Stents liberadores de fármacos frente a stents convencionales en pacientes diabéticos con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST: un análisis combinado de los datos de pacientes individuales de 7 ensayos aleatorizados

Acute coronary syndromes in diabetic patients, outcome, revascularization, and antithrombotic therapy

Diabetes exacerbates the progression of atherosclerosis and is associated with increased risk of developing acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Approximatively 25-30% of patients admitted for ACS have diabetes. ACS occurs earlier in diabetics and is associated with increased mortality and a higher risk of recurrent ischemic events. An increased proinflammatory and prothrombotic state is involved in the poorer outcomes of diabetic patients. In the past decade advancement in both percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and coronary artery by-pass graft (CABG) techniques and more potent antiplatelet drugs like prasugrel and ticagrelor improved outcomes of diabetic patients with ACS, but this population still experiences worse outcomes compared to non-diabetic patients. While in ST elevation myocardial infarction urgent PCI is the method of choice for revascularization, in patients with non-ST elevation ACS an early invasive approach is suggested by the guidelines, but in the setting of multivessel (MV) or complex coronary artery disease (CAD) the revascularization strategy is less clear. This review describes the accumulating evidence regarding factors involved in promoting increased incidence and poor prognosis of ACS in patients with diabetes, the evolution over time of prognosis and outcomes, revascularization strategies and antithrombotic therapy studied until now.

Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes After Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Patients With Insulin-Treated Versus Non-Insulin Treated Diabetes Mellitus

There are conflicting data on whether patients with insulin-treated diabetes mellitus (ITDM) have poorer outcomes compared with non-insulin treated diabetic (non-ITDM) patients following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We therefore compared clinical outcomes following PCI in ITDM versus non-ITDM patients. We prospectively collected data on 4,579 patients with diabetes underwent PCI between 2005 and 2014 in a large multicenter registry and dichotomized them as having ITDM (n = 1,111) or non-ITDM (n = 3,468). The non-ITDM group was further divided into diet control only (diet-DM; n = 786) and those taking oral hypoglycemic agents (OHG-DM; n = 2,639), and clinical outcomes were compared with ITDM patients. Median follow-up for long-term mortality was 4.2 years (IQR 2.0 to 6.6 years). ITDM patients were more likely to be female, obese, and have severe renal impairment (all p <0.001). Procedural characteristics were similar other than a greater use of drug-eluting stents in ITDM patients. On multivariable analysis, ITDM was an independent predictor of 12-month major adverse cardiovascular and cerebrovascular events (MACCE; OR 1.26, 95% CI 1.02 to1.55, p = 0.03). Dividing the non-ITDM group further by treatment, a progressively higher rate of 12-month MACCE across the 3 groups was observed (13.5% vs 17.9% vs 21.8%; p <0.001). Long-term mortality was similar in the diet-DM and OHG-DM groups, but significantly higher in the ITDM group on Kaplan-Meier analysis (log-rank p <0.001). In conclusion, there is a clear gradient of adverse outcomes with escalation of therapy from diet control to OHGs to insulin.

Factors Associated With the Use of Bare Metal Stents in Patients With ST Elevation Myocardial Infarction

BACKGROUND

Drug eluting stents (DES) are used in the majority of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Factors associated with the use of bare metal stents (BMS) for patients undergoing primary PCI for ST elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) have not been adequately explored. The objective of this study was to evaluate factors associated with BMS use in STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI.

METHODS

Patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI between January 2008 and February 2015 were retrospectively identified. Patients who received both a DES and BMS were included in the DES group and patients receiving balloon angioplasty only were excluded. Baseline demographics, angiographic variables, procedure related variables and in-hospital events were collected. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with BMS use.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and sixty-five patients underwent primary PCI for STEMI during the study period. Seventy-two patients (8.3%) received balloon angioplasty only and were excluded, yielding 793 patients for the study cohort. Three hundred fifty-two patients (44%) received BMS and 441 patients (56%) received DES. Patients receiving DES had a higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus, prior myocardial infarction, prior PCI, left anterior descending artery culprit location and Medicaid Insurance compared to those receiving BMS. Patients receiving BMS had a higher prevalence of cardiogenic shock and right coronary artery culprit location. Unadjusted in-hospital mortality was significantly higher for patients receiving BMS compared to patients receiving DES, 11.1% vs 3.2%, respectively, p < 0.0001. Multivariate predictors of BMS use were cardiogenic shock (OR 30.3; 95% CI 11.25 to 81.73) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.99; 95% CI 1.04 to 8.64).

