| 1. |
- Buccheri, Sergio, et al.
(författare)
-
Clinical outcomes with unselected use of an ultrathin-strut sirolimus-eluting stent : a report from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR)
- 2021
-
Ingår i: EuroIntervention. - : European Society of Cardiology. - 1774-024X .- 1969-6213. ; 16:17, s. 1413-1421
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Aims: The aim of this study was to assess the real-world clinical performance of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stent (DES) (Orsiro) in a large nationwide cohort of patients undergoing percu-taneous coronary intervention (PCI).Methods and results: From the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry, the two-year outcomes of 4,561 patients implanted with Orsiro (Orsiro group) and 69,570 receiving other newer-gen-eration DES (n-DES group) were analysed. The rate of definite stent thrombosis was low in both groups (0.67% and 0.83% for Orsiro and n-DES, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.90, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55-1.46, p-value 0.66). Restenosis was also infrequent (1.5% vs 2.0% with Orsiro and n-DES, adjusted HR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.63-1.03, p-value=0.09). The risk of target lesion revascularisation by PCI was lower in the Orsiro group (1.6% vs 2.3%, adjusted HR 0.75, 95% CI: 0.60-0.94, p-value=0.013). All-cause mortality and myocardial infarction did not show a statistically significant difference between the two groups (mortality of 7.5% in both groups, adjusted HR 0.99, 95% CI: 0.72-1.35, p-value=0.94; 6.0% vs 5.2% for myocardial infarction, adjusted HR 1.19, 95% CI: 1.00-1.43, p-value=0.06).Conclusions: In a nationwide scenario, the use of a sirolimus-eluting ultrathin-strut DES portended favourable clinical outcomes.
|
|
| 2. |
- Grimfjärd, Per, et al.
(författare)
-
Outcome of PCI with Xience versus other commonly used modern drug eluting stents : a SCAAR report
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions. - : Wiley. - 1522-1946 .- 1522-726X. ; 98:2, s. E197-E204
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objectives To analyze the clinical outcome of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) using the Xience drug eluting stent (DES) versus other modern DES.Methods This retrospective study based on the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) analyzed the outcome of PCI using Xience versus other commonly used modern DES, 2007 to 2017. The primary outcome measure was a combination of all-cause death, myocardial infarction (MI) and revascularisation with PCI. Angiographical outcome measures were in-stent restenosis (ISR) and stent thrombosis (ST).Results Rates of the primary outcome measure for Xience and other DES were 31.9% and 28.2% respectively, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.99 (95% CI 0.95-1.03). Crude rates of ISR were 2.9% versus 2.1% over 4.3 and 2.9 years respectively, adjusted HR 0.93 (95% CI 0.81-1.06). Crude rates of ST were 0.9% versus 0.7%, adjusted HR 1.07 (95% CI 0.82-1.39). Results were consistent in all sensitivity analyses.Conclusions This nationally complete, real-world study confirms that Xience is a safe and effective DES with low-event rates of ISR and ST. Compared with a control group containing a large proportion of thinner strut stents and absorbable polymers, Xience exhibits similar results in all important clinical endpoint
|
|
| 3. |
- van der Sangen, Niels M. R., et al.
(författare)
-
Patient-tailored antithrombotic therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention
- 2021
-
Ingår i: European Heart Journal. - : Oxford University Press. - 0195-668X .- 1522-9645. ; 42:10, s. 1038-
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Dual antiplatelet therapy has long been the standard of care in preventing coronary and cerebrovascular thrombotic events in patients with chronic coronary syndrome and acute coronary syndrome undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, but choosing the optimal treatment duration and composition has become a major challenge. Numerous studies have shown that certain patients benefit from either shortened or extended treatment duration. Furthermore, trials evaluating novel antithrombotic strategies, such as P2Y(12) inhibitor monotherapy, low-dose factor Xa inhibitors on top of antiplatelet therapy, and platelet function- or genotype-guided (de-)escalation of treatment, have shown promising results. Current guidelines recommend risk stratification for tailoring treatment duration and composition. Although several risk stratification methods evaluating ischaemic and bleeding risk are available to clinicians, such as the use of risk scores, platelet function testing, and genotyping, risk stratification has not been broadly adopted in clinical practice. Multiple risk scores have been developed to determine the optimal treatment duration, but external validation studies have yielded conflicting results in terms of calibration and discrimination and there is limited evidence that their adoption improves clinical outcomes. Likewise, platelet function testing and genotyping can provide useful prognostic insights, but trials evaluating treatment strategies guided by these stratification methods have produced mixed results. This review critically appraises the currently available antithrombotic strategies and provides a viewpoint on the use of different risk stratification methods alongside clinical judgement in current clinical practice. [GRAPHICS]
|
|
