Search

Second-generation drug eluting stents (DES) may reduce costs and improve clinical outcomes compared to first-generation DES with improved cost-effectiveness when compared to bare metal stents (BMS). We aimed to conduct an economic evaluation of a cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co-Cr EES) compared with BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of a cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co-Cr EES) versus BMS in PCI.A Markov state transition model with a 2-year time horizon was applied from a US Medicare setting with patients undergoing PCI with Co-Cr EES or BMS. Baseline characteristics, treatment effects, and safety measures were taken from a patient level meta-analysis of 5 RCTs (n = 4,896). The base-case analysis evaluated stent-related outcomes; a secondary analysis considered the broader set of outcomes reported in the meta-analysis.The base-case and secondary analyses reported an additional 0.018 and 0.013 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost savings of $236 and $288, respectively with Co-Cr EES versus BMS. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses and were most sensitive to the price of clopidogrel. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, Co-Cr EES was associated with a greater than 99% chance of being cost saving or cost effective (at a cost per QALY threshold of $50,000) versus BMS.Using data from a recent patient level meta-analysis and contemporary cost data, this analysis found that PCI with Co-Cr EES is more effective and less costly than PCI with BMS. © 2016 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Background— Biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) were developed to be as effective as second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and as safe >1 year as bare-metal stents (BMS). Thus, very late stent thrombosis (VLST) attributable to durable polymers should no longer appear. Methods and Results— To address these early and late aspects, 2291 patients presenting with acute or stable coronary disease needing stents ≥3.0 mm in diameter between April 2010 and May 2012 were randomly assigned to biolimus-A9–eluting BP-DES, second-generation everolimus-eluting DP-DES, or thin-strut silicon-carbide–coated BMS in 8 European centers. All patients were treated with aspirin and risk-adjusted doses of prasugrel. The primary end point was combined cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization within 2 years. The combined secondary safety end point was a composite of VLST, myocardial infarction, and cardiac death. The cumulative incidence of the primary end point was 7.6% with BP-DES, 6.8% with DP-DES, and 12.7% with BMS. By intention-to-treat BP-DES were noninferior (predefined margin, 3.80%) compared with DP-DES (absolute risk difference, 0.78%; −1.93% to 3.50%; P for noninferiority 0.042; per protocol P =0.09) and superior to BMS (absolute risk difference, −5.16; −8.32 to −2.01; P =0.0011). The 3 stent groups did not differ in the combined safety end point, with no decrease in events >1 year, particularly VLST with BP-DES. Conclusions— In large vessel stenting, BP-DES appeared barely noninferior compared with DP-DES and more effective than thin-strut BMS, but without evidence for better safety nor lower VLST rates >1 year. Findings challenge the concept that durable polymers are key in VLST formation. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT01166685.

To assess the safety and efficacy of Biolimus A9-eluting stents (BES, BioMatrix™ and BioMatrix Flex™) in routine clinical practice.The LEADERS randomized trial has documented equivalent efficacy and superior safety of the BES when compared to a first generation Sirolimus-eluting Cypher(TM) stent.5,472 patients from 57 centers, treated with BES, were enrolled in an international multicenter registry and followed clinically up to 2 years.Mean patient age was 63.2 ± 11 years, 24% of patients had diabetes, and 49.8% presented with an acute coronary syndrome. 99.3% of patients were discharged on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT), 83.3% remained on DAPT at 1 year and 30.6% at 2 years. The incidence of the composite primary end point [major adverse cardiac events (MACE) at 12 months] was 4.5% [cardiac death 0.9%, myocardial infarction 1.7%, clinically indicated target vessel revascularization (ci-TVR) 2.8%]. MACE incidence was 6.8% at 24 months (cardiac death 1.5%, myocardial infarction 2.4%, ci-TVR 4.3%). At 12 months, 32 patients (0.6%) had suffered at least one definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST), and 91 patients (1.7%) a major bleed (MB). Nine patients with ST (27.3%) and 7 patients with a MB (7.7%) died during the first year after the index procedure. Between 12 and 24 months after implantation, there were 18 (0.4%) additional MB and 8 (0.2%) additional ST.This large international cohort documents a low 12 and 24 months MACE incidence and a very low ST incidence in an unselected patient population undergoing BES implantation. The results are in keeping with those of the randomized controlled LEADERS trial. Even though ST with this stent was a rare event, it was still associated with significant mortality. MB remains a problem, and warrants improved tailoring of DAPT in recipients of drug eluting stents.

