Genetic risk model for in-stent restenosis of second-and third-generation drug-eluting stents.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Liu YW
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8455661 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Given the limited salvage options for in-stent restenosis (ISR) of drug-eluting stents (DES), our high-volume cardiac catheterization laboratory has been performing intracoronary brachytherapy (ICBT) in patients with recurrent ISR of DES. This study analyzes their baseline characteristics and assesses the safety/toxicity of ICBT in this high-risk population.A retrospective analysis of patients treated with ICBT between September 2012 and December 2014 was performed. Patients with ISR twice in a single location were eligible. Procedural complications included vessel dissection, perforation, tamponade, slow/absent blood flow, and vessel closure. Postprocedural events included myocardial infarction, coronary artery bypass graft, congestive heart failure, stroke, bleeding, thrombosis, embolism, dissection, dialysis, or death occurring within 72 hours. A control group of patients with 2 episodes of ISR at 1 location who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention without ICBT was identified. Unpaired t tests and χ2 tests were used to compare the groups.There were 134 (78%) patients in the ICBT group with 141 treated lesions and 37 (22%) patients in the control group. There was a high prevalence of hyperlipidemia (>95%), hypertension (>95%), and diabetes (>50%) in both groups. The groups were well-balanced with respect to age, sex, and pre-existing medical conditions, with the exception of previous coronary artery bypass graft being more common the ICBT group. Procedural complication rates were low in the control and ICBT groups (0% vs 4.5%, P = .190). Postprocedural event rates were low (<5%) in both groups. Readmission rate at 30 days was 3.7% in the ICBT group and 5.4% in the control group (P = .649).This is the largest recent known series looking at ICBT for recurrent ISR of DES. ICBT is a safe treatment option with similarly low rates (<5%) of procedural and postprocedural complications compared with percutaneous coronary intervention alone. This study establishes the safety of ICBT in a high-risk patient cohort.
| S-EPMC5506705 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim of our study was to investigate the predictors of target lesion revascularization (TLR) and to compare the in-stent restenosis (ISR) progression rates of different 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents (DES).BackgroundThe predictors of early and late TLR after 2nd-generation DES implantation have not been fully evaluated.MethodsWe analyzed 944 stented lesions from 394 patients who had at least two serial follow-up angiograms, using quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) analysis. The study endpoints were TLR and the velocity of diameter stenosis (DS) progression.ResultsTLR occurred in 58 lesions (6.1%) during the first angiographic follow-up period and 23 de novo lesions (2.4%) during the following second interval. Independent predictors for early TLR were diabetes mellitus (DM) (HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.29-5.15, p=0.007), previous percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.03-5.65, p=0.043), and postprocedure DS% (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.05-1.11, p<0.001, per 1%), while predictors of late TLR were previous PCI (HR 9.43, 95% CI 2.58-34.52, p=0.001) and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.28-2.00, p<0.001). The ISR progression velocity (by DS%) was 12.1 ±21.0%/year and 3.7 ±10.1%/year during the first and second follow-up periods, respectively, which had no significant difference (p>0.05) between the four types of DESs.ConclusionsOur data showed that predictors for TLR may be different at different time intervals. DM, pervious PCI, and postprocedure DS could predict early TLR, while previous PCI and CRP level could predict late TLR. Contemporary DESs had similar rates of ISR progression rates.Trial registrationThis study was retrospectively registered and approved by the institutional review board of Seoul National University Hospital (no. 1801-138-918).
