Randomised comparison of coronary stenting with and without balloon predilatation in selected patients

Clinical and procedural predictors of suboptimal myocardial reperfusion in primary percutaneous coronary intervention

Background

Suboptimal myocardial perfusion in primary PCI is associated with increased infarct size, left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and higher mortality rates as compared as those with optimal myocardial perfusion. We identified clinical and procedural predictors of suboptimal myocardial reperfusion as judged by myocardial plush grade (MBG) in primary PCI.

Methods and Results

100 patients with acute STEMI who underwent primary PCI were prospectively subjected to clinical, ECG, laboratory and angiographic evaluation. Patients were classified into: Optimal myocardial reperfusion group: (n=73) who had final MBG=3. Suboptimal myocardial reperfusion group: (n=27) who had persistent final MBG ≤ 2. Suboptimal myocardial reperfusion group had statistically significant little history of angina prior to MI 5 (18.5%) vs 44 (60.3%), little current aspirin intake 6(22%) vs 38 (52% ), increased blood sugar on admission (240 ± 101 mg/dl vs 171 ± 72 mg/dl), increased total leucocytic count on admission (12.1 ± 3.6 vs 10.2 ± 3.3) 103/mm3, longer reperfusion time (6.1 ± 2.8 vs 4.3 ± 2.1 h ), higher thrombus burden 12 (44.4 % ) vs 13 (17.8 %), higher predilatation pressure (16 ± 2.3 vs 14 ± 1.8 ATM), repeated balloon inflation during predilatation 24 (92.3 % ) vs 46 (69.7%) as compared optimal myocardial reperfusion group, (P < 0.05 for all).

Conclusion

Longer reperfusion time, repeated balloon inflations, high predilatation pressure> 15 ATM , high thrombus burden, neither history of angina nor aspirin intake prior to AMI, high total leucocytic count > 10103/mm3 and high blood glucose level > 160mg/dl were predictors for persistent suboptimal myocardial reperfusion in primary PCI.

New approach to direct stenting using a novel "all-in-one" coronary stent system via 5 French diagnostic catheters: a pilot study

OBJECTIVES

We sought to evaluate the strategy success and short term clinical outcomes of direct stenting via 5 French (F) diagnostic catheters using a novel bare metal stent with integrated delivery system (IDS) (Svelte Medical Systems, New Providence, NJ) and compare the results to a conventionally treated matched group.

METHODS

Fifteen consecutive patients with lesions deemed suitable for direct stenting using a bare metal stent were included. The primary endpoint was the strategy success defined as the ability to successfully treat a target lesion via a 5 F diagnostic catheter with a good angiographic result (TIMI III flow, residual stenosis ≤20%). Procedure and fluoroscopy times, contrast agent use, cost, and short-term clinical outcomes were compared to a matched group treated via conventional stenting.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was reached in 14/15 patients (93%). There were no significant differences in procedural (58.6 min ± 12.7 vs. 57.4 min ± 14.2) or fluoroscopy times (10.0 min ± 4.3 vs.10.1 min ± 3.9) or contrast agent use (193.7 ml ± 54.8 vs. 181.4 ml ± 35.6). However, there were significant reductions in materials used in the study group compared to the control group equating to cost savings of almost US $600 per case (US $212.44 ± 258.09 vs. US $804.69 ± 468.11; P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct stenting using a novel bare metal stent with an IDS via 5 F diagnostic catheters is a viable alternative to conventional stenting in selected patients and is associated with significant cost savings.

Direct stenting compared to balloon predilation in drug-eluting stents: one-year outcomes from the DEScover Registry

OBJECTIVES

We sought to examine the determinants and outcomes of direct stenting (DS) compared to predilation with drug-eluting stents (DES).

BACKGROUND

Limited data suggest that DS with DES is feasible and may reduce restenosis compared to predilation. Whether DS improves clinical outcomes in unselected patients treated with DES is unknown.

METHODS

DEScover is a prospective, multicenter, observational study of percutaneous coronary intervention that enrolled patients in 2005. The analysis cohort included 4,210 patients who received a DES and had a single lesion treated with DS (n = 1,651) or predilation (n = 2,559) at the discretion of the operator. Multivariable analysis was performed for 1-year outcomes.

