Late catch-up in lumen diameter at five-year angiography in MACE-free patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents in the Primary Stenting of Totally Occluded Native Coronary Arteries: a randomised comparison of bare metal stent implantation with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of total coronary occlusions (PRISON II).

AIMS: The present study was designed to examine the five-year angiographic follow-up of MACE-free patients enrolled in the PRISON II study. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the PRISON II study a total of 200 patients were randomised to either bare metal stents (BMS) or sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) after successful recanalisation of total coronary occlusions (TCO). Patients free of MACE with available angiography at six months were approached for repeated angiography at five years. The primary endpoint was in-stent very late luminal loss (VLLL) at five years. The secondary endpoint was additional late luminal loss (ALLL) between six months and five years. At five years, repeated angiography was performed in 72 patients, 50/82 (61%) in the SES group and 22/58 (38%) in the BMS group. In-stent VLLL was lower in the SES group (0.19 mm ± 0.72 vs. 0.51 mm ± 0.71, p=0.09) compared to the BMS group and in-segment VLLL was comparable in both groups (0.01 mm±0.58 vs. 0.03 mm ± 0.73, p=0.89). Late catch-up in lumen diameter was observed in the SES group with a trend towards increased ALLL compared to the BMS group (in-stent, 0.35 mm ± 0.88 vs. 0.04 mm ± 0.81, p=0.16; in-segment, 0.20 mm ± 0.74 vs. -0.05 mm ± 0.73, p=0.19). CONCLUSIONS: At five-year angiographic follow-up, late catch-up was observed after successful recanalisation of TCOs treated with SES. Despite a late catch-up, the angiographic results of SES were superior in-stent and similar in-segment compared to BMS.

The biochemical aspects of a non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome.

The clinical course of an acute coronary syndrome can vary from relatively benign to potentially fatal. The biomarkers of myocardial necrosis relate to the amount of myocardial damage and are closely linked to a patient's prognosis. They are measured to help guide management decisions. Recent interest in myocardial neurohumoral mechanisms has identified the natriuretic peptides as strong prognostic biomarkers following an ischemic event. During an acute event they provide information regarding the area of myocardium at risk. The biomarkers of inflammation, such as C-reactive protein, are related to both the development of atherosclerosis and the risk of acute ischemic events. The mechanism characterizing the pathophysiology of the syndrome is represented by these cardiac biomarkers. Assessing combinations of pathobiologically diverse biomarkers may provide a better risk evaluation method and further dictate subsequent therapy.

Low myocardial protein kinase G activity in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.

BACKGROUND: Prominent features of myocardial remodeling in heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFPEF) are high cardiomyocyte resting tension (F(passive)) and cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. In experimental models, both reacted favorably to raised protein kinase G (PKG) activity. The present study assessed myocardial PKG activity, its downstream effects on cardiomyocyte F(passive) and cardiomyocyte diameter, and its upstream control by cyclic guanosine monophosphate (cGMP), nitrosative/oxidative stress, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). To discern altered control of myocardial remodeling by PKG, HFPEF was compared with aortic stenosis and HF with reduced EF (HFREF). METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HFPEF (n=36), AS (n=67), and HFREF (n=43) were free of coronary artery disease. More HFPEF patients were obese (P<0.05) or had diabetes mellitus (P<0.05). Left ventricular myocardial biopsies were procured transvascularly in HFPEF and HFREF and perioperatively in aortic stenosis. F(passive) was measured in cardiomyocytes before and after PKG administration. Myocardial homogenates were used for assessment of PKG activity, cGMP concentration, proBNP-108 expression, and nitrotyrosine expression, a measure of nitrosative/oxidative stress. Additional quantitative immunohistochemical analysis was performed for PKG activity and nitrotyrosine expression. Lower PKG activity in HFPEF than in aortic stenosis (P<0.01) or HFREF (P<0.001) was associated with higher cardiomyocyte F(passive) (P<0.001) and related to lower cGMP concentration (P<0.001) and higher nitrosative/oxidative stress (P<0.05). Higher F(passive) in HFPEF was corrected by in vitro PKG administration. CONCLUSIONS: Low myocardial PKG activity in HFPEF was associated with raised cardiomyocyte F(passive) and was related to increased myocardial nitrosative/oxidative stress. The latter was probably induced by the high prevalence in HFPEF of metabolic comorbidities. Correction of myocardial PKG activity could be a target for specific HFPEF treatment.

