Long-term (5-year) clinical evaluation of the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent: The RESOLUTE US clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term safety and efficacy of the Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES). BACKGROUND: The R-ZES has been associated with low rates of adverse events over short-intermediate term follow-up. However, reliable assessment of the safety and efficacy of any implanted device requires long-term evaluation. METHODS: The RESOLUTE US trial was a prospective, observational study conducted at 116 U.S. sites and enrolled patients with de novo coronary lesions. Patients were followed clinically for 5 years with independent event adjudication and data monitoring. RESULTS: A total of 1,402 patients (1,573 lesions) were enrolled; 34% had diabetes mellitus and 75% had ACC type B2/C lesions. The 5-year rate of target lesion failure (TLF) was 12.3%, target lesion revascularization was 6.5%, target vessel myocardial infarction was 3.2%, and cardiac death was 4.1%. Dual antiplatelet therapy usage was 94% at 1 year and 47% at 5 years, with a 0.1% and 0.5% respective incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis. The 5-year rate of TLF was 16.9% among patients with diabetes mellitus and 14.7% in patients with at least one small (≤2.5 mm) vessel treated. Covariates independently associated with 5-year TLF in multivariable analysis included diabetes mellitus (odds ratio [OR] 1.89, p < .001), prior coronary artery bypass grafting (OR 2.28, p < .001), prior myocardial infarction (OR 1.85, p = .002), and smaller reference vessel diameter (OR 1.75, p = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Results from the fully adjudicated and monitored RESOLUTE US trial demonstrate long-term 5-year safety and efficacy of the R-ZES stent among a relatively low-risk population of patients, including a 0.5% rate of stent thrombosis at 5 years.

The CLOSER trial: a multi-center study on the clinical safety and effectiveness of CloserTM VSS, a novel resorbable transfemoral vascular access sealing system.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the Closer Vascular Sealing System (VSS) against prespecified performance goals (PGs) in sealing femoral arterial access following 5-7 Fr procedures. BACKGROUND: Inconsistent safety profiles, costs and learning curves of earlier generation vascular closure devices have limited their widespread use following transfemoral procedures. METHODS: In this prospective single-arm, multi-center trial, we compared the clinical outcomes in patients undergoing 5-7 Fr transfemoral diagnostic or interventional procedures and access sites managed with Closer VSS against pre-specified PGs. The primary endpoints were time to hemostasis (TTH) and 30-day access site closure-related major complications; secondary endpoints included time to ambulation (TTA), time to discharge eligibility (TTDE), time to discharge (TTD), 30-day access site minor complications, procedure and device success. RESULTS: A total of 220 subjects (49.5% interventional) were enrolled. The mean TTH was 1.78 ± 7.81 min in the intention to treat and 0.98 ± 3.71 min in the per protocol cohort. Median TTH was 0 min with immediate hemostasis achieved in 80.5% of subjects, mean TTA was 2.50 ± 1.05 hr, and mean TTDE was 2.83 ± 1.54 hr. Thirty-day follow-up was completed on 219 subjects. There were no access site closure-related major complications, minor complication rate was 0.0% for diagnostic and 2.75% for interventional procedures. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing 5-7 Fr transfemoral diagnostic and interventional procedures, the CLOSER Trial met both its primary effectiveness and safety PGs. Immediate hemostasis was achieved in the majority of patients without major complication.

A provisional strategy for treating true bifurcation lesions employing a scoring balloon for the side branch: final results of the AGILITY trial.