CONCLUSION

In a contemporary series of patients undergoing primary PCI for STEMI, BMS were used in 44% of patients and independent factors associated with BMS use were cardiogenic shock and diabetes mellitus.

Long-term impact of diabetes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: Insights from the EXAMINATION randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Long-term outcomes of diabetic patients suffering from ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) and treated with second-generation drug-eluting stent have been scarcely evaluated. The aim of this posthoc subanalysis of the EXAMINATION trial was to compare 5-year outcomes according to the presence of diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

From a total of 1,497 patients included in the trial, 258 were diabetics (n = 137, received everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and n = 121 bare-metal stent (BMS); whereas 1,239 were nondiabetics (n = 613 treated with EES and n = 626 with BMS). Patient-oriented combined endpoint (POCE) defined as all-cause death, any MI or any revascularization, and other clinical parameters were collected up to 5-years. All results were adjusted for various potential confounders.

RESULTS

At 5-years, patients with diabetes showed similar rates of POCE between diabetics treated with EES and those treated with BMS (32.8% vs. 32.2%; p = 0.88). However, rates of TLR were significantly lower in the EES group (4.4% vs. 9.9%; HR 0.52 (0.29-0.94); P = 0.03). In non-diabetics, the use of EES was associated with a significant improvement in all-clinical parameters except for MI rate: POCE: [10.0% vs. 12.6%; HR 0.78(0.62-0.98); P = 0.038], all cause death: [7.0% vs. 12.1%; HR 0.62(0.42-0.90); P = 0.014], and [TLR: 4.2 vs. 6.7; HR 0.60 (0.37-0.98); P = 0.04]. Overall, diabetics showed higher rate of POCE at 5-years (32.6% vs. 21.5% in nondiabetics HR1.45[1.03-2.04];p = 0.03) driven by increased rates of MI and the need for revascularization that occurred in coronary segments remote from target lesions [2.7% vs. 1.1%; HR: 2.27 (1.12-5.23); P = 0.02 and 14% vs. 6.2%; HR: 2.11 (1.38-3.22); P = 0.001, respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetics had worse clinical outcomes than nondiabetics after STEMI mainly due to atherosclerosis progression. At 5-years, the treatment with EES did not reduce the rate of POCE in diabetics but reduced the need for revascularization compared with BMS.

Imatinib mesylate and nilotinib decrease synthesis of bone matrix in vitro

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), such as imatinib (IMA) and nilotinib (NIL), are the cornerstone of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment via the blockade of the oncogenic BCR-ABL1 fusion protein. However, skeletal side effects are commonly observed in pediatric patients receiving long-term treatment with IMA. Additionally, in vitro studies have shown that IMA and NIL alter vitamin D metabolism, which may further impair bone metabolism. To determine whether TKIs directly affect bone cell function, the present study treated the human osteoblastic cell line SaOS-2 with IMA or NIL and assessed effects on their mineralization capacity as well as mRNA expression of receptor activator of nuclear factor κB ligand (RANKL) and osteoprotegerin (OPG), two cytokines that regulate osteoclastogenesis. Both TKIs significantly inhibited mineralization and downregulated osteoblast marker genes, including alkaline phosphatase, osteocalcin, osterix, as well as genes associated with the pro-osteogenic Wnt signaling pathway; NIL was more potent than IMA. In addition, both TKIs increased the RANKL/OPG ratio, which is known to stimulate osteoclastogenesis. The present results suggested that the TKIs IMA and NIL directly inhibited osteoblast differentiation and directly promoted a pro-osteoclastogenic environment through the RANKL-OPG signaling axis. Thus, we propose that future work is required to determine whether the bone health of CML patients undergoing TKI-treatment should be routinely monitored.

