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

Percutaneous coronary intervention in saphenous vein grafts after coronary artery bypass grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To investigate the results of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in saphenous vein grafts after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Design. MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane library were searched for relevant articles published between 1 January 2000 and 29 February 2020. The PICO (population, intervention, comparison, outcome) model was applied in constructing the clinical question. Two independent researchers performed the literature search. Thirty-six articles were identified and subjected to a quality assessment. The primary outcomes of the meta-analysis were long-term in-stent restenosis and long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Results. In-stent restenosis was 9.4% (95% CI: 4.2-14.7%) and MACE was 35.3% (95% CI: 27-43.7%) at mean time 2.7 ± 1.0 years. The secondary outcomes were the unsuccessful PCI rate (7.7%; 95% CI: 2.9-12.5%), 30-day MACE (4.3%; 95% CI: 2.5-6.1%), and 1-year MACE (15.5%; 95% CI: 11.7-19.3%). The use of drug-eluting stents resulted in better outcomes at least in term of in-stent restenosis, while the benefit of using embolic protection devices was questionable. Conclusions. PCI of a stenosed or occluded saphenous vein graft is a challenge for interventional cardiologists, and is still associated with relatively high rates of restenosis, MACE, and procedural failure. All efforts to enhance the results are warranted, including improved quality of the venous grafts used during CABG.

Drug-Eluting Versus Bare Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention: An Updated Comprehensive Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

BACKGROUND

Drug eluting stents (DES) are preferred over bare metal stents (BMS) for native coronary artery revascularization unless contraindicated. However, the preferred stent choice for saphenous venous graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) is unclear due to conflicting results.

METHODS

PubMed, Clinical trials registry and the Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials were searched through June 2018. Seven studies (n = 1639) comparing DES versus BMS in SVG-PCI were included. Endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR), target lesion revascularization (TLR), in-stent thrombosis, binary in-stent restenosis, and late lumen loss (LLL).

RESULTS

Overall, during a mean follow up of 32.1 months, there was no significant difference in the risk of MACE, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, MI, stent thrombosis, TVR and TLR between DES and BMS. However, short-term follow up (mean 11 months) showed lower rate of MACE (OR 0.66 [0.51, 0.85]; p = 0.002), TVR (OR 0.47 [0.23, 0.97]; p = 0.04) and binary in-stent restenosis (OR 0.14 [0.06, 0.37]; p < 0.0001) in DES as compared with BMS. This benefit was lost on long-term follow up with a mean follow up 35.5 months.

CONCLUSION

In this meta-analysis of SVG-PCI, DES use was associated with similar MACE, cardiovascular mortality, all-cause mortality, MI, in-stent thrombosis, TVR and TLR compared with BMS during long-term follow up. There was high incidence of MACE noted in both DES and BMS suggesting a need for exploring novel strategies to treat SVG disease to improve clinical outcomes.

Should We Still Have Bare-Metal Stents Available in Our Catheterization Laboratory?

The introduction of bare-metal stents (BMS) has represented a major advancement over plain old balloon angioplasty in the management of coronary artery disease. However, the high rates of target lesion revascularization associated with use of BMS have led to the development of drug-eluting stents, which require prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy due to the increased risk of late and very late stent thrombosis. The improvements in newer-generation drug-eluting stents have translated into better safety and efficacy compared with earlier generation and BMS, thus allowing shorter dual antiplatelet therapy duration. Here, we aim to provide reasons as to why we still need BMS in our cardiac catheterization laboratory.

Current State of the Art in Approaches to Saphenous Vein Graft Interventions

Saphenous vein grafts (SVGs), used during coronary artery bypass graft surgery for severe coronary artery disease, are prone to degeneration and occlusion, leading to poor long-term patency compared with arterial grafts. Interventions used to treat SVG disease are susceptible to high rates of periprocedural MI and no-reflow. To minimise complications seen with these interventions, proper stents, embolic protection devices (EPDs) and pharmacological selection are crucial. Regarding stent selection, evidence has demonstrated superiority of drug-eluting stents over bare-metal stents in SVG intervention. The ACCF/AHA/SCA American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions guidelines recommend the use of EPDs during SVG intervention to decrease the risk of periprocedural MI, distal embolisation and no-reflow. The optimal pharmacological treatment for slow or no-reflow remains unclear, but various vasodilators show promise.

