Erminio Bonizzoni

Incidence and Predictors of Drug-Eluting Stent Thrombosis During and After Discontinuation of Thienopyridine Treatment

Background— The need for prolonged aspirin and thienopyridine therapy and the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) remain as drawbacks associated with drug-eluting stents. Methods and Results— A prospective observational cohort study was conducted between June 2002 and January 2004 on 3021 patients consecutively and successfully treated in 5389 lesions with drug-eluting stents. Detailed patient information was collected on antiplatelet therapy. We analyzed the incidence of ST throughout the 18-month follow-up period and its relationship with thienopyridine therapy. ST occurred in 58 patients (1.9%) at 18 months. Forty-two patients (1.4%) experienced the event within 6 months of stent implantation. Acute myocardial infarction (fatal or nonfatal) occurred in 46 patients (79%) and death in 23 patients (39%) with ST. The median interval from discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy to ST was 13.5 days (interquartile range 5.2 to 25.7 days) for the first 6 months and 90 days (interquartile range 30 to 365 days) between 6 and 18 months. On multivariable analysis, the strongest predictor for ST within 6 months of stenting was discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy (hazard ratio, 13.74; 95% CI, 4.04 to 46.68; P<0.001). Thienopyridine discontinuation after 6 months did not predict the occurrence of ST (hazard ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.30 to 2.98; P=0.92). Conclusions— Discontinuation of thienopyridine therapy was the major determinant of ST within the first 6 months, but insufficient information is available to determine whether there is benefit in continuing a thienopyridine beyond 6 months.

Dose-dependent risk of malformations with antiepileptic drugs: an analysis of data from the EURAP epilepsy and pregnancy registry

BACKGROUND Prenatal exposure to antiepileptic drugs is associated with a greater risk of major congenital malformations, but there is inadequate information on the comparative teratogenicity of individual antiepileptic drugs and the association with dose. We aimed to establish the risks of major congenital malformations after monotherapy exposure to four major antiepileptic drugs at different doses. METHODS The EURAP epilepsy and pregnancy registry is an observational cohort study representing a collaboration of physicians from 42 countries. We prospectively monitored pregnancies exposed to monotherapy with different doses of four common drugs: carbamazepine, lamotrigine, valproic acid, or phenobarbital. Our primary endpoint was the rate of major congenital malformations detected up to 12 months after birth. We assessed pregnancy outcomes according to dose at the time of conception irrespective of subsequent dose changes. FINDINGS After excluding pregnancies that ended in spontaneous abortions or chromosomal or genetic abnormalities, those in which the women had treatment changes in the first trimester, and those involving other diseases or treatments that could affect fetal outcome, we assessed rates of major congenital malformations in 1402 pregnancies exposed to carbamazepine, 1280 on lamotrigine, 1010 on valproic acid, and 217 on phenobarbital. An increase in malformation rates with increasing dose at the time of conception was recorded for all drugs. Multivariable analysis including ten covariates in addition to treatment with antiepileptic drugs showed that the risk of malformations was greater with a parental history of major congenital malformations (odds ratio 4·4, 95% CI 2·06-9·23). We noted the lowest rates of malformation with less than 300 mg per day lamotrigine (2·0% [17 events], 95% CI 1·19-3·24) and less than 400 mg per day carbamazepine (3·4% [5 events], 95% CI 1·11-7·71). Compared with lamotrigine monotherapy at doses less than 300 mg per day, risks of malformation were significantly higher with valproic acid and phenobarbital at all investigated doses, and with carbamazepine at doses greater than 400 mg per day. INTERPRETATION The risk of major congenital malformations is influenced not only by type of antiepileptic drug, but also by dose and other variables, which should be taken into account in the management of epilepsy in women of childbearing potential. FUNDING Eisai, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen-Cilag, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi-Aventis, UCB, Netherlands Epilepsy Foundation, Stockholm County Council, and ALF.

