New concepts in the design of drug-eluting coronary stents

Nature Reviews Cardiology

Volumn 10, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 248-260

  Garg, Scot ^a   Bourantas, Christos ^b   Serruys, Patrick W ^b  

^a EAST LANCASHIRE HOSPITALS NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANTITHROMBOCYTIC AGENT; BIOPOLYMER; CARBON; CHROMIUM; COBALT; DRUG CARRIER; EVEROLIMUS; HYDROXYAPATITE; MAMMALIAN TARGET OF RAPAMYCIN INHIBITOR; MYOLIMUS; NOVOLIMUS; PACLITAXEL; PHOSPHORYLCHOLINE; POLY(BUTYLMETHACRYLATE); POLY(ETHYLENE CO VINYLACETATE); POLY(LACTIDE CO CAPROLACTONE); POLY(STYRENE B ISOBUTYLENE B STYRENE); POLY(VINYLIDENE FLUORIDEHEXAFLUOROPROPYLENE); POLYGLACTIN; POLYLACTIC ACID; POLYLACTIDE; POLYMER; RAPAMYCIN; STAINLESS STEEL; UMIROLIMUS; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG; WARFARIN; ZOTAROLIMUS;

ANTIPROLIFERATIVE ACTIVITY; BALLOON DILATATION; BARE METAL STENT; BIOCOMPATIBILITY; CORONARY STENT; DEVICE APPROVAL; DEVICE SAFETY; DRUG ELUTING STENT; DRUG MECHANISM; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; HEART MUSCLE REVASCULARIZATION; HUMAN; IN-STENT RESTENOSIS; INTRAVASCULAR ULTRASOUND; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NANOTECHNOLOGY; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; STENT THROMBOSIS; SURFACE PROPERTY;

ANIMALS; CARDIOVASCULAR AGENTS; CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE; CORONARY RESTENOSIS; CORONARY THROMBOSIS; DRUG-ELUTING STENTS; HUMANS; PATIENT SELECTION; PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION; POLYMERS; PROSTHESIS DESIGN; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84876892109     PISSN: 17595002     EISSN: 17595010     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nrcardio.2013.13     Document Type: Review

References (101)

1. Morice, M. C. et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N. Engl. J. Med. 346, 1773-1780 (2002).
2. Jeremias, A. & Kirtane, A. Balancing efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Ann. Intern. Med. 148, 234-238 (2008).
3. Camenzind, E., Steg, P. G. & Wijns, W. Stent thrombosis late after implantation of first-generation drug-eluting stents: A cause for concern. Circulation 115, 1440-1455 (2007).
4. Nordmann, A. J., Briel, M. & Bucher, H. C. Mortality in randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting vs. bare metal stents in coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis. Eur. Heart J. 27, 2784-2814 (2006).
5. Lagerqvist, B. et al. Long-term outcomes with drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in Sweden. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1009-1019 (2007).
6. Pfisterer, M. et al. Late clinical events after clopidogrel discontinuation may limit the benefit of drug-eluting stents: An observational study of drug-eluting versus bare-metal stents. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 48, 2584-2591 (2006).
7. Farb, A. & Boam, A. B. Stent thrombosis redux - the FDA perspective. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 984-987 (2007).
8. Daemen, J. et al. ESC forum on drug-eluting stents. European Heart House, Nice, 27-28 September 2007. Eur. Heart J. 30, 152-161 (2009).
9. Serruys, P. W. et al. Arterial Revascularisation Therapies Study Part II - Sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. EuroIntervention 1, 147-156 (2005).
10. Grube, E. et al. TAXUS I: Six- and twelve-month results from a randomized, double-blind trial on a slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent for de novo coronary lesions. Circulation 107, 38-42 (2003).
11. Serruys, P. W. et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 360, 961-972 (2009).
12. Sabaté, M. et al. Randomized comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent versus standard stent for percutaneous coronary revascularization in diabetic patients: The diabetes and sirolimus-eluting stent (DIABETES) trial. Circulation 112, 2175-2183 (2005).
13. Kirtane, A. J. et al. Paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents in patients with diabetes mellitus: Pooled analysis from 5 randomized trials. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 51, 708-715 (2008).
14. Spaulding, C. et al. Sirolimus-eluting versus uncoated stents in acute myocardial infarction. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 1093-1104 (2006).
15. Laarman, G. J. et al. Paclitaxel-eluting versus uncoated stents in primary percutaneous coronary intervention. N. Engl. J. Med. 355, 1105-1113 (2006).
16. Garg, S. & Serruys, P. W. Coronary stents: Current status. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 56, S1- S42 (2010).
17. Garg, S. & Serruys, P. W. Coronary stents: Looking forward. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 56, S43- S78 (2010).
18. Garg, S., Raber, L., Serruys, P. W. & Windecker, S. in Percutaneous Interventional Cardiovascular Medicine Part III Ch. 3 (Eds Eeckhout, E., Serruys, P. W., Wijns, W., Vahanian, A., van Sambeek, M.) 51-144 (Europa Edition Publishing, Paris, 2012).
19. Stettler, C. et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: A collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet 370, 937-948 (2007).
20. Garg, S. & Serruys, P. W. Benefits of and safety concerns associated with drug-eluting coronary stents. Expert Rev. Cardiovasc. Ther. 8, 449-470 (2010).
21. Kastrati, A. et al. Meta-analysis of randomized trials on drug-eluting stents vs. bare-metal stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction. Eur. Heart J. 28, 2706-2713 (2007).
22. Daemen, J. et al. A pooled safety analysis of data comparing paclitaxel-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. EuroIntervention 3, 392-399 (2007).
23. Spaulding, C., Daemen, J., Boersma, E., Cutlip, D. E. & Serruys, P. W. A pooled analysis of data comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 989-997 (2007).
24. Mauri, L. et al. Stent thrombosis in randomized clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 1020-1029 (2007).
25. Stone, G. W. et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N. Engl. J. Med. 356, 998-1008 (2007).
26. Kirtane, A. J. et al. Safety and efficacy of drug-eluting and bare metal stents: Comprehensive meta-analysis of randomized trials and observational studies. Circulation 119, 3198-3206 (2009).
27. Pinto Slottow, T. L. et al. Observations and outcomes of definite and probable drug-eluting stent thrombosis seen at a single hospital in a four-year period. Am. J. Cardiol. 102, 298-303 (2008).
28. James, S. K., Wallentin, L. & Lagerqvist, B. for the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) study group. The SCAAR-scare in perspective. EuroIntervention 5, 501-504 (2009).
29. Wenaweser, P. et al. Incidence and correlates of drug-eluting stent thrombosis in routine clinical practice. 4 year results from a large 2 institutional cohort study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, 1134-1140 (2008).
30. Serruys, P. W. et al. Angiographic follow-up after placement of a self-expanding coronary-artery stent. N. Engl. J. Med. 324, 13-17 (1991).
31. Serruys, P. W. et al. 5 year clinical outcomes of the ARTS II (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study II) of the sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 55, 1093-1101 (2010).
32. Holmes, D. R. Jr. et al. Stent thrombosis. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 56, 1357-1365 (2010).
33. van Werkum, J. W. et al. Predictors of coronary stent thrombosis: The Dutch Stent Thrombosis Registry. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53, 1399-1409 (2009).
34. Joner, M. et al. Pathology of drug-eluting stents in humans: Delayed healing and late thrombotic risk. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 48, 193-202 (2006).
35. Nakazawa, G. et al. The pathology of neoatherosclerosis in human coronary implants bare-metal and drug-eluting stents. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 57, 1314-1322 (2011).
36. Hara, M. et al. Difference of neointimal formational pattern and incidence of thrombus formation among 3 kinds of stents: An angioscopic study. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 215-220 (2010).
37. Kimura, T. et al. Three-year follow-up after implantation of metallic coronary-artery stents. N. Engl. J. Med. 334, 561-566 (1996).
38. Raber, L. et al. Five-year clinical and angiographic outcomes of a randomized comparison of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: Results of the Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization LATE trial. Circulation 123, 2819-2828 (2011).
39. US Department of Health & Human Services. FDA. Approval document for Cypher sirolimus eluting stent [online], http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh- docs/pdf2/P020026a.pdf (2004).
40. Brodie, B. R. et al. Outcomes and complications with off-label use of drug-eluting stents: Results from the STENT (Strategic Transcatheter Evaluation of New Therapies) group. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 1, 405-414 (2008).
41. Serruys, P. W. FDA panel, 7 and 8 December 2006 - The impact on our practice and research. EuroIntervention 2, 405-407 (2007).
42. Schomig, A. et al. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 50, 1373-1380 (2007).
43. de Waha, A. et al. Everolimus-eluting versus sirolimus-eluting stents: A meta-analysis of randomized trials. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 4, 371-377 (2011).
44. Fan, J. et al. Efficacy and safety of zotarolimus-eluting stents compared with sirolimus-eluting stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions - a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Int. J. Cardiol. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcard.2012.05.105.
45. Joner, M. et al. Endothelial cell recovery between comparator polymer-based drug-eluting stents. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, 333-342 (2008).
46. Cook, S. et al. Correlation of intravascular ultrasound findings with histopathological analysis of thrombus aspirates in patients with very late drug-eluting stent thrombosis. Circulation 120, 391-399 (2009).
47. Serruys, P. W. et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 136-146 (2010).
48. Kedhi, E. et al. Second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice (COMPARE): A randomised trial. Lancet 375, 201-209 (2010).
49. Stone, G. W. et al. Differential clinical responses to everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents in patients with and without diabetes mellitus. Circulation 124, 893-900 (2011).
50. Alazzoni, A., Al-Saleh, A. & Jolly, S. S. Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in percutaneous coronary intervention: meta-analysis of randomized trials. Thrombosis 2012, 126369 (2012).
51. Cassese, S. et al. Two zotarolimus-eluting stent generations: A meta-analysis of 12 randomised trials versus other limus-eluting stents and an adjusted indirect comparison. Heart 98, 1632-1640 (2012).
52. Meredith, I. T. et al. Five-year clinical follow-up after implantation of the Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent: ENDEAVOR I, first in human study. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 74, 989-995 (2009).
53. Wiemer, M. et al. Five-year long-term clinical follow-up of the XIENCE V everolimus eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions: The SPIRIT FIRST trial. Catheter. Cardiovasc. Interv. 75, 997-1003 (2010).
54. Leon, M. B. et al. A randomised comparison of the ENDEAVOR zotarolimus-eluting stent versus the TAXUS Paclitaxel-eluting stent in de novo native coronary lesions: 12-month outcomes from the ENDEAVOR IV trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 55, 543-554 (2010).
55. Kandzari, D. E. et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with native coronary artery disease: A randomized controlled trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 48, 2440-2447 (2006).
56. Leon, M. B. et al. Improved late clinical safety with zotarolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with de novo coronary lesions: 3 year follow-up from the ENDEAVOR IV (Randomized Comparison of Zotarolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents in Patients With Coronary Artery Disease) trial. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 1043-1050 (2010).
57. Camenzind, E. et al. Stent thrombosis and major clinical events at 3 years after zotarolimus-eluting or sirolimus-eluting coronary stent implantation: A randomised, multicentre, open-label, controlled trial. Lancet 380, 1396-1405 (2012).
58. von Birgelen, C. et al. A randomized controlled trial in second-generation zotarolimus-eluting Resolute stents versus everolimus-eluting Xience V stents in real-world patients: The TWENTE trial. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59, 1350-1361 (2012).
