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

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.

Outcomes with various drug eluting or bare metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: mixed treatment comparison analysis of 22,844 patient years of follow-up from randomised trials

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of currently used drug eluting stents compared with each other and compared with bare metal stents in patients with diabetes.

DESIGN

Mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL were searched for randomised clinical trials, until April 2012, of four durable polymer drug eluting stents (sirolimus eluting stents, paclitaxel eluting stents, everolimus eluting stents, and zotarolimus eluting stents) compared with each other or with bare metal stents for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions and enrolling at least 50 patients with diabetes.

PRIMARY OUTCOMES

Efficacy (target vessel revascularisation) and safety (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis).

RESULTS

From 42 trials with 22,844 patient years of follow-up, when compared with bare metal stents (reference rate ratio 1) all of the currently used drug eluting stents were associated with a significant reduction in target vessel revascularisation (37% to 69%), though the efficacy varied with the type of stent (everolimus eluting stents~sirolimus eluting stents>paclitaxel eluting stents~zotarolimus eluting stent>bare metal stents). There was about an 87% probability that everolimus eluting stents were the most efficacious compared with all others, though there were limited usable data for the zotarolimus eluting Resolute stent in patients with diabetes. Moreover, there was no increased risk of any safety outcome (including very late stent thrombosis) with any drug eluting stents compared with bare metal stents. There was about a 62% probability that the everolimus eluting stent was the safest stent for the outcome of "any" stent thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with diabetes treated with coronary stents all currently available drug eluting stents were efficacious without compromising safety compared with bare metal stents. There were relative differences among the drug eluting stents, such that the everolimus eluting stent was the most efficacious and safe.

Diabetes mellitus and acute coronary syndrome: lessons from randomized clinical trials

Diabetes mellitus is a major independent risk factor for acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In addition, diabetic patients with ACS suffer from increased mortality compared to their nondiabetic peers. Driven by multiple pathophysiological disturbances, such patients are predisposed to a proinflammatory, prothrombotic state, which may lead to plaque rupture. To counteract this more complex biology, several therapies and strategies have emerged, with some having unique preferential benefits in this population. Antiplatelet agents such as aspirin and clopidogrel have long been standard of care. Dose adjustment of these therapies remains the subject of continued research. Along with medical therapy, ACS diabetic patients preferentially benefit from primary percutaneous intervention compared to fibrinolysis. However, with advances in reperfusion techniques, the optimal strategy has yet to be determined. With these differences in ACS treatment responses, diabetic individuals may not just be a high-risk group, but may actually constitute a fundamentally different population, requiring dedicated clinical trials and individualized treatment regimens.

Most Important Papers in ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction

The following are highlights from the series, Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions Topic Review. This series summarizes the most important manuscripts, as selected by the editors, that have published in the Circulation portfolio. The studies included in this article represent the most noteworthy research in the area of ST-elevation myocardial infarction. ( Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:e55–e66.)

Bypass versus drug-eluting stents at three years in SYNTAX patients with diabetes mellitus or metabolic syndrome

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus increases adverse outcomes after coronary revascularization; however, the impact of metabolic syndrome is unclear. We examined the impact of diabetes and metabolic syndrome on coronary artery bypass graft surgery (CABG) and stenting outcomes to determine the optimal revascularization option for the treatment of complex coronary artery disease.

METHODS

Patients (n = 1,800) with left main or three-vessel disease or both were randomly allocated to treatment with a TAXUS Express(2) paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) or CABG, and were included in predefined nondiabetic (n = 1,348) or diabetic subgroups (n = 452); 258 patients with diabetes also had metabolic syndrome.

RESULTS

Among diabetic patients, the 3-year major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event (MACCE) rate (22.9% CABG, 37.0% PES; p = 0.002) and revascularization rate (12.9% CABG, 28.0% PES; p < 0.001) were higher after PES treatment. Diabetes increased MACCE rates among PES-treated patients, but had little impact on results after CABG. Compared with CABG, PES treatment yielded comparable MACCE in diabetic patients (30.5% versus 29.8%, p =0.98) and nondiabetic patients (20.2% versus 20.3%, p =0.99) with low Synergy Between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Taxus and Cardiac Surgery (SYNTAX) study scores of 22 or less. For patients with SYNTAX Scores of 33 or greater, MACCE rates were lower with CABG (18.5% versus 45.9%, p < 0.001 diabetic; 19.8% versus 30.0%, p = 0.01 nondiabetic). Metabolic syndrome did not significantly predict MACCE or repeat revascularization.

CONCLUSIONS

These exploratory analyses suggest that among diabetic patients with complex left main or three-vessel disease, or both, 3-year MACCE is higher after PES compared with CABG. Although PES is a potential treatment option in patients with less complex lesions, CABG should be the revascularization option of choice for patients with more complex anatomic disease, especially with concurrent diabetes. Metabolic syndrome had little impact on 3-year outcomes.