Novel drug-eluting stents in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Capodanno D
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3049546 | biostudies-literature | 2011
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Novel drug-eluting stents in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions.
Capodanno Davide D Dipasqua Fabio F Tamburino Corrado C
Vascular health and risk management 20110225
Due to safety concerns in recent years, much effort has been devoted to improving the outcomes associated with drug-eluting stents (DESs). This review summarizes the current status of methodological and technical achievements reported in second-generation DES. Novel stents are described based on the component (the platform, the polymer, and the drug) that has undergone the most significant changes compared to earlier generation DES. An overview of the currently available evidence on the use of n ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Drug-eluting balloons (DEBs) have emerged as a new application in percutaneous coronary intervention. DEBs have proven successful in the treatment of in-stent restenosis, but their role in de novo lesions is less clear. This paper provides a review of the current studies where DEBs have been used in coronary de novo lesions, either as part of a DEB-only strategy or in combination with another device, mainly a bare metal stent (BMS). By searching Pubmed and Embase we were able to identify 52 relevant studies, differing in design, intervention, and clinical setting, including patients with small vessel disease, bifurcation lesions, complex long lesions, acute myocardial infarction, diabetes mellitus, and elderly. In 23 studies, a DEB was combined with a BMS, 25 studies used a DEB-only strategy with only provisional BMS implantation, and four studies combined a DEB with a drug-eluting stent (DES). In the vast majority of studies, DEB in combination with BMS does not seem to improve clinical or angiographic outcome compared with DES, whereas a DEB-only strategy seems promising, especially when predilatation and geographical mismatch are taken into account. A lower risk of recurrent thrombosis with DEB compared with DES is not evident from the current studies. In conclusion, the main indication for DEB seems to be small vessel disease, especially in clinical scenarios in which a contraindication to dual antiplatelet therapy exists. The main approach should be a DEB-only strategy with only provisional bailout stenting, which has shown interesting results in different clinical scenarios. In general, larger randomized controlled studies with prolonged follow-up comparing DEB with best in class DES are warranted. Technical developments of DEBs including the use of different drugs might potentially improve the efficacy of such treatment.
| S-EPMC5125107 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The role of drug-eluting balloons (DEB) is unclear. Increasing evidence has shown a benefit for the treatment of in-stent restenosis. Its effect on de novo coronary lesions is more controversial. Several smaller randomized trials found conflicting results.This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) evaluating the effect of local Paclitaxel delivery/drug eluting balloons (DEB) (+/- bare metal stent) compared to current standard therapy (stenting) to treat de novo coronary lesions. Data sources for RCT were identified through a literature search from 2005 through 28 December 2012. The main endpoints of interest were target lesion revascularization (TLR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), binary in-segment restenosis, stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction (MI), late lumen loss (LLL) and mortality. A random effects model was used to calculate the pooled relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals.Eight studies (11 subgroups) and a total of 1,706 patients were included in this analysis. Follow-up duration ranged from 6 to 12 months. Overall, DEB showed similar results to the comparator treatment. The relative risk (RR) for MACE was 0.95 (0.64 to 1.39); P = 0.776, for mortality it was 0.79 (0.30 to 2.11), P = 0.644, for stent thrombosis it was 1.45 (0.42 to 5.01), P = 0.560, for MI it was 1.26 (0.49 to 3.21), P = 0.629, for TLR it was 1.09 (0.71 to 1.68); P = 0.700 and for binary in-stent restenosis it was 0.96 (0.48 to 1.93), P = 0.918. Compared to bare metal stents (BMS), DEB showed a lower LLL (- 0.26 mm (-0.51 to 0.01)) and a trend towards a lower MACE risk (RR 0.66 (0.43 to 1.02)).Overall, drug-eluting balloons (+/- bare metal stent) are not superior to current standard therapies (BMS or drug eluting stent (DES)) in treating de novo coronary lesions. However, the performance of DEB seems to lie in between DES and BMS with a trend towards superiority over BMS alone. Therefore, DEB may be considered in patients with contraindications for DES. The heterogeneity between the included studies is a limitation of this meta-analysis; different drug-eluting balloons have been used.