59. Ahn, J. M. et al. Comparison of Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents and sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with de novo long coronary artery lesions: A randomized LONG-DES IV trial. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 5, 633-640 (2012).
60. Palmerini, T. et al. Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: Evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. Lancet 379, 1393-1402 (2012).
61. Kolandaivelu, K. et al. Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings. Circulation 123, 1400-1409 (2011).
62. Bangalore, S. et al. Short- and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary stents: A mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117, 762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circulation 125, 2873-2891 (2012).
63. Palmerini, T. et al. Stent thrombosis with everolimus-eluting stents: meta-analysis of comparative randomized controlled trials. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 5, 357-364 (2012).
64. Waksman, R. & Pakala, R. Coating bioabsorption and chronic bare metal scaffolding versus fully bioabsorbable stent. EuroIntervention 5 (Suppl. F), F36- F42 (2009).
65. Windecker, S. et al. Biolimus-eluting stent with biodegradable polymer versus sirolimus-eluting stent with durable polymer for coronary revascularisation (LEADERS): A randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet 372, 1163-1173 (2008).
66. Serruys, P. W. Five-year outcomes from the LEADERS trial. Presented at 24th Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2012.
67. Stefanini, G. G. et al. Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents reduce the risk of stent thrombosis at 4 years in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: A pooled analysis of individual patient data from the ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4, and LEADERS randomized trials. Eur. Heart J. 33, 1214-1222 (2012).
68. Barlis, P. et al. An optical coherence tomography study of a biodegradable vs. durable polymer-coated limus-eluting stent: A LEADERS trial sub-study. Eur. Heart J. 31, 165-176 (2010).
69. Gutierréz-Chico, J. L. et al. Long-term tissue coverage of a biodegradable polylactide polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent: Comparative sequential assessment with optical coherence tomography until complete resorption of the polymer. Am. Heart J. 162, 922-931 (2011).
70. Smits, P. Primary endpoint results from the COMPARE II trial: A large scale, multicentre, prospective randomised comparison between the everolimus-eluting stent with a durable polymer and the biolimus-eluting stent with an abluminal biodegradable polymer in a real-life setting. Presented at EuroPCR 2012.
71. Park, S. J. et al. A paclitaxel-eluting stent for the prevention of coronary restenosis. N. Engl. J. Med. 348, 1537-1545 (2003).
72. Tada, N. et al. Polymer-free biolimus a9-coated stent demonstrates more sustained intimal inhibition, improved healing, and reduced inflammation compared with a polymer-coated sirolimus-eluting cypher stent in a porcine model. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 174-183 (2010).
73. Grube, E. Biofreedom: Polymer-free drug-eluting stent - preclinical results and first in man trial status. Presented at EuroPCR 2009.
74. Costa, J. R. Jr. et al. Preliminary results of the hydroxyapatite nonpolymer-based sirolimus-eluting stent for the treatment of single de novo coronary lesions a first in human analysis of a third-generation drug-eluting stent system. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 1, 545-551 (2008).
75. Mehilli, J. et al. Randomized trial of a nonpolymer-based rapamycin-eluting stent versus a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent for the reduction of late lumen loss. Circulation 113, 273-279 (2006).
76. Carrié, D. et al. A multicenter randomized trial comparing amphilimus- with paclitaxel-eluting stents in de novo native coronary artery lesions. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 59, 1371-1376 (2012).
77. Mehilli, J. et al. Randomized trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis. Eur. Heart J. 29, 1975-1982 (2008).
78. Byrne, R. A. et al. Randomised trial of three rapamycin-eluting stents with different coating strategies for the reduction of coronary restenosis: 2 year follow-up results. Heart 95, 1489-1494 (2009).
79. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01623180?term=LEADERS+FREE&rank=1 (2013).
80. Massberg, S. et al. Polymer-free sirolimus- and probucol-eluting versus new generation zotarolimus-eluting stents in coronary artery disease: The intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: Test Efficacy of Sirolimus- and Probucol-Eluting Versus Zotarolimus-Eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST 5) trial. Circulation 124, 624-632 (2011).
