scholarly journals Impact of prediabetes and diabetes on 3-year outcome of patients treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents in two large-scale randomized clinical trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eline H. Ploumen ◽  
Tineke H. Pinxterhuis ◽  
Paolo Zocca ◽  
Ariel Roguin ◽  
Rutger L. Anthonio ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Diabetes is associated with adverse outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with drug-eluting stents (DES), but for prediabetes this association has not been definitely established. Furthermore, in patients with prediabetes treated with contemporary stents, bleeding data are lacking. We assessed 3-year ischemic and bleeding outcomes following treatment with new-generation DES in patients with prediabetes and diabetes as compared to normoglycemia. Methods For this post-hoc analysis, we pooled patient-level data of the BIO-RESORT and BIONYX stent trials which both stratified for diabetes at randomization. Both trials were multicenter studies performed in tertiary cardiac centers. Study participants were patients of whom glycemic state was known based on hemoglobin A1c, fasting plasma glucose, or medically treated diabetes. Three-year follow-up was available in 4212/4330 (97.3 %) patients. The main endpoint was target vessel failure, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization. Results Baseline cardiovascular risk profiles were progressively abnormal in patients with normoglycemia, prediabetes, and diabetes. The main endpoint occurred in 54/489 patients with prediabetes (11.2 %) and 197/1488 with diabetes (13.7 %), as compared to 142/2,353 with normoglycemia (6.1 %) (HR: 1.89, 95 %-CI 1.38–2.58, p < 0.001, and HR: 2.30, 95 %-CI 1.85–2.86, p < 0.001, respectively). In patients with prediabetes, cardiac death and target vessel revascularization rates were significantly higher (HR: 2.81, 95 %-CI 1.49–5.30, p = 0.001, and HR: 1.92, 95 %-CI 1.29–2.87, p = 0.001), and in patients with diabetes all individual components of the main endpoint were significantly higher than in patients with normoglycemia (all p ≤ 0.001). Results were consistent after adjustment for confounders. Major bleeding rates were significantly higher in patients with prediabetes and diabetes, as compared to normoglycemia (3.9 % and 4.1 % vs. 2.3 %; HR:1.73, 95 %-CI 1.03–2.92, p = 0.040, and HR:1.78, 95 %-CI 1.23–2.57, p = 0.002). However, after adjustment for confounders, differences were no longer significant. Conclusions Not only patients with diabetes but also patients with prediabetes represent a high-risk population. After treatment with new-generation DES, both patient groups had higher risks of ischemic and bleeding events. Differences in major bleeding were mainly attributable to dissimilarities in baseline characteristics. Routine assessment of glycemic state may help to identify patients with prediabetes for intensified management of cardiovascular risk factors. Trial registration: BIO-RESORT ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01674803, registered 29-08-2012; BIONYX ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02508714, registered 27-7-2015.

Circulation ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 132 (suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim W Hansen ◽  
Rikke Sørensen ◽  
Raban Jeger ◽  
Christoph Kaiser ◽  
Matthias Pfisterer ◽  
...  

Introduction: The new generation thinner-strut silicon carbide (SiC) coated cobalt chromium (CoCr) bare-metal stents (BMS) are designed to accelerate rapid endothelialisation and reduce thrombogenicity when implanted in coronary arteries. However, smaller studies suggest reduced efficacy with higher rates of symptomatic restenosis in patients receiving the newer generation BMS. Objective: We investigated the efficacy and safety of a new generation thinner-strut SiC coated CoCr BMS (SCC-BMS) as compared to an older thin-strut uncoated CoCr BMS (UC-BMS) in patients presenting with coronary artery disease requiring stenting of large vessels (≥3.0mm) and thus at low risk of restenosis. Methods: We included all patients randomized to SCC- (n=761) or UC-BMS (n=765) in the BASKET-PROVE II and I trials, respectively. Design, patients, interventions and follow-up were similar between trials except differing regimens of dual antiplatelet therapy. The primary endpoint was clinically driven target-vessel revascularization within 24 months. Safety endpoints of cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), and definite/probable stent thrombosis were also assessed. We used Cox proportional hazards regressions to estimate relative hazards adjusting for known confounders. Results: Demographics, clinical presentation, and risk factors were comparable between the groups, but patients receiving SCC-BMS underwent less complex procedures. Rates of the primary endpoint were 10.4% in the SCC-BMS group and 8.4% among patients receiving UC-BMS yielding an adjusted relative hazard (HR) of 1.46 ([1.03-2.07], p=0.032). Estimates for the safety endpoints were: cardiac death (1.8% vs. 2.4% ; HR 0.77 [0.36-1.59], p=0.46), non-fatal MI (3.2% vs. 2.5% ; HR 1.68 [0.88-3.21], p=0.11), and definite/probable stent thrombosis (0.8% vs. 1.0% ; HR 0.97 [0.32-3.00], p=0.96). We detected no particular subgroups driving the increased risk of target-vessel revascularization in the SCC-BMS group. Conclusions: In patients requiring stenting of large coronary arteries, use of the newer generation SCC-BMS was associated with a higher risk of symptomatic restenosis despite less complex procedures compared to the UC-BMS with no signs of an offsetting safety benefit.


