Non-polymer-based paclitaxel-coated coronary stents for the treatment of patients with de novo coronary lesions: angiographic follow-up of the DELIVER clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Paclitaxel, a microtubule-stabilizing compound with potent antitumor activity, has been shown to inhibit smooth muscle cell proliferation and migration. The DELIVER trial was a prospective, randomized, blinded, multicenter clinical evaluation of the non-polymer-based paclitaxel-coated ACHIEVE stent compared with the stainless steel Multi-Link (ML) PENTA stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 1043 patients with focal de novo coronary lesions, <25 mm in length, in 2.5- to 4.0-mm vessels were randomized (ACHIEVE n=524; ML PENTA n=519). Angiographic follow-up was performed in a subset of 442 patients (ACHIEVE n=228; ML PENTA n=214). Prespecified end points were a 40% reduction in target-vessel failure at 9 months (primary clinical end point) and a 50% reduction in binary restenosis at 8 months (major secondary end point). Baseline clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups. Patients in ACHIEVE had more type C lesions and a larger reference diameter. At follow-up, stent late loss was 0.81 versus 0.98 mm (P=0.003), stent binary restenosis was 14.9% versus 20.6% (P=0.076), and target-vessel failure was 11.9% versus 14.5% (P=0.12) for ACHIEVE and ML PENTA, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The ACHIEVE paclitaxel-coated stent decreased neointimal proliferation compared with the bare-metal PENTA stent; however, this reduction was insufficient to meet the prespecified primary end point of target-vessel failure and the secondary end point of binary restenosis.

Costs of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention.

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the costs of transradial percutaneous coronary intervention (TRI) and transfemoral percutaneous coronary intervention (TFI) from a contemporary hospital perspective. BACKGROUND: Whereas the TRI approach to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) has been shown to reduce access-site complications compared with TFI, whether it is associated with lower costs is unknown. METHODS: TRI and TFI patients were identified at 5 U.S. centers. The primary outcome was the cost of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) hospitalization, defined as cost on the day of PCI through hospital discharge. Cost was obtained from each hospital's cost accounting system. Independent costs of TRI were identified using propensity-scoring methods with inverse probability weighting. Secondary outcomes of interest were bleeding, in-hospital mortality, and length of stay, which were stratified by pre-procedural risk and PCI indication. RESULTS: In 7,121 PCI procedures performed from January 1, 2010, to March 31, 2011, TRI was performed in 1,219 (17%) patients and was associated with shorter lengths of stay (2.5 vs. 3.0 days; p < 0.001) and lower bleeding events (1.1% vs. 2.4%, adjusted odds ratio [OR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 to 0.79; p = 0.002). TRI was associated with a total cost savings of $830 (95% CI: $296 to $1,364; p < 0.001), of which $130 (95% CI: -$99 to $361; p = 0.112) were procedural savings and $705 (95% CI: $212 to $1,238; p < 0.001) were post-procedural savings. There was an associated graded increase in savings among patients at higher predicted risk of bleeding: low risk: $642 (95% CI: $43 to $1,236; p = 0.035); moderate risk: $706 (95% CI: $104 to $1,308; p = 0.029); and high risk: $1,621 (95% CI: $271 to $2,971, p = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: TRI was associated with a cost savings exceeding $800 per patient relative to TFI. Increased adoption of TRI may result in cost savings at hospitals.