Choice of Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Saphenous Vein Grafts

Background—

There are limited data on comparison of contemporary drug-eluting stent (DES) platforms, previous generation DES, and bare-metal stents (BMS) for percutaneous coronary intervention in saphenous vein grafts (SVG). We aimed to assess clinical outcomes following percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in patients receiving bare-metal stents (BMS), first-generation DES, and newer generation DES in a large unselected national data set from the BCIS (British Cardiovascular Intervention Society).

Methods and Results—

Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in the United Kingdom from January 2006 to December 2013 were divided into 3 groups according to stent use: BMS, first-generation DES, and newer generation DES group. Study outcomes included in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality. Patients (n=15 003) underwent percutaneous coronary intervention to SVG in England and Wales during the study period. Of these, 38% received BMS, 15% received first-generation DES, and 47% received second-generation DES. The rates of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events were significantly lower in patients treated with second-generation DES (odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence interval, 0.38–0.68; P <0.001), but not with first-generation DES, compared with BMS-treated patients. Similarly, 30-day mortality (odds ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.32–0.59; P <0.001) and 1-year mortality (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% confidence interval, 0.51–0.71; P <0.001) were lower in patients treated with second-generation DES, but not with first-generation DES, compared with the patients treated with BMS.

Conclusions—

Patients receiving second-generation DES for the treatment SVG disease have lower rates of in-hospital major adverse cardiovascular events, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality, compared with those receiving BMS.

Drug-eluting stents appear superior to bare metal stents for vein-graft PCI in vessels up to a stent diameter of 4 mm

Background

Research trials have shown improved short-term outcome with drug-eluting stents (DES) over bare metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), primarily by reducing target vessel revascularization (TVR) for in-stent restenosis. We compared the outcomes in patients undergoing SVG stent implantation treated with DES or BMS. In exploratory analyses we investigated the influence of stent generation and diameter.

Methods

Data were obtained from a prospective database of 657 patients who underwent PCI for SVG lesions between 2003 and 2011. A total of 344 patients had PCI with BMS and 313 with DES. Propensity scores were developed based on 15 observed baseline covariates in a logistic regression model with stent type as the dependent variable. The nearest-neighbour-matching algorithm with Greedy 5-1 Digit Matching was used to produce two patient cohorts of 313 patients each. We assessed major adverse cardiac events (MACE) out to a median of 3.3 years (interquartile range: 2.1-4.1). MACE was defined as all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), TVR and stroke.

Results

There was a significant difference in MACE between the two groups in favour of DES (17.9% DES vs. 31.2% BMS group; p = 0.0017) over the 5-year follow-up period. MACE was driven by increased TVR in the BMS group. There was no difference in death, MI or stroke. Adjusted Cox analysis confirmed a decreased risk of MACE for DES compared with BMS 0.75 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.52-0.94), with no difference in the hazard of all-cause mortality (hazard ratio: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.77-1.68). However, when looking at stent diameters greater than 4 mm, no difference was seen in MACE rates between BMS and DES.

Conclusions

Overall in our cohort of patients who had PCI for SVG disease, DES use resulted in lower MACE rates compared with BMS over a 5-year follow-up period; however, for stent diameters over 4 mm no difference in MACE rates was seen.

Drug-eluting versus bare metal stent in treatment of patients with saphenous vein graft disease: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Drug-eluting stent (DES) and bare metal stent (BMS) are effective treatments for preventing vascular disease, but whether using DES is associated with positive clinical outcomes compared with BMS in patients with saphenous vein graft disease (SVGD) has not been established. Three electronic databases including PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched to identify potentially includible studies. We did a random-effects meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to obtain summary effect estimates for the clinical outcomes with the use of relative risk calculated from the raw data of individual trial. Among 812 patients from 4 RCTs, DES was associated with lower risk of short-term major cardiovascular events (MACEs) when compared with BMS, whereas no significant effect on the risk of long-term MACEs. Furthermore, there was no significant difference between DES and BMS for short-term myocardial infarction (MI) and long-term MI. Similarly, DES was not associated with risk of short- and long-term mortality risk as compared with BMS. In addition, DES has no significant effect on the risk of cardiac death and stent thrombosis. Finally, DES therapy significantly reduced the risk of TLR, TVF, and TVR. SVGD patients received DES can minimize the risk of short-term MACEs, TLR, TVF, and TVR when compared with BMS. However, it does not effect on the incidence of long-term MACEs, MI, mortality, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis.

