The benefits of drug-eluting stents in the treatment of coronary artery disease

References

• Gruntzig AR, Senning A, Siegenthaler WE. Nonoperative dilatation of coronary-artery stenosis: percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. N Engl J Med. 1979;301(2):61–68.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cannan CR, Yeh W, Kelsey SF, Cohen HA, Detre K, Williams DO. Incidence and predictors of target vessel revascularization following percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: a report from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty Registry. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84(2):170–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormiston JA, Stewart FM, Roche AH, Webber BJ, Whitlock RM, Webster MW. Late regression of the dilated site after coronary angioplasty: a 5-year quantitative angiographic study. Circulation. 1997;96(2):468–474.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guiteras-Val P, Varas-Lorenzo C, Garcia-Picart J, Marti-Claramunt V, Auge-Sanpera JM. Clinical and sequential angiographic follow-up six months and 10 years after successful percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Am J Cardiol. 1999;83(6):868–874.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu MW, Parks JM, Cox DA, et al. Vascular Biology of Mechanical Intervention. In: Stack RS, Roubin GS, O’Neill WW, editors. Interventional Cardiovascular Medicine, Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Muhlestein JB, Zidar JP, Blazing MA. The Vascular Biology of Restenosis: An Overview. In: Stack RS, Roubin GS, O’Neill WW, editors. Interventional Cardiovascular Medicine, Principles and Practice. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Churchill Livingstone; 2001.
   Google Scholar
• Mintz GS, Popma JJ, Pichard AD, et al. Arterial remodeling after coronary angioplasty: a serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 1996; 94(1):35–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoffmann R, Mintz GS, Dussaillant GR, et al. Patterns and mechanisms of in-stent restenosis. A serial intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation. 1996;94(6):1247–1254.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Virmani R, Farb A. Pathology of in-stent restenosis. Curr Opin Lipidol. 1999;10(6):499–506.
   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(8):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(8):489–495.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cutlip DE, Chauhan MS, Baim DS, et al. Clinical restenosis after coronary stenting: perspectives from multicenter clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2002;40(12):2082–2089.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien ER, Ma X, Simard T, Pourdjabbar A, Hibbert B. Pathogenesis of neointima formation following vascular injury. Cardiovasc Hematol Disord Drug Targets. 2011;11(1):30–39.
   Google Scholar
• Liu MW, Roubin GS, King SB 3rd. Restenosis after coronary angioplasty. Potential biologic determinants and role of intimal hyperplasia. Circulation. 1989;79(6):1374–1387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz RS, Henry TD. Pathophysiology of coronary artery restenosis. Rev Cardiovasc Med. 2003;3 Suppl 5:S4–S9.
   Google Scholar
• Ross R, Glomset JA. The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis (second of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1976;295(8):420–425.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ross R, Glomset JA. The pathogenesis of atherosclerosis (first of two parts). N Engl J Med. 1976;295(7):369–377.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glover C, Ma X, Chen YX, et al. Human in-stent restenosis tissue obtained by means of coronary atherectomy consists of an abundant proteoglycan matrix with a paucity of cell proliferation. Am Heart J. 2002;144(4):702–709.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson PG, Bajaj RK, Baxley WA, Roubin GS. Vascular pathology of balloon-expandable flexible coil stents in humans. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;19(2):372–381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Komatsu R, Ueda M, Naruko T, Kojima A, Becker AE. Neointimal tissue response at sites of coronary stenting in humans: macroscopic, histological, and immunohistochemical analyses. Circulation. 1998;98(3):224–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Beusekom HM, Whelan DM, Hofma SH, et al. Long-term endothelial dysfunction is more pronounced after stenting than after balloon angioplasty in porcine coronary arteries. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1998;32(4):1109–1117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karas SP, Gravanis MB, Santoian EC, Robinson KA, Anderberg KA, King SB 3rd. Coronary intimal proliferation after balloon injury and stenting in swine: an animal model of restenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;20(2):467–474.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morton AC, Arnold ND, Crossman DC, Gunn J. Response of very small (2 mm) porcine coronary arteries to balloon angioplasty and stent implantation. Heart. 2004;90(3):324–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunn J, Arnold N, Chan KH, Shepherd L, Cumberland DC, Crossman DC. Coronary artery stretch versus deep injury in the development of in-stent neointima. Heart. 2002;88(4):401–405.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz RS, Huber KC, Murphy JG, et al. Restenosis and the proportional neointimal response to coronary artery injury: results in a porcine model. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992;19(2):267–274.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farb A, Weber DK, Kolodgie FD, Burke AP, Virmani R. Morphological predictors of restenosis after coronary stenting in humans. Circulation. 2002;105(25):2974–2980.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang CW, Wu D, Edelman ER. Physiological transport forces govern drug distribution for stent-based delivery. Circulation. 