BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated that the second-generation cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (CoCr-EES) is superior to the first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) and is noninferior or superior to the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in terms of safety and efficacy. It remains unclear whether vascular responses to CoCr-EES are different from those to SES and PES because the pathology of CoCr-EES has not been described in humans. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 204 lesions (SES=73; PES=85; CoCr-EES=46) from 149 autopsy cases with duration of implantation >30 days and ≤3 years were pathologically analyzed, and comparison of vascular responses was corrected for duration of implantation. The observed frequency of late and very late stent thrombosis was less in CoCr-EES (4%) versus SES (21%; P=0.029) and PES (26%; P=0.008). Neointimal thickness was comparable among the groups, whereas the percentage of uncovered struts was strikingly lower in CoCr-EES (median=2.6%) versus SES (18.0%; P<0.0005) and PES (18.7%; P<0.0005). CoCr-EES showed a lower inflammation score (with no hypersensitivity) and less fibrin deposition versus SES and PES. The observed frequency of neoatherosclerosis, however, did not differ significantly among the groups (CoCr-EES=29%; SES=35%; PES=19%). CoCr-EES had the least frequency of stent fracture (CoCr-EES=13%; SES=40%; PES=19%; P=0.007 for CoCr-EES versus SES), whereas fracture-related restenosis or thrombosis was comparable among the groups (CoCr-EES=6.5%; SES=5.5%; PES=1.2%). CONCLUSIONS: CoCr-EES demonstrated greater strut coverage with less inflammation, less fibrin deposition, and less late and very late stent thrombosis compared with SES and PES in human autopsy analysis. Nevertheless, the observed frequencies of neoatherosclerosis and fracture-related adverse pathological events were comparable in these devices, indicating that careful long-term follow-up remains important even after CoCr-EES placement.
BACKGROUND: Clinical trials have demonstrated that the second-generation cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stent (CoCr-EES) is superior to the first-generation paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) and is noninferior or superior to the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in terms of safety and efficacy. It remains unclear whether vascular responses to CoCr-EES are different from those to SES and PES because the pathology of CoCr-EES has not been described in humans. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 204 lesions (SES=73; PES=85; CoCr-EES=46) from 149 autopsy cases with duration of implantation >30 days and ≤3 years were pathologically analyzed, and comparison of vascular responses was corrected for duration of implantation. The observed frequency of late and very late stent thrombosis was less in CoCr-EES (4%) versus SES (21%; P=0.029) and PES (26%; P=0.008). Neointimal thickness was comparable among the groups, whereas the percentage of uncovered struts was strikingly lower in CoCr-EES (median=2.6%) versus SES (18.0%; P<0.0005) and PES (18.7%; P<0.0005). CoCr-EES showed a lower inflammation score (with no hypersensitivity) and less fibrin deposition versus SES and PES. The observed frequency of neoatherosclerosis, however, did not differ significantly among the groups (CoCr-EES=29%; SES=35%; PES=19%). CoCr-EES had the least frequency of stent fracture (CoCr-EES=13%; SES=40%; PES=19%; P=0.007 for CoCr-EES versus SES), whereas fracture-related restenosis or thrombosis was comparable among the groups (CoCr-EES=6.5%; SES=5.5%; PES=1.2%). CONCLUSIONS:CoCr-EES demonstrated greater strut coverage with less inflammation, less fibrin deposition, and less late and very late stent thrombosis compared with SES and PES in human autopsy analysis. Nevertheless, the observed frequencies of neoatherosclerosis and fracture-related adverse pathological events were comparable in these devices, indicating that careful long-term follow-up remains important even after CoCr-EES placement.
Authors: Stéphane Cook; Peter Wenaweser; Mario Togni; Michael Billinger; Cyrill Morger; Christian Seiler; Rolf Vogel; Otto Hess; Bernhard Meier; Stephan Windecker Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-05-08 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: A Farb; P F Heller; S Shroff; L Cheng; F D Kolodgie; A J Carter; D S Scott; J Froehlich; R Virmani Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-07-24 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Aloke V Finn; Michael Joner; Gaku Nakazawa; Frank Kolodgie; John Newell; Mike C John; Herman K Gold; Renu Virmani Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-04-16 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Oscar C Marroquin; Faith Selzer; Suresh R Mulukutla; David O Williams; Helen A Vlachos; Robert L Wilensky; Jean-François Tanguay; Elizabeth M Holper; J Dawn Abbott; Joon S Lee; Conrad Smith; William D Anderson; Sheryl F Kelsey; Kevin E Kip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-01-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gaku Nakazawa; Aloke V Finn; Michael Joner; Elena Ladich; Robert Kutys; Erik K Mont; Herman K Gold; Allen P Burke; Frank D Kolodgie; Renu Virmani Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-08-25 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Manel Sabate; Angel Cequier; Andrés Iñiguez; Antonio Serra; Rosana Hernandez-Antolin; Vicente Mainar; Marco Valgimigli; Maurizio Tespili; Pieter den Heijer; Armando Bethencourt; Nicolás Vazquez; Joan Antoni Gómez-Hospital; José Antonio Baz; Victoria Martin-Yuste; Robert-Jan van Geuns; Fernando Alfonso; Pascual Bordes; Matteo Tebaldi; Monica Masotti; Antonio Silvestro; Bianca Backx; Salvatore Brugaletta; Gerrit Anne van Es; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Lancet Date: 2012-09-03 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lei Song; Gary S Mintz; Dong Yin; Myong Hwa Yamamoto; Chee Yang Chin; Mitsuaki Matsumura; Khady Fall; Ajay J Kirtane; Manish A Parikh; Jeffrey W Moses; Ziad A Ali; Richard A Shlofmitz; Akiko Maehara Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2017-03-09 Impact factor: 2.357