Recanalization of Chronic Total Occlusions in Patients With Previous Coronary Bypass Surgery and Consideration of Retrograde Access via Saphenous Vein Grafts

Background—

The prevalence of native coronary chronic total occlusions (CTOs) after coronary artery bypass grafts (CABGs) is higher than in non-CABG population. We examined outcomes of CTO percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) post-CABG versus without CABG. Then, we looked at feasibility and outcomes of retrograde CTO PCI via patent or occluded saphenous vein graft.

Methods and Results—

We compared patient and procedural characteristics of 470 CTO cases treated from January 2010 to December 2015 depending on history of CABG. We assessed major adverse cardiac events, including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization, or reocclusion 1 year after successful CTO PCI in patients treated before February 2015. Post-CABG patients (175 cases) had a higher J-CTO score (2.5 versus 2.1; P =0.002). In-hospital complications were similar, although the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy was higher in post-CABG patients (4.6% versus 1%; P =0.01). With multivariable analysis, post-CABG status was associated with higher incidence of 1-year major adverse cardiac event (hazards ratio=2.2; P =0.02). As a second level analysis, we looked at the feasibility and safety of CTO PCI via saphenous vein grafts (19% of post-CABG cases) versus collateral channels (36%) versus with an antegrade-only approach (45%), and assessed short-term outcomes and complications. High success was achieved in the saphenous vein graft group. In-hospital events were similar in the 3 groups.

Conclusions—

Post-CABG CTO PCI is associated with similar high success and low complications compared with CTO PCI in patients who never had CABG. However, it is associated with higher recurrent events at 1 year. To achieve high success rate, use of saphenous vein grafts as retrograde conduits seems to be safe and effective.

An update on coronary bypass graft intervention

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains one of the most common surgical procedures. In spite of great advancements like arterial grafts and off-pump bypass procedure, recurrent ischaemia may ensue with the lesions of the graft. Early postoperative ischaemia (<30 days) is due to graft occlusion or stenosis, and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is frequently feasible. Late postoperative ischaemia (>3 years) is most often due to a saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesion. Multiple diseased grafts, reduced left ventricular function, and available arterial conduits favour repeat CABG, whereas, a patent left internal mammary artery to left anterior descending favours PCI. Embolic protection reduces atheroembolic myocardial infarction during PCI of SVG and should be routinely used in treatment of SVG lesions. A variety of vasodilators may reduce the risk of or mitigate the consequences of no-reflow. Drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis in SVG grafts, and have become the default strategy for many interventionalists.

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

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

Degenerated Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention: Should We Target the Native Vessel instead?

Coronary interventions of degenerated saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) continue to present a management challenge. Although repeat coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) remains a significant risk factor for operative mortality, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is still associated with a high risk for periprocedural events. There is a lack of consensus on the optimal treatment strategy for patients with severe stenosis of SVGs. It is imperative to review the characteristics of native versus SVG disease, risk factors for complications after SVG intervention, procedural treatment strategies important to the decision on which therapeutic strategy to follow, and measures to mitigate the risks of periprocedural complications.

Long-term safety and efficacy of drug-eluting and bare metal stents in saphenous vein grafts

BACKGROUND

Long-term safety and efficacy data of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) are lacking. This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes of DES versus bare metal stents (BMS) in SVGs.

METHODS

We studied all stent implantations in SVGs in Sweden during 74 months between 2005 and 2011 registered in the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. We evaluated outcome in patients who received DES compared with those who received BMS after adjustments for differences in clinical, vessel, and lesion characteristics.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up time was 3 years and 4 months. A total of 4,576 stents, implanted at 3,063 procedures, were included in the analysis of which 2,499 stents (54.6 %) were BMS and 2,077 (45.4%) were DES. The outcome analysis was based on 190 stent thromboses, 898 restenoses, and 523 deaths. The incidence of stent thrombosis did not differ between groups. When adjusted for baseline characteristics, including a propensity score for receiving DES, the incidence of restenosis was significantly lower with DES as compared with BMS (risk ratio 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.97, P = .019). There was a difference in mortality in the crude analysis between DES and BMS, and after multivariable adjustment, this difference remained statistically significant (risk ratio 0.80, CI 0.65-0.99, P = .038).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of DES compared with BMS in SVGs was associated with a significantly lower adjusted incidence of restenosis and death in this large, national, all-encompassing propensity adjusted observational study.

