Complete versus incomplete revascularization in patients with multivessel disease undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents.

To investigate the long-term prognostic implications of complete versus incomplete revascularization in multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES). Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with MVD provides better outcomes when complete revascularization is achieved. There is a paucity of data on the outcomes of complete versus incomplete revascularization of MVD patients undergoing PCI, and currently there is no data available with DES. Patients with MVD undergoing PCI with DES (sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stent) were included. Comparisons of long-term outcomes between completely versus incompletely revascularized patients were made. The primary outcome measure was the composite of cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or any revascularization. Secondary endpoints were the components of the composite endpoint. A total of 508 patients were considered for this analysis: 212 (41.7%) and 296 (58.3%) had complete and incomplete revascularization, respectively. The median follow-up was 27.0 (interquartile range: 23.0-37.1) months. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, the hazard ratio (HR, 95% confidence interval) for complete revascularization was 0.43 (0.29-0.63, P < 0.0001) for the primary composite endpoint. Complete revascularization was associated with better outcomes for components of the composite endpoint: 0.37 (0.15-0.92, P = 0.03) for cardiac death, 0.34 (0.16-0.75 P = 0.008) for the composite of cardiac death or MI and 0.45 (0.29-0.69, P = 0.0003) for any repeat revascularization. This association was confirmed in a propensity-matched population. Complete revascularization with DES of MVD patients is associated with lower rates of long-term adverse events.

Tamburino C ，Angiolillo DJ ，Capranzano P ，Dimopoulos K ，La Manna A ，Barbagallo R ，Tagliareni F ，Mangiafico S ，Guzman LA ，Galassi AR ，Bass TA ... -  《-》

PCI versus CABG for multivessel coronary disease in diabetics.

To explore the clinical performance of a strategy of revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) in diabetic patients with multivessel disease (MVD) compared with coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), when it is based on clinical judgment. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major risk factor for poor outcome after PCI. However, PCI may result in better outcome if the choice of revascularization (PCI versus CABG) is based on the physician decision, rather than randomization. Limited experiences have compared revascularization by DES-PCI versus CABG in DM patients with MVD. From August 2004 to August 2005, 220 consecutive DM patients with MVD underwent DES-PCI (93) or CABG (127) at our Institution. The type of revascularization was dependent on patient and/or physician choice. Major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE) included death, myocardial infarction, repeat coronary revascularization, and stroke. Compared with PCI patients, CABG patients had higher prevalence of 3-vessel disease (P < 0.001), significant LAD involvement (P < 0.001), presence of total occlusions (P = 0.04), collateral circulation (P < 0.001). At 2-year follow-up, MACCE were not different between CABG group and DES-PCI group (OR 1.2; P = 0.6) and, only when the clinical judgment on the revascularization choice was excluded at propensity analysis, DES-PCI increased the risk of 24-month MACCE in total population (OR 1.8; P = 0.04). For patients with DM and MVD, a clinical judgment-based revascularization by DES-PCI is not associated with worse 2-year outcome compared with CABG.

Tarantini G ，Ramondo A ，Napodano M ，Favaretto E ，Gardin A ，Bilato C ，Nesseris G ，Tarzia V ，Cademartiri F ，Gerosa G ，Iliceto S ... -  《-》

Four-year clinical outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents compared to bare-metal stents for the percutaneous treatment of stable coronary artery disease.

There are limited data on the long-term safety and efficacy profile of coronary stent implantation in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We aimed to assess the 4-year clinical outcome in patients who received a bare-metal stent (BMS), sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) for the percutaneous treatment of stable angina in our center during 2000-2005. In the study period, a total of 2,449 consecutive patients (BMS = 1,005; SES = 373; and PES = 1071) underwent a PCI as part of three historical PCI-cohorts for stable angina and were routinely followed for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). At 4 years follow-up, 264 BMS patients (26.8%) had a MACE, compared to 75 SES patients (20.9%) and 199 PES patients (23.9%). Multivariate analysis showed that SES and PES were superior to BMS with respect to MACE [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.47-0.81; HR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.55-0.82, respectively]. The occurrence of MACE was significantly lower in the SES and PES population, primarily due to less target-vessel revascularization (TVR) procedures (HR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.37-0.75; HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.62-0.81, respectively). The occurrence of early, late, and very late stent thrombosis was equally rare with each stent type. There were no significant differences between SES and PES on death, myocardial infarction, TVR, and MACE. These findings suggest that SES and PES result in decreased TVR procedures and MACE compared to BMS at 4 years follow-up. SES or PES implantation should be the preferred choice over BMS for patients with stable CAD undergoing PCI.

