“Head-to-head comparison between sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with complex coronary artery disease: An intravascular ultrasound study”

One-Year Outcomes of the Paclitaxel-Eluting, Self-Expanding Stentys Stent System in the Treatment of Infrapopliteal Lesions in Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of the paclitaxel-coated, self-expanding, nitinol Stentys Stent System in tibioperoneal lesions ≤50 mm long. Methods: The prospective, single-arm, multicenter PES-BTK-70 trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01630070) evaluated the safety and efficacy of the coronary Stentys Stent System in the treatment of a stenotic or occlusive lesion ≤50 mm long in the tibioperoneal arteries of patients with critical limb ischemia (CLI). Between January 2012 and May 2013, 70 patients (mean age 74.6±9.4 years; 45 men) with CLI [Rutherford category 4 (37, 52.9%) or 5 (33, 47.1%)] received a Stentys drug-eluting stent for the treatment of infrapopliteal stenosis (60, 85.7%) or occlusion (10, 14.3%). The mean lesion length was 17.2 mm (4.0–58.5). The primary outcome measures were primary patency at 6 months (duplex ultrasound) and 12 months (angiography). Secondary outcomes included limb salvage and freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR). Kaplan-Meier estimates of the outcomes are given with the 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: Technical and procedure success (<30% residual stenosis without major complications) was achieved in 68 (97.1%) of 70 cases. Primary patency was 87.6% (95% CI 83.5% to 91.7%) at 6 months and 72.6% (95% CI 66.9% to 78.3%) at 1 year. Freedom from TLR was 79.1% at 1 year (95% CI 73.9% to 84.3) and limb salvage was 98.5% (95% CI 97.0 to 100.0). No stent fractures were found by core laboratory review of all follow-up imaging data available up to 12 months. Conclusion: In this study, the self-expanding, nitinol, paclitaxel-eluting, coronary Stentys stent was found to be safe and effective in the below-the-knee region, with results similar to the most recent limus-eluting stent trials.

Dual-source computed tomography angiography and intravascular ultrasound assessment of restenosis in patients after coronary stenting for bifurcation left main stenosis: a pilot study

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of dual-source computed tomography coronary angiography (CTCA) compared to intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) for the detection of restenosis in patients who underwent coronary stenting for bifurcation left main (LM) stenosis.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-four patients underwent percutaneous intervention of the LM and were subsequently examined (median 9.2 months after procedure) using IVUS and CTCA for the detection of restenosis.

RESULTS

Significant restenosis was detected according to IVUS examination in 6 patients (25%) and 8 segments (13%). Based on segment analysis, sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values of CTCA for the detection of restenosis were 89%, 68%, 32%, 97%, respectively. There was moderate to good correlation between the minimal luminal area (MLA), measured by CTCA and IVUS for LM, the left anterior descending artery (LAD) and the left circumflex artery (LCx) (r=0.64, p<0.01; r=0.49, p=0.03; r=0.76, p<0.01, respectively). A Bland-Altman analysis showed that the MLAs measured by CTCA were underestimated in all segments (mean difference 1.67 ±2.2 mm(2) for LM; 2.0 ±2.0 mm(2) for LAD; 1.79 ±1.79 mm(2) for LCx). An ROC analysis of the MLAs derived by CTCA for detecting significant stenosis was performed. The area under the curve for all analysed segments was 0.73.

CONCLUSIONS

The present study demonstrates that in patients after LM bifurcation stenting CTCA performs well in the exclusion of in-segment restenosis. However, due to the low positive predictive value of CTCA, the finding of any restenosis should be confirmed by invasive examination.

Long-term vascular changes after drug-eluting stent implantation assessed by serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis

Using serial volumetric intravascular ultrasonography, we evaluated the predictors of late intimal hyperplasia (IH) increases after drug-eluting stent implantation. All eligible patients who underwent 6-month angiography without visual restenosis were requested to undergo a 2-year follow-up examination. Complete serial (after stenting and early [6-month], and late [2-year] follow-up) angiographic and intravascular ultrasound data were available for 135 patients with 143 lesions: 99 sirolimus-eluting stents and 44 paclitaxel-eluting stents. The external elastic membrane, stent, lumen, and peri-stent plaque volumes (external elastic membrane minus stent) were normalized by stent length. The percentage of IH volume was calculated as IH volume/stent volume x 100. The early reduction in the minimum lumen area was greater than the late reduction in the minimum lumen area (-0.8 +/- 0.8 vs -0.2 +/- 0.5 mm(2), p <0.001). A progressive increase occurred in the percentage of IH volume: 8.1 +/- 7.1% from baseline to 6 months and 2.4 +/- 3.9% from 6 months to 2 years (p <0.001, between the early and late increases in the percentage of IH). The use of paclitaxel-eluting stents was the only independent predictor for the percentage of IH volume at 6 months (beta = 0.419, p <0.001). The use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (beta = 0.365, p <0.001, 95% confidence interval 3.7 to 9.7) and the post-stenting normalized plaque and media volume (beta = 0.195, p = 0.020, 95% confidence interval 0.1 to 1.6) were the only independent predictors for the percentage of IH volume at 2 years. However, when the percentage of IH at 6 months was forced into the model, the percentage of IH at 6 months and the post-stenting normalized plaque and media volume, not paclitaxel-eluting stent use, predicted the 2-year percentage of IH. In conclusion, although IH continued to increase beyond 6 months, the growth rate of intima and luminal loss attenuated with time.

Impact of post-intervention minimal stent area on 9-month follow-up patency of paclitaxel-eluting stents: an integrated intravascular ultrasound analysis from the TAXUS IV, V, and VI and TAXUS ATLAS Workhorse, Long Lesion, and Direct Stent Trials

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the predictive value of the intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) measured post-intervention minimum stent area (MSA) on 9-month follow-up paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) patency compared with bare-metal stents (BMS).

BACKGROUND

Stent underexpansion is a strong predictor for restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation, but the implication of underexpansion in PES is still unknown.

METHODS

From the combined TAXUS IV, V, and VI and TAXUS ATLAS Workhorse, Long Lesion, and Direct Stent trials, 1,580 patients (PES 1,098, BMS 482) in IVUS substudies were analyzed. The MSA that best predicted angiographic in-stent restenosis (ISR) (% diameter stenosis > or =50%) was determined.

RESULTS

The post-intervention IVUS MSA was similar in PES and BMS (6.6 +/- 2.5 mm(2) vs. 6.7 +/- 2.3 mm(2), p = 0.92). At 9-month follow-up, ISR was lower in the PES group versus the BMS group (10% vs. 31%, p < 0.0001). Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, post-intervention IVUS MSA was the independent predictor of subsequent ISR in both the PES and BMS groups (p = 0.0002 for PES and p = 0.0002 for BMS). The ability of the post-intervention IVUS MSA to predict ISR was further assessed using receiver operating characteristic analysis. The post-intervention IVUS MSA was found to be a faithful discriminator between patients with and without ISR in both PES (c = 0.6382) and BMS (c = 0.6373). Finally, the optimal thresholds of post-intervention IVUS MSA that best predicted stent patency at 9 months were 5.7 mm(2) for PES and 6.4 mm(2) for BMS.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-intervention MSA measured by IVUS can predict 9-month follow-up stent patency after both PES and BMS implantation. (Randomized Trial Evaluating Slow-Release Formulation TAXUS Paclitaxel-Eluting Coronary Stents to Treat De Novo Coronary Lesions; NCT00301522) (Direct Stenting of TAXUS Liberté-SR Stent for the Treatment of Patients With de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00371423) (A Study of the TAXUS Liberté Stent for the Treatment of Long De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00371475) (A Study of the TAXUS Liberté Stent for the Treatment of de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions in Small Vessels; NCT00371748).

Comparison of sirolimus and paclitaxel-eluting stents for complex coronary lesions: an intravascular ultrasound study

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Recent intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) studies of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) have demonstrated a significant reduction in neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) based on simple coronary lesions. In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of SES and PES using IVUS in complex coronary lesions.

METHODS

Eighty-seven patients in whom 95 drug-eluting stents (66 SES and 29 PES) were implanted in complex coronary lesions were enrolled in this study. Case selection was based on the availability of IVUS and quantitative coronary angiographic (QCA) examinations at the index procedure and at follow-up. The neointimal volume index (volume/length: NIVI) and percent neointimal volume (% NIV) were calculated. The longitudinal length of stented segments without IVUS-detectable NIH was also evaluated.

RESULTS

The baseline patient demographics were similar between the SES and PES groups. At follow-up, no significant differences were observed in the vessel, plaque, or stent volume indices between the two groups. However, the NIVI and % NIV were significantly lower in the SES group (p<0.01). The longitudinal length of stented segments without IVUS-detectable NIH was significantly higher in the SES group (p<0.01). The net gain was significantly larger in the SES group (2.3+/-0.7 vs. 2.0x0.6 mm, p=0.025), while the rate of major adverse cardiac events was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although SES showed significantly greater suppression of NIH at follow-up, both stents were highly effective at inhibiting NIH in complex coronary lesions.