Early and Mid-Term Results of Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Unprotected Left Main

Background—The safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention in unprotected left main (ULM) coronary arteries are still a matter of debate. Methods and Results—All consecutive patients who had a sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher, Cordis, Johnson and Johnson Co) or a paclitaxel-eluting stent (Taxus, Boston Scientific) electively implanted in de novo lesions on unprotected left main were analyzed. Patients treated with a drug-eluting stent (DES) were compared with the historical group of consecutive patients treated with bare metal stent (BMS). Eighty-five patients were treated with DES; 64 had BMS implantation. Patients treated with DES had lower ejection fractions (51.1±11% versus 57.4±13%, P=0.002) and were more often diabetics (21.2% versus 10.9%, P=0.12) with more frequent distal left main involvement (81.2% versus 57.8%, P=0.003). Furthermore, in the DES group, smaller vessels (3.33±0.6 versus 3.7±0.7 mm, respectively; P=0.0001) with more lesions (2.94±1.6 versus 2.25±1.3, P=0.004) and vessels (2.03±0.69 versus 1.8±0.72, P=0.05) were treated with longer stents (24.3±12 versus 15.8±8.6 mm, P=0.0001). Despite the higher-risk patients and lesion profiles in the DES group, the incidence of major cardiac events at a 6-month clinical follow-up was lower in the DES than in the BMS group (20.0% versus 35.9%, respectively; P=0.039). Moreover, cardiac deaths occurred in 3 DES patients (3.5%), as compared with 6 (9.3%) in the BMS group (P=0.17). Conclusions—In this early experience with DES in unprotected left main, this procedure appears safe with favorable and improved clinical results as compared with historical control subjects with a BMS. A randomized study comparing surgery appears justified at present.

Renal insufficiency following contrast media administration trial (REMEDIAL) : A randomized comparison of 3 preventive strategies

Background— Volume supplementation by saline infusion combined with N-acetylcysteine (NAC) represents an effective strategy to prevent contrast agent–induced nephrotoxicity (CIN). Preliminary data support the concept that sodium bicarbonate and ascorbic acid also may be effective in preventing CIN. Methods and Results— Three hundred twenty-six consecutive patients with chronic kidney disease, referred to our institutions for coronary and/or peripheral procedures, were randomly assigned to prophylactic administration of 0.9% saline infusion plus NAC (n=111), sodium bicarbonate infusion plus NAC (n=108), and 0.9% saline plus ascorbic acid plus NAC (n=107). All enrolled patients had serum creatinine ≥2.0 mg/dL and/or estimated glomerular filtration rate <40 mL · min−1 · 1.73 m−2. Contrast nephropathy risk score was calculated in each patient. In all cases, iodixanol (an iso-osmolar, nonionic contrast agent) was administered. The primary end point was an increase of ≥25% in the creatinine concentration 48 hours after the procedure (CIN). The amount of contrast media administered (179±102, 169±92, and 169±94 mL, respectively; P=0.69) and risk scores (9.1±3.4, 9.5±3.6, and 9.3±3.6; P=0.21) were similar in the 3 groups. CIN occurred in 11 of 111 patients (9.9%) in the saline plus NAC group, in 2 of 108 (1.9%) in the bicarbonate plus NAC group (P=0.019 by Fisher exact test versus saline plus NAC group), and in 11 of 107 (10.3%) in the saline plus ascorbic acid plus NAC group (P=1.00 versus saline plus NAC group). Conclusions— The strategy of volume supplementation by sodium bicarbonate plus NAC seems to be superior to the combination of normal saline with NAC alone or with the addition of ascorbic acid in preventing CIN in patients at medium to high risk.

A clinical outcome-based prospective study on venous thromboembolism after cancer surgery: The @RISTOS Project

Summary Background Data:The epidemiology of venous thromboembolism (VTE) after cancer surgery is based on clinical trials on VTE prophylaxis that used venography to screen deep vein thrombosis (DVT). However, the clinical relevance of asymptomatic venography-detected DVT is unclear, and the population of these clinical trials is not necessarily representative of the overall cancer surgery population. Objective:The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of clinically overt VTE in a wide spectrum of consecutive patients undergoing surgery for cancer and to identify risk factors for VTE. Methods:@RISTOS was a prospective observational study in patients undergoing general, urologic, or gynecologic surgery. Patients were assessed for clinically overt VTE occurring up to 30 ± 5 days after surgery or more if the hospital stay was longer than 35 days. All outcome events were evaluated by an independent Adjudication Committee. Results:A total of 2373 patients were included in the study: 1238 (52%) undergoing general, 685 (29%) urologic, and 450 (19%) gynecologic surgery. In-hospital prophylaxis was given in 81.6% and postdischarge prophylaxis in 30.7% of the patients. Fifty patients (2.1%) were adjudicated as affected by clinically overt VTE (DVT, 0.42%; nonfatal pulmonary embolism, 0.88%; death 0.80%). The incidence of VTE was 2.83% in general surgery, 2.0% in gynecologic surgery, and 0.87% in urologic surgery. Forty percent of the events occurred later than 21 days from surgery. The overall death rate was 1.72%; in 46.3% of the cases, death was caused by VTE. In a multivariable analysis, 5 risk factors were identified: age above 60 years (2.63, 95% confidence interval, 1.21–5.71), previous VTE (5.98, 2.13–16.80), advanced cancer (2.68, 1.37–5.24), anesthesia lasting more than 2 hours (4.50, 1.06–19.04), and bed rest longer than 3 days (4.37, 2.45–7.78). Conclusions:VTE remains a common complication of cancer surgery, with a remarkable proportion of events occurring late after surgery. In patients undergoing cancer surgery, VTE is the most common cause of death at 30 days after surgery.