2001;104(5):600–605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Takebayashi H, Mintz GS, Carlier SG, et al. Nonuniform strut distribution correlates with more neointimal hyperplasia after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Circulation. 2004;110(22):3430–3434.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garg S, Serruys PW. Coronary stents: current status. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(10 Suppl):S1–S42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa JE, Serruys PW, Costa MA. New frontiers in cardiology: drug-eluting stents: Part II. Circulation. 2003;107(18):2383–2389.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa JE, Serruys PW, Costa MA. New frontiers in cardiology: drug-eluting stents: Part I. Circulation. 2003;107(17):2274–2279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx SO, Jayaraman T, Go LO, Marks AR. Rapamycin-FKBP inhibits cell cycle regulators of proliferation in vascular smooth muscle cells. Circ Res. 1995;76(3):412–417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flechner SM, Gurkan A, Hartmann A, et al. A randomized, open-label study of sirolimus versus cyclosporine in primary de novo renal allograft recipients. Transplantation. 2013;95(10):1233–1241.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marx SO, Marks AR. Bench to bedside: the development of rapamycin and its application to stent restenosis. Circulation. 2001;104(8):852–855.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Poon M, Marx SO, Gallo R, Badimon JJ, Taubman MB, Marks AR. Rapamycin inhibits vascular smooth muscle cell migration. J Clin Invest. 1996;98(10):2277–2283.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sousa JE, Sousa AG, Costa MA, Abizaid AC, Feres F. Use of rapamycin-impregnated stents in coronary arteries. Transplant Proc. 2003; 35(3 Suppl):165S–170S.
   Google Scholar
• Sousa JE, Costa MA, Abizaid AC, et al. Sustained suppression of neointimal proliferation by sirolimus-eluting stents: one-year angiographic and intravascular ultrasound follow-up. Circulation. 2001; 104(17):2007–2011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE, et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(23):1773–1780.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wani MC, Taylor HL, Wall ME, Coggon P, McPhail AT. Plant antitumor agents. VI. The isolation and structure of taxol, a novel antileukemic and antitumor agent from Taxus brevifolia. J Am Chem Soc. 1971;93(9):2325–2327.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiff PB, Fant J, Horwitz SB. Promotion of microtubule assembly in vitro by taxol. Nature. 1979;277(5698):665–667.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sollott SJ, Cheng L, Pauly RR, et al. Taxol inhibits neointimal smooth muscle cell accumulation after angioplasty in the rat. J Clin Invest. 1995;95(4):1869–1876.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(14):1315–1323.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350(3):221–231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weisz G, Leon MB, Holmes DR Jr, et al. Five-year follow-up after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation results of the SIRIUS (Sirolimus-Eluting Stent in De-Novo Native Coronary Lesions) Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(17):1488–1497.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis SG, Stone GW, Cox DA, et al. Long-term safety and efficacy with paclitaxel-eluting stents: 5-year final results of the TAXUS IV clinical trial (TAXUS IV-SR: Treatment of De Novo Coronary Disease Using a Single Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent). JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(12):1248–1259.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimura T, Morimoto T, Nakagawa Y, et al. Very late stent thrombosis and late target lesion revascularization after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation: five-year outcome of the j-Cypher Registry. Circulation. 2012;125(4):584–591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sarno G, Lagerqvist B, Frobert O, et al. Lower risk of stent thrombosis and restenosis with unrestricted use of ‘new-generation’ drug-eluting stents: a report from the nationwide Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR). Eur Heart J. 2012;33(5):606–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schampaert E, Cohen EA, Schluter M, et al. The Canadian study of the sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients with long de novo lesions in small native coronary arteries (C-SIRIUS). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2004;43(6):1110–1115.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schofer J, Schluter M, Gershlick AH, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of patients with long atherosclerotic lesions in small coronary arteries: double-blind, randomised controlled trial (E-SIRIUS). Lancet. 2003;362(9390):1093–1099.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moussa I, Leon MB, Baim DS, et al. Impact of sirolimus-eluting stents on outcome in diabetic patients: a SIRIUS (SIRolImUS-coated Bx Velocity balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo coronary artery lesions) substudy. Circulation. 2004;109(19):2273–2278.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spaulding C, Henry P, Teiger E, et al. Sirolimus-eluting versus uncoated stents in acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(11):1093–1104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grube E, Silber S, Hauptmann KE, et al. TAXUS I: six- and twelve-month results from a randomized, double-blind trial on a slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent for de novo coronary lesions. Circulation. 2003; 107(1):38–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colombo A, Drzewiecki J, Banning A, et al. Randomized study to assess the effectiveness of slow- and moderate-release polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary artery lesions. Circulation. 2003; 108(7):788–794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. One-year clinical results with the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent: the TAXUS-IV trial. Circulation. 2004;109(16):1942–1947.