BACKGROUND: The provisional approach for bifurcation stenting with side-branch balloon angioplasty is associated with dissections and suboptimal results requiring kissing balloon techniques or bailout stenting. We hypothesized that using a scoring balloon for the side branch and a drug-eluting stent for the main vessel might improve outcomes of true bifurcation lesions. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 93 patients with complex bifurcations were enrolled in a multicenter, single-arm, prospective clinical trial. A drug-eluting stent was deployed in the main vessel following dilatation of the side-branch stenosis with a scoring balloon. The overall angiographic success rate was 93.5%, and procedural success rate was 91.4%. The final diameter stenosis was 13.9% ± 7.2% for the main vessel and 33.3% ± 22.9% for the side branch. Crossover to stent deployment in the side branch was required in 10.8%. The postscoring balloon dissection rate was 8.2% and 6% (all ≤ class C) for the main vessel and side branch respectively, which was reduced to 1.1 and 2.1% poststenting. At 9-month follow-up, the composite MACE rate [cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization (TLR)] was 5.4%, including a TLR rate of 3.3% (1.1% from hospital discharge to 9 months). CONCLUSION: The 9-month results of the AGILITY trial support a simple provisional strategy for treating complex true bifurcation lesions with deployment of a drug-eluting stent in the main vessel after dilatation of the side-branch vessel with a scoring balloon. This strategy was associated with excellent and safe procedural results, a low rate of crossover to side-branch stenting, and favorable outcomes.

Long-term benefit of the TAXUS Liberté stent in small vessels and long lesions. TAXUS ATLAS program.

BACKGROUND: The long-term impact of treating de novo coronary lesions in native vessels and challenging small vessel and long lesion subsets with TAXUS Liberté stents is unknown. This report examines the 3-year efficacy and safety from the TAXUS ATLAS program. METHODS AND RESULTS: TAXUS ATLAS WH, Small Vessel, and Long Lesion are non-randomized studies comparing TAXUS Liberté (n = 871), TAXUS Liberté 2.25 mm (n = 261), and TAXUS Liberté 38 mm (n = 150) stents, respectively, to case-matched TAXUS Express historical controls. TAXUS Liberté demonstrated comparable 3-year rates of major adverse cardiac events (19.0% vs. 20.2%, P = 0.51) in de novo lesions, reduced target lesion revascularization (TLR, 10.0% vs. 22.1%, P = 0.008) in small vessels, and reduced myocardial infarction (MI, 2.9% vs. 10.4%; P = 0.01) and stent thrombosis (ST, 0.0% vs. 3.9%, P = 0.03) in long lesions vs. TAXUS Express. After propensity score adjustment, no statistically significant effect of TAXUS Liberté on TLR (9.7% vs. 16.9%, P = 0.12) in small vessels or MI (2.9% vs. 7.9%, P = 0.05) in long lesions was noted, although reduced ST (0.0% vs. 2.7%, P = 0.02) remained in long lesions. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that TAXUS Liberté treatment significantly reduced TLR by 66% in small vessels, and MI by 75% in long lesions, vs. TAXUS Express. CONCLUSIONS: TAXUS Liberté suggests durable 3-year effectiveness in reducing restenosis and improved clinical outcomes in small vessels and long lesions compared with TAXUS Express.

Safety and efficacy of renal artery stenting following suboptimal renal angioplasty for de novo and restenotic ostial lesions: results from a nonrandomized, prospective multicenter registry.

PURPOSE: This registry was designed to evaluate the Bridge Extra Support renal stent system (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, California) in the treatment of renal artery ostial lesions following suboptimal percutaneous transluminal renal angioplasty (PTRA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This consecutive, nonrandomized, prospective, multicenter registry enrolled 188 patients between April 1999 and May 2002 with single de novo or restenotic renal artery ostial lesions (>or=70% stenosis) who underwent implantation of a balloon-expandable stent immediately following unsuccessful PTRA. Primary safety endpoints were major adverse clinical events (MACE) at 30 days and 9-12 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was absence of binary restenosis at 9-12 months with duplex ultrasonography (US). Secondary endpoints were acute success and quality-of-life (QOL) improvements (blood pressure, antihypertensive medications, renal function). The long-term effect of renal artery stenting on blood pressure and renal function was assessed to 36 months. RESULTS: The acute procedure and clinical success rates were 92.9%. At 30 days, the MACE rate was 3.2%, with no instances of target lesion revascularization (TLR). At 9-12 months, the MACE rate was 16.5%, with five (2.7%) deaths and 14 (7.4%) instances of TLR. The rate of restenosis at 9-12 months with duplex US was 12.6%, and 94% of patients had QOL improvements. A significant reduction in systolic blood pressure occurred following renal artery stenting and persisted to 36 months. CONCLUSIONS: Renal artery stenting is safe and efficacious in the treatment of single de novo and restenotic renal artery ostial lesions following suboptimal PTRA.

