Coronary Stents in Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Chronic Kidney Disease Undergoing Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention

Everolimus Eluting Stents in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus and Chronic Kidney Disease: Insights from the TUXEDO Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with diabetes and those with chronic kidney disease (CKD) are at increased risk of cardiovascular events. Everolimus eluting stents (EES) have been shown to be superior to paclitaxel eluting stents (PES) in patients with diabetes. However, it is not known if EES is as beneficial in diabetic patients with CKD compared with those without CKD.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Patients enrolled in the TUXEDO-India trial, which is a clinical trial of patients with diabetes and coronary artery disease (CAD) randomly assigned to EES vs. thin-strut PES (Taxus Element), with data on baseline renal function were selected. CKD was defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 ml/min/1.73 m² using the Cockcroft-Gault formula. Primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF-defined as cardiac death, TV myocardial infarction (MI) or ischemia driven TV revascularization) at 1 year. Various secondary outcomes including stent thrombosis were evaluated. Among the 1821 patients with diabetes included in this analysis, 344 (19%) had CKD. In a propensity score adjusted analysis, patients with CKD had a significant increase in MACE (HR = 2.02; 95% CI 1.17-3.50; P = 0.01); death/MI/TVR (HR = 1.99; 95% CI 1.18-3.34; P = 0.009); death/MI (HR = 2.31; 95% CI 1.30-4.08; P = 0.004); cardiac death/MI (HR = 2.40; 95% CI 1.31-4.42; P = 0.005); death (HR = 2.88; 95% CI 1.35-6.13; P = 0.006) driven by an increase in cardiac death (HR = 3.33; 95% CI 1.42-7.83; P = 0.006) when compared with those without CKD. However, stent related events (TV-MI, TVR, TLR and stent thrombosis) were not different between CKD and non CKD groups. A significant interaction between CKD status and stent type (EES vs. PES) was noted for the outcomes of TVF (P_interaction = 0.046), MACE (P_interaction = 0.02), cardiac death or MI (P_interaction = 0.05), non-target vessel related MI (P_interaction = 0.04), non-Q-wave MI (P_interaction = 0.03) and deaths/MI/TVR (P_interaction = 0.04) such that EES was superior to PES in the non-CKD cohort but not in the CKD cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

In subjects with diabetes, CKD is an independent predictor of adverse cardiovascular outcomes including increased risk of death driven largely by non-stent related events. While EES was superior to PES in patients without CKD, this was not the case in those with CKD (Clinical Trials Registry-India number, CTRI/2011/06/001830).

Comparison of Limus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Intervention in Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients have worse adverse cardiovascular outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Clinical outcomes comparing a limus-eluting stent (LES) to a paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients with CKD remain controversial.A systematic search was conducted using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. A pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to calculate original data. We conducted heterogeneity, quality assessment, and publication bias analyses.A total of 17 trials involving 10,724 patients were included. No significant differences were found regarding target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between first-generation LES implantation and PES implantation. Second-generation LES implantation was associated with lower rates of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39-0.82; P = 0.003), MACE (OR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38-0.97; P = 0.04), and ST (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.26-0.77; P = 0.004) compared with PES implantation. In all, the long-term all-cause mortality rate was significantly lower after LES implantation than after PES implantation in patients with CKD (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66-0.93; P = 0.004). However, second-generation LES implantation resulted in a higher rate of TLR (OR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.53-3.25; P < 0.001) than PES implantation in dialysis patients.In patients with CKD, first-generation LES and PES implantation had comparable mortality and morbidity. Second-generation LES implantation was superior to PES in reducing long-term mortality, MACE, and ST. However, PES may be more effective than LES in dialysis patients.

First-generation versus second-generation drug-eluting stents in patients with chronic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are associated with very high rate of adverse cardiovascular outcomes after drug-eluting stents (DES) implantation. The clinical outcomes of second-generation DES versus first-generation DES in CKD patients remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the current study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the safety and efficacy of second-generation DES versus first-generation DES in CKD patients.

METHODS

A systematical search of databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library was conducted for eligible studies comparing the clinical outcomes of first-generation DES versus second-generation DES. Sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents were classified as first-generation DES, and everolimus-eluting, zotarolimus-eluting, and biolimus-eluting stent (BES) were classified as second-generation DES. A pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were used to summary the estimates. Heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis and publication bias were also performed.

RESULTS

We identified 14 trials involving 9,542 patients with CKD undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. First-generation DES implantation was associated with higher risk of long-term all-cause mortality (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.02-1.69; P = 0.04; I² = 0%), in stent restenosis (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.14-2.49; P = 0.008; I² = 49%) and stent thrombosis (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.00-2.69; P = 0.05; I² = 49%) compared with second-generation DES implantation. First-generation DES and second-generation DES showed similar efficacy in decreasing risk of repeat revascularization, myocardial infarction (MI), or major adverse cardiac events (MACE) between first-generation and second-generation DES implantation.

CONCLUSIONS

In CKD patients, the use of second-generation DES was associated with lower risk of long-term all-cause mortality, in stent restenosis and stent thrombosis as compared with first-generation DES. No differences were found regarding repeat revascularization, MI, and MACE.

