Intravascular ultrasound insights from the Cobalt Chromium Stent With Antiproliferative for Restenosis II (COSTAR II) trial comparing CoStar and Taxus paclitaxel-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND: Dedicated IVUS analyses of the second CObalt chromium STent with Antiproliferative for Restenosis (COSTAR II) trial have not been documented. We aim to compare IVUS findings between CoStar paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) and Taxus PES in patients enrolled in the COSTAR II trial. We also attempted to examine the possible regional impact of multiple stenting. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Among the 1700 patients enrolled, 238 were assigned to an IVUS cohort including 168 patients treated by provisional multiple stenting. At 9 months, qualitative and quantitative IVUS observations including incomplete stent apposition (ISA) and neointimal proliferation (neointimal obstruction: neointimal volume/stent volume ×100) were compared between CoStar and Taxus PESs. RESULTS: In qualitative analysis, late-acquired ISA was observed in 1 patient treated by Taxus PES. Impaired strut continuity suggestive of stent fracture was observed in 2 out of 33 patients treated by multiple CoStar, and 4 out of 21 patients treated by multiple Taxus (P=.14). No such findings were found in single-stented patients in either stent subset. Quantitative analysis showed greater neointimal obstruction in CoStar (19.7%±13.4%, n=52) than in Taxus (10.7%±9.9%, n=38), whereas no significant difference in neointimal obstruction was found between single and multiple stenting in either CoStar or Taxus PES. CONCLUSIONS: The CoStar PES exhibits greater neointimal proliferation compared with Taxus PES at 9 months but with similar qualitative outcomes including late-acquired ISA. IVUS findings suggestive of stent fracture were found only in multiple-stenting cases irrespective of the stent used.

Intravascular ultrasound results from the ENDEAVOR IV trial: randomized comparison between zotarolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the vessel response between zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) using intravascular ultrasound. BACKGROUND: The ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) trial was a randomized controlled study of zotarolimus-eluting, phosphorylcholine-coated, cobalt-alloy stents for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions compared with using PES for the same treatment. METHODS: Data were obtained from patients with serial (baseline and 8-months follow-up) intravascular ultrasound analysis available (n = 198). Volumetric analysis was performed for vessel, lumen, plaque, stent, and neointima. Cross-sectional narrowing (given as percentage) was defined as neointimal area divided by stent area. Neointima-free frame ratio was calculated as the number of frames without intravascular ultrasound-detectable neointima divided by the total number of frames within the stent. Subsegment analysis was performed at every matched 1-mm subsegment throughout the stent. RESULTS: At follow-up, the ZES group showed significantly greater percentage of neointimal obstruction (16.6 +/- 12.0% vs. 9.9 +/- 8.9%, p < 0.01) and maximum cross-sectional narrowing (31.8 +/- 16.1% vs. 25.2 +/- 14.9%, p < 0.01) with smaller minimum lumen area than the PES group did. However, the incidence of maximum cross-sectional narrowing >50% was similar in the 2 groups. Neointima-free frame ratio was significantly lower in the ZES group. In overall analysis, whereas the PES group showed positive remodeling during follow-up (13.7 +/- 4.2 mm(3)/mm to 14.3 +/- 4.3 mm(3)/mm), the ZES group showed no significant difference (12.7 +/- 3.6 mm(3)/mm to 12.9 +/- 3.5 mm(3)/mm). In subsegment analysis, significant focal positive vessel remodeling was observed in 5% of ZES and 25% of PES cases (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There were different global and focal vessel responses for ZES and PES. Both drug-eluting stents showed a similar incidence of lesions with severe narrowing despite ZES having a moderate increase in neointimal hyperplasia compared with neointimal hyperplasia in PES. There was a relatively lower neointima-free frame ratio in ZES, suggesting a greater extent of neointimal coverage. (The ENDEAVOR IV Clinical Trial: A Trial of a Coronary Stent System in Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00217269).

Characterization of late incomplete stent apposition: a comparison among bare-metal stents, intracoronary radiation and sirolimus-eluting stents.

BACKGROUND: Late incomplete stent apposition (LISA) develops following implantation of conventional bare-metal stents (BMS) or drug-eluting stents, or after adjunctive intracoronary radiation (IR). However, no study has systematically compared the morphology of LISA seen with various treatment modalities. PURPOSE: To compare the morphometric features of LISA accompanying BMS, IR or sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) using serial intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS: A query of Stanford University's IVUS database of the Cardiovascular Core Analysis Laboratory was performed to identify LISA cases. Dedicated software programs were used for volumetric IVUS analyses. RESULTS: In 30 LISA cases (12 BMS, 6 IR and 12 SES), there was no intertreatment difference in the degree of LISA (lumen area minus stent area at follow up). Serial analyses of LISA segments showed that vessel area of SES and IR showed significant increase at follow up as compared with post procedure, while there was no significant change in plaque area. In contrast, the BMS group showed no increase in vessel area, whereas plaque area revealed significant reduction. Eight of 12 BMS cases were treated by directional atherectomy before stenting; however, there was no difference in the area change between patients with or without pre-stent atherectomy. Post-procedure plaque thickness beneath the stent struts of LISA was thinner for SES as compared with BMS. CONCLUSIONS: Plaque reduction primarily contributes to LISA after BMS, whereas vessel expansion is the predominant factor in LISA development for IR and SES. Thus, the mechanism of LISA may vary among different interventional treatments.