Author(s):  
Raffaele Piccolo ◽  
Kaare H. Bonaa ◽  
Orestis Efthimiou ◽  
Olivier Varenne ◽  
Philip Urban ◽  
...  

Background New‐generation drug‐eluting stents (DES) reduce target‐vessel revascularization compared with bare‐metal stents (BMS), and recent data suggest that DES have the potential to decrease the risk of myocardial infarction and cardiovascular mortality. We evaluated the treatment effect of DES versus BMS according to the target artery (left anterior descending [LAD] and/or left main [LM] versus other territories [no‐LAD/LM]). Methods and Results The Coronary Stent Trialist (CST) Collaboration gathered individual patient data of randomized trials of DES versus BMS for the treatment of coronary artery disease. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were derived from a 1‐stage individual patient data meta‐analysis. We included 26 024 patients across 19 trials: 13 650 (52.4%) in the LAD/LM and 12 373 (47.6%) in the no‐LAD/LM group. At 6‐year follow‐up, there was strong evidence that the treatment effect of DES versus BMS depended on the target vessel ( P ‐interaction=0.024). Compared with BMS, DES reduced the risk of cardiac death or myocardial infarction to a greater extent in the LAD/LM (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.68–0.85) than in the no‐LAD/LM territories (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.83–1.05). This benefit was driven by a lower risk of cardiac death (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70–0.98) and myocardial infarction (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65–0.85) in patients with LAD/LM disease randomized to DES. An interaction ( P =0.004) was also found for all‐cause mortality with patients with LAD/LM disease deriving benefit from DES (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.76–0.97). Conclusions As compared with BMS, new‐generation DES were associated with sustained reduction in the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction if used for the treatment of LAD or left main coronary stenoses. Registration URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ; Unique identifier: CRD42017060520.


BMJ Open ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e017231 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin-Zan Cai ◽  
Yong-Xiang Zhu ◽  
Xin-Yu Wang ◽  
Christos V Bourantas ◽  
Javaid Iqbal ◽  
...  

ObjectiveThe study sought to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR).DesignMeta-analysis using data from randomised trial found by searches on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of major cardiovascular congresses.SettingOnly randomised trials comparing DES with DCB were included.ParticipantsPatients with ISR in the included trials.InterventionsNew-generation DES versus DCB.OutcomesThe angiographic and clinical outcomes including cardiac death, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis were investigated.ResultsFive trials including 913 patients were eligible and included. Pooled analysis in angiographic results identified that new-generation DES were associated with higher acute luminal gain (−0.31 mm, 95% CI −0.42 to −0.20, P<0.001) and lower per cent diameter stenosis (risk ratio (RR): 0.28, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.55, P=0.04). DES significantly reduced the risk of TLR (RR: 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.28, P=0.01) compared with DCB; however, there was no statistical differences for MACE (RR: 1.21, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.17, P=0.53), myocardial infarction (RR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.48, P=0.69) and cardiac death (RR: 1.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 5.39, P=0.29).ConclusionsInterventions with new-generation DES appear to be associated with significant reduction in per cent diameter stenosis and TLR at short-term follow-up, but had similar MACE, myocardial infarction and cardiac death for patients with coronary ISR compared with DCB. Appropriately powered studies with longer term follow-up are warranted to confirm these findings.


Author(s):  
Tobias Lenz ◽  
Tobias Koch ◽  
Michael Joner ◽  
Erion Xhepa ◽  
Jens Wiebe ◽  
...  

Background Extended long‐term follow‐up data of new‐generation drug‐eluting stents in patients with diabetes mellitus is scant. The aim of this study is to assess the 10‐year clinical outcome of new‐generation biodegradable polymer‐based sirolimus‐eluting stents (Yukon Choice PC) versus permanent polymer‐based everolimus‐eluting stents (XIENCE) in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results In a prespecified subgroup analysis, outcomes of patients with or without diabetes mellitus treated with drug‐eluting stents were compared. The primary end point of this analysis was major adverse cardiac event, the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization. The analysis includes a total of 1951 patients (560 patients with and 1391 patients without diabetes mellitus) randomized to treatment with Yukon Choice PC (n=1299) or Xience (n=652). Regarding the primary end point, at 10 years patients with diabetes mellitus showed significantly higher major adverse cardiac event rates than patients without diabetes mellitus ( P <0.001; hazard ratio [HR], 1.41; 95% CI, 1.22–1.63). There was no significant difference between patients treated with Yukon Choice PC versus Xience, neither in the subgroup of patients with ( P =0.91; HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.79–1.30) nor without diabetes mellitus ( P =0.50; HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79–1.21). Rates of definite/probable stent thrombosis were 2.3% in patients with and 1.9% in patients without diabetes mellitus (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.34–2.60; P =0.52), without significant differences between study devices. Conclusions The clinical outcome of patients with diabetes after percutaneous coronary intervention with different new‐generation drug‐eluting stents is considerably worse than that of patients without diabetes mellitus, with event rates constantly increasing out to 10 years. Registration URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT00598676.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document