Catheter-based delivery of fluid paclitaxel for prevention of restenosis in native coronary artery lesions after stent implantation.

BACKGROUND: Stents eluting antiproliferative drugs reduce the incidence of restenosis but delay healing of the vascular wall. We assessed the safety and efficacy of catheter-based local delivery of fluid paclitaxel in patients with coronary de novo stenoses after implantation of a bare metal stent. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a prospective, randomized trial comparing the local delivery of fluid paclitaxel after bare metal stent implantation (group I) with the implantation of a bare metal stent (group II) and the implantation of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (group III) in 204 patients. The primary end point was in-stent late lumen loss. Secondary end points included binary restenosis rate >50%, minimal lumen diameter, diameter stenosis, and a composite clinical end point (major adverse cardiac events and revascularization of the target lesion) 6 months after intervention. At 6 months, angiography showed an in-stent late lumen loss of 0.61+/-0.44 mm in group I versus 0.99+/-0.72 mm in group II (I versus II, P=0.0006) and 0.44+/-0.48 mm in group III (noninferiority of I versus III, P=0.023). The 1-sided 95% CI for the true difference of the means of in-stent late lumen loss in groups I and III was -infinity to 0.3174188. The cumulative overall rate of major cardiac events was 13.4% in group I, 26.8% in group II, and 14.9% in group III. Target lesion revascularization rate was 13.4% (group I), 22.1% (group II), and 13.4% (group III). CONCLUSIONS: Additional antiproliferative treatment of de novo lesions in native coronary arteries with catheter-based delivery of fluid paclitaxel after bare metal stenting was safe and significantly reduced neointimal proliferation, restenosis, and clinical events compared with bare metal stent implantation alone.

Statins do not adversely affect post-interventional residual platelet aggregation and outcomes in patients undergoing coronary stenting treated by dual antiplatelet therapy.

AIMS: There are growing data suggesting a clinical relevance of residual platelet aggregation (RPA) in patients undergoing PCI. Drug-drug interaction of statins and clopidogrel has been controversially discussed in ex vivo studies and clinical trials. The aim of the present study was to investigate the effects of peri-procedural statin medication on the metabolization of aspirin and clopidogrel with regard to platelet aggregation and clinical outcome in patients undergoing coronary intervention. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with coronary stenting for symptomatic coronary artery disease are routinely evaluated by platelet function analysis in a monocentre registry, and for the present study, a consecutive cohort of 1155 patients were analysed. About 87.7% of the patients were treated with statins at the time of platelet function analysis. Residual platelet activity assessed by adenosine diphosphate (20 micromol/L)-induced platelet aggregation was not significantly influenced by statin treatment. Nor the significant effects of CYP3A4-metabolization pathway on post-treatment aggregation were recorded, although there was even a trend to lower RPA values in patients treated with CYP3A4-metabolized statins. Further, in an inter-individual analysis comparing patients treated with CYP3A4- and non-CYP3A4-metabolized statins, no time-dependent difference of clopidogrels anti-aggregatory effects was observed. Clinical follow-up of major adverse events (myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, death) in 991 patients within 3 months revealed no significant adverse effects of statin treatment on clinical outcome. Instead, statin treatment was independently associated with lower incidence of composite events (HR 0.44, 95% confidence interval 0.23-0.83, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Peri-procedural co-administration of statins does not increase the post-interventional RPA in cardiovascular patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy and does not worsen the clinical prognosis of these patients.