Coronary optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI) for in vivo evaluation of stent healing: comparison with light and electron microscopy

Coronary late stent thrombosis, a rare but devastating complication, remains an important concern in particular with the increasing use of drug-eluting stents. Notably, pathological studies have indicated that the proportion of uncovered coronary stent struts represents the best morphometric predictor of late stent thrombosis. Intracoronary optical frequency domain imaging (OFDI), a novel second-generation optical coherence tomography (OCT)-derived imaging method, may allow rapid imaging for the detection of coronary stent strut coverage with a markedly higher precision when compared with intravascular ultrasound, due to a microscopic resolution (axial approximately 10-20 microm), and at a substantially increased speed of image acquisition when compared with first-generation time-domain OCT. However, a histological validation of coronary OFDI for the evaluation of stent strut coverage in vivo is urgently needed. Hence, the present study was designed to evaluate the capacity of coronary OFDI by electron (SEM) and light microscopy (LM) analysis to detect and evaluate stent strut coverage in a porcine model.

Analysis of coronary bifurcations by intravascular ultrasound and virtual histology

Background Regional differences in shear stress have been identified as reason for early plaque formation in vessel bifurcations. We aimed to investigate regional plaque morphology and composition using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and virtual histology (IVUS–VH) in coronary artery bifurcations. Methods We performed IVUS and IVUS–VH studies at coronary bifurcations to analyze segmental plaque burden and composition of different segments in relation to their orientation to the bifurcation. Results A total of 236 patients with a mean age of 59 ± 11 years (69% male) were analyzed. Plaque burden was higher at the contralateral vessel wall facing the bifurcation compared to the ipsilateral vessel wall and this difference was true for proximal and distal segments (proximal: 37 ± 12% and 45 ± 15% for segments at the ipsilateral and contralateral vessel wall, respectively, p < 0.001; distal: 37 ± 10% and 47 ± 15% for segments at the ipsilateral and contralateral vessel wall, respectively, p < 0.001). In addition, these segments exhibited a higher proportion of dense calcium and a lower proportion of fibrous tissue and fibro fatty tissue. Conclusions Segments on the contralateral wall of the bifurcation which have previously been identified as regions with low shear stress not only exhibited a higher plaque burden, but also a higher degree of calcification.

Five-Year Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes of a Randomized Comparison of Sirolimus-Eluting and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents: Results of the Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization LATE Trial

Background—Long-term comparative data of first-generation drug-eluting stents are scarce. We investigated clinical and angiographic outcomes of sirolimus-eluting (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) at 5 years as part of the Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization (SIRTAX) LATE study. Methods and Results—A total of 1012 patients were randomly assigned to SES or PES. Repeat angiography was completed in 444 of 1012 patients (43.8%) at 5 years. Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 19.7% of SES- and 21.4% of PES-treated patients (hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.68 to 1.17; P=0.39) at 5 years. There were no differences between SES and PES in terms of cardiac death (5.8% versus 5.7%; P=0.35), myocardial infarction (6.6% versus 6.9%; P=0.51), and target lesion revascularization (13.1% versus 15.1%; P=0.29). Between 1 and 5 years, the annual rate of target lesion revascularization was 2.0% (95% confidence interval, 1.4% to 2.6%) for SES and 1.4% (95% confidence interval, 0.9% to 2.0%) for PES. Among patients undergoing paired angiography at 8 months and 5 years, delayed lumen loss amounted to 0.37±0.73 mm for SES and 0.29±0.59 mm for PES (P=0.32). The overall rate of definite stent thrombosis was 4.6% for SES and 4.1% for PES (P=0.74), and very late definite stent thrombosis occurred at an annual rate of 0.65% (95% confidence interval, 0.40% to 0.90%). Conclusions—Long-term follow-up of first-generation drug-eluting stents shows no significant differences in clinical and angiographic outcomes between SES and PES. The continuous increase in late lumen loss in conjunction with the ongoing risk of very late stent thrombosis suggests that vascular healing remains incomplete up to 5 years after implantation of first-generation drug-eluting stents.

