Search

The efficacy of second‐generation drug‐eluting stents (DES; eg, everolimus and zotarolimus) compared with bare‐metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention was challenged recently by new evidence from large clinical trials. Thus, we aimed to conduct an updated systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy and safety of second‐generation DES compared with BMS. Electronic databases were systematically searched for all RCTs comparing second‐generation DES with BMS and reporting clinical outcomes. The primary efficacy outcome was major adverse cardiac events (MACE); the primary safety outcome was definite stent thrombosis. The DerSimonian and Laird method was used for estimation of summary risk ratios (RR). A total of 9 trials involving 17 682 patients were included in the final analysis. Compared with BMS, second‐generation DES were associated with decreased incidence of MACE (RR: 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.69‐0.88), driven by the decreased incidence of myocardial infarction (MI) (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.48‐0.95), target‐lesion revascularization (RR: 0.47, 95% CI: 0.42‐0.53), definite stent thrombosis (RR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.41‐0.78), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (RR: 0.54, 95% CI: 0.38‐0.80). The incidence of all‐cause mortality was similar between groups (RR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.79‐1.10). Meta‐regression showed lower incidences of MI with DES implantation in elderly and diabetic patients (P = 0.026 and P

Background Amphilimus sirolimus-eluting stents (A-SES) represent a novel elution technology in the current era of drug-eluting stents with promising results in patients with diabetes mellitus. At present no large trial has been designed to evaluate clinical outcomes of A-SES as compared to new-generation drug-eluting stents in unselected patients. Accordingly, we designed this trial to evaluate clinical noninferiority of A-SES as compared with zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) in a real-world, all-comers setting. Study design ReCre8 is a prospective multicenter randomized clinical trial evaluating the clinical outcomes of A-SES as compared with ZES in all-comers requiring percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients are randomized 1:1 to receive either A-SES or ZES. On-site block-randomization is stratified by diabetes mellitus, and troponin status to perform prespecified subanalyses. Patients receive 1-month of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) when troponin-negative, or 12-months of DAPT when troponin-positive. The primary endpoint is target-lesion failure at 1-year follow-up. A total of 1,532 patients will be enrolled to demonstrate clinical noninferiority of A-SES with at least 80% power, a noninferiority margin of 3.5% and a type-I-error of 0.05. Conclusions ReCre8 (NCT02328898) is the first randomized multicenter trial with a head-to-head comparison of A-SES as compared with ZES to investigate the clinical safety and efficacy of these new-generation DES in a real-world, all-comers population.

OBJECTIVES To evaluate long-term outcomes in patients undergoing either paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) or endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stents (E-ZES) placement and to assess comparative effectiveness of PES vs. E-ZES in different "off-label" and "high-risk" patient subgroups. BACKGROUND PES and E-ZES are frequently used in percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs). However, the long-term comparative effectiveness of PES vs. E-ZES in real practice is unknown. METHODS We created a longitudinal database by linking the New York State (NYS) cardiac registries, the NYS hospital discharge file, the National Death Index, and the U.S. Census file for patients undergoing either PES or E-ZES placement from July 2008 through December 2009. All-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), target lesion PCI (TLPCI), and target vessel coronary artery bypass graft (TVCABG) surgery were compared for 9,264 propensity score matched patients for a 5-year follow-up period using the Kaplan-Meier method with further adjustment using Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS We did not detect significant differences between E-ZES and PES (reference) in 5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio : 1.02, 95% confidence interval : 0.91-1.14), AMI (AHR: 1.05, 95% CI: 0.90-1.22), TLPCI (AHR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.86-1.13), and TVCABG (AHR, 1.07, 95% CI: 0.84-1.36). For six "off-label" and two "high-risk" subpopulations, we had similar findings for the two stent groups. CONCLUSION NYS observational data suggest that 5-year outcomes are comparable in patients receiving either PES or E-ZES placement, mirroring the findings of recent clinical trials. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background Comparative data on long-term safety and efficacy of bioresorbable-polymer-BES versus durable-polymer-EES/ZES in ACS setting have hitherto been lacking. We sought to assess the safety and efficacy of bioresorbable-polymer-biolimus-A9-eluting stents (BES) compared with thin-strut-durable-polymer-everolimus- and zotarolimus-eluting stents (EES/ZES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) undergoing PCI. Methods and Results Between 2007 and 2012, 1,547 patients were implanted with new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). Out of these, 369 received BES and 1,178 EES/ZES. The primary endpoint was probable/definite stent thrombosis (ST) while the secondary endpoint was a composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI), target vessel revascularization (TVR) and definite ST up to 5 years. As stent assignment was not random, we performed a propensity score matching (PSM), with 1:3 ratio, to account for potential confounders. Primary analysis demonstrated no significant differences between both groups for the primary endpoint of ST (BES vs. EES/ZES: 1.6% vs. 1.9%; mean-event-time = 1,797 days vs. 1,795 days, respectively; P = 0.75) and composite safety endpoint (BES vs. EES/ZES: 12.5% vs. 12.9%; mean-event-time = 1,631 days vs. 1,620 days, respectively; P = 0.88). Results regarding the 5-year-ST- and safety endpoint remained non-significant after PSM (P = 0.85, P = 0.56; respectively). After stratification based on cardiovascular risk, no difference regarding ST and composite outcome measure has been documented between both stent groups in high-risk- and low-risk patients. The type of stent did neither predict ST (HR 1.11, 95%CI 0.45–2.74, P = 0.82) nor composite safety endpoint (HR 0.93, 95%CI 0.67–1.30, P = 0.69). Conclusions Long-term safety and efficacy of bioresorbable-polymer-BES and durable-polymer-EES/ZES appear comparable in patients with ACS. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background Patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) undergoing drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation are at increased risk of late adverse events, partly explained by an exaggerated inflammatory reaction to durable-polymer stent coatings. Objectives We sought to investigate whether implantation of polymer-free DES would reduce this risk. Methods In the ISAR-TEST 5 (the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol- and Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents) trial, patients were randomly allocated to receive a polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stent or a new generation durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stent. We analyzed late clinical outcomes in the subgroup of patients presenting with STEMI. The primary endpoint was the combined incidence of cardiac death, target vessel-related myocardial infarction or target lesion revascularization at 5 years. Results 311 patients with STEMI were randomized to receive sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents (n = 215) or zotarolimus-eluting stents (n = 96). At 5 years, there was no difference in the incidence of the primary endpoint in patients treated with sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus zotarolimus-eluting stents (18.3% versus 20.1% respectively, hazard ratio = 0.87, 95% CI, 0.50–1.51; P = 0.62). Rates of the individual components of the primary endpoint were also comparable in both groups. The incidence of definite/probable stent thrombosis was 1.4% versus 1.0% respectively (hazard ratio = 1.35, 95% CI, 0.14–12.94, P = 0.80). Conclusions Long-term outcomes of patients with STEMI treated with polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting stents versus durable-polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents were similar. Stent thrombosis rates were low and comparable in both treatment groups, with no events beyond 12 months. Clinical Trial Registration: Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier NCT 00598533) © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

BACKGROUND Both bare-metal stents (BMS; the first-generation coronary stent) and zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES; a second-generation drug-eluting stent [DES]) have been widely utilized to treat coronary heart disease. However, the long-term comparative effectiveness of BMS and ZES remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate long-term comparative effectiveness of BMS versus ZES. METHODS We created a longitudinal database by linking the New York State (NYS) cardiac registries, statewide hospital discharge data, the National Death Index (NDI), and the U.S. Census file (2010) for patients receiving either BMS or ZES during the 2008-2009 period. We examined the rates of all-cause mortality, acute myocardial infarction (AMI), target-lesion PCI (TLPCI), and target-vessel coronary artery bypass graft (TVCABG) surgery for a follow-up period of 4.5 years. A total of 10,443 propensity score matched pairs were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression adjusting for patient risk factors. RESULTS We found that patients receiving ZES had a lower rate of 4.5-year mortality (adjusted hazard ratio AHR: 0.68, 95% confidence interval CI: 0.63-0.73), AMI (AHR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.80-0.98), and TVCABG (AHR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.71-0.99) but a similar rate of TLPCI (AHR: 1.02, 95% CI: 0.93-1.12). For "off-label" and "high-risk" subgroups, ZES was associated with improved mortality and generally better or non-inferior AMI, TLPCI, and TVCABG outcomes relative to BMS. CONCLUSIONS Compared with BMS, ZES was associated with lower long-term mortality, AMI and TVCABG. (J Interven Cardiol 2016;29:265-274).

