Advances in coronary stent technology: current expectations and new developments

References

• Roubin GS, Canon AD, Agrawal SK, et al. Intracoronary stenting for acute and threatened closure complicating percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1992;85:916–927.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Epstein AJ, Polsky D, Yang F, LinYang L, Groeneveld PW. Coronary revascularization trends in the United States: 2001–2008. JAMA. 2011;305:1769–1776.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garg S, Serruys PW. Coronary stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56: S1-S42.
   Google Scholar
• Luscher TF, Steffel J, Eberli F, et al. Drug-eluting stent and coronary thrombosis: biological mechanisms and clinical implications. Circulation. 2007;115:1051–1058.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med. 1994;331:496–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F, et al. A comparison of balloon- expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. N Engl J Med. 1994;331: 489–495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jukema JW, Verschuren JW, Tan A, Quax PH. Restenosis after PCI. Part 1 : pathophysiology and risk factors. Nat Rev Cardiol. 2011;9:53–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gyöngyösi M, Yang P, Khorsand A, Glogar D. Longitudinal straightening effect of stents is an additional predictor for major adverse cardiac events. Austrian Wiktor Stent Study Group and European Paragon Stent Investigators. JAm Coll Cardiol. 2000;35:1580–1589.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silber S, Windecker S, Vranckx P, Serruys PW; RESOLUTE All Comers investigators. Unrestricted randomised use of two new generation drug- eluting coronary stents: 2-year patient-related versus stent-related outcomes from the RESOLUTE All Comers trial. Lancet. 2011;377:1241–1247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle BJ, Rihal CS, Gastineau DA, Holmes DR Jr. Bleeding, blood transfusion, and increased mortality after percutaneous coronary intervention: implications for contemporary practice. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:2019–2027.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cruden NL, Harding SA, Flapan AD, et al; Scottish Coronory Revascularisation Register Steering Committee. Previous coronary stent implantation and cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:236–242.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dewilde WJ, Oirbans T, Verheugt FW, et al; WOEST study investigators. Use of clopidogrel with or without aspirin in patients taking oral anticoagulant therapy and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: an open-label, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;381: 1107–1115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moreno R, Jimenez-Valero S, Sanchez-Recalde A, et al. Periprocedural (30- day) risk of myocardial infarction after drug-eluting coronary stent implantation: a meta-analysis comparing cobalt-chromium and stainless steel drug-eluting coronary stents. EuroIntervention. 2011;6: 1003–1010.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Dirschinger J, et al. Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: strut thickness effect on restenosis outcome (ISAR-STEREO) trial. Circulation. 2001;103:2816–2821.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sketch MH, Ball M, Rutherford B, Pompa JJ, Russell C, Kereiakes DJ; Driver investigators. Evaluation of the Medtronic (Driver) cobalt- chromium alloy coronary stent system. Am J Cardiol. 2005;95:8–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reifart N, Morice MC, Silber S, et al; NUGGET study. The NUGGET study: NIR ultra gold-gilded equivalency trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004;62:18–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanratty CG, Walsh SJ. Longitudinal compression: a “new” complication with modern coronary stent platforms – time to think beyond deliverability? EuroIntervention. 2011;7:872–877.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hofma SH, van der Giesen WJ, van Dalen BM, et al. Indication of longterm endothelial dysfunction after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Eur Heart J. 2006;27:166–170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waksman R, Erbel R, Di Mario C, et al; PROGRESS-AMS (Clinical Performance and Angiographic Results of Coronary Stenting with Absorbable Metal Stents) Investigators. Early- and long-term intravascu- lar ultrasound and angiographic findings after bioabsorbable magnesium stent implantation in human coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:312–320.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormiston JA, Serruys PW. Bioabsorbable coronary stents. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:255–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nishio S, Kosuga K, Igaki K, et al. Long-Term (>10 Years) clinical outcomes of first-in-human biodegradable poly-l-lactic acid coronary stents: Igaki-Tamai stents. Circulation. 2012;125:2343–2353.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Regar E, et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus- eluting coronary stent system for patients with single de-novo coronary artery lesions (ABSORB): a prospective open-label trial. Lancet. 2008;371:899–907.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Ormiston JA, Onuma Y, et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus- eluting coronary stent system (ABSORB): 2 year outcomes and results from multiple imaging methods. Lancet. 2009;373:897–910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onuma Y. Three year results of clinical follow-up after a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold in patients with de novo coronary artery disease: the ABSORB trial. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:447–453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yamawaki T, Shimokawa H, Kozai T, et al. Intramural delivery of a specific tyrosine kinase inhibitor with biodegradable stent suppresses the restenotic changes of the coronary artery in pigs in vivo. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32:780–786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ABSORB II randomized controlled trial: a clinical evaluation to compare the safety, efficacy, and performance of the Absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold system against the XIENCE everolimus-eluting coronary stent system in the treatment of subjects with ischemic heart disease caused by de novo native coronary artery lesions: rationale and study design. Diletti R, Serruys PW, Farooq V et al. Am Heart J. 2012;164:654–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haude M, Erbel R, Erne P, et al. Safety and performance of the drug- eluting absorbable metal scaffold (DREAMS) in patients with de-novo coronary lesions: 12 month results of the prospective, multicentre, first-in-man BIOSOLVE-I trial. Lancet. 2013;381:836–844.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jabara R, Pendyala L, Geve S, Chen J, Chronos N, Robinson K. Novel fully bioabsorbable salicylate-based sirolimus eluting stent. EuroIntervention. 2009;5 Suppl F:F58-F64.
