Dataset Information

Early vascular responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated versus circumferential durable polymer-coated newer-generation drug-eluting stents in humans: a pathological study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Recent clinical studies are testing strategies for short (1-3 months) dual antiplatelet therapy following newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) placement. However, detailed biological responses to newer-generation DES remain unknown in humans.

Aims

We sought to evaluate early pathologic responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated (BP-) DES compared with circumferential durable polymer-coated (DP-) DES in human autopsy cases.

Methods

The study included 38 coronary lesions with newer-generation DES implanted for <90 days (DP-DES=24, BP-DES=14) in 26 autopsy cases. The degree of strut coverage was defined as follows: grade 0 (bare), grade 1 (with fibrin or tissues/cells without endothelium), grade 2 (with single-layered endothelium), and grade 3 (with endothelium and underlying smooth muscle cell layers).

Results

The duration following implantation was similar in DP- and BP-DES (median=20 vs 17 days). A total of 2,022 struts (DP-DES=1,297, BP-DES=725) were pathologically analysed. Focal grade 2 coverage was observed as early as 5 days after the implantation in both stents. The multilevel mixed-effects ordered logistic regression model demonstrated that BP-DES exhibited greater strut coverage compared with DP-DES (odds ratio [OR]: 3.64, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.37-9.67; p=0.009), which remained significant after adjustment for the duration following implantation and underlying tissue characteristics (OR: 2.74, 95% CI: 1.10-6.80; p=0.030). The predictive probability of grade 2 and 3 coverage was comparably limited at 30 days (DP-DES=17.1%, BP-DES=28.7%) and increased at 90 days (DP-DES=76.5%, BP-DES=86.6%). Both stents showed low inflammation and a similar degree of fibrin deposition.

Conclusions

Single-layered endothelial coverage begins in the days after newer-generation DES placement, and BP-DES potentially exhibit faster strut coverage with smooth muscle cell infiltration than DP-DES in humans. Nevertheless, vessel healing remains suboptimal in both stents at 30 days.

SUBMITTER: Kawagoe Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10018292 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Early vascular responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated versus circumferential durable polymer-coated newer-generation drug-eluting stents in humans: a pathological study.

Kawagoe Yasuhito Y Otsuka Fumiyuki F Onozuka Daisuke D Ishibashi-Ueda Hatsue H Ikeda Yoshihiko Y Ohta-Ogo Keiko K Matsumoto Manabu M Amemiya Kisaki K Asaumi Yasuhide Y Kataoka Yu Y Nishimura Kunihiro K Miyamoto Yoshihiro Y Noguchi Teruo T Finn Aloke V AV Virmani Renu R Hatakeyama Kinta K Yasuda Satoshi S

EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology 20230301 15

<h4>Background</h4>Recent clinical studies are testing strategies for short (1-3 months) dual antiplatelet therapy following newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) placement. However, detailed biological responses to newer-generation DES remain unknown in humans.<h4>Aims</h4>We sought to evaluate early pathologic responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated (BP-) DES compared with circumferential durable polymer-coated (DP-) DES in human autopsy cases.<h4>Methods</h4>The study included ...[more]

PMID: 36448921

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents with those of bare metal stents and durable polymer drug eluting stents.DesignMixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of 258,544 patient years of follow-up from randomized trials.Data sources and study selectionPubMed, Embase, and Central were searched for randomized trials comparing any of the Food and Drug Administration approved durable polymer drug eluting stents (sirolimus eluting, paclitaxel eluting, cobalt chromium everolimus eluting, platinum chromium everolimus eluting, zotarolimus eluting-Endeavor, and zotarolimus eluting-Resolute) or biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents, with each other or against bare metal stents.OutcomesLong term efficacy (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization) and safety (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis). Landmark analysis at more than one year was evaluated to assess the potential late benefit of biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents.ResultsFrom 126 randomized trials and 258,544 patient years of follow-up, for long term efficacy (target vessel revascularization), biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel eluting stents (rate ratio 0.66, 95% credibility interval 0.57 to 0.78) and zotarolimus eluting stent-Endeavor (0.69, 0.56 to 0.84) but not to newer generation durable polymer drug eluting stents (for example: 1.03, 0.89 to 1.21 versus cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents). Similarly, biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel eluting stents (rate ratio 0.61, 0.37 to 0.89) but inferior to cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents (2.04, 1.27 to 3.35) for long term safety (definite stent thrombosis). In the landmark analysis after one year, biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to sirolimus eluting stents for definite stent thrombosis (rate ratio 0.29, 0.10 to 0.82) but were associated with increased mortality compared with cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents (1.52, 1.02 to 2.22). Overall, among all stent types, the newer generation durable polymer drug eluting stents (zotarolimus eluting stent-Resolute, cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents, and platinum chromium everolimus eluting stents) were the most efficacious (lowest target vessel revascularization rate) stents, and cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents were the safest with significant reductions in definite stent thrombosis (rate ratio 0.35, 0.21 to 0.53), myocardial infarction (0.65, 0.55 to 0.75), and death (0.72, 0.58 to 0.90) compared with bare metal stents.ConclusionsBiodegradable polymer drug eluting stents are superior to first generation durable polymer drug eluting stents but not to newer generation durable polymer stents in reducing target vessel revascularization. Newer generation durable polymer stents, and especially cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents, have the best combination of efficacy and safety. The utility of biodegradable polymer stents in the context of excellent clinical outcomes with newer generation durable polymer stents needs to be proven.