RESULTS

DS was performed in 39.2% of patients. The direct stent patients were younger, less often male, and had a lesser extent of CAD. DS was performed less often in patients presenting with an acute myocardial infarction (MI) and more often in stable angina and elective procedures. Lesion characteristics differed with DS performed less often for calcified lesions, high-grade stenoses (>90%), and bifurcation lesions. Lesion postdilation was less common in direct stent patients (42.1% vs. 50.7%, P = 0.0001). Complete procedural success was similar (99.8% vs. predilation 99.7%, P = 0.46). At 1 year, there was no difference in the adjusted hazard ratios of death (0.67, 0.44-1.04, P = 0.08), MI (1.05, 0.66-1.67, P = 0.83), stent thrombosis (0.38, 0.13-1.14, P = 0.08), TLR (0.75, 0.48-1.17, P = 0.21), TVR (0.89, 0.64-1.23, P = 0.47), and major adverse coronary event (0.88, 0.71-1.09, P = 0.24).

CONCLUSIONS

DS with DES is commonly performed in clinical practice and results in similar long-term outcomes as predilation.

Impact of operator volume on overall major adverse cardiac events following direct coronary stent implantation versus stenting after predilatation

OBJECTIVES

To determine the impact of operator experience on procedural, clinical and angiographic outcome after (direct) coronary stent implantation.

BACKGROUND

Although for other forms of percutaneous coronary interventions an inverse relationship between operator volume and patient outcomes has been shown, the impact of operator volume on outcome after direct stenting has never been investigated.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on data from a prospective randomized trial comparing direct stenting with that after predilatation. The trial consisted of 400 patients with stable and unstable angina pectoris and/or myocardial ischemia due to a coronary stenosis of a single native vessel eligible in 1999-2001 for direct stenting. For a single-center high-volume clinic (>1500 cases/year), the authors compared the most experienced operators (case load: >4000) with well trained practitioners (case load: 175). One hundred and fifteen patients were identified who were treated by high-volume and 180 who were treated by medium-volume operators.

RESULTS

Baseline patient characteristics were evenly distributed among groups. High-volume, compared with medium-volume operators, were faster (30.8 versus 42.2 minutes, p < 0.001), needed less frequent postdilatation (15% versus 24%, p = 0.06) and had lower fluoroscopy times (7.5 versus 11.2 minutes, p < 0.001), lower contrast usage (180 versus 228 ml, p < 0.001), lower procedural costs (euro1982 versus euro2164, p = 0.05) and reduced rates of major adverse cardiac and cerebral event (MACCE) at six months (12.2 versus 21.1%, p = 0.03). The medium-volume operator group experienced higher angiographic binary restenosis rates after direct stenting compared with stenting after predilatation (31.5 versus 14.9%, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Stenting performed by high-volume operators resulted in a 50% reduction in MACCE as compared with medium-volume physicians, which also had twice as much restenosis when using direct stenting. Hence, the more demanding technique of direct stenting should not be performed by unsupervised operators who have not yet completed their training. Furthermore, prolonged training periods and even more intensive supervision by experienced operators seems mandatory.

In-hospital and mid-term adverse clinical outcomes of a direct stenting strategy versus stenting after pre-dilatation for the treatment of coronary artery lesions

BACKGROUND

Direct stenting without balloon dilatation may reduce procedural costs and duration, and hypothetically, the restenosis rate. This study was designed to compare the in-hospital and long-term outcomes of direct stenting (DS) versus stenting after pre-dilatation (PS) in our routine clinical practice.

METHODS

The 1 603 patients treated with stenting for single coronary lesions were enrolled into a prospective registry. Patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) within the preceding 48 hours, and those with highly calcified lesions, total occlusions, or a lesion in a saphenous graft were excluded. The baseline, angiographic and procedural data, in-hospital outcomes and follow-up data were recorded in our database and analysed with appropriate statistical methods.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and fifty-seven patients (53.5%) were treated with DS and 746 (46.5%) underwent PS. In the DS group, lesions were shorter in length, larger in diameter and had lower pre-procedural diameter stenosis. Type C and diffuse lesions and drug-eluting stents were found less often (p < 0.001). With univariate analysis, dissection and non- Q-wave MI occurred less frequently in this group (0.2 and 0.6% vs 3.9 and 2.1%, p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively). However, the cumulative major adverse cardiac events (MACE) did not differ significantly (4.9 vs 4.6%, p = 0.79). With multivariate analysis, direct stenting reduced the risk of dissection (OR = 0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.33, but neither the cumulative endpoint of MACE (OR = 1.1, 95% CI = 0.58- 2.11, p = 0.7) nor its constructing components were different between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct stenting in the real world has at least similar long-term outcomes in patients treated with stenting after pre-dilatation, and is associated with lower dissection rates.

