http://repub.eur.nl/res/aut/15542/ List of Publications en http://repub.eur.nl/static-eur/img/logo.png http://repub.eur.nl http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/17026/ 2009-09-01T00:00:00Z Aim: To compare the long-term relative efficacy and safety of SES and PES in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease and to evaluate the role of lesion location and stenting technique in determining outcomes. Methods and results: From April 2002 to April 2004, 288 consecutive patients who underwent elective PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA have been retrospectively selected and analyzed in seven European and US tertiary care centers. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. SES was used in 152 patients while 136 received PES. Isolated ostial-shaft disease was present in 27% of patients. Distal LM disease (73%) was treated with single and double stent approach in 29.5% and 43.4% of patients respectively. After 3 years, rates of survival free from any of the events investigated, were independent from lesion location and stenting approach and did not differ significantly between SES and PES groups. Freedom from MACE (SES vs. PES) was 76.3% vs. 83.1% in the ostial/shaft group, 80.3% vs. 72.8% in the distal-single stent group and 67.1% vs. 66.2% in the distal-double stent group. Definite stent thrombosis occurred only in 1(0.3%) patient at 439 days. Conclusions: In elective patients who underwent PCI for de novo lesions in the ostium, shaft or distal ULMCA, long-term clinical outcomes with SES and PES use were similar independently of lesion location and stenting technique. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29354/ 2008-09-01T00:00:00Z Aims: To evaluate the occurrence of late and very late stent thrombosis (ST) following elective drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation in unprotected left main coronary artery (LMCA) stenosis in a large multicentre registry. Methods and results: All 731 consecutive patients who had sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stent electively implanted in de novo lesions on unprotected LMCA in five centres were included. ST was defined according to Academic Research Consortium definitions. Four (0.5%) patients had a definite ST: three early (two acute and one subacute) and one late ST, no cases of very late definite ST were recorded. All patients survived from the event. Three patients had a probable ST. Therefore, 7/731 (0.95%) patients had a definite or a probable ST and all were on dual antiplatelet therapy at the time of the event. Possible (eight late and 12 very late) ST occurred in 20 (2.7%) patients. At 29.5 ± 13.7 months follow-up, a total of 45 (6.2%) patients had died; 31 (4.2%) of cardiac death. Ninety five (12.9%) patients had a target-vessel and 76 (10.4%) a target-lesion revascularization. Angiographic follow-up was performed in 548 patients (75%): restenosis occurred in 77 (14.1%) patients. Conclusion: Elective treatment of LMCA stenosis with DES appears safe with a 0.9% incidence of definite and probable ST at 29.5 ± 13.7 months. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/29761/ 2008-06-10T00:00:00Z Objectives: The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation for unprotected left main coronary artery (ULMCA) disease. Background: Long-term clinical outcomes after DES implantation for ULMCA disease have not yet been ascertained. Methods: From April 2002 to April 2004, 358 consecutive patients who underwent PCI with DES implantation for de novo lesions on ULMCA were retrospectively selected and analyzed in 7 European and U.S. tertiary care centers. No patients were excluded from the analysis, and all patients had a minimum follow-up of 3 years. Results: Technical success rate was 100%. Procedural success rate was 89.6%. After 3 years, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)-free survival in the whole population was 73.5%. According to the Academic Research Consortium definitions, cardiac death occurred in 9.2% of patients, and reinfarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) occurred in 8.6%, 5.8%, and 14.2% of patients, respectively. Definite stent thrombosis occurred in 2 patients (specifically at 0 and 439 days). In elective patients, the 3-year MACE-free survival was 74.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 6.2%, 8.3%, 6.6%, and 16%, respectively. In the emergent group the 3-year MACE-free survival was 68.2%, with mortality, reinfarction, TLR, and TVR rates of 21.4%, 10%, 2.8%, and 7.1%, respectively. Conclusions: Routine DES implantation in ULMCA disease seems encouraging, with favorable long-term clinical results. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/35862/ 2007-01-02T00:00:00Z There is ongoing debate to identify the most effective, safe and cost-beneficial drug-eluting stent, between the two currently approved and used devices, i.e. sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). To date, head-to-head comparison studies of SES vs PES have been however limited by relatively small sample sizes and the low number of events typically associated with these highly effective coronary devices. To overcome the drawbacks of single trials, direct and indirect comparison meta-analyses have been designed and conducted to thoroughly compare sirolimus- vs paclitaxel eluting-stents. This article provides results of a pooled analysis of such indirect and direct comparisons, definitively demonstrating across 5854 patients the superiority of SES in comparison to PES (odds ratio 0.62 [95% confidence interval 0.50-0.75], p < 0.0001 for binary angiographic restenosis, and odds ratio 0.66 [0.52-0.84], p = 0.0008 for target lesion revascularization). Indeed, such combination of direct and indirect comparisons should also be envisaged to soundly and timely appraise the next generation of drug-eluting stents. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/35661/ 2007-01-01T00:00:00Z To assess the temporal effect of statin therapy on coronary atherosclerotic plaque volume measured by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS), we searched PubMed for eligible studies published between 1990 and January 2006. Inclusion criteria for retrieved studies were (1) IVUS volume analysis at baseline and follow-up and (2) statin therapy in ≥1 group of patients. All data of interest were abstracted in prespecified structured collection forms. Statistical analysis was performed with Review Manager 4.2. Random-effect weighted mean difference (WMD) was used as summary statistics for comparison of continuous variables. Nine studies of 985 patients (with 11 statin treatment arms) were selected. After a mean follow-up of 9.8 ± 4.9 months, we found a significant decrease in coronary plaque volume (WMD -5.77 mm3, 95% confidence interval -10.36 to -1.17, p = 0.01), with no significant heterogeneity across studies (p = 0.47). Prespecified subgroup analyses showed similar trends. Studies in which the achieved low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level was <100 mg/dl showed a trend for plaque regression (WMD -7.88 mm3, 95% confidence interval -16.31 to 0.55, p = 0.07), whereas studies in which the achieved level of LDL cholesterol was ≥100 mg/dl, the trend was less evident (WMD -4.22 mm3, 95% confidence interval -10.27 to 1.82, p = 0.17). Plaque volume remained essentially unchanged in patients not treated with statins (WMD 0.13 mm3, 95% confidence interval -4.42 to 4.68, p = 0.96). In conclusion, statin therapy, particularly when achieving the target LDL level, appears to promote a significant regression of coronary plaque volume as measured by IVUS. http://repub.eur.nl/res/pub/13658/ 2005-05-01T00:00:00Z AIMS: To compare, by meta-analytical techniques, the clinical impact of bare-metal stenting vs. balloon angioplasty for the treatment of lesions in small coronary arteries. METHODS AND RESULTS: We included trials with random allocation and prospective comparison of angioplasty vs. stenting, reference vessel diameter<3 mm, and follow-up>or=6 months. Random effect odds ratios (OR) for death, myocardial infarction (MI), repeat revascularization (RR), and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) were computed. In a pre-specified subgroup analysis, we compared stenting with optimal (post-procedural stenosis<20%) and suboptimal (>20%) angioplasty. Thirteen studies (4383 patients) were selected. No differences were found in terms of death and MI, while MACEs, mainly driven by RR, were significantly less common after stenting (17.6%) than after angioplasty (22.7%), OR 0.71 (0.57-0.90). Heterogeneity among trials was present. When considering only optimal angioplasty, MACE rates were homogeneously similar, 17.9 vs. 21.1%, OR 0.86 (0.66-1.11). If angioplasty were suboptimal, MACEs were significantly more common after angioplasty (24%) than after stenting (17.3%), OR 0.62 (0.44-0.88). CONCLUSION: Stenting is superior to balloon angioplasty for the treatment of small vessels, in particular after suboptimal angioplasty. However, MACE and RR rates remain high after stenting, and the advantage of stent over angioplasty is moderate. An optimal balloon angioplasty strategy (with provisional stenting) may achieve results not inferior to routine stenting.