Frequency of coronary artery bypass grafting following implantation of a paclitaxel-eluting or a bare-metal stent into a single coronary artery.

Limited data are available on the relative effect of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents on the requirement for subsequent coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence and predictors of CABG after bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent implantation. A patient-level, pooled analysis was conducted of 2,736 patients from 3 double-blind, randomized trials comparing the slow-release paclitaxel-eluting Taxus stent with an otherwise identical bare-metal stent control in single de novo coronary lesions, with 5-year follow-up. The rate of target lesion revascularization by CABG (TLR-CABG) was reduced from 4.1% in patients with bare-metal stents to 1.4% in those with Taxus stents (p <0.001). The use of the Taxus stent was the strongest predictor of freedom from TLR-CABG on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio 0.33, p <0.001). Significant reductions in TLR-CABG with Taxus compared with bare-metal stents were seen in the treatment of left anterior descending artery lesions (6.1% vs 1.8%, p <0.001) and non-left anterior descending artery lesions (2.8% vs 1.3%, p = 0.037), in patients with diabetes (6.0% vs 1.0%, p <0.01), and in those without diabetes (3.5% vs 1.6%, p <0.01). In conclusion, referral to CABG is significantly less common after stenting single coronary lesions with Taxus compared with bare-metal stents. The relative reductions in TLR-CABG of 54% in patients without diabetes, 87% in patients with diabetes, 70% in left anterior descending artery lesions, and 54% in non-left anterior descending artery lesions with Taxus compared with bare-metal stents should be considered during stent selection.

Six-month outcomes after percutaneous intervention for lesions in aortocoronary saphenous vein grafts using distal protection devices: results from the FIRE trial.

BACKGROUND: The filter-based FilterWire EX (Boston Scientific, Natick, MA) embolic protection system and the GuardWire (Medtronic, Santa Rosa, CA) balloon occlusion and aspiration device have been previously shown to reduce periprocedural complication rates of percutaneous coronary intervention for saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease and are considered the standard of care in this setting. The late clinical course after treatment with these devices has not been reported. METHODS: In the FIRE trial, 651 patients undergoing SVG intervention were randomized to either the FilterWire EX or GuardWire. Six-month rates of the primary end point (composite major adverse cardiac events [MACE]) and its components (death, myocardial infarction [MI], or target vessel revascularization) were studied. RESULTS: MACE at 30 days occurred in 9.9% of patients randomized to the FilterWire EX compared with 11.6% with the GuardWire, P = .53. By 6 months, MACE had increased to 19.3% and 21.9% in FilterWire EX and GuardWire groups, respectively, (relative risk 0.88, 95% CI 0.65-1.19; P = .44). All-cause 6-month mortality in the entire population was 3.5% (3.0% with FilterWire EX vs 4.1% with GuardWire, P = .53, with all deaths occurring after hospital discharge). MI occurred in 12.0% of patients at 6 months (12.1% vs 11.9% with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire, respectively, P = .99), and target vessel revascularization was required in 9.1% (8.2% vs 10.0%, respectively, P = .42). CONCLUSIONS: SVG intervention with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire distal protection devices resulted in similar outcomes at 6 months, although the clinical course after hospital discharge was not benign, with significant rates of death, MI, and repeat intervention.

Randomized comparison of distal protection with a filter-based catheter and a balloon occlusion and aspiration system during percutaneous intervention of diseased saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts.

BACKGROUND: The high rate of periprocedural complications resulting from atherothrombotic embolization after percutaneous intervention in diseased saphenous vein grafts is reduced by distal microcirculatory protection using a balloon occlusion and aspiration system. Whether filter-based catheters, which offer the inherent advantages of maintained perfusion and ease of use, are as effective for this purpose has not been established. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 651 patients undergoing percutaneous intervention of 682 saphenous vein graft lesions were prospectively randomized to distal protection with the filter-based FilterWire EX versus the GuardWire balloon occlusion and aspiration system. Device success was 95.5% and 97.2% with the FilterWire EX and GuardWire, respectively (P=0.25). Postprocedural measures of epicardial flow and angiographic complications were similar between the 2 groups, although bailout IIb/IIIa inhibitors were required slightly less frequently in the FilterWire EX group (0% versus 1.5%, P=0.03). The primary end point, the composite incidence of death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization at 30 days, occurred in 9.9% of FilterWire EX patients and 11.6% of GuardWire patients (difference [95% CI]=-1.7% [-6.4%, 3.1%]; P for superiority=0.53, P for noninferiority=0.0008). CONCLUSIONS: Distal protection with the FilterWire EX may be safely used as an adjunct to percutaneous intervention of diseased saphenous vein grafts and, compared with distal protection with the GuardWire balloon occlusion and aspiration system, results in similar rates of major adverse cardiac events at 30 days.