Direct stenting versus predilatation and stenting technique when using paclitaxel-eluting stents

Direct stenting without predilatation is a well-defined, feasible method with bare metal stents. Direct stenting has also been shown to be safe and feasible with drug-eluting stents, however, there is much less evidence with this type of device when compared with bare metal stents. Three hundred and sixty-four coronary lesions in 257 consecutive patients (mean age, 57.4 +/- 9.8 years; 63 women) who had undergone elective stenting either with or without predilatation via a paclitaxel-eluting stent between March 2003 and March 2006 were retrospectively analyzed. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis was compared between the two groups of procedures; stenting with predilatation and direct stenting. All procedures were uneventful. No deaths occurred during the follow-up period. Direct stenting when compared with the predilatation technique, significantly decreased both procedure time (32.1 +/- 17.9 minute versus 41.2 +/- 18.6 minute, P < 0.0001) and fluoroscopy time (10.6 +/- 7.8 minute versus 15.5 +/- 7.6 minute, P < 0.0001). There was no difference in quantitative analysis parameters of coronary angiography during follow-up or the rates of stent thrombosis and restenosis. Direct stenting seems to be as feasible and safe as conventional predilatation and stenting in selected cases. Direct stenting seems to decrease procedural time and radiation exposure without any negative effect on quantitative analysis parameters of coronary angiography with approximately a one-year follow-up period.

The SIRIUS-DIRECT trial: A multi-center study of direct stenting using the sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions

OBJECTIVE

To assess the safety and efficacy of direct stenting using the sirolimus-eluting BX Velocitytrade mark stent in patients with coronary lesions.

BACKGROUND

Although direct coronary stenting has become a widespread practice, there have been no systematic assessments of direct stenting with drug-eluting stents.

METHODS

Total of 225 patients with identical inclusion and exclusion criteria as the original SIRIUS trial were enrolled in this prospective single-arm study. They were compared in a no-inferiority design with 412 similar patients from the SIRIUS trial who had sirolimus-eluting stents deployed after predilatation and were preassigned to angiographic follow-up evaluation.

RESULTS

Direct stenting was successful in 85.8% of the patients. Compared with the predilatation group, direct stenting was associated with shorter median procedure duration (33 min vs. 45 min, P < 0.001). Angiographic follow-up at 8 months revealed similar late loss (in-stent-0.19 +/- 0.47 mm vs. 0.17 +/- 0.44 mm, and in-lesion-0.23 +/- 0.41 mm vs. 0.24 +/- 0.47 mm) and similar frequency of binary restenosis (in-stent-4.6% vs. 3.2% and in-lesion-6.1% vs. 8.9%) between the two treatment strategies. However, stent-edge restenosis was lower with direct stenting than in the predilatation control group (2.1% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.02). At 12-months, there were no significant differences in target lesion revascularization (3.7% vs. 5.1%, P = ns) or composite major adverse cardiac events (7.0% vs. 8.3%, P = ns).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients similar to those treated in the SIRIUS trial, direct stenting using sirolimus-eluting stents achieves excellent short- and long-term clinical and angiographic results with shorter procedure time and less frequent stent edge restenosis compared with predilation stent implantation techniques.

Effectiveness of "direct" stenting without balloon predilatation (from the Multilink Tetra Randomised European Direct Stent Study [TRENDS])

