Multivessel Palmaz-Schatz stenting: early results and one-year outcome

Evaluation of clinical outcomes in patients undergoing dual vessel percutaneous coronary intervention using sirolimus-eluting coronary stent system in India

INTRODUCTION

Coronary artery disease is the most common catastrophic disease in India. The safety and effectiveness of dual vessel sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation (used as an intervention in CAD) is currently unknown in Indian population. The purpose of this study was to investigate one year clinical outcomes of patients with dual vessel coronary artery disease after implantation of the Supralimus-Core SES, in a "real-world" setting.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We evaluated 60 patients between April-2011 and August-2012, who underwent dual vessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Supralimus-Core SES implantation at the same index procedure. Dual vessels were defined as involvement of two major epicardial vessels (right, left anterior descending, circumflex, or left main coronary arteries) or one major epicardial vessel and a branch (≥2.5 mm in diameter) originating from another major epicardial vessel. The primary endpoint was target lesion failure (TLF) defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) at one year. Secondary endpoint included combined (definite, probable and possible) stent thrombosis (ST).

RESULTS

A total of 120 lesions were treated in 60 enrolled patients (mean age 56.0±9.2 y; 80.0% male) with average stent length of 23.1±8.5 mm. Among 60 patients, diabetes, hypertension and hypercholesterolemia were present in 15 (25.0%), 22 (36.7%) and 25 (41.7%) patients respectively. Indications for PCI were unstable angina in 30 (50.0%) patients and stable angina in 11 (18.3%) patients. Overall, 40 (33.3%) lesions were classified as complex (American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association type B2/C). The cumulative TLF rate was 5.0% (n=3) at one year. Cardiac death, MI and clinically-driven TLR occurred in 1 (1.7%), 0 (0%) and 2 (3.3%) patients, respectively at one year follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier curve of the freedom from overall events at one year was 95.0%. According to the Academic Research Consortium definition, there were no events of stent thrombosis during one year.

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that, dual vessel Supralimus-Core SES implantation allows safe and effective treatment with low rates of TLF at one year follow-up in Indian population.

Acute and intermediate-term procedural results using cypher stenting to treat multi-vessel coronary artery disease

OBJECTIVE

We examined our experience using the sirolimus eluting stents (Cypher) as an alternative to surgical revascularization in carefully selected cohort of patients undergoing multi-vessel percutaneous coronary intervention.

METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients with multi-vessel disease who were good candidates for both surgical and percutaneous revascularization were included in the current analysis. All patients underwent a careful clinical evaluation prior to the intervention, and they were followed for procedural and clinical outcomes for nine months.

RESULTS

Mean age was 64+/-11 years (40 males, 30% diabetics) and 10 patients (20%) had three-vessel disease. Angina class was 2.7+/-0.6 at baseline. Overall, 116 lesions were treated using 122 stents (mean 2.4 stents per patient). Total mean stent length was 43+/-12 mm (range: 21-90 mm). Overall, one patient died during follow-up (2%), no patient had stroke or Q wave MI and one patient experienced non-Q myocardial infarction. There was no documented stent thrombosis and two patients (4%) underwent target-vessel revascularization. The hierarchical cumulative major adverse cardiac event rate was 8% and the cardiac event-free survival rate was thus 92%.

CONCLUSION

Multi-vessel stenting using Cypher stents is a viable treatment strategy in selected group of patients with multi-vessel coronary artery disease. It is associated with excellent intermediate-term clinical outcomes and thus it could serve as the primary revascularization strategy of choice in appropriate candidates.

Treatment of multivessel coronary artery disease with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: immediate and mid-term results

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated clinical outcome after multivessel stenting with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in unselected lesions.

BACKGROUND

Safety and effectiveness of multivessel SES implantation is currently unknown.

METHODS

Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction [MI], and repeat revascularization) were analyzed at 30 days and at 6 months after multivessel SES implantation.

