|
Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting
and Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents
|
Comparison of Zotarolimus-Eluting and Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stents
Patrick W. Serruys, M.D., Ph.D., et al
New England Journal Medicine
June 16, 2010 (10.1056/NEJMoa1004130)
ABSTRACT
Background New-generation coronary stents that release zotarolimus or everolimus have been shown to reduce the risk of restenosis. However, it is unclear whether there are differences in efficacy and safety between the two types of stents on the basis of prospectively adjudicated end points endorsed by the Food and Drug Administration.
Methods In this multicenter, noninferiority trial with minimal exclusion criteria, we randomly assigned 2292 patients to undergo treatment with coronary stents releasing either zotarolimus or everolimus. Twenty percent of patients were randomly selected for repeat angiography at 13 months. The primary end point was target-lesion failure, defined as a composite of death from cardiac causes, any myocardial infarction (not clearly attributable to a nontarget vessel), or clinically indicated target-lesion revascularization within 12 months. The secondary angiographic end point was the extent of in-stent stenosis at 13 months.
Results At least one off-label criterion for stent placement was present in 66% of patients. The zotarolimus-eluting stent was noninferior to the everolimus-eluting stent with respect to the primary end point, which occurred in 8.2% and 8.3% of patients, respectively (P<0.001 for noninferiority). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of death from cardiac causes, any myocardial infarction, or revascularization. The rate of stent thrombosis was 2.3% in the zotarolimus-stent group and 1.5% in the everolimus-stent group (P=0.17). The zotarolimus-eluting stent was also noninferior regarding the degree (±SD) of in-stent stenosis (21.65±14.42% for zotarolimus vs. 19.76±14.64% for everolimus, P=0.04 for noninferiority). In-stent late lumen loss was 0.27±0.43 mm in the zotarolimus-stent group versus 0.19±0.40 mm in the everolimus-stent group (P=0.08). There were no significant between-group differences in the rate of adverse events.
Conclusions At 13 months, the new-generation zotarolimus-eluting stent was found to be noninferior to the everolimus-eluting stent in a population of patients who had minimal exclusion criteria
Featured Angina| Acute Coronary Syndrome and Heart Disease Interviews
|
Author Interview: Claes Held MD
Associate professor at Uppsala Clinical Research Center and the
Cardiology department at Uppsala University Hospital in Sweden
|
Publication:
Physical activity levels, ownership of goods promoting sedentary behaviour and risk of myocardial infarction: results of the INTERHEART study
Eur Heart J first published online January 11, 2012 doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehr432
2012 doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehr432
Claes Held, Romaina Iqbal, Scott A. Lear, Annika Rosengren, Shofiqul Islam,James Mathew, and Salim Yusuf
|
What are the main findings of the study?
|
The main findings are he following:
-
It is well known that physical inactivity is a risk factor for developing cardiovascular disease.
-
Our study shows that being physically active reduces the risk of having a heart attack.
-
Older studies have mostly studied people in the developed countries. This study which has a global perspective and includes 52 countries from all continents, shows that physical inactivity reduces the risk also in both low- middle-and high-income countries.
-
We also found that ownership of a car and TV was associated with a more than doubled risk of being sedentary and that in low- and middle income the risk for a heart attack was increased with 27 %.
-
We can however, not conclude from this study that there is a causal relationship but it is an interesting finding.
|
Were any of the findings unexpected?
|
We looked at the relationship between physical activity both at work and during leisure time.
A bit surprising was that people with heavy physical labor did not have a reduction in the risk of heart attacks, whereas people with both mild and moderate intensity did.
|
What should clinicians and patients take away from this study?
|
The main findings above and also that physical activity with duration below the recommended 30 minutes/day does seem to prevent from heart attacks as well although not as much as when you do it according to guidelines.
This may be a comfort to those who are completely sedentary and feel that it would be a too big step to move to the 30 minutes/day right away.
