Impact of structural features of very thin stents implanted in unprotected left main or coronary bifurcations on clinical outcomes.


Journal

Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
ISSN: 1522-726X
Titre abrégé: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100884139

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
07 2020
Historique:
received: 13 09 2019
revised: 24 10 2019
accepted: 08 12 2019
pubmed: 21 12 2019
medline: 9 2 2021
entrez: 21 12 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To evaluate the independent clinical impact of stent structural features in a large cohort of patients undergoing unprotected left main (ULM) or coronary bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a range of very thin strut stents. Clinical impact of structural features of contemporary stents remains to be defined. All consecutive patients enrolled in the veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life (RAIN) registry were included. The following stent structural features were studied: antiproliferative drugs (everolimus vs. sirolimus vs. zotarolimus), strut material (platinum-chromium vs. cobalt-chromium), polymer (bioresorbable vs. durable), number of crowns (<8 vs. ≥8) and number of connectors (<3 vs. ≥3). For small diameter stents (≤2.5 mm), struct thickness (74 vs. 80/81 μm) was also tested. Target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis, was the primary endpoint. Multivariate analysis was performed with Cox regression models. Out of 2,707 patients, 110 (4.1%) experienced a TLF event after 16 months (12-18). After adjustment for confounders, an increased number of connectors (adjusted hazard ratio [adj-HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.99, p = .04) reduced risk of TLF, driven by stents with ≥2.5 mm diameter (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.93, p = .02). This independent relationship was lost for stents with diameter <2.5 mm, where only strut thickness appeared to impact. Conversely, no independent relationship of polymer type, number of crowns, and the specific limus-family eluted drug with outcomes was observed. Among a range of contemporary very thin stent models, an increased number of connectors improved device-related outcomes in this investigated high-risk procedural setting.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the independent clinical impact of stent structural features in a large cohort of patients undergoing unprotected left main (ULM) or coronary bifurcation percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with a range of very thin strut stents.
BACKGROUND
Clinical impact of structural features of contemporary stents remains to be defined.
METHODS
All consecutive patients enrolled in the veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life (RAIN) registry were included. The following stent structural features were studied: antiproliferative drugs (everolimus vs. sirolimus vs. zotarolimus), strut material (platinum-chromium vs. cobalt-chromium), polymer (bioresorbable vs. durable), number of crowns (<8 vs. ≥8) and number of connectors (<3 vs. ≥3). For small diameter stents (≤2.5 mm), struct thickness (74 vs. 80/81 μm) was also tested. Target lesion failure (TLF), a composite of target lesion revascularization and stent thrombosis, was the primary endpoint. Multivariate analysis was performed with Cox regression models.
RESULTS
Out of 2,707 patients, 110 (4.1%) experienced a TLF event after 16 months (12-18). After adjustment for confounders, an increased number of connectors (adjusted hazard ratio [adj-HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-0.99, p = .04) reduced risk of TLF, driven by stents with ≥2.5 mm diameter (HR 0.54, 95% CI 0.32-0.93, p = .02). This independent relationship was lost for stents with diameter <2.5 mm, where only strut thickness appeared to impact. Conversely, no independent relationship of polymer type, number of crowns, and the specific limus-family eluted drug with outcomes was observed.
CONCLUSIONS
Among a range of contemporary very thin stent models, an increased number of connectors improved device-related outcomes in this investigated high-risk procedural setting.

Identifiants

pubmed: 31860158
doi: 10.1002/ccd.28667
doi:

Types de publication

Comparative Study Journal Article Multicenter Study Observational Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1-9

Informations de copyright

© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Références

Nakazawa G, Otsuka F, Nakano M, et al. The pathology of neoatherosclerosis in human coronary implants: Bare-metal and drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57:1314-1322.
Bangalore S, Kumar S, Fusaro M, et al. Short-and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary stents: a mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117 762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circulation. 2012;125:2873-2891.
von Birgelen C, Kok MM, van der Heijden LC, et al. Very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIO-RESORT): a three-arm, randomised, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2016;388:2607-2617.
Biolè C, Huczek Z, Nuñez-Gil I, et al. Daily risk of adverse outcomes in patients undergoing complex lesions revascularization: A subgroup analysis from the RAIN-CARDIOGROUP VII study (veRy thin stents for patients with left mAIn or bifurcatioN in real life). Int J Cardiol. 2019;290:64-69.
Serruys PW, Cavalcante R, Collet C, et al. Outcomes after coronary stenting or bypass surgery for men and women with unprotected left main disease: The EXCEL Trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2018;11:1234-1243.
D'Ascenzo F, Omedè P, De Filippo O, et al. Impact of final kissing balloon and of imaging on patients treated on unprotected left main coronary artery with thin-strut stents (from the RAIN-CARDIOGROUP VII study). Am J Cardiol. 2019;123:1610-1619.
Kolandaivelu K, Swaminathan R, Gibson WJ, et al. Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings. Circulation. 2011;123:1400-1409.
Bangalore S, Toklu B, Patel N, Feit F, Stone GW. Newer-generation ultrathin strut drug-eluting stents versus older second-generation thicker strut drug-eluting stents for coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2018;138:2216-2226.
Kandzari DE, Mauri L, Koolen JJ, et al. Ultrathin, bioresorbable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents versus thin, durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing coronary revascularisation (BIOFLOW V): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2017;390:1843-1852.
Iannaccone M, Gatti P, Barbero U, et al. Impact of strut thickness and number of crown and connectors on clinical outcomes on patients treated with second-generation drug eluting stent. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2019. doi: 10.1002/ccd.28228. [Epub ahead of print].
Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, et al. Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results. Circulation. 2001;103:2816-2821.
Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, et al. Clinical outcomes with bioabsorbable polymer- Versus durable polymer-based drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014; 63(4):299-307.
Valle JA, Tamez H, Abbott JD, et al. Contemporary use and trends in unprotected left main coronary artery percutaneous coronary intervention in the United States. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4:100-109.
D'Ascenzo F, Chieffo A, Cerrato E, et al. Incidence and management of restenosis after treatment of unprotected left main disease with second-generation drug-eluting stents (from failure in left main study with 2nd generation stents-Cardiogroup III Study). Am J Cardiol. 2017;119:978-982.
Cutlip DE, Windecker S, Mehran R, et al. Clinical end points in coronary stent trials: A case for standardized definitions. Circulation. 2007;115:2344-2351.
Stefanini GG, Holmes DR. Drug-eluting coronary artery stents. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:254-265.
Wessely R, Blaich B, BelAiba RS, et al. Comparative characterization of cellular and molecular anti-restenotic profiles of paclitaxel and sirolimus: implications for local drug delivery. Thromb Haemost. 2007;97(6):1003-1012.
Waseda K, Ako J, Yamasaki M, et al. Impact of polymer formulations on neointimal proliferation after zotarolimus-eluting stent with different polymers: Insights from the RESOLUTE trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:248-255.
Rizas KD, Mehilli J. Stent polymers: Do they make a difference? Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9:1-13.
Cassese S, Ndrepepa G, King LA, Tada T, Fusaro M, Kastrati A. Two zotarolimus-eluting stent generations: A meta-analysis of 12 randomised trials versus other limus-eluting stents and an adjusted indirect comparison. Heart. 2012;98:1632-1640.
Iannaccone M, D'Ascenzo F, Templin C, et al. Optical coherence tomography evaluation of intermediate-term healing of different stent types: systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2017;18:159-166.
Ormiston JA, Dixon SR, Webster MWI, et al. Stent longitudinal flexibility: a comparison of 13 stent designs before and after balloon expansion. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2000;50:120-124.
Ormiston JA, Webber B, Webster MWI. Stent longitudinal integrity: bench insights into a clinical problem. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:1310-1317.
Godino C, Beneduce A, Ferrante G, et al. One-year clinical outcome of biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent in all-comers population. Insight from the ULISSE registry (ULtimaster Italian multicenter all comerS Stent rEgistry). Int J Cardiol. 2018;260:36-41.
Gundert TJ, Marsden AL, Yang W, Marks DS, LaDisa JF. Identification of hemodynamically optimal coronary stent designs based on vessel caliber. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2012;59:1992-2002.
D'ascenzo F, Gallone G, Boccuzzi G, et al. Dual antiplatelet therapy strategies and clinical outcomes for a polymer-free biolimus A9-coated stent. EuroIntervention. 2019:EIJ-D-19-00450. doi: 10.4244/EIJ-D-19-00450. [Epub ahead of print].
Gallone G, Baldetti L, Pagnesi M, et al. Medical therapy for long-term prevention of atherothrombosis following an acute coronary syndrome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2018;72:2886-2903.
D'Ascenzo F, Moretti C, Bianco M, et al. Meta-analysis of the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents. Am J Cardiol. 2016;117:1714-1723.
D'Ascenzo F, Iannaccone M, Giordana F, et al. Provisional vs. two-stent technique for unprotected left main coronary artery disease after ten years follow up: a propensity matched analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2016;211:37-42.

Auteurs

Mario Iannaccone (M)

Division of Cardiology, SS. Annunziata Hospital, Savigliano, Italy.

Fabrizio D'Ascenzo (F)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Guglielmo Gallone (G)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Satoru Mitomo (S)

Unit of Cardiovascular Interventions, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Radosław Parma (R)

Division of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Daniela Trabattoni (D)

Department of Cardiovascular Sciences, Centro Cardiologico Monzino, IRCCS, Milan, Italy.

Nicola Ryan (N)

Hospital Clínico San Carlos, IDISSC, and Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Saverio Muscoli (S)

Department of Cardiovascular Disease, Tor Vergata University of Rome, Rome, Italy.

Giuseppe Venuti (G)

Division of Cardiology, Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.

Andrea Montabone (A)

Department of Cardiology, S.G. Bosco Hospital, Torino, Italy.

Francesca De Lio (F)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Lorenzo Zaccaro (L)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Giorgio Quadri (G)

Department of Cardiology, Infermi Hospital, Rivoli, Italy.

Ovidio De Filippo (O)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Wojciech Wojakowski (W)

Division of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Andrea Rognoni (A)

Coronary Care Unit and Catheterization Laboratory, A.O.U. Maggiore della Carità, Novara, Italy.

Gerard Helft (G)

Pierre and Marie Curie University, Paris, France.

Diego Gallo (D)

PolitoBIOMed Lab, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.

Leonardo De Luca (L)

Division of Cardiology, S. Giovanni Evangelista Hospital, Tivoli, Italy.

Filippo Figini (F)

Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Italy.

Yoichi Imori (Y)

Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Nippon Medical School, Tokyo, Japan.

Federico Conrotto (F)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Giacomo Boccuzzi (G)

Department of Cardiology, S.G. Bosco Hospital, Torino, Italy.

Alessio Mattesini (A)

Division of Structural Interventional Cardiology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.

Wojciech Wańha (W)

Division of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Grzegorz Smolka (G)

Division of Cardiology and Structural Heart Diseases, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland.

Zenon Huczek (Z)

Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland.

Cristina Rolfo (C)

Department of Cardiology, Infermi Hospital, Rivoli, Italy.

Mauro Pennone (M)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Bernardo Cortese (B)

Interventional Cardiology Unit, ASST Fatebenefratelli-Sacco, Milan, Italy.

Davide Capodanno (D)

Division of Cardiology, Ferrarotto Hospital, University of Catania, Catania, Italy.

Alaide Chieffo (A)

Unit of Cardiovascular Interventions, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Milan, Italy.

Ivan Nuñez-Gil (I)

Hospital Clínico San Carlos, IDISSC, and Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Umberto Morbiducci (U)

PolitoBIOMed Lab, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.

Maurizio D'Amico (M)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Ferdinando Varbella (F)

Department of Cardiology, Infermi Hospital, Rivoli, Italy.

Francesco Romeo (F)

Department of Medicine, Università degli Studi di Roma 'Tor Vergata', Rome, Italy.

Imad Sheiban (I)

Pederzoli Hospital, Peschiera del Garda, Italy.

Javier Escaned (J)

Hospital Clínico San Carlos, IDISSC, and Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.

Roberto Garbo (R)

Department of Cardiology, S.G. Bosco Hospital, Torino, Italy.

Claudio Moretti (C)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Carlo di Mario (C)

Division of Structural Interventional Cardiology, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.

Gaetano M De Ferrari (GM)

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Città della Salute e della Scienza, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH