Comparison of six-month outcomes for primary percutaneous revascularization for acute myocardial infarction with drug-eluting versus bare metal stents (from the APEX-AMI study)

Integrity(®) bare-metal coronary stent-induced platelet and endothelial cell activation results in a higher risk of restenosis compared to Xience(®) everolimus-eluting stents in stable angina patients

Drug-eluting stenting (DES) has become a reliable tool for coronary stenting; however, its direct effects on platelet and endothelium function differ from those of bare-metal stenting (BMS). This study involved a periprocedural analysis of various biomarkers of cellular activation after elective DES (Xience(®), Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA) or BMS (Integrity(®), Medtronic, Minneapolis, MI, USA). Forty-nine stable angina patients were recruited: 28 underwent BMS, and 21 received everolimus-eluting stents. Samples were collected (i) prior to stenting, (ii) at 24 hours after procedure, and (iii) after 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. Platelet activation was analyzed by surface P-selectin positivity in parallel with plasma levels of soluble P-selectin, CD40L and platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF). Endothelial cell (EC) activation was detected by measuring markers of early (von Willebrand factor) and delayed response (VCAM-1, ICAM-1, E-selectin). Patients were followed for 6 months for the occurrence of restenosis or stent thrombosis. Increased platelet activation was sustained regardless of stent type or antiplatelet medication. Concentrations of most EC markers were more elevated after BMS than after DES. No stent thrombosis was seen, but six BMS subjects displayed restenosis with significantly higher sCD40L (779 [397-899] vs. 381 [229-498] pg/mL; p = 0.032) and sICAM-1 (222 [181-272] vs. 162 [153-223] ng/mL; p = 0.046) levels than in those without complication, while DES patients exhibited significantly decreased PDGF (572 [428-626] vs. 244 [228-311] pg/mL; p = 0.004) after 1 month. Nonresponsiveness to antiplatelet drugs did not influence these changes. In conclusion, the degree of platelet and EC activation suggests that Xience(®) DES may be regarded a safer coronary intervention than Integrity(®) BMS, with a lower risk of in-stent restenosis.

Drug-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Taiwanese Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: An Outcome Report of a Multicenter Registry

BACKGROUND

The study aims to compare cardiovascular outcomes of using bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) through analysis of the database from the Taiwan ACS registry. Large domestic studies comparing outcomes of interventional strategies using DES and BMS in a Taiwanese population with ACS are limited.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Collected data regarding characteristics and cardiovascular outcomes from the registry database were compared between the BMS and DES groups. A Cox regression model was used in an unadjusted or adjusted manner for analysis. Baseline characteristics apparently varied between DES group (n = 650) and BMS group (n = 1672) such as ACS types, Killip's classifications, or coronary blood flows. Compared with the BMS group, the DES group was associated with significantly lower cumulative incidence of all-cause mortality (3.4% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.008), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (5.2% vs. 7.4%, p = 0.035), or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (10.2% vs. 15.6%, p < 0.001) at 1 year in a real-world setting. Cox regression analysis showed the BMS group referenced as the DES group had significantly higher risk-adjusted total mortality [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.85, p = 0.026], target vessel revascularization (TVR) (HR = 1.59, p = 0.035), and MACE (HR = 1.68, p = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The data show use of DES over BMS provided advantages to patients with ACS in terms of lower 1-year mortality, TVR, and MACE. The study suggests implantation of DES compared with BMS in Taiwanese patients with ACS is safe and beneficial in the real-world setting.

KEY WORDS

Acute coronary syndrome; Bare-metal stent; Cardiovascular outcome; Drug-eluting stent; Percutaneous coronary intervention.

Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting stents versus sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents for primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction: results from the Korean Multicentre Endeavor (KOMER) acute myocardial infarction (AMI) trial

AIMS

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

METHODS AND RESULTS

This study was a prospective, single-blind, multicentre, randomised trial. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months post-procedure, defined as cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR). An angiographic substudy was performed at nine months among 348 patients. From October 2006 to April 2008, 611 patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI were randomly assigned to treatment with ZES (n=205), SES (n=204), or PES (n=202). The cumulative incidence of MACE was 5.9% in the ZES group, 3.4% in the SES group and 5.7% in the PES group at 12-month follow-up (p=0.457). There was a trend towards a lower rate of ischaemia-driven TLR at 12- (p=0.092) and 18-month (p=0.080) follow-up in the SES group compared to the ZES and PES groups. No difference was observed in rates of cardiac death, recurrent MI and combined death and/or recurrent MI among three groups at 12- and 18-month follow-up. The rate of stent thrombosis was similar among the three groups (2.0% in each group, p=1.000).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with SES and PES, the use of ZES in patients with STEMI undergoing primary PCI, showed similar rates of MACE, cardiac death and recurrent MI at 12 and 18 months. There was a trend towards a higher rate of TLR with ZES or PES compared to SES.

Four-year follow-up of TYPHOON (trial to assess the use of the CYPHer sirolimus-eluting coronary stent in acute myocardial infarction treated with BallOON angioplasty)

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the CYPHER (Cordis, Johnson and Johnson, Bridgewater, New Jersey) sirolimus-eluting coronary stent (SES) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

BACKGROUND

Concern over the safety of drug-eluting stents implanted during PCI for STEMI remains, and long-term follow-up from randomized trials are necessary. TYPHOON (Trial to assess the use of the cYPHer sirolimus-eluting stent in acute myocardial infarction treated with ballOON angioplasty) randomized 712 patients with STEMI treated by primary PCI to receive either SES (n = 355) or bare-metal stents (BMS) (n = 357). The primary end point, target vessel failure at 1 year, was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (7.3% vs. 14.3%, p = 0.004) with no increase in adverse events.

METHODS

A 4-year follow-up was performed. Complete data were available in 501 patients (70%), and the survival status is known in 580 patients (81%).

RESULTS

Freedom from target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 4 years was significantly better in the SES group (92.4% vs. 85.1%; p = 0.002); there were no significant differences in freedom from cardiac death (97.6% and 95.9%; p = 0.37) or freedom from repeat myocardial infarction (94.8% and 95.6%; p = 0.85) between the SES and BMS groups. No difference in definite/probable stent thrombosis was noted at 4 years (SES: 4.4%, BMS: 4.8%, p = 0.83). In the 580 patients with known survival status at 4 years, the all-cause death rate was 5.8% in the SES and 7.0% in the BMS group (p = 0.61).

CONCLUSIONS

In the 70% of patients with complete follow-up at 4 years, SES demonstrated sustained efficacy to reduce TLR with no difference in death, repeat myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. (The Study to Assess AMI Treated With Balloon Angioplasty [TYPHOON]; NCT00232830).

A meta-analysis of randomized trials on clinical outcomes of paclitaxel-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients

A meta-analysis was performed to address the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all randomized clinical trials in mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction (rMI), repeat revascularization (RR), and stent thrombosis (ST). A total of 4190 STEMI patients were enrolled in six randomized trials comparing PES with bare-metal stent (BMS). The pooled repeat revascularization rate was 5.7% in PES group, significantly lower than 10.0% in BMS group with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI) [0.44, 0.72] (P<0.00001). No significant difference was found between PES and BMS groups in mortality at one year after the indexing procedure (3.9% vs. 5.1%, OR 0.88, 95% CI [0.63, 1.21], P=0.42). Similarly, rMI rate did not differ significantly between the two groups (3.4% vs. 4.1%, OR 0.80, 95% CI [0.56, 1.13], P=0.21). PES was also associated with the comparable pooled rate of definite stent thrombosis with BMS (2.3% vs. 2.4%, OR 0.81, 95% CI [0.52, 1.26], P=0.35). The results show that PES improved clinical outcomes in STEMI patients with a decreased need for repeat revascularization and no concerns for safety.

Optimizing primary PCI beyond "door to intervention time"--are we there yet?

AIM

To assess the effects of shortened door-to-intervention (DTI) time on appropriate clinical decisions regarding the four most critical and costly decisions during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI): cath-lab activation (CLA), use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors (GPI), use of PCI, and deployment of drug-eluting stent (DES).

BACKGROUND

STEMI PCI patients are frequently subject to decision making based on abbreviated medical encounter and limited medical information.

METHODS

Clinical data were prospectively collected in a STEMI registry over 19 months. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted to determine the level of appropriateness of the above-mentioned decisions.

RESULTS

Between June 2006 and December 2007, 200 EKGs with suspected STEMI were transmitted; 88 (44%) resulted in CLA. Compared to prior year, DTI times decreased from 145.7 to 69.9 min (P=.00001). DTI was longer during nights and weekends (87.5 vs. 51.8 min, P=.001) and the initial 6 months of the registry (86.8 vs. 66.8 min, P=.07). Nineteen (21.6%) of the patients undergoing angiography did not require revascularization, 56 (63.6%) received GPIs, and 65 patients (73.8%) underwent at least one vessel PCI, and at least one DES was used in 39 patients (60% of PCI cohort). When assessed for appropriateness, CLA was appropriate in 81.8% of the time and rendered borderline or inappropriate in 5.7% and 12.5%, respectively. GPI use was appropriate in 66% of the patients but seemed borderline or inappropriate in 28.5% and 5.4%, respectively. PCI was appropriate in 90% of the lesions treated, and borderline or inappropriate in 7.1% and 2.9%, respectively. DES use was viewed appropriate in 38.4%, and borderline or inappropriate in 51% and 10.2% of the DES deployments, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) In view of expedited care, certain information required for decision-making process is either not available or ignored during primary PCI. (2) Appropriate use of resources in primary PCI needs to be better defined. (3) Measures of extracting patients' previous medical records and imaging studies along with in-lab immediate blood work and echocardiography and establishing new "time-out" protocols for STEMI patients may improve resource utilization and patient care and outcome.