Sirolimus-eluting coronary stents in small vessels

The use of paclitaxel coated balloon (PCB) in acute coronary syndrome of small vessel de novo lesions: an analysis of a prospective 'real world' registry

Background

Paclitaxel-coated balloon (PCB) angioplasty in small vessel de novo lesions has favourable outcome and appears to be an alternative to stent implantation. However there is limitted data on its use specifically in small vessel acute coronary syndrome (ACS).

Methods

We analyse patients data from the SeQuent Please Small Vessel ‘PCB only’ Registry. It was an international, prospective, multicentre registry which enrolled patients with de novo lesions of small vessel diameter (≥2.0, ≤2.75 mm). Patients were divided into the ACS group and the non-ACS group and comparison made between the two groups. The primary end-point was clinically driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR) at 9 months. Secondary end-points were acute technical success, 30-day and 9-month major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction or TLR) (MACE) and the occurence of definite lesion and vessel thrombosis.

Results

A total of 447 patients were enrolled for this registry of which 105 (23.5 %) patients were ACS (STEMI and NSTEMI). The procedural success rate was 98.1 % in ACS group. The mean vessel diameter for the ACS and non-ACS group were 2.15 ± 0.36 and 2.14 ± 0.35 respectively. Similar mean lesion length of around 15.5 mm was recorded in both groups. Additional stenting was required in 9.3 % ACS and 6.5 % non-ACS, p = 0.308. Reasons for additional stenting were target lesion related dissection (57.6 %) or non-target lesion stenosis (41.2 %). More than half of the patients had 4 weeks of aspirin/clopidogrel (57.1 % ACS, 60.5 % non-ACS). No significant difference between the ACS and non-ACS groups with regards to the duration and types of DAPT during follow up. At 30-day, MACE rate were (0 % ACS vs 0.3 % non-ACS, p = 0.599). At 9 months TLR rates were (1.2 % ACS vs 4.3 % non-ACS, p = 0.180) and MACE rates (3.6 % ACS vs 5.0 % non-ACS, p = 0.601).

Conclusion

PCB in ACS with small vessel de novo lesions has low 30-day and 9-month TLR/MACE rates comparable to non-ACS small vessels. Thus it appears to be an alternative to stent implantation in the treatment ACS.

Two-year clinical outcomes of the NOBORI biolimus-eluting stents versus XIENCE/PROMUS everolimus-eluting stents in small vessel disease

BACKGROUND

Biolimus-eluting stents (BES) have similar efficacy and safety compared with cobalt chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES), whereas it is unclear whether the same applies to small vessel disease. We sought compare clinical outcomes between BES and CoCr-EES in patients with small vessel disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 1,132 patients treated only with BES (612 patients) or EES (520 patients) in small vessel disease (stent size 2.5-mm) were retrospectively analyzed. We assessed the cumulative 2-year incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST), and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). The cumulative 2-year incidence of MACE was similar between the two groups (12.1% vs. 11.8%, P = 0.77). The cumulative incidence of cardiac death, CD-TLR, and definite ST were also not significantly different between both groups (3.2% vs. 3.6%, P = 0.78; 8.3% vs. 8.4%, P = 1.00; 0.33% vs. 0.21%, P = 0.66, respectively). After multivariate adjusting, the adjusted risk of BES group relative to CoCr-EES group for MACE was not significantly different (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.78, 95% confidential interval [CI]: 0.53-1.15, P = 0.20). Similarly, no significant difference in the adjusted risks for cardiac death and CD-TLR were observed between the two groups (HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.28-1.37, P = 0.24; HR: 0.81, 95% CI: 0.51-1.29, P = 0.38).

CONCLUSIONS

Two-year clinical outcomes of BES are similar to those of CoCr-EES in patients with small vessel disease. The use of BES is acceptable for small coronary artery disease. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Composite outcomes in 2.25-mm drug eluting stents: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Coronary atherosclerosis often involves small-caliber coronaries, yet the safety and efficacy of 2.25-mm DES have been poorly defined, with a general lack of separation of 2.25 with 2.5-mm performance. No randomized head-to-head 2.25 mm DES studies have been reported. There are several single-arm prospective studies, and we aim to systematically review all published specific 2.25-mm data to estimate composite DES-specific performance and highlight current knowledge gaps.

