A Narrative Review of Ultrathin-strut Drug-eluting Stents: The Thinner the Better?

Ultra-thin everolimus-eluting stents in atherosclerotic lesions: Three years follow-up with subgroup analysis of ultra-long stents

OBJECTIVES

To assess the long-term (3 years) safety and efficacy of Tetrilimus everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and subgroup analysis of outcomes of ultra-long (44/48 mm) Tetrilimus EES implantation in patients with long coronary lesions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

In this observational, single-centre, single-arm, investigator-initiated registry, 558 patients who underwent implantation of Tetrilimus EES for the treatment of coronary artery disease were retrospectively included. The primary endpoint was occurrence of any major adverse cardiac event (MACE) at 12 months follow-up (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction [MI], and target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and we hereby report 3 years follow-up data. Stent thrombosis was assessed as a safety endpoint. A subgroup analysis of patients with long coronary lesions is also reported.

RESULTS

A total of 558 patients (57.0 ± 10.2 years) received 766 Tetrilimus EES (1.3 ± 0.5 stents/patient) to treat 695 coronary lesions. In subgroup analysis of 143 patients implanted with ultra-long EES, 155 lesions were intervened successfully with only one Tetrilimus EES (44/48 mm) implanted per lesion. At 3 years, event rates of 9.1% MACE with predominance of MI (4.4%), followed by 2.9% TLR and 1.7% cardiac death, and only 1.0% stent thrombosis were reported in overall population, while in a subgroup of patients implanted with ultra-long EES, 10.4% MACE and 1.5% stent thrombosis were reported.

CONCLUSIONS

Three years clinical outcomes showed favourable long-term safety and excellent performance of Tetrilimus EES in high-risk patients and complex coronary lesions in routine clinical practice, including a subgroup of patients with long coronary lesions, with acceptable primary and safety endpoints.

Advancements in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Techniques: A Comprehensive Literature Review of Mixed Studies and Practice Guidelines

Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is a widely used therapy for coronary artery disease (CAD), but it carries risks and complications. Adhering to evidence-based practice guidelines is crucial for optimal outcomes. This review compares the recommendations of the 2021 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (ACC/AHA/SCAI) and 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for coronary artery revascularization and discusses emerging trends and novel devices in PCI. A comprehensive literature review of mixed studies, clinical trials, and guidelines was conducted. Intravascular imaging, including intravascular ultrasound and optical coherence tomography, for stent optimization, is also recommended when feasible. However, differences reflecting variations in evidence quality interpretation and applicability were identified. Furthermore, novel devices and technologies with the potential for improving outcomes were highlighted, but their safety and efficacy compared to standard-of-care techniques require further evaluation through extensive randomized trials. Clinicians should stay updated on advancements and personalize treatment decisions based on individual patient factors. Future research should address evidence gaps and barriers to adopting innovative devices and techniques. This review provides recommendations for clinical practice, emphasizing the need to remain current with the evolving landscape of PCI to optimize patient outcomes. The discoveries provide valuable counsel for the deliberation of clinical interventions and prospective inquiries within the realm of interventional cardiology. Overall, the review underscores the importance of evidence-based practice and ongoing advancements in PCI for CAD management.

Stent Thrombosis and Restenosis with Contemporary Drug-Eluting Stents: Predictors and Current Evidence

Iterations in stent technologies, advances in pharmacotherapy, and awareness of the implications of implantation techniques have markedly reduced the risk of stent failure, both in the form of stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, given the number of percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) performed worldwide every year, ST and ISR, albeit occurring at a fairly low rate, represent a public health problem even with contemporary DES platforms. The understanding of mechanisms and risk factors for these two PCI complications has been of fundamental importance for the parallel evolution of stent technologies. Risk factors associated with ST and ISR are usually divided into patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related. A number of studies have shown how certain risk factors are related to early (1 month) versus late/very late ST (between 1 month and 1 year and >1 year, respectively). However, more research is required to conclusively show the role of time-dependence of risk factors also in the incidence of ISR (early [1 year] or late [>1 year]). A thorough risk assessment is required due to the complex etiology of ST and ISR. The most effective strategy to treat ST and ISR is still to prevent them; hence, it is crucial to identify patient-, lesion-, device- and procedure-related predictors.