Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon for the Treatment of Drug-Eluting Stent Restenosis 3-Year Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial

AbstractObjectivesThis study sought to investigate the long-term comparative efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-eluting balloon (PEB), paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES), or balloon angioplasty (BA) for the treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis.BackgroundThe optimal treatment of drug-eluting stent restenosis remains unknown. Although PEB has shown encouraging results, the long-term clinical efficacy and safety of PEB remains poorly defined.MethodsA total of 402 patients with clinically significant restenosis in limus-eluting stents were randomly assigned to receive PEB (n = 137), PES (n = 131), or BA (n = 134). For this analysis, PEB versus PES and PEB versus BA were compared. The primary efficacy and safety endpoints were target lesion revascularization and the composite of death or myocardial infarction.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 3 years, the risk of target lesion revascularization was comparable with PEB versus PES (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.91 to 2.33; p = 0.11) and lower with PEB versus BA (HR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34 to 0.74; p < 0.001). The risk of death/myocardial infarction tended to be lower with PEB versus PES (HR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.28 to 1.07; p = 0.08), due to a lower risk of death (HR: 0.38, 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.87; p = 0.02). The risk of death/myocardial infarction was similar with PEB versus BA (HR: 0.96, 95% CI: 0.46 to 2.0; p = 0.91).ConclusionsAt 3 years, the use of PEB as compared with PES to treat patients with limus-eluting stent restenosis has similar efficacy and safety. PEB remains superior to BA. The sustained efficacy without trade-off in safety supports the role of PEB as treatment option for patients with drug-eluting stent restenosis. (Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Drug Eluting Stent In-Stent Restenosis: 3 Treatment Approaches [ISAR-DESIRE 3]; NCT00987324

Impact of Dabigatran versus Phenprocoumon on ADP Induced Platelet Aggregation in Patients with Atrial Fibrillation with or without Concomitant Clopidogrel Therapy (the Dabi-ADP-1 and Dabi-ADP-2 Trials)

Background. A relevant number of patients receive triple therapy with clopidogrel, aspirin, and oral anticoagulation. Clopidogrel’s efficacy on ADP induced platelet function may be influenced by concomitant antithrombotic therapies. Data regarding the effect of dabigatran on platelet function is limited to in vitro studies and healthy individuals. Methods. The “Dabi-ADP-1” and “Dabi-ADP-2” trials randomized patients with atrial fibrillation to either dabigatran or phenprocoumon for a 2-week period. In Dabi-ADP-1 (n=70) patients with clopidogrel therapy were excluded and in Dabi-ADP-2 (n=46) patients had to be treated concomitantly with clopidogrel. The primary endpoint was ADP-induced platelet aggregation between dabigatran and phenprocoumon at 14 days. Secondary endpoints were ADPtest HS-, TRAP-, and COL-induced platelet aggregation. Results. There was no significant difference regarding the primary endpoint between both groups in either trial (Dabi-ADP-1: Dabigatran: 846 [650–983] AU × min versus phenprocoumon: 839 [666–1039] AU × min, P=0.90 and Dabi-ADP-2: 326 [268–462] versus 350 [214–535], P=0.70) or regarding the secondary endpoints, ADPtest HS-, TRAP-, and COL-induced platelet aggregation. Conclusion. Dabigatran as compared to phenprocoumon has no impact on ADP-induced platelet aggregation in atrial fibrillation patients neither with nor without concomitant clopidogrel therapy

Six Versus Twelve Months Clopidogrel Therapy After Drug-Eluting Stenting in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndrome: An ISAR-SAFE Study Subgroup Analysis

In patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) the optimal duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation remains unclear. At 6 months after intervention, patients receiving clopidogrel were randomly assigned to either a further 6-month period of placebo or clopidogrel. The primary composite endpoint was death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or major bleeding 9 months after randomization. The ISAR-SAFE trial was terminated early due to low event rates and slow recruitment. 1601/4000 (40.0%) patients presented with ACS and were randomized to 6 (n = 794) or 12 months (n = 807) clopidogrel. The primary endpoint occurred in 14 patients (1.8%) receiving 6 months of clopidogrel and 17 patients (2.2%) receiving 12 months;hazard ratio (HR) 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.41-1.68, P = 0.60. There were 2 (0.3%) cases of stent thrombosis in each group;HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.14-7.09, P = >0.99. Major bleeding occurred in 3 patients (0.4%) receiving 6 months clopidogrel and 5 (0.6%) receiving 12 months;HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.15-2.49, P = 0.49. There was no significant difference in net clinical outcomes after DES implantation in ACS patients treated with 6 versus 12 months clopidogrel. Ischaemic and bleeding events were low beyond 6-months

Impact of design of coronary stents and length of dual antiplatelet therapies on ischaemic and bleeding events: a network meta-analysis of 64 randomized controlled trials and 102 735 patients

Aims The differential impact on ischaemic and bleeding events of the type of drug-eluting stent [durable polymer stents [DES] vs. biodegradable polymer stents vs. bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS)] and length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remains to be defined. ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing different types of DES and/or DAPT durations were selected. The primary and results endpoint was Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) [a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization]. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) and single components of MACE were secondary endpoints. The arms of interest were: BRS with 12 months of DAPT (12mDAPT), biodegradable polymer stent with 12mDAPT, durable polymer stent [everolimus-eluting (EES), zotarolimus-eluting (ZES)] with 12mDAPT, EES/ ZES with <12 months of DAPT, and EES/ZES with >12 months of DAPT (DAPT > 12 m). Sixty-four studies with 150 arms and 102 735 patients were included. After a median follow-up of 20 months, MACE rates were similar in the different arms of interest. EES/ZES with DAPT > 12 m reported a lower incidence of MI than the other groups, while BRS showed a higher rate of ST when compared to EES/ZES, irrespective of DAPT length. A higher risk of major bleedings was observed for DAPT > 12 m as compared to shorter DAPT. ................................................................................................................................................................................................... Conclusion Durable and biodegradable polymer stents along with BRS report a similar rate of MACE irrespective of DAPT length. Fewer MI are observed with EES/ZES with DAPT > 12 m, while a higher rate of ST is reported for BRS when compared to EES/ZES, independently from DAPT length. Stent type may partially affect the outcome to- gether with DAPT length

Validation of the DAPT score in patients randomized to 6 or 12 months clopidogrel after predominantly second-generation drug-eluting stents

The DAPT score is a recently-proposed decision tool for guiding optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). It showed modest accuracy in prior derivation and validation cohorts of patients with >= 12 months DAPT. This study was aimed to evaluate the validity of the DAPT score in a cohort of patients with 6 or 12 months DAPT after implantation of predominantly second-generation drug-eluting stents. We analyzed data of patients enrolled in the ISAR-SAFE trial. Patients were classified into low (= 2) DAPT score groups. Primary ischaemic (all-cause death, myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis or stroke) and bleeding (TIMI major or minor) outcomes were analyzed in the low and high DAPT score groups. Data of 3976 patients were available for DAPT score calculation. 2407 patients (60.5 %) were classified in the low DAPT score group and 1569 patients (39.5%) in the high DAPT score group. In the low DAPT score group there were no significant differences between 6 and 12 months DAPT regarding ischaemic (1.0% vs. 1.4%, HR=0.74, 95% CI, 0.35-1.57; p=0.43) or bleeding outcomes (0.3 % vs. 0.8%, HR=0.44, 95 % CI, 0.13-1.42; p=0.17). In the high DAPT score group there were also no significant differences between 6 and 12 months DAPT regarding ischaemic (1.9% vs. 1.8%, HR=1.02, 95 % CI, 0.49-2.14; p=0.96) or bleeding (0.3 % vs. 0.5%, HR=0.51, 95 % CI, 0.09-2.78; p=0.44) outcomes. In conclusion, the DAPT score failed to show a differential treatment effect in patients receiving 6 or 12 months DAPT after contemporary drug-eluting stent implantation