498 research outputs found
sj-docx-1-jet-10.1177_15266028231212133 – Supplemental material for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Infrapopliteal Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Primary Patency and Binary Restenosis Rates
No full textSupplemental material, sj-docx-1-jet-10.1177_15266028231212133 for Percutaneous Transluminal Angioplasty for Infrapopliteal Chronic Limb-Threatening Ischemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Primary Patency and Binary Restenosis Rates by Daniel J. Snyder, Robert S. Zilinyi, Sonal Pruthi, Sareena George, Daniela Tirziu, Alexandra Lansky, Ari J. Mintz, Sanjum S. Sethi and Sahil A. Parikh in Journal of Endovascular Therapy</p
Radial versus femoral access for primary percutaneous coronary intervention: is there a preferred route to the heart?
No full textCritical evaluation of stents in the peripheral arterial disease of the superficial femoral artery – focus on the paclitaxel eluting stent
No full textJason Litsky,1 Arijit Chanda,2 Erik Stilp,1 Alexandra Lansky,1 Carlos Mena11Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA; 2Section of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Bridgeport Hospital, Bridgeport, CT, USAAbstract: The endovascular management of obstructive disease of the superficial femoral artery (SFA) is challenging due to unique anatomical and biomechanical forces. Obstructive lesions of the SFA make up the largest proportion of lesions leading to symptomatic peripheral arterial disease. Accordingly, endovascular treatment of SFA disease is becoming increasingly common and, in many cases, is the preferred initial therapy. The use of self-expanding nitinol stents have proven superior to percutaneous transluminal balloon angioplasty in the treatment of intermediate length SFA stenosis. However, achieving durable results, as well as attaining adequate therapy for long occlusions typically seen in clinical practice, remains problematic. Newer technologies, such as paclitaxel eluting stents, seem promising in improving outcomes.Keywords: Zilver PTX, self-expanding stent, atherosclerotic disease, superficial femoral arter
Paclitaxel-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in acute myocardial infarction.
No full textBACKGROUND: There is no consensus regarding the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who are undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: We randomly assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, 3006 patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to receive paclitaxel-eluting stents (2257 patients) or otherwise identical bare-metal stents (749 patients). The two primary end points of the study were the 12-month rates of target-lesion revascularization for ischemia (analysis powered for superiority) and a composite safety outcome measure of death, reinfarction, stroke, or stent thrombosis (powered for noninferiority with a 3.0% margin). The major secondary end point was angiographic evidence of restenosis at 13 months. RESULTS: Patients who received paclitaxel-eluting stents, as compared with those who received bare-metal stents, had significantly lower 12-month rates of ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (4.5% vs. 7.5%; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.83; P=0.002) and target-vessel revascularization (5.8% vs. 8.7%; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; P=0.006), with noninferior rates of the composite safety end point (8.1% vs. 8.0%; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.36; absolute difference, 0.1 percentage point; 95% CI, -2.1 to 2.4; P=0.01 for noninferiority; P=0.92 for superiority). Patients treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents and those treated with bare-metal stents had similar 12-month rates of death (3.5% and 3.5%, respectively; P=0.98) and stent thrombosis (3.2% and 3.4%, respectively; P=0.77). The 13-month rate of binary restenosis was significantly lower with paclitaxel-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents (10.0% vs. 22.9%; hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.57; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were undergoing primary PCI, implantation of paclitaxel-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, significantly reduced angiographic evidence of restenosis and recurrent ischemia necessitating repeat revascularization procedures. No safety concerns were apparent at 1 year. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00433966.