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawkins KD, Grube E, Guagliumi G, et al. Clinical efficacy of polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents in the treatment of complex, long coronary artery lesions from a multicenter, randomized trial: support for the use of drug-eluting stents in contemporary clinical practice. Circulation. 2005;112(21):3306–3313.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cannon L, et al. Comparison of a polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stent with a bare metal stent in patients with complex coronary artery disease: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2005; 294(10):1215–1223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Windecker S, Remondino A, Eberli FR, et al. Sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(7):653–662.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raber L, Wohlwend L, Wigger M, et al. Five-year clinical and angiographic outcomes of a randomized comparison of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: results of the Sirolimus-Eluting Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization LATE trial. Circulation. 2011;123(24):2819–2828.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2007;370(9591):937–948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ong AT, McFadden EP, Regar E, de Jaegere PP, van Domburg RT, Serruys PW. Late angiographic stent thrombosis (LAST) events with drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45(12):2088–2092.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westphal S. Concerns Prompt Some Hospitals To Pare Use of Drug-Coated Stents. Wall Street Journal. 2006 Jun 22.
   Google Scholar
• Wenaweser P, Daemen J, Zwahlen M, et al. Incidence and correlates of drug-eluting stent thrombosis in routine clinical practice. 4-year results from a large 2-institutional cohort study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52(14):1134–1140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camenzind E, Steg PG, Wijns W. Stent thrombosis late after implantation of first-generation drug-eluting stents: a cause for concern. Circulation. 2007;115(11):1440–1455.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eisenstein EL, Anstrom KJ, Kong DF, et al. Clopidogrel use and long-term clinical outcomes after drug-eluting stent implantation. JAMA. 2007;297(2):159–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finn AV, Nakazawa G, Joner M, et al. Vascular responses to drug eluting stents: importance of delayed healing. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2007;27(7):1500–1510.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis SG, Colombo A, Grube E, et al. Incidence, timing, and correlates of stent thrombosis with the polymeric paclitaxel drug-eluting stent: a TAXUS II, IV, V, and VI meta-analysis of 3,445 patients followed for up to 3 years. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(10):1043–1051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Pache J, et al. Analysis of 14 trials comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. N Engl J Med. 2007; 356(10):1030–1039.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kolandaivelu K, Swaminathan R, Gibson WJ, et al. Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings. Circulation. 2011;123(13):1400–1409.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Moses JW, Ellis SG, et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med. 2007;356(10):998–1008.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levine GN, Bates ER, Blankenship JC, et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation. 2011;124(23):e574–e651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grines CL, Bonow RO, Casey DE Jr, et al. Prevention of premature discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with coronary artery stents: a science advisory from the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, American College of Surgeons, and American Dental Association, with representation from the American College of Physicians. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(6):734–739.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brar SS, Kim J, Brar SK, et al. Long-term outcomes by clopidogrel duration and stent type in a diabetic population with de novo coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;51(23):2220–2227.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steinhubl SR, Berger PB, Mann JT 3rd, et al. Early and sustained dual oral antiplatelet therapy following percutaneous coronary intervention: a randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002;288(19):2411–2420.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hibbert B, Ma X, Pourdjabbar A, et al. Inhibition of endothelial progenitor cell glycogen synthase kinase-3beta results in attenuated neointima formation and enhanced re-endothelialization after arterial injury. Cardiovasc Res. 2009;83(1):16–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill JM, Zalos G, Halcox JP, et al. Circulating endothelial progenitor cells, vascular function, and cardiovascular risk. N Engl J Med. 2003;348(7):593–600.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joner M, Finn AV, Farb A, et al. Pathology of drug-eluting stents in humans: delayed healing and late thrombotic risk. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48(1):193–202.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Virmani R, Guagliumi G, Farb A, et al. Localized hypersensitivity and late coronary thrombosis secondary to a sirolimus-eluting stent: should we be cautious? Circulation. 2004;109(6):701–705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang KN, Grandi SM, Filion KB, Eisenberg MJ. Late and very late stent thrombosis in patients with second-generation drug-eluting stents. Can J Cardiol. 2013;29(11):1488–1494.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Joner M, Nakazawa G, Finn AV, et al. Endothelial cell recovery between comparator polymer-based drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008;52(5):333–342.