Fernándo AlfonsoMarı́a José Pérez-VizcaynoBruno García del BlancoArturo García‐TouchardJosé-Ramón López-MínguezMónica MasottiJavier ZuecoRafael MelgaresVicente MainarRaúl MorenoAntonio DomínguezJuan SanchísArmando BethencourtJosé MoreuÁngel CequierVicens Martı́Imanol OtaeguiTeresa BastanteNieves GonzaloPilar Jiménez‐QuevedoAlberto CárdenasCristina Fernández
Background— Treatment of patients with drug-eluting stent (DES) in-stent restenosis (ISR) is more challenging than that of patients with bare-metal stent ISR. However, the results of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in these distinct scenarios remain unsettled. Methods and Results— A pooled analysis of the RIBS IV (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Drug-Eluting Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) and RIBS V (Restenosis Intra-Stent of Bare Metal Stents: Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon vs Everolimus-Eluting Stent) randomized trials was performed using patient-level data to compare the efficacy of EES in bare-metal stent ISR and DES-ISR. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were identical in both trials. Results of 94 patients treated with EES for bare-metal stent ISR were compared with those of 155 patients treated with EES for DES-ISR. Baseline characteristics were more adverse in patients with DES-ISR, although they presented later and more frequently with a focal pattern. After intervention, minimal lumen diameter (2.22±0.5 versus 2.38±0.5 mm, P =0.01) was smaller in the DES-ISR group. Late angiographic findings (89.3% of eligible patients), including minimal lumen diameter (2.03±0.7 versus 2.36±0.6 mm, P <0.001) and diameter stenosis (23±22 versus 13±17%, P <0.001) were poorer in patients with DES-ISR. Results were consistent in the in-segment and in-lesion analyses. On multiple linear regression analysis, minimal lumen diameter at follow-up remained significantly smaller in patients with DES-ISR. Finally, at 1-year clinical follow-up (100% of patients), mortality (2.6 versus 0%, P <0.01) and need for target vessel revascularization (8 versus 2%, P =0.03) were higher in the DES-ISR group. Conclusions— This patient-level pooled analysis of the RIBS IV and RIBS V randomized clinical trials suggests that EES provide favorable outcomes in patients with ISR. However, the results of EES are less satisfactory in patients with DES-ISR than in those with bare-metal stent ISR. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT01239953 and NCT01239940.
Mohammad AlmallaVerena ProssNikolaus MarxRainer Hoffmann
Mohammad AlmallaJörg SchröderVerena ProssEmilia StegemannNikolaus MarxRainer Hoffmann
Fernándo AlfonsoMarı́a José Pérez-VizcaynoBruno García del BlancoImanol OtaeguiMónica MasottiJavier ZuecoMaite VeláquezJuan SanchísArturo García‐TouchardRosa Lázaro-GarcíaJosé MoreuArmando BethencourtJavier CuestaFernando RiveroAlberto CárdenasNieves GonzaloPilar Jiménez‐QuevedoCristina Fernández
Daniel SteinbergMichael A. GagliaTina L. Pinto SlottowP. RoyLaurent BonelloAxel de LabriolleTeruo OkabeRebecca TorgusonK. KaneshigeXue ZhangAugusto D. PichardLowell F. SatlerK.M. KentWilliam O. SuddathJoseph LindsayRon Waksman