Effects of Elective Coronary Revascularization vs Medical Therapy Alone on Noncardiac Mortality
No full textBackground: uncertainty exists whether coronary revascularization plus medical therapy (MT) is associated with an increase in noncardiac mortality in chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) when compared with MT alone, particularly following recent data from the ISCHEMIA-EXTEND (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches) trial.Objectives: this study conducted a large-scale meta-analysis of trials comparing elective coronary revascularization plus MT vs MT alone in patients with CCS to determine whether revascularization has a differential impact on noncardiac mortality at the longest follow-up.Methods: we searched for randomized trials comparing revascularization plus MT vs MT alone in patients with CCS. Treatment effects were measured by rate ratios (RRs) with 95% CIs, using random-effects models. Noncardiac mortality was the prespecified endpoint. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022380664).Results: eighteen trials were included involving 16,908 patients randomized to either revascularization plus MT (n = 8,665) or to MT alone (n = 8,243). No significant differences were detected in noncardiac mortality between the assigned treatment groups (RR: 1.09; 95% CI: 0.94-1.26; P = 0.26), with absent heterogeneity (I2 = 0%). Results were consistent without the ISCHEMIA trial (RR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.84-1.18; P = 0.97). By meta-regression, follow-up duration did not affect noncardiac death rates with revascularization plus MT vs MT alone (P = 0.52). Trial sequential analysis confirmed the reliability of meta-analysis, with the cumulative Z-curve of trial evidence within the nonsignificance area and reaching futility boundaries. Bayesian meta-analysis findings were consistent with the standard approach (RR: 1.08; 95% credible interval: 0.90-1.31).Conclusions: in patients with CCS, noncardiac mortality in late follow-up was similar for revascularization plus MT compared with MT alone
Cardiac mortality in patients randomised to elective coronary revascularisation plus medical therapy or medical therapy alone: a systematic review and meta-analysis
No full textAims: the value of elective coronary revascularisation plus medical therapy over medical therapy alone in managing stable patients with coronary artery disease is debated. We reviewed all trials comparing the two strategies in this population.Methods and results: from inception through November 2020, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and other databases were searched for randomised trials comparing revascularisation against medical therapy alone in clinically stable coronary artery disease patients. Treatment effects were measured by rate ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals, using random-effects models. Cardiac mortality was the pre-specified primary endpoint. Spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI) and its association with cardiac mortality were secondary endpoints. Further endpoints included all-cause mortality, any MI, and stroke. Longest follow-up data were abstracted. The study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021225598). Twenty-five trials involving 19 806 patients (10 023 randomised to revascularisation plus medical therapy and 9783 to medical therapy alone) were included. Compared with medical therapy alone, revascularisation yielded a lower risk of cardiac death [RR 0.79 (0.67-0.93), P < 0.01] and spontaneous MI [RR 0.74 (0.64-0.86), P < 0.01]. By meta-regression, the cardiac death risk reduction after revascularisation, compared with medical therapy alone, was linearly associated with follow-up duration [RR per 4-year follow-up: 0.81 (0.69-0.96), P = 0.008], spontaneous MI absolute difference (P = 0.01) and percentage of multivessel disease at baseline (P = 0.004). Trial sequential and sensitivity analyses confirmed the reliability of the cardiac mortality findings. All-cause mortality [0.94 (0.87-1.01), P = 0.11], any MI (P = 0.14), and stroke risk (P = 0.30) did not differ significantly between strategies.Conclusion: in stable coronary artery disease patients, randomisation to elective coronary revascularisation plus medical therapy led to reduced cardiac mortality compared with medical therapy alone. The cardiac survival benefit after revascularisation improved with longer follow-up times and was associated with fewer spontaneous MIs.</p
Fractional Flow Reserve From 3-Dimensional Quantitative Coronary Angiography Fresh Light Through an Old Window∗
No full textNovel supreme drug-eluting stents with early synchronized antiproliferative drug delivery to inhibit smooth muscle cell proliferation after drug-eluting stents implantation in coronary artery disease: Results of the PIONEER III randomized clinical trial
No full textBACKGROUND: Accelerated endothelial healing after targeted antiproliferative drug delivery may limit the long-term inflammatory response of drug-eluting stents (DESs). The novel Supreme DES is designed to synchronize early drug delivery within 4 to 6 weeks of implantation, leaving behind a prohealing permanent base layer. Whether the Supreme DES is safe and effective in the short term and can improve long-term clinical outcomes is not known. METHODS: In an international, 2:1 randomized, single-blind trial, we compared treatment with Supreme DES to durable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (DP-EES) in patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes. The primary end point was target lesion failure—a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically driven target lesion revascularization. The trial was designed to demonstrate noninferiority (margin of 3.58%) of the Supreme DES at 12 months compared with DP-EES (URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT03168776). RESULTS: From October 2017 to July 2019, a total of 1629 patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to the Supreme DES (N=1086) or DP-EES (N=543). At 12 months, target lesion failure occurred in 57 of 1057 patients (5.4%) in the Supreme DES group and in 27 of 532 patients (5.1%) in the DP-EES group (absolute risk difference, 0.32% [95% CI, −1.87 to 2.5]; Pnoninferiority=0.002]. There were no significant differences in rates of device success, clinically driven target lesion revascularization, or stent thrombosis at 12 months, and the safety composite of cardiovascular death and target vessel myocardial infarction was 3.5% versus 4.6% (hazard ratio, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.46–1.25]) with Supreme DES compared with DP-EES, although rates of combined clinically and non–clinically driven target lesion revascularization at 12 months were higher with Supreme DES. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with acute and chronic coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, the Supreme DES proved to be noninferior to the standard DP-EES
- …
