Comparación de los stents liberadores de fármaco y los convencionales en puentes de safena. Resultados inmediatos y a largo plazo

Percutaneous coronary intervention strategies and prognosis for graft lesions following coronary artery bypass grafting

The purpose of this study was to compare the prognosis of graft-percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and native vessel (NV)-PCI, drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare-metal stents (BMSs) for the treatment of graft lesions following coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), and to determine the risk factors for major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). A total of 289 patients who underwent PCI following CABG between August 2005 and March 2010 were retrospectively analyzed. The effects on survival were compared among patients who underwent NV- and graft-PCI, and DES and BMS implantation. Additionally, the risk factors for MACEs following PCI for graft lesions were analyzed. The findings showed that MACE-free and revascularization-free survival rates were significantly higher in the NV-PCI group compared with those in the graft-PCI group. There were 63 cases (29.0%) of MACEs in the DES group and 25 cases (52.1%) in the BMS group. In patients undergoing NV-PCI, the DES group had significantly fewer MACEs and less target vessel revascularization (TVR) than the BMS group. In patients undergoing graft-PCI, the DES group showed a tendency for fewer MACEs and a lower incidence of cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction and TVR compared with the BMS group. Diabetes, an age of >70 years and graft-PCI were independent risk factors for MACEs in patients post-PCI. It is concluded that NV-PCI has superior long-term outcomes compared with graft-PCI, and should therefore be considered as the first-line treatment for graft disease following CABG. Despite this, graft-PCI remains a viable option. DESs are the first choice for graft-PCI due to their safety and efficacy and their association with reduced mortality and MACE rate. Diabetes, older age and graft-PCI are independent risk factors for MACEs in patients post-CABG who are undergoing revascularization.

Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of saphenous vein graft (SVG) is associated with higher adverse event rates, lower procedural success, and inferior longterm patency rates compared with native vessel PCI. The ability to comply with dual antiplatelet therapy, and whether the patient will need an interruption in dual antiplatelet therapy, should be considered when deciding whether to implant a drug-eluting stent (DES) or bare metal stent (BMS) in an SVG. DES should be used for SVG PCI because they seem to reduce target vessel revascularization. This article reviews the evolution and contemporary evidence regarding use of DES versus BMS in SVG PCI.

Percutaneous revascularization strategies in saphenous vein graft lesions: long-term results

AIMS

Although half of saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) present obstructive atherosclerotic disease 10 years after implantation, controversy remains concerning the ideal treatment. Our aim was to compare percutaneous revascularization (PCI) options in SVG lesions, according to intervention strategy and type of stent.

METHODS

A retrospective single-center analysis selected 618 consecutive patients with previous bypass surgery who underwent PCI between 2003 and 2008. Clinical and angiographic parameters were analyzed according to intervention strategy - PCI in SVG vs. native vessel vs. combined approach - and type of stent implanted - drug-eluting (DES) vs. bare-metal (BMS) vs. both. A Cox regressive analysis of event-free survival was performed with regard to the primary outcomes of death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel failure (TVF).

RESULTS

During a mean follow-up of 796±548 days the rates of death, MI and TVF were 10.9%, 10.5% and 29.5%, respectively. With regard to intervention strategy (74.4% of PCI performed in native vessels, 17.2% in SVGs and 8.4% combined), no significant differences were seen between groups (death p=0.22, MI p=0.20, TVF p=0.80). The type of stents implanted (DES 83.2%, BMS 10.2%, both 3.2%) also did not influence long-term prognosis (death p=0.09, MI p=0.11, TVF p=0.64). The implantation of DES had a favorable impact on survival (p<0.001) in the subgroup of patients treated in native vessels but not in SVG.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with SVG lesions, long-term mortality, MI and TVF were not affected by intervention options, except for the favorable impact on survival of DES in patients treated in native vessels.

[Update in interventional cardiology]

This article contains a detailed review of the most important studies on interventional cardiology reported in either publications or presentations. With regard to coronary interventions, ST-elevation myocardial infarction is highlighted because of the ongoing substantial expansion in primary angioplasty programs. Drug-eluting stents, especially new-generation stents, continue to be the focus of numerous studies. Clinical outcomes in diabetic patients with left main coronary artery or multivessel disease are also dealt with by much research. In addition, intracoronary diagnostic techniques, particularly optical coherence tomography, is reviewed. Finally, there is increasing interest in the percutaneous treatment of structural heart disease, particularly percutaneous aortic valve implantation.

Drug-eluting or bare metal stents for the treatment of saphenous vein graft disease: a Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Observational studies and randomized, controlled trials have yielded uncertain results regarding the benefits of drug-eluting stents (DES) for the treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the cumulative evidence regarding the efficacy and effectiveness of DES to treat SVG compared with bare metal stent (BMS).

METHODS AND RESULTS

We conducted a bayesian hierarchical meta-analysis of all randomized, controlled trials and observational studies that compared clinical outcomes after DES or BMS placement in SVG disease. Our search resulted in 25 studies, cumulating 5755 patients. DES implantation was not associated with an increased risk of death (odds ratio [OR], 0.85; 95% credible intervals (CrI) [CrI], 0.62 to 1.21) or myocardial infarction (OR, 0.83; 95% CrI, 0.56 to 1.32), but wide CrIs preclude definitive conclusions. Target vessel revascularization (OR, 0.55; 95% CrI, 0.39 to 0.76) and target lesion revascularization (OR, 0.58; 95% CrI, 0.37 to 0.87) were both reduced by approximately 45% with DES. When combining these outcomes, the OR for major adverse cardiac events was reduced in patients treated with DES (OR, 0.62; 95% CrI, 0.46 to 0.81). Finally, the relative risk of stent thrombosis appeared lower with DES, although again the CrIs were very wide (OR, 0.54; 95% CrI, 0.13 to 1.39).

CONCLUSIONS

In this study-level meta-analysis, the largest ever reported and the first using bayesian methods, the use of DES for the treatment of SVG disease reduces target vessel revascularization and target lesion revascularization procedures compared with BMS. Although there is no evidence to date to suggest increased rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis, further data are needed to address this safety issue.

Comparison by meta-analysis of drug-eluting stents and bare metal stents for saphenous vein graft intervention

This meta-analysis was undertaken to assess the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents (DESs) compared to bare metal stents (BMSs) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) interventions. DESs decrease the risk of target vessel revascularization in native coronary arteries compared to BMSs. The ideal treatment strategy in patients with SVG disease is unknown. A search of the published reports was conducted to identify studies that compared DESs and BMSs in SVG intervention with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. A total of 19 studies (2 randomized trials and 17 registries), including 3,420 patients who had undergone SVG intervention (DESs, n = 1,489 and BMS, n = 1,931), met the selection criteria. The mean length of follow-up was 20 + or - 12 months. Using the fixed effect model, target vessel revascularization was less frequently performed in patients who had undergone SVG intervention with a DES than with a BMS (odds ratio [OR] 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.49 to 0.72). The incidence of myocardial infarction was lower in patients with a DES than in those with a BMS (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.49 to 0.99). No differences were found in the risk of death (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.02) or stent thrombosis (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.11) between the 2 groups. In conclusion, these findings support the use of DESs in SVG lesions.

Effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents in vein grafts: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) in degenerative vein grafts is currently an off-label indication. Recent studies have had conflicting results regarding the effectiveness and safety of this practice. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare DES to bare-metal stents for the treatment of vein graft stenosis.

METHODS

PubMed and the Cochrane clinical trials database were systematically searched to identify all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies examining DES for vein graft stenosis published in English between 2003 and 2009. Inclusion criteria included follow-up duration > or =6 months. Data were stratified by study design and pooled using random effects models.

RESULTS

Twenty studies were found to meet our inclusion criteria. Eighteen studies were observational and 2 were RCTs. In observational studies, DES were associated with a reduction in major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% CI 0.35-0.72), death (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.53-0.91), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.79), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.78). The incidence of myocardial infarction was similar between groups. In the RCTs, pooled results were inconclusive because of small sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Although data from observational studies suggest that the use of DES for vein graft stenosis has favorable effects on MACE, death, TVR, and TLR, these data should be interpreted with caution due to their observational nature. Corresponding RCT data are inconclusive. There remains a need for large multicenter RCTs to address the effectiveness and safety of DES for vein graft stenosis.

Outcomes with drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft intervention results from the STENT (strategic transcatheter evaluation of new therapies) group

OBJECTIVES

This study compares outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing saphenous vein graft (SVG) intervention.

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of DES in patients undergoing SVG intervention is controversial.

METHODS

The STENT (Strategic Transcatheter Evaluation of New Therapies) registry is a multicenter U.S. registry evaluating outcomes with DES. Our study population includes patients undergoing PCI of SVG lesions with DES (n = 785) or BMS (n = 343) who completed 9-month or 2-year follow-up. Outcomes were adjusted with propensity analyses.

RESULTS

The DES patients had fewer emergent procedures but had smaller vessels and longer lesions. The DES patients had less death or myocardial infarction at 9 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33 to 0.83, p = 0.006) and less death at 2 years (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.98, p = 0.041). Target vessel revascularization (TVR) was less with DES at 9 months (7.2% vs. 10.0%, HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.61, p < 0.001) but was no different by 2 years (18.3% vs. 16.9%, p = 0.86), although adjusted TVR rates were lower (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.90, p = 0.014). The DES reduced TVR at 9 months in SVG lesions with diameter <3.5 mm (8.0% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.013) but not >or=3.5 mm (6.0% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of SVG lesions with DES vs. BMS is effective in reducing TVR at 9 months, although most of this advantage is lost at 2 years. The DES seem safe with less death or myocardial infarction, although selection bias might have affected these results. Our data suggest that DES might have short-term advantages over BMS in SVG lesions with diameter <3.5 mm.

Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents for treating saphenous vein grafts

BACKGROUND

Current data show conflicting results regarding safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) for treating saphenous vein grafts (SVG). Our objective was to compare DES with BMS for SVG intervention.

METHODS

Patients undergoing stenting with DES or BMS to SVG from January 2000 to June 2007 were included. To eliminate any unobserved bias regarding stent selection, the BMS cohort was divided into pre- and post-2003 when DES became available. Adjusted Cox analysis compared DES with pre- and post-2003 BMS patients. The primary end point was a composite of all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization.

RESULTS

Of the total 566 patients, 217 (38%) received DES, 110 (20%) received BMS post-2003, and 239 (42%) received BMS pre-2003. Median follow-up was 2.9 years (interquartile range 1.4-4.9 years). There was a trend toward lower primary end point with DES compared to post-2003 BMS (91 events, adjusted hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.35-1.07, P = .08). However, despite 179 events, DES use was not associated with lower primary end point compared with pre-2003 BMS (adjusted hazard ratio 0.61, 95% CI 0.28-1.35, P = .23).

CONCLUSIONS

Although DES showed a trend toward a lower primary end point when compared with BMS post-2003, this association was no longer present when DES was compared to pre-2003 BMS. These results are consistent with the preponderance of available data and indicate that unobserved bias in observational registries may explain the reported benefit of DES over BMS for treating SVG.