   Google Scholar
• Strauss BH, Serruys PW, Bertrand ME, et al. Quantitative angiographic follow-up of the coronary Wallstent in native vessels and bypass grafts (European experience – Mar 1986 to Mar 1990). Am J Cardiol. 1992;69:475–481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheye S, Ramcharitar S, Grube E, et al. Six-month clinical and angiographic results of the STENTYS® self-apposing stent in bifurcation lesions. EuroIntervention. 2011;7:580–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Geuns R, Tamburino C, Faj adet J, et al. Self-expanding versus balloon- expandable stents in acute myocardial infarction: results from the APPOSITION II Study. Self-expanding stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:1209–1219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abizaid AC, de Ribamar Costa J, Whitbourn RJ, Chang JC. The Car- dioMind coronary stent delivery system: stent delivery on a 0.014″ guidewire platform. EuroIntervention. 2007;3:154–157.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Chamie D, Costa R, Abizaid A, et al. Serial angiography and intravascu- lar ultrasound: results of the SISC Registry (Stents In Small Coronaries). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:191–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kume T, Waseda K, Koo BK, et al. Intravascular ultrasound analysis of small vessel lesions treated with the sparrow coronary stent system: results of the CARE II trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. [Epub February 14, 2013.]
   Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Dizon JM, Merkely B, et al. Prospective, randomized, multicenter evaluation of a polyethylene terephthalate micronet mesh- covered stent (MGuard) in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction the MASTER Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;60:1975–1984.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Behan MW, Holm NR, Curzen NP, et al. Simple or complex stenting for bifurcation coronary lesions. A patient-level pooled-analysis of the Nordic Bifurcation Study and the British Bifurcation Coronary Study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:57–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan M, de Lezo JS, Medina A, et al. Rapamycin-eluting stents for the treatment of bifurcated coronary lesions: a randomized comparison of a simple versus complex strategy. Am Heart J. 2004;148:857–864.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jensen JS, Galloe A, Lassen JF, et al; Nordic-Baltic PCI Study Group. Safety in simple versus complex stenting of coronary artery bifurcation lesions. The nordic bifurcation study 14-month follow-up results. EuroIntervention. 2008;4:229–233.
   Google Scholar
• Hildick-Smith D, de Beider AJ, Cooter N, et al. Randomized trial of simple versus complex drug-eluting stenting for bifurcation lesions: the British Bifurcation Coronary Study: old, new, and evolving strategies. Circulation. 2010;121:1235–1243.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colombo A, Bramucci E, Sacca S, et al. Randomized study of the crush technique versus provisional side-branch stenting in true coronary bifurcations: the CACTUS (Coronary Bifurcations: Application of the Crushing Technique Using Sirolimus-Eluting Stents) study. Circulation. 2009;119:71–78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang F, Dong L, Ge J. Simple versus complex stenting strategy for coronary artery bifurcation lesions in the drug-eluting stent era: a metaanalysis of randomized trials. Heart. 2009;95:1676–1681.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Katritsis DG, Siontis GCM, Ioannidis JPA. Double versus single stenting for coronary bifurcation lesions: a meta-analysis. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:409–415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Onuma Y, Müller R, Ramcharitar S, et al. Tryton I, First-In-Man (FIM) study: six month clinical and angiographic outcome, analysis with new quantitative coronary angiography dedicated for bifurcation lesions. EuroIntervention. 2008;3:546–552.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grundeken MJ, Asgedom S, Damman P et al. Six-month and one-year clinical outcomes after placement of a dedicated coronary bifurcation stent: a patient-level pooled analysis of eight registry studies. EuroIntervention. [Epub January 30, 2013.]