Long-term comparison of everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents for coronary revascularization

Objectives This study sought to compare the unrestricted use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Background It is unclear whether there are differences in safety and efficacy between EES and SES during long-term follow-up. Methods Using propensity score matching, clinical outcome was compared among 1,342 propensity score–matched pairs of patients treated with EES and SES. The primary outcome was a composite of death, MI, and target vessel revascularization. Results The median follow-up was 1.5 years with a maximum of 3 years. The primary outcome occurred in 14.9% of EES- and 18.0% of SES-treated patients up to 3 years (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.68 to 1.00, p = 0.056). All-cause mortality (6.0% vs. 6.5%, HR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.68 to 1.25, p = 0.59) was similar, risks of myocardial infarction (MI) (3.3% vs. 5.0%, HR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.92, p = 0.017), and target vessel revascularization (7.0% vs. 9.6%, HR: 0.75, 95% CI: 0.57 to 0.99, p = 0.039) were lower with EES than SES. Definite stent thrombosis (ST) (HR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.75, p = 0.01) was less frequent among patients treated with EES. The reduced rate of MI with EES was explained in part by the lower risk of definite ST and the corresponding decrease in events associated with ST (HR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.08 to 0.75, p = 0.013). Conclusions The unrestricted use of EES appears to be associated with improved clinical long-term outcome compared with SES. Differences in favor of EES are driven in part by a lower risk of MI associated with ST.

Presentation and outcome of patients with acute coronary syndromes in eastern Nepal

The burden of ischemic heart disease (IHD) in developing countries is on the rise, due to urbanisation, industrialisation and the low availability of evidence based therapies and interventions.

Sirolimus versus paclitaxel coronary stents in clinical practice

Objectives: We aimed at comparing the long term clinical outcome of SES and PES in routine clinical practice. Background: Although sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) more effectively reduce neointimal hyperplasia than paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), uncertainty prevails whether this difference translates into differences in clinical outcomes outside randomized controlled trials with selected patient populations and protocol-mandated angiographic follow-up. Methods: Nine hundred and four consecutive patients who underwent implantation of a drug-eluting stent between May 2004 and February 2005: 467 patients with 646 lesions received SES, 437 patients with 600 lesions received PES. Clinical follow-up was obtained at 2 years without intervening routine angiographic follow-up. The primary endpoint was a composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or target vessel revascularization (TVR). Results: At 2 years, the primary endpoint was less frequent with SES (12.9%) than PES (17.6%, HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.50–0.98, P = 0.04). The difference in favor of SES was largely driven by a lower rate of target lesion revascularisation (TLR; 4.1% vs. 6.9%, P = 0.05), whereas rates of death (6.4% vs. 7.6%, P = 0.49), MI (1.9% vs. 3.2%, P = 0.21), or definite stent thrombosis (0.6% vs. 1.4%, P = 0.27) were similar for both stent types. The benefit regarding reduced rates of TLR was significant in nondiabetic (3.6% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.04) but not in diabetic patients (5.6% vs. 6.1%, P = 0.80). Conclusions: SES more effectively reduced the need for repeat revascularization procedures than PES when used in routine clinical practice. The beneficial effect is maintained up to 2 years and may be less pronounced in diabetic patients.

Randomized trial of a computerized coronary heart disease risk assessment tool in HIV-infected patients receiving combination antiretroviral therapy

Exposure to combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) can lead to important metabolic changes and increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Computerized clinical decision support systems have been advocated to improve the management of patients at risk for CHD but it is unclear whether such systems reduce patients' risk for CHD.

Persistent sensitivity disorders at the radial artery and saphenous vein graft harvest sites: a neglected side effect of coronary artery bypass grafting procedures

The use of radial artery conduits in coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery is associated with improved long-term patency and patient survival rates as compared with saphenous vein conduits. Despite increasing popularity, relative incidence of local harvest-site complications and subjective perception of adverse long-term sequelae remain poorly described.

The prevalence of endothelial dysfunction in patients with and without coronary artery disease

Endothelial dysfunction (ED) is frequently present in patients presenting with acute or stable coronary artery disease (CAD), but it is also found in patients presenting with chest pain without angiographic coronary lesions.

Impact of coronary artery disease and percutaneous coronary intervention on outcomes in patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation

Coronary artery disease (CAD) is frequently present in patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS) undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). While revascularisation affects peri-operative outcome in patients undergoing surgical aortic valve replacement, the impact of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients undergoing TAVI is not well established.