The purpose of the TRENDS trial was to assess the safety, efficacy, and cost effectiveness of a no-predilatation ("direct") stenting strategy in the treatment of de novo native coronary artery lesions using the Multilink Tetra stent system. In this multicenter, prospective clinical trial, 1,000 patients were randomized (1:1) to receive a Multilink Tetra stent with or without balloon predilatation. The primary outcome measurement was major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) at 30 days; secondary end points included resource utilization (including procedural duration, equipment use, and length of hospital stay), MACEs, and angiographic binary restenosis at 180 days. In the predilatation group, 587 stents were implanted in 499 patients; in the direct group, 579 stents were implanted in 501 patients. In the direct group, stents in 31 lesions (5.7%) required predilatation and multivariate analysis identified calcification (odds ratio 5.81), angulation (odds ratio 5.34), and preprocedural minimal lumen diameter (odds ratio 0.09) as direct stenting failure. MACEs at 30 days were similar in the 2 groups, with 19 (3.8%) in the predilatation group and 13 (2.6%) in the direct group (p = NS). Resource utilization favored the direct strategy, with decreases in balloon use, contrast media, and procedure time, but a larger number of guiding catheters was used. The 180-day MACE rate of 9.8% in the direct group was not significantly less than the rate of 10.8% in the predilatation group (p = NS). Quantitative angiographic follow-up at 6 months demonstrated in-stent binary restenotic rates of 11.4% in the predilatation group (late loss 0.88 +/- 0.53 mm) and 12.3% in the direct group (late loss 0.82 +/- 0.51 mm, p = NS) and in-segment restenosis rates of 12.2% and 13.4%, respectively (p = NS). In conclusion, a direct stenting strategy with the Multilink Tetra stent was feasible and safe in 94% of lesions and associated with lower resource utilization compared with a predilatation approach. Direct stenting was not associated with significantly lower MACE and target lesion revascularization rates and had no effect on late angiographic follow-up, with similar late loss reflecting an identical biologic response to bare metal stent placement.

Early results of direct coronary stenting in consecutive patients when multivessel, complex, long lesions, and small vessels are included

BACKGROUND

Direct coronary stenting is the dominant technique for coronary stent implantation, but previous randomized studies have strongly selected lesions to treat. To evaluate whether the results can be generalized to routine clinical practice, all consecutive patients with direct stenting in 15 hospitals were entered into a prospective registry. Single vessels and simple lesions, but also multivessel, complex and long lesions, and small vessels size (< or =2.5 mm) were included. Immediately results as well as clinical events within 30 days after the procedure were evaluated.

METHODS

Between April and November 2002, direct coronary stenting was performed in 452 consecutive patients (559 lesions) at 15 sites. Stents edge-protected by "sleeves" (SOX technology, NIR Stent, Boston Scientific) or with short transitional edge protection (STEP technology, Multilink Stents, Guidant) were selected to minimize vessel injury outside the stent edges during balloon inflation/deployment.

RESULTS

Stents were successfully implanted in 96% of lesions. Lesions were multivessel in 27%, type B2-C in 40%, very angulated in 28%, calcified in 18%, and longer than 20 mm in 10% of patients. Vessels were smaller than < or =2.5 mm in 27% of patients. Direct coronary stenting was unsuccessful in 25 lesions (24 patients) characterized by more unstable angina (p=0.07), more treated lesions (p<0.01), and more distal locations (p=0.001). Dissection occurred in 6% of patients, and one stent embolised. The 30-day follow-up period included 1 death (due to subacute occlusion), 11 (2.4%) acute myocardial infarctions (8 non-Q wave), and one stroke (following carotid surgery).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct coronary stenting yielded excellent results at 30 days although some expanded indications will be included.

Peri-procedural myocardial injury: 2005 update

During the past three decades, percutaneous coronary intervention has become one of the cardinal treatment strategies for stenotic coronary artery disease. Technical advances, including the introduction of new devices such as stents, have expanded the interventional capabilities of balloon angioplasty. At the same time, there has been a decline in the rate of major adverse cardiac events, including Q-wave acute myocardial infarction, emergency coronary artery bypass grafting, and cardiac death. Despite these advances, the incidence of post-procedural cardiac marker elevation has not substantially decreased since the first serial assessment 20 years ago. As of now, these post-procedural cardiac marker elevations are considered to represent peri-procedural myocardial injury (PMI) with worse long-term outcome potential. Recent progress has been made for the identification of two main PMI patterns, one near the intervention site (proximal type, PMI type I) and one in the distal perfusion territory of the treated coronary artery (distal type, PMI type II) as well as for preventive strategies. Integrating these new developments into the wealth of clinical information on this topic, this review aims at giving a current perspective on the entity of PMI.

Randomized comparison of direct stenting with predilatation followed by stenting on vessel trauma and restenosis

BACKGROUND

Direct stenting may reduce trauma to the vessel wall, thereby having a positive impact on acute and long-term results. This study evaluated acute vessel trauma and acute and follow-up angiographic and intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) results after direct stenting in comparison to conventional stenting.

METHODS

Two hundred forty-nine patients were randomly assigned to direct stenting (n = 124) or stenting after predilatation (n = 125) and were followed up by angiography at 6 +/- 2 months. Intracoronary serum endothelin (ET-1) levels were determined distal to the lesion before and after coronary intervention to define vessel trauma, and IVUS was performed before and after intervention and at follow-up to determine induced changes in vessel morphology and intimal hyperplasia in a subgroup of 40 patients.