This study sought to assess outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main (LM) disease.Limited data are available on outcomes in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction undergoing LM PCI.Of 9,075 patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction enrolled in the AMIS (Acute Myocardial Infarction in Switzerland) Plus registry between 2005 and June 30, 2010, 6,666 underwent primary PCI. Of them, 348 (5.2%; mean age: 63.5 ± 12.6 years) underwent LM PCI, either isolated (n = 208) or concomitant to PCI for other vessel segments (n = 140). They were compared with 6,318 patients (94.8%; mean age: 61.9 ± 12.5 years) undergoing PCI of non-LM vessel segments only.The LM patients had higher rates of cardiogenic shock (12.2% vs. 3.5%; p0.001), cardiac arrest (10.6% vs. 6.3%; p0.01), in-hospital mortality (10.9% vs. 3.8%; p0.001), and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (12.4% vs. 5.0%; p0.001) than non-LM PCI. Rates of mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were highest for concurrent LM and non-LM PCI (17.9% and 18.6%, respectively), intermediate for isolated LM PCI (6.3% and 8.3%, respectively), and lowest for non-LM PCI (3.8% and 5.0%, respectively). Rates of mortality and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events for LM PCI were higher than for non-LM multivessel PCI (10.9% vs. 4.9%, p0.001, and 12.4% vs. 6.4%, p0.001, respectively). LM disease independently predicted in-hospital death (odds ratio: 2.36; 95% confidence interval: 1.34 to 4.17; p = 0.003).Emergent LM PCI in the context of acute myocardial infarction, even including 12% cardiogenic shock, appears to have a remarkably high (89%) in-hospital survival. Concurrent LM and non-LM PCI has worse outcomes than isolated LM PCI.

We assessed the impact of vessel size on outcomes of stenting with biolimus-eluting degradable polymer stent (BES) and sirolimus-eluting permanent polymer stent (SES) within a randomized multicenter trial (LEADERS).Stenting of small vessels might be associated with higher rates of adverse events."All-comer" patients (n = 1,707) were randomized to BES and SES. Post-hoc-stratified analysis of angiographic and clinical outcomes at 9 months and 1 year, respectively, was performed for vessels with reference diameteror=2.75 mm versus2.75 mm.Of 1,707 patients, 429 patients in the BES group with 576 lesions and 434 patients in the SES group with 557 lesions had only small vessels treated (50.6% of the patient cohort). In patients with small vessels there was no significant difference in overall major adverse cardiac events (MACE) rate (12.1% vs. 11.8%; p = 0.89) or target lesion revascularization (TLR) rate (9.6% vs. 7.4%; p = 0.26) between BES and SES. The MACE and TLR rates in the small-vessel patient population were higher than in the large-vessel population. The TLR rate was 9.6% versus 2.6%, and MACE rate was 12.1% versus 7.1% for small versus large vessels in the BES arm (TLR: hazard ratio [HR] = 3.724, p = 0.0013; MACE: HR = 1.720, p = 0.0412). In the SES arm, TLR was 7.4% versus 5.1%, and MACE was 11.8% versus 10.3% in small versus large vessels (TLR: HR = 1.435, p = 0.2594; MACE: HR = 1.149, p = 0.5546).Prevalence of small vessel disease is high in an "all-comer" population with higher TLR and MACE rates. The BES and SES seem equivalent in treatment outcomes of small vessels in this "all-comer" patient population.

Clopidogrel has become the standard of care to prevent thrombotic complications following cardiological interventions, in particular intracoronary stenting. In addition, patients with aspirin intolerance and those with carotid and peripheral vascular disease are also increasingly treated with clopidogrel. Platelet inhibition may become a concern for hemostasis in patients treated with clopidogrel who need emergency and undelayed surgery.We prospectively analyzed the intra- and postoperative outcome of 505 consecutive patients who underwent isolated CABG and compared two groups: those with clopidogrel exposure until 72 h prior to surgery (n = 136) with those without exposition to clopidogrel (n = 369). Patients undergoing emergency surgery because of failed PTCA and cardiogenic shock, associated valvular surgery, redo-CABG, and those with additional platelet IIb/IIIa receptor inhibitor exposure were excluded. Patients who received aspirin and/or heparin treatment prior to surgery were not excluded.Patients who received clopidogrel had a higher prevalence of angina class III or IV (67 vs 39%, P0.01), received more often revascularization within 48 h (41 vs 14%, P = 0.02), and had received more frequently stenting (57 vs 13%). Chest tube drainage was significantly increased during the first 24 h following CABG in the group of patients who had clopidogrel treatment (1485 vs 780 ml, P = 0.003) These patients also required more transfusion of platelets and fresh frozen plasma. Overall re-exploration rate because of bleeding was significantly higher in the clopidogrel group (5.9 vs 1.2%, P0.01). Platelets transfused before chest closure had a beneficial effect on preservation of the hemostasis.Clopidogrel exposure 3 days or less prior to CABG surgery significantly increases the risk of postoperative bleeding, the need for perioperative transfusion and the incidence of re-exploration. Surgery should be performed using standard heparinization and anti-fibrinolytic strategies but aggressive correction of platelets dysfunction is required before chest closure.