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous interventions in saphenous vein grafts using drug-eluting stents compared to bare-metal stents: a comprehensive meta-analysisof all randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

Clinical outcomes of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) remain poor despite the use of drug-eluting stents (DES). There is a disparity in clinical outcomes in SVG PCI based on various registries, and randomized clinical data remain scant. We conducted a meta-analysis of all existing randomized controlled trials (RCTS) comparing bare-metal stents (BMS) and DES in SVGPCIs.

HYPOTHESIS

PCI in patients with SVG disease using DES may reduce need for repeat revascularization without an excess mortality when compared to BMS.

METHODS

An aggregate data meta-analysis of clinical outcomes in RCTs comparing PCI with DES vs BMS for SVGs reporting at least 12 months of follow-up was performed. A literature search between Janurary 1, 2003 and September 30, 2011 identified 4 RCTs (812 patients; DES = 416, BMS = 396). Summary odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using the random-effects model. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). These outcomes were assessed in a cumulative fashion at 30 days, 18 months, and 36 months.

RESULTS

There were no intergroup differences in baseline clinical and sociodemographic characteristics. At a median follow-up of 25 months, patients in the DES and BMS group had similar rates of death (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 0.45-5.92), MI (OR; 0.83, 95% CI: 0.27-2.60), and MACE (OR: 0.58, 95% CI: 0.25-1.32). Patients treated with DES had lower rates of repeat revascularization (OR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.22-0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

In this comprehensive meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing clinical outcomes of PCI using DES vs BMS in patients with SVG disease, use of DES was associated with a reduction in rate of repeat revascularization and no difference in rates of all-cause death and MI. Clin. Cardiol. 2012 DOI: 10.1002/clc.21984 Dr. Virani is supported by a Department of Veterans Affairs Health Services Research and Development Service (HSR&D) Career Development Award (CDA-09-028), and has research support from Merck and National Football League Charities (all grants to the institution and not individual). The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Veterans Affairs. The authors have no other funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.

Saphenous vein graft intervention

Saphenous vein grafts are commonly used conduits for surgical revascularization of coronary arteries but are associated with poor long-term patency rates. Percutaneous revascularization of saphenous vein grafts is associated with worse clinical outcomes including higher rates of in-stent restenosis, target vessel revascularization, myocardial infarction, and death compared with percutaneous coronary intervention of native coronary arteries. Use of embolic protection devices is a Class I indication according to the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines to decrease the risk of distal embolization, no-reflow, and periprocedural myocardial infarction. Nonetheless, these devices are underused in clinical practice. Various pharmacological agents are available that may also reduce the risk of or mitigate the consequences of no-reflow. Covered stents do not decrease the rates of periprocedural myocardial infarction and restenosis. Most available evidence supports treatment with drug-eluting stents in this high-risk lesion subset to reduce angiographic and clinical restenosis, although large, randomized trials comparing drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents are needed.

Paclitaxel-eluting stents reduce neointimal hyperplasia compared to bare metal stents in saphenous vein grafts: intravascular ultrasonography analysis of the SOS (Stenting of Saphenous Vein Grafts) trial

AIMS

To compare the intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS) findings between saphenous vein grafts (SVG) treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) in the Stenting Of Saphenous Vein Grafts (SOS) trial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Of the 80 SOS trial patients, 38 had both baseline and follow-up IVUS examination and were included in this substudy: 17 patients received 28 BMS in 26 lesions and 21 patients received 30 PES in 28 lesions. Quantitative IVUS analysis was performed to determine the volume of in-stent neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) - defined as the difference between stent volume and lumen volume in the stented segments. Baseline characteristics were similar between patients who did and did not undergo baseline and follow-up IVUS. Patients receiving BMS and PES had similar stent and lumen volumes immediately after stenting. At 12-month follow-up, compared to BMS, PES-treated lesions had significantly less NIH volume (3.4 vs. 21.9 mm³, p<0.001) and neointima hyperplasia progression (1.6 vs. 17.1 mm³, p<0.001). No significant differences were seen in the 5 mm segment proximal and distal to the stent.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to BMS, use of PES in SVG lesions is associated with significantly lower NIH formation, which may help explain the improved clinical outcomes with PES in these lesions.

Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions Editors' Picks

The following are highlights from the new series, Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions Topic Review. This series will summarize the most important manuscripts, as selected by the editors, that have published in the Circulation portfolio. The objective of this new series is to provide a concise review of significant papers that are relevant to interventional cardiology. The studies included in this article represent the most noteworthy research in the area of coronary stent placement.