RESULTS

Feasibility of direct stenting was 91%, with 9% requiring crossover to predilatation. There were no differences between the 2 groups in immediate clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound results. Intracoronary ET-1 levels increased significantly after intervention, without differences between the 2 groups (increase in ET-1 level, 0.79 +/- 1.06 vs 0.96 +/- 1.22 fmol/L, P =.206). At 6-month follow-up, angiographic late loss (0.76 +/- 0.86 vs 0.69 +/- 1.09 mm, P =.788) and restenosis rate (21% vs 20%, P = 1.000) were similar for direct stenting versus conventional stenting, respectively. IVUS demonstrated comparable intimal hyperplasia areas for direct versus conventional stenting (2.0 +/- 1.5 mm(2) vs 2.2 +/- 1.6 mm(2), respectively, P =.243).

CONCLUSIONS

Direct stenting is highly feasible and results in similar vessel trauma and change in vessel morphology and acute lumen dimensions compared with stenting after predilatation. Similar acute angiographic and IVUS results persist at 6-month follow-up.

Direct stent implantation without predilatation through 5 French guiding catheter following transfemoral coronary angiogram: a feasibility study

Direct stenting (DS) is accepted as reducing procedural cost and duration and 5 Fr guiding catheters as lowering peripheral vascular complications. We aimed to evaluate the feasibility and safety of both strategies. We retrospectively studied 150 consecutive patients treated with DS strategy using a 5 Fr femoral approach. A need for 6 Fr devices or balloon predilatation defined 5 Fr DS failure. Procedural success was defined as good angiographic result (residual stenosis < 30% and TIMI flow 3) without ischemic complications. A total of 161 out of 174 lesions were elected as suitable for DS. The success rate of 5 Fr DS was 87.6% (141/161 lesions). The procedural success rate was 92% (138/150 patients). The angiographic success rate was 96.3% (155/161 lesions). Other complications were six non-Q-wave MI and one repeat angioplasty for acute in-stent thrombosis. Only one major peripheral vascular complication occurred. Direct stenting through 5 Fr guiding catheters in selected lesions is safe and effective with a low incidence of peripheral arterial complications.

Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: Restenosis after direct stenting versus stenting with predilation in patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease (ISAR-DIRECT trial)

The objective of this randomized study was to assess whether direct stenting leads to less restenosis than does conventional stenting (CS) with predilation in clinical practice. We included 910 patients who were randomly assigned to undergo either direct stenting (DS; n = 456) or CS (n = 454). No significant difference was observed in the incidence of angiographic restenosis (primary endpoint): 23.6% for DS and 21.0% for CS (P = 0.41; relative risk = 1.1; 95% CI = 0.8-1.5). The incidence of target vessel revascularization was 17.3% among DS and 14.8% among CS patients (P = 0.29; relative risk = 1.2; 95% CI = 0.8-1.6). The combined incidence of death or myocardial infarction at one year was 9.0% in the DS group and 7.0% in the CS group (P = 0.28). In conclusion, direct stenting is not associated with any reduction of thrombotic and restenotic complications as compared to the conventional stenting.

Impact of intravascular ultrasound-guided direct stenting on clinical outcome of patients treated for native coronary disease

BACKGROUND

Despite the fact that in animal models direct stenting (DS) reduces the vessel injury, in clinical practice this treatment strategy did not reduce late restenosis as compared to conventional strategy with balloon predilatation (PD). However, the influence of DS was not evaluated when stent expansion is optimized by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) assessment.

METHODS

We analyzed the in-hospital and 1-year outcomes of patients at Washington Hospital Center who were treated with percutaneous coronary interventions and stent implantation when percutaneous intervention was guided by IVUS. Only patients treated for single de novo lesions were included.

RESULTS

In 1386 patients, 251 (18.1%) were treated with DS and 1135 (71.9%) were treated with PD. Pre- and postprocedure characteristics by angiography and IVUS were similar in both groups. Postprocedure non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (MI) occurred in 4.9% of the DS group and in 12.5% of the PD group (P = .005). At 1-year follow-up, target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate was 4.9% in the DS group and 14.8% in the PD group (P = .005). DS strategy (odds ratio = .46, confidence interval = .25-.85, P = .013) was independently correlated to lower risk for revascularization in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

When DS is implemented by IVUS assessment, it is associated with low in-hospital and long-term events.

