Angela Humphrey

Outcomes With Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Saphenous Vein Graft Intervention: Results From the STENT (Strategic Transcatheter Evaluation of New Therapies) Group

OBJECTIVES This study compares outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing saphenous vein graft (SVG) intervention. BACKGROUND The safety and efficacy of DES in patients undergoing SVG intervention is controversial. METHODS The STENT (Strategic Transcatheter Evaluation of New Therapies) registry is a multicenter U.S. registry evaluating outcomes with DES. Our study population includes patients undergoing PCI of SVG lesions with DES (n = 785) or BMS (n = 343) who completed 9-month or 2-year follow-up. Outcomes were adjusted with propensity analyses. RESULTS The DES patients had fewer emergent procedures but had smaller vessels and longer lesions. The DES patients had less death or myocardial infarction at 9 months (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.33 to 0.83, p = 0.006) and less death at 2 years (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.36 to 0.98, p = 0.041). Target vessel revascularization (TVR) was less with DES at 9 months (7.2% vs. 10.0%, HR: 0.36, 95% CI: 0.22 to 0.61, p < 0.001) but was no different by 2 years (18.3% vs. 16.9%, p = 0.86), although adjusted TVR rates were lower (HR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.40 to 0.90, p = 0.014). The DES reduced TVR at 9 months in SVG lesions with diameter <3.5 mm (8.0% vs. 17.2%, p = 0.013) but not >or=3.5 mm (6.0% vs. 6.6%, p = 0.74). CONCLUSIONS Treatment of SVG lesions with DES vs. BMS is effective in reducing TVR at 9 months, although most of this advantage is lost at 2 years. The DES seem safe with less death or myocardial infarction, although selection bias might have affected these results. Our data suggest that DES might have short-term advantages over BMS in SVG lesions with diameter <3.5 mm.

Outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction: Results from the Strategic Transcatheter Evaluation of New Therapies (STENT) Group†

This study compares outcomes with drug‐eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST‐elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).

An integer based risk score for predicting 30-day major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents: results from a large prospective multicentre registry, the STENT Group

AIMS Previous risk models predicting in-hospital major adverse cardiac or cerebrovascular events (MACCE) after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) may underestimate actual short-term post-procedure complications due to the trend toward early discharge of patients. METHODS AND RESULTS Using a subset (N=10,679) from the STENT Group registry, a logistic regression model was developed to predict 30-day MACCE which includes death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularisation and stroke. An integer-based risk score was created from the model and validated in another subset (N=3,099). In the study subset, there was significant difference between in-hospital and 30-day MACCE N=443 (2.0%) vs. 131 (4.2), p<0.01, respectively. A final risk model included nine variables; absence of pre-procedural statin (odds ratio=1.3, 95% confidence interval=1.0-1.5), haemoglobin level (0.9/1 gm increase, 0.8-0.9), cardiogenic shock (4.4, 3.1-6.3), acute congestive heart failure (1.6, 1.2-2.3), left main disease (2.2, 1.3-3.7), left anterior descending artery lesion (1.3, 1.0-1.5), ostial lesion (1.6, 1.2-2.1), coronary thrombosis (2.0, 1.4-2.9) and ACC/AHA type C lesion (1.3, 1.1-1.6). The c-statistics of the final model were 0.653 and 0.692 in the study and validation subset, respectively. CONCLUSIONS In this large real world registry of DES, in-hospital MACCE did not represent short-term post-procedure prognosis. The risk model consisting of nine variables predicted 30-day MACCE with modest discriminatory value.