Si Wan Choi

Drug-Eluting Stenting Followed by Cilostazol Treatment Reduces Late Restenosis in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus: The DECLARE-DIABETES Trial (A Randomized Comparison of Triple Antiplatelet Therapy With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Diabetic Patients)

OBJECTIVES We sought to evaluate the impact of cilostazol on neointimal hyperplasia after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND Although cilostazol has reduced the extent of neointimal hyperplasia and restenosis in patients after bare-metal stent implantation, it is not known whether this effect occurs after DES implantation in diabetic patients. METHODS This randomized, multicenter, prospective study compared triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol, triple group, n = 200) and dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel, standard group, n = 200) for 6 months in patients with DM receiving DES. The primary end point was in-stent late loss at 6 months. RESULTS The 2 groups had similar baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. The in-stent (0.25 +/- 0.53 mm vs. 0.38 +/- 0.54 mm, p = 0.025) and in-segment (0.42 +/- 0.50 mm vs. 0.53 +/- 0.49 mm, p = 0.031) late loss were significantly lower in the triple versus standard group, as were 6-month in-segment restenosis (8.0% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.033) and 9-month target lesion revascularization (TLR) (2.5% vs. 7.0%, p = 0.034). At 9 months, major adverse cardiac events, including death, myocardial infarction, and TLR, tended to be lower in the triple than in the standard group (3.0% vs. 7.0%, p = 0.066). Multivariate analysis showed that sirolimus-eluting stents and the use of cilostazol were strong predictors of reduced restenosis or TLR. CONCLUSIONS Triple antiplatelet therapy after DES implantation decreased angiographic restenosis and extent of late loss, resulting in a reduced risk of 9-month TLR compared with dual antiplatelet therapy in diabetic patients.

Sirolimus-eluting stent versus paclitaxel-eluting stent for patients with long coronary artery disease.

Background— Outcomes remain relatively unfavorable for stent-based coronary intervention of lesions with long diseased segments. This study compared sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) for long coronary lesions. Methods and Results— The present randomized, multicenter, prospective study compared the use of long (≥32 mm) SES with PES in 500 patients with long (≥25 mm) native coronary lesions. The primary end point of the trial was the rate of binary in-segment restenosis according to follow-up angiography at 6 months. The SES and PES groups had similar baseline characteristics. Lesion length was 33.9±11.6 mm in the SES group and 34.5±12.6 mm in the PES group (P=0.527). The in-segment binary restenosis rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the PES group (3.3% versus 14.6%; relative risk 0.23; P<0.001). In-stent late loss of lumen diameter was 0.09±0.37 mm in the SES group and 0.45±0.55 mm in the PES group (P<0.001). In patients with restenoses, a pattern of focal restenosis was more common in the SES group than in the PES group (100% versus 53.3%, P=0.031). Consequently, SES patients had a lower rate of target-lesion revascularization at 9 months (2.4% versus 7.2%, P=0.012). The incidence of death (0.8% in SES versus 0% in PES, P=0.499) or myocardial infarction (8.8% in SES versus 10.8% in PES, P=0.452) at 9 months of follow-up was not statistically different between the 2 groups. Conclusions— For patients with long native coronary artery disease, SES implantation was associated with a reduced incidence of angiographic restenosis and a reduced need for target-lesion revascularization compared with PES implantation.

A Randomized Comparison of Sirolimus- Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Implantation in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus

OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). BACKGROUND Drug-eluting stent implantation significantly improved the angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with bare-metal stent implantation in diabetic patients. However, comparison of SES with PES in diabetic patients has not been sufficiently evaluated. METHODS This prospective, multicenter, randomized study compared SES (n = 200) and PES implantation (n = 200) for diabetic patients (n = 400). The primary end point was in-segment restenosis at 6 months according to intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS The 2 groups had similar baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics. Six-month in-stent (3.4% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.001) and in-segment restenosis (4.0% vs. 20.8%, p < 0.001) and 9-month target lesion revascularization (2.0% vs. 7.5%, p = 0.017) were significantly lower in the SES versus the PES group. The incidence of death (0% in SES vs. 0.5% in PES, p = 0.999) or myocardial infarction (0.5% in SES vs. 0.5% in PES, p = 0.999) at 9-month follow-up was not statistically different between the 2 groups. Major adverse cardiac events including death, myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 9 months (2.0% vs. 8.0%, p = 0.010) were lower in the SES versus the PES group. CONCLUSIONS Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation is superior in reducing angiographic restenosis and improving 9-month clinical outcomes in patients with DM and coronary artery disease compared with PES implantation.