Comparison of vascular response to zotarolimus-eluting stent vs paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation: pooled IVUS results from the ZoMaxx I and II trials.

BACKGROUND: The ZoMaxx I and II trials were randomized controlled studies of the zotarolimus-eluting, phosphorylcholine-coated, TriMaxx stent for the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. The aim of this study was to compare the vessel response between zotarolimus- (ZES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). METHODS AND RESULTS: Data were obtained from the ZoMaxx I and II trials, in which a standard IVUS parameter was available in 263 cases (baseline and 9-months follow up). Neointima-free frame ratio was calculated as the number of frames without IVUS-detectable neointima divided by the total number of frames within the stent. While an increase in vessel and plaque was observed in PES from baseline to follow up, there was no significant change in ZES. At follow up, % neointimal obstruction was significantly higher (15.4 ± 8.8% vs 11.3 ± 9.7%), and minimum lumen area at follow up was significantly smaller in ZES compared to PES. However, the incidence of IVUS-defined restenosis (maximum cross-sectional narrowing >60%) was similar in the 2 groups (3.2% vs 6.7%). Neointima-free frame ratio was significantly lower in ZES. There were 5 cases of late incomplete stent apposition in PES and none in ZES. CONCLUSIONS: These IVUS results demonstrate a similar incidence of severe narrowing between these 2 DES. There was a moderate increase in neointimal hyperplasia that was associated with a greater extent of neointimal coverage in ZES compared with PES.

Two-year clinical outcomes after paclitaxel-eluting stent or brachytherapy treatment for bare metal stent restenosis: the TAXUS V ISR trial.

AIMS: This study sought to investigate the 2-year outcomes of patients treated with the paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS((R)) stent (PES) or vascular brachytherapy (VBT), the previous 'gold standard therapy', for bare metal stent in-stent restenosis (ISR). METHODS AND RESULTS: In the TAXUS V-ISR trial, 396 patients with bare metal stent ISR referred for percutaneous coronary intervention were prospectively randomized to either PES or beta source VBT. The present analysis reports 24-month clinical outcomes from that study. Between 9 and 24 months, ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization tended to be required less frequently with assignment to PES compared to VBT (5.3 vs. 10.3%, P = .07). As a result, ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 24 months was significantly reduced with PES compared with VBT (10.1 vs. 21.6%, P = 0.003), as was ischaemia-driven target vessel revascularization (18.1 vs. 27.5%, P = .03). There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel thrombosis either between 12 and 24 months, or cumulative to 24 months. CONCLUSION: Freedom from clinical restenosis at 2 years is significantly enhanced after PES placement compared with VBT for bare metal stent ISR, with similar rates of death, myocardial infarction, and target vessel thrombosis.

Statin therapy, LDL cholesterol, C-reactive protein, and coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials have demonstrated better outcomes with intensive than with moderate statin treatment. Intensive treatment produced greater reductions in both low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and C-reactive protein (CRP), suggesting a relationship between these two biomarkers and disease progression. METHODS: We performed intravascular ultrasonography in 502 patients with angiographically documented coronary disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive moderate treatment (40 mg of pravastatin orally per day) or intensive treatment (80 mg of atorvastatin orally per day). Ultrasonography was repeated after 18 months to measure the progression of atherosclerosis. Lipoprotein and CRP levels were measured at baseline and follow-up. RESULTS: In the group as a whole, the mean LDL cholesterol level was reduced from 150.2 mg per deciliter (3.88 mmol per liter) at baseline to 94.5 mg per deciliter (2.44 mmol per liter) at 18 months (P<0.001), and the geometric mean CRP level decreased from 2.9 to 2.3 mg per liter (P<0.001). The correlation between the reduction in LDL cholesterol levels and that in CRP levels was weak but significant in the group as a whole (r=0.13, P=0.005), but not in either treatment group alone. In univariate analyses, the percent change in the levels of LDL cholesterol, CRP, apolipoprotein B-100, and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were related to the rate of progression of atherosclerosis. After adjustment for the reduction in these lipid levels, the decrease in CRP levels was independently and significantly correlated with the rate of progression. Patients with reductions in both LDL cholesterol and CRP that were greater than the median had significantly slower rates of progression than patients with reductions in both biomarkers that were less than the median (P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For patients with coronary artery disease, the reduced rate of progression of atherosclerosis associated with intensive statin treatment, as compared with moderate statin treatment, is significantly related to greater reductions in the levels of both atherogenic lipoproteins and CRP.

A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease.

BACKGROUND: Restenosis after coronary stenting necessitates repeated percutaneous or surgical revascularization procedures. The delivery of paclitaxel to the site of vascular injury may reduce the incidence of neointimal hyperplasia and restenosis. METHODS: At 73 U.S. centers, we enrolled 1314 patients who were receiving a stent in a single, previously untreated coronary-artery stenosis (vessel diameter, 2.5 to 3.75 mm; lesion length, 10 to 28 mm) in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. A total of 652 patients were randomly assigned to receive a bare-metal stent, and 662 to receive an identical-appearing, slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent. Angiographic follow-up was prespecified at nine months in 732 patients. RESULTS: In terms of base-line characteristics, the two groups were well matched. Diabetes mellitus was present in 24.2 percent of patients; the mean reference-vessel diameter was 2.75 mm, and the mean lesion length was 13.4 mm. A mean of 1.08 stents (length, 21.8 mm) were implanted per patient. The rate of ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at nine months was reduced from 12.0 percent with the implantation of a bare-metal stent to 4.7 percent with the implantation of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk, 0.39; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.59; P<0.001). Target-lesion revascularization was required in 3.0 percent of the group that received a paclitaxel-eluting stent, as compared with 11.3 percent of the group that received a bare-metal stent (relative risk, 0.27; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.43; P<0.001). The rate of angiographic restenosis was reduced from 26.6 percent to 7.9 percent with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk, 0.30; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.46; P<0.001). The nine-month composite rates of death from cardiac causes or myocardial infarction (4.7 percent and 4.3 percent, respectively) and stent thrombosis (0.6 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively) were similar in the group that received a paclitaxel-eluting stent and the group that received a bare-metal stent. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with bare-metal stents, the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent is safe and markedly reduces the rates of clinical and angiographic restenosis at nine months.

Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery.

BACKGROUND: Preliminary reports of studies involving simple coronary lesions indicate that a sirolimus-eluting stent significantly reduces the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary revascularization. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial comparing a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent in 1058 patients at 53 centers in the United States who had a newly diagnosed lesion in a native coronary artery. The coronary disease in these patients was complex because of the frequent presence of diabetes (in 26 percent of patients), the high percentage of patients with longer lesions (mean, 14.4 mm), and small vessels (mean, 2.80 mm). The primary end point was failure of the target vessel (a composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, and repeated percutaneous or surgical revascularization of the target vessel) within 270 days. RESULTS: The rate of failure of the target vessel was reduced from 21.0 percent with a standard stent to 8.6 percent with a sirolimus-eluting stent (P<0.001)--a reduction that was driven largely by a decrease in the frequency of the need for revascularization of the target lesion (16.6 percent in the standard-stent group vs. 4.1 percent in the sirolimus-stent group, P<0.001). The frequency of neointimal hyperplasia within the stent was also decreased in the group that received sirolimus-eluting stents, as assessed by both angiography and intravascular ultrasonography. Subgroup analyses revealed a reduction in the rates of angiographic restenosis and target-lesion revascularization in all subgroups examined. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized clinical trial involving patients with complex coronary lesions, the use of a sirolimus-eluting stent had a consistent treatment effect, reducing the rates of restenosis and associated clinical events in all subgroups analyzed.

Relationship between angiographic late loss and target lesion revascularization after coronary stent implantation: analysis from the TAXUS-IV trial.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the relationship between angiographic late loss and clinical outcomes in the drug-eluting stent era. BACKGROUND: The interrelationship between angiographic late loss, binary restenosis, and clinical recurrence (target lesion revascularization [TLR]) after coronary stent implantation has been incompletely evaluated. METHODS: Using the angiographic substudy of the TAXUS-IV trial, in which 1,314 patients with de novo coronary lesions were randomized to either the paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or to its bare-metal equivalent, we defined the relationship between in-stent and analysis segment late loss, the shape of the late loss histogram (variance and skewedness), and nine-month TLR. RESULTS: Late loss by several measures was closely related to TLR (area under the receiver-operator curve >0.90). For individual vessels of the size in this study (2.8 +/- 0.5 mm), the likelihood of TLR did not exceed 5% until analysis segment late loss was >0.5 mm, and did not exceed 10% until late loss was >0.65 mm. At greater late losses, the late loss TLR relationship was steep and nearly linear. For the overall patient cohort, the rate of TLR was related, however, not only to median late loss, but also to measures of its statistical distribution (TLR increased with lack of homogeneous biologic response [greater variance and greater right skewedness]). Similar relationships held for late loss measured within the confines of the stent itself. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary stents result in large lumens with "room" to accommodate up to approximately 0.5 to 0.65 mm of tissue (angiographic analysis segment late loss) before the likelihood of clinical restenosis (TLR) exceeds 5% to 10%. These data have important implications toward understanding the absolute and relative efficacy of drug-eluting stents.

Polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents reduce in-stent neointimal tissue proliferation: a serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis from the TAXUS-IV trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to use serial volumetric intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) to evaluate the effects of polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stents on in-stent neointima formation and late incomplete stent apposition. BACKGROUND: The TAXUS-IV trial demonstrated that the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent reduces angiographic restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization procedures. Serial IVUS studies reveal details of the pattern of vascular responses provoked by stent implantation that provide insight into device safety and efficacy. METHODS: In the TAXUS-IV trial, patients were randomized to the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or a bare-metal EXPRESS stent (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts). As part of a formal substudy, complete volumetric IVUS data were available in 170 patients, including 88 TAXUS patients and 82 controls, at implantation and at nine-month follow-up. RESULTS: No baseline differences were present in the clinical characteristics or IVUS parameters between the control and TAXUS groups. At nine-month follow-up, IVUS lumen volumes were larger in the TAXUS group (123 +/- 43 mm(3) vs. 104 +/- 44 mm(3), p = 0.005), due to a reduction in neointimal volume (18 +/- 18 mm(3) vs. 41 +/- 23 mm(3), p < 0.001). Millimeter-by-millimeter analysis within the stent demonstrated uniform suppression of neointimal growth along the entire stent length. Late lumen loss was similar at the proximal edge of the stent between the two groups, and reduced with the TAXUS stent at the distal edge (p = 0.004). Incomplete stent apposition at nine months was observed in only 3.0% of control and 4.0% of TAXUS stents (p = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS: Polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stents are effective in inhibiting neointimal tissue proliferation, and do not result in late incomplete stent apposition.

Comparison of the efficacy of direct coronary stenting with sirolimus-eluting stents versus stenting with predilation by intravascular ultrasound imaging (from the DIRECT trial).

A direct coronary stenting technique using drug-eluting stents may decrease drug-eluting stent efficacy due to possible damage to the surface coating of the stent. The DIRECT is a multicenter, prospective, nonrandomized trial designed to evaluate the direct stenting strategy for the sirolimus-eluting Bx-Velocity stent compared with the historical control (SIRIUS trial, stenting with predilation). Volumetric and cross-sectional intravascular ultrasound analyses at 8-month follow-up were performed in 115 patients (DIRECT n= 64, control n = 51). Patient and lesion characteristics were comparable between groups. The DIRECT group achieved an equivalent uniform expansion index, defined as minimum stent area/maximum stent area x 100, compared with the control group (65.9 +/- 11.7 vs 63.1 +/- 12.7, p = NS). At 8-month follow-up, vessel, stent, lumen, and neointimal volume index (volume in cubic millimeters/length in millimeters) and percent neointimal volume were similar between the DIRECT and control groups (vessel volume index 13.9 +/- 4.40 vs 15.0 +/- 3.83; stent volume index 6.83 +/- 2.02 vs 6.94 +/- 2.04; lumen volume index 6.71 +/- 2.04 vs 6.81 +/- 2.07; neointimal volume index 0.14 +/- 0.24 vs 0.16 +/- 0.23; percent neointimal volume 3.73 +/- 6.97 vs 3.14 +/- 5.32, p = NS for all). In addition, in-stent neointimal hyperplasia distribution was significantly smaller near the distal stent edge (0.22 vs 0.098 mm(3)/mm, p = 0.01 for an average neointimal volume index within 3 mm from the distal stent edge). In conclusion, direct coronary stenting with the sirolimus-eluting Bx-Velocity stent is equally effective in terms of uniform stent expansion and long-term quantitative intravascular ultrasound results compared with conventional stenting using predilation. This strategy appears to be associated with less neointimal hyperplasia near the distal stent edge.

Paclitaxel-eluting stents vs vascular brachytherapy for in-stent restenosis within bare-metal stents: the TAXUS V ISR randomized trial.

CONTEXT: Restenosis within bare-metal stents is often treated with repeat percutaneous coronary intervention, although subsequent recurrence rates are high, with vascular brachytherapy (VBT) affording the best results. The effectiveness of drug-eluting stents in this setting has not been established. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of the polymer-based, slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with restenotic lesions after prior stent implantation in native coronary arteries. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, multicenter, randomized trial conducted between June 6, 2003, and July 16, 2004, at 37 North American academic and community-based institutions in 396 patients with in-stent restenosis of a previously implanted bare-metal coronary stent (vessel diameter, 2.5-3.75 mm; lesion length, < or =46 mm). INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to undergo angioplasty followed by VBT with a beta source (n = 201) or paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation (n = 195). Clinical and angiographic follow-up at 9 months was scheduled in all patients. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 9 months. RESULTS: Diabetes mellitus was present in 139 patients (35.1%). Median reference vessel diameter was 2.65 mm and median lesion length was 15.3 mm. In the VBT group, new stents were implanted in 22 patients (10.9%) and in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group, multiple stents were required in 57 patients (29.2%), with median stent length of 24 mm. Follow-up at 9 months was complete in 194 patients in the VBT group and 191 patients in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group (96.5% and 97.9%, respectively). For VBT and paclitaxel-eluting stents, respectively, the number of events and 9-month rates for ischemic target lesion revascularization were 27 (13.9%) vs 12 (6.3%) (relative risk [RR], 0.45; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.86; P = .01); for ischemic target vessel revascularization, 34 (17.5%) vs 20 (10.5%) (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.36-1.00; P = .046); and for overall major adverse cardiac events, 39 (20.1%) vs 22 (11.5%) (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.35-0.93; P = .02), with similar rates of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (10 [5.2%] vs 7 [3.7%]; RR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.28-1.83; P = .48) and target vessel thrombosis (5 [2.6%] vs 3 [1.6%]; RR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.15-2.50; P = .72). Angiographic restenosis at 9 months was 31.2% (53 of 170 patients) with VBT and 14.5% (25 of 172 patients) with paclitaxel-eluting stents (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30-0.71; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Treatment of bare-metal in-stent restenotic lesions with paclitaxel-eluting stents rather than angioplasty followed by VBT reduces clinical and angiographic restenosis at 9 months and improves event-free survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00287573.

One-year clinical results with the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent: the TAXUS-IV trial.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent after implantation in a broad cross section of de novo coronary lesions at 1 year are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the TAXUS-IV trial, 1314 patients with single de novo coronary lesions 10 to 28 mm in length, with reference-vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.75 mm, coverable by a single study stent, were prospectively randomized to the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or an identical-appearing bare-metal EXPRESS stent. By actuarial analysis, the TAXUS stent compared with the bare-metal stent reduced the 12-month rates of target-lesion revascularization by 73% (4.4% versus 15.1%, P<0.0001), target-vessel revascularization by 62% (7.1% versus 17.1%, P<0.0001), target-vessel failure by 52% (10.0% versus 19.4%, P<0.0001), and composite major adverse cardiac events by 49% (10.8% versus 20.0%, P<0.0001). The 1-year rates of cardiac death (1.4% versus 1.3%), myocardial infarction (3.5% versus 4.7%), and subacute thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.8%) were similar between the paclitaxel-eluting and control stents, respectively. Between 9 and 12 months, there were significantly fewer myocardial infarctions (0% versus 1.1%, P=0.007), target-vessel revascularizations (2.4% versus 5.8%, P=0.002), and major adverse cardiac events (2.4% versus 6.3%, P=0.0009) in the paclitaxel-eluting stent than in the control stent group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The relative efficacy reported at 9 months for the polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent compared with the EXPRESS stent is preserved and continues to increase at 1 year, with no safety concerns apparent.

