Dataset Information

Efficacies of the new paclitaxel-eluting Coroflex Please stent in percutaneous coronary intervention; comparison of efficacy between Coroflex Please and Taxus (ECO-PLEASANT) trial: study rationale and design.

ABSTRACT: Previous randomized trials have showed the superiority of Paclitaxel-eluting stent over bare metal stent in angiographic and clinical outcomes. Coroflex Please stent is a newly developed drug eluting stent using the Coroflex stent platform combined with the drug paclitaxel contained in a polymer coating. PECOPS I trial, one-arm observational study, showed that the clinical and angiographic outcomes of Coroflex Please stent were within the range of those of Taxus, the 1st generation paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES). However, there have been no studies directly comparing the Coroflex Please stent with the Taxus Liberte stent that is the newest version of Taxus. Therefore, prospective, randomized trial is required to demonstrate the non-inferiority of Coroflex Please stent compared with Taxus Liberte stent in a head-to-head manner.In the comparison of Efficacy between COroflex PLEASe ANd Taxus stent(ECO-PLEASANT) trial, approximately 900 patients are being prospectively and randomly assigned to the either type of Coroflex Please stent and Taxus Liberte stent via web-based randomization. The primary endpoint is clinically driven target vessel revascularization at 9 months. The secondary endpoints include major cardiac adverse events, target vessel failure, stent thrombosis and angiographic efficacy endpoints.The ECO-PLEASANT trial is the study not yet performed to directly compare the efficacy and safety of the Coroflex Please versus Taxus Liberte stent. On the basis of this trial, we will be able to find out whether the Coroflex Please stent is non-inferior to Taxus Liberte stent or not.ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00699543.

SUBMITTER: Seo JB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2773780 | biostudies-literature | 2009 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Efficacies of the new paclitaxel-eluting Coroflex Please stent in percutaneous coronary intervention; comparison of efficacy between Coroflex Please and Taxus (ECO-PLEASANT) trial: study rationale and design.

Seo Jae-Bin JB Jeon Hui-Kyung HK Park Kyung-Woo KW Park Jong-Seon JS Bae Jang-Ho JH Kim Sang-Wook SW Moon Keon-Woong KW Choi Jae-Woong JW Lee Sang-Gon SG Chung Woo-Young WY Youn Tae-Jin TJ Kim Soo-Joong SJ Kim Doo-Il DI Kim Byung-Ok BO Hyon Min-Su MS Park Keum-Soo KS Cha Tae-Joon TJ Hwang Hweung-Kon HK Hur Seung-Ho SH Kim Hyo-Soo HS

Trials 20091023

<h4>Background</h4>Previous randomized trials have showed the superiority of Paclitaxel-eluting stent over bare metal stent in angiographic and clinical outcomes. Coroflex Please stent is a newly developed drug eluting stent using the Coroflex stent platform combined with the drug paclitaxel contained in a polymer coating. PECOPS I trial, one-arm observational study, showed that the clinical and angiographic outcomes of Coroflex Please stent were within the range of those of Taxus, the 1st gener ...[more]

PMID: 19849864

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsIn-stent chronic total occlusion (IS-CTO) represents a unique challenge for percutaneous coronary intervention. Whether the optimal treatment for IS-CTO is angioplasty with paclitaxel-coated balloons (PCBs) or repeat stenting with drug-eluting stents (DESs) is unclear. We aimed to evaluate the long-term clinical outcome of PCB angioplasty and DES repeat stenting for DES IS-CTO.MethodsWe retrospectively included patients with DES IS-CTO who underwent successful PCB angioplasty or DES repeat stenting from January 2016 to December 2019. The primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). Cox proportional hazards model was performed to compare the risk of MACEs between PCB angioplasty and DES repeat stenting, and to further explore the prognostic factors of patients with DES IS-CTO.ResultsA total of 214 patients with DES IS-CTO were enrolled: 78 patients (36.4%) treated with PCB and 136 patients (63.6%) treated with DES respectively. The median follow-up was 1160 days, and MACEs were observed in 28.2% of patients with PCB angioplasty versus 26.5% of patients with DES repeat stenting (P = 0.784), mainly driven by TLR (21.8% vs. 19.9%, P = 0.735). There was no significant difference in the risk of MACEs between the PCB group and the DES group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.25, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-2.46, P = 0.512). Multivariate Cox analysis revealed that chronic kidney disease and ≥ 3 stent layers in the lesion were independent predictors of MACEs, while switching to another antiproliferative drug was an independent protective factor (all P < 0.05).ConclusionsPCB angioplasty was an effective alternative treatment strategy for DES IS-CTO, which had similar long-term outcomes to DES repeat stenting in contemporary practice, but both were accompanied by a high rate of long-term MACEs. Improving the poor prognosis of patients with DES IS-CTO remains a challenge.