METHODS

We performed a systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and Cochrane database for clinical trials of 2.25-mm DES. Angiographic and composite clinical outcomes were compared with descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

2.25 mm-Paclitaxel (PES), sirolimus (SES), everolimus (EES) and platinum chromium EES DES-specific outcomes have been reported. Death at 12 months for SES, PES, EES and platinum chromium EES was 1.3%, 3.0%, 1.5%, and 4.4%. Rates of target vessel revascularization at 12 months for SES, PES, EES and platinum chromium EES were 5.7%, 13.3%, 8.8%, and 3.3%. Angiographic outcomes at 9 months to one year were as follows: mean late lumen loss (LLL) for SES, PES, and EES was 0.15 ± 0.11-mm, 0.28 ± 0.11-mm, and 0.16 ± 0.41-mm and mean diameter restenosis for SES, PES, and EES were 29.5 ± 6.2%, 34.7 ± 4.2%, and 20.9 ± 22.5%. Reported stent thrombosis rates for 2.25-mm DES were low ranging from 0% to 2.2% in up to 24-months of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review summarizes and tabulates all available specific data on 2.25-mm DES. Based on our descriptive analysis, 2.25-mm DESs have a favorable safety and efficacy profile for the treatment of very small coronary lesions.

Clinical utility of low-pressure implantation of drug-eluting stent into very small vessels

BACKGROUND

Although drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce restenosis, the best strategy for DES implantation in small vessels has not been established.

PURPOSE

We investigated the clinical usefulness of low-pressure implantation of a 2.5-mm DES for small vessels less than 2.5mm in diameter.

METHODS

In 118 patients, a 2.5-mm DES was implanted for small vessels less than 2.5mm in diameter between 2007 and 2009 in our hospital. The patients were divided into two groups by initial deployment pressure: low-pressure (LP; n=46) and nominal-pressure (NP; n=72).

RESULTS

Patients with impaired glucose tolerance were more frequent (p=0.02) and the target vessel diameter was significantly smaller (p=0.01) in the LP group than in the NP group. A smaller minimum lumen diameter (MLD) was obtained (LP: 2.22±0.27mm vs. NP: 2.34±0.26mm, p=0.02) after DES implantation with a smaller balloon-to-artery ratio (p=0.03) in the LP group. However, at mid-term follow-up (7.7±3.9 months), MLD (p=0.55) and the binary restenosis rate (LP: 2.6% vs. NP: 11.1%, p=0.12) were not significantly different between the LP and NP groups. Furthermore, by Kaplan-Meier analysis, the incidence of major adverse cardiac events was not different between the groups during the long-term follow-up (32.4±8.6 months).

CONCLUSION

The present study indicates that low-pressure implantation of 2.5-mm DES for very small vessels may be feasible with regard to short- and long-term clinical outcomes.

One-year outcome of small-vessel disease treated with sirolimus-eluting stents: a subgroup analysis of the e-SELECT registry

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the characteristics and one-year outcomes following sirolimus-eluting CYPHER Select Plus stent (SES) implantation in small (SmVD) and non-small vessel disease (NSmVD) in the international e-SELECT registry.

BACKGROUND

Large-scale registry data are lacking on DES outcomes in SmVD treatment.

METHODS

There were 4,700 SmVD (at least one vessel with estimated reference vessel diameter [RVD] < 2.5 mm, excluding 283 patients with unknown RVD vessels) and 10,139 NSmVD only patients.

RESULTS

The SmVD population was older, with more women, diabetics, and vessels treated, higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score (CCI), shorter lesions, and less STEMI presentation. The 1-year stent thrombosis (ST) rate (primary end-point), was significantly higher (1.3% vs. 0.7%) in SmVD versus NSmVD, mainly driven by early events. One-year major adverse cardiac event (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization (TLR) rates were significantly higher in SmVD although death and major bleeding rates were similar in both groups. Complication rates were similar between pure (3,188 patients; only RVD < 2.5 mm) and mixed (1,795 patients; some RVD < 2.5 mm or unknown RVD) SmVD. Multivariate predictors for 1-year MACE in SmVD included saphenous vein graft or bifurcation lesions, major bleeding, any antiplatelet therapy discontinuation within 1 month, age, number of stents implanted, CCI, acute coronary syndrome, and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus.