Lack of long-term clinical benefit of thrombus aspiration during primary percutaneous coronary intervention with paclitaxel-eluting stents or bare-metal stents: post-hoc analysis of the PASSION-trial.

BACKGROUND: Although current clinical guidelines recommend the use of thrombus aspiration (TA) during primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI), previous studies evaluating TA demonstrated contradictory results. The aim of this study was to evaluate long-term clinical outcome after TA in adjunct to PPCI for acute ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI), as compared with conventional treatment, with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents or bare-metal stents. METHODS: We analyzed data of the PASSION trial, in which 619 patients with STEMI were randomly assigned to a paclitaxel-eluting stent or a bare-metal stent. TA was performed in 311 patients (50.2%). Clinical endpoints at 2 years were compared between patients who received TA during PPCI with patients who underwent conventional PPCI. The primary outcome of interest was a composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction (MI), or target-lesion revascularization (TLR). A propensity score model was made to account for baseline differences that could have affected the probability of performing TA. RESULTS: Complete follow-up was available for 598 patients (96.6%). The cumulative incidence of the combined outcome measure of cardiac death, recurrent MI, or TLR was 40 (13.0%) in the TA group and 41 (13.5%) in the conventional PPCI group (HR 0.96; 95% CI 0.62-1.47; P = 0.84). Also after adjusting for propensity score, no significant difference in event rate was observed between both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis of the PASSION trial, TA in adjunct to PPCI did not affect rates of major adverse cardiac events at 2 years follow-up, as compared with conventional PPCI.

Five-year clinical outcome after primary stenting of totally occluded native coronary arteries: a randomised comparison of bare metal stent implantation with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of total coronary occlusions (PRISON II study).

AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine the five-year clinical outcome in patients enrolled in the Primary Stenting of Totally Occluded Native Coronary Arteries II (PRISON II) study. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with totally occluded coronary arteries were randomised to either sirolimus-eluting stent (SES, n=100) or bare metal stent (BMS, n=100) implantation. At five years, patients in the SES group had significantly lower rates of target lesion revascularisation (12% vs. 30%, p=0.001), target vessel revascularisation (17% vs. 34%, p=0.009) and major adverse cardiac events (12% vs. 36%, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in death and myocardial infarction. Eight (8%) cases of stent thrombosis (seven definite and one probable; one early, one late, and six very late) were noticed in the SES group versus three cases (3%, one definite and two possible; all very late) in the BMS group (p=0.21). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study show that the documented superior short-term angiographic and clinical results of SES in patients with total coronary occlusions are maintained during long-term 5-year follow-up as compared with BMS. On the other hand, there is a trend to a higher stent thrombosis rate in the SES group.

Patency of paclitaxel-eluting versus bare metal stents long term after implantation in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.

Drug-eluting stents effectively inhibit neointimal hyperplasia within the first year, thereby reducing the need for repeat revascularization. However, a delayed pattern of restenosis might be more prominent in drug-eluting stents compared to bare metal stents (BMSs). The extent of restenosis of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs) long term after implantation in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is currently unknown. The present study was designed to evaluate very late luminal loss (VLLL) of PESs used in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction compared to BMSs. A total of 116 patients (61 with PESs and 55 with BMSs) initially included in the Paclitaxel Eluting Stent Versus Conventional Stent in ST-segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (PASSION) trial and who were free from previous lesion failure underwent angiographic follow-up. Off-line quantitative coronary analysis of the angiogram immediately after stent implantation and at follow-up was performed. The primary end point was VLLL within the stent. The presence of binary restenosis was defined as diameter stenosis >50% as a secondary end point. The mean interval between stent implantation and follow-up was 4.1 ± 0.5 years in both stent groups. In-stent VLLL was 0.12 mm (interquartile range -0.03 to 0.42) in the PES group versus 0.30 mm (interquartile range 0.08 to 0.69) in the BMS group (p = 0.011). In-segment binary restenosis was found in 4 patients (6.6%) with a PES and 6 patients (10.9%) with a BMS (p = 0.40). In conclusion, angiographic follow-up 4 years after implantation in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction showed that in patients prospectively randomized to PESs or BMSs, VLLL was low in both stent groups. PESs were associated with lower VLLL than BMSs, and the observed rate of binary restenosis was not significantly different between the 2 stent groups.

