RESUMO
BACKGROUND: While dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) constitutes the cornerstone of post-PCI pharmacotherapy, duration of DAPT in high bleeding risk (HBR) patients has not been fully defined especially with regard to sex. The results from the Onyx ONE Clear trial demonstrated favorable safety and efficacy after PCI with 1-month dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in HBR patients treated with Resolute Onyx drug-eluting stents (DES). We sought to evaluate impact of sex on clinical outcomes in this trial. METHODS: In this prespecified subgroup analysis from Onyx ONE Clear, patients were divided into 2 groups according to sex. Primary endpoint was cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) from 1 month to 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 487 female patients (32%) and 1019 males (68%) were free from major ischemic events 1-month after PCI and were transitioned to single antiplatelet therapy.Women were older (p<0.001), had more HBR criteria (p=0.02), and higher rates of moderate/severe calcific lesions (p=0.03) compared to men. Men had higher rates of previous MI (p=0.003), atrial fibrillation (p=0.001), and multivessel coronary artery disease (p<0.001). Clinical outcomes between 1 and 12 months are shown in (Figure) and were similar for males and females except for target vessel revascularization which was greater for males (p=0.04). CONCLUSIONS: In HBR patients treated with Resolute Onyx DES and an abbreviated DAPT course of one month, rates of the primary endpoint of cardiac death or MI between 1 and 12 months were low and did not show any sex-based differences. These data support the use of an abbreviated DAPT regimen in men and women with HBR after PCI with Resolute Onyx DES.
Assuntos
Sexo , Doença da Artéria Coronariana , Stents FarmacológicosRESUMO
BACKGROUND Polymer-free drug-coated stents provide superior clinical outcomes to bare-metal stents in patients at high bleeding risk who undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and are treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy. Data on the use of polymer-based drug-eluting stents, as compared with polymer-free drug-coated stents, in such patients are limited. METHODS In an international, randomized, single-blind trial, we compared polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents with polymer-free umirolimuscoated stents in patients at high bleeding risk. After PCI, patients were treated with 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy, followed by single antiplatelet therapy. The primary outcome was a safety composite of death from cardiac causes, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis at 1 year. The principal secondary outcome was target-lesion failure, an effectiveness composite of death from cardiac causes, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization. Both outcomes were powered for noninferiority. RESULTS A total of 1996 patients at high bleeding risk were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive zotarolimus-eluting stents (1003 patients) or polymer-free drugcoated stents (993 patients). At 1 year, the primary outcome was observed in 169 of 988 patients (17.1%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 164 of 969 (16.9%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% confidence interval [CI], 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.1; P=0.01 for noninferiority). The principal secondary outcome was observed in 174 patients (17.6%) in the zotarolimus-eluting stent group and in 169 (17.4%) in the polymer-free drug-coated stent group (risk difference, 0.2 percentage points; upper boundary of the one-sided 97.5% CI, 3.5; noninferiority margin, 4.4; P=0.007 for noninferiority). CONCLUSIONS Among patients at high bleeding risk who received 1 month of dual antiplatelet therapy after PCI, use of polymer-based zotarolimus-eluting stents was noninferior to use of polymer-free drug-coated stents with regard to safety and effectiveness composite outcomes. (Funded by Medtronic; ONYX ONE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03344653.). (AU)
Assuntos
Doença da Artéria Coronariana/tratamento farmacológico , Terapia Combinada , Sirolimo , Stents Farmacológicos , Polímeros , Método Duplo-CegoRESUMO
Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate 1-year clinical outcomes of diabetic patients treatedwith the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS).Background Clinical outcomes of diabetic patients after BVS implantation have been unreported.Methods This study included 101 patients in the ABSORB Cohort B trial and the first consecutive 450patients with 1 year of follow-up in the ABSORB EXTEND trial. A total of 136 diabetic patients werecompared with 415 nondiabetic patients. In addition, 882 diabetic patients treated with everolimuselutingmetal stents (EES) in pooled data from the SPIRIT trials (SPIRIT FIRST [Clinical Trial of the AbbottVascular XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System], SPIRIT II [A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCEV Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System], SPIRIT III [Clinical Trial of the XIENCE V Everolimus ElutingCoronary Stent System (EECSS)], SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial [Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V EverolimusEluting Coronary Stent System]) were used for the comparison by applying propensity score matching.The primary endpoint was a device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE), including cardiac death, targetvessel myocardial infarction, and target lesion revascularization at 1-year follow-up.Results The cumulative incidence of DoCE did not differ between diabetic and nondiabetic patientstreated with the BVS (3.7% vs. 5.1%, p » 0.64). Diabetic patients treated with the BVS had a similarincidence of the DoCE compared with diabetic patients treated with EES in the matched study group(3.9% for the BVS vs. 6.4% for EES, p » 0.38). There were no differences in the incidence of definite orprobable scaffold/stent thrombosis (0.7% for both diabetic and nondiabetic patients with the BVS; 1.0%for diabetic patients with the BVS vs. 1.7% for diabetic patients with EES in the matched study group).Conclusions In the present analyses, diabetic patients treated with the BVS showed...
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus , Doença , Stents Farmacológicos , Vasos CoronáriosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: This analysis was undertaken to determine the composite incidence of cumulative adverse events (death, reinfarction, disabling stroke, and target vessel revascularization) at the end of the first year after acute myocardial infarction, in diabetic patients who underwent coronary stenting or primary coronary balloon angioplasty. METHODS: From the STENT PAMI trial, we analyzed the 6-month angiographic and 1-year clinical outcomes of 135 diabetic (112, noninsulin dependent) patients who underwent the randomization process of the trial and compared them with 758 nondiabetic patients. RESULTS: Coronary stenting did not significantly reduce the primary composite clinical end point when compared with PTCA (20 vs. 30%, p=0.2). A significant benefit from stenting was observed in patients with noninsulin dependent diabetes, with a trend toward a lesser need for new revascularization procedures (10 vs. 21%, p<.001), with a significant reduction in the primary composite clinical end point at 1 year (12 vs. 28%, p=. 04). At 6 months, the restenosis rate were significantly reduced only in nondiabetic patients (18 vs. 33%, p<. 001). Diabetic patients had the same restenosis rate (38%) either with stenting or balloon PTCA. CONCLUSIONS: Coronary Stenting in diabetics noninsulin dependent offered a significant reduction in the composite incidence of major clinical adverse events compared with balloon PTCA.