   Google Scholar
• Agostoni P, Foley D, Lesiak M, et al. A prospective multicentre registry, evaluating real-world usage of the Tryton side branch stent: results of the E-Tryton 150/Benelux registry. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1293–1300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doi H, Maehara A, Mintz GS, Dani L, Leon MB, Grube E. Serial intravascular ultrasound analysis of bifurcation lesions treated using the novel self-expanding sideguard side branch stent. Am J Cardiol. 2009;104:1216–1221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamas MA, Farooq V, Latib A, et al. Use of the Sideguard (Cappella) stent in bifurcation lesions: a real-world experience. EuroIntervention. 2012;7:1170–1180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verheye S, Agostoni P, Dubois CL, et al. 9-month clinical, angiographic, and intravascular ultrasound results of a prospective evaluation of the Axxess self-expanding biolimus A9-eluting stent in coronary bifurcation lesions: the DIVERGE (Drug-Eluting Stent Intervention for Treating Side Branches Effectively) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53: 1031–1039.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook S, Ladich E, Nakazawa G, et al. Correlation of intravascular ultrasound findings with histopathological analysis of thrombus aspirates in patients with very late drug-eluting stent thrombosis. Circulation. 2009;120:391–399.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nakazawa G, Ladich E, Finn AV, Virmani R. Pathophysiology of vascular healing and stent mediated arterial injury. EuroIntervention. 2008;4(Suppl C):C7–C10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nebeker JR, Virmani R, Bennett CL, et al. Hypersensitivity cases associated with drug-eluting coronary stents: a review of available cases from the Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) project. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006;47:175–181.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Rizvi A, Newman W, et al; SPIRIT IV Investigators. Everolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(18):1663–1674.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kedhi E, Joesoef KS, McFadden E, et al. Second-generation everolimus- eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice (COMPARE): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;375:201–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Silber S, Garg S, et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2010;363: 136–146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chevalier B, Silber S, Park SJ, et al; NOBORI 1 Clinical Investigators. Randomized comparison of the Nobori Biolimus A9-eluting coronary stent with the Taxus Liberté paclitaxel-eluting coronary stent in patients with stenosis in native coronary arteries: the NOBORI 1 trial-Phase 2. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2:188–195.
   Google Scholar
• Stefanini GG, Kalesan B, Serruys PW, et al. Long-term clinical outcomes of biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease (LEADERS): 4 year follow-up of a randomised non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2011;378:1940–1948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meredith IT, Verheye S, Dubois CL, et al. Primary endpoint results of the EVOLVE trial: a randomized evaluation of a novel bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting coronary stent. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;59:1362–1370.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne RA, Kastrati A, Kufner S, et al; Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of 3 Limus-Eluting Stents (ISAR- TEST-4) Investigators. Randomized, non-inferiority trial of three limus agent-eluting stents with different polymer coatings: the Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Results: Test Efficacy of 3 Limus-Eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST-4) Trial. Eur Heart J. 2009;30:2441–2449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefanini GG, Byrne RA, Serruys PW, et al. Biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents reduce the risk of stent thrombosis at 4 years in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from the ISAR-TEST 3, ISAR-TEST 4, and LEADERS randomized trials. Eur Heart J. 2012;33: 1214–1222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehilli J, Kastrati A, Wessely R, et al; Intracoronary Stenting and Angiographic Restenosis-Test Equivalence Between 2 Drug-eluting Stents (ISAR-TEST) Trial Investigators. Randomized trial of a nonpolymer-based Rapamycin-eluting stent versus a polymer-based Paclitaxel-eluting stent for the reduction of late lumen loss. Circulation. 2006;113:273–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grube E, Mueller R, Schuler G, Hauptmann K, Schofer J. Comparison of Polymer-Free BioFreedom™ Stents with Durable Polymer Taxus Liberté™ Stents: 3-Year Results from the BioFreedom First-In-Man Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60(17_S).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silber S, Damman P, Klomp M. Clinical results after coronary stenting with the Genous Bio-engineered R stent: 12-month outcomes of the e-HEALING (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth) worldwide registry. EuroIntervention. 2011;6: 819–825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beijk MA, Klomp M, Verouden NJ, et al. Genous endothelial progenitor capturing stent vs the Taxis Liberte stent in patients with de novo coronary lesions with a high risk of coronary restenosis: a randomized, single-centre, pilot study. Eur Heart J. 2010;31:1055–1064.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beijk MA, Klomp M, van Geloven N, et al. Two-year follow-up of the Genous™ endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent versus the Taxus Liberté stent in patients with de novo coronary artery lesions with a high-risk of restenosis: a randomized, single-center, pilot study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;78:189–195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorchakova O, Koch W, Beckerath N, Mehill J, Schomig A, Kastrati A. Association of a genetic variant of endothelial nitric oxide synthase with the 1 year clinical outcome after coronary stent placement. Eur Heart J. 2003;24:820–827.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moschovitis A, Simon R, Seidenstücker A, et al. Randomised comparison of titanium-nitride-oxide coated stents with bare metal stents: five-year follow-up of the TiNOX trial. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:63–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karjalainen PP, Ylitalo A, Niemelä M, et al. Two-year follow-up after percutaneous coronary intervention with titanium-nitride-oxide-coated stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in acute myocardial infarction. Ann Med. 2009;41:599–607.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karjalainen PP, Ylitalo A, Niemelä M, et al. Titanium-nitride-oxide coated stents versus paclitaxel eluting stents in acute myocardial infarction: a 12-month follow-up report from the TITAX AMI trial. EuroIntervention. 2008;4:234–241.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tuomainen PO, Ylitalo A, Niemelä M, et al. Five-year clinical outcome of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction: long-term follow-up from the TITAX AMI trial. Int J Cardiol. [Epub December 3, 2012.]