RESULTS

In 155 consecutive patients, 573 SES were implanted in 3.3 +/- 1.3 lesions per patient. At 30 days, the cumulative MACE rate was 10.3%: 7.1% patients developed a non-Q-wave MI, 1.9% developed a Q-wave MI, 0.6% died for non-cardiac reasons, and 0.6% had a repeat revascularization. Clinical follow-up was obtained in all 112 eligible patients treated for 359 lesions at a mean time of 6.5 +/- 2.2 months. The cumulative MACE rate was 22.3%: 3 (2.7%) deaths (1 for cardiac reasons), 4 (3.6%) MIs, target lesion revascularization (TLR) in 16 (14.3%) patients with 24 (6.7%) lesions. Target vessel revascularization was required in 18 (16.1%) patients due to TLR of lesions treated with SES or to disease progression (1.8% of patients). Cox regression analysis revealed total stent length per patient as the most powerful independent predictor of MACE. Overall stent thrombosis occurred in three (1.9%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Multivessel SES implantation can be safely performed on patients with complex coronary artery disease. The need for revascularization increases because of the cumulative effect of TLR on patients with multiple lesions.

Angiographic outcome in multivessel disease (GABI II study) using new coronary device interventions and comparison with GABI I trial results

Percutaneous coronary interventions using stents were investigated in patients with multivessel disease. Acute and long-term results were compared with those of the German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation trial in a prospective multicenter study. The study included 134 patients in whom 277 lesions were treated. Angiographic success and procedural success were achieved in 268 of 277 lesions (97%) and 118 of 134 patients (88%), respectively. Control angiography performed in 90 of 118 eligible patients (76%) exhibited restenosis in 43 of 182 lesions (24%). Multivariate regression analysis found that a diffuse lesion, the lesion and stent length, and the final luminal diameter were predictive for restenosis. Thus, immediate and long-term results of multivessel coronary intervention utilizing stents were improved compared to percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty of multivessel lesions. However, there is still need for improvement of long-term results, especially in particular lesion subgroups.

Stent deployment failure: reasons, implications, and short- and long-term outcomes

Stents have revolutionized percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI), impacting on both acute and long-term results. However, despite improvements in stent design, stent deployment failure is not an unusual event. The aim of the present study was to assess the frequency and causes of stent deployment failure, as well as the outcome of these patients. Between 1997 and 2001, a total of 3,537 patients underwent stent-assisted PCI and delivery of 5,275 stents was attempted. In the majority of patients (118; 78.1%), stenting was performed as provisional; in the remaining 33 (21.8%) as a bailout procedure. A total of 175 (3.3%) stents in 151 (4.3%) patients failed. Failure to deliver the stent to the lesion site was the main cause in 139 patients (92%) and failure either to expand adequately the stent or premature disengagement of the stent from the balloon in only 12 patients (8%). Peripheral stent embolization occurred in 10 (0.3%) patients. Deployment of a different stent in place of the failed one was attempted in 122 patients and was successful in the majority (108; 88.5%). In-hospital major adverse cardiac events were observed in six patients (4%): three patients required emergency coronary artery bypass surgery, two had a myocardial infarction (MI), and one patient underwent urgent repeat coronary intervention. At a mean follow-up of 32.2 +/- 17.7 months, 22 major adverse cardiac event occurred in 17 patients (11.2%): 1 cardiac death, 3 patients had an MI, and 18 patients required target vessel revascularization. One-year event-free survival for the whole group was 91.2%. Patients with stent embolization did not have any major adverse cardiac or vascular events. Thus, the rate of stent deployment failure in our series was 3.3%, mainly due to failure to deliver the stent to the site. Another stent was successfully deployed in the majority of cases and these patients had favorable short- and long-term outcomes.

