An asymmetric surface coating strategy for improved corrosion resistance and vascular compatibility of magnesium alloy stents

Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents. We searched relevant sources from inception to March, 2007, and contacted investigators and manufacturers to identify randomised controlled trials in patients with coronary artery disease that compared drug-eluting with bare-metal stents, or that compared sirolimus-eluting stents head-to-head with paclitaxel-eluting stents. Safety outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis; the effectiveness outcome was target lesion revascularisation. We included 38 trials (18,023 patients) with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Trialists and manufacturers provided additional data on clinical outcomes for 29 trials. We did a network meta-analysis with a mixed-treatment comparison method to combine direct within-trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation. Mortality was similar in the three groups: hazard ratios (HR) were 1.00 (95% credibility interval 0.82-1.25) for sirolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents, 1.03 (0.84-1.22) for paclitaxel-eluting versus bare-metal stents, and 0.96 (0.83-1.24) for sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. Sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with the lowest risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0.81, 95% credibility interval 0.66-0.97, p=0.030 vs bare-metal stents; 0.83, 0.71-1.00, p=0.045 vs paclitaxel-eluting stents). There were no significant differences in the risk of definite stent thrombosis (0 days to 4 years). However, the risk of late definite stent thrombosis (>30 days) was increased with paclitaxel-eluting stents (HR 2.11, 95% credibility interval 1.19-4.23, p=0.017 vs bare-metal stents; 1.85, 1.02-3.85, p=0.041 vs sirolimus-eluting stents). The reduction in target lesion revascularisation seen with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents was more pronounced with sirolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (0.70, 0.56-0.84; p=0.0021). The risks of mortality associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents are similar. Sirolimus-eluting stents seem to be clinically better than bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting stents.

A fully bioabsorbable drug-eluting coronary stent that scaffolds the vessel wall when needed and then disappears once the acute recoil and constrictive remodelling processes have subsided has theoretical advantages. The bioasorbable everolimus-eluting stent (BVS) has a backbone of poly-L-lactic acid that provides the support and a coating of poly-D,L-lactic acid that contains and controls the release of the antiproliferative agent everolimus. We assessed the feasibility and safety of this BVS stent. In this prospective, open-label study we enrolled 30 patients who had either stable, unstable, or silent ischaemia and a single de-novo lesion that was suitable for treatment with a single 3.0 x 12 mm or 3.0 x 18 mm stent. Patients were enrolled from four academic hospitals in Auckland, Rotterdam, Krakow, and Skejby. The composite endpoint was cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and ischaemia-driven target lesion revascularisation. Angiographic endpoints were available for 26 patients and intravascular-ultrasound endpoints for 24 patients. Clinical endpoints were assessed in all 30 patients at 6 and 12 months. In a subset of 13 patients, optical coherence tomography was undertaken at baseline and follow-up. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00300131. Procedural success was 100% (30/30 patients), and device success 94% (29/31 attempts at implantation of the stent). At 1 year, the rate of major adverse cardiac events was 3.3%, with only one patient having a non-Q wave myocardial infarction and no target lesion revascularisations. No late stent thromboses were recorded. At 6-month follow-up, the angiographic in-stent late loss was 0.44 (0.35) mm and was mainly due to a mild reduction of the stent area (-11.8%) as measured by intravascular ultrasound. The neointimal area was small (0.30 [SD 0.44] mm2), with a minimal area obstruction of 5.5%. This study shows the feasibility of implantation of the bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting stent, with an acceptable in-stent late loss, minimal intrastent neointimal hyperplasia, and a low stent area obstruction. Abbott Vascular.