Nine-month clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes treated with polymer-free sirolimus-eluting stents and 6‑month vs. 12‑month dual-antiplatelet therapy (DAPT)

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus is known to be associated with worse clinical outcomes in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES). Defining the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after DES implantation is still under debate. The objective of this subgroup analysis of the all-comers ISAR 2000 registry was to assess the safety and efficacy of a short DAPT (<6 month) versus a longer DAPT (>6 month) in patients with diabetes electively treated with the polymer-free sirolimus-coated ultrathin strut drug-eluting stent (PF-SES).

METHODS

Patients who received the PF-SES were investigated in a multicenter all-comers observational study. The primary endpoint was the 9‑month target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate, whereas secondary endpoints included the 9‑month major adverse cardiac event (MACE) and procedural success rates.

RESULTS

In all, 167 patients were treated with DAPT for ≤6 months (S-DAPT group) and 350 patients underwent DAPT treatment for 12 months (L-DAPT group). There was no significant difference in the overall MACE rate (4.6% vs. 3.1%, p = 0.441), the 9‑month accumulated stent thrombosis rates (0.8% vs. 0.3%, p = 0.51), or the accumulated rate of bleeding complications (5.3% vs. 3.4%, p = 0.341).

CONCLUSION

PF-SES are safe and effective in daily clinical routine with low rates of TLR and MACE in patients with diabetes and stable disease. Our data suggest that extending the duration of DAPT beyond 6 months does not improve MACE or TLR at 9 months in patients with stable CAD (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02629575).

Selective use of contemporary drug-eluting stents in primary angioplasty for ST-elevation myocardial infarction: pooled analysis of COMFORTABLE AMI and EXAMINATION

AIMS

Selective use of DES only in patients at higher risk of MACE is common practice, particularly in healthcare systems with a large premium payable for DES. We aimed to identify subgroups of patients in which the use of BMS in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for STEMI can still be justified.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We performed a patient-level pooled analysis of COMFORTABLE AMI and EXAMINATION comparing contemporary DES with BMS in PPCI. A risk score was applied using three parameters: lesion length >15 mm, vessel size <3 mm, and diabetes mellitus. Individual data were available for 2,655 patients. The incidence of MACE at one year was incrementally higher in patients with risk scores of 1 or 2/3. MACE rates were lower in patients with a risk score 0 or 1 who were treated with DES (p=0.0073 and p=0.008). No difference in death or reinfarction was seen between DES and BMS in any group. There was a significant reduction in TLR with DES in all three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A score comprising vessel size, lesion length, and diabetes did not identify patients at low risk with equivalent or better results from BMS use. The results suggest that the practice of only selective use of DES in primary PCI should be discouraged.

Long-term outcome of early percutaneous coronary intervention in diabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome: insights from the BASE ACS trial

BACKGROUND

The BASE ACS trial demonstrated an outcome of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents (BAS) that was non-inferior to everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). We performed a post-hoc analysis of diabetic versus non-diabetic patients from the trial.

METHODS

We randomised 827 patients (1:1) with ACS to receive either BAS or EES. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE): a composite of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Follow-up was planned yearly through 7 years.

RESULTS

Of 827 patients, 140 (16.9%) were diabetic; of these, 36 (25.7%) were insulin-treated. Mean follow-up duration was 4.2 ± 1.9 years. MACE was more frequent in diabetics versus non-diabetics (23.6% versus 13.7%, respectively, p = 0.003), mainly driven by more frequent cardiac death (7.9% versus 2.2%, respectively, p = 0.002). The rates of non-fatal MI, ischaemia-driven TLR were comparable (p > 0.05 for all). In diabetic patients, MACE was comparable between the two stent arms (18.5% versus 28.0%, for BAS versus EES, respectively, p = 0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetic patients treated with early percutaneous coronary intervention for ACS had worse long-term outcome, compared with non-diabetics, mainly driven by more frequent cardiac death. The long-term outcome of BAS was comparable to EES in diabetics. Key Messages Diabetic patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome who were treated with early percutaneous coronary intervention had worse long-term clinical outcome, compared with non-diabetics, mainly driven by a high incidence of cardiac death. Age independently predicted both major adverse cardiac events and cardiac death in diabetic patients. The long-term clinical outcome of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents was comparable to that of everolimus-eluting stents in the diabetic, as well as in the non-diabetic subgroup.

