Very late stent thrombosis and neointimal plaque rupture after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents: observations with angiography, IVUS and OCT.
ABSTRACT Drug-eluting stent (DES) dramatically reduces the incidence of restenosis and rates of target lesion revascularization. Although several reports suggest that very late stent thrombosis could occur in patients after DES implantation, neointimal plaque rupture may be uncommon in the patients treated with DES compared with bare-metal stent. It is unclear that the reason why the patient in acute coronary syndrome (ACS) treated with DES has a high frequency of very late stent thrombosis and pathophysiological mechanisms of neointimal plaque rupture after DES implantation. We report a case of very late stent thrombosis with the findings of neontimal plaque rupture as well as incomplete stent apposition 4 years after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation in ACS.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The goal of this intravascular ultrasound investigation was to provide a more detailed morphological analysis of the local biological effects of the implantation of a sirolimus-eluting stent compared with an uncoated stent. In the RAVEL trial, 238 patients with single de novo lesions were randomized to receive either an 18-mm sirolimus-eluting stent (Bx VELOCITY stent, Cordis) or an uncoated stent (Bx VELOCITY stent). In a subset of 95 patients (sirolimus-eluting stent=48, uncoated stent=47), motorized intravascular ultrasound pullback (0.5 mm/s) was performed at a 6-month follow-up. Stent volumes, total vessel volumes, and plaque-behind-stent volumes were comparable. However, the difference in neointimal hyperplasia (2+/-5 versus 37+/-28 mm3) and percent of volume obstruction (1+/-3% versus 29+/-20%) at 6 months between the 2 groups was highly significant (P<0.001), emphasizing the nearly complete abolition of the proliferative process inside the drug-eluting stent. Analysis of the proximal and distal edge volumes showed no significant difference between the 2 groups in external elastic membrane or lumen and plaque volume at the proximal and distal edges. There was also no evidence of intrastent thrombosis or persisting dissection at the stent edges. Although there was a higher incidence of incomplete stent apposition in the sirolimus group compared with the uncoated stent group (P<0.05), it was not associated with any adverse clinical events at 1 year. Sirolimus-eluting stents are effective in preventing neointimal hyperplasia without creating edge effect and without affecting the plaque burden behind the struts.Circulation 08/2002; 106(7):798-803. · 15.20 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Sirolimus-eluting stents (SESs) recently proved to be superior to bare metal stents (BMSs) in decreasing the need for repeat revascularization in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) at 1 year. Whether this also holds for paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) is currently unclear and the long-term relatively efficacy of the 2 drug-eluting stents is currently unknown. We investigated the 3-year efficacy of SESs and PESs versus BMSs in patients with STEMI. Primary angioplasty was performed in a consecutive group of 505 patients (BMSs in 183, SESs in 186, PESs in 136). At 3 years, the cumulative mortality rate was comparable in the 3 groups: 13.3% in the BMS group, 11.5% in the SES group, and 12.4% in the PES group (nonsignificant for all). The rate of target vessel revascularization (TVR) was 12.0% in the BMS group compared with 8.0% and 7.7% in the SES and PES groups, respectively (p = 0.12 for BMS vs SES, 0.30 for BMS vs PES, 0.62 for SES vs PES). The cumulative incidence of death, MI, or TVR was 25.5% in the BMS group compared with 17.9% and 20.6% in the SES and PES groups, respectively (p = 0.06 for BMS vs SES, 0.32 for BMS vs PES, 0.45 for SES vs PES). Angiographic stent thrombosis occurred in 2.4% of all patients (BMS 1.6%, SES 2.7%, PES 2.9%). In conclusion, in this relatively small consecutive patient cohort, the use of SESs and PESs was no longer associated with significantly lower rates of TVR and major adverse cardiace events in patients with STEMI after 3 years of follow-up. A high frequency of stent thrombosis was observed in the 2 drug-eluting stent groups.The American Journal of Cardiology 05/2007; 99(8):1027-32. · 3.21 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents. We searched relevant sources from inception to March, 2007, and contacted investigators and manufacturers to identify randomised controlled trials in patients with coronary artery disease that compared drug-eluting with bare-metal stents, or that compared sirolimus-eluting stents head-to-head with paclitaxel-eluting stents. Safety outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis; the effectiveness outcome was target lesion revascularisation. We included 38 trials (18,023 patients) with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Trialists and manufacturers provided additional data on clinical outcomes for 29 trials. We did a network meta-analysis with a mixed-treatment comparison method to combine direct within-trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Mortality was similar in the three groups: hazard ratios (HR) were 1.00 (95% credibility interval 0.82-1.25) for sirolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents, 1.03 (0.84-1.22) for paclitaxel-eluting versus bare-metal stents, and 0.96 (0.83-1.24) for sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. Sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with the lowest risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0.81, 95% credibility interval 0.66-0.97, p=0.030 vs bare-metal stents; 0.83, 0.71-1.00, p=0.045 vs paclitaxel-eluting stents). There were no significant differences in the risk of definite stent thrombosis (0 days to 4 years). However, the risk of late definite stent thrombosis (>30 days) was increased with paclitaxel-eluting stents (HR 2.11, 95% credibility interval 1.19-4.23, p=0.017 vs bare-metal stents; 1.85, 1.02-3.85, p=0.041 vs sirolimus-eluting stents). The reduction in target lesion revascularisation seen with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents was more pronounced with sirolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (0.70, 0.56-0.84; p=0.0021). The risks of mortality associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents are similar. Sirolimus-eluting stents seem to be clinically better than bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting stents.The Lancet 09/2007; 370(9591):937-48. · 39.06 Impact Factor