All PA does a good job for the heart as compared to not doing anything at all!
|
What recommendations do you have for cardiology health care providers as a result of your study?
|
It would be interesting to follow up on the ownership of car and TV and do a prospective study to see if the theory holds true.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
Background— Despite data showing the benefits of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) insertion for primary prevention in populations at risk for sudden death, professional society guidelines recommending primary prevention, and recognition by payers of the clinical value of ICDs in these populations, ICDs for primary prevention remain underused. We sought to determine whether implementing a screening tool would increase appropriate identification of patients showing clinical evidence of ICD benefit and prompt referral to an electrophysiologist for ICD implantation.
Methods and Results— Screening tools were affixed to medical records for patients seen in 2 outpatient cardiology offices that queried ejection fraction and whether referral to an electrophysiologist was made (N=6632).
The number of appropriate referrals in the screening period were compared with analogous data collected before implementation of the screening tool (control period) through retrospective record review (n=3606). Significantly more eligible patients were offered referral during the screening period than during the control period at both sites, 80% (8/10 eligible) versus 33% (5/15) at site 1 (P<0.02) and 100% (44/44) versus 60% (21/35) at site 2 (P<0.001). Of all patients offered referral, 41% (32/78) accepted.
Conclusions— The use of a screening tool increases referral to electrophysiology for patients in whom placement of an ICD confers the benefit of sudden cardiac death primary prevention. Barriers to referral include both physician and patient factors. Verification of these findings on a larger scale as well as studies defining the foundation of these barriers may further improve use of ICDs in patients for whom their mortality benefit is well described.
|
Keywords and tags:
Angina, atypical angina, heart disease,chest pain, angina pectoris, chest pains, cardiology ,ivabradine for chronic angina, emergency room evaluation of chest pain, heart attacks, cardiac syndrome X,cpr, heart disease in women, cholesterol, lipids, heart medications, aspirin, cardiologists, ekg, ecg, echocardiology, heart surgery, bypass surgery, stents, spiral CTs, 64 slice CTs, chest pain, heart risk factors, cardiology news, angina.com, CRP, C Reactive Protein, troponins, troponin I, troponin T, Prinzmetal's angina, nitrates, angina treatment, JUPITER study, Crestor, CHF, congestive heart failure, Avandia, myeloperoxidase, MPO, biomarkers, AEDs, cardiac defibrillators, cardiac CTs, coronary 64 slice scanners,128 slice CT, 256 Cat Scan, Vitamin D and heart disease, Get with the Program -Coronary Artery Disease updates, Acute Coronary Syndrome, stress tests, thallium stress test, PCI, angioplasty, CABG, coronary artery bypass surgery, calcium
Angina | Heart Disease Resourses
| Chest Pain
Amazon.com 's Editorial Reviews
Angina: New Ways to Treat
Chronic Chest Pain
Part of the award winning public television series Healthy head
/Healthy Mind. It's one of the scariest medical symptoms for people who are generally healthy: a tightening, painful feeling in the chest known as Angina. In some cases this chest pain can be a serious warning that requires immediate treatment. But for the millions of people with chronic, stable angina the discomfort is something that can be readily managed with a variety of treatments. In this program we take a look at what generally causes angina, what can be done to prevent it and how it can be effectively treated with lifestyle changes, innovative drug therapies and medical procedures.
|
Amazon.com Editorial Review:
Philips HeartStart Home Defibrillator (AED)
Be prepared for the unexpected.
When sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) strikes, the electrical system of the heart short circuits, causing the heart to quiver rather than pump in a normal rhythm. It typically results in the abnormal heart rhythm know as ventricular fibrillation (VF). It usually happens without warning and the majority of people have no previously recognized symptoms of heart disease. And it most often happens at home. For the best chance of survival from SCA caused by VF, a defibrillator should be used within 5 minutes. Yet, less than 1 in 20 people survive largely because a defibrillator does not arrive in time.
Just as seat belts or airbags do not save every life in a traffic accident, a defibrillator will not save every person who suffers a sudden cardiac arrest. Yet many lives could be saved if more people could be reached more quickly.
|
|
Angina.com Tag Cloud | Angina Keywords
|
**************************************
|
