No abstract

No abstract

Background Outcomes after sirolimus-eluting stent (SES: Cypher ® ) implantation remained to be elucidated in Japan. Methods and Results Among 1,070 consecutive angiographic follow-up lesions, 99 lesions underwent target lesion revascularization (TLR) with in-stent restenosis (ISR). Retrospective estimation by multivariate analysis including 50 variables showed that the ostiums of right coronary and left circumflex arteries, hemodialysis, calcification, non-direct stenting, ISR of SES, and non-eccentric lesion were the predictors of TLR. There was no documented late stent thrombosis (LST) among 2,166 lesions and very LST (VLST) among 1,423 lesions. Conclusion Further revises are needed to implant SES to these predictive lesions. LST and VLST were very rare. (Circ J 2007; 71: 1328 -1331

No abstract

The success rate of the procedure was lower in the TASC D group. Complications were more frequent in the TASC D group, and they were related to MACLE.

SUMMARYWe estimated the benefit of a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES, Cypher ® ) for diffuse ( > 10 mm) in-stent restenosis (ISR) inside bare metal stents (BMS) because the feasibility of the SES was not confirmed after its recent approval in Japan. Clinical and angiographic outcomes after SES implantation to 93 diffuse ISR were compared with those of 3 groups treated by plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA, (n = 54)), cutting balloon angioplasty (CB, (n = 24)), and BMS (n = 41) in a series of 153 patients whose follow-up quantitative coronary angiography (QCA) evaluated 3-9 months after the treatments was obtained from January 2003 through December 2005. For 33 lesions in the SES group, 12-month follow-up QCA results were obtained and compared with those at 6 months. Ticlopidine (200 mg/day) was prescribed for at least 12 weeks after SES implantation and for 2 weeks after BMS in addition to aspirin (81-100 mg/day). Patient characteristics and the characteristics of previous implanted BMS in the SES group were not significantly different from those in the other groups. Death from cardiac causes and nonfatal myocardial infarction did not occur in any group. Stent thrombosis was not observed in the BMS and SES groups. The incidence of repeat target lesion revascularization (re-TLR) in the SES group (3.23%) was significantly lower compared with that of the POBA (37.0%), CB (25.0%), and BMS (29.3%) groups (P < 0.001, respectively). Late loss in the SES group (0.44 ± 0.41 mm) was significantly smaller than that in the BMS group (1.34 ± 0.74 mm) (P < 0.05). The rate of recurrent ISR (re-ISR) in SES (5.38%) was significantly lower than that in POBA (46.3%), CB (41.7%), and BMS (46.3%) (P < 0.001, respectively). The QCA variables at 6 months in the SES group were not significantly different from those at 12 months. Thus, SES implantation for diffuse ISR was far superior since it markedly reduced the incidence of re-TLR with re-ISR at up to 6-months follow-up. In addition, this angiographic patency after SES implantation continued until 12 months. (Int Heart J 2006; 47: 651-661)

The preoperative clinical symptoms for EVT can predict the prognosis in patients with PAD undergoing EVT.

Hemodialysis patients were recognized as a high-risk group for restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention in the era of the bare-metal stent. Recently, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) have reduced restenosis and target lesion revascularization (TLR); however, it has been reported that their efficacy in hemodialysis patients is limited. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) improved angiographic outcomes of hemodialysis patients compared with SES. This study is a retrospective cohort study. We analyzed 54 hemodialysis patients with 87 lesions implanted with PES from February 2007 to September 2008, and 49 hemodialysis patients with 68 lesions implanted with SES from August 2004 to January 2007. Angiographic follow-up after 8-10 months was obtained for 59 lesions (67.8%) in the PES group and 43 lesions (63.2%) in the SES group. At baseline, the PES patients had more peripheral artery disease compared with the SES group (66.7 vs. 34.7%; p = 0.0012). There were no significant differences in the angiographic characteristics or procedural index. The binary restenosis rate was lower in lesions implanted with PES than in those with SES (13.6 vs. 39.5%; p = 0.034). Accordingly, the TLR rate was lower in lesions implanted with PES than with SES (9.3 vs. 26.5%; p = 0.041). Our results suggest that PES is more effective than SES in reducing restenosis and TLR in hemodialysis patients.