The Grand SANS FLUORO (SAy No Series to FLUOROsopy) Study: Examining Fluoroscopy Use in More than 1,000 Ablation Procedures.

The majority of electrophysiologists routinely use fluoroscopy (FLUORO) during ablation procedures for common arrhythmias despite the known complications of radiation exposure and protective lead use. This study assessed the safety of catheter ablation (CA) with FLUORO versus without FLUORO (SANS FLUORO) in patients with the following common arrhythmias: atrial fibrillation (AF), atrial flutter, supraventricular tachycardia, and ventricular tachycardia. A total of 1,258 CA procedures were performed in 816 consecutive patients over a 53-month period (SANS FLUORO CA: 609 patients; FLUORO CA: 209 patients). The secondary outcome was the efficacy of AF ablation in FLUORO versus SANS FLUORO patients. Ultimately, there was no statistically significant difference found concerning the safety of CA in the SANS FLUORO and FLUORO groups in terms of procedure time, vascular complications, tamponade, stroke, or death. FLUORO patients had markedly increased FLUORO time, increased radiation exposure, and increased dose-area product (all p < 0.0001). AF development after SANS FLUORO CA of AF was not different from that after FLUORO CA regardless of the pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) modality used (cryoablation versus radiofrequency) at 24 months (p = 0.21). Additionally, women fared just as well as men after CA ablation for AF. At 36 months, 58% of SANS FLUORO AF device patients were free from AF. As such, SANS FLUORO CA of common arrhythmias appears to be as safe as FLUORO CA but with a markedly reduced level of radiation exposure. Also, SANS FLUORO CA remains as effective as FLUORO CA in the prevention of AF for up to 24 months.

Impact of sirolimus-eluting stents on outcome in diabetic patients: a SIRIUS (SIRolImUS-coated Bx Velocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions) substudy.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials have shown that a sirolimus-eluting stent significantly reduces restenosis after percutaneous coronary revascularization. Diabetic patients are known to have a higher risk of restenosis compared with nondiabetic patients. The purpose of this analysis was to determine the impact of sirolimus-eluting stents on outcomes of diabetic compared with nondiabetic patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SIRIUS (SIRolImUS-coated Bx Velocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions) trial is a randomized, double-blind study that compared sirolimus-eluting and bare metal stent implantation in 1058 patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions. Diabetes mellitus was present in 279 (26%) patients (diabetes mellitus group, 131 patients received sirolimus-eluting stents and 148 patients received bare metal stents) and was absent in 778 patients (no-diabetes mellitus group, 402 patients received sirolimus-eluting stents and 376 patients received bare metal stents). At 270 days, target lesion revascularization was reduced in diabetic patients from 22.3% with bare metal stents to 6.9% with sirolimus-eluting stents (P<0.001) and in nondiabetic patients from 14.1% to 2.99% (P<0.001), respectively. Major adverse cardiac events were reduced in diabetic patients from 25% with bare metal stents to 9.2% with sirolimus-eluting stents (P<0.001) and from 16.5% to 6.5% (P<0.001) in nondiabetic patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with bare metal stents in de novo coronary lesions reduces major adverse cardiac events in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. However, among patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents, there remains a trend toward a higher frequency of repeat intervention in diabetic patients compared with nondiabetic patients, particularly in the insulin-requiring patients.

The Nitinol SMART stent vs Wallstent for suboptimal iliac artery angioplasty: CRISP-US trial results.

PURPOSE: The Cordis Randomized Iliac Stent Project-US (CRISP-US) trial evaluated, with an equivalence design, the performance of the shape memory alloy recoverable technology (SMART) nitinol self-expanding stent and the stainless steel Wallstent for treating iliac artery disease after suboptimal percutaneous transluminal angioplasty (PTA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multicenter, prospective, randomized trial comprised 203 patients with chronic limb ischemia who received either the SMART stent (n = 102) or the Wallstent (n = 101) after suboptimal PTA. The primary equivalence end point was a composite of 9-month restenosis, 30-day death, and 9-month target vessel revascularization. Functional, clinical, and hemodynamic assessments were made at hospital discharge and at 1, 6, 9, and 12 months. RESULTS: The 9-month composite end point rate was equivalent for the SMART stent and Wallstent (6.9% vs 5.9%), with low rates of restenosis (3.5% vs 2.7%), death (2.0% vs 0.0%), and revascularization (2.0% vs 4.0%) in the two groups. Primary patency at 12 months was 94.7% and 91.1% with the SMART stent and Wallstent, respectively. Functional and hemodynamic improvement was also comparable between the groups. The acute procedural success rate was higher in the SMART stent group (98.2% vs 87.5%; P =.002). The frequency of major adverse events was similar at 1 year (4.9% vs 5.9%). CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the SMART stent was equivalent to that of the Wallstent for treating iliac artery stenosis. The design characteristics of the SMART stent may contribute to greater procedural success and more accurate stent deployment.