidence of stent thrombosis at 3 years in patients randomized to Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) or Cypher sirolimus-eluting stent (C-SES). Methods and results Of 8709 patients in PROTECT, 4357 were randomized to E-ZES and 4352 to C-SES. Aspirin was to be given indefinitely, and clopidogrel/ticlopidine for ≥3 months or up to 12 months after implantation. Main outcome measures were definite or probable stent thrombosis at 3 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was applied, with stent type, DAPT, and their interaction as the main outcome determinants. Dual antiplatelet therapy adherence remained the same in the E-ZES and C-SES groups (79.6% at 1 year, 32.8% at 2 years, and 21.6% at 3 years). We observed a statistically significant (P = 0.0052) heterogeneity in treatment effect of stent type in relation to DAPT. In the absence of DAPT, stent thrombosis was lower with E-ZES vs. C-SES (adjusted hazard ratio 0.38, 95% confidence interval 0.19, 0.75; P = 0.0056). In the presence of DAPT, no difference was found (1.18; 0.79, 1.77; P = 0.43). Conclusion A strong interaction was observed between drug-eluting stent type and DAPT use, most likely prompted by the vascular healing response induced by the implanted DES system. These results suggest that the incidence of stent thrombosis in DES trials should not be evaluated independently of DAPT use, and the optimal duration of DAPT will likely depend upon stent type (Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT00476957

Anatomy of coronary disease in diabetic patients: an explanation for poorer outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention and potential target for intervention

There are over 1.3 million known diabetic patients in the UK and a similar number who have the disease undiagnosed. Over 90% have non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus usually characterised by insulin resistance and adult onset. Over half of all diabetic patients die of coronary disease and account for over a fifth of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) revascularisation procedures. Despite recent therapeutic advances such as new antiplatelet treatments and drug eluting stents, outcomes for diabetic patients after PCI are still significantly worse than for non-diabetic patients. This article summarises what is known about the pattern and severity of diabetic coronary disease, what mechanisms are responsible for these differences, and whether this information can help explain the poorer prognosis for these patients after PCI and form the basis of interventions to improve outcome

Can the published cost analysis data for delivery of an efficient primary angioplasty service be applied to the modern National Health Service?

Despite the clinical benefits and safety profile of primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the health care system in the UK has been slow to adopt this strategy as first line management for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction. The cost implications of a 24 hour a day, seven days per week primary PCI service and the absence of an existing efficient working model within the National Health Service (NHS) framework are two of the major deterrents for provision of such a service. The existent cost effectiveness data for primary PCI is critically reviewed, with particular reference to the NHS