Drug-Eluting or Bare-Metal Stents for Coronary Artery Disease.

BACKGROUND: Limited data are available on the long-term effects of contemporary drug-eluting stents versus contemporary bare-metal stents on rates of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis and on quality of life. METHODS: We randomly assigned 9013 patients who had stable or unstable coronary artery disease to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the implantation of either contemporary drug-eluting stents or bare-metal stents. In the group receiving drug-eluting stents, 96% of the patients received either everolimus- or zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction after a median of 5 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included repeat revascularization, stent thrombosis, and quality of life. RESULTS: At 6 years, the rates of the primary outcome were 16.6% in the group receiving drug-eluting stents and 17.1% in the group receiving bare-metal stents (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88 to 1.09; P=0.66). There were no significant between-group differences in the components of the primary outcome. The 6-year rates of any repeat revascularization were 16.5% in the group receiving drug-eluting stents and 19.8% in the group receiving bare-metal stents (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85; P<0.001); the rates of definite stent thrombosis were 0.8% and 1.2%, respectively (P=0.0498). Quality-of-life measures did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing PCI, there were no significant differences between those receiving drug-eluting stents and those receiving bare-metal stents in the composite outcome of death from any cause and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction. Rates of repeat revascularization were lower in the group receiving drug-eluting stents. (Funded by the Norwegian Research Council and others; NORSTENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00811772 .).

Variability of quantitative coronary angiography: an evaluation of on-site versus core laboratory analysis.

To assess the validity of locally performed off-line quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) measurement in clinical trials, we carried out a comparative study between on-site QCA analysis and analysis performed at an independent external core laboratory. One local operator analyzed the pre, post and follow-up angiograms of 116 patients participating in the Stenting in Small Coronary Arteries Study (SISCA) prior to final QCA analysis in the core laboratory. The mean values of the reference diameter (RD), minimal lumen diameter (MLD) and diameter stenosis (DS) showed acceptable agreement between study site and core laboratory. However, on the level of individuals the interobserver differences were large, affecting the outcome of restenosis rate significantly, and in a such way that the conclusions in the SISCA trial might have come out differently if a core laboratory had not been used. This emphasizes the importance of using independent core laboratories in coronary interventional trials.

Clinical benefit of small vessel stenting: one-year follow-up of the SISCA trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term clinical benefit of elective stenting as compared with percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) in small coronary arteries. DESIGN: The Stenting in Small Coronary Arteries (SISCA) trial was a randomized trial comparing elective stenting with PTCA in coronary arteries with a reference diameter of 2.1-3.0 mm. The heparin-coated beStent was used. Control angiography was performed after 6 months, and the patients were followed clinically for 12 months. RESULTS: At 6 months the clinical outcome was significantly better in the stent group as compared with the PTCA group, with an event-free survival in 90.5 and 76.1% (p = 0.016), respectively. From 6 to 12 months, event-free survival was unchanged in both groups, demonstrating a sustained long-term clinical benefit of elective stenting. CONCLUSION: Angioplasty in small coronary arteries is associated with a favorable clinical outcome after 1 year. The clinical benefit of elective stenting using the Hepamed-coated beStent is maintained beyond 6 months, without any tendency towards late events. Thus, elective stenting should be considered as an option when treating small coronary arteries.