The value of N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide for early identification of myocardial infarction in patients with high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes.

BACKGROUND: N-terminal proB-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is a marker of biomechanical strain, secreted by cardiomyocytes in response to ischemia. As necrosis occurs after prolonged ischemia, a rise in NT-proBNP concentration could precede a rise in markers of necrosis. METHODS: The aim of the study was to evaluate whether NT-proBNP is able to identify those patients with an evolving myocardial infarction (MI) with high-risk non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes (NSTE-ACS). Data were analyzed from a prospective cohort of 103 high-risk NSTE-ACS patients admitted within 6 h after onset of pain and treated with an early invasive strategy. NT-proBNP samples, obtained immediately upon admission, were related to the presence of an in hospital MI. The optimal cut-off value for NT-proBNP was determined using receiver-operating characteristics (ROC) curve analysis. RESULTS: Analyses was performed separately for creatinine kinase MB-mass (CKMB) and troponin T (TnT) based MI definitions. In both cases, a NT-proBNP concentration above 40 pmol/L (339 ng/L) at admission proved to be independently associated with the presence of MI. The diagnostic odds ratio (OR) for CKMB-MI was 4.9 (confidence interval 2.0-11.9, p<0.001). The diagnostic OR for TnT-MI was 4.9 (1.8-14.4, p=0.003). Adjusting for differences in baseline variables did not weaken the diagnostic OR. In addition, elevated NT-proBNP concentrations were related to unfavour-able demographic, physical and biochemical parameters. CONCLUSIONS: With a dichotomous cut-off value, a single elevated NT-proBNP (>40 pmol/L) at admission provides independent information about the presence of MI in high-risk NSTE-ACS patients.

5-year follow-up after primary percutaneous coronary intervention with a paclitaxel-eluting stent versus a bare-metal stent in acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: a follow-up study of the PASSION (Paclitaxel-Eluting Versus Conventional Stent in Myocardial Infarction with ST-Segment Elevation) trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term outcomes of the PASSION (Paclitaxel-Eluting Versus Conventional Stent in Myocardial Infarction with ST-Segment Elevation) trial. BACKGROUND: In primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is still controversial. Several randomized controlled trials of DES, compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), with short-term follow-up showed a reduction in target lesion revascularization (TLR), but no differences in rates of cardiac death or recurrent myocardial infarction. Moreover, the occurrence of (very) late stent thrombosis (ST) continues to be of major concern, and, therefore, long-term follow-up results are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 619 patients presenting with STEMI to a paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) or the similar BMS. The primary end point was the composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or TLR. We performed clinical follow-up at 5 years. RESULTS: At 5 years, the occurrence of the composite of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or TLR was comparable at 18.6% versus 21.8% in PES and BMS, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58 to 1.18, p = 0.28). The incidence of definite or probable ST was 12 (4.2%) in the PES group and 10 (3.4%) in the BMS group (HR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.51 to 276, p = 0.68). CONCLUSIONS: In the present analysis of PES compared with BMS in primary percutaneous coronary intervention for STEMI, no significant difference in major adverse cardiac events was observed. In addition, no difference in the incidence of definite or probable ST was seen, although very late ST was almost exclusively seen after the use of PES. (Paclitaxel-Eluting Versus Conventional Stent in Myocardial Infarction with ST-Segment Elevation [PASSION]; ISRCTN65027270).

Percutaneous coronary intervention for non ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes: which, when and how?

The presentation of patients with suspected non ST-elevation acute coronary syndromes is quite diverse. Therefore, the diagnostic workup and choice of treatment may vary accordingly. Major issues regarding the evaluation are the likelihood of the diagnosis and the risk for adverse events. These factors should guide the choice of diagnostic test. Patients with increased risk for ischemic events and patients with recurrent ischemia are most likely to benefit from revascularization. In addition, when percutaneous coronary intervention is considered, evidence suggests that sufficient time should be allowed for pharmacologic stabilization, reducing the possibility of periprocedurally inflicted myocardial infarction. However, postponement of intervention may lead to an increase of new spontaneous events, and high-risk patients should apply for revascularization soon after pharmacologic stabilization. The extent of revascularization performed by percutaneous coronary intervention depends predominantly on patient characteristics and anatomy but should be limited to flow-obstructive lesions. In conclusion, patients presenting with non-ST elevation acute coronary syndromes constitute a very diverse population; diagnostic workup, treatment, and the timing of a possible intervention should be tailored individually.

Drug-eluting stents in acute myocardial infarction: updated meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains an "off label" indication due to concerns regarding their performance in this patient subset. METHODS: We searched Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Internet-based sources of information on clinical trials in cardiology for randomized trials comparing drug-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in patients with AMI. Hazard ratios for the composite of death or recurrent myocardial infarction, (primary safety endpoint), reintervention (primary efficacy endpoint), death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were calculated performing a meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials with 7,781 patients. RESULTS: There was no difference in the hazard of death or recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.91; [95% CI 0.75-1.09]) between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. Treatment with drug-eluting stents resulted in a significant reduction in the hazard of reintervention (0.41 [95% CI 0.32-0.52]). The hazards of death (0.90 [95% CI 0.71-1.15]), myocardial infarction (0.81 [95% CI 0.63-1.04]), and stent thrombosis (0.84 [95% CI 0.61-1.17]) were not significantly different between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. CONCLUSIONS: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with AMI is safe and markedly reduces the need for reintervention as compared to bare-metal stents.

Early discharge after primary percutaneous coronary intervention.

The length of hospital stay after a successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for acute myocardial infarction is subject of debate. Patients should not be kept in hospital longer than strictly needed in terms of safety, psycho-social reasons, adequate mobilisation and patient comfort. In many tertiary centres with a busy PCI program insufficient bed capacity is an ongoing concern. Moreover, it seems obvious that shorter hospital stay will lead to a significant cost reduction. In order to know if very early discharge after primary PCI is feasible and safe one should identify the events that might threaten the patient as well as the timing of occurrence of such events. As a result a relatively large proportion of patients with a very low risk of early complications can be defined and in those patients very early discharge is indicated.

Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in diabetic patients with ST-segment elevation acute myocardial infarction: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from seven randomized trials.

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The performance of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in high-risk patients with diabetes and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who have undergone primary angioplasty has not been previously studied. The objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DESs in diabetic patients with STEMI. METHODS: We performed a pooled analysis of individual patient data from seven randomized trials that compared DESs (i.e., sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) with bare-metal stents (BMSs) in patients with STEMI. The analysis involved 389 patients with diabetes mellitus from a total of 2476 patients. The outcomes of interest were target-lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, death and the composite endpoint of death or recurrent myocardial infarction during a follow-up of 12-24 months. RESULTS: Overall, 206 diabetic patients received a DES and 183, a BMS. The risk of target-lesion revascularization was significantly lower in patients treated with a DES compared to those treated with a BMS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.88; P=.02). There was no significant difference in the risk of stent thrombosis between those treated with a DES or a BMS (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.09-1.13; P=.08). Similarly, the risk of the combined endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was not significantly different between patients treated with a DES or a BMS (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.36-1.13; P=.12). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with BMSs, DES use improved clinical outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing primary angioplasty for STEMI: the need for reintervention was reduced, with no increase in mortality or myocardial infarction.