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittersma SZ, de Winter RJ, Koch KT, et al. Impact of strut thickness on late luminal loss after coronary artery stent placement. Am J Cardiol. 2004;93(4):477–480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finn AV, Joner M, Nakazawa G, et al. Pathological correlates of late drug-eluting stent thrombosis: strut coverage as a marker of endothelialization. Circulation. 2007;115(18):2435–2441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JS, Jang IK, Kim JS, et al. Optical coherence tomography evaluation of zotarolimus-eluting stents at 9-month follow-up: comparison with sirolimus-eluting stents. Heart. 2009;95(23):1907–1912.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole OJ, Shehata M, Rigg KM. Effect of SDZ RAD on transplant arteriosclerosis in the rat aortic model. Transplant Proc. 1998;30(5):2200–2203.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chin-Quee SL, Hsu SH, Nguyen-Ehrenreich KL, et al. Endothelial cell recovery, acute thrombogenicity, and monocyte adhesion and activation on fluorinated copolymer and phosphorylcholine polymer stent coatings. Biomaterials. 2010;31(4):648–657.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meredith IT, Worthley S, Whitbourn R, et al. Clinical and angiographic results with the next-generation resolute stent system: a prospective, multicenter, first-in-human trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(10):977–985.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Midei M, Newman W, et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease: a randomized trial. JAMA. 2008;299(16):1903–1913.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Midei M, Newman W, et al. Randomized comparison of everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents: two-year clinical follow-up from the Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients with de novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SPIRIT) III trial. Circulation. 2009;119(5):680–686.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Rizvi A, Newman W, et al. 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
• Stone GW, Rizvi A, Sudhir K, et al. Randomized comparison of everolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. 2-year follow-up from the SPIRIT (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System) IV trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(1):19–25.
   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(9710):201–209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smits PC, Kedhi E, Royaards KJ, et al. 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of everolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization in daily practice. COMPARE (Comparison of the everolimus eluting XIENCE-V stent with the paclitaxel eluting TAXUS LIBERTE stent in all-comers: a randomized open label trial). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(1):11–18.
   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(2):136–146.
   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(9773):1241–1247.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taniwaki M, Stefanini GG, Silber S, et al. 4-year clinical outcomes and predictors of repeat revascularization in patients treated with new-generation drug-eluting stents: a report from the RESOLUTE All-Comers trial (A Randomized Comparison of a Zotarolimus-Eluting Stent With an Everolimus-Eluting Stent for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;63(16):1617–1625.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• von Birgelen C, Sen H, Lam MK, et al. Third-generation zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting stents in all-comer patients requiring a percutaneous coronary intervention (DUTCH PEERS): a randomised, single-blind, multicentre, non-inferiority trial. Lancet. 2014;383(9915):413–423.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Teirstein PS, Meredith IT, et al. A prospective, randomized evaluation of a novel everolimus-eluting coronary stent: the PLATINUM (a Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Trial to Assess an Everolimus-Eluting Coronary Stent System [PROMUS Element] for the Treatment of Up to Two de Novo Coronary Artery Lesions) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;57(16):1700–1708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GW, Teirstein P, Meredith IT, et al. Final Five-Year Results of the Platinum Randomized Trial Comparing Platinum Chromium Promus Element and Cobalt Chromium Xience V Everolimus-Eluting Stents in Workhorse Lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(10_S).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangalore S, Kumar S, Fusaro M, et al. Short- and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary stents: a mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117 762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials. Circulation. 2012;125(23):2873–2891.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmerini T, Biondi-Zoccai G, Della Riva D, et al. Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;379(9824):1393–1402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palmerini T, Benedetto U, Biondi-Zoccai G, et al. Long-Term Safety of Drug-Eluting and Bare-Metal Stents: Evidence From a Comprehensive Network Meta-Analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(23):2496–2507.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Task Force Members, Montalescot G, Sechtem U, et al. 2013 ESC guidelines on the management of stable coronary artery disease: the Task Force on the management of stable coronary artery disease of the European Society of Cardiology. Eur Heart J. 2013;34(38):2949–3003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Authors/Task Force members, Windecker S, Kolh P, et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS)Developed with the special contribution of the European Association of Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI). Eur Heart J. 2014;35(37):2541–2619.