Initial and long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents for calcified lesions compared with bare-metal stents.

The aim of this study was to compare the initial and long-term outcomes of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with calcified lesions without performing rotational atherectomy. The subjects were 79 consecutive lesions (38 in the SES group and 41 in the BMS group) which were confirmed to have superficially calcified lesions by intravascular ultrasound. In all lesions, the stent was implanted after predilatation with a balloon. The patient characteristics were not different between the 2 groups. All procedures were successfully performed in both groups. Vessel area was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (11.01 +/- 3.88 mm(2) versus 13.08 +/- 3.49 mm(2), P < 0.005), as was the lumen area (5.41 +/- 2.31mm(2) versus 6.48 +/- 2.04 mm(2), P < 0.005). Minimum stent area was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (5.61 +/- 1.54 mm(2) versus 6.69 +/- 1.74 mm(2), P < 0.01). In cases in whom angiographic follow-ups were performed, the late loss was significantly smaller in the SES group than in the BMS group (0.19 +/- 0.49 mm versus 0.76 +/- 0.48 mm, P < 0.001). The restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (8.8% versus 33.3%, P < 0.05) and the TLR rate tended to be lower in the SES group (7.9% versus 19.5%). Stent thrombosis was not observed in either group. The results suggest that SES are more effective than BMS and can be used safely when treating calcified lesions if predilatation with a balloon is possible.

Effect of amlodipine on vascular responses after coronary stenting compared with an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of restenosis after coronary stenting is clinically important. We compared amlodipine and quinapril to determine which is more effective in preventing restenosis after stenting. METHODS AND RESULTS: Immediately after successful coronary stenting of 101 lesions in 63 consecutive patients, the patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: 32 patients with 48 lesions were administered amlodipine 5 mg/day (group A), and 31 patients with 53 lesions were administered quinapril 10 mg/day (group Q). Lesions were assessed by quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) before and immediately after stenting and in the follow-up phase. Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) could only be performed on 20 lesions in group A and 16 lesions in group Q throughout the follow-up period. We analyzed each lesion at 5 sites. In the follow-up phase, the minimal lumen diameter in group A was significantly larger than that in group Q (1.88 +/- 0.64 mm vs 1.52 +/- 0.53 mm, p<0.01). In the follow-up phase, the neointimal area (stent area-lumen area) in group A was significantly smaller than that in group Q (1.9 +/- 0.5 mm2 vs 2.7 +/- 0.8 mm2 at the middle portion of stent, p<0.01). CONCLUSION: These QCA and IVUS findings suggest that amlodipine has beneficial effects in inhibiting neointimal hyperplasia in stented lesions compared with quinapril.