Simsek C ，Onuma Y ，Magro M ，de Boer S ，Battes L ，van Domburg RT ，Boersma E ，Serruys PW ，Interventional Cardiologists of the Thoraxcenter (2000-2005) ... -  《-》

Long-term clinical outcomes of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for patients with unprotected left main coronary artery disease: analysis of the MAIN-COMPARE (revascularization for unprotected left main coronary artery stenosis: comparison of p

The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) among patients with unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) disease. There have been few comparisons of long-term outcomes among currently available drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of LMCA disease. A total of 858 consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA stenosis were treated with SES (n = 669) or PES (n = 189) between May 2003 and June 2006. Primary outcome was the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the 2 groups. During 3 years of follow-up, the adjusted risk of primary composite outcome was similar among the groups (SES vs. PES: 25.8% vs. 25.7%, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.64 to 1.41, p = 0.79). The 2 groups also showed a comparable adjusted rate of each component of outcome: death (9.1% vs. 11.0%, HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.47 to 1.80, p = 0.82), MI (8.1% vs. 8.0%, HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.43 to 1.48, p = 0.47), and TVR (12.1% vs. 10.6%, HR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.53 to 2.29, p = 0.81). The 3-year rates of definite or probable stent thrombosis were 0.6% in the SES group and 1.6% in the PES group (adjusted p = 0.18). In consecutive patients with unprotected LMCA disease undergoing DES implantation, SES and PES showed similar long-term clinical outcomes in terms of death, MI, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis.

Lee JY ，Park DW ，Yun SC ，Lee SW ，Kim YH ，Lee CW ，Hong MK ，Park SW ，Park SJ ... -  《-》

Long-term clinical outcomes after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for treatment of restenosis within bare-metal versus drug-eluting stents.

Sirolimus-eluting stents have been increasingly used for treatment of restenosis after implantation of bare metal stents (BMSs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs), but little is known regarding their long-term outcomes. We compared long-term clinical outcomes in 295 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents for post-BMS (n = 224) vs. post-DES (n = 71) restenosis. All follow-ups were at least 12 months, and the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except that mean lesion length (28.0 +/- 16.2 vs. 19.5 +/- 13.6, P < 0.01) and mean stented length (35.4 +/- 19.2 vs. 25.7 +/- 14.7, P < 0.01) were significantly longer in the post-BMS group. Major in-hospital complications occurred in 2 patients. During a mean follow-up of 31.3 +/- 11.1 months, there were 9 deaths (4 cardiac, 5 noncardiac), 3 nonfatal MIs, and 25 TLRs. Late stent thrombosis was documented in 2 patients (1 in each group). There were no between group differences in cardiac or total deaths, but there were trends toward less frequent cardiac death/MI or TLR in the post-BMS group. The cumulative probability of MACE-free survival was significantly better for the post-BMS group (95.0% +/- 1.5% vs. 87.3% +/- 4.0% at 1 year; 93.0% +/- 1.7% vs. 81.0% +/- 5.2% at 2 years; Log Rank P = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, post-DES restenosis was the only significant predictor of MACE (OR 3.29, 95%CI 1.13-9.61, P = 0.029). Sirolimus-eluting stents were effective for treatment of in-stent restenosis, but post-DES restenosis was associated with poorer outcomes than post-BMS restenosis.

Whan Lee C ，Kim SH ，Suh J ，Park DW ，Lee SH ，Kim YH ，Hong MK ，Kim JJ ，Park SW ，Park SJ ... -  《-》