Ron T. van Domburg

Early and late coronary stent thrombosis of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in routine clinical practice: data from a large two-institutional cohort study.

BACKGROUND Stent thrombosis is a safety concern associated with use of drug-eluting stents. Little is known about occurrence of stent thrombosis more than 1 year after implantation of such stents. METHODS Between April, 2002, and Dec, 2005, 8146 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES; n=3823) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES; n=4323) at two academic hospitals. We assessed data from this group to ascertain the incidence, time course, and correlates of stent thrombosis, and the differences between early (0-30 days) and late (>30 days) stent thrombosis and between SES and PES. FINDINGS Angiographically documented stent thrombosis occurred in 152 patients (incidence density 1.3 per 100 person-years; cumulative incidence at 3 years 2.9%). Early stent thrombosis was noted in 91 (60%) patients, and late stent thrombosis in 61 (40%) patients. Late stent thrombosis occurred steadily at a constant rate of 0.6% per year up to 3 years after stent implantation. Incidence of early stent thrombosis was similar for SES (1.1%) and PES (1.3%), but late stent thrombosis was more frequent with PES (1.8%) than with SES (1.4%; p=0.031). At the time of stent thrombosis, dual antiplatelet therapy was being taken by 87% (early) and 23% (late) of patients (p<0.0001). Independent predictors of overall stent thrombosis were acute coronary syndrome at presentation (hazard ratio 2.28, 95% CI 1.29-4.03) and diabetes (2.03, 1.07-3.83). INTERPRETATION Late stent thrombosis was encountered steadily with no evidence of diminution up to 3 years of follow-up. Early and late stent thrombosis were observed with SES and with PES. Acute coronary syndrome at presentation and diabetes were independent predictors of stent thrombosis.

Unrestricted Utilization of Sirolimus-Eluting Stents Compared With Conventional Bare Stent Implantation in the “Real World” The Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) Registry

Background—The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents in unselected patients treated in the daily practice is currently unknown. Methods and Results—Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation has been used as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital as part of the R apamycin-E luting S tent E valuated A t R otterdam C ardiology H ospital (RESEARCH) registry. Consecutive patients with de novo lesions (n=508) treated exclusively with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES group) were compared with 450 patients who received bare stents in the period just before (pre-SES group). Patients in the SES group more frequently had multivessel disease, more type C lesions, received more stents, and had more bifurcation stenting. At 1 year, the cumulative rate of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was 9.7% in the SES group and 14.8% in the pre-SES group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.89]; P =0.008). The 1-year risk of clinically driven target vessel revascularization in the SES group and in the pre-SES group was 3.7% versus 10.9%, respectively (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.57]; P <0.001). Conclusions—Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents in the “real world” is safe and effective in reducing both repeat revascularization and major adverse cardiac events at 1 year compared with bare stent implantation.

Incidence and correlates of drug-eluting stent thrombosis in routine clinical practice. 4-year results from a large 2-institutional cohort study.

OBJECTIVES We sought to determine the risk of late stent thrombosis (ST) during long-term follow-up beyond 3 years, searched for predictors, and assessed the impact of ST on overall mortality. BACKGROUND Late ST was reported to occur at an annual rate of 0.6% up to 3 years after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. METHODS A total of 8,146 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) (n=3,823) or paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) (n=4,323) and were followed up to 4 years after stent implantation. Dual antiplatelet treatment was prescribed for 6 to 12 months. RESULTS Definite ST occurred in 192 of 8,146 patients with an incidence density of 1.0/100 patient-years and a cumulative incidence of 3.3% at 4 years. The hazard of ST continued at a steady rate of 0.53% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.44 to 0.64) between 30 days and 4 years. Diabetes was an independent predictor of early ST (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.96; 95% CI: 1.18 to 3.28), and acute coronary syndrome (HR: 2.21; 95% CI: 1.39 to 3.51), younger age (HR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.95 to 0.99), and use of PES (HR: 1.67; 95% CI: 1.08 to 2.56) were independent predictors of late ST. Rates of death and myocardial infarction at 4 years were 10.6% and 4.6%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS Late ST occurs steadily at an annual rate of 0.4% to 0.6% for up to 4 years. Diabetes is an independent predictor of early ST, whereas acute coronary syndrome, younger age, and PES implantation are associated with late ST.

Short- and Long-Term Clinical Outcome After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation for the Percutaneous Treatment of Left Main Coronary Artery Disease Insights From the Rapamycin-Eluting and Taxus Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital Registries (RESEARCH and T-SEARCH)

Background—The impact of drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation on the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients undergoing percutaneous intervention for left main (LM) coronary disease is largely unknown. Methods and Results—From April 2001 to December 2003, 181 patients underwent percutaneous coronary intervention for LM stenosis at our institution. The first cohort consisted of 86 patients (19 protected LM) treated with bare metal stents (pre-DES group); the second cohort comprised 95 patients (15 protected LM) treated exclusively with DES. The 2 cohorts were well balanced for all baseline characteristics. At a median follow-up of 503 days (range, 331 to 873 days), the cumulative incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events was lower in the DES cohort than in patients in the pre-DES group (24% versus 45%, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.52 [95% CI, 0.31 to 0.88]; P=0.01). Total mortality did not differ between cohorts; however, there were significantly lower rates of both myocardial infarction (4% versus 12%, respectively; HR, 0.22 [95% CI, 0.07 to 0.65]; P=0.006) and target vessel revascularization (6% versus 23%, respectively; HR, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.10 to 0.65]; P=0.004) in the DES group. On multivariate analysis, use of DES, Parsonnet classification, troponin elevation at entry, distal LM location, and reference vessel diameter were independent predictors of major adverse cardiovascular events. Conclusions—When percutaneous coronary intervention is undertaken at LM lesions, routine DES implantation, which reduces the cumulative incidence of myocardial infarction and the need for target vessel revascularization compared with bare metal stents, should currently be the preferred strategy.

Percutaneous left ventricular assist devices vs. intra-aortic balloon pump counterpulsation for treatment of cardiogenic shock: a meta-analysis of controlled trials

AIMS Studies have compared safety and efficacy of percutaneous left ventricular assist devices (LVADs) with intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) counterpulsation in patients with cardiogenic shock. We performed a meta-analysis of controlled trials to evaluate potential benefits of percutaneous LVAD on haemodynamics and 30-day survival. METHODS AND RESULTS Two independent investigators searched Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for all controlled trials using percutaneous LVAD in patients with cardiogenic shock, where after data were extracted using standardized forms. Weighted mean differences (MDs) were calculated for cardiac index (CI), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP). Relative risks (RRs) were calculated for 30-day mortality, leg ischaemia, bleeding, and sepsis. In main analysis, trials were combined using inverse-variance random effects approach. Two trials evaluated the TandemHeart and a recent trial used the Impella device. After device implantation, percutaneous LVAD patients had higher CI (MD 0.35 L/min/m(2), 95% CI 0.09-0.61), higher MAP (MD 12.8 mmHg, 95% CI 3.6-22.0), and lower PCWP (MD -5.3 mm Hg, 95% CI -9.4 to -1.2) compared with IABP patients. Similar 30-day mortality (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.68-1.66) was observed using percutaneous LVAD compared with IABP. No significant difference was observed in incidence of leg ischaemia (RR 2.59, 95% CI 0.75-8.97) in percutaneous LVAD patients compared with IABP patients. Bleeding (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.40-3.93) was significantly more observed in TandemHeart patients compared with patients treated with IABP. CONCLUSION Although percutaneous LVAD provides superior haemodynamic support in patients with cardiogenic shock compared with IABP, the use of these more powerful devices did not improve early survival. These results do not yet support percutaneous LVAD as first-choice approach in the mechanical management of cardiogenic shock.

Clinical, Angiographic, and Procedural Predictors of Angiographic Restenosis After Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation in Complex Patients An Evaluation From the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) Study

Background—The factors associated with the occurrence of restenosis after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in complex cases are currently unknown. Methods and Results—A cohort of consecutive complex patients treated with SES implantation was selected according to the following criteria: (1) treatment of acute myocardial infarction, (2) treatment of in-stent restenosis, (3) 2.25-mm diameter SES, (4) left main coronary stenting, (5) chronic total occlusion, (6) stented segment >36 mm, and (7) bifurcation stenting. The present study population was composed of 238 patients (441 lesions) for whom 6-month angiographic follow-up data were obtained (70% of eligible patients). Significant clinical, angiographic, and procedural predictors of post-SES restenosis were evaluated. Binary in-segment restenosis was diagnosed in 7.9% of lesions (6.3% in-stent, 0.9% at the proximal edge, 0.7% at the distal edge). The following characteristics were identified as independent multivariate predictors: treatment of in-stent restenosis (OR 4.16, 95% CI 1.63 to 11.01; P <0.01), ostial location (OR 4.84, 95% CI 1.81 to 12.07; P <0.01), diabetes (OR 2.63, 95% CI 1.14 to 6.31; P =0.02), total stented length (per 10-mm increase; OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.68; P <0.01), reference diameter (per 1.0-mm increase; OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.87; P =0.03), and left anterior descending artery (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.69; P <0.01). Conclusions—Angiographic restenosis after SES implantation in complex patients is an infrequent event, occurring mainly in association with lesion-based characteristics and diabetes mellitus.

Coronary Restenosis After Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation Morphological Description and Mechanistic Analysis From a Consecutive Series of Cases

Background We describe the clinical and morphological patterns of restenosis after sirolimus‐eluting stent (SES) implantation. Methods and Results From 121 patients with coronary angiography obtained >30 days after SES implantation, restenosis (diameter stenosis >50%) was identified in 19 patients and 20 lesions (located at the proximal 5‐mm segment in 30% or within the stent in 70%). Residual dissection after the procedure or balloon trauma outside the stent was identified in 83% of the proximal edge lesions. Lesions within the stent were focal, and stent discontinuity was identified in some lesions evaluated by intravascular ultrasound. Conclusions Sirolimus‐eluting stent edge restenosis is frequently associated with local trauma outside the stent. In‐stent restenosis occurs as a localized lesion, commonly associated with a discontinuity in stent coverage. Local conditions instead of intrinsic drug‐resistance to sirolimus are likely to play a major role in post‐SES restenosis. (Circulation. 2003; 108:257‐260.)

Very Late Coronary Stent Thrombosis of a Newer-Generation Everolimus-Eluting Stent Compared With Early-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents A Prospective Cohort Study

Background— Early-generation drug-eluting stents releasing sirolimus (SES) or paclitaxel (PES) are associated with increased risk of very late stent thrombosis occurring >1 year after stent implantation. It is unknown whether the risk of very late stent thrombosis persists with newer-generation everolimus-eluting stents (EES). Methods and Results— We assessed the risk of stent thrombosis in a cohort of 12 339 patients with unrestricted use of drug-eluting stents (3819 SES, 4308 PES, 4212 EES). Results are incidence rates per 100 person-years after inverse probability of treatment weighting to adjust for group differences. During follow-up of up to 4 years, the overall incidence rate of definite stent thrombosis was lower with EES (1.4 per 100 person-years) compared with SES (2.9; hazard ratio, 0.41; 95% confidence interval, 0.27–0.62; P<0.0001) and PES (4.4; hazard ratio, 0.33; 95% confidence interval, 0.23–0.48; P<0.0001). The incidence rate per 100 person-years of early (0–30 days), late (31 days–1 year), and very late stent thrombosis amounted to 0.6, 0.1, and 0.6 among EES-treated patients; 1.0, 0.3, and 1.6 among SES-treated patients; and 1.3, 0.7, and 2.4 among PES-treated patients. Differences in favor of EES were most pronounced beyond 1 year, with a hazard ratio of 0.33 (EES versus SES; P=0.006) and 0.34 (EES versus PES; P<0.0001). There was a lower risk of cardiac death or myocardial with EES compared with PES (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.56–0.75; P<0.0001), which was directly related to the lower risk of stent thrombosis–associated events (EES versus PES: hazard ratio, 0.36; 95% confidence interval, 0.23–0.57). Conclusion— Current treatment with EES is associated with a lower risk of very late stent thrombosis compared with early-generation drug-eluting stents.

Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy in a large community-based population: Clinical outcome and identification of risk factors for sudden cardiac death and clinical deterioration

OBJECTIVES This study evaluates the clinical course and identifies risk factors for sudden cardiac death (SCD) and clinical deterioration in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) in a large community-based population. Comparison was made with data from six tertiary referral and six nonreferral institutions. BACKGROUND Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a disease with marked heterogeneity in clinical presentation and prognosis. Risk factors for SCD are not well defined in patients free of referral bias. METHODS Between 1970 and 1999, 225 consecutive patients (mean age [+/-SD] 41+/-16 years) were examined and followed at yearly intervals. RESULTS Forty-four deaths were recorded of which 27 cases were cardiovascular. Fourteen patients died suddenly, six were successfully resuscitated, and seven patients died of congestive heart failure. The annual mortality, annual cardiac mortality, and annual mortality due to sudden death were 1.3%, 0.8%, and 0.6%, respectively. At least one New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class deterioration was reported in 33% of the patients with a significant (> or =50 mm Hg) left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) gradient in contrast to 7% without obstruction. The presence of syncope was related to SCD (p < 0.05). Younger age and more severe functional limitation distinguishes patients from in hospital-based centers from the ones in community-based centers. CONCLUSIONS Hypertrophic cardiomyopathy is a benign disease in an unselected population with a low incidence of cardiac death. Syncope was associated with a higher incidence of SCD and patients with a significant LVOT obstruction were more susceptible to clinical deterioration.

Early Outcome After Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes Insights From the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) Registry

OBJECTIVES This study evaluated the early outcomes of patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). BACKGROUND The safety of SES implantation in patients with a high risk for early thrombotic complications is currently unknown. METHODS Sirolimus-eluting stents have been utilized as the device of choice for all percutaneous procedures in our institution, as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. After four months of enrollment, 198 patients with ACS had been treated exclusively with SES (64% of those treated in the period) and were compared with a control group composed of 301 consecutive patients treated with bare stents in the same time period immediately before this study. The incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) during the first month was evaluated (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI], or re-intervention). RESULTS Compared with control patients, patients treated with SES had more primary angioplasty (95% vs. 77%; p < 0.01), more bifurcation stenting (13% vs. 5%; p < 0.01), less previous MI (28% vs. 45%; p < 0.01), and less glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor utilization (27% vs. 42%; p < 0.01). The 30-day MACE rate was similar between both groups (SES 6.1% vs. control patients 6.6%; p = 0.8), with most complications occurring during the first week. Stent thrombosis occurred in 0.5% of SES patients and in 1.7% of control patients (p = 0.4). In multivariate analysis, SES utilization did not influence the incidence of MACE (odds ratio 1.0 [95% confidence interval: 0.4 to 2.2]; p = 0.97). CONCLUSIONS Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for patients with ACS is safe, with early outcomes comparable with bare metal stents.