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mauri L, Kereiakes DJ, Yeh RW, et al. Twelve or 30 months of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stents. N Engl J Med. 2014; 371(23):2155–2166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schulz-Schupke S, Byrne RA, Ten Berg JM, et al. ISAR-SAFE: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 6 vs 12 months of clopidogrel therapy after drug-eluting stenting. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(20):1252–1263.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gwon HC, Hahn JY, Park KW, et al. Six-month versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents: the Efficacy of Xience/Promus Versus Cypher to Reduce Late Loss After Stenting (EXCELLENT) randomized, multicenter study. Circulation. 2012;125(3):505–513.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feres F, Costa RA, Abizaid A, et al. Three vs twelve months of dual antiplatelet therapy after zotarolimus-eluting stents: the OPTIMIZE randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310(23):2510–2522.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim BK, Hong MK, Shin DH, et al. A new strategy for discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy: the RESET Trial (REal Safety and Efficacy of 3-month dual antiplatelet Therapy following Endeavor zotarolimus-eluting stent implantation). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2012; 60(15):1340–1348.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colombo A, Chieffo A, Frasheri A, et al. Second-generation drug-eluting stent implantation followed by 6- versus 12-month dual antiplatelet therapy: the SECURITY randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2014;64(20):2086–2097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilard M, Barragan P, Noryani AA, et al. 6- versus 24-month dual antiplatelet therapy after implantation of drug-eluting stents in patients nonresistant to aspirin: the randomized, multicenter ITALIC trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(8):777–786.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valgimigli M, Campo G, Monti M, et al. Short- versus long-term duration of dual-antiplatelet therapy after coronary stenting: a randomized multicenter trial. Circulation. 2012;125(16):2015–2026.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collet JP, Silvain J, Barthelemy O, et al. Dual-antiplatelet treatment beyond 1 year after drug-eluting stent implantation (ARCTIC-Interruption): a randomised trial. Lancet. 2014;384(9954):1577–1585.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee CW, Ahn JM, Park DW, et al. Optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation: a randomized, controlled trial. Circulation. 2014;129(3):304–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giustino G, Baber U, Sartori S, et al. Duration of dual antiplatelet therapy after drug-eluting stent implantation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015;65(13):1298–1310.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garg S, Serruys PW. Coronary stents: looking forward. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;56(10 Suppl):S43–S78.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangalore S, Toklu B, Amoroso N, et al. Bare metal stents, durable polymer drug eluting stents, and biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents for coronary artery disease: mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;347f6625.
   Google Scholar
• Navarese EP, Tandjung K, Claessen B, et al. Safety and efficacy outcomes of first and second generation durable polymer drug eluting stents and biodegradable polymer biolimus eluting stents in clinical practice: comprehensive network meta-analysis. BMJ. 2013;347f6530.
   Google Scholar
• Mehilli J, Kastrati A, Wessely R, et al. 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(2):273–279.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne RA, Iijima R, Mehilli J, et al. Durability of antirestenotic efficacy in drug-eluting stents with and without permanent polymer. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;2(4):291–299.
   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(19):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(9616):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(9667):897–910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dudek D, Onuma Y, Ormiston JA, Thuesen L, Miquel-Hebert K, Serruys PW. Four-year clinical follow-up of the ABSORB everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold in patients with de novo coronary artery disease: the ABSORB trial. EuroIntervention. 2012;7(9):1060–1061.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Ormiston JA, et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus drug-eluting vascular scaffold for treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: six-month clinical and imaging outcomes. Circulation. 2010;122(22):2301–2312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Dudek D, et al. Evaluation of the second generation of a bioresorbable everolimus-eluting vascular scaffold for the treatment of de novo coronary artery stenosis: 12-month clinical and imaging outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2011;58(15):1578–1588.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ormiston JA, Serruys PW, Onuma Y, et al. First serial assessment at 6 months and 2 years of the second generation of absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2012;5(5):620–632.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diletti R, Serruys PW, Farooq V, et al. 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. Am Heart J. 2012;164(5):654–663.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Dudek D, et al. A bioresorbable everolimus-eluting scaffold versus a metallic everolimus-eluting stent for ischaemic heart disease caused by de-novo native coronary artery lesions (ABSORB II): an interim 1-year analysis of clinical and procedural secondary outcomes from a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2015;385(9962):43–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• No authors listed. First-year results of CABRI (Coronary Angioplasty versus Bypass Revascularisation Investigation). CABRI Trial Participants. Lancet. 1995;346(8984):1179–1184.
   Google Scholar
• No authors listed. Coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery: the Randomized Intervention Treatment of Angina (RITA) trial. Lancet. 1993;341(8845):573–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King SB 3rd, Lembo NJ, Weintraub WS, et al. A randomized trial comparing coronary angioplasty with coronary bypass surgery. Emory Angioplasty versus Surgery Trial (EAST). N Engl J Med. 1994; 331(16):1044–1050.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hamm CW, Reimers J, Ischinger T, Rupprecht HJ, Berger J, Bleifeld W. A randomized study of coronary angioplasty compared with bypass surgery in patients with symptomatic multivessel coronary disease. German Angioplasty Bypass Surgery Investigation (GABI). N Engl J Med. 1994;331(16):1037–1043.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Puel J, Karouny E, Marco F, et al. Angioplasty versus surgery in multivessel disease: immediate results and in-hospital outcome in a randomised prospective study. Circulation. 1992;86 (Suppl 1):372.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez A, Boullon F, Perez-Balino N, Paviotti C, Liprandi MI, Palacios IF. Argentine randomized trial of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass surgery in multivessel disease (ERACI): in-hospital results and 1-year follow-up. ERACI Group. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1993;22(4):1060–1067.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BARI Investigators. The final 10-year follow-up results from the BARI randomized trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;49(15):1600–1606.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(15):1117–1124.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez A, Bernardi V, Navia J, et al. Argentine Randomized Study: Coronary Angioplasty with Stenting versus Coronary Bypass Surgery in patients with Multiple-Vessel Disease (ERACI II): 30-day and one-year follow-up results. ERACI II Investigators. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(1):51–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SoS Investigators. Coronary artery bypass surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention with stent implantation in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (the Stent or Surgery trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2002;360(9338):965–970.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison DA, Sethi G, Sacks J, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery for patients with medically refractory myocardial ischemia and risk factors for adverse outcomes with bypass: a multicenter, randomized trial. Investigators of the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Study #385, the Angina With Extremely Serious Operative Mortality Evaluation (AWESOME). J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38(1):143–149.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Ong AT, Morice MC, et al. Arterial Revascularisation Therapies Study Part II – Sirolimus-eluting stents for the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. EuroIntervention. 2005;1(2):147–156.
   Google Scholar
• Rodriguez AE, Maree AO, Mieres J, et al. Late loss of early benefit from drug-eluting stents when compared with bare-metal stents and coronary artery bypass surgery: 3 years follow-up of the ERACI III registry. Eur Heart J. 2007;28(17):2118–2125.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med. 2009;360(10):961–972.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA, et al. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(25):2375–2384.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serruys PW, Onuma Y, Garg S, et al. 5-year clinical outcomes of the ARTS II (Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study II) of the sirolimus-eluting stent in the treatment of patients with multivessel de novo coronary artery lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010;55(11):1093–1101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohr FW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP, et al. Coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with three-vessel disease and left main coronary disease: 5-year follow-up of the randomised, clinical SYNTAX trial. Lancet. 2013;381(9867):629–638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bangalore S, Toklu B, Feit F. Outcomes with coronary artery bypass graft surgery versus percutaneous coronary intervention for patients with diabetes mellitus: can newer generation drug-eluting stents bridge the gap? Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(4):518–525.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Campos CM, Christiansen EH, Stone GW, Serruys PW. The EXCEL and NOBLE trials: similarities, contrasts and future perspectives for left main revascularisation. EuroIntervention. 2015;11 Suppl V: V115–V119.
   Google Scholar
• Garcia S, Sandoval Y, Roukoz H, et al. Outcomes after complete versus incomplete revascularization of patients with multivessel coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis of 89,883 patients enrolled in randomized clinical trials and observational studies. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2013; 62(16):1421–1431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar