OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare, in a randomized fashion, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs). BACKGROUND:Sirolimus-eluting stents reduce restenosis and repeated revascularization in native coronary arteries compared with BMS. However, randomized data in SVG are absent. METHODS:Patients with SVG lesions were randomized to SES or BMS. All were scheduled to undergo 6-month coronary angiography. The primary end point was 6-month angiographic in-stent late lumen loss. Secondary end points included binary angiographic restenosis, neointimal volume by intravascular ultrasound and major adverse clinical events (death, myocardial infarction, target lesion, and vessel revascularization). RESULTS: A total of 75 patients with 96 lesions localized in 80 diseased SVGs were included: 38 patients received 60 SES for 47 lesions, whereas 37 patients received 54 BMS for 49 lesions. In-stent late loss was significantly reduced in SES (0.38 +/- 0.51 mm vs. 0.79 +/- 0.66 mm in BMS, p = 0.001). Binary in-stent and in-segment restenosis were reduced, 11.3% versus 30.6% (relative risk [RR] 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15 to 0.97, p = 0.024) and 13.6% versus 32.6% (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.97, p = 0.031), respectively. Median neointimal volume was 1 mm(3) (interquartile range 0 to 13) in SES versus 24 (interquartile range 8 to 34) in BMS (p < 0.001). Target lesion and vessel revascularization rates were significantly reduced, 5.3% versus 21.6% (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.0, p = 0.047) and 5.3% versus 27% (RR 0.19; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.83, p = 0.012), respectively. Death and myocardial infarction rates were not different. CONCLUSIONS:Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduce late loss in SVG as opposed to BMS. This is associated with a reduction in restenosis rate and repeated target lesion and vessel revascularization procedures. (The RRISC Study; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show; NCT00263263).
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare, in a randomized fashion, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein grafts (SVGs). BACKGROUND:Sirolimus-eluting stents reduce restenosis and repeated revascularization in native coronary arteries compared with BMS. However, randomized data in SVG are absent. METHODS:Patients with SVG lesions were randomized to SES or BMS. All were scheduled to undergo 6-month coronary angiography. The primary end point was 6-month angiographic in-stent late lumen loss. Secondary end points included binary angiographic restenosis, neointimal volume by intravascular ultrasound and major adverse clinical events (death, myocardial infarction, target lesion, and vessel revascularization). RESULTS: A total of 75 patients with 96 lesions localized in 80 diseased SVGs were included: 38 patients received 60 SES for 47 lesions, whereas 37 patients received 54 BMS for 49 lesions. In-stent late loss was significantly reduced in SES (0.38 +/- 0.51 mm vs. 0.79 +/- 0.66 mm in BMS, p = 0.001). Binary in-stent and in-segment restenosis were reduced, 11.3% versus 30.6% (relative risk [RR] 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.15 to 0.97, p = 0.024) and 13.6% versus 32.6% (RR 0.42; 95% CI 0.18 to 0.97, p = 0.031), respectively. Median neointimal volume was 1 mm(3) (interquartile range 0 to 13) in SES versus 24 (interquartile range 8 to 34) in BMS (p < 0.001). Target lesion and vessel revascularization rates were significantly reduced, 5.3% versus 21.6% (RR 0.24; 95% CI 0.05 to 1.0, p = 0.047) and 5.3% versus 27% (RR 0.19; 95% CI 0.05 to 0.83, p = 0.012), respectively. Death and myocardial infarction rates were not different. CONCLUSIONS:Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduce late loss in SVG as opposed to BMS. This is associated with a reduction in restenosis rate and repeated target lesion and vessel revascularization procedures. (The RRISC Study; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct/show; NCT00263263).
Authors: Ibrahim Akin; Marcus Wiemer; Steffen Schneider; Jochen Senges; Matthias Hochadel; Gert Richardt; Mohamed Abdel-Wahab; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Christoph A Nienaber Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2011-11-13 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Saami K Yazdani; Andrew Farb; Masataka Nakano; Marc Vorpahl; Elena Ladich; Aloke V Finn; Frank D Kolodgie; Renu Virmani Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Emmanouil S Brilakis; Subhash Banerjee; Robert Edson; Kendrick Shunk; Steven Goldman; David R Holmes; Deepak L Bhatt; Sunil V Rao; Mark W Smith; Mike Sather; Cindy Colling; Biswajit Kar; Lori Nielsen; Todd Conner; Todd Wagner; Bavana V Rangan; Beverly Ventura; Ying Lu; Mark Holodniy; Mei-Chiung Shih Journal: Clin Cardiol Date: 2017-08-25 Impact factor: 2.882
Authors: Pascal Meier; Emmanouil S Brilakis; Roberto Corti; Guido Knapp; Mehdi H Shishehbor; Hitinder S Gurm Journal: PLoS One Date: 2010-06-10 Impact factor: 3.240