Staged versus one-step approach for multivessel percutaneous coronary interventions

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) may be staged or performed in a single session. No data exist about the relative safety and efficacy of these 2 strategies. Our aim was to compare short-term and long-term outcomes of patients with multivessel CAD who underwent PCI in 1 versus 2 sessions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The study included 264 consecutive patients who underwent treatment in our center during 1997 and 1998. PCI was conducted in a single session in 129 patients and was staged in 135 patients. The mean interval between the sessions in the staged group was 45.6 +/- 22.3 days. The rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) during in-hospital stay did not differ significantly between the staged (combined for both stages) and nonstaged groups (2.2% vs 4.6%; P =.28). A trend for lower event rates at 30-day (2.9% vs 6.9%; P =.13) and 1-year follow-up (26.1 vs 35.9; P =.08) favored the staged arm. Diameter stenosis > or =50% was found in 17% of patients in the staged group in the second session and was successfully retreated in most of them. No MACE occurred between the sessions. Multivariate analysis identified staging of the procedure as a single independent predictor of MACE at 1-year follow-up (P =.05).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that a practical staging strategy within 4 to 8 weeks is safe and allows for identification and treatment of potential excessive proliferative response in the previously intervened lesions during the second procedure.

Long-term (> or =8 years) outcome after Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation

The purpose of this single-center study was to evaluate the long-term (> or =8 years) outcome of Palmaz-Schatz intracoronary stenting and to identify independent predictors of outcome. Although short-term results of Palmaz-Schatz intracoronary stenting have been promising, with a reduction in both angiographic restenosis and clinical cardiac events up to 3 years, longer-term follow-up has not been established. We analyzed clinical outcome in 426 consecutive patients at least 8 years after coronary stenting. Demographic, clinical, and procedural predictors of restenosis, survival, and event-free survival, defined as freedom from death, myocardial infarction (MI), and coronary revascularization (target stented site, target vessel, and any revascularization) were analyzed. Before discharge, 28 patients (6.6%) sustained at least 1 major cardiovascular event: 3 deaths (0.7%), 18 MIs (4.2%), and 17 repeat revascularizations. Surviving patients were followed for 8.9 years (interquartile range 8.4 to 9.4). After discharge, 59 patients (13.9%) died, 47 (11.1%) sustained an MI, and 188 (44.4%) underwent coronary revascularization. The 8-year event-free survival (freedom from death, freedom from death/MI/target-stented site revascularization, and freedom from death/MI/any coronary revascularization) was (mean +/- SE) 0.86 +/- 0.01, 0.62 +/- 0.03, and 0.47 +/- 0.02, respectively. Unstable angina, lower left ventricular ejection fraction, and saphenous vein graft stenting were found to be independent predictors of death during follow-up. Hypertension, unstable angina, multivessel disease, and multiple stent implantation were found to be independent predictors of the composite of death/MI/any coronary revascularization during follow-up. This study provided a useful assessment of very long-term outcome in survival, event-free survival, and predictors of major cardiac events 8 to 10 years after Palmaz-Schatz stent implantation.

A randomised trial of endoluminal reconstruction comparing the NIR stent and the Wallstent in angioplasty of long segment coronary disease: results of the RENEWAL Study

BACKGROUND

The role of coronary stents in reducing the incidence of acute complications and late restenosis after angioplasty has been established in randomized studies focusing on simple, short coronary lesions. The development of long coronary stents has provided a safe and predictable means of treating long coronary lesions, but this carries with it a higher risk of restenosis. By comparing the outcome of treating long lesions with two different stent types, we aimed to assess the influence of stent design rather than the nature of long lesions per se on the relatively high restenosis rates in this subgroup.

METHODS

This study was designed to assess procedural complications and 6-month restenosis rates in a randomized trial comparing a slotted tube stent with a self-expanding stent for the treatment of long coronary lesions. Randomization of vessels to either stent occurred after successful balloon angioplasty. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) was used to assess and optimize stent deployment. The patients were restudied angiographically and by IVUS at 6 months.

