Comparison of effectiveness and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in patients with diabetes mellitus (from the Italian Multicenter Randomized DESSERT Study).

Few studies directly compared drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents (BMSs) in diabetic patients. DESSERT was an Italian multicenter randomized trial to show the efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) compared with BMSs in de novo lesions of diabetic patients treated with insulin and/or oral antidiabetics for > or =3 months on top of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors. The primary end point was in-stent late lumen loss, assessed using centralized quantitative coronary angiography at 8-month follow-up. Centrally adjudicated composite major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and target-vessel failure (TVF; death, treated vessel-related acute myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization) at 30 days and 9 and 12 months were secondary end points. Seventy-five patients were randomly assigned to an SES (109 lesions), and 75 (109 lesions), to a BMS. The 2 groups were well balanced for clinical, anatomic, and procedural characteristics. In-stent late lumen loss decreased from 0.96 +/- 0.61 mm for BMSs to 0.14 +/- 0.33 for SESs (p <0.001), and in-segment binary restenosis was 38.8% versus 3.6%, respectively (p <0.001). Twelve-month clinical events were significantly lower in the sirolimus group: MACEs 22.1% versus 40% (p = 0.023), target-lesion revascularization 5.9% versus 30% (p <0.001), and TVF 14.7% versus 34.3% (p = 0.008). At multivariate analysis, stent type was confirmed as an independent predictor of in-segment late loss (p <0.001), binary restenosis (p <0.001), 12-month TVF (p = 0.010), and 12-month MACEs (p = 0.037). In conclusion, the randomized DESSERT showed SESs to be safe and effective in decreasing both angiographic parameters of restenosis and incidence of MACEs compared with BMSs in diabetic patients with de novo 1- or 2-vessel coronary stenoses.

Comparison of two antiplatelet regimens (aspirin alone versus aspirin + ticlopidine or clopidogrel) after intracoronary implantation of a carbofilm-coated stent.

Stent thrombosis (ST) is an infrequent (0.5% to 1.5%) complication of intracoronary stenting, with severe clinical consequences. This multicenter, randomized study evaluated the clinical outcome in 479 patients (598 lesions treated) who underwent elective coronary stenting with a Carbofilm-coated stent (CarboStent) who met prespecified eligibility criteria and were randomly assigned to receive aspirin alone (n = 235) or aspirin plus a thienopyridine antiplatelet regimen (n = 244). Clinical, angiographic, and procedural characteristics were similar between groups. The primary end point was the incidence of 30-day ST; secondary end points included major vascular or bleeding complications within 30 days and death, acute myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization at 6 months. ST occurred in 4 patients (1.4%) in the aspirin-only group and in 1 patient (0.3%) in the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 0.23, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 2.08, p = NS). After careful review of cases, 89 patients (19%) with protocol deviations were identified. When they were excluded from the analysis, no ST was observed in either group. Secondary end points were reached by 4% of the aspirin-alone group and 8% of the aspirin-plus-thienopyridine group (relative risk 2.35, 95% confidence interval 0.94 to 5.85, p = NS). In conclusion, after optimal intracoronary implantation of the CarboStent, antiplatelet therapy with aspirin alone was safe and provided efficacy comparable to aspirin plus a thienopyridine in the prevention of ST.

Clinical outcomes for sirolimus-eluting stents and polymer-coated paclitaxel-eluting stents in daily practice: results from a large multicenter registry.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the clinical outcome of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in a real-world scenario. BACKGROUND: In selected patients, SES has been associated with lower late luminal loss than PES. Whether this emerging biological difference could translate into different clinical efficacy in daily practice is presently unknown. METHODS: This analysis included 1,676 consecutive patients with de novo coronary lesions treated solely with drug-eluting stents (SES = 992; PES = 684). All patients were enrolled in a dynamic prospective registry comprising 13 hospitals. We assessed the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) during follow-up. RESULTS: Overall, 29% of the patients had diabetes, 23% had prior MI, and 9% had poor left ventricular function. ST-segment elevation MI was diagnosed at admission in 12%. Multivessel intervention was performed in 16%. At 1-year follow-up, SES was associated with a reduced incidence of MACE (9.2% SES vs. 14.1% PES; p = 0.007) and TVR (5.0% SES vs. 10.0% PES; p = 0.0008) compared to PES. A propensity analysis with many clinical and angiographic variables was carried out to adjust for baseline differences. In this analysis, SES was associated with a 44% risk reduction of MACE (hazard ratio 0.56, 95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.78) and a 55% reduction of TVR (hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.70). This result was consistent across most subgroups tested. Similar rates of death and MI were observed in the 2 treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this large real-world population, SES improved 1-year clinical results as compared to PES.