| S-EPMC6739790 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:The study sought to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). DESIGN:Meta-analysis using data from randomised trial found by searches on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of major cardiovascular congresses. SETTING:Only randomised trials comparing DES with DCB were included. PARTICIPANTS:Patients with ISR in the included trials. INTERVENTIONS:New-generation DES versus DCB. OUTCOMES:The angiographic and clinical outcomes including cardiac death, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis were investigated. RESULTS:Five trials including 913 patients were eligible and included. Pooled analysis in angiographic results identified that new-generation DES were associated with higher acute luminal gain (-0.31?mm, 95%?CI -0.42 to -0.20, P<0.001) and lower per cent diameter stenosis (risk ratio (RR): 0.28, 95%?CI 0.02 to 0.55, P=0.04). DES significantly reduced the risk of TLR (RR: 1.96, 95%?CI 1.17 to 3.28, P=0.01) compared with DCB; however, there was no statistical differences for MACE (RR: 1.21, 95%?CI 0.67 to 2.17, P=0.53), myocardial infarction (RR: 1.16, 95%?CI 0.55 to 2.48, P=0.69) and cardiac death (RR: 1.80, 95%?CI 0.60 to 5.39, P=0.29). CONCLUSIONS:Interventions with new-generation DES appear to be associated with significant reduction in per cent diameter stenosis and TLR at short-term follow-up, but had similar MACE, myocardial infarction and cardiac death for patients with coronary ISR compared with DCB. Appropriately powered studies with longer term follow-up are warranted to confirm these findings.
| S-EPMC5855471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeWe evaluated the incidence, predictors, and prognosis of coronary artery aneurysm (CAA) after second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation.Materials and methodsA total of 976 consecutive patients (1245 lesions) who underwent follow-up angiography after second-generation DES implantation were analyzed. Incidence and predictors of CAA were assessed, and clinical prognosis was compared with 34 cases of CAA after first-generation DES implantation using previous CAA registry data.ResultsAll 10 cases of CAA (0.80% per lesion) in 10 patients (1.02% per patient) were detected at follow up. Compared to lesions without CAA, those with CAA had greater involvement of the proximal segment (90% vs. 51%, p=0.014), a higher proportion of pre-intervention, a Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction score of 0 or 1 flow (80% vs. 16%, p<0.001), more chronic total occlusions (40% vs. 10%, p<0.001), and longer implanted stents (41.9±23.2 mm vs. 28.8±14.8 mm, p=0.006). As for CAA morphology, instances of CAA after second-generation DES were predominantly the single fusiform type (90%), whereas instances of CAA after first-generation DES were multiple saccular (47%) and single saccular (35%) types (p<0.001). Myocardial infarction with stent thrombosis occurred in 5 patients with CAA after first-generation DES (15%), and no adverse events were observed in patients with CAA after second-generation DES over a median follow-up duration of 4.3 years (p=0.047, log-rank).ConclusionAlthough CAAs after second-generation DES implantation were detected at a similar incidence to that for CAAs after first-generation DES implantation, second-generation DES-related CAAs had different morphologies and more benign clinical outcomes versus first-generation DES-related CAAs.
| S-EPMC6704022 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrently, drug-eluting balloon (DEB) appears to be an attractive alternative option for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). Nevertheless, the clinical outcomes of DEB have seldom been compared to those of new-generation drug-eluting stent (DES). Thus, this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DEB compared to those of new-generation DES in the treatment of ISR.MethodsA comprehensive search of electronic databases including PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library up to November 2, 2017 was performed to identify pertinent articles comparing DEB to new-generation DES for the treatment of ISR. In addition, conference proceedings for the scientific sessions of the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, European Society of Cardiology, Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, and EuroPCR were also searched. The primary endpoint was target lesion revascularization (TLR) at the longest follow-up. Dichotomous variables were presented as risk ratios (RR s) with 95% confidence intervals (CI s), while the overall RR s were estimated using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model.ResultsFive randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and eight observational studies involving 2743 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. Overall, DEB was comparable to new-generation DES in terms of TLR (RR = 1.24, 95% CI: 0.89-1.72, P = 0.21), cardiac death (RR = 1.55, 95% CI: 0.89-2.71, P = 0.12), major adverse cardiovascular event (RR = 1.21, 95% CI: 0.98-1.48, P = 0.07), myocardial infarction (RR = 1.12, 95% CI: 0.72-1.76, P = 0.62), and stent thrombosis (RR = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.38-2.42, P = 0.92). However, DEB was associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality than new-generation DES (RR = 1.65, 95% CI: 1.09-2.50, P = 0.02). This was especially true in the real-world observational studies (RR = 1.79, 95% CI: 1.12-2.88, P = 0.02). In RCTs, however, no significant difference was found between the two treatment strategies in the risk of all-cause mortality.ConclusionsThe current meta-analysis showed that DEB and new-generation DES had comparable safety and efficacy for the treatment of ISR in RCTs. However, treatment with DEB was associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality in the real-world nonrandomized studies.