81. Wilcox, J. Progress with a hollow-curve rapamycin filled stent (Medtronic). Presented at 24th Transcather Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2012.
82. Seth, A. Nanoparticle based stents - FOCUS np (Envision Scientific) program update. Presented at 24th Transcather Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2012.
83. Cannon, L. Two-year outcomes from the PERSEUS randomised trial of the paclitaxel-eluting platinum chromium stent versus palitaxel-eluting stainless steel. Presented at 23rd Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2011.
84. Stone, G Two-year results of the PLATINUM Randomized Trial Comparing Platinum Chromium PROMUS Element and Cobalt Chromium PROMUS/XIENCE V Everolimus-eluting stents in de novo coronary artery lesions. Presented at the ACC Scientific Sessions 2012.
85. Verheye, S. et al. 9 month clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound results of a prospective evaluation of the Axxess self-expanding biolimus A9-eluting stent in coronary bifurcation lesions: The DIVERGE (Drug-Eluting Stent Intervention for Treating Side Branches Effectively) study. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 53, 1031-1039 (2009).
86. Chamié, D. et al. Serial angiography and intravascular ultrasound: Results of the SISC Registry (Stents In Small Coronaries). JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 3, 191-202 (2010).
87. Serruys, P. W., Garcia-Garcia, H. M. & Onuma, Y. From metallic cages to transient bioresorbable scaffolds: Change in paradigm of coronary revascularization in the upcoming decade? Eur. Heart J. 33, 16b- 25b (2012).
88. Colombo, A. & Karvouni, E. Biodegradable stents: "fulfilling the mission and stepping away". Circulation 102, 371-373 (2000).
89. Erbel, R. et al. Temporary scaffolding of coronary arteries with bioabsorbable magnesium stents: A prospective, non-randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 369, 1869-1875 (2007).
90. Tanimoto, S. et al. Late stent recoil of the bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent and its relationship with plaque morphology. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 52, 1616-1620 (2008).
91. Grube, E. Bioabsorbable stent. The Boston Scientific and REVA technology. Presented at EuroPCR 2009.
92. Ormiston, J. A. et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system for patients with single de-novo coronary artery lesions (ABSORB): A prospective open-label trial. Lancet 371, 899-907 (2008).
93. Serruys, P. W. et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (ABSORB): 2 year outcomes and results from multiple imaging methods. Lancet 373, 897-910 (2009).
94. Serruys, P. W. et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold for treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: Six-month clinical and imaging outcomes. Circulation 122, 2301-2312 (2010).
95. Ormiston, J. A. et al. First serial assessment at 6 months and 2 years of the second generation of absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: A multi-imaging modality study. Circ. Cardiovasc. Interv. 5, 620-632 (2012).
96. Serruys, P. W. et al. A randomised comparison of an everolimus-eluting coronary stent with a paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent: The SPIRIT II trial. EuroIntervention 2, 286-294 (2006).
97. Serruys, P. W. et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffold for the treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: 12-month clinical and imaging outcomes. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 58, 1578-1588 (2011).
98. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01023789 (2012).
99. US National Library of Medicine. ClinicalTrials.gov [online], http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT01308346 (2012).
100. Diletti, R. et al. ABSORB II randomized controlled trial: A clinical evaluation to compare the safety, efficacy, and performance of the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold system against the XIENCE everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of subjects with ischemic heart disease caused by de novo native coronary artery lesions: Rationale and study design. Am. Heart J. 164, 654-663 (2012).
101. Serruys, P. W. et al. in Percutaneous Interventional Cardiovascular Medicine Part III, Ch. 4 (Eds Eeckhout, E., Serruys, P. W., Wijns, W., Vahanian, A. & van Sambeek, M.) 145-177 (Europa Edition Publishing, Paris, 2012).