Adjunctive balloon dilatation after stent deployment: Beneficial or deleterious?

Additional postdilatation using noncompliant balloons after everolimus-eluting stent implantation: Results of the PRESS trial

Background

There are limited data on the clinical value of routine postdilatation using noncompliant balloons after contemporary drug‐eluting stent implantation.

Hypothesis

Additional postdilatation using noncompliant balloons after everolimus‐eluting stent implantation could provide better clinical outcomes.

Methods

We randomly assigned 1774 patients with coronary artery disease to undergo additional high‐pressure postdilatation using noncompliant balloons and moderate‐pressure dilatation using stent balloons after everolimus‐eluting stent implantation. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) 2 years after randomization.

Results

The study was discontinued early owing to slow enrollment. In total, 810 patients (406 patients in the high pressure group and 404 in the moderate pressure group) were finally enrolled. At 2 years, the primary endpoint occurred in 3.6% of patients in the high pressure group and in 4.4% of those in the moderate pressure group (P = .537). In addition, no significant differences were observed between the two groups in the occurrence of an individual end point of death (0.8% in the high pressure group vs 1.5% in the moderate group, P = .304), MI (0.2% vs 0.5%, P = .554), stent thrombosis (0% vs 0.2%, P = .316), or TVR (2.8% vs 2.6%, P = .880).

Conclusions

The strategy of routine postdilatation using noncompliant balloons after everolimus‐eluting stent implantation did not provide incremental clinical benefits.

Impact of Postdilation on Intervention Success and Long-Term Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes

Postdilation is frequently used during coronary interventions to prevent stent malapposition. Currently there are contradictory findings regarding the benefits of postdilation for both intraprocedural and long-term outcomes. We evaluated the impact of postdilation among patients who presented with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and underwent percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI). A total of 258 consecutive patients who presented with ACS and underwent PCI were included in the study. The patients were followed up for 25±1.7 months for the occurrence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). During follow-up, 65 patients (25.2%) had MACE. Among patients without MACE, intracoronary nitrate infusion was less frequently used (P=0.005), myocardial blush grade was higher (P<0.001), and a drug-eluting stent was more frequently used (P=0.005). No significant differences were noted between groups regarding the predilation, recurrent dilation, postdilation, and other angiographic characteristics. In multivariate analysis, female sex (P=0.047), myocardial blush grade (P=0.038), previous coronary artery disease (P=0.030), and peak troponin level (P=0.002) were found to be predictors of MACE. In patients who were treated with PCI for ACS, performing postdilation did not predict final Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) flow grade, corrected TIMI frame count, myocardial blush grade, or MACE.

Potent effect of prasugrel on acute phase resolution of intra-stent athero-thrombotic burden after percutaneous intervention to acute coronary syndrome

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggested protruding thrombus and atheroma after stent placement could be a substrate for subsequent adverse ischemic events. Although protruded atherothrombotic burden can be assessed as intra-stent tissue (IST) by optical coherence tomography (OCT), the effects of potent antiplatelet therapy on the acute phase resolution of IST in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) was unknown.

METHODS

Ninety-six consecutive ACS patients with multi-vessel disease were enrolled in this prospective registry. In combination with aspirin, either clopidogrel or prasugrel was selected according to the date of enrolment. OCT examination was done immediately after percutaneous coronary intervention (post-PCI) and 10 days after index PCI (follow-up acute phase) to calculate averaged IST score as semi-quantitative measures of IST. High residual platelet reactivity (HRPR) was defined as platelet reactivity units (PRU)≥240 by VerifyNow P2Y12 assay (Accumetrics Inc., San Diego, CA, USA).

RESULTS

Thirty two patients (38 stents) were enrolled in the prasugrel group and sixty four patients (72 stents) in the clopidogrel group. Averaged IST scores post-PCI were similar between the two groups (0.68±0.41 vs. 0.68±0.40, p=0.99), which decreased in all of the prasugrel group and in 87.5% of the clopidogrel group (p=0.02). Consequently, changes in averaged IST score (delta averaged IST score) were significantly greater in the prasugrel group compared to those in the clopidogrel group (-0.411±0.288 vs. -0.299±0.270, p=0.045). The frequency of HRPR was significantly lower in the prasugrel group (10.0% vs 32.4%, p=0.028).

CONCLUSIONS

Prasugrel plus aspirin achieved greater acute phase reduction of IST than clopidogrel plus aspirin, which might underlie the clinical benefit of potent antiplatelet therapy in ACS. (UMIN000018751).