Two-year outcome of patients treated with sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in an unselected population with coronary artery disease (from the REWARDS Registry)

Multiple studies comparing sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with coronary artery disease have been performed. Despite these comparisons, it remains uncertain whether a differential in long-term efficacy and safety exists. Unselected patients treated exclusively with 1 drug-eluting stent type were enrolled in the Registry Experience at the Washington Hospital Center with Drug-Eluting Stents. There were 2,099 patients (3,766 lesions) treated with SES and 1,079 patients (1,850 lesions) treated with PES. Patients were followed at 30 days, 1 year, and 2 years for the clinical endpoints of death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and definite and definite/probable stent thrombosis. Patients in the SES group had more dyslipidemia, history of congestive heart failure, and ostial lesions; patients treated with PES had more previous coronary artery bypass surgery, unstable angina, and type C lesions. At 2 years, unadjusted major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (22.6% vs 21.1%, p = 0.3) and target vessel revascularization (13.3% vs 11.2%, p = 0.1) were comparable. The incidence of definite stent thrombosis was higher in the SES group (1.8% vs 0.9%, p = 0.05) driven by early events. Similar results were seen after adjustment for baseline differences: MACE (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.9 to 1.3, p = 0.5), definite stent thrombosis (hazard ratio 2.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 5.2, p = 0.05), and target vessel revascularization (hazard ratio 1.1, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.4, p = 0.4). The incidence and rate of late stent thrombosis (>30 days) were similar (0.7% vs 0.5%, p = 0.4 and 0.24%/year, both groups, respectively). In conclusion, no major differential in long-term safety or efficacy was detected between SES and PES; both stent types were efficacious in reducing revascularization but were limited by a small continual increase in late stent thrombosis.

Comparative safety and efficacy of a sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stent: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Drug-eluting stents have emerged as the favored device for percutaneous coronary intervention. It is not clear if there are differences in the currently available drug-eluting stents. We performed a meta-analysis to systematically evaluate currently available data comparing sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) in patients with coronary artery disease.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, ISI Web of Knowledge, Current Contents, and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts databases, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, as well as scientific meeting abstracts up to November 30, 2006. All randomized controlled trials comparing SES with PES and providing follow-up data of > or = 6 months were eligible for inclusion in our analysis.

RESULTS

Data from 12 trials (number of patients 7455) were pooled. There was no difference in death (summary odds ratio [OR] 0.88, 95% CI 0.61-1.25, P = .46), myocardial infarction (summary OR 0.92, 95% CI, 0.71-1.19, P = .51), or stent thrombosis (summary OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.40-1.40, P = .37) between SES and PES. The use of SES was associated with a significant reduction in angiographic restenosis (summary OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.52-0.78, P < .001), target vessel revascularization (5.66% vs 7.70%, summary OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59-0.88, P = .002), or target lesion revascularization (summary OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.53-0.84, P = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with SES appear to have a significantly lower risk of restenosis and need for target vessel revascularization compared with those treated with PES. There is no significant difference between the 2 stents with respect to mortality, myocardial infarction, or early stent thrombosis.

Features and parameters of drug-eluting stent deployment discoverable by intravascular ultrasound

The only routinely available tool for assessing many features of stent implantation, intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) has become indispensable in trials of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and is currently the best way to identify or exclude causes of DES failure. Although IVUS resolution is not sufficient for determining reendothelialization, serial (postprocedure and follow-up) IVUS can measure intimal hyperplasia (IH), assess acute and late incomplete stent apposition, detect the presence and persistence of edge dissections, assess vascular responses such as remodeling, study edge effects, compare overlapping with nonoverlapping segments, and look for causes of restenosis and thrombosis. Percentage IH volume is one IVUS measure of efficacy that has been routinely assessed and compared in studies of DESs; IH volume and external elastic membrane, luminal, and stent cross-sectional area are others. This review details and evaluates IVUS findings in the important clinical trials conducted with the first-generation DESs: a sirolimus-eluting stent, a polymeric paclitaxel-eluting stent, and a nonpolymeric paclitaxel-eluting stent. IVUS results apparent in DES failure (restenosis and thrombosis) are also examined.

A Meta-Analysis of 16 Randomized Trials of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease

OBJECTIVES

Our purpose was to make a synthesis of the available evidence on the relative efficacy and safety of 2 drug-eluting stents (DES)--sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES)--in patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND

It is not known whether there are differences in late outcomes between the 2 most commonly used DES: SES and PES.