| S-EPMC5850679 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo improve outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention remain an unmet clinical need. The study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of G2-DESs and BP-DESs in patients with and without DM in a single center in China.MethodsA total of 7666 consecutive patients who exclusively had G2-DES or BP-DES implantation throughout 2013 in our center were studied. The primary efficacy endpoint was any target lesion revascularization (TLR), whereas the primary safety endpoint was a composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI) at 2-year follow-up.ResultsG2-DESs had a similar occurrence of death, non-fatal MI, TLR, stroke, and stent thrombosis compared with BP-DESs in patients with DM (all P?>?0.05). The incidence of TVR and TLR was lower for G2-DESs than for BP-DESs in patients without DM (3.2% vs. 5.1%, P?=?0.002; 2.2% vs. 4.5%, P?<?0.001, respectively). Kaplan-Meier analysis also showed better TVR- and TLR-free survival rates for G2-DESs than for BP-DESs in patients without DM. Multivariate analysis showed that a BP-DES was an independent risk factor for TLR (hazard ratio 1.963, 95% confidence interval 1.390-2.772, P?<?0.001) in patients without DM, which was not predictive of other components of major adverse cardiac events (P?>?0.05).ConclusionsG2-DESs have better efficacy, represented by a reduced risk of TLR, and similar safety compared with BP-DESs in patients without DM. G2-DESs have similar efficacy and safety compared with BP-DESs in patients with DM at 2-year follow-up.
| S-EPMC6090623 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVES:To assess patients' perspective about factors associated with stent choice. BACKGROUND:Drug eluting stents (DES) markedly reduce the risk of repeat percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), but necessitate a longer duration of dual anti-platelet therapy (DAPT) as compared with bare metal stents (BMS). Thus, understanding patients' perspective about factors associated with stent choice is paramount. METHODS:Patients undergoing angiography rated, on a 10-point scale, the importance (1?=?not important, 10?=?most important) of avoiding repeat revascularization and avoiding the following potential DAPT drawbacks: bleeding/bruising, more pills/day, medication costs and delaying elective surgery. The factor, or group of factors, that was rated highest by each patient was identified. RESULTS:Among 311 patients, repeat revascularization was the single most important consideration to 14.4% of patients, while 20.6% considered avoiding one of the DAPT drawbacks as most important. Most patients (65%) considered avoiding at least one DAPT drawback as important as avoiding repeat revascularization. In no subgroup of patients did more than a quarter of patients prefer avoiding repeat revascularization above all other concerns. Among patients undergoing PCI, more than three quarters received a DES, regardless of their stated preferences (DES use among those most valuing DES benefits, avoiding DAPT drawbacks, or both equally were 78.7%, 86.2%, and 85.6%, respectively, P = 0.56). CONCLUSION:Most patients reported that avoiding DAPT drawbacks was as important as avoiding repeat revascularization. Eliciting patient preferences regarding stent type can enhance shared decision-making and allow physicians to better tailor stent choice to patients' goals and values. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Developing and Testing a Personalized Evidence-based Shared Decision-making Tool for Stent Selection (DECIDE-PCI). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02046902. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02046902 © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
| S-EPMC5771426 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIMS:Simple surface modifications can enhance coronary stent performance. Ultra-hydrophilic surface (UHS) treatment of contemporary bare metal stents (BMS) was assessed in vivo to verify whether such stents can provide long-term efficacy comparable to second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) while promoting healing comparably to BMS. METHODS AND RESULTS:UHS-treated BMS, untreated BMS and corresponding DES were tested for three commercial platforms. A thirty-day and a 90-day porcine coronary model were used to characterise late tissue response. Three-day porcine coronary and seven-day rabbit iliac models were used for early healing assessment. In porcine coronary arteries, hydrophilic treatment reduced intimal hyperplasia relative to the BMS and corresponding DES platforms (1.5-fold to threefold reduction in 30-day angiographic and histological stenosis; p<0.04). Endothelialisation was similar on UHS-treated BMS and untreated BMS, both in swine and rabbit models, and lower on DES. Elevation in thrombotic indices was infrequent (never observed with UHS, rare with BMS, most often with DES), but, when present, correlated with reduced endothelialisation (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS:Ultra-hydrophilic surface treatment of contemporary stents conferred good healing while moderating neointimal and thrombotic responses. Such surfaces may offer safe alternatives to DES, particularly when rapid healing and short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are crucial.
| S-EPMC6563826 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFor bifurcating coronary lesions, a provisional stent technique is recommended compared with a routine 2-stent strategy. However, much of these data are from trials involving first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) or bare-metal stents where the risk of restenosis with the 2-stent technique is higher. We investigated the efficacy of various 2-stent techniques versus a provisional stent technique for bifurcation lesions with newer-generation DES.MethodsPubMed and Embase were searched through May 2022 for randomized control trials investigating bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention techniques using newer-generation DES, and a meta-analysis was conducted. The primary end point was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at the longest reported follow-up time.ResultsOur study identified 13 randomized control trials including 4041 patients. Compared with the provisional technique, 2-stent techniques significantly decreased MACE (hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.97; P = .03), target vessel myocardial infarction (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.20-0.71; P = .002), and target vessel revascularization (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.47-0.93; P = .02). There were no significant differences in all-cause mortality (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.62-1.45; P = .79), cardiovascular mortality (HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.49-1.38; P = .45), myocardial infarction (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.73-1.37; P = .99), and stent thrombosis (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.52-1.44; P = .58). Of the 2-stent techniques, the double kissing crush technique significantly decreased MACE and target lesion revascularization than other 2-stent techniques.ConclusionsIn this era of newer-generation DES, a 2-stent approach, especially the double kissing crush technique, is superior to a provisional stenting technique for a bifurcation lesion, with a significant reduction in MACE, target vessel myocardial infarction, and revascularization.
| S-EPMC11307680 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:We evaluated optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) after second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in acute coronary syndrome (ACS). MATERIAL AND METHODS:From pooled analysis of three randomized clinical trials (EXCELLENT, IVUS-XPL, RESET), a total of 2,216 patient with ACS undergoing second-generation DES implantation were selected. Each study randomized patients to a short-duration DAPT arm (n = 1119; ?6 months) or a standard-duration DAPT arm (n = 1097; ?12 months). Two-thirds of patients were male, and their mean age was 63 years. Mean DAPT durations were 164 ±76 and 359 ±68 days, respectively. The primary endpoint was composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke or major bleeding during the first 12 months after implantation, analyzed according to the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS:Demographic characteristics were balanced between groups. Mean DAPT duration was 164 and 359 days, respectively. Primary endpoint occurred in 22 patients with short-DAPT and 21 patients with standard-DAPT (2.0% versus 1.9%; hazard ratio [HR] 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-1.86; p = 0.94). Landmark analysis after six-months, no significant difference in primary endpoint between short and standard duration DAPT (1.0% versus 0.8%; HR 1.22; 95% CI 0.51-2.95; p = 0.66). CONCLUSIONS:Short-duration DAPT (?6 months) demonstrated a similar incidence of net adverse cardiovascular and clinical events at 12 months after second-generation DES in ACS compared with standard duration DAPT (?12 months). CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:EXCELLENT (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00698607), RESET (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01145079), IVUS-XPL (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01308281).
| S-EPMC6261023 | biostudies-literature