14 Oct 10
By S Savonitto, M D’Urbano, M Caracciolo, F Barlocco, G Mariani, M Nichelatti,
Patients with a recently implanted coronary drug-eluting stent (DES) who need urgent surgery are at increased risk of surgical bleeding unless clopidogrel is discontinued beforehand, but clopidogrel discontinuation has been associated with a high rate of adverse events due to stent thrombosis. This pilot study tested the hypothesis that the i.v. perioperative administration of the short-acting antiplatelet agent tirofiban allows the safe withdrawal of clopidogrel without increasing the rate of surgical bleeding.
Phase II study with a Simon two-stage design.
Thirty patients with a recently implanted DES [median (range) 4 (1–12) months] and high-risk characteristics for stent thrombosis underwent urgent major surgery or eye surgery. Clopidogrel was to be withdrawn 5 days before surgery, and tirofiban started 24 h later, continued until 4 h before surgery, and resumed 2 h after surgery until oral clopidogrel was resumed. The use of aspirin was decided by the surgeon. There were no cases of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or surgical re-exploration due to bleeding during the index admission, with a risk estimate of 0–11.6% (one-tail 97.5% CI). There was one case of thrombolysis in myocardial infarction (TIMI) major and one of TIMI minor bleeding in the postoperative phase; another four patients were transfused without meeting the TIMI criteria for major or minor bleeding.
In patients with a recently implanted DES and high-risk characteristics for stent thrombosis needing urgent surgery, a ‘bridging strategy’ using i.v. tirofiban may allow temporary withdrawal of oral clopidogrel without increasing the risk of bleeding.
04 Jun 10
By G Stone, A Rizvi, W Newman, K Mastali, J Wang, R Caputo, J Doostzadeh, S Cao, C Simonton, K Sudhir, A Lansky, D Cutlip, D Kereiakes for the SPIRIT IV Investigators
Previous studies have established the superiority of coronary everolimus-eluting stents over paclitaxel-eluting stents with respect to angiographic findings. However, these trials were not powered for superiority in clinical end points.
We randomly assigned 3687 patients at 66 U.S. sites to receive everolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents without routine follow-up angiography. The primary end point was the 1-year composite rate of target-lesion failure (defined as cardiac death, target-vessel myocardial infarction, or ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization).
Everolimus-eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel-eluting stents with respect to the primary end point of target-lesion failure (4.2% vs. 6.8%; relative risk, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 0.82; P=0.001). Everolimus-eluting stents were also superior with respect to the major secondary end point of the 1-year rate of ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (P=0.001) and were noninferior with respect to the major secondary end point of the 1-year composite rate of cardiac death or target-vessel myocardial infarction (P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.09 for superiority). The 1-year rates of myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis were also lower with everolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (1.9% vs. 3.1%, P=0.02 for myocardial infarction; 0.17% vs. 0.85%, P=0.004 for stent thrombosis). Target-lesion failure was consistently reduced with everolimus-eluting stents as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents in 12 prespecified subgroups, except in the subgroup of patients with diabetes (6.4% vs. 6.9%, P=0.80).
Everolimus-eluting stents, as compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents, resulted in reduced rates of target-lesion failure at 1 year, results that were consistent in all patients except those with diabetes, in whom the results were nonsignificantly different.