Francisco Bosa

Prospective application of pre-defined intravascular ultrasound criteria for assessment of intermediate left main coronary artery lesions results from the multicenter LITRO study.

OBJECTIVES This study is a prospective validation of 6 mm(2) as a minimum lumen area (MLA) cutoff value for revascularization of left main coronary artery (LMCA) lesions. BACKGROUND Lesions involving the LMCA are prognostically relevant. Angiography has important limitations in the evaluation of LMCA lesions with intermediate severity. An MLA of 6 mm(2) assessed by intravascular ultrasound has been proposed as a cutoff value to determine lesion severity, but there are no large studies evaluating the prospective application and safety of this approach. METHODS We have designed a multicenter, prospective study. Consecutive patients with intermediate lesions in unprotected LMCA were evaluated with intravascular ultrasound. An MLA <6 mm(2) was used as criterion for revascularization. RESULTS A total of 354 patients were included in 22 centers. LMCA revascularization was performed in 90.5% (152 of 168) of patients with an MLA <6 mm(2) and was deferred in 96% (179 of 186) of patients with an MLA of 6 mm(2) or more. A large scatter was observed between both groups regarding angiographic parameters. In a 2-year follow-up period, cardiac death-free survival was 97.7% in the deferred group versus 94.5% in the revascularized group (p = 0.5), and event-free survival was 87.3% versus 80.6%, respectively (p = 0.3). In the 2-year period, only 8 (4.4%) patients in the deferred group required subsequent LMCA revascularization, none with an infarction. CONCLUSIONS Angiographic measurements are not reliable in the assessment of intermediate LMCA lesions. An MLA of 6 mm(2) or more is a safe value for deferring revascularization of the LMCA, given the application of the clinical and angiographic inclusion criteria used in this study.

Thrombosis of Second-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Real Practice: Results From the Multicenter Spanish Registry ESTROFA-2 (Estudio Español Sobre Trombosis de Stents Farmacoactivos de Segunda Generacion-2)

OBJECTIVES This study sought to evaluate second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) thrombosis in clinical practice. BACKGROUND First-generation DES are associated with a significant incidence of late thrombosis. There is paucity of data regarding real practice late thrombosis incidence and predictors with second-generation DES, zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES), and everolimus-eluting stents (EES). METHODS A prospective, large-scale, non-industry-linked multicenter registry was designed. Complete clinical-procedural data and systematic follow-up of all patients treated with these stents was reported in a dedicated registry supported by the Spanish Working Group on Interventional Cardiology. RESULTS From 2005 to 2008, 4,768 patients were included in 34 centers: 2,549 treated with ZES, and 2,219 with EES. The cumulative incidence of definite/probable thrombosis for ZES was 1.3% at 1 year and 1.7% at 2 years and for EES 1.4% at 1 year and 1.7% at 2 years (p = 0.8). The increment of definite thrombosis between the first and second year was 0.2% and 0.25%, respectively. In a propensity score analysis, the incidence remained very similar. Ejection fraction (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: 0.97; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.95 to -0.99; p = 0.008), stent diameter (adjusted HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.17to 0.81; p = 0.01) and bifurcations (adjusted HR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.14 to 3.7; p = 0.02) emerged as independent predictors of thrombosis. In the subgroup of patients with bifurcations, the use of ZES was independently associated with a higher thrombosis rate (adjusted HR: 4; 95% CI: 1.1 to 13; p = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS In a real practice setting, the incidence of thrombosis at 2 years with ZES and EES was low and quite similar. The incidence of very late thrombosis resulted lower than was reported in registries of first-generation DES. In the subset of bifurcations, the use of ZES significantly increased the risk of thrombosis.

Comparison of Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents (Taxus) and Everolimus-Eluting Stents (Xience) in Left Main Coronary Artery Disease With 3 Years Follow-Up (from the ESTROFA-LM Registry)

Evidence regarding therapy with drug-eluting stents in the left main coronary artery (LM) is based mostly on trials performed with first-generation drug-eluting stents. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcomes after treatment for unprotected LM disease with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) and everolimus-eluting stents (EES). The ESTROFA-LM is a multicenter retrospective registry including consecutive patients with unprotected LM disease treated with PES or EES. A total of 770 patients have been included at 21 centers, 415 with treated PES and 355 with EES. Treatment with 2 stents was more frequent with PES (17% vs 10.4%, p = 0.007), whereas intravascular ultrasound was more frequently used with EES (35.2% vs 26%, p = 0.006). The 3-year death and infarction survival rates were 86.1% for PES and 87.3% for EES (p = 0.50) and for death, infarction, and target lesion revascularization were 83.6% versus 82% (p = 0.60), respectively. Definite or probable thrombosis was 1.6% for PES and 1.4% for EES (p = 0.80). The use of 2 stents, age, diabetes, and acute coronary syndromes were independent predictors of mortality. In the subgroup of distal lesions, the use of intravascular ultrasound was an independent predictor of better outcome. Comparison of propensity score-matched groups did not yield differences between the 2 stents. In conclusion, the results of this multicenter registry show comparable safety and efficacy at 3 years for PES and EES in the treatment of LM disease. The use of bifurcation stenting techniques in distal lesions was a relevant independent predictor for events. The use of intravascular ultrasound appears to have a positive impact on patients treated for LM distal disease.

Role of the Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent and Tirofiban in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Postfibrinolysis Angioplasty The GRACIA-3 Randomized Clinical Trial

Background—A catheter-based approach after fibrinolysis is recommended if fibrinolysis is likely to be successful in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We designed a 2×2 randomized, open-label, multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the paclitaxel-eluting stent and tirofiban administered after fibrinolysis but before catheterization to optimize the results of this reperfusion strategy. Methods and Results—We randomly assigned 436 patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction to (1) bare-metal stent without tirofiban, (2) bare-metal stent with tirofiban, (3) paclitaxel-eluting stent without tirofiban, and (4) paclitaxel-eluting stent with tirofiban. All patients were initially treated with tenecteplase and enoxaparin. Tirofiban was started 120 minutes after tenecteplase in those patients randomly assigned to tirofiban. Cardiac catheterization was performed within the first 3 to 12 hours after inclusion, and stenting (randomized paclitaxel or bare stent) was applied to the culprit artery. The primary objectives were the rate of in-segment binary restenosis of paclitaxel-eluting stent compared with that of bare-metal stent and the effect of tirofiban on epicardial and myocardial flow before and after mechanical revascularization. At 12 months, in-segment binary restenosis was similar between paclitaxel-eluting stent and bare-metal stent (10.1% versus 11.3%; relative risk, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.52; P=0.89). However, late lumen loss (0.04±0.055 mm versus 0.27±0.057 mm, P=0.003) was reduced in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group. No evidence was found of any association between the use of tirofiban and any improvement in the epicardial and myocardial perfusion. Major bleeding was observed in 6.1% of patients receiving tirofiban and in 2.7% of patients not receiving it (relative risk, 2.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 5.73; P=0.14). Conclusions—This trial does not provide evidence to support the use of tirofiban after fibrinolysis to improve epicardial and myocardial perfusion. Compared with bare-metal stent, paclitaxel-eluting stent significantly reduced late loss but appeared not to reduce in-segment binary restenosis. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00306228.

Role of the Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent and Tirofiban in Patients With ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction Undergoing Postfibrinolysis AngioplastyClinical Perspective

Background—A catheter-based approach after fibrinolysis is recommended if fibrinolysis is likely to be successful in patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction. We designed a 2×2 randomized, open-label, multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the paclitaxel-eluting stent and tirofiban administered after fibrinolysis but before catheterization to optimize the results of this reperfusion strategy. Methods and Results—We randomly assigned 436 patients with acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction to (1) bare-metal stent without tirofiban, (2) bare-metal stent with tirofiban, (3) paclitaxel-eluting stent without tirofiban, and (4) paclitaxel-eluting stent with tirofiban. All patients were initially treated with tenecteplase and enoxaparin. Tirofiban was started 120 minutes after tenecteplase in those patients randomly assigned to tirofiban. Cardiac catheterization was performed within the first 3 to 12 hours after inclusion, and stenting (randomized paclitaxel or bare stent) was applied to the culprit artery. The primary objectives were the rate of in-segment binary restenosis of paclitaxel-eluting stent compared with that of bare-metal stent and the effect of tirofiban on epicardial and myocardial flow before and after mechanical revascularization. At 12 months, in-segment binary restenosis was similar between paclitaxel-eluting stent and bare-metal stent (10.1% versus 11.3%; relative risk, 1.06; 95% confidence interval, 0.74 to 1.52; P=0.89). However, late lumen loss (0.04±0.055 mm versus 0.27±0.057 mm, P=0.003) was reduced in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group. No evidence was found of any association between the use of tirofiban and any improvement in the epicardial and myocardial perfusion. Major bleeding was observed in 6.1% of patients receiving tirofiban and in 2.7% of patients not receiving it (relative risk, 2.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 5.73; P=0.14). Conclusions—This trial does not provide evidence to support the use of tirofiban after fibrinolysis to improve epicardial and myocardial perfusion. Compared with bare-metal stent, paclitaxel-eluting stent significantly reduced late loss but appeared not to reduce in-segment binary restenosis. Clinical Trial Registration—URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00306228.

Dual Antiplatelet Therapy for 6 Months vs 12 Months After New-generation Drug-eluting Stent Implantation: Matched Analysis of ESTROFA-DAPT and ESTROFA-2.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The recommendation for dual antiplatelet therapy following drug-eluting stent implantation ranges from 6 months to 12 months or beyond. Recent trials have suggested the safety of a 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy regimen, yet certain caveats to these studies limit the applicability of this shorter duration dual antiplatelet therapy strategy in real world settings. METHODS A registry was constructed with consecutive recruitment of patients undergoing new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation and prescribed 6 months of dual antiplatelet therapy. Propensity score matching was undertaken with a historical cohort of patients treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents who received 12 months of dual antiplatelet therapy from the ESTROFA-2 registry. The sample size was calculated using a noninferiority basis and the primary endpoint was the combination of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, revascularization, or major bleeding at 12 months. RESULTS The analysis included 1286 patients in each group, with no significant differences in baseline characteristics. The primary endpoint occurred in 5.0% and 6.6% in the 6-month and 12-month groups, respectively (P = .001 for noninferiority). The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis was 0.5% and 0.7% in the 6-month and 12-month groups, respectively (P = .4). Major bleeding events were lower in the 6-month group than in the 12-month group (0.8% vs 1.4%; P = .2) CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients in this large multicenter study, the safety and efficacy of a 6-month dual antiplatelet therapy regimen after implantation of new-generation drug-eluting stents appeared to be noninferior to those of a 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy regimen.

Primary Angioplasty in Patients Older Than 75 Years. Profile of Patients and Procedures, Outcomes, and Predictors of Prognosis in the ESTROFA IM + 75 Registry

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The proportion of elderly patients undergoing primary angioplasty is growing. The present study describes the clinical profile, procedural characteristics, outcomes, and predictors of outcome. METHODS A 31-center registry of consecutive patients older than 75 years treated with primary angioplasty. Clinical and procedural data were collected, and the patients underwent clinical follow-up. RESULTS The study included 3576 patients (39.3% women, 48.5% with renal failure, 11.5% in Killip III or IV, and 29.8% with>6hours of chest pain). Multivessel disease was present in 55.4% and nonculprit lesions were additionally treated in 24.8%. Radial access was used in 56.4%, bivalirudin in 11.8%, thromboaspiration in 55.9%, and drug-eluting stents in 26.6%. The 1-month and 2-year incidences of cardiovascular death were 10.1% and 14.7%, respectively. The 2-year rates of definite or probable thrombosis, repeat revascularization, and BARC bleeding>2 were 3.1%, 2.3%, and 4.2%, respectively. Predictive factors were diabetes mellitus, renal failure, atrial fibrillation, delay to reperfusion>6hours, ejection fraction<45%, Killip class III-IV, radial access, bivalirudin, drug-eluting stents, final TIMI flow of III, and incomplete revascularization at discharge. CONCLUSIONS Notable registry findings include frequently delayed presentation and a high prevalence of adverse factors such as renal failure and multivessel disease. Positive procedure-related predictors include shorter delay, use of radial access, bivalirudin, drug-eluting stents, and complete revascularization before discharge.

THE ESTROFA-MI REGISTRY: COMPARISON OF PACLITAXEL-ELUTING STENT AND EVEROLIMUS-ELUTING STENT IN ST-ELEVATION MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION. RESULTS AT 2 YEARS FOLLOW-UP

The evidences of therapy with drug-eluting stents (DES) in ST-elevation myocardial infarction are mostly based on trials performed with first-generation DES. There is paucity of data with long-term follow up with second-generation DES in this setting. The ESTROFA-MI is a multicenter retrospective

Comparison of Paclitaxel and Everolimus-eluting Stents in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction and Influence of Thrombectomy on Outcomes. ESTROFA-IM Study

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES We sought to compare the long-term clinical outcome of with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents or everolimus-eluting stents and the influence of thrombectomy on outcomes. METHODS The ESTROFA-IM is a multicenter retrospective registry collecting consecutive patients with infarction treated with these stents in 16 centers. Propensity-score matching was performed to select comparable stent groups and comparable groups with and without thrombectomy. RESULTS After matching patients, 350 treated with everolimus-eluting stents and 350 with paclitaxel-eluting stents were included in the analysis. The clinical and angiographic characteristics were comparable in both groups. The 2-year incidence of death, infarction, and target lesion revascularization was 14.9% for paclitaxel-eluting stents and 11.5% for everolimus-eluting stents (P = .04) and the incidence of definite/probable thrombosis 4.3% and 1.4%, respectively (P = .01). The use of paclitaxel-eluting was an independent predictor for events (hazard ratio = 2.44, 95% confidence interval, 1.28-4.65; P = .006). The benefit of everolimus-eluting stents over paclitaxel-eluting stents regarding stent thrombosis was more evident in the nonthrombectomy subgroup (5.4% vs 1.4%; P = .01). A significant interaction was found in the subgroups with and without thombectomy in the comparison between paclitaxel-eluting stents and everolimus-eluting stents for the end-point of stent thrombosis (P = .039). CONCLUSIONS The results of this multicenter registry suggest better clinical outcomes with the everolimus-eluting stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. The lower risk of thrombosis with these stents could be more relevant in the absence of thrombectomy.

Multivessel disease in patients over 75 years old with ST elevated myocardial infarction. Current management strategies and related clinical outcomes in the ESTROFA MI + 75 nation-wide registry

BACKGROUND In elderly patients with ST elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) and multivessel disease (MVD the outcomes related with different revascularization strategies are not well known. METHODS Subgroup-analysis of a nation-wide registry of primary angioplasty in the elderly (ESTROFA MI+75) with 3576 patients over 75years old from 31 centers. Patients with MVD were analyzed to describe treatment approaches and 2years outcomes. RESULTS Of 1830 (51%) with MVD, 847 (46%) underwent multivessel revascularization either in acute (51%), staged (44%) or both procedures (5%). Patients with previous myocardial infarction and those receiving drug-eluting stents or IIb-IIIa inhibitors were more prone to be revascularized, whereas older patients, females and those with Killip III-IV, renal failure and higher ejection fraction were less likely. Survival free of cardiac death and infarction at 2years was better for those undergoing multivessel PCI (85.8% vs. 80.4%, p<0.0008), regardless of Killip class. Multivessel PCI was protective of cardiac death and infarction (HR 0.60, 95% CI 0.40-0.89; p=0.011). Complete revascularization made no difference in outcomes among those patients undergoing multivessel PCI. The best prognosis corresponded to those undergoing multivessel PCI in staged procedures (p<0.001). A propensity score matching analysis (514 patients in each group) yielded similar results. CONCLUSIONS In elderly patients with STEMI and MVD, multivessel PCI was related with better outcomes especially after staged procedures. Among those undergoing multivessel PCI, anatomically defined completeness of revascularization had not prognostic influence. SUMMARY We sought to investigate the revascularization strategies applied and their prognostic implications in patients aged over 75years with ST elevated myocardial infarction showing multivessel disease. Of 1830 patients, 847 (46%) underwent multivessel PCI either in acute (51%), staged (44%) or both procedures (5%). Multivessel PCI was independent predictor of cardiac death and infarction with the best prognosis corresponding to those undergoing staged procedures.