METHODS

Sixteen randomized trials of SES versus PES with a total number of 8,695 patients were included in this meta-analysis. A full set of individual outcome data from 5,562 patients was also available. Mean follow-up period ranged from 9 to 37 months. The primary efficacy end point was the need for reintervention (target lesion revascularization). The primary safety end point was stent thrombosis. Secondary end points were death and recurrent myocardial infarction (MI).

RESULTS

No significant heterogeneity was found across trials. Compared with PES, SES significantly reduced the risk of reintervention (hazard ratio [HR] 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 to 0.87, p < 0.001) and stent thrombosis (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.46 to 0.94, p = 0.02) without significantly impacting on the risk of death (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.74 to 1.13, p = 0.43) or MI (HR 0.84; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.03, p = 0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Sirolimus-eluting stents are superior to PES in terms of a significant reduction of the risk of reintervention and stent thrombosis. The risk of death was not significantly different between the 2 DES, but there was a trend toward a higher risk of MI with PES, especially after the first year from the procedure.

Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents.

METHODS

We searched relevant sources from inception to March, 2007, and contacted investigators and manufacturers to identify randomised controlled trials in patients with coronary artery disease that compared drug-eluting with bare-metal stents, or that compared sirolimus-eluting stents head-to-head with paclitaxel-eluting stents. Safety outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis; the effectiveness outcome was target lesion revascularisation. We included 38 trials (18,023 patients) with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Trialists and manufacturers provided additional data on clinical outcomes for 29 trials. We did a network meta-analysis with a mixed-treatment comparison method to combine direct within-trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation.

FINDINGS

Mortality was similar in the three groups: hazard ratios (HR) were 1.00 (95% credibility interval 0.82-1.25) for sirolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents, 1.03 (0.84-1.22) for paclitaxel-eluting versus bare-metal stents, and 0.96 (0.83-1.24) for sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. Sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with the lowest risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0.81, 95% credibility interval 0.66-0.97, p=0.030 vs bare-metal stents; 0.83, 0.71-1.00, p=0.045 vs paclitaxel-eluting stents). There were no significant differences in the risk of definite stent thrombosis (0 days to 4 years). However, the risk of late definite stent thrombosis (>30 days) was increased with paclitaxel-eluting stents (HR 2.11, 95% credibility interval 1.19-4.23, p=0.017 vs bare-metal stents; 1.85, 1.02-3.85, p=0.041 vs sirolimus-eluting stents). The reduction in target lesion revascularisation seen with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents was more pronounced with sirolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (0.70, 0.56-0.84; p=0.0021).

INTERPRETATION

The risks of mortality associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents are similar. Sirolimus-eluting stents seem to be clinically better than bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting stents.

Safety and efficacy of the CYPHER Select Sirolimus-eluting stent in the "Real World"--clinical and angiographic results from the China CYPHER Select registry

OBJECTIVE

This post-marketing surveillance registry is aimed at determining the safety and reliability of the CYPHER Select Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in routine clinical practice.

BACKGROUND

Little information and angiographic follow-up data in large-scale "real world" registry is available for the CYPHER Select SES, an advanced-generation SES.

METHODS

This was a prospective multicenter (20 centers) registry. 1189 consecutive patients who received at least 1 CYPHER Select SES during daily clinical practice were enrolled. Patients who underwent emergency stenting for acute myocardial infarction were excluded.

RESULTS

The procedure's success rate was 98.3% for CYPHER Select SES implantation, and follow-up rates were 98% with 100% data auditing. Target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months occurred in 60 (5.14%) cases, cardiac death in 13 cases (1.11%), Q wave myocardial infarction (MI) in 5 cases (0.43%), non-Q-MI in 9 cases (0.77%), target vessel revascularization (TVR) in 67 cases (5.74%), and MACE defined as cardiac death, nonfatal MI and TLR in 76 cases (6.51%). MACE-free survival rate at 12 months was 93.7%. Angiographic follow-up at 9 months was performed in 418 (68.3%) lesions treated by CYPHER Select SES. The binary restenosis rate was 4.8% in-stent and 9.6% in-segment. Subgroup analysis showed diabetes, bifurcation lesion and combined use of different stents were independent risk factors of cumulative MACE. In-segment MLD </=2.25 mm at post-procedure and ostial lesion was independent predictors of in-segment restenosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this registry, the MACE, TLR, angiographic late loss and binary restenosis rates of CYPHER Select SES were similar to those reported in SES randomized trials and "real world" registries. The safety and efficacy of CYPHER Select SES shown in this registry are consistent with those seen in SES studies.