Direct stenting with 3000 i.u. heparin

In order to reduce vascular complications, the authors assessed safety and feasability of a new percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) strategy consisting of direct stenting with 3000 i.u. heparin and immediate sheath removal. Predicting factors of vascular complications during PTCA include heparin dosages, sheath dwell time and use of anti-glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa. A simplified PTCA with direct stenting technique may allow the use of very low doses of heparin without anti-GPIIb/IIIa in selected cases. From April 1999 to April 2000 all patients who underwent PTCA in the authors' center were screened. Exclusion criteria comprised a contraindication for direct stenting, primary PTCA for acute myocardial infarction (MI) and a TIMI (thrombolysis in myocardial infarction) grade zero flow. All other patients were included. They received 3000 i.u. heparin before direct stenting whatever their current anticoagulation and their weight. The sheath was immediately removed using manual compression. Out of 716 consecutive PTCA patients, 171 (24%) were enrolled in the study (198 sites). Complete protocol was achieved in 150 patients (88%). Activated clotting time during the procedure was 179 +/- 32 seconds. No subacute thrombosis or creatine kinase elevation was observed before discharge. Only two uncomplicated groin hematomas and two false aneurysms (one surgical repair) were noted. This study shows that direct stenting with 3000 iu heparin is safe. Immediate sheath removal can be performed with a low rate of major vascular complications.

Effect of direct stenting on clinical outcome in patients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention on saphenous vein graft

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of saphenous vein graft (SVG) is associated with frequent postprocedural enzyme elevation and late cardiac events. New strategies are proposed to minimize distal embolization and to improve the outcome of patients treated with stenting for SVG lesions. The objectives of the current study were to examine direct stenting (DS) strategy of PCI in SVG lesions and its effects on creatine-kinase (CK) release, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and late outcome when compared to conventional stenting (CS).

METHODS

A consecutive series of 527 patients treated with stent implantation for SVG stenosis was analyzed. In this cohort, 170 patients with 229 lesions were treated with DS and 357 patients with 443 lesions were treated with CS. The inhospital and 12-month follow-up events were recorded and reported.

RESULTS

Baseline clinical and postprocedural angiographic characteristics were similar between the 2 groups except for higher preprocedural prevalence of thrombus-containing lesions in the DS group. Patients in the DS group had less CK-MB release (P <.001), and less non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (P =.024). Multivariate analysis detected unstable angina (odds ratio [OR] = 1.8, P =.03) as a correlate for non-Q-wave MI; DS was inversely associated with non-Q-wave myocardial infarction (OR = 0.65, P =.04). At 1 year, the target lesion revascularization-MACE was significantly lower in the DS group (P =.021). Multivariate analysis showed that DS (OR = 0.47, P =.007) was associated with reduction of the target lesion revascularization-MACE.

CONCLUSIONS

When feasible, DS may be the best approach for treating SVG stenosis.

[Nonselected use of direct coronary stenting. The DISCO 2 trial]

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Direct coronary stenting yields immediate long-term clinical results similar to those obtained with balloon predilation, with the advantage of lower costs and procedural times. Until now, direct stenting has been attempted only for selected lesions, so that the potential scope of its use in everyday practice remains unknown. The DISCO 2 trial was designed to identify the number and type of lesions that could be safely treated by direct stenting. Patients and method. 1,269 lesions (886 patients) were treated consecutively in 7 different hospitals. Direct stenting was attempted in all cases, except for total chronic occlusions, severe tortuosity or calcification of the vessel, lesions in the sinus ostium, or bifurcated lesions and vessel diameter < 2.4 mm. If the procedure failed, the stent was recovered and the lesion dilated with a balloon before a second attempt at stenting.

RESULTS

Direct stenting was attempted in 585 lesions (54.9% of all electively implanted stents and 46.1% of all angioplasties). This was successful in 553 (94.6%) and failed in 32 (5.4%). In 30 of these latter patients a stent was implanted after predilation. Predictors of failure were tortuosity, location in the nonproximal right coronary artery, age > 65 years and type B2 or C lesion. After 6 months of follow-up the total incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients treated with direct stenting was 6.2%, with a target lesion revascularization rate of 4.45%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a mostly nonselected sample of coronary lesions, direct stenting was as safe as stenting with predilation. More than half of all elective stenting procedures can be attempted safely without balloon predilation. Greater need for predilation was associated with tortuosity, nonproximal right coronary artery location, older age and lesion complexity (B2, C). The 6-month clinical outcome was excellent, with a low rate of repeat revascularization.