Randomized Comparison of Everolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Implantation for De Novo Coronary Artery Disease in Patients With Diabetes Mellitus (ESSENCE-DIABETES) Results From the ESSENCE-DIABETES Trial

Background— Drug-eluting stents significantly improved angiographic and clinical outcomes compared with bare metal stents in diabetic patients. However, a comparison of everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in diabetic patients has not been evaluated. Therefore we compared effectiveness of everolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results— This prospective, multicenter, randomized study compared everolimus-eluting stent (n=149) and sirolimus-eluting stent (n=151) implantation in diabetic patients. The primary end point was noninferiority of angiographic in-segment late loss at 8 months. Clinical events were also monitored for at least 12 months. Everolimus-eluting stents were noninferior to sirolimus-eluting stents for 8-month in-segment late loss (0.23±0.27 versus 0.37±0.52 mm; difference, −0.13 mm; 95% confidence interval, −0.25 to −0.02; upper 1-sided 95% confidence interval, −0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority), with reductions in in-stent restenosis (0% versus 4.7%; P=0.029) and in-segment restenosis (0.9% versus 6.5%; P=0.035). However, in-stent late loss (0.11±0.26 versus 0.20±0.49 mm; P=0.114) was not statistically different between the 2 groups. At 12 months, ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (0.7% versus 2.6%; P=0.317), death (1.3% versus 3.3%; P=0.448), and myocardial infarction (0% versus 1.3%; P=0.498) were not statistically different between the 2 groups. Major adverse cardiac events, including death, myocardial infarction, and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (2.0% versus 5.3%; P=0.218), were also not statistically different between the 2 groups. Conclusions— Everolimus-eluting stents were noninferior to sirolimus-eluting stents in reducing in-segment late loss and reduced angiographic restenosis at 8 months in patients with diabetes mellitus and coronary artery disease. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00997763.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Comparison Study of Triple Antiplatelet Therapy With Dual Antiplatelet Therapy to Reduce Restenosis After Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation in Long Coronary Lesions: Results From the DECLARE-LONG II (Drug-Eluting Stenting Followed by Cilostazol Treatment Reduces Late Restenosis in Patients with Long Coronary Lesions) Trial

OBJECTIVES The purpose of this study was to determine whether cilostazol reduces intimal hyperplasia in patients undergoing long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation (stent length: ≥ 30 mm) for native long coronary lesions (length: ≥ 25 mm). BACKGROUND Restenosis after drug-eluting stent implantation remains a significant clinical problem in long coronary lesions. METHODS Patients (n = 499) were assigned randomly to triple (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol, triple group: n = 250) or dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel and placebo, dual group: n = 249) for 8 months after long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation. The primary end point was in-stent late loss at the 8-month angiography according to the intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics. The in-stent (0.56 ± 0.55 mm vs. 0.68 ± 0.59 mm, p = 0.045) and in-segment (0.32 ± 0.54 mm vs. 0.47 ± 0.54 mm, p = 0.006) late loss were significantly lower in the triple versus dual group, as were 8-month in-stent restenosis (10.8% vs. 19.1%, p = 0.016), in-segment restenosis (12.2% vs. 20.0%, p = 0.028), and 12-month ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization (5.2% vs. 10.0%, p = 0.042) rates. At 12 months, major adverse cardiac events including death, myocardial infarction, and ischemic-driven target lesion revascularization tended to be lower in the triple group than the dual group (7.2% vs. 12.0%, p = 0.07). Percent intimal hyperplasia volume by volumetric intravascular ultrasound analysis was reduced from 27.1 ± 13.2% for the dual group to 22.1 ± 9.9% for the triple group (p = 0.017). CONCLUSIONS Patients receiving triple antiplatelet therapy after long zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation had decreased extent of late luminal loss, percent intimal hyperplasia volume, and angiographic restenosis, resulting in a reduced risk of 12-month target lesion revascularization compared with patients receiving dual antiplatelet therapy. (Triple Versus Dual Antiplatelet Therapy after ABT578-Eluting Stent; NCT00589927).

Effects of Statins on the Epicardial Fat Thickness in Patients with Coronary Artery Stenosis Underwent Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Comparison of Atorvastatin with Simvastatin/Ezetimibe

Background Epicardial fat is a visceral thoracic fat and known to be related with presence of dyslipidemia and coronary arterial stenosis. We evaluated the effects and differences of statins on epicardial fat thickness (EFT) in patients underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we enrolled consecutive patients underwent successful PCI and scheduled six to eight-months follow-up coronary angiography from March 2007 to June 2009. EFT was measured by echocardiography twice at the time of PCI and the follow-up coronary angiography. We included 145 patients (58 females; mean, 63.5 ± 9.5 years). Results Of the 145 patients, 82 received 20 mg of atorvastatin (atorvastatin group) and 63 medicated with 10 mg of simvastatin with 10 mg of ezetimibe (simvastatin/ezetimibe group). With statin treatments, total cholesterol concentration (189.1 ± 36.1 to 143.3 ± 36.5 mg/dL, p < 0.001), triglycerides (143.5 ± 65.5 to 124.9 ± 63.1 mg/dL, p = 0.005), low density lipoprotein-cholesterol (117.4 ± 32.5 to 76.8 ± 30.9 mg/dL, p < 0.001) and EFT (4.08 ± 1.37 to 3.76 ± 1.29 mm, p < 0.001) were significantly decreased. Atorvastatin and simvastatin/ezetimibe showed similar improvements in the cholesterol profiles. However, atorvastatin decreased EFT more significantly than simvastatin/ezetimibe (EFT change 0.47 ± 0.65 in the atorvastatin vs. 0.12 ± 0.52 mm in the simvastatin/ezetimibe group; p = 0.001). Conclusion In this study, the atorvastatin group showed significant reduction in EFT than in the simvastatin/ezetimibe group. This might be originated from the statin difference. More large, randomized study will be needed to evaluate this statin difference.

Prevalence and Patterns of Left Ventricular Dysfunction in Patients with Pheochromocytoma.

Background Excessive catecholamine release in pheochromocytoma is known to cause transient reversible left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, such as in the case of pheochromocytoma-associated catecholamine cardiomyopathy. We investigated patterns of clinical presentation and incidence of LV dysfunction in patients with pheochromocytoma. Methods From January 2004 to April 2011, consecutive patients with pheochromocytoma were retrospectively studied with clinical symptoms, serum catecholamine profiles, and radiologic findings. Patterns of electrocardiography and echocardiography were also analyzed. Results During the study period, a total of 36 patients (21 males, 49.8 ± 15.8 years, range 14-81 years) with pheochromocytoma were included. In the electrocardiographic examinations, normal findings were the most common findings (19, 52.8%). LV hypertrophy in 12 cases (33.3%), sinus tachycardia in 3 (8.3%), ischemic pattern in 1 (2.8%) and supraventricular tachycardia in 1 (2.8%). Echocardiographic exam was done in 29 patients (80.6%). Eighteen patients (62.1%) showed normal finding, 8 (27.6%) revealed concentric LV hypertrophy with normal LV systolic function, and 3 (10.3%) demonstrate LV systolic dysfunction (LV ejection fraction < 50%). Three showed transient LV dysfunction (2 with inverted Takotsubo-type cardiomyopathy and 1 with a diffuse hypokinesia pattern). Common presenting symptoms in the 3 cases were new onset chest discomfort and dyspnea which were not common in the other patients. Their echocardiographic abnormalities were normalized with conventional treatment within 3 days. Conclusion Out of total 36 patients with pheochromocytoma, 3 showed transient LV systolic dysfunction (catecholamine cardiomyopathy). Pheochromocytoma should be included as one of possible causes of transient LV systolic dysfunction.

Comparison of Triple Antiplatelet Therapy and Dual Antiplatelet Therapy in Patients at High Risk of Restenosis After Drug–Eluting Stent Implantation (from the DECLARE-DIABETES and -LONG Trials)

Although cilostazol has decreased restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR) after drug-eluting stent implantation, it is not known if this effect is durable at 2 years. We analyzed 2 randomized studies (Drug-Eluting stenting followed by Cilostazol treatment reduces LAte REstenosis in patients with DIABETES mellitus and Drug-Eluting Stenting Followed by Cilostazol treatment reduces LAte REstenosis in patients with LONG native coronary lesions trials) in which 900 patients were randomly assigned to triple antiplatelet therapy (aspirin, clopidogrel, and cilostazol; triple group, n = 450) and dual antiplatelet therapy (aspirin and clopidogrel; standard group, n = 450) for 6 months in patients with diabetes or long lesions receiving drug-eluting stents. We evaluated 2-year major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) including death, myocardial infarction (MI), and TLR. Nine-month TLRs and MACEs were significantly decreased in the triple versus standard group. At 2 years, the triple group sowed significantly decreased TLRs (4.2% vs 9.1%, hazard ratio 0.45, 95% confidence interval 0.26 to 0.78, p = 0.004) and MACEs (5.6% vs 10.4%, hazard ratio 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32 to 0.84, p = 0.008) compared to the standard group with no differences in death and MI. In subgroup analysis, triple antiplatelet therapy decrease of 2-year TLR was favorable in all subgroups, especially in patients with paclitaxel-eluting stents, diabetes mellitus, small vessels, long lesions, and left anterior descending coronary artery lesions. In conclusion, compared to the standard group, initial benefit in decreases of 9-month TLRs and MACEs in the triple group was sustained at 2 years with no differences in death or MI. Triple antiplatelet therapy decrease of 2-year TLR was favorable in all subgroups, especially in patients with high-risk profiles.

A randomized comparison of sirolimus- versus paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation in patients with diabetes mellitus 2-year clinical outcomes of the DES-DIABETES trial.

To the Editor: The presence of diabetes mellitus has been associated with an increased risk of restenosis and unfavorable clinical outcomes in the era of bare-metal stents (BMS) or drug-eluting stents (DES). Previous studies found sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) to have greater efficacy than

Incidence and predictors of drug-eluting stent fractures in long coronary disease

BACKGROUND Stent fractures after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation have not been evaluated sufficiently in patients with long coronary artery disease. METHODS This study comprised of 415 patients, who were enrolled in the Long-DES-II study and had a complete serial angiography both before and after procedure and also at follow-up. The lesions were > or =25 mm in length and were randomly treated with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES, 210 lesions) or paclitaxel-eluting stent (205 lesions). RESULTS DES fracture was identified in 7 lesions (1.7%): 1 minor, 3 moderate, and 3 severe fractures. Most of the fractures occurred in patients who received SES (85.7%) and in the right coronary artery (RCA) lesions (71.4%). Lesions with fracture had a smaller minimal lumen diameter before procedure than lesions without fracture (0.38+/-0.55 vs. 0.71+/-0.46 mm, p=0.043). However, acute gain (2.28+/-0.39 vs. 1.44+/-0.60 mm, p=0.001) and late loss (0.81+/-0.49 vs. 0.42+/-0.50 mm, p=0.033) in analysis segment were greater in lesions with fracture. By multivariate analysis, the independent predictor of fracture was the RCA lesion (Odds ratio, 7.81; 95% CI, 1.45 approximately 42.04; p=0.017). Although one patient had an intermediate angiographic narrowing at the fracture site, there was no adverse cardiac event related with fracture. CONCLUSIONS The incidence of stent fracture in long DES implantation was not common and was associated with SES implantation or RCA lesions. Fortunately, the clinical prognosis of DES fracture was somewhat benign.