Project description:Background The choice of optimal drug-eluting stent therapy for patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remains uncertain. We aimed to assess the long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents (BP-SES) versus durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with DM. Methods and Results In a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE (Ultrathin Strut Biodegradable Polymer Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Revascularization) trial (NCT01443104), patients randomly assigned to ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES were stratified according to diabetic status. The primary end point was target lesion failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, at 5 years. Among 2119 patients, 486 (22.9%) presented with DM. Compared with individuals without DM, patients with DM were older and had a greater baseline cardiac risk profile. In patients with DM, target lesion failure at 5 years occurred in 74 patients (cumulative incidence, 31.0%) treated with BP-SES and 57 patients (25.8%) treated with DP-EES (risk ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.87-1.73 [P=0.24]). In individuals without DM, target lesion failure at 5 years occurred in 124 patients (16.8%) treated with BP-SES and 132 patients (16.8%) treated with DP-EES (risk ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.77-1.26 [P=0.90; P for interaction=0.31]). Cumulative 5-year incidence rates of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, clinically indicated target lesion revascularization, and definite stent thrombosis were similar among patients with DM treated with BP-SES or DP-EES. There was no interaction between diabetic status and treatment effect of BP-SES versus DP-EES. Conclusions In a prespecified subgroup analysis of the BIOSCIENCE trial, we found no difference in clinical outcomes throughout 5 years between patients with DM treated with ultrathin-strut BP-SES or thin-strut DP-EES. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01443104.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the safety and effectiveness between biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) and durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS).DesignMeta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Primary and secondary outcome measuresMajor adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) were considered the primary endpoint. Efficacy endpoints included target vessel revascularisation (TVR) and target lesion revascularisation (TLR). Safety endpoints included all-cause death, cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis (ST).MethodsWe searched PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for comparative studies of BP-DES and DP-DES in patients with ACS from January 2000 to July 2021. Statistical pooling was performed to estimate incidence using a random-effects model with generic inverse-variance weighting. Risk estimates were computed with 95% CIs.ResultsEight articles with seven RCTs that compared BP-DES and DP-DES in patients with ACS were identified and included in the qualitative and quantitative analyses. There was no difference in the baseline characteristics, except for the number of smoking patients (OR: 1.13, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.24; p=0.008, I2=29%), which was significantly lower in the BP-DES group. The meta-analysis demonstrated that MACEs, efficacy endpoints and safety endpoints were similar between the groups at 1 year. However, the incidence of total ST was signiﬁcantly different between the BP-DES and DP-DES groups in the follow-up period (p=0.0001). Further analysis showed a statistically significant difference in MACEs (OR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.88; p=0.002, I2=0 %), TLR (OR: 0.71, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.01; p=0.05, I2=0%), TVR (OR: 0.70, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.94; p=0.002, I2=15%), total ST incidence (OR: 0.59, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.77; p=0.0001, I2=48%) and ST incidence (OR: 0.63, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.85; p=0.002, I2=0%) over 2 years.ConclusionThis meta-analysis revealed that both stent types demonstrated excellent safety and efficacy profiles at 12 months. However, a slight increase in MACEs, TLR, TVR and ST incidence was observed in the DP-DES group over the 2-year follow-up period, suggesting that BP-DES may be more favourable when treating patients with ACS.Trial registration numberNCT00389220.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the theoretical benefits of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES), clinical benefits of BP-DES over durable polymer DES (DP-DES) have not been clearly demonstrated. Using data from a large-volume nationwide cohort, we compared long-term clinical outcomes between BP-DES- and DP-DES-treated patients.MethodsA retrospective cohort study that enrolled all patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with new-generation DES between 2010 and 2016 in Korea was conducted by using the National Health Insurance Service database. The outcomes of interest were all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and myocardial infarction (MI).ResultsA total of 127,731 patients treated with new-generation DES with thin struts (<90 μm) were enrolled for this analysis. After stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting, the incidence of all-cause death was significantly lower in patients treated with BP-DES (n = 19,521) at 5 years after PCI (11.3 vs. 13.0% in those treated with DP-DES [n = 108,067], hazard ratio [HR] 0.92, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88-0.96, p < 0.001), while showing no statistically significant difference at 2 years after PCI (5.7 vs. 6.0%, respectively, HR 0.95, 95% CI, 0.89-1.01, p = 0.238). Similarly, use of BP-DES was associated with a lower incidence of cardiovascular death (7.4 vs. 9.6% in those treated with DP-DES, HR 0.82, 95% CI, 0.77-0.87, p < 0.001), and MI (7.4 vs. 8.7%, respectively, HR 0.90, 95% CI, 0.86-0.94, p = 0.006) at 5 years after PCI. There was no statistically significant difference of cardiovascular death (4.6 vs. 4.9%, respectively, HR 0.93, 95% CI, 0.85-1.01, p = 0.120) and MI (5.0 vs. 5.1%, respectively, HR 0.98, 95% CI, 0.92-1.05, p = 0.461) at 2 years after PCI.ConclusionsImplantation of BP-DES was associated with a lower risk of all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and MI compared with DP-DES implantation. This difference was clearly apparent at 5 years after DES implantation.Clinical trial registrationClinicalTrial.gov, NCT04715594.

Dataset Information

Early vascular responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated versus circumferential durable polymer-coated newer-generation drug-eluting stents in humans: a pathological study.

Background

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Early vascular responses to abluminal biodegradable polymer-coated versus circumferential durable polymer-coated newer-generation drug-eluting stents in humans: a pathological study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets