Search

Aims The differential impact on ischaemic and bleeding events of the type of drug-eluting stent [durable polymer stents [DES] vs. biodegradable polymer stents vs. bioresorbable scaffolds (BRS)] and length of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) remains to be defined. Methods and results Randomized controlled trials comparing different types of DES and/or DAPT durations were selected. The primary endpoint was Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE) [a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization]. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) and single components of MACE were secondary endpoints. The arms of interest were: BRS with 12 months of DAPT (12mDAPT), biodegradable polymer stent with 12mDAPT, durable polymer stent [everolimus-eluting (EES), zotarolimus-eluting (ZES)] with 12mDAPT, EES/ZES with 12 months of DAPT (DAPT > 12 m). Sixty-four studies with 150 arms and 102 735 patients were included. After a median follow-up of 20 months, MACE rates were similar in the different arms of interest. EES/ZES with DAPT > 12 m reported a lower incidence of MI than the other groups, while BRS showed a higher rate of ST when compared to EES/ZES, irrespective of DAPT length. A higher risk of major bleedings was observed for DAPT > 12 m as compared to shorter DAPT. Conclusion Durable and biodegradable polymer stents along with BRS report a similar rate of MACE irrespective of DAPT length. Fewer MI are observed with EES/ZES with DAPT > 12 m, while a higher rate of ST is reported for BRS when compared to EES/ZES, independently from DAPT length. Stent type may partially affect the outcome together with DAPT length.

Incidence, predictors, and impact on prognosis of target lesion revascularization (TLR) for patients treated with second-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) on unprotected left main (ULM) remain to be defined. The present study is a multicenter study including patients treated with a second-generation DES on ULM from June 2007 to January 2015. Rate of TLR was the primary end point. All cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. A total of 1,270 patients were enrolled: after a follow-up of 650 days (230 to 1,170), 47 (3.7%) of them underwent a re–percutaneous coronary intervention TLR on the left main, 22 during a planned angiographic follow-up. Extent of coronary artery disease was similar among groups (median value of Syntax of 27 ± 10 vs 26 ± 9, p = 0.45), as localization of the lesion in the ULM. Of patients reporting with TLR on ULM, 56% presented with a focal restenosis, 33% diffuse and 10% proliferative. At multivariate analysis, insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus increased risk of TLR (hazard ratio [HR] 2.0: 1.1 to 3.6, p = 0.04), whereas use of intravascular ultrasound resulted protective (HR 0.5: 0.3 to 0.9, p = 0.02). At follow-up, rates of cardiovascular death did not differ among the 2 groups (4% vs 4%, p = 0.95). At multivariate analysis, TLR on LM did not increase risk of all cause death (HR 0.4: 0.1 to 1.6, p = 0.22), whereas cardiogenic shock and III tertile of Syntax portended a worse prognosis (HR 4.5: 2.1 to 10.2, p = 0.01 and HR 1.4: 1.1 to 1.6, p = 0.03, respectively). In conclusion, repeated revascularization after implantation of second-generation DES on ULM represents an unfrequent event, being increased in insulin-dependent patients and reduced by intravascular ultrasound. Impact on prognosis remains neutral, being related to clinical presentation and extent of coronary artery disease.