Comparison of drug-eluting stents with bare metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction

Aims To evaluate safety and effectiveness of early generation drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and to determine whether benefits and risks vary over time. Methods and results We performed a meta-analysis of 15 randomized controlled trials enrolling a total of 7867 patients comparing first-generation FDA-approved DES with BMS in patients with STEMI. Random effect models were used to assess differences in outcomes between DES and BMS among different time periods with regard to the pre-specified primary outcomes stent thrombosis (ST) and target vessel revascularization (TVR). The overall risk of definite ST was similar for DES and BMS [risk ratio (RR) = 1.08, 95% CI 0.82-1.43]. However, there were time-dependent effects, with a RR of 0.80 during the first year (95% CI 0.58-1.12) and 2.10 during subsequent years (95% CI 1.20-3.69), with a positive test for interaction between RR of ST and time (P for interaction = 0.009). Results were similar for definite or probable ST (P for interaction = 0.015). In the overall analysis, TVR was performed less frequently in patients with DES when compared with BMS (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.43-0.61), with a greater benefit in the first year (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38-0.55) when compared with subsequent years (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.94; P for interaction = 0.007). Conclusion An early benefit of early generation DES in primary PCI for STEMI with a reduction in TVR and a trend towards less definite ST is offset in subsequent years by an increased risk of very late S

Role for substance p-based nociceptive signaling in progenitor cell activation and angiogenesis during ischemia in mice and in human subjects

Our data highlight the role of SP in reparative neovascularization. Nociceptive signaling may represent a novel target of regenerative medicine

High-Risk Percutaneous Intervention in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era

High-risk Intervention in the Drug-eluting stent era The use of drug-eluting stents in high-risk interventions, including those undertaken to treat the left main coronary artery (Chapter 2), multivessel disease (Chapter 14) or on-going ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (Chapters 11 and 12) appeared overall beneficial in comparison with traditional metallic stents. In particular, the use of drug eluting stents was associated to a remarkable decrease in late loss (Chapter 3) which ultimately resulted in lower need for re- intervention (Chapter 2), while no clear effect on death and myocardial infarction was observed. The safety profile of these new coronary devices appeared overall consistent with what has been reported in the pivotal trials focusing on selected patient/lesion subsets (Chapters 2, 3, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 16). The incidence of possible or confirmed acute, sub-acute or late thrombosis was low in this high-risk subset of patients patients undergoing treatment for left main coronary artery disease (Chapters 2, 3, 7, 8, 12, 14, 15, 16) and importantly we could not confirm previous concerns regarding the potential association between intimal hyperplasia and sudden death in patients undergoing treatment for left main coronary artery disease (Chapters 7 and 8)

Combined anatomical and clinical factors for the long-term risk stratification of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the Logistic Clinical SYNTAX score

Background The SYNTAX score (SXscore), an anatomical-based scoring tool reflecting the complexity of coronary anatomy, has established itself as an important long-term prognostic factor in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The incorporation of clinical factors may further augment the utility of the SXscore to longer-term risk stratify the individual patient for clinical outcomes. Methods and results Patient-level merged data from >6000 patients in seven contemporary coronary stent trials was used to develop a logistic regression model—the Logistic Clinical SXscore—to predict 1-year risk for all-cause death and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). A core model (composed of the SXscore, age, creatinine clearance, and left ventricular ejection fraction) and an extended model [incorporating the core model and six additional (best performing) clinical variables] were developed and validated in a cross-validation procedure. The core model demonstrated a substantial improvement in predictive ability for 1-year all-cause death compared with the SXscore in isolation [area under the receiver operator curve (AUC): core model: 0.753, SXscore: 0.660]. A minor incremental benefit of the extended model was shown (AUC: 0.791). Consequently the core model alone was retained in the final the Logistic Clinical SXscore model. Validation plots confirmed the model predictions to be well calibrated. For 1-year MACE, the addition of clinical variables did not improve the predictive ability of the SXscore, secondary to the SXscore being the predominant determinant of all-cause revascularization. Conclusion The Logistic Clinical SXscore substantially enhances the prediction of 1-year mortality after PCI compared with the SXscore, and allows for an accurate personalized assessment of patient ris

Effects of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents or bare metal stent on fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events: patient level meta-analysis

Objectives: To examine the safety and effectiveness of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents. Design: Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Cox proportional regression models stratified by trial, containing random effects, were used to assess the impact of stent type on outcomes. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence interval for outcomes were reported. Data sources and study selection: Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials that compared cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents with bare metal stents were selected. The principal investigators whose trials met the inclusion criteria provided data for individual patients. Primary outcomes: The primary outcome was cardiac mortality. Secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, definite or probable stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularisation, and all cause death. Results: The search yielded five randomised controlled trials, comprising 4896 participants. Compared with patients receiving bare metal stents, participants receiving cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents had a significant reduction of cardiac mortality (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.91; P=0.01), myocardial infarction (0.71, 0.55 to 0.92; P=0.01), definite stent thrombosis (0.41, 0.22 to 0.76; P=0.005), definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.48, 0.31 to 0.73; P<0.001), and target vessel revascularisation (0.29, 0.20 to 0.41; P<0.001) at a median follow-up of 720 days. There was no significant difference in all cause death between groups (0.83, 0.65 to 1.06; P=0.14). Findings remained unchanged at multivariable regression after adjustment for the acuity of clinical syndrome (for instance, acute coronary syndrome v stable coronary artery disease), diabetes mellitus, female sex, use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and up to one year v longer duration treatment with dual antiplatelets. Conclusions: This meta-analysis offers evidence that compared with bare metal stents the use of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents improves global cardiovascular outcomes including cardiac survival, myocardial infarction, and overall stent thrombosis

El labrador: Año I Número 3 - (14/03/22)

BACKGROUND: Use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) has proven to be clinically effective and safe in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction but it remains unclear whether it is cost-effective compared to bare-metal stents (BMS) in the long-term. We sought to assess the cost-effectiveness of EES versus BMS based on the 5-year results of the EXAMINATION trial, from a Spanish health service perspective. METHODS: Decision analysis of the use of EES versus BMS was based on the patient-level clinical outcome data of the EXAMINATION trial. The analysis adopted a lifelong time horizon, assuming that long-term survival was independent of the initial treatment strategy after the end of follow-up. Life-expectancy, health-state utility scores and unit costs were extracted from published literature and publicly available sources. Non-parametric bootstrapping was combined with probabilistic sensitivity analysis to co-assess the impact of patient-level variation and parameter uncertainty. The main outcomes were total costs and quality-adjusted life-years. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was expressed as cost per quality-adjusted life-years gained. Costs and effects were discounted at 3%. RESULTS: The model predicted an average survival time in patients receiving EES and BMS of 10.52 and 10.38 undiscounted years, respectively. Over the life-long time horizon, the EES strategy was €430 more costly than BMS (€8,305 vs. €7,874), but went along with incremental gains of 0.10 quality-adjusted life-years. This resulted in an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio over all simulations of €3,948 per quality-adjusted life-years gained and was below a willingness-to-pay threshold of €25,000 per quality-adjusted life-years gained in 86.9% of simulation runs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite higher total costs relative to BMS, EES appeared to be a cost-effective therapy for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients due to their incremental effectiveness. Predicted incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were below generally acceptable threshold values

Initial experience with everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for treatment of patients presenting with acute myocardial infarction

Aims: Limited data are currently available on midterm outcomes after implantation of everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffolds (BVS) for treatment of acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods and results: Patients presenting with STEMI and undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention in the initial experience with BVS were evaluated and compared with patients treated with everolimus-eluting metal stents (EES) by applying propensity matching. Quantitative coronary angiography analysis, and 18-month clinical follow-up were reported. A total of 302 patients were analysed, 151 with BVS and 151 with EES. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between groups. Final TIMI 3 flow was 87.4% vs. 86.1%, p=0.296. At 18-month follow-up, all-cause mortality was 2.8% vs. 3.0% in the BVS and EES groups respectively, p=0.99; the MACE rate was higher in the BVS group (9.8% vs. 3.6%, p=0.02); target lesion revascularisation was 5.7% vs. 1.3%, p=0.05. The 30-day MACE rate in BVS patients without post-dilatation was 6.8%, while in patients with post-dilatation it was 3.6%. Scaffold thrombosis (ST) occurred primarily in the acute phase (acute ST 2.1% vs. 0.7%, p=0.29; subacute 0.7% vs. 0.7%, p=0.99; late 0.0% vs. 0.0%; very late 1.5% vs. 0.0%, p=0.18). All three BVS cases with acute ST had no post-dilatation at the index procedure. Conclusions: STEMI patients treated during the early experience with BVS had similar acute angiographic results as compared with the EES group. Clinical midterm follow-up data showed a higher clinical events rate compared with metal stents. The majority of clinical events occurred in the early phase after implantation and mainly in cases without post-dilatation. Optimisation of the implantation technique in the acute clinical setting is of paramount importance for optimal short and mid-term outcomes

Reducing Microvascular Dysfunction in Revascularized Patients with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction by Off-Target Properties of Ticagrelor versus Prasugrel. Rationale and Design of the REDUCE-MVI Study

Microvascular injury is present in a large proportion of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) despite successful revascularization. Ticagrelor potentially mitigates this process by exerting additional adenosine-mediated effects. This study aims to determine whether ticagrelor is associated with a better microvascular function compared to prasugrel as maintenance therapy after STEMI. A total of 110 patients presenting with STEMI and additional intermediate stenosis in another coronary artery will be studied after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of the infarct-related artery. Patients will be randomized to treatment with ticagrelor or prasugrel for 1 year. FFR-guided PCI of the non-infarct-related artery will be performed at 1 month. Microvascular function will be assessed by measurement of the index of microcirculatory resistance (IMR) in the infarct-related artery and non-infarct-related artery, immediately after primary PCI and after 1 month. The REDUCE-MVI study will establish whether ticagrelor as a maintenance therapy may improve microvascular function in patients after revascularized STEMI