Stent thrombosis and adverse cardiovascular outcomes observed between six months and five years with sirolimus-eluting stents and other drug-eluting stents in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus complicated by coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

This study aimed to compare 6 months to 5 years stent thrombosis (ST) and adverse cardiovascular outcomes associated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and other drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Electronic databases were searched for studies comparing SES with other DES in patients with T2DM. Total ST, definite ST, probable ST, and other adverse cardiovascular outcomes reported between 6 months and 5 years were considered as the clinical end points in this study. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for categorical variables and the pooled analyses were performed with RevMan 5.3 software.Twenty-nine studies involving a total number of 25,729 patients with diabetes were included in this meta-analysis. SES were not associated with significantly higher total, definite, and probable STs with OR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.77-1.17, P = 0.62; OR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.65-1.37, P = 0.76; and OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.77-1.45, P = 0.74, respectively. SES were also noninferior to the other non-sirolimus eluting drug eluting stents (non-SE DES) in terms of all-cause mortality, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stroke with OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.82-1.03, P = 0.16; OR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.88-1.35, P = 0.44; OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.80-1.06, P = 0.26; and OR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.49-1.28, P = 0.43, respectively. Target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events were also similarly reported between SES and non-SE DES with OR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.83-1.31, P = 0.72; OR: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.95-1.64, P = 0.11; and OR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.90-1.25, P = 0.49, respectively.During this particular follow-up period, SES were not associated with any increase in ST among these patients with T2DM. Mortality and other adverse cardiovascular outcomes were also not significantly different between these 2 groups. Hence, SES should be considered neither superior nor inferior to other DES. They are expected to be equally effective and safe to use in patients with T2DM.

Pooled analysis of two randomized trials comparing titanium-nitride-oxide-coated stent versus drug-eluting stent in STEMI

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

We performed a pooled analysis based on patient-level data from the TITAX-AMI and BASE-ACS trials to evaluate the outcome of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents vs drug-eluting stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction at 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

The TITAX-AMI trial compared bioactive stents with paclitaxel-eluting stents in 425 patients with acute myocardial infarction. The BASE-ACS trial compared bioactive stents with everolimus-eluting stents in 827 patients with acute coronary syndrome. The primary endpoint for the pooled analysis was major adverse cardiac events: a composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis included 501 patients; 245 received bioactive stents, and 256 received drug-eluting stents. The pooled bioactive stent group was associated with a risk ratio of 0.85 for major adverse cardiac events (95% confidence interval, 0.53-1.35; P=.49) compared to the pooled drug-eluting stent group. Similarly, the pooled bioactive stent group was associated with a risk ratio of 0.71 for cardiac death (95% confidence interval, 0.26-1.95; P=.51), 0.44 for recurrent myocardial infarction (95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.97; P=.04), and 1.39 for ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (95% confidence interval, 0.74-2.59; P=.30), compared to the pooled drug-eluting stent group. These results were confirmed by propensity-score adjusted analysis of the combined datasets.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction, bioactive stents were associated with lower rates of recurrent myocardial infarction compared to drug-eluting stents at 2-year follow-up; yet, the rates of cardiac death and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization were similar.

Outcomes of coronary revascularization (percutaneous or bypass) in patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel coronary disease

Clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus and multivessel disease (MVD) undergoing coronary revascularization have not been extensively evaluated, we sought to examine outcomes in a diabetic cohort of 195 consecutive patients with MVD characterized by SYNTAX scores (SSs) undergoing nonrandomized revascularization, 102 (52%) by percutaneous intervention (PCI) and 93 (48%) by coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) at Liverpool Hospital (Sydney, Australia) from June 2006 to March 2010. Clinical outcomes were assessed at a median term of 14 months. The overall median SS was 44, with significantly higher SSs in CABG- than PCI-treated patients (48 vs 39, p <0.0001). There was a similar incidence of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction and stroke in PCI- and CABG-treated patients (6.1% vs 8.3%, p = 0.383; 12% vs 4.9%, p = 0.152; 3.1% vs 3.5%, p = 0.680 respectively). However, the rates of target vessel revascularization and major adverse coronary and cerebral event were significantly higher in PCI-treated patients than in those undergoing CABG (20% vs 1.2%, p <0.0001; 29% vs 15%, p = 0.034). Despite a much higher SS, patients who underwent PCI achieved comparable outcomes at 1 year to those with diabetes mellitus and a SS ≥ 33 as reported in the SYNTAX trial. In conclusion, in this single-center nonrandomized observational study, coronary revascularization by PCI is associated with increased major adverse coronary and cerebral events at 1-year follow-up, predominantly driven by a high rate of target vessel revascularization. Thus, CABG should remain the revascularization procedure of choice for diabetic patients with MVD and high SSs.

Influence of diabetes mellitus on clinical outcomes following primary percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) have a worse outcome after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) than nondiabetic patients. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), and death in diabetic and nondiabetic patients treated with primary PCI for ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) in Western Denmark. From January 2002 through June 2005, 3,655 consecutive patients with STEMI treated with primary PCI and stent implantation (316 patients with DM, 8.6%; 3,339 patients without DM, 91.4%) were recorded in the Western Denmark Heart Registry. All patients were followed for 3 years. Cox regression analysis was used to compute hazard ratios (HRs), controlling for potential confounding. Three-year rates of definite stent thrombosis were 1.6% in the DM group and 1.5% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.50 to 2.67). The rate of MI was 12.3% in the DM group versus 5.6% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 2.56, 95% CI 1.81 to 3.61). Rates of TLR were 12.1% in the DM group and 8.7% in the non-DM group (adjusted HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.14 to 2.11). All-cause mortality was 23.7% in patients with DM versus 12.7% in patients without DM (adjusted HR 2.03, 95% CI 1.59 to 2.59). In conclusion, stent thrombosis rate was similar in patients with and without DM and STEMI treated with primary PCI, whereas the presence of DM increased the risk of MI, TLR, and death.

Paclitaxel-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents in diabetic patients with acute myocardial infarction: the Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) trial

BACKGROUND

In the prospective, randomized Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularization and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) trial, implantation of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) safely reduced the rates of ischemic target lesion revascularization (TLR) compared with bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous intervention. Diabetes mellitus is a known predictor of adverse outcomes after percutaneous intervention in STEMI. We therefore sought to assess the impact of PES in diabetic patients with STEMI from the HORIZONS-AMI trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 478 patients with diabetes and 2527 without diabetes were randomly assigned to receive PES versus BMS. The 12-month rates of ischemic TLR were significantly reduced by PES compared with BMS in both diabetic (11.2% versus 5.2%; hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]=0.45 [0.21 to 0.93]; P=0.03) and nondiabetic (6.8% versus 4.3%, hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]=0.63 [0.44 to 0.92]; P=0.02) patients. In patients with insulin-treated diabetes, PES compared with BMS reduced the 12-month TLR rate from 21.4% to 7.3% (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]=0.35 [0.12 to 1.03]; P=0.046). Angiographic late loss and binary restenosis at 13 months were also significantly reduced in PES-treated diabetic patients. There were no significant differences between the BMS and PES groups in the 12-month rates of death, reinfarction, stroke, or stent thrombosis in either diabetic or nondiabetic patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In the large-scale, prospective, randomized HORIZONS-AMI trial, implantation of PES compared with BMS in patients with STEMI and diabetes mellitus resulted in significant reductions in ischemia-driven TLR and angiographic restenosis at 1 year, with comparable safety outcomes, including stent thrombosis. These results suggest that PES can safely be used to reduce restenosis in high-risk diabetic patients presenting with STEMI.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00433966.

Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in acute myocardial infarction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Objectives: Recent concerns have been raised for the safety after drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation compared with the use of bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction (STEMI). The objective of this study was to estimate the relative impact of DES versus BMS on mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and stent thrombosis (ST) in STEMI patients by performing comprehensive meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies.

Methods: We performed an electronic search and manual search of studies presented through September 2009, without language restrictions. An approach of “using systematic reviews” was used. Two independent reviewers extracted prespecified data from each study. A random-effects model was used to combine trials and to perform stratified analyses based on study designs and the duration of follow-up.

Results: Fourteen RCTs were identified (N = 7,654). Compared with BMS, DES significantly reduced TVR (risk ratio [RR], 0.48; 95 percent confidence interval [CI], 0.41–0.56) and MI (RR, 0.77; 95 percent CI, 0.61–0.97), without increasing mortality (RR, 0.88; 95 percent CI, 0.70–1.10) and ST (RR, 0.93; 95 percent CI, 0.72–1.21). Among 35 observational studies (N = 44,849), the use of DES was associated with a significant reduction in mortality (RR, 0.85; 95 percent CI, 0.79–0.91) and TVR (RR, 0.61; 95 percent CI, 0.48–0.77). MI and ST were significantly lower in the DES group within 1-year follow-up, but there were no differences within 2 years of follow-up. There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity and publication bias.

Conclusions: These data in aggregate suggest that using DES in STEMI patients is safe and efficacious, but there are differences between RCT and observational data comparing DES and BMS.

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.

Long-term outcome after sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: a patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Although it is widely believed that patients with diabetes mellitus obtain the greatest benefit from drug-eluting stents, convincing evidence on long-term efficacy and safety of these stents is lacking.

METHODS

We performed a meta-analysis of individual patient data from four randomized trials including 583 patients comparing sirolimus eluting with bare metal stents (median follow-up of 4.2 years). These were the only specific trials reporting on drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients. The primary endpoint was the incidence of major cardiac events. The secondary endpoints were all-cause mortality and myocardial infarction as a safety endpoint and target lesion re-intervention as an efficacy endpoint. Stent thrombosis was also evaluated.

RESULTS

There was a significant reduction in the overall hazard of major cardiac events (hazard ratio [HR] 0.48, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-0.63, P < 0.001) with sirolimus-eluting stents. This was mostly due to a significant reduction in the overall hazard of repeat revascularization (HR 0.27, 95% CI 0.18-0.41, P < 0.001) in favor of sirolimus-eluting stents. However, the overall hazard of death (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.59-1.41, P = 0.68) as well as death or myocardial infarction (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.54-1.09, P = 0.14) were not significantly different between the groups. No significant differences were observed regarding stent thrombosis (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.15-1.69, P = 0.26).

CONCLUSIONS

Sirolimus-eluting stents are highly effective in reducing the risk for major cardiac events and safe in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease.

Evaluation and management of special subgroups after primary percutaneous coronary intervention

In recent decades, the increased use of novel pharmacologic therapies and primary percutaneous coronary intervention has considerably improved survival in the setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. Nevertheless, optimal management and care of particular subgroups of patients such as the elderly and individuals with diabetes mellitus, renal dysfunction, or cardiogenic shock are still debated. In fact, because of their clinically relevant comorbidities, these patients are often excluded from randomized trials; thus, data are largely limited to those from retrospective cohorts or subgroup analyses of large clinical studies. These particular subgroups of patients require special management during and after prompt mechanical reperfusion because of their high risk of both thrombotic and bleeding events. Therefore, cardiologists should accurately assess the risk-benefit equation before administrating and dosing currently available antithrombotic and antiplatelets agents in these high-risk populations.

Outcomes in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients who present with acute myocardial infarction and are treated with drug-eluting stents

Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are at a greater risk of mortality and cardiovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention than those without DM. We aimed to determine whether differences exist in the long-term mortality of patients with versus without DM who present with acute myocardial infarction and receive drug-eluting stents. Data were collected on 161 patients with and 395 without DM referred for primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction and treated with drug-eluting stents. The patients with cardiac arrest or cardiogenic shock were excluded. The 1-year major cardiac event (MACE) rates, defined as death, Q-wave myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization, were compared between the 2 groups. The patients with DM were sicker at baseline. The MACE rates at 1 year were significantly increased in those with DM compared to those without DM. This was primarily driven by all-cause mortality. No differences in Q-wave myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, type of drug-eluting stents used, or procedure-related renal failure were seen. No differences were found in death or MACE rates at 1 year after adjusting for age, gender, race, systemic hypertension, peripheral artery disease, and a history of chronic renal failure between the 2 groups (weighted log-rank statistic, p = 0.37 and p = 0.37, respectively). In patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction, those with DM were sicker than those without DM. In conclusion, after correction for co-morbid conditions, no difference was seen in the 1-year MACE or death rates between those with and without DM who presented with acute myocardial infarction and were treated with drug-eluting stents.