| S-EPMC3648374 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundDrug-coated balloon (DCB) has been proved efficacy for coronary small vessel disease, but data regarding outcomes of DCB in common de novo lesions (including reference vessel diameter more than 3.0mm) compared with new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) are lacking. We hypothesized that a DCB-only strategy for coronary de novo lesions would be non-inferior to DES treatment on angiographic outcomes.MethodsIn this randomized controlled trial, we compared the effect of DCB with DES on late lumen loss (LLL) at 9-month angiographic follow-up and 12-month major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), including death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR).ResultsFrom July 2017 to July 2018, 288 consecutive patients with reference vessel diameter (RVD) between 2.25 and 4.0mm were screened. After proper pre-dilation, 170 patients were enrolled and randomized to the DCB and the DES groups at 1:1 ratio. Seven patients withdrew the consent forms during hospital stay (1 in DCB group, 6 in DES group). Two patients in DCB group underwent bailout stenting due to severe dissection after DCB release. The primary endpoint of 9-month LLL was -0.19±0.49mm with the DCB versus 0.03±0.64mm with the DES. The one-sided 97.5% upper confidence limit of the difference was -0.04mm, achieving non-inferiority of the DCB compared with the DES (P=0.019). The 12-month cumulative MACE rate was similar in the DCB and DES groups (2.44% vs. 6.33%, P=0.226).ConclusionsIn this prospective study, the DCB only strategy for de novo lesion was non-inferior to the new-generation DES in terms of 9-month late lumen loss.
| S-EPMC9270292 | biostudies-literature
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.
| S-EPMC3898413 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC6483499 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The combined use of a drug-eluting balloon (DEB) and a bare metal stent (BMS) for the treatment of de novo non-small vessel coronary artery diseases (CAD) remains to be evaluated. We investigated the efficacy of a sequential treatment using a DEB together with a BMS implantation in comparison to a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES). This study was a prospective, randomized, open-label study. We designed it to demonstrate the non-inferiority of a sequential treatment using a DEB first followed by a BMS (DEB + BMS) compared with the use of a ZES. The primary endpoint was in-segment late loss (LL) at 9 months measured by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA). A total of 180 patients were enrolled in the study. The 9-month follow-up angiography was performed in 72 patients with DEB + BMS and 74 patients with ZES. When comparing the DEB + BMS results with the ZES ones, LL was 0.50 ± 0.46 mm in DEB + BMS patients vs. 0.21 ± 0.44 mm in ZES patients (P < 0.001). The mean difference of the LL was 0.31 mm, which was larger than the prespecified non-inferiority margin of 0.19 mm, and the 2-sided 95% confidence interval was 0.15-0.48. The clinical outcomes were not significantly different. In conclusion, the DEB + BMS strategy is inferior to the ZES one in terms of the LL result at 9 months. The DEB strategy for de novo coronary artery lesions needs to be improved for it to become an alternative treatment option.
| S-EPMC5426232 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundData on clinical outcomes among patients treated with the zotarolimus-eluting Endeavor™ stent versus the sirolimus-eluting Cypher™ stent favor the sirolimus-eluting stent. However, a separate comparison of clinical outcome among patients treated for multiple lesions with these stents is lacking. We performed this comparison within the SORT OUT III trial data set.MethodsAmong 2332 patients randomized in SORT OUT III, 695 were treated for multiple lesions with zotarolimus-eluting (n = 350) or sirolimus-eluting (n = 345) stents and followed for 18 months. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE); composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization (TVR); was the primary endpoint.ResultsZotarolimus-eluting compared to sirolimus-eluting stent treatment was associated with increased MACE rate (13.2% vs. 2.6%; hazard ratio 5.29 with 95% confidence interval: 2.59-10.8). All secondary endpoints; all cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, TVR, target lesion revascularization, in-stent restenosis, and definite stent thrombosis; were observed more frequently among zotarolimus-eluting stent treated patients. For all endpoints, hazard ratios were 1.6 to 4.6 times higher than in the overall results of the SORT OUT III trial.ConclusionsWe observed better clinical outcomes among patients treated for multiple lesions with the sirolimus-eluting stent compared to those treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent.
