International journal of cardiology · 2012
Comparisons of detailed arterial healing response at seven months following implantation of an everolimus- or sirolimus-eluting stent in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sawada Takahiro, Shinke Toshiro, Otake Hiromasa, Mizoguchi Taiji, Iwasaki Masamichi, Emoto Takuo, Terashita Daisuke, Mizuguchi Takao, Okamoto Hiroshi, Matsuo Yosuke, Kim Sushi-ku, Takarada Akira, Yokoyama Mitsuhiro
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The difference of arterial healing response following everolimus-eluting stent (EES) or sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) implantation in patients with ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI) has not been compared in detail.
METHODS: Thirty-five patients with STEMI were randomly implanted with an EES or SES (23 EES, 12 SES). At seven months, neointimal thickness (NIT) and strut malapposition were evaluated by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the grade and heterogeneity of neointimal coverage (NIC) and development of intra-stent thrombi were evaluated by angioscopy.
RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in clinical events experienced by the two groups, although one patient with an EES died following a papillary muscle rupture and one patient with a SES experienced sub-acute stent thrombosis. On OCT, although the EES implants showed a greater NIT than the SES implants (94.8 ± 88.8 μm vs 65.6 ± 63.3 μm, P<0.0001), both the EES and SES showed an excellent suppression of neointimal proliferation in the culprit lesion of STEMI. The frequency of uncovered and malapposed struts of EES was significantly lower than that of SES (2.7% vs. 15.7%, P<0.0001, 0.7% vs. 2.3%, P<0.0001, respectively). The ratio of stents fully covered with neointima of EES group was significantly higher than that of SES group (P=0.04). Angioscopic analysis also showed greater dominant NIC grade with homogenous NIC in EES than in SES (P=0.03, P=0.0002, respectively). The incidence of massive intra-stent thrombus of EES was lower than that of SES (P=0.05).
CONCLUSION: For patients with STEMI, EES may promote better arterial healing response than SES.
METHODS: Thirty-five patients with STEMI were randomly implanted with an EES or SES (23 EES, 12 SES). At seven months, neointimal thickness (NIT) and strut malapposition were evaluated by optical coherence tomography (OCT) and the grade and heterogeneity of neointimal coverage (NIC) and development of intra-stent thrombi were evaluated by angioscopy.
RESULTS: No significant differences were noted in clinical events experienced by the two groups, although one patient with an EES died following a papillary muscle rupture and one patient with a SES experienced sub-acute stent thrombosis. On OCT, although the EES implants showed a greater NIT than the SES implants (94.8 ± 88.8 μm vs 65.6 ± 63.3 μm, P<0.0001), both the EES and SES showed an excellent suppression of neointimal proliferation in the culprit lesion of STEMI. The frequency of uncovered and malapposed struts of EES was significantly lower than that of SES (2.7% vs. 15.7%, P<0.0001, 0.7% vs. 2.3%, P<0.0001, respectively). The ratio of stents fully covered with neointima of EES group was significantly higher than that of SES group (P=0.04). Angioscopic analysis also showed greater dominant NIC grade with homogenous NIC in EES than in SES (P=0.03, P=0.0002, respectively). The incidence of massive intra-stent thrombus of EES was lower than that of SES (P=0.05).
CONCLUSION: For patients with STEMI, EES may promote better arterial healing response than SES.