   Google Scholar
• Brito LA, Chandrasekhar S, Little SR, Amiji MM. Non-viral eNOS gene delivery and transfection with stents for the treatment of restenosis. Biomed Eng Online. 2010;9:56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharif F, Hynes SO, McCullagh KJ, et al. Gene-eluting stents: non-viral, liposome-based gene delivery of eNOS to the blood vessel wall in vivo results in enhanced endothelialization but does not reduce restenosis in a hypercholesterolemic model. Gene Ther. 2012;19:321–328.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Indermuehle A, Bahl R, Lansky AJ, et al. Drug-eluting balloon angioplasty for in-stent restenosis: a systematic review and metaanalysis of randomised controlled trials. Heart. 2013;99:327–333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latib A, Colombo A, Castriota F, et al. A randomized multicenter study comparing a paclitaxel drug-eluting balloon with a paclitaxel-eluting stent in small coronary vessels: the BELLO (Balloon Elution and Late Loss Optimization) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012;60:2473–2480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortese B, Micheli A, Picchi A, et al. Paclitaxel-coated balloon versus drug-eluting stent during PCI of small coronary vessels, a prospective randomised clinical trial. The PICCOLETO study. Heart. 2010;96:1291–1296.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unverdorben M, Kleber FX, Heuer H, et al. Treatment of small coronary arteries with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. Clin Res Cardiol. 2010;99:165–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamm C. PEPCAD III: a randomised trial comparing a pacitaxel-coated balloon-stent system. American Heart Association Scientific Sessions; November 14–18, 2009; Orlando, FL, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Werner G. PEPCAD-CTO: A prospective non-randomised study of paclitaxel eluting balloons after BMS placement in successfully recanalised chronic total occlusions. Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics; September 21–25, 2010; Washington DC, DC, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Ormiston JA, Lefevre T, Grube E, Allocco DJ, Dawkins KD. First human use of the TAXUS Petal paclitaxel-eluting bifurcation stent. EuroIntervention. 2010;6:46–53.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Unverdorben M, Vallbracht C, Cremers B, et al. Paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter versus paclitaxel-coated stent for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis. Circulation. 2009;119:2986–2994.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne RA, Neumann F-J, Mehilli J, et al; ISAR-DESIRE 3 investigators. Paclitaxel-eluting balloons, paclitaxel-eluting stents, and balloon angioplasty in patients with restenosis after implantation of a drug- eluting stent (ISAR-DESIRE 3): a randomised, open-label trial. Lancet. 2012;381:461–467.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittger H, Brachmann J, Sinha AM, et al. A randomized, multicenter, single-blinded trial comparing paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty with plain balloon angioplasty in drug-eluting stent restenosis: the PEPCAD-DES study. J Am Coll Cardiol 2012;59:1377–1382.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Habara S, Mitsudo K, Kadota K, et al. Effectiveness of paclitaxel-eluting balloon catheter in patients with sirolimus-eluting stent restenosis. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011;4:149–154.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scheller B, Clever YP, Kelsch B, et al. Long-term follow-up after treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5:323–330.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bondesson P, Lagerqvist B, James SK, Olivecrona GK, Venetsanos D, Harnek J. Comparison of two drug-eluting balloons: a report from the SCAAR registry. EuroIntervention. 2012;8:444–449.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar