Charles O'Shaughnessy

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).

Long-term safety and efficacy with paclitaxel-eluting stents: 5-year final results of the TAXUS IV clinical trial (TAXUS IV-SR: Treatment of De Novo Coronary Disease Using a Single Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent).

OBJECTIVES The pivotal TAXUS IV (TAXUS IV-SR: Treatment of De Novo Coronary Disease Using a Single Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent) trial evaluated the long-term safety and effectiveness of the paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) compared with an otherwise identical bare-metal stent (BMS) in a relatively uncomplicated population of patients with a single de novo lesion in a native coronary vessel, treated between March and July 2002. BACKGROUND Long-term follow-up is required to determine whether the early safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents are maintained. METHODS The primary end point of this prospective, randomized, double-blind trial was 9-month ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR) for PES versus the BMS control. Follow-up was complete in 1,230 (95.1%) of 1,294 randomized evaluable patients at 5 years. RESULTS Compared with BMS, PES significantly reduced TVR at 9 months (12.1% vs. 4.7%; p < 0.0001); this benefit was maintained through 5 years (27.4% vs. 16.9%; p < 0.0001), given comparable TVR rates for BMS and PES between years 1 and 5 (4.1%/year vs. 3.3%/year; respectively, p = 0.16). Similar patterns were observed for composite major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (32.8% BMS vs. 24.0% PES, p = 0.0001 at 5 years). Stent thrombosis was comparable for PES and BMS at 9 months (0.8% BMS vs. 0.8% PES; p = 0.98) and at 5 years (2.1% BMS vs. 2.2% PES, p = 0.87). The overall revascularization benefits of PES were consistent across multiple subgroups, including sex, diabetes, left anterior descending artery lesion location, reference vessel diameter, lesion length, and multiple stents. CONCLUSIONS These 5-year results demonstrate the long-term safety and sustained efficacy of PES compared with BMS in patients with noncomplex lesions. (TAXUS IV-SR: Treatment of De Novo Coronary Disease Using a Single Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent; NCT00292474).

A novel bioresorbable polymer paclitaxel-eluting stent for the treatment of single and multivessel coronary disease: primary results of the COSTAR (Cobalt Chromium Stent With Antiproliferative for Restenosis) II study.

OBJECTIVES The aim was to compare safety and effectiveness of the CoStar drug-eluting stent (DES) (Conor MedSystems, Menlo Park, California) with those of the Taxus DES (Boston Scientific, Maple Grove, Minnesota) in de novo single- and multivessel percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). BACKGROUND Paclitaxel elution from a stent coated with biostable polymer (Taxus) reduces restenosis after PCI. The CoStar DES is a novel stent with laser-cut reservoirs containing bioresorbable polymer loaded to elute 10 microg paclitaxel/30 days. METHODS Patients undergoing PCI for a single target lesion per vessel in up to 3 native epicardial vessels were randomly assigned 3:2 to CoStar or Taxus. Primary end point was 8-month major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as adjudicated death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target vessel revascularization (TVR). Protocol-specified 9-month angiographic follow-up included 457 vessels in 286 patients. RESULTS Of the 1,700 patients enrolled, 1,675 (98.5%) were evaluable (CoStar = 989; Taxus = 686), including 1,330 (79%) single-vessel and 345 (21%) multivessel PCI. The MACE rate at 8 months was 11.0% for CoStar versus 6.9% for Taxus (p < 0.005), including adjudicated death (0.5% vs. 0.7%, respectively), MI (3.4% vs. 2.4%, respectively), and TVR (8.1% vs. 4.3%, respectively). Per-vessel 9-month in-segment late loss was 0.49 mm with CoStar and 0.18 mm with Taxus (p < 0.0001). Findings were consistent across pre-specified subgroups. CONCLUSIONS The CoStar DES is not noninferior to the Taxus DES based on per-patient clinical and per-vessel angiographic analyses. The relative benefit of Taxus is primarily attributable to reduction in TVR. Follow-up to 9 months showed no apparent difference in death, MI, or stent thrombosis rates.

Reduced Risk of Restenosis in Small Vessels and Reduced Risk of Myocardial Infarction in Long Lesions With the New Thin-Strut TAXUS Liberté Stent: 1-Year Results From the TAXUS ATLAS Program

OBJECTIVES The TAXUS ATLAS Small Vessel (SV) and Long Lesion (LL) multicenter studies compared the performance of the thin-strut (0.0038 inch) TAXUS Liberté 2.25-mm stent (Boston Scientific; Natick, Massachusetts) and the TAXUS Liberté 38-mm long stent (Boston Scientific; Natick, Massachusetts) with the earlier paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS Express (Boston Scientific) stent that has identical polymer, drug dosage, and release kinetics but different stent geometry and thicker struts (0.0052 inch). BACKGROUND The TAXUS Liberté stent was designed with thinner and more even strut spacing to provide more uniform drug distribution, as well as increased flexibility and conformability. Clinical benefits of the new stent design have not been evaluated. METHODS The TAXUS ATLAS SV and LL studies are nonrandomized studies comparing outcomes of the TAXUS Liberté 2.25 mm (N = 261) and TAXUS Liberté 38 mm (N = 150) stents to TAXUS Express historical control groups derived from the TAXUS IV and V trials. Inclusion/exclusion criteria for TAXUS Express and Liberté groups were similar in both studies. RESULTS Each study met its primary end point of noninferiority of 9-month in-segment diameter stenosis. Furthermore, TAXUS Liberté 2.25 mm, when compared with TAXUS Express, significantly reduced the rate of both 9-month angiographic restenosis (18.5% vs. 32.7%, p = 0.0219) and 12-month target lesion revascularization (6.1% vs. 16.9%, p = 0.0039). In addition, TAXUS Liberté 38 mm significantly reduced the risk of 12-month myocardial infarction compared with TAXUS Express (1.4% vs. 6.5%, p = 0.0246). CONCLUSIONS The thinner-strut TAXUS Liberté stent improved outcomes compared with the earlier TAXUS Express stent in both SVs and LLs (A Study of the TAXUS Liberté Stent for the Treatment of de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions in Small Vessels; NCT00371748; A Study of the TAXUS Liberté Stent for the Treatment of Long De Novo Coronary Artery Lesions; NCT00371475).

Clinical and angiographic outcomes in diabetics from the ENDEAVOR IV trial: randomized comparison of zotarolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease.

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to examine outcomes related to the use of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) (Medtronic CardioVascular, Santa Rosa, California) compared with the TAXUS paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) in the 477 patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the randomized ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease) trial. BACKGROUND Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in diabetic patients is associated with increased rates of restenosis-related end points compared with PCI in nondiabetic patients. Although ZES has been associated with similar clinical efficacy compared with PES in the overall trial population of the ENDEAVOR IV trial, whether these results are maintained in the higher-risk restenosis subgroup of patients with DM has not been determined. METHODS Clinical and angiographic outcomes were compared according to randomized treatment assignment to either ZES or PES. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were similar among ZES (n = 241) and PES (n = 236) diabetic patients, with slightly longer lesion lengths in PES-treated patients (12.9 mm vs. 14.0 mm, p = 0.041). Among the 86 DM patients assigned to routine angiographic follow-up (18% of the overall DM cohort), in-stent percent diameter stenosis at 8 months was greater among ZES-treated patients (32.9 vs. 21.1, p = 0.023), with a trend toward higher in-stent late loss. One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with either ZES or PES (target vessel failure: 8.6% vs. 10.8%, p = 0.53; target lesion revascularization: 6.9% vs. 5.8%, p = 0.70; target vessel revascularization: 8.6% vs. 9.4%, p = 0.87). There were no significant interactions between DM status and stent type with respect to the outcomes measured, and the relative efficacy/safety of ZES and PES were similar among insulin- and noninsulin-requiring subgroups. CONCLUSIONS One-year clinical outcomes were similar among DM patients treated with ZES and PES in the ENDEAVOR IV trial. These findings parallel the overall trial results, which demonstrated similar efficacy and safety of ZES and PES for single de novo coronary lesions.