Stents liberadores de fármacos frente a stents convencionales en pacientes diabéticos con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST: un análisis combinado de los datos de pacientes individuales de 7 ensayos aleatorizados / Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Diabetic Patients With ST-Segment Elevation Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Pooled Analysis of Individual Patient Data From Seven Randomized Trials

Introducción y objetivos. Los resultados obtenidos con los stents liberadores de fármacos (SLF) en el grupo de pacientes de alto riesgo formado por los pacientes diabéticos con infarto agudo de miocardio con elevación del segmento ST (IAMCEST) tratados con angioplastia primaria no se han estudiado con anterioridad. Nuestro objetivo fue evaluar la eficacia y la seguridad de los SLF en pacientes diabéticos con IAMCEST. Métodos. Llevamos a cabo un análisis combinado de los datos de pacientes individuales de siete ensayos aleatorizados en los que se comparó el empleo de stents liberadores de sirolimus o de paclitaxel (SLF) con el de stents convencionales (SC) en el contexto de un IAMCEST. Se incluyó en este análisis a 389 pacientes con diabetes mellitus de un grupo total de 2.476. Los objetivos del estudio fueron la revascularización de la lesión diana, la trombosis del stent, la muerte y la variable combinada de muerte o infarto de miocardio recurrente durante un periodo de seguimiento de 12-24 meses. Resultados. Hubo 206 pacientes diabéticos tratados con SLF y 183 tratados con SC. El riesgo de que se practicara una revascularización de la lesión diana fue significativamente inferior en los pacientes tratados con SLF en comparación con los pacientes tratados con SC (razón de riesgos [HR] = 0,44; intervalo de confianza [IC] del 95%, 0,23-0,88; p = 0,02). El riesgo de trombosis del stent no presentó diferencias significativas entre los pacientes tratados con SLF y los tratados con SC (HR = 0,33; IC del 95%, 0,09-1,13; p = 0,08). De forma análoga, el riesgo de la variable de valoración combinada formada por la muerte y el infarto de miocardio no presentó diferencias significativas entre los pacientes tratados con SLF y los tratados con SC (HR = 0,64; IC del 95%, 0,36-1,13; p = 0,12). Conclusiones. En comparación con los SC, los SLF mejoran los resultados clínicos en los pacientes diabéticos a los que se practica una angioplastia primaria por un IAMCEST, al reducir la necesidad de reintervención sin incrementar la tasa de mortalidad o infarto de miocardio (AU)

Introduction and objectives. The performance of drug-eluting stents (DES) in high-risk patients with diabetes and acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who have undergone primary angioplasty has not been previously studied. The objestive was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DESs in diabetic patients with STEMI. Methods. We performed a pooled analysis of individual patient data from 7 randomized trials that compared DES (ie, sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) with bare-metal stent (BMS) in patients with STEMI. The analysis involved 389 patients with diabetes mellitus from a total of 2476 patients. The outcomes of interest were target-lesion revascularization, stent thrombosis, death, and the composite endpoint of death or recurrent myocardial infarction during a follow-up of 12-24 months. Results. Overall, 206 diabetic patients received a DES and 183, a BMS. The risk of target-lesion revascularization was significantly lower in patients treated with a DES compared to those treated with a BMS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.88; P=.02). There was no significant difference in the risk of stent thrombosis between those treated with a DES or a BMS (HR=0.33; 95% CI, 0.09-1.13; P=.08). Similarly, the risk of the combined endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was not significantly different between patients treated with a DES or a BMS (HR=0.64; 95% CI, 0.36-1.13; P=.12). Conclusions. Compared with BMSs, DES use improved clinical outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing primary angioplasty for STEMI: the need for reintervention was reduced, with no increase in mortality or myocardial infarction. was significantly lower in patients treated with a DES compared to those treated with a BMS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.23-0.88; P=.02). There was no significant difference in the risk of stent thrombosis between those treated with a DES or a BMS (HR 0.33, 95% CI 0.09-1.13; P=.08). Similarly, the risk of the combined endpoint of death or myocardial infarction was not significantly different between patients treated with a DES or a BMS (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.36-1.13; P=.12). Conclusions. Compared with BMSs, DES use improved clinical outcomes in diabetic patients undergoing primary angioplasty for STEMI: the need for reintervention was reduced, with no increase in mortality or myocardial infarction (AU)

Magnetically navigated percutaneous coronary intervention in distal and/or complex lesions may improve procedural outcome and material consumption.

AIMS: Comparison of magnetic guidewire navigation in percutaneous coronary intervention (magnetic PCI) across distal and/or complex lesions versus conventional navigation (conventional PCI). METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-seven consecutive patients (age 61 +/- 10 yr) undergoing elective single vessel magnetic PCI for distal and/or complex lesions were matched by age and lesion location with 45 patients undergoing conventional PCI (age 63 +/- 10 yr). Technical success rate was defined as an intraluminal wire position distal to the stenosis. Procedural outcome and costs were evaluated. Baseline demographics and angiographic characteristics of the two groups were similar. The technical success rate did not differ between magnetic and conventional PCI (95.7 vs 97.8%; p = 1.00). Significantly shorter procedural and fluoroscopy time were observed for magnetic compared to conventional PCI (29.9 +/- 17.6 vs 41.1 +/- 21 min, p = 0.007; 7.5 +/- 7.3 vs 16.1 +/- 22.4 min, p = 0.02 respectively). Less contrast was used in the magnetic PCI group (58 ml/patient; P = 0.02). These advantages resulted in a mean estimated saving of 1400 euro per patient (P < 0.001). Advantages of procedural outcome were even more pronounced in the ACC/AHA lesion class C subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Magnetic compared to conventional PCI is an attractive novel technique that proved to be feasible and safe and might be faster in distal and especially complex lesions.

Three-year clinical outcome after primary stenting of totally occluded native coronary arteries: a randomized comparison of bare-metal stent implantation with sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for the treatment of total coronary occlusions (Primary Stenting of Totally Occluded Native Coronary Arteries [PRISON] II study).

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to examine the 3-year clinical outcome in patients enrolled in the Primary Stenting of Totally Occluded Native Coronary Arteries II study. METHODS: Patients with totally occluded coronary arteries randomized to either sirolimus-eluting Cypher stents (SESs) (Cordis, a Johnson & Joshson Company, Miami Lakes, FL) (100 patients) or bare-metal BxVelocity stents (BMSs) (Cordis) (100 patients) were followed clinically for 3 years. RESULTS: Between 1 and 3 years, there were infrequent additional clinical events that were equally distributed between the SES and the BMS group. After 3 years, target lesion revascularization was 7% in the SES group versus 27% in the BMS group (P < .001); and target vessel revascularization was seen in 11% in the SES group versus 30% in the BMS group (P = .002). Major adverse cardiac events were noted in 10% of the SES group versus 34% in the BMS group (P < .001). There were no statistically significant differences in death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis according to the Academic Research Consortium criteria between the 2 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcome up to 3 years after implantation of SESs for total coronary occlusions continues to demonstrate a significant reduction in adverse clinical events compared with BMSs without the evidence for either disproportionate late restenosis or late stent thrombosis.

Two year follow-up after primary PCI with a paclitaxel-eluting stent versus a bare-metal stent for acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (the PASSION trial): a follow-up study.

AIMS: This follow-up study was performed to assess the long-term effects of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients who had undergone a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). METHODS AND RESULTS: The PASSION trial randomly assigned 619 patients with STEMI to receive either a PES or BMS. The composite endpoint for the follow-up study was the occurrence of the combination of cardiac death, recurrent myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR) or stent thrombosis at two years. A trend towards a lower rate of the composite endpoint was observed in the PES compared to the BMS group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.70; 95% C.I. 0.45-1.09). This was driven by a reduced TLR in favour of PES (HR 0.60; 95% C.I. 0.34-1.09). Angiographically proven stent thrombosis at two years did not differ significantly between groups (2.1% in the PES group versus 1.4%; HR 1.48; 95% C.I. 0.42-5.23). CONCLUSIONS: PES implantation for STEMI did not significantly improve clinical outcome at two years after the index event, although there was a trend towards a lower rate of target-lesion revascularisation. The rate of stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between groups.