Percutaneous Treatment With Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation Versus Bypass Surgery for Unprotected Left Main Stenosis A Single-Center Experience

Background— Improvements in results with percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES) may extend their use in patients with left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis. Methods and Results— Two hundred forty-nine patients with LMCA stenosis were treated with PCI and DES implantation (n=107) or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) (n=142), in a single center, between March 2002 and July 2004. A propensity analysis was performed to adjust for baseline differences between the two cohorts. At 1 year, there was no statistical difference in the occurrence of death in PCI versus CABG both for the unadjusted (OR=0.291; 95% CI=0.054 to 1.085; P=0.0710) and adjusted analyses (OR=0.331; 95% CI=0.055 to 1.404; P=0.1673). PCI was correlated to a lower occurrence of the composite end points of death and myocardial infarction (unadjusted OR=0.235; 95% CI=0.048 to 0.580; P=0.0002; adjusted OR=0.260; 95% CI=0.078 to 0.597; P=0.0005) and death, myocardial infarction, and cerebrovascular events (unadjusted OR=0.300; 95% CI=0.102 to 0.617; P=0.0004; adjusted OR=0.385; 95% CI=0.180 to 0.819; P=0.01). No difference was detected in the occurrence of major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular event at the unadjusted (OR=0.675; 95% CI=0.371 to 1.189; P=0.1891) and adjusted analyses (OR=0.568; 95% CI=0.229 to 1.344; P=0.2266). Conclusions— At 1 year, in this single-center, retrospective experience, there was no difference in the degree of protection against death, stroke, myocardial infarction, and revascularization between PCI with DES and CABG for LMCA disease.

In-Stent Restenosis in Small Coronary Arteries Impact of Strut Thickness

UNLABELLED OBJECTIVES; We sought to evaluate whether strut thickness may impact the restenosis rate after stent implantation in small coronary arteries. BACKGROUND Small vessel size (<3.0 mm) is an independent risk factor for the occurrence of in-stent restenosis. It has been reported that vessel damage induced during stent deployment is an important factor in restenosis. METHODS From our database, we selected all patients who had successful stenting in small native vessels, with angiographic follow-up available, between March 1996 and April 2001. The strut was defined as thin when <0.10 mm and thick when > or = 0.10 mm. According to these criteria, we identified two subgroups: a thin group and a thick group. RESULTS A total of 821 (57%) of the 1,447 patients had angiographic follow-up available and were included in the analysis. The thin group included 400 patients with 505 lesions. The thick group included 421 patients with 436 lesions. The restenosis rate was 28.5% in the thin group and 36.6% in the thick group (p = 0.009; odds ratio [OR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09 to 1.90). The study group was classified into three subgroups according to the reference vessel diameter: < or = 2.50 mm, 2.51 to 2.75 mm and 2.76 to 2.99 mm. Strut thickness influenced the restenosis rate only in the subgroup with a reference vessel diameter between 2.76 and 2.99 mm, with rates of 23.5% in the thin group and 37% in the thick group (p = 0.006). By logistic regression analysis, predictors of restenosis were stent length (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.04; p = 0.001), strut thickness (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.29; p = 0.001) and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.10, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.68; p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS This study supports that strut thickness is an independent predictor of restenosis in coronary arteries with a reference diameter of 2.75 to 2.99 mm.

Favorable Long-Term Outcome After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Nonbifurcation Lesions That Involve Unprotected Left Main Coronary Artery A Multicenter Registry

Background— The presence of a lumen narrowing at the ostium and the body of an unprotected left main coronary artery but does not require bifurcation treatment is a class I indication of surgical revascularization. Methods and Results— A total of 147 consecutive patients who had a stenosis in the ostium and/or the midshaft of an unprotected left main coronary artery (treatment of the bifurcation not required) and were electively treated with percutaneous coronary intervention and sirolimus-eluting stents (n=107) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (n=40) in 5 centres were included in this registry. In 72 patients (almost 50%), intravascular ultrasound guidance was performed. Procedural success was achieved in 99% of the patients; in 1 patient with stenosis in the left main coronary artery ostium, a >30% residual stenosis persisted at the end of the procedure, and the patient was referred for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. During hospitalization, no patients experienced a Q-wave myocardial infarction or died. One patient died 19 days after the procedure because of pulmonary infection. At long-term clinical follow-up (886±308 days), 5 patients had died; 7 patients had target vessel revascularization (5 repeat percutaneous coronary interventions and 2 coronary artery bypass graft surgeries), and of these only 1 patient had a target lesion revascularization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 106 patients (72%) with a late loss of −0.01 mm. Restenosis in the left main trunk occurred only in 1 patient (0.9%). Conclusions— Percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents implantation in nonbifurcation left main coronary artery lesions appears safe with a long-term major adverse clinical event rate of 7.4% and a restenosis rate of 0.9%.

Late and very late stent thrombosis following drug-eluting stent implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery: a multicentre registry

AIMS To evaluate the occurrence of late and very late stent thrombosis (ST) following elective drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis in a large multicentre registry. METHODS AND RESULTS All 731 consecutive patients who had sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stent electively implanted in de novo lesions on unprotected LMCA in five centres were included. ST was defined according to Academic Research Consortium definitions. Four (0.5%) patients had a definite ST: three early (two acute and one subacute) and one late ST, no cases of very late definite ST were recorded. All patients survived from the event. Three patients had a probable ST. Therefore, 7/731 (0.95%) patients had a definite or a probable ST and all were on dual antiplatelet therapy at the time of the event. Possible (eight late and 12 very late) ST occurred in 20 (2.7%) patients. At 29.5 ± 13.7 months follow-up, a total of 45 (6.2%) patients had died; 31 (4.2%) of cardiac death. Ninety five (12.9%) patients had a target-vessel and 76 (10.4%) a target-lesion revascularization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 548 patients (75%): restenosis occurred in 77 (14.1%) patients. CONCLUSION Elective treatment of LMCA stenosis with DES appears safe with a 0.9% incidence of definite and probable ST at 29.5 ± 13.7 months.

Incidence of thrombotic complications in patients with haematological malignancies with central venous catheters: a prospective multicentre study

This prospective, observational and multicentre study assessed the incidence of, and risk factors for, symptomatic venous thrombotic complications after central venous catheter (CVC) positioning in patients with haematological malignancies. A total of 458 consecutive CVC insertions were registered in 416 patients (81·2% of whom had severe thrombocytopenia). Over the observation period (3 months or up to catheter removal), the incidence of events was: CVC‐related deep vein thrombosis (DVT), 1·5%; lower limb DVT, 0·4%; pulmonary embolism (PE), 1·3%; fatal PE, 0·6%; CVC‐related superficial thrombophlebitis, 3·9%; CVC‐occlusion/malfunction of thrombotic origin, 6·1%; major arterial events, 1·1%. Severe bleeding and CVC‐related infections were observed in 3·5% and 4·6% of cases respectively. A composite end point (any venous thromboembolism or superficial thrombophlebitis or CVC occlusion/malfunction) was defined in order to consider venous thrombotic events with a significant impact on clinical practice. With this criterion, the overall incidence was 12·0% (2·54 cases/1000 catheter days). No factor helped to predict venous thrombotic complications: only thrombocytopenia was associated with a weak trend for a reduced risk (odds ratio 0·52; 95% confidence interval 0·26–1·07). No severe bleeding was observed in those patients who received antithrombotic prophylaxis. This study shows that the impact on clinical practice of symptomatic CVC‐related thrombotic complications is not negligible in patients with haematological malignancies.