RESULTS

A total of 82 patients (85 vessels) were recruited (slotted tube stent, n = 44 vessels; self-expanding stent, n = 41 vessels). Successful deployment occurred in 41 (100%) of 41 of the self-expanding stent group and 41 (93%) of 44 of the slotted tube stent group. There was no difference in lesion length between the two groups (slotted tube stent, 26.6 +/- 6.9 [SD] mm; self-expanding stent, 28.7 +/- 9.8 [SD] mm; P = .2), but the mean length of the self-expanding stent was greater than that of the slotted tube stent (41.6 +/- 18.8 [SD] mm vs 35.4 +/- 16.2 [SD] mm, respectively; P < .05). There was no significant difference in the rate of major events between the two groups at 6-month follow-up. The angiographic restenosis rate at follow-up was less in the slotted tube stent group, but this did not reach statistical significance (26% vs 46%, respectively; P = .1) and the target lesion revascularization rate was similar for both groups (7.9% vs 7.7%, respectively; P = .8). IVUS assessment of plaque/stent ratios suggested a greater plaque burden in the self-expanding stent compared with the slotted tube stent at follow-up (0.42 +/- 1.2 [SD] vs 0.3 +/- 0.08 [SD]), but this was not statistically significant (P = .1).

CONCLUSIONS

Long stents can be safely and successfully deployed in long segment coronary disease, with an acceptable 6-month target lesion revascularization rate. Our results showed a trend toward lower angiographic restenosis and a lesser in-stent plaque burden at follow-up in the slotted tube stent compared with the self-expanding stent. This suggests that stent design may influence the restenotic process in long coronary lesions.

Multivessel coronary stenting versus bypass surgery in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function: immediate and 2-year long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Compared with coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), the clinical benefits of intracoronary stenting have not been established in patients with multivessel coronary lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

To compare the clinical outcomes of intracoronary stenting with that of CABG, we reviewed the outcomes of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease from an observational database. Two hundred consecutive patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function were evaluated. In 200 patients, multivessel stenting was performed in 100 and CABG was performed in 100. Complete revascularization was achieved in 95% in the CABG group and in 69% in the stent group (P <.05). The duration of total hospital stay and coronary care unit admission was significantly shorter in the stent group (P <.05). The long-term survival was similar between the 2 groups. There were no significant differences of cardiac events between the 2 groups except for the recurrence of angina (19% in stenting vs 8% in CABG, P =.03) and target lesion revascularization (19% vs 2%, P <.01) in the patients with stents.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease and normal left ventricular function, intracoronary stenting may offer an effective alternative to coronary bypass surgery.

Procedural results and intermediate clinical outcomes after multiple saphenous vein graft stenting

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the early and mid-term (18-month) clinical events in a consecutive series of patients undergoing a nonstaged multiple saphenous vein grafting (SVG) intervention with stents as compared with a single SVG stent procedure.

BACKGROUND

Saphenous vein graft angioplasty has been limited by high rates of distal embolization, myocardial infarction, restenosis and late mortality. It is unknown whether stenting of multiple, different SVGs at the same setting is associated with higher risk.

METHODS

We evaluated in-hospital and mid-term clinical outcomes (death, Q wave myocardial infarction [MI] and repeat revascularization rates up to 18 months) in 70 consecutive patients treated with coronary stents in 2 (93% of patients) or 3 SVGs, as compared with 649 patients undergoing stenting of a single SVG between January 1, 1994 and December 31, 1997.

RESULTS

Overall procedural success was obtained in 97% of patients with 2 or 3 SVGs and 97% of patients with a single SVG (p = 0.94). Procedural complications were also similar (2.8% for multiple SVGs vs. 2.7% for a single SVG, p = 0.94). There was a higher prevalence of periprocedural non-Q wave MI (28% vs. 16%, p = 0.009) in the multiple SVG group. During follow-up (18 months), target lesion revascularization was 11% in multiple SVG and 15% in single SVG interventions (p = 0.19), and repeat revascularization (calculated per treated patient) was also similar for both groups (19% vs. 18%, p = 0.94). There was no difference in death (5.6% vs. 5.3%, p = 0.92) and Q wave MI rate (4.3% vs. 2.9%, p = 0.55) after the multiple SVG intervention. Overall cardiac event-free survival was similar for both groups (62% vs. 60%, p = 0.75). The study was powered to detect a clinically meaningful difference of 10% in mortality; smaller differences could not be evaluated on the basis of this sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous stenting of multiple SVGs in carefully selected patients has similar in-hospital procedural success and major complications rates, as well as mid-term (18-month) clinical outcomes, as compared with single SVG stenting. Thus, multiple SVG interventions using stents may be a viable revascularization strategy for carefully selected patients and suitable lesions in multiple SVG disease.

One-year outcome in multivessel coronary disease patients undergoing coronary stenting

The purpose of this study was to assess 1-year clinical outcome of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) who underwent coronary stenting and were prospectively enrolled in the Registro Impianto Stent Endocoronarico (RISE). Of 939 consecutive patients included in the registry, 377 patients with angiographic evidence of multivessel CAD had a 1-year clinical follow-up. All patients underwent PTCA and single or multiple stenting in at least one vessel. Angiographic optimization was usually performed by using high-pressure balloon dilation. After the procedure, continuation of aspirin (at least 250 mg/day) was recommended, whereas the use of anticoagulation or ticlopidine was determined by the physician in charge of the patient in the various centers. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, Q-wave or non-Q-wave myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. Mean age of patients (311 men, 66 women) was 60 +/- 10 years. Globally, there were 596 stents implanted (72% Palmaz-Schatz stents) in 434 vessels. In about 75% of the procedures, an inflation pressure > 12 atm was used. Angiographic success rate was 98.5%. After stenting, 77% of patients received antiplatelet treatment with ticlopidine and aspirin. During hospitalization, there were 34 major adverse cardiac events in 24 patients. At 1-year follow-up, 309 patients were alive and event-free; cumulative incidence of death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularization were 2.9%, 4.7%, and 10.8%, respectively. By Cox regression analysis, multiple stents implantation (HR 1.72, 95% CI 1-2.97), left anterior descending artery revascularization (HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.01-3.42), use of inflation pressure > 12 atm (HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.97), ticlopidine therapy (HR 0.41, 95% CI 0.23-0.74), and stent length (HR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.05) were associated with 1-year major cardiac events. In patients with multivessel CAD undergoing stent implantation in at least one vessel, 1-year follow-up is favorable and the need for repeat revascularization procedures, based on clinical data, is lower than previously reported for conventional PTCA. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 48:343-349, 1999.

Baseline clinical and angiographic variables associated with long-term outcome after successful intracoronary stent implantation

Although randomized studies have demonstrated improved outcomes with stents over balloon angioplasty in straightforward coronary narrowings in low-risk patients, this advantage is less clear for complex lesions and high-risk patients. This study was designed to identify clinical and angiographic variables that are associated with long-term outcome after stent implantation. We identified 1,709 patients undergoing successful stent placement without in-hospital major adverse events. We analyzed clinical, lesional, and procedural variables to determine their correlation with outcome. Mean duration of follow-up was 1.6 +/- 1.4 years. Cox proportional-hazards models and stepwise methods were used to assess which covariates were potentially related to each end point. The occurrence of death/myocardial infarction (MI) was associated with any history of congestive heart failure (relative risk [RR] 3.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3 to 4.7, p <0.0001), procedure within 24 hours of MI (RR 2.3, CI 1.3 to 4.1, p = 0.0048), vein graft intervention (RR 1.8, CI 1.3 to 2.6, p = 0.0007), and prior MI (RR 1.8, CI 1.2 to 2.6, p = 0.004). Repeat revascularization was associated with multivessel stent placement (RR 1.8, CI 1.2 to 2.8, p = 0.006) and stent for abrupt closure (RR 1.7, CF 1.1 to 2.7, p = 0.03), but was less frequent with de novo lesions and right coronary artery lesions (RR 0.6, CI 0.5 to 0.8, p = 0.0007, and RR 0.8, CI 0.6 to 1.0, p = 0.05, respectively). The cumulative end point of death/MI/repeat revascularization was associated with congestive heart failure (RR 1.7, CI 1.3 to 2.2, p <0.0001), multivessel stent placement (RR 1.6, Cl 1.1 to 2.3, p = 0.03), warfarin therapy (RR 1.4, CI 1.2 to 1.8, p = 0.001), and procedure within 24 hours of MI (RR 1.5, CI 1.1 to 2.1, p = 0.02), but was less frequent with complete revascularization and right coronary artery intervention (RR 0.8, CI 0.7 to 0.99, p = 0.04, and RR 0.7, CI 0.6 to 0.9, p = 0.009, respectively). Thus, this study demonstrates that there are readily identifiable characteristics in patients treated successfully with stents that are associated with long-term outcome.