| S-EPMC3325867 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AimThe marked variation in bifurcation anatomy has brought about an ongoing search for stents specifically constructed for coronary bifurcations. This study aimed to analyze the angiographic restenosis prevalence and patterns and predictors of different patterns in dedicated bifurcation BiOSS® vs. current generation drug-eluting stents implanted in coronary bifurcation lesions based on data from two clinical trials POLBOS I and II.MethodsDedicated bifurcation BiOSS® stents were compared with drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) or nonST elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) (POLBOS I: paclitaxel eluting BiOSS® Expert vs. DES; POLBOS II: sirolimus eluting BiOSS® LIM vs. DES). Provisional T-stenting was the default treatment. Morphological pattern of in-stent restenosis according to the modified Mehran classification adopted for bifurcation lesions was assessed with bifurcation dedicated quantitative coronary angiographic software (CAAS 5.11, Pie Medical Imaging BV, the Netherlands).ResultsIn total, 445 patients (222 patients in BiOSS group and 223 patients in DES group) were included into the analysis. In BiOSS group 24 cases of angiographic restenosis (10.8%) were recorded, and in DES group-17 cases (7.6%) at 12 months follow-up (angiographic control rate at follow-up-90.3%). In the BiOSS group most frequent medina classification in restenotic cases was 0.0.1 (25%), whereas in DES-0.0.1 and 0.1.1 (23.5% each). In multivariate regression analysis proximal optimization technique was associated with the lowest chance for restenosis (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.06-0.33), whereas diabetes on insulin was associated with the highest risk of restenosis (OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.48-11.44).ConclusionsThe angiographic restenosis pattern and rate was similar between BiOSS stents and DES in coronary bifurcation lesions.
| S-EPMC7204374 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose: Dissection after plain balloon angioplasty is required to achieve adequate luminal area; however, it is associated with a high risk of vascular events. This study aimed to examine the relationship between non-flow limiting coronary dissections and subsequent lumen loss and long-term clinical outcomes following successful drug-coated balloon (DCB) treatment of de novo coronary lesions.Materials and methods: A total of 227 patients with good distal flow (Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade 3) following DCB treatment were retrospectively enrolled and stratified according to the presence or absence of a non-flow limiting dissection. The primary endpoint was late lumen loss (LLL) at 6-month angiography, and the secondary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and target vessel thrombosis).Results: The cohort consisted of 95 patients with and 132 patients without a dissection. There were no between-group differences in LLL (90.8%) returning for angiography at 6 months (0.05±0.19 mm in non-dissection and 0.05±0.30 mm in dissection group, p=0.886) or in TVF (6.8% in non-dissection and 8.4% in dissection group, p=0.799) at a median follow-up of 3.4 years. In a multivariate analysis, the presence of dissection and its severity were not associated with LLL or TVF. Almost dissections (93.9%) were completely healed, and there was no newly developed dissection at 6-month angiography.Conclusion: The presence of a dissection following successful DCB treatment of a de novo coronary lesion may not be associated with an increased risk of LLL or TVF (Impact of Drug-coated Balloon Treatment in de Novo Coronary Lesion; NCT04619277).
| S-EPMC7700881 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The comparative effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) has not been studied in the kidney transplant population. METHODS:Using the US Renal Data System, we identified 3245 kidney transplant patients who underwent PCI between April 2003 and December 2010; 2400 and 845 patients received DES and BMS, respectively. We used propensity score matching and inverse probability of treatment weighting to create DES- and BMS-treated groups whose observed baseline characteristics were well-balanced. The associations between stent type and the outcomes of (1) death; (2) death or myocardial infarction (MI); (3) death, MI, or repeat revascularization (RR); and (4) hospitalized bleeding were compared using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS:Drug-eluting stent use increased during the study period, mirroring the trend described in the general population. In the propensity score-matched cohort, no significant association among DES (vs BMS) use and outcomes was observed at 1 and 2 years of follow-up. However, at 3 years, DES was associated with 20% (95% confidence interval [CI], 4-33%) lower risk of death, 15% (95% CI, 1-27%) lower risk of death or MI, and 14% (95% CI, 2-24%) lower risk of death, MI, or repeat revascularization. There were no significant differences in rates of hospitalized bleeding at any time point. Results were similar in the inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis. CONCLUSIONS:In this retrospective study of US kidney transplant recipients undergoing PCI, DES was associated with better clinical outcomes beyond 2 years of follow-up.
| S-EPMC5807106 | biostudies-literature