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.

Comparison of a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent with a bare metal stent in patients with complex coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Compared with bare metal stents, drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis in noncomplex lesions. The utility of drug-eluting stents has not been evaluated in more difficult stenoses. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of the polymer-based, slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent in a patient population with more complex lesions than previously studied. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter randomized trial conducted from February 2003 to March 2004 at 66 academic and community-based institutions with 1156 patients who underwent stent implantation in a single coronary artery stenosis (vessel diameter, 2.25-4.0 mm; lesion length, 10-46 mm), including 664 patients (57.4%) with complex or previously unstudied lesions (requiring 2.25-mm, 4.0-mm, and/or multiple stents) and 9-month clinical and angiographic follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 or more bare metal stents (n = 579) or identical-appearing paclitaxel-eluting stents (n = 577). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 9 months. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well matched. Diabetes was present in 31% of patients. The mean (SD) reference vessel diameter was 2.69 (0.57) mm, the reference lesion length was 17.2 (9.2) mm, and 78% of lesions were type B2/C. A mean (SD) of 1.38 (0.58) stents (total mean [SD] length, 28.4 [13.1] mm) were implanted per lesion; 33% of lesions required multiple stents. Stents that were 2.25 mm and 4.0 mm in diameter were used in 18% and 17% of lesions, respectively. Compared with bare metal stents, paclitaxel-eluting stents reduced the 9-month rate of target lesion revascularization from 15.7% to 8.6% (P<.001) and target vessel revascularization from 17.3% to 12.1% (P = .02). Similar rates were observed for cardiac death or myocardial infarction (5.5% for bare metal stent group vs 5.7% for paclitaxel-eluting stent group) and stent thrombosis (0.7% in both groups). Angiographic restenosis was reduced from 33.9% to 18.9% in the entire study cohort (P<.001), including among patients receiving 2.25-mm stents (49.4% vs 31.2%; P = .01), 4.0-mm stents (14.4% vs 3.5%; P = .02), and multiple stents (57.8% vs 27.2%; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with a bare metal stent, implantation of the paclitaxel-eluting stent in a patient population with complex lesions effectively reduces clinical and angiographic restenosis.

A randomized, controlled, multi-center trial comparing the safety and efficacy of zotarolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo lesions in coronary arteries: final results of the ZoMaxx II trial.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this prospective, randomized, single-blind controlled clinical trial was to compare the effectiveness of a zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZoMaxx™) with a paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent (Taxus™ Express(2)™) in patients with angina pectoris and a single native coronary artery lesion between 10-28 mm in length and 2.5-3.75mm in diameter. METHODS: Patients were enrolled at 75 international institutions between June 2005 and November 2006. RESULTS: 1099 (1672 originally planned) patients received 557 ZoMaxx and 542 Taxus stents: cohorts were well-matched for diabetes (27% vs. 27%), reference vessel diameter (2.73 ± 0.46mm vs. 2.74 ± 0.45mm) and lesion length (14.8 ± 6.7mm vs. 14.3 ± 6.4mm). Nine month clinical and angiographic follow-up was available in 1052/1099 (96%) and 649/836 (78%) patients, respectively. The safety profiles for the two stents (myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death and/or target vessel revascularization (TVR)) were similar (ZoMaxx 8.7% vs. Taxus 6.9%, p=NS). The primary endpoint of 9-month TVR occurred more frequently after treatment with ZoMaxx (6.8%) as compared with Taxus (4.2%), therefore the primary clinical endpoint was not met. However, the 9-month in-segment late lumen loss for ZoMaxx (0.29 ± 0.47mm) and Taxus (0.22 ± 0.41mm, p=NS) were similar, thus satisfying the primary angiographic endpoint. Secondary endpoints of the rates of in-segment and in-stent binary restenosis were also similar (5.9% vs. 5.8%, 7.8% vs. 7.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: At 9months, the ZoMaxx stent failed to achieve the primary endpoint of non-inferiority in TVR to the Taxus stent, but safety endpoints were equal between the two stent systems.

5-year follow-up of polytetrafluoroethylene-covered stents compared with bare-metal stents in aortocoronary saphenous vein grafts the randomized BARRICADE (barrier approach to restenosis: restrict intima to curtail adverse events) trial.

OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate the utility of the JOSTENT polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) stent-graft (Jomed GmbH, Rangendingen, Germany) in patients with diseased saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND: Prior trials of the JOSTENT stent-graft did not mandate high-pressure implantation or prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, and were limited by short-term follow-up. METHODS: A total of 243 patients at 47 centers with 1 to 2 discrete lesions in SVGs were prospectively randomized to JOSTENT implantation (≥18 atm.) versus bare-metal stents (BMS). The JOSTENT patients were treated with aspirin indefinitely and clopidogrel for ≥8 months. Routine angiographic follow-up was performed at 8 months, and all patients were followed for 5 years. RESULTS: The primary end point of in-lesion binary restenosis occurred in 31.8% of lesions treated with the JOSTENT versus 28.4% of lesions treated with BMS (relative risk: 1.12, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.72 to 1.75, p = 0.63). At 9 months, the major secondary end point of target vessel failure (death, myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target vessel revascularization) occurred in 32.2% of patients treated with the JOSTENT versus 22.1% of patients treated with BMS (hazard ratio: 1.54, 95% CI: 0.94 to 2.53, p = 0.08). During long-term follow-up, significantly more events accrued in the JOSTENT arm such that by 5 years target vessel failure had occurred in 68.3% of JOSTENT patients versus 51.8% of BMS patients (hazard ratio: 1.59, 95% CI: 1.13 to 2.23, p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: The long-term prognosis for diseased SVGs requiring PCI is dismal. The JOSTENT PTFE stent-graft results in inferior outcomes compared with BMS, despite high-pressure implantation and prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy, a finding that becomes more evident with longer-term follow-up.

A randomized comparison of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent versus the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent in de novo native coronary lesions 12-month outcomes from the ENDEAVOR IV trial.

OBJECTIVES: The ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial evaluated the safety and efficacy of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) compared with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES). BACKGROUND: First-generation drug-eluting stents have reduced angiographic and clinical restenosis, but long-term safety remains controversial. A second-generation drug-eluting stent, which delivers zotarolimus, a potent antiproliferative agent, via a biocompatible phosphorylcholine polymer on a cobalt alloy thin-strut stent has shown promising experimental and early clinical results. METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized (1:1), single-blind, controlled trial comparing outcomes of patients with single de novo coronary lesions treated with ZES or PES. The primary end point was noninferiority of 9-month target vessel failure defined as cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. RESULTS: Among a total of 1,548 patients assigned to ZES (n = 773) or PES (n = 775), at 9 months, ZES was noninferior to PES with rates of target vessel failure 6.6% versus 7.1%, respectively (p(noninferiority) < or = 0.001). There were fewer periprocedural myocardial infarctions with ZES (0.5% vs. 2.2%; p = 0.007), whereas at 12 months, there were no significant differences between groups in rates of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or stent thrombosis. Although incidence of 8-month binary angiographic in-segment restenosis was higher in patients treated with ZES versus PES (15.3% vs. 10.4%; p = 0.284), rates of 12-month target lesion revascularization were similar (4.5% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.228), especially in patients without planned angiographic follow-up (3.6% vs. 3.2%; p = 0.756). CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate that ZES has similar clinical safety and efficacy compared with PES in simple and medium complexity single de novo coronary lesions. (ENDEAVOR IV Clinical Trial; NCT00217269).