Incomplete stent apposition after implantation of paclitaxel-eluting stents or bare metal stents: insights from the randomized TAXUS II trial.

BACKGROUND: The clinical impact of late incomplete stent apposition (ISA) for drug-eluting stents is unknown. We sought to prospectively investigate the incidence and extent of ISA after the procedure and at 6-month follow-up of paclitaxel-eluting stents in comparison with bare metal stents (BMS) and survey the clinical significance of ISA over a period of 12 months. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAXUS II was a randomized, double-blind study with 536 patients in 2 consecutive cohorts comparing slow-release (SR; 131 patients) and moderate-release (MR; 135 patients) paclitaxel-eluting stents with BMS (270 patients). This intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) substudy included patients who underwent serial IVUS examination after the procedure and at 6 months (BMS, 240 patients; SR, 113; MR, 116). The qualitative and quantitative analyses of ISA were performed by an independent, blinded core laboratory. More than half of the instances of ISA observed after the procedure resolved at 6 months in all groups. No difference in the incidence of late-acquired ISA was observed among the 3 groups (BMS, 5.4%; SR, 8.0%; MR, 9.5%; P=0.306), with a similar ISA volume (BMS, 11.4 mm3; SR, 21.7 mm3; MR, 8.5 mm3; P=0.18). Late-acquired ISA was the result of an increase of vessel area without change in plaque behind the stent. Predictive factors of late-acquired ISA were lesion length, unstable angina, and absence of diabetes. No stent thrombosis occurred in the patients diagnosed with ISA over a period of 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence and extent of late-acquired ISA are comparable in paclitaxel-eluting stents and BMS. ISA is a pure IVUS finding without clinical repercussions.

Chronic arterial responses to polymer-controlled paclitaxel-eluting stents: comparison with bare metal stents by serial intravascular ultrasound analyses: data from the randomized TAXUS-II trial.

BACKGROUND: Polymer-controlled paclitaxel-eluting stents have shown a pronounced reduction in neointimal hyperplasia compared with bare metal stents (BMS). The aim of this substudy was to evaluate local arterial responses through the use of serial quantitative intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) analyses in the TAXUS II trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAXUS II was a randomized, double-blind study with 536 patients in 2 consecutive cohorts comparing slow-release (SR; 131 patients) and moderate-release (MR; 135 patients) paclitaxel-eluting stents with BMS (270 patients). This IVUS substudy included patients treated with one study stent who underwent serial IVUS examination after the procedure and at 6-month follow-up (BMS, 152 patients; SR, 81; MR, 81). The analyzed stented segment (15 mm) was divided into 5 subsegments in which mean vessel area (VA), stent area (SA), lumen area (LA), intrastent neointimal hyperplasia area (NIHA), and peristent area (VA-SA) were measured. NIHA was significantly reduced in SR (0.7+/-0.9 mm2, P<0.001) and MR (0.6+/-0.8 mm2, P<0.001) compared with BMS (1.9+/-1.5 mm2), with no differences between the two paclitaxel-eluting release formulations. Longitudinal distribution of neointimal hyperplasia throughout the paclitaxel-eluting stent was uniform. Neointimal growth was independent of peristent area at postprocedure examination in all groups. There were progressive increases in peristent area from BMS to SR to MR (0.5+/-1.7, 1.0+/-1.8, and 1.4+/-2.0 mm2, respectively; P<0.001). The increase in peristent area was directly correlated with increases in VA. CONCLUSIONS: Both SR and MR paclitaxel-eluting stents prevent neointimal formation to the same degree compared with BMS. However, the difference in peristent remodeling suggests a release-dependent effect between SR and MR.

TAXUS III Trial: in-stent restenosis treated with stent-based delivery of paclitaxel incorporated in a slow-release polymer formulation.

BACKGROUND: The first clinical study of paclitaxel-eluting stent for de novo lesions showed promising results. We performed the TAXUS III trial to evaluate the feasibility and safety of paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The TAXUS III trial was a single-arm, 2-center study that enrolled 28 patients with ISR meeting the criteria of lesion length < or =30 mm, 50% to 99% diameter stenosis, and vessel diameter 3.0 to 3.5 mm. They were treated with one or more TAXUS NIRx paclitaxel-eluting stents. Twenty-five patients completed the angiographic follow-up at 6 months, and 17 of these underwent intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) examination. No subacute stent thrombosis occurred up to 12 months, but there was one late chronic total occlusion, and additional 3 patients showed angiographic restenosis. The mean late loss was 0.54 mm, with neointimal hyperplasia volume of 20.3 mm3. The major adverse cardiac event rate was 29% (8 patients; 1 non-Q-wave myocardial infarction, 1 coronary artery bypass grafting, and 6 target lesion revascularization [TLR]). Of the patients with TLR, 1 had restenosis in a bare stent implanted for edge dissection and 2 had restenosis in a gap between 2 paclitaxel-eluting stents. Two patients without angiographic restenosis underwent TLR as a result of the IVUS assessment at follow-up (1 incomplete apposition and 1 insufficient expansion of the stent). CONCLUSIONS: Paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation is considered safe and potentially efficacious in the treatment of ISR. IVUS guidance to ensure good stent deployment with complete coverage of target lesion may reduce reintervention.

Vascular response to sirolimus-eluting stents delivered with a nonaggressive implantation technique: comparison of intravascular ultrasound results from the multicenter, randomized E-SIRIUS, and SIRIUS trials.

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of SES to reduce the risk of restenosis was initially demonstrated in short lesions using stent implantation with routine pre-dilatation and post-dilatation. This intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) substudy of the E-SIRIUS trial sought to evaluate local arterial responses to sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) delivered with a stent implantation technique allowing direct stenting and only selectively applying high-pressure post-dilatation. METHODS AND RESULTS: IVUS was performed immediately after intervention and at 8-month follow-up in 51 patients randomised to either bare-metal stents (BMS; Bx-Velocitytrade mark; N=20) or SES (Cyphertrade mark N=31). Direct stenting was allowed (24%) and post-dilation was performed only selectively (32%). Lumen dimensions, intimal hyperplasia and vessel remodeling were compared between SES and BMS. Subsequently, results of SES in the E-SIRIUS IVUS substudy (N=31) were compared to those of SES in the IVUS substudy of the SIRIUS trial (N=137). SES in SIRIUS IVUS substudy were delivered with 100% pre-dilatation and 77% post-dilatation. Baseline stent and reference segment measurements were similar between BMS and SES in E-SIRIUS IVUS patients. Using SES there was a 96% reduction in intimal hyperplasia volume within the stented segment (1.8+/-4.9 vs 50.6+/-39.7 mm3, P<0.001) and a significantly larger minimal lumen cross sectional area at 8-month follow-up (4.5+/-1.1 vs 2.3+/-0.9 mm2, P<0.001). No vessel remodeling was observed with the use of SES. The applied stent implantation technique resulted in a minimal stent/reference vessel area ratio of 0.75+/-0.17 in E-SIRIUS SES as compared to 0.84+/-0.23 in SIRIUS SES (P=0.046). Mean intimal hyperplasia cross-sectional area at follow-up was 0.1+/-0.2 mm2 in the SES group of E-SIRIUS and 0.5+/-0.8 mm2 in the SES group of SIRIUS (P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS: An implantation technique of SES which includes direct stenting and minimizes the use of high-pressure post-dilatation results in less optimal stent expansion. However, follow-up results compare very favourable to those of BMS and are characterised by even less intimal hyperplasia than after a more forceful implantation of SES.