Circulating white blood cells and platelets amplify oxidative stress in heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Mitochondria of circulating white blood cells (WBC) and platelets sense oxidative stress during capillary passage and react by producing reactive oxygen species (ROS). Although evidence indicates that congestive heart failure (CHF) is associated with oxidative stress, the role of WBC and platelets as mediators in CHF has not been investigated. METHODS: Patients with CHF (n = 15) and healthy volunteers (n = 9) were enrolled between 2006 and 2007 into this observational study. Arterial and venous blood samples from participants were incubated with probes to detect cytosolic and mitochondrial ROS. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting was used to measure the degree of fluorescence in WBC and platelets. RESULTS: Patients with CHF had a higher proportion of ROS-positive arterial WBC and platelets than did controls (67% +/- 47% versus 16% +/- 9%; P <0.005), as well as venous WBC and platelets (77% +/- 43% versus 38% +/- 13%; P <0.01). In the control group, the proportion of cytosolic ROS-positive arterial WBC and platelets was lower than that for ROS-positive venous WBC and platelets (16% +/- 9% versus 38% +/- 13%; P <0.005). CHF patients had a higher proportion of mitochondrial ROS-positive arterial and venous WBC and platelets than did controls. CONCLUSION: In CHF, the proportion of WBC and platelets that are ROS-positive is raised, possibly because cytosolic ROS-positive WBC and platelets are normally cleared in the lungs; this function is deficient in CHF while mitochondrial ROS production is increased. The raised numbers of circulating ROS-positive WBC and platelets amplify oxidative stress in CHF.

Diastolic stiffness of the failing diabetic heart: importance of fibrosis, advanced glycation end products, and myocyte resting tension.

BACKGROUND: Excessive diastolic left ventricular stiffness is an important contributor to heart failure in patients with diabetes mellitus. Diabetes is presumed to increase stiffness through myocardial deposition of collagen and advanced glycation end products (AGEs). Cardiomyocyte resting tension also elevates stiffness, especially in heart failure with normal left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). The contribution to diastolic stiffness of fibrosis, AGEs, and cardiomyocyte resting tension was assessed in diabetic heart failure patients with normal or reduced LVEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Left ventricular endomyocardial biopsy samples were procured in 28 patients with normal LVEF and 36 patients with reduced LVEF, all without coronary artery disease. Sixteen patients with normal LVEF and 10 with reduced LVEF had diabetes mellitus. Biopsy samples were used for quantification of collagen and AGEs and for isolation of cardiomyocytes to measure resting tension. Diabetic heart failure patients had higher diastolic left ventricular stiffness irrespective of LVEF. Diabetes mellitus increased the myocardial collagen volume fraction only in patients with reduced LVEF (from 14.6+/-1.0% to 22.4+/-2.2%, P<0.001) and increased cardiomyocyte resting tension only in patients with normal LVEF (from 5.1+/-0.7 to 8.5+/-0.9 kN/m2, P=0.006). Diabetes increased myocardial AGE deposition in patients with reduced LVEF (from 8.8+/-2.5 to 24.1+/-3.8 score/mm2; P=0.005) and less so in patients with normal LVEF (from 8.2+/-2.5 to 15.7+/-2.7 score/mm2, P=NS). CONCLUSIONS: Mechanisms responsible for the increased diastolic stiffness of the diabetic heart differ in heart failure with reduced and normal LVEF: Fibrosis and AGEs are more important when LVEF is reduced, whereas cardiomyocyte resting tension is more important when LVEF is normal.

Meta-analysis of randomized trials on drug-eluting stents vs. bare-metal stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents vs. bare-metal stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a meta-analysis of eight randomized trials comparing drug-eluting stents (sirolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting stents) with bare-metal stents in 2786 patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. All patients were followed up for a mean of 12.0-24.2 months. Individual data were available for seven trials with 2476 patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the need for reintervention (target lesion revascularization). The primary safety endpoint was stent thrombosis. Other outcomes of interest were death and recurrent myocardial infarction. Drug-eluting stents significantly reduced the risk of reintervention, hazard ratio of 0.38 (95% CI, 0.29-0.50), P < 0.001. The overall risk of stent thrombosis: hazard ratio of 0.80 (95% CI, 0.46-1.39), P = 0.43; death: hazard ratio of 0.76 (95% CI, 0.53-1.10), P = 0.14; and recurrent myocardial infarction: hazard ratio of 0.72 (95% CI, 0.48-1.08, P = 0.11) was not significantly different for patients receiving drug-eluting stents vs. bare-metal stents. CONCLUSION: The use of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction is safe and improves clinical outcomes by reducing the risk of reintervention compared with bare-metal stents.