Direct stenting with the Bx VELOCITY balloon-expandable stent mounted on the Raptor rapid exchange delivery system versus predilatation in a European randomized Trial: the VELVET trial

AIMS

This study examined the six-month angiographic results of direct coronary stenting, and compared the nine-month safety, efficacy and cost of this strategy versus stenting after balloon predilatation.

METHODS

In phase I of VELVET, 122 patients (mean age = 62.3 +/- 10.1 years, 77% male, 11% with diabetes) with angina pectoris or myocardial ischemia resulting from a single de novo 51% to 95% coronary stenosis underwent direct stenting. The endpoints of phase I included angiographic findings and rates of major adverse cardiac events up to six months of follow-up. In phase II, 401 patients (mean age = 61.3 +/- 10.8 years, 79% male, 16% with diabetes) with angina pectoris or documented myocardial ischemia resulting from single or multiple, de novo or restenotic, coronary lesions were randomized between direct stenting and stenting after predilatation. The immediate angiographic results, and clinical outcomes and costs associated with the two treatment strategies up to nine months of follow-up were compared.

RESULTS

In phase I the mean diameter stenosis immediately before and after the procedure, and at six months was 61.7+/-9.4%, 13.5+/-6.3%, and 33.6+/-16.2%, respectively. The six-month binary restenosis rate was 11%. The overall rate of major adverse cardiac events, including two non-cardiac deaths, was 9.8%. In phase II, the success rates of the intended delivery strategies were 87.9% and 97.9% for direct stenting and predilatation, respectively (p < 0.001), while the procedural success rates were similar (93.9% vs 96.5%). Over a follow-up period of nine months, major adverse cardiac events rates were 12.0% and 10.9% in patients randomized to direct stenting and predilatation, respectively (non-significant). Analyses of the costs incurred up to nine months in each treatment group revealed a mean saving of e362 per patient in favor of the direct stenting strategy (non-significant).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with a strategy of stenting preceded by balloon dilatation, direct stenting was associated with an equivalent procedural success rate, equivalent clinical results up to nine months of follow-up, and a reduction in procedural and in-hospital costs (p < 0.0001 and p < 0.001, respectively), that was no longer significant after nine months.

Multicenter randomized comparison of direct vs. conventional stenting: the DIRECTO trial

With conventional stenting, predilatation frequently induces dissections that require deploying stents longer than originally planned. To assess whether direct stenting is safe and may prevent dissections and reduce the length of stents implanted, we conducted a randomized study comparing direct (n = 73) and conventional (n = 78) stenting. Direct stenting was successful in 89% of cases, 11% crossed over to predilation without complications. Dissections occurred more frequently in conventional stenting group (10.3% vs. 1.4%; P = 0.034), but did not translate to a significant stent length difference (16.31 +/- 7.6 vs. 15.31 +/- 5.5; P = NS). Periprocedure creatine kinase elevation and number of balloons utilized were lower with direct stenting.

Comparison of outcomes (early and six- month) of direct stenting with conventional stenting (a meta-analysis of ten randomized trials)

Although direct stenting (DS) is increasingly used in clinical practice instead of stent implantation after predilatation (conventional stenting [CS]), its impact has not been scientifically proved. We therefore performed, using Mantel-Haenszel analysis, a meta-analysis of the published randomized studies comparing DS with CS. Furthermore, all the key procedural data were systematically sought out and pooled. Ten trials (2,650 coronary lesions, 2,576 patients) were identified and entered into the analysis. Adopted angiographic exclusion criteria were homogeneous. DS, compared with CS, was found to have a similar success rate (98.7% vs 98.9%) and no specific complications. Across the studies, the mean rate of crossover to predilatation in the DS arm was 5.9%. Overall, DS was associated with a 17% procedural time (95% confidence interval [CI] 14% to 20%), a 18% fluoroscopic time (95% CI 15% to 21%), a 11% contrast volume (95% CI 9% to 14%), and a 22% cost reduction (95% CI 16% to 28%). In the early postintervention period, DS was associated with a trend toward reduction of each of the major adverse events (MACEs) and with a significant reduction of myocardial infarction (MI) + death (odds ratio [OR] 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.95). However, at 6 months, the OR (95% CI) for death, MI, target lesion revascularization, and MACEs were 0.47 (0.19 to 1.27), 0.72 (0.45 to 1.25), 1.07 (0.77 to 1.46), and 0.82 (0.63 to 1.08), respectively. In the subgroup of studies providing quantitative angiographic data, all the parameters were found to be similar between the CS and DS groups. In conclusion, the present meta-analysis shows that DS compared with CS, in selected coronary lesions, is safe, optimizes equipment use, and may enhance the early results of coronary interventions while warranting similar late clinical outcomes.