Results (>6 months) of stenting of >1 major coronary artery in multivessel coronary artery disease

Multivessel percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) is associated with a high requirement for further revascularization procedures. Although stenting can reduce restenosis and clinical events after 1-vessel intervention, little information is available after multivessel coronary stenting. We followed up 136 patients (9% of 1,481 undergoing stenting in our center) who had had stent implantation in at least 2 different major native coronary arteries and were followed-up for >6 months. Each patient had received a mean of 2.3 +/- 0.6 stents (1.13 +/- 0.4 stents per lesion) and procedural success was 95%. In-hospital complications included 1 death, 1 Q-wave infarction, 5 non-Q-wave myocardial infarctions, and 1 repeat PTCA. After a mean of 18 +/- 13 months, 7 patients died (3 of heart failure, 4 of noncardiac causes), 2 required coronary bypass surgery, 1 had a myocardial infarction, 13 target vessel repeat PTCA, and 4 non-target vessel PTCA. Survival free of major cardiac events was 75% at 3 years. A history of heart failure, dilation of a restenotic lesion, and 3-vessel dilation were independent negative predictors of event-free survival. Angiographic follow-up was available in 86 patients: 56 (65%) were restenosis free, 23 (27%) had 1-vessel restenosis, and 6 (7%) had 2-vessel and 1 patient 3-vessel restenosis. Restenosis per vessel was 23% (41 of 177). Reference diameter, past-PTCA minimal luminal diameter, and length of the stent were independent predictors of restenosis. We conclude that multivessel stenting provides good midterm results in selected patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. Midterm events are less frequent than previously reported after balloon PTCA.

Procedural results and late clinical outcomes following multivessel coronary stenting

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes in a large consecutive series of patients undergoing percutaneous multivessel stent intervention.

BACKGROUND

High restenosis and recurrent angina rates have limited the clinical outcomes of multivessel coronary angioplasty before stents were available to improve angioplasty results.

METHODS

We evaluated in-hospital and long-term clinical outcomes (death, Q-wave myocardial infarction [MI], and repeat revascularization rates at one year) in 398 consecutive patients treated with coronary stents in two (94% of patients) or three native arteries, compared to 1,941 patients undergoing stenting procedure in a single coronary artery between January 1, 1994 and August 29, 1997.

RESULTS

Overall procedural success was obtained in 96% of patients with two- or three-vessel stenting and in 970% of patients with single-vessel stent intervention (p = 0.36). Procedural complications were also similar (3.8% for multivessel versus 2.9% for single vessel, p = 0.14). During follow up, target lesion revascularization was 15% in multivessel and 16% in single-vessel interventions (p = 0.38), and repeat revascularization (calculated per treated patient) was also similar for both groups (20% vs. 21%, p = 0.73). There was no difference in death (1.4% vs. 0.7%, p = 0.26), and Q-wave MI (1.2% vs. 0%, p = 0.02) was lower following multivessel interventions. Overall cardiac event-free survival was similar for both groups (p = 0.52).

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike previous conventional angioplasty experiences, multivessel stenting has (1) similar in-hospital procedural success and major complication rates and (2) similar long-term (one year) clinical outcomes compared with single-vessel stenting. Thus, stents may be a viable therapeutic strategy in carefully selected patients with multivessel coronary disease.