Objectives To evaluate angiographic and clinical results of ZES compared with EES after recanalization of CTOs. Background ZES and EES showed similar clinical results in non-CTO lesions. Whether ZES and EES are also comparable in true CTO lesions (TIMI 0 flow, duration of occlusion of more than 3 months) with a higher risk of restenosis has not been addressed so far. Methods 125 patients with successful CTO recanalization via antegrade or retrograde approach were included. EES were implanted in 68 patients and ZES in 57 patients. Dual antiplatelet therapy was prescribed for 12 months. Follow-up angiography was scheduled at 9 months and clinical follow-up at 12 months. The primary angiographic outcome measure was in-stent late lumen loss. Primary clinical outcome measures were target lesion revascularization rate (TLR) and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) as a composite of cardiac death, TLR and myocardial infarction not clearly attributable to a non-target vessel. Results Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. Mean stent length was 72.8 ± 33.0mm with EES and 70.8 ± 31.5 mm with ZES (P = 0.72). In-stent late lumen loss was 0.50 ± 0.71 mm for EES compared with 0.59 ± 0.72 (P = 0.52) for ZES. There were similar rates for TLR (EES 10.3% versus ZES 10.5%, P = 0.97) and MACE (EES 10.3% versus ZES 12.3%). No definite or probable stent thrombosis occurred. Stent length but not type of stent was predictive for in-stent late loss and TLR. Conclusion ZES and EES showed similar angiographic and clinical outcomes for treatment of CTOs. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Aim To assess the “real world” clinical outcome of patients with bifurcated lesions undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with implantation of second and third generations of zotarolimus-eluting stent. Methods and Results Nine Italian centres participated in a prospective multicentre clinical project evaluating the outcome of patients receiving zotarolimus-eluting Resolute stent and Resolute Integrity stents. Patients with bifurcated lesions entered this evaluation. Clinical characteristics and angiographic and procedural details were prospectively recorded. Clinical outcome was prospectively assessed to evaluate the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). A total of 577 patients were enrolled. The target lesion was distal left main in 11.1% and left anterior descending artery in 52.8%, and 30.3% of lesions were Medina 1,1,1. At a mean follow-up time of 27.0 ± 13.5 months, the survival free from MACE was 91.8%. Survival free from MACE was similar in patients grouped according to different bifurcated lesion complexity. On the contrary, patients receiving a single stent had better survival free from MACE as compared with those with double stent (P = 0.005). At multivariable analysis, double stenting (but not bifurcated lesion complexity) was found to be a significant predictor of MACE (hazard ratio, 2.52; 95% confidence interval, 1.28–4.94; P = 0.007). Of note, patients receiving the second stent as a bail-out had worse survival free from MACE compared with those who received it as a planned technique (P = 0.045). Conclusion The treatment of patients with bifurcated lesions with second and third generation zotarolimus-eluting stents is associated with good long-term clinical outcomes. Clinical outcome seems to be independent of lesion complexity, but may be influenced by the stenting technique (single or double stenting as well as elective or bail-out double stenting). © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

BACKGROUND An increased body mass index (BMI) is associated with a high risk of cardiovascular disease and reduction in life expectancy. However, several studies reported improved clinical outcomes in obese patients treated for cardiovascular diseases. The aim of the present study is to investigate the impact of BMI on long-term clinical outcomes after implantation of zotarolimus eluting stents. METHODS Individual patient data were pooled from the RESOLUTE Clinical Program comprising five trials worldwide. The study population was sorted according to BMI tertiles and clinical outcomes were evaluated at 2-year follow-up. RESULTS Data from a total of 5,127 patients receiving the R-ZES were included in the present study. BMI tertiles were as follow: I tertile (≤ 25.95 kg/m(2) -Low or normal weight) 1,727 patients; II tertile (>25.95 ≤ 29.74 kg/m(2) -overweight) 1,695 patients, and III tertile (>29.74 kg/m(2) -obese) 1,705 patients. At 2-years follow-up no difference was found for patients with high BMI (III tertile) compared with patients with normal or low BMI (I tertile) in terms of target lesion failure (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 0.89 [0.69, 1.14], P = 0.341; major adverse cardiac events (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 0.90 [0.72, 1.14], P = 0.389; cardiac death (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 1.20 [0.73, 1.99], P = 0.476); myocardial infarction (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.55, 1.35], P = 0.509; clinically-driven target lesion revascularization (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 0.75 [0.53, 1.08], P = 0.123; definite or probable stent thrombosis (I-III tertile, HR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.49, 1.99], P = 0.964. CONCLUSIONS In the present study, the patients' body mass index was found to have no impact on long-term clinical outcomes after coronary artery interventions.

Background: To date, it remains unknown whether different types of new-generation drug-eluting stents have a differential impact on long-term outcomes in diabetic patients. Methods and Results: In this historical cohort study (two Italian centers), we analyzed 400 diabetic patients with 553 coronary lesions treated with new-generation CoCr zotarolimus-eluting stents (R-ZES: 136 patients, 196 lesions) or everolimus-eluting stents (EES: 264 patients, 357 lesions) between October 2006 and August 2012. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) over a 2-year follow-up period. MACE was defined as all-cause mortality, any myocardial infarction (MI) and/or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Multivessel revascularization, intervention for restenotic lesion and use of intravascular ultrasound were significantly higher in the R-ZES group, whereas small stent (≤2.5 mm) deployment was significantly higher in the EES group. At 2-year follow-up, there was no significant difference in occurrence of MACE (R-ZES vs EES: 22.8% vs 18.9%, P = 0.39). Similarly, no significant differences were observed in the composite endpoint of all-cause mortality/MI (10.0% vs 10.3%, P = 0.86) or TLR (12.4% vs 7.4%, P = 0.11). Adjustment for confounders and baseline propensity-score matching did not alter the aforementioned associations. Conclusion: After 2 years of follow up similar outcomes (MACE, all-cause mortality/MI, TLR) were observed in real-world diabetic patients, including those with complex lesions and patient characteristics, treated with R-ZES and EES. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objective To assess the differences in clinical outcome between complex patients treated with Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) versus Xience V everolimus-eluting stents (EES). Background Nowadays, many complex patients with coronary disease are treated with percutaneous coronary interventions, using drug-eluting stents (DES). Methods We analyzed 2-year outcome data of 1,033 complex patients of the TWENTE trial, treated with second-generation Resolute ZES or Xience V EES. Complex patients had at least one of the following characteristics: renal insufficiency (creatinine ≥ 140 µmol/l); ejection fraction 1 lesion/vessel; >2 vessels treated; lesion length > 27 mm; bifurcation; saphenous vein graft lesion; arterial bypass graft lesion; in-stent restenosis; unprotected left main lesion; lesion with thrombus; or lesion with total occlusion. Target vessel failure (TVF), the primary composite endpoint of the trial, was defined as cardiac death, target vessel-related MI, or target vessel revascularization. Results Among the 1,033 complex patients, 529 (51%) were treated with Resolute ZES and 504 (49%) with Xience V EES. Patient- and procedure-related characteristics were similar between DES groups. After 2-year follow-up, outcome was also similar between DES groups. TVF occurred in 12.1% of patients treated with Resolute ZES and 12.3% of patients treated with Xience V EES. In addition, DES groups did not differ significantly in cardiac death, MI, or target vessel revascularization—the individual components of TVF. Conclusion Complex patients treated with Resolute ZES and Xience V EES showed similar safety and efficacy during 2-year follow-up

Background: There are few studies comparing the long-term efficacy and safety of the zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) with sirolimus- (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in the unselected cohorts that were subject to real life clinical practice. Methods: Total 2,769 patient who underwent successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the three drug-eluting stents (DES) between April 2006 and July 2008 were analyzed retrospectively. A total of 1,152 patients were treated with SES, 810 with PES, and 807 with ZES. The primary analysis endpoint was cumulative rate of target-lesion failure (TLF) at 24 months, defined as the composite of cardiac death, target-vessel-related myocardial infarction (MI), and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: At 24 months, the incidence of TLF was significantly lower in the SES group compared with the ZES (7.6% vs. 11.3%, HR = 0.66, CI = 0.49–0.88, P = 0.005) or the PES group (7.6% vs. 10.2%, HR = 0.74, CI = 0.55–0.99, P = 0.048), while similar between the PES and the ZES groups (HR = 0.89, CI = 0.66–1.20, P = 0.443). The difference was mostly driven by higher rate of TLR in the ZES and PES groups compared with the SES group, mostly within the first year post-PCI. However, the rate of hard endpoints (cardiac death or nonfatal MI) was similar among the three groups. These results were reproduced in the propensity score-matched cohort.Conclusions: This observational study shows that the use of SES is superior to PES or ZES for the TLF in the overall and matched analysis. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

OBJECTIVE To obtain imaging evidence by 2-week optical coherence tomography (OCT) on the completion of neointimal coverage (NIC; the percentage of stent strut coverage and thickness of the formed neointima) completion after implantation of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES). BACKGROUND Despite the fact that NIC is a cardinal process in the pathomechanism of late stent thrombosis, little imaging information is available on morphological changes thereof on a short-time interval basis. METHODS 27 Japanese patients with stable angina pectoris and de novo native coronary artery lesions were enrolled, and 27 lesions (30 implantations) were examined. OCT was performed at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 after E-ZES implantation. NIC was examined using cross-sectional OCT images obtained at the 1.0-mm intervals. RESULTS In total, 621 cross-sectional OCT images, which depicted 7,747 stent struts, were analyzed. The mean percentages of stent strut coverage at weeks 2, 4, 6, 8, and 10 after E-ZES implantation were 12.3, 70.4, 67.9, 86.0, and 99.2%, respectively; a marked increase was found between weeks 2 and 4. The mean thicknesses of the formed neointima were 40.2, 52.1, 48.1, 86.5, and 146.2 μm at respective weeks, with the high-signal and thick neointima (146 µm) at week 10. An intracoronary thrombus was detected in only one stent at week 4. CONCLUSIONS The full circumferential coverage of the vessel wall by the high-signal neointima was found at as early as week 10 after E-ZES implantation, imparting a surrogate index for vascular healing by NIC.

BACKGROUND: The ZOMAXX I trial tested the noninferiority of a zotarolimus-eluting coronary stent (ZoMaxx(™) ) when compared with a paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent (Taxus(™) Express(2™) ) in a randomized trial of percutaneous intervention for de novo coronary artery stenosis. Angiographic analysis at the primary endpoint of 9 months has been reported previously. The purpose of this follow-on analysis was to describe the clinical results of the ZoMaxx and Taxus cohorts of the ZOMAXX I trial after 5 years. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the ZOMAXX I trial, 199 patients received a ZoMaxx stent and 197 patients received a Taxus stent at 29 investigative sites in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand. The two groups were generally well matched with respect to both clinical and lesional characteristics, including the incidence of diabetes (ZoMaxx 22% vs. Taxus 26%; P = 0.29), reference vessel diameter (ZoMaxx 2.79 ± 0.43 mm vs. Taxus 2.81 ± 0.46 mm; P = 0.65), and lesion length (ZoMaxx 14.9 ± 5.7 mm vs. Taxus 14.6 ± 5.5; P = 0.61). Through 5 years of follow-up, a total of 21 patients had died, six patients had withdrawn, nine had been lost to follow-up, and 13 missed their 5-year visit, leaving a total of 347 patients for analysis (169 ZoMaxx and 178 Taxus). At the 5-year time point, there were no significant differences in any clinical metric including ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR; ZoMaxx 10.6% vs. Taxus 7.1%; P = 0.29), Q-wave myocardial infarction (ZoMaxx 1.5% vs. Taxus 1.0%; P = 0.99), definite/probable stent thrombosis (ZoMaxx 1.5% vs. Taxus 3.0%; P = 0.34), and cardiac death (ZoMaxx 3.0% vs. Taxus 1.0%; P = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: After 5 years, the differences in clinical outcome between patients treated with ZoMaxx vs. Taxus stents did not reach statistical significance. However, the nominally higher rate of ischemia-driven TLR (10.6 vs. 7.1%) and the previously reported higher rate of restenosis after 9 months suggest that the ZoMaxx stent afforded less neointimal inhibition when compared with Taxus. © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objectives Long-term clinical outcomes were evaluated in long coronary artery stenosis treated with different types of drug-eluting stents. Background Long-term follow-up data to compare clinical outcomes between Resolute™ zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) versus sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation for long coronary artery stenosis is insufficient. Methods A total of 254 patients (307 lesions) treated with R-ZES and 265 patients (303 lesions) treated with SES for long coronary lesions (total stent length ≥30 mm) were enrolled, and long-term (3 years) clinical outcomes were compared between the 2 groups. Efficacy (target lesion revascularization [TLR]) and safety (the composite occurrence of cardiovascular death, target lesion–related myocardial infarction, or target lesion–related definite stent thrombosis) were assessed. Results The 2 groups had similar baseline characteristics except for the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy (23.4 ± 11.2 months in R-ZES-treated patients vs. 27.4 ± 13.9 months in SES-treated patients, P

Objectives To evaluate the differential treatment effects of zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) according to diabetic status. Background Diabetic patients have a higher risk of ischemic complications after stenting than nondiabetic patients. Methods Using data from the ZEST randomized trial, comparing ZES with SES and PES, we evaluated relative outcomes among stents in diabetic and nondiabetic patients. The primary outcome was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as a composite of death, myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization. Results Of the 2,645 patients enrolled in the ZEST trial, 760 (29%) had diabetes mellitus. Baseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar in the three stent groups, regardless of diabetic status. In diabetic patients, ZES showed similar rates of MACE as compared to PES (13.8% vs. 15.3%, P = 0.58), but higher rates of MACE than SES (13.8% vs. 7.7%, P = 0.05). In nondiabetic patients, ZES showed similar rates of MACE as compared to SES (10.3% vs. 10.8%, P = 0.72), whereas significantly lower rates of MACE compared to PES (10.3% vs. 15.3%, P = 0.01). In comparing the ZES and SES groups, there was a substantial interaction between diabetic status and stent types on MACE occurrence (Interaction P = 0.07). However, in comparison of ZES and PES, there were no significant interactions between diabetes and stent type on MACE (Interaction P = 0.25). Conclusions In diabetic patients, SES showed the lowest rate of MACE compared with ZES and PES. But, in nondiabetic patients, SES and ZES showed significantly lower rates of MACE than PES. ZES shows a diabetes-related interaction on MACE compared with SES, but not with PES. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background Polymer-coating represents a key component of drug-eluting stent (DES) technology and its possible impact on vessel-wall healing is a matter of debate. The clinical impact of different polymer-coating may be assessed by comparing the outcome of patients treated by DES having the same stent platform and drug, and differing in the polymer. Thus, we compared the clinical outcome of patients treated by Endeavor Zotarolimus-eluting stent (E-ZES) and Resolute Zotarolimus-eluting stent (R-ZES) as they differ in the polymer-coating only. Methods At our Institution, E-ZES was available during a first period and then it was substituted by the R-ZES during a second period. Clinical, angiographic, and procedural data were prospectively collected. Clinical follow-up was prospectively obtained up to 1-year. Primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12-month. Results A total of 467 patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were enrolled: 233 patients treated with E-ZES and 234 with R-ZES. Patients treated by R-ZES had similar clinical characteristics and worse angiographic characteristics compared with those treated by E-ZES. At 12-month follow-up, MACE rate was significantly lower in the R-ZES group compared with E-ZES group (4.2% vs. 14.6%; P < 0.01). This difference was due to nonsignificantly lower rates of death and myocardial infarction and to significant lower rate of target-lesion-revascularization (R-ZES 3.4% vs. E-ZES 10.3%, P < 0.01). Conclusions The results of this study suggest that the clinical outcome of patients treated by DES differing for the polymer coating only may be different. Polymer coating is a pivotal, probably underrated, component of DES technology which may influence the clinical performance of DES. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Eur J Clin Invest 2012; 42 (10): 1047–1054 Abstract Objectives: To compare clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in the SORT OUT III trial. Background: Currently, only limited data allow direct comparison of clinical outcomes among patients with acute coronary syndrome treated with a second-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) eluting zotarolimus vs. a first-generation DES eluting sirolimus. Methods: Patients with acute coronary syndrome (n = 1052) were randomized to treatment with zotarolimus-eluting (n = 506) or sirolimus-eluting (n = 546) stents and followed for 18 months. The primary composite endpoint, major adverse cardiac events (MACE), was defined as a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction or target vessel revascularization. Results: Zotarolimus-eluting stent treatment compared to sirolimus-eluting stent treatment was associated with increased rates of MACE (8·7% vs. 5·0%; hazard ratio (HR), 1·78; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1·10–2·88; P = 0·02) and TVR (6·8% vs. 3·9%; HR, 1·77; 95% CI, 1·03–3·04; P = 0·04), while all-cause death, cardiac death, myocardial infarction and definite stent thrombosis did not differ significantly. In the same trial, stable angina pectoris patients (n = 1206) were randomized to zotarolimus-eluting (n = 614) and sirolimus-eluting (n = 592) stents with similar results. Conclusions: With and without acute coronary syndromes, patients treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent had better clinical outcomes than those treated with the zotarolimus-eluting stent.

Objectives The aim of this study was to compare the pharmacokinetics of the four limus-eluting stents used in Japanese patients. Background There are presently no reports comparing human pharmacokinetics among drug-eluting stents (DESs). Methods We retrospectively analyzed data from pharmacokinetic studies of patients implanted with an 18-mm DES: Cypher stent (sirolimus, n = 10), Endeavor stent (zotarolimus, n = 7), Xience V stent (everolimus, n = 6), and Nobori stent (biolimus A9, n = 10), in multicenter trials of Japan. Total drug doses of the Cypher stent, Endeavor stent, Xience V stent, and Nobori stent were 150, 180, 88, and 293 μg, respectively. Drug concentrations were measured in serial whole blood samples after implantation and the pharmacokinetics were analyzed. Results Mean peak drug levels were 0.86 ng mL(-1) for Cypher, 1.80 ng mL(-1) for Endeavor, 0.50 ng mL(-1) for Xience V, and 0.09 ng mL(-1) for Nobori. After adjustment for the loaded dose, mean peak drug levels of the Cypher and Xience V stents were similar (0.0057 ng mL(-1) μg(-1) each) while the Endeavor (0.0100 ng mL(-1) μg(-1)) was higher, and the Nobori (0.0003 ng mL(-1) μg(-1)) was lower, compared with the Cypher and Xience V stents. The other pharmacokinetic parameters of four DESs differed according to characteristics of the coated drug. The systemic exposure of biolimus A9 was much lower than that of the other DESs studied. Conclusions In Japanese patients, systemic exposure was low, regardless of the type of limus drug eluted from the stents; but specific pharmacokinetic activities were varied according to the drug characteristics, concentration, and DES design.

Objectives: To compare zotarolimus-eluting stent (Endeavor Sprint®; ZES-S) and the everolimus-eluting stent (Xience V®; EES) in the treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions Background: Both these stents have demonstrated good outcomes in the treatment of coronary lesions. However, the outcomes with respect to treatment of bifurcation lesions have yet to be conclusively demonstrated. Methods: In this single centered, nonrandomized, open label study, we treated, between August 2006 and December 2008, 110 bifurcations with ZES-S and, in a second stage of the study, 129 bifurcations with EES. The primary end point was to compare the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (death, myocardial infarction, and new target lesion revascularization) in-hospital and at 12 months of follow-up. Provisional T stenting was the strategy used in the majority of cases. Angiographic follow-up was performed only in patients who presented signs or symptoms suggestive of angina or ischemia. Results: There were no significant differences in in-hospital MACE between the groups (ZES-S: 8.1%; EES: 6.2%; P = 0.5). At 12 months, the ZES-S group had significantly more MACE than the EES group (23.1% vs. 4.5%; P < 0.001) and an elevated index of new revascularization of the bifurcation (17.5% vs. 3.2%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in mortality (four patients in ZES-S vs. one in EES; P = 0.14). Conclusion: The treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions using everolimus-eluting stents results in better outcomes at 12 months of follow-up than zotarolimus-eluting stents. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Objectives: To present data from the cohort of patients in the all-comers Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES) registry (E-Five) who underwent 2-year follow-up. Background: The Endeavor ZES has been shown to be safe and efficacious for treatment of single, de novo lesions in patients with stable coronary artery disease. E-Five evaluated the ZES in over 8,000 real-world patients, at 188 sites followed to 1 year. A subset of sites continued follow-up through 2 years to evaluate late-term safety and effectiveness of the ZES in this population with diverse clinical and lesion characteristics. Methods: E-Five, a prospective, multicenter, nonrandomized global registry, collected 2-year outcomes for 2,116 patients from 26 centers. Sites were selected for participation based on patient accrual rates and the ability to continue follow-up activities for an additional year. Complete data was available for 2,054 patients. To observe whether or not a sustained benefit was achieved, data for all patients from the selected sites were included in the analysis. Results: The outcomes in the 2-year cohort tracked with the results of randomized controlled trials using the Endeavor ZES. One year results were MACE 7.5%, TLR 4.5%, and ARC definite/probable stent thrombosis 0.6%. Outcomes at 2 years for MACE, TLR, and ARC definite/probable stent thrombosis were 8.5, 5.1, and 0.7%, respectively. Conclusions: Long-term efficacy and safety outcomes were maintained between 1 and 2 years for the 2-year patient cohort, with only a small number of additional MACE, TLR, and very late stent thrombosis events. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Objectives: We examined angiographic and late-term clinical outcomes according to sex in recent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) trials involving zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES). Background. Differences in outcome between men and women undergoing PCI have been inconsistently described with bare metal and first-generation drug-eluting stents. Methods. Clinical and angiographic outcomes among ZES-treated patients were evaluated by sex using propensity score modeling in a patient-level systematic overview of six trials and were also compared to patients receiving bare metal stents (BMS). Results. Among 2,132 patients, 608 were female (28.5%). Compared to men, women were older and more frequently had diabetes, hypertension, and a smaller reference vessel diameter (P < 0.05 for all). For both sexes, the relative reductions in 8-month angiographic binary restenosis and late lumen loss were statistically significant and of similar extent with ZES compared to BMS. By 2 years, treatment with ZES resulted in significantly lower target vessel revascularization (TVR) and target vessel failure (TVF; 10.0% vs. 21.5%, P = 0.0003) among women that paralleled risk reductions for men. However, among ZES-treated patients, 2-year rates of TVR (8.2% vs. 10.4%, P = 0.005) and TVF (9.9% vs. 12.8%, P = 0.004) were significantly lower among women, although rates of death and myocardial infarction were similar. Conclusions. Despite greater baseline clinical and angiographic risk than men, women undergoing PCI with ZES compared to BMS experienced significant reductions in angiographic restenosis and repeat revascularization yet similar safety. Among all patients treated with ZES, late-term safety and efficacy outcomes are similar, if not lower, among women compared to men. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Background: Treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is a challenging clinical problem. Recent studies have verified the safety and efficacy of first-generation DES for the treatment of ISR. The safety and effectiveness of new-generation drug-eluting stents (nDES) for ISR has not been previously investigated. The aim of the present study was to prospectively evaluate the clinical outcomes after treatment with nDES implantation in patients with bare metal stent (BMS) ISR. Methods: Consecutive patients with ISR after BMS implantation were included. Primary end-point was a major adverse cardiac event (MACE), defined as death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). The incidence of stent thrombosis was also evaluated. Results: A total of 46 consecutive patients were enrolled for the treatment of ISR, 23 patients from ZES and 23 from EES group. There were two (8.7%) cases of TVR in ZES cohort due to proliferative ISR at 6 and 7 months after DES implantation, and none in EES. One (4.3%) patient underwent percutaneous coronary intervention and the other (4.3%) was treated surgically. Neither acute nor subacute thrombosis was observed during the 13.3±6.3 months follow-up period. In all other patients, stress test was negative for ischemia at 6 months. Conclusions: In this prospective study, we showed that direct nDES implantation is highly effective for ISR and seems to be a promising management for the treatment of ISR.

Introduction: Vascular response at edges of drug-eluting stents is still not well established, particularly in diabetic patients who are prone to aggressive atherosclerosis progression. Recently, Biolimus and Zotarolimus have demonstrated potent antiproliferative effects. Objective: To compare the vascular responses at edges of sirolimus analogous-eluting stents in patients with and without diabetes, using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). Methods: 306 edges were analyzed in 153 patients treated with drug-eluting stents and divided in: diabetics (122 edges) and nondiabetics (166 edges). IVUS was performed postintervention and at 6-month follow-up and included 5 mm distal and proximal to the stented segment. Vessel, lumen, and plaque volumes were calculated. Volume variation (follow-up minus basal) was also calculated. Edge restenosis was defined as obstruction >50%. Results: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. In both groups the entire lesion length was covered (stent length/lesion length ratio was 1.5 for both groups). There were no differences in edge volumes and restenosis rate between the groups. Among diabetics, there was no significant volume variation. However, in nondiabetic patients there was significant increase in vessel volume in proximal (from 67.1 ± 22 mm3 to 72.2 ± 25 mm3: P = 0.02) and distal (from 54.4 ± 22 mm3 to 59.8 ± 22 mm3: P = 0.001) edges. Conclusion: Nondiabetic patients showed a significant positive vascular remodeling in proximal and distal edges of sirolimus analogous-eluting stent. This vascular mechanism was not observed in diabetic patients. Although different vascular responses were observed, restenosis rates were equivalent between the 2 groups at 6-month follow-up. © 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.