Direct coronary stenting without balloon predilation of lesions requiring long stents: immediate and 6-month results of a multicenter prospective registry

To assess the outcomes of direct coronary stenting (DS) using long stents and examine predictive factors of DS failure, this prospective multicenter registry included 128 consecutive patients who underwent the implantation of stents >or= 18 mm in length without balloon predilation for de novo coronary artery stenoses. Mean lesion and stent lengths were 20.7 +/- 5.4 and 21.4 +/- 3.8 mm, respectively. Rates of DS success, lesion success, and primary success were 82%, 99%, and 97.7%, respectively. At 6 months, rates of MACE and TVR were 12.5% and 6.3%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, factors predictive of DS failure vs. DS success were presence of calcifications (78% vs. 45%; P = 0.004) and reference vessel diameter (2.77 +/- 0.4 vs. 3.13 +/- 0.42 mm; P = 0.0002). DS of complex lesions with stents >or= 18 mm in length was performed safely and with a high success rate. This strategy was less successful in the treatment of small vessels and in presence of calcifications.

Is coronary stent deployment and remodeling affected by predilatation? An intravascular ultrasound randomized study Stenting with or without predilation: an IVUS study

In this intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) randomized trial we compared a strategy of direct stenting (DS) without predilation (n = 30) vs. conventional stenting with predilation (SWP) (n = 30) in patients with suitable type A or B non-calcified lesions in native vessels > or = 3 mm. Optimal deployment was achieved using angiographic criteria without interactive IVUS. The goal of our study was to determine whether stent expansion and coronary remodeling were similar. Maximal pressure inflation was comparable in the two groups (11.4 +/- 2.2 vs. 11.8 +/- 1.9 atm; NS). Stent deployment was obtained in all patients with complete apposition to the vessel wall. DS and SWP resulted in comparable lumen enlargement (5.4 +/- 2.5 vs. 5.5 +/- 2.1 mm2) with an identical mechanism: 66% of lumen enlargement was due to increased enlarged elastic membrane (EEM)-cross sectional area (CSA) (delta = 3.7 +/- 2.1 mm2 and delta = 2.4 +/- 6.8 mm2, respectively, p < 0.49) and 34% was due to a reduced P + M-CSA (delta = 0.02 +/- 6.9 mm2 and delta = 1.2 +/- 6.3 mm2, respectively, p < 0.50). We conclude that at the same maximal pressure inflation the mechanisms of stent expansion are similar in both DS and SWP groups. In this observational study, the IVUS data showed clearly under-expansion of stents in both groups in comparison with previously published CSA values (minimum stent CSA of 7.5 mm2).

Could direct stenting reduce no-reflow in acute coronary syndromes? A randomized pilot study

OBJECTIVES

Recently, direct stenting has been shown in retrospective and randomized studies to be feasible and safe in highly selected patients, with a potential interest to reduce the cost of the procedure and the rate of no-reflow. This randomized pilot study was designed to compare the incidence of no-reflow after direct stenting or conventional stenting after balloon predilation in acute coronary syndrome-related lesions.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between December 1998 and October 1999, 130 patients in our center with acute coronary syndromes were included in this study and randomized in 2 groups. In group A (n = 65), direct stent implantation was performed without balloon predilation. In group B (n = 65), conventional balloon predilation was carried out before stent implantation. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics before the procedure were similar in the 2 groups of patients. No-reflow was observed in 7.7% after direct stenting and in 6.1% after conventional stent implantation (P = not significant). The immediate clinical success rate was similar in the 2 groups. Among the procedural data, only duration of the procedure (shorter in the direct stenting group), the number of balloons used, and the quantity of contrast agent (lower in the direct stenting group) were significantly different between the 2 groups (P <.05). The 6-month clinical outcome was similar in the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

This randomized study confirms the promising results of previous studies that show the feasibility and the safety of direct coronary stenting in highly selected acute coronary syndrome-related lesions. The major impact of this strategy is the improvement of the cost-benefit ratio, with no major influence on the acute complications and especially on the occurrence of no-reflow in this high-risk population.