CONCLUSION

SES implantation for SmVD occurs more frequently in women, diabetics, and those with multivessel disease and comorbidities. One-year ST, MACE, MI, and clinically indicated TLR rates are higher, although low overall, in SmVD or mixed SmVD patients while death rates are similar to NSmVD.

The XIENCE nano everolimus eluting coronary stent system for the treatment of small coronary arteries: the SPIRIT Small Vessel trial

OBJECTIVES

The SPIRIT Small Vessel (SV) was designed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the 2.25-mm XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system (EECSS), known as the XIENCE nano EECSS, in subjects with SVs and ischemic heart disease.

BACKGROUND

The core sizes of XIENCE V EECSS are associated with low rates of restenosis and thrombosis in the general population, but the XIENCE nano EECSS has not been tested in the United States.

METHODS

This prospective, single-arm, open-label study was conducted at 33 centers and in 150 patients in the United States. The primary endpoint was the target lesion failure (TLF) rate at 1 year, required to meet the prespecified performance goal (PG) of 20.4%, derived from historical data.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 63 years, 38% were women, 39.2% were diabetic, 49.3% had multivessel disease, and the reference vessel diameter was 2.13 ± 0.23 mm. The 1-year TLF rate was 8.1% in with an upper limit of the one-sided 95% confidence interval of 13.0%, which met the PG of 20.4% (P < 0.0001). At 1 year, the rate of cardiac death was 1.5%, the target vessel myocardial infarction rate was 1.5%, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization rate was 5.1%. The 8-month angiographic in-stent late loss was 0.2 ± 0.4 mm, respectively. The 1-year academic research consortium defined definite/probable stent thrombosis rate was 1.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the 1-year clinical and 8-month angiographic SPIRIT SV data, the XIENCE nano EECSS is considered safe and effective in the treatment of SVs.

Drug-eluting stents for coronary artery disease: a review

Over the past decade the introduction of drug-eluting stents (DESs) has revolutionised the treatment of coronary artery disease. However, in recent years concern has arisen over the long-term safety and efficacy of DESs due to the occurrence of late adverse clinical events such as stent thrombosis. With this concern in mind, research and development is currently centred on increasing the long-term safety and efficacy of DESs. The aim of this paper is to provide a thorough review of currently approved and promising investigational DESs. With dozens of companies involved in the development of new and innovative anti-restenotic agents, polymeric coatings and stent platforms, it is intended that this review paper will provide a clear indication of how DESs are currently evolving and prove a valuable reference tool for future research in this area.

Drug-eluting stents perform better than bare metal stents in small coronary vessels: a meta-analysis of randomised and observational clinical studies with mid-term follow up

BACKGROUND

We tested drug-eluting stent (DES) and bare metal stent (BMS) performance in small coronary vessels by means of meta-analysis of all available clinical studies.

METHODS

The analysis included randomised controlled trials (RCT), subgroups of RCT and observational studies with a follow-up of at least six months comparing the use of DES and BMS during percutaneous interventions involving small coronary arteries (diameter<3mm). The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF); the others were pooled and isolated major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), stent thrombosis (ST), binary restenosis and late lumen loss at the longest available follow-up. The effect of treatment was evaluated in terms of odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for binary variables, and mean difference (MD)± standard deviation (SD) for continuous variables. Fixed- or random-effect models were used depending on the statistical heterogeneity of studies. The analyses of major endpoints were stratified by study type, length of follow-up, and type of DES.

RESULTS

We pooled 12 studies involving 3182 patients. Trial heterogeneity was a minor issue. TVF (OR: 0.35; CI: 0.24-0.51), MACE (OR: 0.36; CI: 0.29-0.45), binary restenosis (OR: 0.15; CI: 0.12-0.20) and late lumen loss (MD: -0.46; SD: -0.55 to -0.38) all significantly improved with DES treatment; ST (OR: 0.63; CI: 0.34-1.17) was not statistically different between studies.

CONCLUSIONS

DES are superior to BMS in terms of their efficacy in managing small coronary arteries (diameter<3mm), and at least equivalent in terms of safety. The use of DES should be considered the treatment of choice in this setting.

Small coronary vessel angioplasty: outcomes and technical considerations

Small vessel (<3 mm) coronary artery disease is common and has been identified as independent predictor of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention. It remains controversial whether bare-metal stent (BMS) implantation in small vessels has an advantage over balloon angioplasty in terms of angiographic and clinical outcomes. Introduction of drug-eluting stent (DES) has resulted in significant reduction in restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization. Several DESs have been introduced resulting in varying reduction in outcomes as compared with BMS. However, their impact on outcomes in small vessels is not clearly known. It is expected that DES could substantially reduce restenosis in smaller vessels. Large, randomized studies are warranted to assess the impact of different DESs on outcomes in patients with small coronary arteries.

Off-label use of drug-eluting versus bare metal stents: a lesion-specific systematic review of long-term outcomes

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate differences in lesion-specific outcomes with the "off-label" use of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS).

METHODS

MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane databases, and other Web were searched for studies evaluating off-label use of DES and BMS with the same characteristics. Of 1,258 abstracts or manuscripts reviewed, 112 studies were included (total N = 23,438). Studies were excluded if patients received both types of stent or no stent; lesion type was unknown; lesion-specific outcomes for ≥6 months were unavailable; or <25 patients were enrolled.

RESULTS

Overall mortality at 6-12 months was approximately 3% for BMS and DES for off-label use. Increase in mortality was greater from 6-12 months to 2 years with BMS than with DES (3.3%-9.1%; 2.8%-4.1%); however, rates were similar at 3 years (BMS: 18.8%; DES:15.3%). Myocardial Infarction rates were similar for both types at 6-12 months (BMS: 6.5%; DES: 6.0%). Overall rates of stent thrombosis were 1.8% and 1.7% for BMS and DES, respectively. Similar or slightly lower rates of stent thrombosis were seen for most lesion types, except higher rates for small vessels for BMS (5.2%) and true bifurcation for DES (3.3%). Rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) were 7.5% for BMS and 19.6% for DES at 6-12 months. At 2-years TLR remained lower than DES. When the combined group was compared to registry data alone, similar values were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Rates of mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and stent thrombosis were similar in patients receiving BMS or DES, while TLR rates were lower in DES patients.

Thin strut chrome-cobalt stent implantation for treatment of de-novo lesions in small coronary vessels: results of the RISICO Italian Registry (Registro Italiano Mini VISION nei piccolo Vasi) utilizing the Mini VISION coronary stent platform

OBJECTIVES

The Registro Italiano Mini VISION nei piccoli Vasi registry is a prospective, multicenter, observational study, aimed at assessing immediate and long-term angiographic and clinical outcomes of a small-vessel cobalt-chrome super alloy-dedicated stent (Multi-Link RX VISION) in de-novo and long lesions.

BACKGROUND

Small artery size is an important determinant of poor outcomes in percutaneous coronary interventions.

METHODS

Patients with ischemic heart disease were included. The primary end point was procedural success. Secondary end points included clinical restenosis (need for target lesion revascularization ), incidence of major adverse cardiac events at 6 months, and cost-effectiveness analysis.

RESULTS

Between September 2004 and October 2005, 143 patients (mean age 67 +/- 11 years; 22% diabetes) were enrolled; 6-month follow-up was completed in May 2006. Average lesion length, mean stent length and diameter were 16.8 +/- 7.1, 17.01 +/- 3.9 and 2.41 +/- 0.14 mm, respectively. Procedural success was 96%. At 6-month follow-up, the hierarchical major adverse cardiac event rate was 11.6%, 2.9% deaths, 2.9% myocardial infarction and 5.8% target lesion revascularization. Cost-effectiveness analysis will be reported in a further publication.

CONCLUSION

Small-vessel disease treatment with Mini VISION stents permits an elevated procedural success rate with low incidence of clinical restenosis and major adverse cardiac events at mid-term follow-up. Such results require confirmation by means of a randomized controlled study against drug-eluting stents.

Predictive risk factors for restenosis after remote superficial femoral artery endarterectomy

OBJECTIVES

Restenosis following remote superficial femoral artery endarterectomy (RSFAE) remains a challenging problem. The determinants predicting failure are lacking. This study investigated patient characteristics with predictive value for restenosis during the first year after RSFAE.

DESIGN

A prospective cohort study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 90 patients post-RSFAE were studied for the occurrence of restenosis (peak systolic velocity ratio >or= 2.5) in the first 12 months postoperatively. At baseline, clinical parameters were recorded. Vessel size was measured on the basis of plaque perimeter in the culprit lesion and lumen diameter on perioperative digital subtraction angiography.

RESULTS

In 57 patients (63%), a restenotic lesion was diagnosed within 12 months following surgery. Patients with longer time interval between start of ischaemic walking complaints and RSFAE revealed a significantly higher incidence of restenosis (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.3 (1.05-1.52) per 4 years). Small plaque perimeter and small superficial femoral artery (SFA) diameter on angiography were significantly associated with restenosis (HR = 0.54 (0.34-0.88) per 10 mm and HR = 0.46 (0.27-0.78) per 1.5 mm, respectively). In multivariate analysis, age, duration of ischaemic walking complaints and lumen diameter were independently associated with increased risk of restenosis after RSFAE.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that age, vessel size and duration of ischaemic walking complaints before RSFAE are predictive values for restenosis after RSFAE.

Clinical use of sirolimus-eluting stents

Drug-eluting stents, or intracoronary stents that combine the local delivery of antirestenotic pharmacologic therapies while maintaining the mechanical advantage of bare metal stents over balloon angioplasty alone, are a highly complex technology that have profoundly affected the practice of percutaneous coronary intervention over the last 5 years. These devices were designed specifically to treat the neointimal hyperplasia occurring after conventional bare metal stent placement, and have been remarkably successful in this regard. However, recent concerns have been raised regarding the long-term safety of these devices, particularly when used outside of the specific patient and lesion subsets studied in the pivotal randomized trials that led to device approval by regulatory bodies within the United States and abroad. This review aims to present a brief description of the sirolimus-eluting stent device platform and its mechanism of action, followed by an overview of current data regarding efficacy and safety regarding the clinical use of sirolimus-eluting stent technology.

Impact of Vessel Size on Outcome After Implantation of Sirolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the impact of vessel size on angiographic and long-term clinical outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) within a randomized trial (SIRTAX [Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Compared With Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent for Coronary Revascularization]).

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention in small-vessel disease is associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

METHODS

A total of 1,012 patients were randomly assigned to treatment with SES (n = 503) or PES (n = 509). A stratified analysis of angiographic and clinical outcome was performed up to 2 years after PCI according to size of the treated vessel (reference vessel diameter < or =2.75 vs. >2.75 mm).

RESULTS

Of 1,012 patients, 370 patients (37%) with 495 lesions underwent stent implantation in small vessels only, 504 patients (50%) with 613 lesions in large vessels only, and 138 patients (14%) with 301 lesions in both small and large vessels (mixed). In patients with small-vessel stents, SES reduced MACE by 55% (10.4% vs. 21.4%; p = 0.004), mainly driven by a 69% reduction of target lesion revascularization (TLR) (6.0% vs. 17.7%; p = 0.001) compared with PES at 2 years. In patients with large- and mixed-vessel stents, rates of MACE (large: 10.4% vs. 13.1%; p = 0.33; mixed: 16.7% vs. 18.0%; p = 0.83) and TLR (large: 6.9% vs. 8.6%; p = 0.47; mixed: 16.7% vs. 15.4%; p = 0.86) were similar for SES and PES. There were no significant differences with respect to death and myocardial infarction between the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with PES, SES more effectively reduced MACE and TLR in small-vessel disease. Differences between SES and PES appear less pronounced in patients with large- and mixed-vessel disease. (The SIRTAX trial; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show/NCT00297661?order=1; NCT00297661).

Sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: a review

The sirolimus-eluting coronary stent received CE Mark approval in Europe in April 2002. In the US, FDA approval followed in April 2003. Since the preliminary results from the First-in-Man feasibility study were presented, several randomized, controlled trials have documented the profound antiproliferative effects of sirolimus, a macrolide antibiotic and potent cytostatic inhibitor of smooth muscle cell proliferation. Subsequently, the body of clinical evidence was increased by the second wave of evidence from trials in more complex lesions (such as in-stent restenosis, small vessels, chronic total occlusions) and "high-risk" patients such as those with diabetes. More recently we have had the opportunity to compare the two commercially available drug-eluting stents following the presentation of data from six head-to-head trials. As a result of numerous single and multi-center, national and international studies in which the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting coronary stents have been subjected to close scrutiny, the global interventional cardiology community now has a wealth of evidence in support of the use of this technology resulting in dramatically improved patient outcomes after percutaneous intervention.

Small coronary arteries treated with sirolimus-eluting stents: one-year results of the PORTO multicentre registry

AIMS

To assess the effectiveness and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in de novo native coronary lesions in small vessels (</= 2.5 mm).

METHODS AND RESULTS

PORTO was a multicentre, prospective registry, performed in 274 patients. Of these, 120 (43.8%) patients were diabetic. A total of 324 lesions were treated with 347 SES. The primary end-point was 6-month in-stent late luminal loss (LL); secondary end-points included in-stent and in-segment binary restenosis (BR), target lesion revascularisation (TLR), target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate at six months and one-year. Pre-specified subgroup analysis included the comparison between diabetic and non-diabetic patients, and patients with stents of different diameter (2.25 mm vs. 2.5 mm) and length (</= 18 mm vs. >/= 23 mm).The mean (SD) reference vessel diameter of the treated segment was 2.08 (0.33) mm and lesion length 11.04 (6.0) mm. After six months, LL was 0.07 (0.37) mm. BR was 5.1% in-stent and 9.1% in-segment. At one year, TLR was 5.6% and TVR was 9.0%. MACE rate was 2.6% at six months and 8.6% at one year with 2.3% cardiac death and 1.5% non-fatal myocardial infarction. Stent thrombosis rate at one year was 0.8% per protocol. There were more MACE in diabetic patients (12.8%) than in non-diabetic (5.4%, p=0.046), but no other significant differences in clinical and angiographic parameters were noted between the subgroups analysed.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of SES for lesions in very small coronary arteries proved to be safe and efficacious, irrespective of the size and length of the stents, with low restenosis and repeat revascularisation rates at one year.

Periprocedural and Late Consequences of Overlapping Cypher Sirolimus-Eluting Stents

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this research was to determine the relative safety and efficacy of multiple (> or =2) overlapping Cypher sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) (Johnson & Johnson, New Brunswick, New Jersey).

BACKGROUND

Overlapping coronary stents are common. The periprocedural and late clinical and angiographic consequences of overlapped coronary stents are not clearly defined, particularly for drug-eluting stents.

METHODS

All patients enrolled into five clinical trials of the SES were analyzed. Three of these trials were prospective randomized comparisons of the SES to the bare-metal stent (BMS), and two were prospective non-randomized trials of SES-treated patients with historical controls. All clinical and angiographic outcomes in overlap-stent-treated patients were compared by stent type and with single-stent-treated patients for the same stent device.

RESULTS

In all, 575 patients with stent overlap (337 SES, 238 BMS) and 1,162 patients with single stents (697 SES, 465 BMS) were analyzed. Stent overlap was associated with a greater late lumen loss in stent and more frequent angiographic restenosis regardless of stent type. Among overlap-stent-treated patients, the SES provided similar magnitude of restenosis benefit as observed for single-stent-treated patients. Overlapped SES was not associated with an increase in myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

The strategy of SES overlap, when required, is both safe and efficacious in reducing restenosis with no increase in the incidence of myocardial infarction or major adverse cardiovascular events, when compared with a bare metal coronary stent prosthesis.