ABSTRACT
Iliac artery angioplasty with stenting is an effective alternative treatment modality for aortoiliac occlusive diseases. Few randomized controlled trials have compared the efficacy and safety between self-expandable stent (SES) and balloon-expandable stent (BES) in atherosclerotic iliac artery disease. In this randomized, multicenter study, patients with common or external iliac artery occlusive disease were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either BES or SES. The primary end point was the 1-year clinical patency, defined as freedom from any surgical or percutaneous intervention due to restenosis of the target lesion after the index procedure. The secondary end point was a composite event from major adverse clinical events at 1 year. A total of 201 patients were enrolled from 17 major cardiovascular intervention centers in South Korea. The mean age of the enrolled patients was 66.8 ± 8.5 years and 86.2% of the participants were male. The frequency of critical limb ischemia was 15.4%, and the most common target lesion was in the common iliac artery (75.1%). As the primary end point, the 1-year clinical patency as primary end point was 99% in the BES group and 99% in the SES group (p > 0.99). The rate of repeat revascularization at 1 year was 7.8% in the BES group and 7.0% in the SES group (p = 0.985; confidence interval, 1.011 [0.341-2.995]). In our randomized study, the treatment of iliac artery occlusive disease with self-expandable versus balloon-expandable stent was comparable in 12-month clinical outcomes without differences in the procedural success or geographic miss rate regardless of the deployment method in the distal aortoiliac occlusive lesion (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01834495).
ABSTRACT
Data regarding the clinical outcomes of older patients after Synergy everolimus-eluting stent (S-EES) implantation are limited. This study investigated the 12-month clinical outcomes of older patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention with new-generation drug-eluting stents according to ischemic risks. This prospective multicenter study targeted patients aged ≥75 years who underwent S-EES implantation. The primary and secondary end points included 12-month device-oriented composite end point (DOCE) (cardiovascular death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularization) and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCEs; all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, stent thrombosis, or stroke), respectively. A stratified analysis was conducted according to high-ischemic risk (HIR), defined as complex coronary intervention (number of stents implanted ≥3, total stented length >60 mm, chronic total occlusion, left main, or bifurcation), diabetes, or chronic kidney disease. In total, 650 enrolled patients aged ≥75 years were categorized into HIR (n = 425) and non-HIR groups (n = 225). In the total population, the 1-year incidence of DOCEs was 2.5%. The rates of DOCEs were not significantly different between the HIR and the non-HIR groups, whereas the MACCE rate was higher in the HIR (9.4%) than the non-HIR group (4.9%, p = 0.035), and the DOCE and MACCE components did not differ significantly in the occurrence between the groups. The independent predictors for the DOCEs or MACCEs included age, anemia, or left ventricular ejection fraction <40%. In conclusion, in older patients, S-EES implantation demonstrated favorable device-related outcomes, regardless of procedural complexity or co-morbidities. However, it requires careful attention because older patients with HIR are associated with worse clinical outcomes.
