Optical Coherence Tomography Assessment of In Vivo Vascular Response After Implantation of Overlapping Bare-Metal and Drug-Eluting Stents

Objectives We designed a randomized trial exploiting optical coherence tomography (OCT) to assess coverage and apposition of overlapping bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) in human coronary arteries. Background Overlapping DES impair healing in animals. Optical coherence tomograph...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:JACC. Cardiovascular interventions 2010-05, Vol.3 (5), p.531-539
Hauptverfasser: Guagliumi, Giulio, MD, Musumeci, Giuseppe, MD, Sirbu, Vasile, MD, Bezerra, Hiram G., MD, PhD, Suzuki, Nobuaki, MD, Fiocca, Luigi, MD, Matiashvili, Aleksandre, MD, Lortkipanidze, Nikoloz, MD, Trivisonno, Antonio, MD, Valsecchi, Orazio, MD, Biondi-Zoccai, Giuseppe, MD, Costa, Marco A., MD, PhD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objectives We designed a randomized trial exploiting optical coherence tomography (OCT) to assess coverage and apposition of overlapping bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) in human coronary arteries. Background Overlapping DES impair healing in animals. Optical coherence tomography allows accurate in vivo assessment of stent strut coverage and apposition. Methods Seventy-seven patients with long coronary stenoses were randomized to overlapping sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES), or BMS. The primary goal of the study was to determine the rate of uncovered/malapposed struts in overlap versus nonoverlap segments, according to stent type, at 6-month follow-up with OCT. Results A total of 53,047 struts were analyzed. The rate of uncovered/malapposed struts was 1.5 ± 3.4% and 0.6 ± 2.7% in overlap versus nonoverlap BMS (p = NS), respectively, and 4.3 ± 11% and 3.6 ± 8% in overlap versus nonoverlap DES (p = NS), respectively. There were no differences in the rates of uncovered/malapposed struts between overlapping BMS and DES, likely due to low frequency of uncovered/malapposed struts in ZES (0.1 ± 0.4%), which offset the higher rates observed in SES (6.7 ± 9.6%) and PES (6.7 ± 16.5%, p < 0.05). Overlap segments showed greater neointimal volume obstruction versus nonoverlap segments in all DES (p < 0.05 for all DES types). Strut-level neointimal thickness at overlap and nonoverlap segments were lowest in SES (0.16 ± 0.1 mm and 0.12 ± 0.1 mm, respectively) compared with PES (0.27 ± 0.1 mm and 0.20 ± 0.1 mm, respectively), ZES (0.40 ± 0.16 mm and 0.33 ± 0.13 mm, respectively), and BMS (0.55 ± 0.31 mm and 0.53 ± 0.25 mm, respectively, p < 0.05). Conclusions As assessed by OCT the impact of DES on vascular healing was similar at overlapping and nonoverlapping sites. However, strut malapposition, coverage pattern, and neointimal hyperplasia differ significantly according to DES type. (Optical Coherence Tomography for Drug Eluting Stent Safety [ODESSA]; NCT00693030 )
ISSN:1936-8798
1876-7605
DOI:10.1016/j.jcin.2010.02.008