Frequency and Clinical Consequences Associated With Sidebranch Occlusion During Stent Implantation Using Zotarolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Coronary Stents

Background—Myocardial infarction (MI) after drug-eluting stent placement has been associated with an unfavorable late prognosis. Although the etiology of periprocedural MI is multifactorial, sidebranch occlusion may be an important contributing factor. We sought to identify the incidence of sidebranch occlusion during zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) and paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) placement and to relate sidebranch occlusion to the occurrence of periprocedural MI. Methods and Results—Angiograms were reviewed from patients randomly assigned to treatment with a ZES (597 patients; 943 sidebranches) or a PES (619 patients; 977 sidebranches). Sidebranch occlusion was defined as Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade 0 or 1. Sidebranch occlusion was correlated with frequency of MI, as assessed by the creatine phosphokinase MB isoenzyme. Sidebranch occlusion occurred less often after the first stent deployment in patients treated with ZES (2.2%) than in patients treated with PES (4.0%; P=0.032). A similar reduction in the frequency of sidebranch occlusion at any point during the procedure was found in patients treated with ZES (2.9% versus 4.8% in PES patients; P=0.042). Multivariable predictors of sidebranch occlusion included baseline sidebranch stenosis, complex lesion morphology, smaller baseline minimal lumen diameters, and the use of a PES. Of the 20 patients with MI within 30 days of the procedure, 30% had evidence of sidebranch occlusion during the stent procedure. Conclusions—Patients treated with ZES were less likely to develop sidebranch occlusion during stent placement than patients treated with PES. Less frequent sidebranch occlusion with ZES may have contributed to the lower frequency rates of periprocedural MI in this study.

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.

TAXUS Liberté Attenuates the Risk of Restenosis in Patients With Medically Treated Diabetes Mellitus : Results From the TAXUS ATLAS Program

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to assess the relative efficacy and safety of the second-generation TAXUS Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. BACKGROUND Diabetic patients suffer from accelerated atherosclerosis and increased risk of restenosis after coronary interventions; however, prior data suggest that PES might blunt this effect, providing equal benefit in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. METHODS A pooled analysis of all 4 TAXUS ATLAS studies was conducted that included 413 diabetic and 1,116 nondiabetic subjects treated with the TAXUS Liberté stent for de novo coronary lesions. Angiographic and intravascular ultrasound outcomes at 9 months and clinical outcomes at 9 and 12 months were compared in patients with and without diabetes. Propensity score and multivariate adjustments were performed to correct for baseline differences. RESULTS In-stent angiographic restenosis (13.0% vs. 9.6%, p = 0.12), late luminal loss (0.40 mm vs. 0.38 mm, p = 0.58), and intimal hyperplasia (14.8% vs. 13.4%, p = 0.29) were similar for diabetic and nondiabetic subjects. After propensity adjustment, 12-month target lesion revascularization rates were similar for diabetic and nondiabetic subjects (6.4% vs. 4.7%, p = 0.18), with no differences in mortality, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis. However, the rate of target vessel revascularization (TVR) was higher for diabetic subjects due to increased TVR outside the target lesion (TVR Remote). CONCLUSIONS Similar clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound outcomes were observed for both diabetic and nondiabetic subjects treated with TAXUS Liberté, suggesting that this PES attenuates the effect of diabetes on restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention, yielding comparable efficacy and safety in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. (TAXUS ATLAS; NCT00371709, NCT00371423, NCT00371748, and NCT00371475).

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.

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

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.