Italian Multicenter Registry of Bare Metal Stent Use in Modern Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Era (AMARCORD): A multicenter observational study.
bare metal stent
bleeding
coronary artery disease
drug-eluting stent
dual antiplatelet therapy
percutaneous coronary intervention
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:
15 02 2021
15 02 2021
Historique:
received:
05
09
2019
revised:
21
01
2020
accepted:
11
02
2020
pubmed:
22
3
2020
medline:
25
9
2021
entrez:
22
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to evaluate the use of bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era, focusing on indications for use and clinical outcomes. Limited data on BMS usage in current clinical practice are available. All patients who underwent PCI with at least one BMS implantation in 18 Italian centers from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017, were included in our registry. Rates of BMS use and reasons for BMS implantations were reported for the overall study period and for each year. Primary outcomes were mortality, bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-BARC and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-TIMI non-CABG definitions), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause and cardiac death, any myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or any stent thrombosis. Among 58,879 patients undergoing PCI in the study period, 2,117 (3.6%) patients (mean age 73 years, 69.7% males, 73.3% acute coronary syndrome) were treated with BMS implantation (2,353 treated lesions). The rate of BMS implantation progressively decreased from 10.1% (2013) to 0.3% (2017). Main reasons for BMS implantation were: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (23.1%), advanced age (24.4%), and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk (34.0%). At a mean follow-up of 2.2 ± 1.5 years, all-cause and cardiac mortality were 25.6 and 12.7%, respectively; MACE rate was 35.3%, any bleeding rate was 13.0% (BARC 3-5 bleeding 6.3%, TIMI non-CABG major bleeding 6.1%). In a large, contemporary, real-world, multicenter registry, BMS use progressively reduced over the last 5 years. Main reasons for BMS implantation were STEMI, advanced age, and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk. High rates of mortality and MACE were observed in this real-world high-risk population.
Sections du résumé
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to evaluate the use of bare metal stent (BMS) implantation in current percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) era, focusing on indications for use and clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND
Limited data on BMS usage in current clinical practice are available.
METHODS
All patients who underwent PCI with at least one BMS implantation in 18 Italian centers from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2017, were included in our registry. Rates of BMS use and reasons for BMS implantations were reported for the overall study period and for each year. Primary outcomes were mortality, bleeding (Bleeding Academic Research Consortium-BARC and Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction-TIMI non-CABG definitions), and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as the composite of all-cause and cardiac death, any myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, or any stent thrombosis.
RESULTS
Among 58,879 patients undergoing PCI in the study period, 2,117 (3.6%) patients (mean age 73 years, 69.7% males, 73.3% acute coronary syndrome) were treated with BMS implantation (2,353 treated lesions). The rate of BMS implantation progressively decreased from 10.1% (2013) to 0.3% (2017). Main reasons for BMS implantation were: ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (23.1%), advanced age (24.4%), and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk (34.0%). At a mean follow-up of 2.2 ± 1.5 years, all-cause and cardiac mortality were 25.6 and 12.7%, respectively; MACE rate was 35.3%, any bleeding rate was 13.0% (BARC 3-5 bleeding 6.3%, TIMI non-CABG major bleeding 6.1%).
CONCLUSION
In a large, contemporary, real-world, multicenter registry, BMS use progressively reduced over the last 5 years. Main reasons for BMS implantation were STEMI, advanced age, and physician's perception of high-bleeding risk. High rates of mortality and MACE were observed in this real-world high-risk population.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
411-420Informations de copyright
© 2020 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Références
Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1773-1780.
Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2007;370:937-948.
Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:221-231.
Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A, et al. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2018;00:1-96.
Colombo A, Giannini F, Briguori C. Should we still have bare-metal stents available in our catheterization laboratory? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:607-619.
Morice MC, Urban P, Greene S, Schuler G, Chevalier B. Why are we still using coronary bare-metal stents? J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013;61:1122-1123.
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.
Thygesen K, Alpert JS, Jaffe AS, et al. Third universal definition of myocardial infarction. Eur Heart J. 2012;33:2551-2567.
Räber L, Kelbaek H, Ostojic M, et al. Effect of biolimus-eluting stents with biodegradable polymer vs bare-metal stents on cardiovascular events among patients with acute myocardial infarction: the COMFORTABLE AMI randomized trial. JAMA. 2012;308:777-787.
Sabaté M, Räber L, Heg D, et al. Comparison of newer-generation drug-eluting with bare-metal stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of the EXAMINATION (clinical evaluation of the Xience-V stent in Acute Myocardial INfArcTION) and COMFORTABLE-AMI (comparison of Biolimus Eluted From an Erodible Stent Coating With Bare Metal Stents in Acute ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction) trials. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2014;7:55-63.
Kaiser C, Galatius S, Erne P, et al. Drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents in large coronary arteries. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:2310-2319.
Pfisterer M, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Rickenbacher P, et al. Long-term benefit-risk balance of drug-eluting vs. bare-metal stents in daily practice: does stent diameter matter? Three-year follow-up of BASKET. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:16-24.
Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, et al. Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379:1393-1402.
Urban P, Meredith IT, Abizaid A, et al. Polymer-free drug- coated coronary stents in patients at high bleeding risk. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2038-2047.
Garot P, Morice MC, Tresukosol D, et al. 2-year outcomes of high bleeding risk patients after polymer-free drug-coated stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69:162-171.
Varenne O, Cook S, Sideris G, et al. Drug-eluting stents in elderly patients with coronary artery disease (SENIOR): a randomised single-blind trial. Lancet. 2018;391:41-50.
Bønaa KH, Mannsverk J, Wiseth R, et al. Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:1242-125218.
Lipiecki J, Brunel P, Morice MC, et al. Biolimus A9 polymer-free coated stents in high bleeding risk patients undergoing complex PCI: evidence from the LEADERS FREE randomised clinical trial. EuroIntervention. 2018;14:e418-e425.
Morice MC, Talwar S, Gaemperli O, et al. Drug-coated versus bare-metal stents for elderly patients: a predefined sub-study of the LEADERS FREE trial. Int J Cardiol. 2017;243:110-115.
Watanabe H, Domei T, Morimoto T, et al. Effect of 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy followed by Clopidogrel vs 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy on cardiovascular and bleeding events in patients receiving PCI: the STOPDAPT-2 randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2019;321:2414-2427.
Onyx ONE-Presented by Dr. Stephan Windecker at the Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics meeting (TCT 2019), San Francisco, CA, September 26, 2019.