Margo Klomp

Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent vs. the Taxus Liberté stent in patients with de novo coronary lesions with a high-risk of coronary restenosis: a randomized, single-centre, pilot study

Aims The purpose of this study was to evaluate the GenousTM endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent vs. the Taxus Liberté paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with de novo coronary lesions with a high-risk of coronary restenosis. Methods and results We randomly assigned 193 patients with lesions carrying a high risk of restenosis to have the Genous stent or the Taxus stent implanted. Lesions were considered high risk of restenosis if one of the following applied: chronic total occlusion, lesion length >23 mm, vessel diameter <2.8 mm, or any lesion in a diabetic patient. At 1-year, the rate of the primary end point, target vessel failure (TVF), was 17.3% in the Genous stent group when compared with 10.5% in the Taxus stent group [risk difference (RD) 6.8%, 95% CI −3.1 to 16.7%], a difference predominantly due to a higher incidence of repeat revascularization in patients treated with the Genous stent. In contrast, no stent thrombosis was observed in the Genous stent group compared to 4 stent thromboses in the Taxus stent group (RD −4.2%; 95% CI −10.3 to 0.3%). Repeat angiography between 6 and 12 months in a subgroup of patients showed a significantly higher late loss in the Genous stent compared with the Taxus stent (1.14 ± 0.64 and 0.55 ± 0.61 mm). Conclusion In patients with lesions carrying a high risk of restenosis, the Genous stent resulted in a non-significant higher rate of TVF compared with the Taxus stent mainly due to more repeat revascularizations in the Genous stent group. There were four stent thromboses with Taxus stent, none with the Genous stent.

Clinical results after coronary stenting with the Genous™ Bio-engineered R stent™: 12-month outcomes of the e-HEALING (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth) worldwide registry.

AIMS e-HEALING is a worldwide, internet-based registry designed to capture post marketing clinical data on the use of the Genous™ EPC capturing R stent™. Rapid restoration of a healthy endothelial layer after stent placement by capturing circulating endothelial progenitor cells may reduce both stent thrombosis (ST) and in-stent-restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS We planned a 5,000 patient registry with ≥1 lesion suitable for stenting. The 12-month primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF), defined as target vessel-related cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularisation. Secondary outcomes were the composite of cardiac death, MI or target lesion revascularisation (TLR), and individual outcomes including ST. A total of 4,939 patients received ≥1 Genous stent between 2005 and 2007. Baseline characteristics showed a median age of 63 years, 79% males, 25% diabetics, and 37% with prior MI. A total of 49% of lesions treated were ACC/AHA type B2 or C; 1.1 stents per lesion were used. At 12 months, TVF occurred in 8.4% and the composite of cardiac death, MI or TLR in 7.9%. Twelve-month TLR and ST were 5.7% and 1.1%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Coronary stenting with the Genous results in good clinical outcomes, and low incidences of repeat revascularisation and ST.

Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell-capturing stent system: a novel stent technology

Drug-eluting stents have been demonstrated to significantly reduce clinical and angiographic restenosis in patients with coronary artery disease compared with bare-metal stents. Intuitively, however, a prohealing approach for the prevention of in-stent restenosis by promoting accelerated re-endothelialization is favored over the aggressive pharmacologic cytotoxic and cytostatic approach of the drug-eluting stents. The endothelial progenitor cell-capturing stent attracts circulating CD43+ progenitor cells that bind to the stent surface and differentiate into a functional endothelial layer. It is theorized that the accelerated establishment of the endothelial layer covering the stent struts will reduce the risk of neointimal hyperplasia and smooth muscle cell proliferation. The safety and efficacy have been demonstrated in the nonrandomized Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth (HEALING) studies, and the device received a CE mark in 2005. This article reviews the realization of the endothelial progenitor cell-capturing stent, its relevance compared with other stent types, current evidence on clinical performance, and future perspectives. At present, the larger randomized Tri-stent Adjudication Study (TRIAS) that is ongoing will directly compare the clinical usefulness of this new endothelial progenitor cell-capturing stent with bare-metal stents and drug-eluting stents.

Two-year follow-up of the Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent versus the Taxus Liberté stent in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions with a high-risk of restenosis: a randomized, single-center, pilot study

In the prospective randomized TRIAS pilot study, the bio‐engineered Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent was compared with the Taxus Liberté™ SR paclitaxel‐eluting stent. At 1 yr, a statistically nonsignificant difference in the rates of target vessel failure (cardiac death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was observed. We have evaluated the safety and efficacy up to 2 yr.

One-year clinical outcome in an unselected patient population treated with the Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent

Objective: We assessed the 1‐year clinical outcome in a large cohort of unselected patients treated with an endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) capturing coronary stent. Background: The novel EPC capturing stent is coated with CD34+ antibodies that bind circulating EPCs to the stent surface, thereby accelerating endothelialization of the stent struts; it is hypothesized that this may prevent restenosis and stent thrombosis. Methods: A total of 405 unselected patients were treated percutaneously with the EPC capturing stent. The majority of patients had complex lesions with an estimated high risk of restenosis. Results: The primary endpoint defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target lesion revascularization (TLR) at 1‐year was 13.3%, mainly attributable to TLR which was 10.9%. The occurrence of definite and probable ST was low, 0.5 and 0.7%, respectively. Based on the risk of restenosis, in patients with an estimated high risk of restenosis (n = 249), the composite primary endpoint was 16.1% versus 9.0% in patients with an estimated low risk (n = 155). Moreover, the 1 year clinical outcomes in diabetic patient compared well with the nondiabetic patients. Conclusion: In this single‐center study, the 1‐year clinical follow‐up in a “real‐world” population treated with the EPC capturing stent showed good results. Currently, large randomized studies are conducted to evaluate the long‐term safety and efficacy of this stent.

Twelve-month outcomes after coronary stenting with the Genous™ bio-engineered R Stent™ in diabetic patients from the e-HEALING registry.

OBJECTIVES We compared 12-month outcomes, regarding ischemic events, repeat intervention, and ST, between diabetic and nondiabetic patients treated with the Genous™ EPC capturing R stent™ during routine nonurgent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using data from the multicenter, prospective worldwide e-HEALING registry. BACKGROUND Diabetic patients have an increased risk for restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST). METHODS In the 4,996 patient e-HEALING registry, 273 were insulin requiring diabetics (IRD), 963 were non-IRD (NIRD), and 3,703 were nondiabetics. The 12-month primary outcome was target vessel failure (TVF), defined as target vessel-related cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes were the composite of cardiac death, MI or target lesion revascularization (TLR), and individual outcomes including ST. Cumulative event rates were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with a log-rank test. RESULTS TVF rates were respectively 13.4% in IRD, 9.0% in NIRD, and 7.9% in nondiabetics (P < 0.01). This was mainly driven by a higher mortality hazard in IRD (P < 0.001) and NIRD (P = 0.07), compared with nondiabetics. TLR rates were comparable in NIRD and nondiabetics, but significantly higher in IRD (P = 0.04). No difference was observed in ST. CONCLUSION The 1-year results of the Genous stent in a real-world population of diabetics show higher TVF rates in diabetics compared with nondiabetics, mainly driven by a higher mortality hazard. IRD is associated with a significant higher TLR hazard. Definite or probable ST in all diabetic patients was comparable with nondiabetics. (J Interven Cardiol 2011;24:285-294).

Three-Year Clinical Follow-Up of an Unselected Patient Population Treated with the Genous Endothelial Progenitor Cell Capturing Stent

BACKGROUND We assessed the 3-year clinical outcome in our single-center cohort of mainly unselected patients treated with the endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent (ECS). The ECS is coated with CD34+ antibodies specifically targeting the circulating endothelial progenitor cells population to accelerate endothelialization that in turn may prevent the occurrence of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis (ST). METHODS All patients in our study had coronary artery lesions that were treated with an ECS. The majority of patients had complex lesions with an estimated high risk of restenosis. RESULTS A total of 405 patients were enrolled. The primary end-point of target lesion failure (TLF) was defined as the composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization (TLR). At 3 years, TLF was 18.3% and TLR was 14.2%. Early ST occurred in 2 patients. No cases of late and very late definite ST were reported. CONCLUSIONS This single-center study demonstrates the safety at 3 years of the ECS in an unselected patient population, including a fair number of patients with complex lesions, reflecting daily practice. Our data compare well with drug-eluting stent and bare metal stent registries enrolling unselected patient populations. Importantly, in our analysis, no cases of late or very late definite ST were reported.

One-year clinical outcome after provisional T-stenting for bifurcation lesions with the endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent compared with the bare-metal stent

OBJECTIVE Currently no data exists regarding the outcomes after the novel endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent (EPCcS) placement in bifurcation lesions using a provisional T-stenting. This study evaluates the 1-year clinical outcome in patients treated with the EPCcS for a bifurcation lesion using a provisional T-stenting technique and compared these to a historical control group treated with an identical bare-metal stent (BMS). METHODS In single-center study, 178 consecutive patients with a de novo bifurcation lesion treated with an EPCcS and 465 consecutive patients treated with an equivalent BMS were included. Multivariate and propensity-score analyses were performed to adjust for differences in clinical and angiographic characteristics between the EPCcS group and the BMS group. RESULTS At 1-year, the cumulative rate of the primary end point (cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target lesion revascularization (TLR)) was 12.4% in the EPCcS group and 17.2% in the BMS group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.44-1.12; P=0.13). The 1-year cumulative rate of TLR was lower among patients treated with EPCcS compared with the control stent as a result of fewer coronary artery bypass grafting, 10.7% vs. 12% respectively (HR 0.88; 95% CI, 0.53-1.49; P=0.64). The cumulative rate of definite ST was 0.6% in the EPCcS as compared with 0.4% in the BMS group. CONCLUSIONS Although, the EPC stent shows favorable outcomes in the treatment of bifurcation lesions, the reduction in the cumulative rate of cardiac death, MI, or TLR as compared with the BMS was statistically non-significant.

Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy and outcomes after coronary stenting with the Genous bio-engineered R stent in patients from the e-HEALING registry.

Objective: We investigated the relation between duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) and clinical outcomes up to 12 months after Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing R stent™ placement in patients from the e‐HEALING registry. Background: Cessation of (DAPT) has been shown to be associated with the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST). After Genous placement, 1 month of DAPT is recommended. Methods: Patients were analyzed according to continuation or discontinuation of DAPT at a 30‐day and 6‐month landmark, excluding patients with events before the landmark. Each landmark was a new baseline, and outcomes were followed up to 12 months after stenting. The main outcome for our current analysis was target vessel failure (TVF), defined as target vessel‐related cardiac death or myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization. Secondary outcomes included ST. (Un)adjusted hazard ratios (HR) for TVF were calculated with Cox regression. Results: No difference was observed in the incidence of TVF [HR: 1.03; 95% confidence intervals (CI): 0.65–1.65, P = 0.89] in patients continuing DAPT (n = 4,249) at 30 days versus patients stopped (n = 309), and HR: 0.82 (95% CI: 0.55–1.23, P = 0.34) in patients continuing DAPT (n = 2,654) at 6 months versus patients stopped [n = 1,408] DAPT). Furthermore, no differences were observed in ST. Even after addition of identified independent predictors for TVF, adjusted TVF hazards were comparable. Conclusions: In a post‐hoc analysis of e‐HEALING, duration of DAPT was not associated with the occurrence of the outcomes TVF or ST. The Genous stent may be an attractive treatment especially in patients at increased risk for (temporary) cessation of DAPT or bleeding.

Understanding the Role of Endothelial Progenitor Cells in Cardiovascular Disease, Coronary Artery Lesion Progression, and In-Stent Restenosis

Bone marrow-derived, circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) were first described by Asahara et al. ([1][1]) in 1997. They discovered that EPCs have regenerative capacities and play an important role in vessel wall homeostasis. Whereas animal studies have shown that these progenitor cells