Into the eyes of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells therapy for myocardial infarction and other diseases

Applications of bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells (BM-MSCs) have been documented for diseases occur in the sports system, the central nervous system, the cardiovascular system etc. However, poor viability of donor stem cells after transplantation limits their therapeutic efficiency. Although the autophagy theory has been reported, the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood. Isolation and culture methods of mesenchymal stem cells are currently concentrate on four ways. Overall, BM-MSCs have both important research significance and clinical application value in cell replacement therapy, gene therapy and reconstruction of tissues as well as organs especially for myocardial infarction (MI). In this article, we review the biological characteristics of BM-MSCs and its research progress especially in MI.

Percutaneous coronary interventions and antiplatelet therapy in renal transplant recipients

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality and morbidity following renal transplantation (RT), accounting for 40-50% of all deaths. After renal transplantation, an adverse cardiovascular event occurs in nearly 40% of patients; given the dialysis vintage and the average wait time, the likelihood of receiving coronary revascularization is very high. There is a significant gap in the literature in terms of the outcomes of prophylactic coronary revascularization in renal transplantation candidates. Current guidelines on myocardial revascularization stipulate that renal transplant patients with significant coronary artery disease (CAD) should not be excluded from the potential benefit of revascularization. Compared with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), however, coronary artery bypass grafting is associated with higher early and 30-day mortality. About one-third of renal transplant patients with CAD have to be treated invasively and so PCI is currently the most popular mode of revascularization in these fragile and compromised patients. A newer generation drug-eluting stent (DES) should be preferred over a bare metal stent (BMS) because of its lower risk of restenosis and improved safety concerns (stent thrombosis) compared with first generation DES and BMS. Among DES, despite no significant differences being reported in terms of efficacy, the newer everolimus and zotarolimus eluting stents should be preferred given the possibility of discontinuing, if necessary, dual antiplatelet therapy before 12 months. Since there is a lack of randomized controlled trials, the current guidelines are inadequate to provide a specifically tailored antiplatelet therapeutic approach for renal transplant patients. At present, clopidogrel is the most used agent, confirming its central role in the therapeutic management of renal transplant patients undergoing PCI. While progress in malignancy-related mortality seems a more distant target, a slow but steady reduction in cardiovascular deaths, improving pharmacological and interventional therapy, is nowadays an achievable medium-term target in renal transplant patients.

Prevalence and Impact of High Platelet Reactivity in Chronic Kidney Disease

Background—

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with increased rates of adverse events after percutaneous coronary intervention. We sought to determine the impact of CKD on platelet reactivity in clopidogrel-treated patients and whether high platelet reactivity (HPR) confers a similar or differential risk for adverse events among patients with CKD and non-CKD.

Methods and Results—

We performed a post hoc analysis of the Assessment of Dual Antiplatelet Therapy With Drug-Eluting Stents (ADAPT-DES) registry, which included 8582 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents and platelet function testing using the VerifyNow assay. We compared HPR and its impact on ischemic and bleeding events >2 years among patients with CKD and non-CKD. Patients with CKD (n=1367) were older, more often female, diabetic, and had lower ejection fraction compared with their non-CKD counterparts (n=7043). Although HPR prevalence increased with worsening renal function in unadjusted analyses, these associations were no longer present after adjustment. Major adverse cardiac event rates at 2 years among those without CKD or HPR, HPR alone, CKD alone, and both CKD and HPR were 9.0%, 11.2%, 13.3%, and 17.5%, respectively ( P <0.001). Associations between HPR and adverse events were uniform across CKD strata without evidence of interaction.

Conclusions—

HPR is more common among those with versus without CKD, an association that is attributable to confounding risk factors that are more prevalent in CKD. The impact of HPR on ischemic and bleeding events is similar irrespective of CKD status.

Clinical Trial Registration—

URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00638794.

Mechanism of edge restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation. Angulation at the edge and mechanical properties of the stent

BACKGROUND

Edge restenosis is not an unusual finding after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES). We hypothesized that mechanical stress imposed on the stent edge would cause vessel wall injury and inflammation, which may consequently lead to edge restenosis.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 1,496 patients were implanted with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES), paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) or zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) in Seoul National University Hospital between 2007 and 2009. Binary restenosis occurred in 161 lesions in 119 patients. We retrospectively compared the 3 DES with regard to the percentage of edge stent restenosis among all cases of restenosis. We also evaluated the maximal, minimal, and Δ (maximal angle-minimal angle) angles. The percentage of edge restenosis was higher for SES than for ZES (37.5% vs. 16.7%, P=0.017). Maximal angle at the proximal edge was 64.82°±33.46° for 26 stents with proximal edge restenosis compared with 31.84°±31.51° for 89 stents without proximal edge restenosis (P=0.001). The Δ angle was also significantly different between the 2 groups (14.81°±15.98° vs. 7.60°±8.86°, P=0.035). Similar findings were observed for distal edge restenosis. Both the maximal angle (39.09°±21.04° vs. 22.71°±22.83°, P=0.010) and Δ angle (20.23°±15.39° vs. 9.18°±9.66°, P=0.016) at the distal edge were significantly different between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical stress determined by angulation at the stent edge segment and biomechanical properties of the DES can be considered as one of the plausible mechanisms for edge stent restenosis.