Project description:BackgroundDrug-eluting stents (DESs) were considered as ground-breaking technology promising to eradicate restenosis and the necessity to perform multiple revascularization procedures subsequent to percutaneous coronary intervention. Soon after DESs were released on the market, however, there were reports of a potential increase in mortality and of early or late thrombosis. In addition, DESs are far more expensive than bare-metal stents (BMSs), which has led to their limited use in many countries. The technology has improved over the last few years with the second generation of DESs (DES-2). Moreover, costs have come down and an improved safety profile with decreased thrombosis has been reported.ObjectivePerform a cost-benefit analysis of DES-2s versus BMSs in the context of a publicly funded university hospital in Quebec, Canada.MethodsA systematic review of meta-analyses was conducted between 2012 and 2016 to extract data on clinical effectiveness. The clinical outcome of interest for the cost-benefit analysis was target-vessel revascularization (TVR). Cost units are those used in the Quebec health-care system. The cost-benefit analysis was based on a 2-year perspective. Deterministic and stochastic models (discrete-event simulation) were used, and various risk factors of reintervention were considered.ResultsDES-2s are much more effective than BMSs with respect to TVR rate ratio (i.e., 0.29 to 0.62 in more recent meta-analyses). DES-2s seem to cause fewer deaths and in-stent thrombosis than BMSs, but results are rarely significant, with the exception of the cobalt-chromium everolimus DES. The rate ratio of myocardial infraction is systematically in favor of DES-2s and very often significant. Despite the higher cost of DES-2s, fewer reinterventions can lead to huge savings (i.e., -$479 to -$769 per patient). Moreover, the higher a patient's risk of reintervention, the higher the savings associated with the use of DES-2s.ConclusionDespite the higher purchase cost of DES-2s compared to BMSs, generalizing their use, in particular for patients at high risk of reintervention, should enable significant savings.

Project description:BackgroundPatients treated with percutaneous coronary intervention are often considered to be at a high bleeding risk (HBR). Drug-eluting stents have been shown to be superior to bare-metal stents in patients with HBR, even when patients were given abbreviated periods of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Short DAPT has not been evaluated with the EluNIR ridaforolimus-eluting stent. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a shortened period of DAPT following implantation of the ridaforolimus-eluting stent in patients with HBR.Methods and resultsThis was a prospective, multicenter, binational, single-arm, open-label trial. Patients were defined as HBR according to the LEADERS-FREE (Prospective Randomized Comparison of the BioFreedom Biolimus A9 Drug-Coated Stent versus the Gazelle Bare-Metal Stent in Patients at High Bleeding Risk) trial criteria. After percutaneous coronary intervention, DAPT was given for 1 month to patients presenting with stable angina. In patients presenting with an acute coronary syndrome, DAPT was given for 1 to 3 months, at the investigator's discretion. The primary end point was a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis up to 1 year (Academic Research Consortium definite and probable). Three hundred fifteen patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were enrolled, and 56.4% presented with acute coronary syndrome; 33.7% were receiving oral anticoagulation. At 1 year, the primary end point occurred in 15 patients (4.9%), meeting the prespecified performance goal of 14.1% (P<0.0001). Stent thrombosis (Academic Research Consortium definite and probable) occurred in 2 patients (0.6%). Bleeding Academic Research Consortium type 3 and 5 bleeding occurred in 6 patients (1.9%).ConclusionsWe observed favorable results in patients with HBR who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with a ridaforolimus-eluting stent and received shortened DAPT, including a low rate of ischemic events and low rate of stent thrombosis.RegistrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03877848.

Project description:BackgroundThe effectiveness and durability of endovascular revascularization therapies for chronic critical limb ischemia (CLI) are challenged by the extensive burden of infrapopliteal arterial disease and lesion-related characteristics (e.g., severe calcification, chronic total occlusions), which frequently result in poor clinical outcomes. While infrapopliteal vessel patency directly affects pain relief and wound healing, sustained patency and extravascular care both contribute to the ultimate "patient-centric" outcomes of functional limb preservation, mobility and quality of life (QoL).Methods/designIN.PACT DEEP is a 2:1 randomized controlled trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of infrapopliteal arterial revascularization between the IN.PACT Amphirion™ paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon (IA-DEB) and standard balloon angioplasty (PTA) in patients with Rutherford Class 4-5-6 CLI.DiscussionThis multicenter trial has enrolled 358 patients at 13 European centers with independent angiographic core lab adjudication of the primary efficacy endpoint of target lesion late luminal loss (LLL) and clinically driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in major amputation-free surviving patients through 12-months. An independent wound core lab will evaluate all ischemic wounds to assess the extent of healing and time to healing at 1, 6, and 12 months. A QoL questionnaire including a pain scale will assess changes from baseline scores through 12 months. A Clinical Events Committee and Data Safety Monitoring Board will adjudicate the composite primary safety endpoints of all-cause death, major amputation, and clinically driven TLR at 6 months and other trial endpoints and supervise patient safety throughout the study. All patients will be followed for 5 years. A literature review is presented of the current status of endovascular treatment of CLI with drug-eluting balloon and standard PTA. The rationale and design of the IN.PACT DEEP Trial are discussed. IN.PACT DEEP is a milestone, prospective, randomized, robust, independent core lab-adjudicated CLI trial that will evaluate the role of a new infrapopliteal revascularization technology, the IA-DEB, compared to PTA. It will assess the overall impact on infrapopliteal artery patency, limb salvage, wound healing, pain control, QoL, and patient mobility. The 1-year results of the adjudicated co-primary and secondary endpoints will be available in 2014.Trial registrationNCT00941733.

Dataset Information

Efficacies of the new paclitaxel-eluting Coroflex Please stent in percutaneous coronary intervention; comparison of efficacy between Coroflex Please and Taxus (ECO-PLEASANT) trial: study rationale and design.

Publications

Efficacies of the new paclitaxel-eluting Coroflex Please stent in percutaneous coronary intervention; comparison of efficacy between Coroflex Please and Taxus (ECO-PLEASANT) trial: study rationale and design.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets