PDF icon Download PDF
Int J Angiol
DOI: 10.1055/a-2625-9999
Review Article

Coronary Stents: All Those Trials

Margaret Mary Glazier
1   Department of Medicine, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
,
James J. Glazier 
2   Department of Medicine, Wayne State University, Detroit Medical Center, Detroit, Michigan
3   Department of Cardiology, Corewell Health William Beaumont University Hospital, Royal Oak, Michigan
› Author Affiliations
Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints
Preview

Abstract

In the nearly 40 years that have elapsed since the first coronary stent implantation in man, there has been a multitude of trials regarding this procedure. Stents were designed to combat two major weaknesses of balloon angioplasty: a high restenosis rate (>30%) and a 2 to 10% rate of abrupt closure. Early trials by some of the pioneers of the field suggested that stents, by scaffolding the artery, were indeed very successful in treating angioplasty-induced flow-limiting dissections. Findings of the BENESTENT-I (Belgian Netherlands stent trial) and STRESS (Stent Restenosis Study) demonstrated that stents reduced the restenosis rate to <30%. Drug-eluting stents were developed to further reduce the restenosis rates. In the SIRIUS trial (Sirolimus-Eluting Stents versus Standard Stents in Patients with Stenosis in a Native Coronary Artery), when compared with a bare metal stent, a sirolimus-eluting stent reduced significantly the need for revascularization of target lesions. Concerns regarding late and very late stent thrombosis with these first-generation drug-eluting stents led to the development of second-generation stents. Multiple trials have demonstrated very low stent thrombosis rates (<1%) with the latter stents. The promise of bioresorbable stents was dimmed by the findings of the ABSORB II trial (Bioresorbable Everolimus-Eluting Scaffold Versus a Metallic Everolimus-Eluting Stent). The findings of the SYNTAX (Synergy between Percutaneous Coronary Intervention with Taxus and Cardiac Surgery) trial suggests that the majority of patients with left main stem and three vessel coronary artery disease are better served by coronary artery bypass surgery rather than angioplasty with drug-eluting stents.

Keywords

stents for coronary artery disease - coronary artery disease - acute coronary dissection - coronary restenosis - coronary angioplasty - bare metal coronary stents - drug-eluting coronary stents - bioresorbable stents

Authors' Contributions

All authors had access to the data and a role in writing the manuscript.




Publication History

Article published online:
24 June 2025

© 2025. International College of Angiology. This article is published by Thieme.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sigwart U. The stent story: how it all started…. Eur Heart J 2017; 38 (28) 2171-2172
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Emmert MY, Templin C. 40 years on. Eur Heart J 2017; 38 (28) 2158-2160
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Palmerini T, Kirtane AJ. Coronary stenting. In: Topol EJ, Teirstein PS. eds. Textbook of Interventional Cardiology. 8th ed.. Philadelphia: Elsevier/Saunders; 2018: 235-286
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 4 Russo FD, Rao SV. Coronary stents. In: Kern MJ, Seto AH. eds. SCAI Interventional Cardiology Review. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2018: 187-195
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Macaya-Ten F, Gonzalo N, Escaned J, Macaya C. [Inception of the coronary stent: a story of successful collaboration between innovative scientists and the biotechnology industry]. REC Interv Cardiol 2024; 6 (04) 321-331
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Sigwart U, Puel J, Mirkovitch V, Joffre F, Kappenberger L. Intravascular stents to prevent occlusion and restenosis after transluminal angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1987; 316 (12) 701-706
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Sigwart U, Urban P, Golf S. et al. Emergency stenting for acute occlusion after coronary balloon angioplasty. Circulation 1988; 78 (5 Pt 1): 1121-1127
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Serruys PW, Strauss BH, Beatt KJ. et al. Angiographic follow-up after placement of a self-expanding coronary-artery stent. N Engl J Med 1991; 324 (01) 13-17
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Nakamura S, Colombo A, Gaglione A. et al. Intracoronary ultrasound observations during stent implantation. Circulation 1994; 89 (05) 2026-2034
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 George BS, Voorhees III WD, Roubin GS. et al. Multicenter investigation of coronary stenting to treat acute or threatened closure after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty: clinical and angiographic outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 22 (01) 135-143
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Serruys PW, de Jaegere P, Kiemeneij F. et al; Benestent Study Group. A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994; 331 (08) 489-495
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Fischman DL, Leon MB, Baim DS. et al; Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 1994; 331 (08) 496-501
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Versaci F, Gaspardone A, Tomai F, Crea F, Chiariello L, Gioffrè PA. A comparison of coronary-artery stenting with angioplasty for isolated stenosis of the proximal left anterior descending coronary artery. N Engl J Med 1997; 336 (12) 817-822
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Sirnes PA, Golf S, Myreng Y. et al. Stenting in chronic coronary occlusion (SICCO): a randomized, controlled trial of adding stent implantation after successful angioplasty. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996; 28 (06) 1444-1451
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Serruys PW, Umans V, Heyndrickx GR. et al. Elective PTCA of totally occluded coronary arteries not associated with acute myocardial infarction; short-term and long-term results. Eur Heart J 1985; 6 (01) 2-12
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Grines CL, Cox DA, Stone GW. et al; Stent Primary Angioplasty in Myocardial Infarction Study Group. Coronary angioplasty with or without stent implantation for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 1999; 341 (26) 1949-1956
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 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 (23) 2816-2821
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Pache J, Kastrati A, Mehilli J. et al. Intracoronary stenting and angiographic results: strut thickness effect on restenosis outcome (ISAR-STEREO-2) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2003; 41 (08) 1283-1288
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Abbott JD, Cutlip D. Percutaneous coronary intervention with intracoronary stents: Overview. Accessed May 26, 2025 at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/percutaneous-coronary-intervention-with-intracoronary-stents-overview
    PubMed
  • 20 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Morice MC, Serruys PW, Sousa JE. et al; RAVEL Study Group. Randomized Study with the Sirolimus-Coated Bx Velocity Balloon-Expandable Stent in the Treatment of Patients with de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2002; 346 (23) 1773-1780
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Morice MC, Serruys PW, Barragan P. et al. Long-term clinical outcomes with sirolimus-eluting coronary stents: five-year results of the RAVEL trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50 (14) 1299-1304
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ. et al; SIRIUS Investigators. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med 2003; 349 (14) 1315-1323
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA. et al; TAXUS-IV Investigators. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004; 350 (03) 221-231
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Schömig A, Dibra A, Windecker S. et al. A meta-analysis of 16 randomized trials of sirolimus-eluting stents versus paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007; 50 (14) 1373-1380
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Cutlip D, Abbott JD. Intracoronary stents: stent types. Accessed May 26, 2025 at: https://www.uptodate.com/contents/intracoronary-stents-stent-types
    PubMed
  • 27 Stone GW, Teirstein PS, Meredith IT. et al; PLATINUM Trial Investigators. 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
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Kelly CR, Teirstein PS, Meredith IT. et al. Long-term safety and efficacy of platinum chromium everolimus-eluting stents in coronary artery disease: 5-year results from the PLATINUM trial. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10 (23) 2392-2400
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Yeh RW, Silber S, Chen L. et al. 5-year safety and efficacy of resolute zotarolimus-eluting stent: the RESOLUTE Global Clinical Trial Program. JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2017; 10 (03) 247-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Serruys PW, Silber S, Garg S. et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med 2010; 363 (02) 136-146
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Kereiakes DJ, Meredith IT, Windecker S. et al. Efficacy and safety of a novel bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting coronary stent: the EVOLVE II randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2015; 8 (04) e002372
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Kereiakes DJ, Windecker S, Jobe RL. et al. Clinical outcomes following implantation of thin-strut, bioabsorbable polymer-coated, everolimus-eluting SYNERGY stents. Circ Cardiovasc Interv 2019; 12 (09) e008152
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 von Birgelen C, Kok MM, van der Heijden LC. et al. Very thin strut biodegradable polymer everolimus-eluting and sirolimus-eluting stents versus durable polymer zotarolimus-eluting stents in allcomers with coronary artery disease (BIO-RESORT): a three-arm, randomised, non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2016; 388 (10060): 2607-2617
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Serruys PW, Chevalier B, Sotomi Y. et al. Comparison of an everolimus-eluting bioresorbable scaffold with an everolimus-eluting metallic stent for the treatment of coronary artery stenosis (ABSORB II): a 3 year, randomised, controlled, single-blind, multicentre clinical trial. Lancet 2016; 388 (10059): 2479-2491
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Haude M, Wlodarczak A, van der Schaaf RJ. et al. A new resorbable magnesium scaffold for de novo coronary lesions (DREAMS 3): one-year results of the BIOMAG-I first-in-human study. EuroIntervention 2023; 19 (05) e414-e422
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Glazier JJ, Ramos-Parra B, Kaki A. Therapeutic options for left main, left main equivalent, and three-vessel disease. Int J Angiol 2021; 30 (01) 76-82
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE. et al; Arterial Revascularization Therapies Study Group. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 2001; 344 (15) 1117-1124
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Serruys PW, Morice MC, Kappetein AP. et al; SYNTAX Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary-artery bypass grafting for severe coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2009; 360 (10) 961-972
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Neumann FJ, Sousa-Uva M, Ahlsson A. et al; ESC Scientific Document Group. 2018 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J 2019; 40 (02) 87-165
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 Fihn SD, Blankenship JC, Alexander KP. et al. 2014 ACC/AHA/AATS/PCNA/SCAI/STS focused update of the guideline for the diagnosis and management of patients with stable ischemic heart disease: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines, and the American Association for Thoracic Surgery, Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 64 (18) 1929-1949
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Thuijs DJFM, Kappetein AP, Serruys PW. et al; SYNTAX Extended Survival Investigators. Percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass grafting in patients with three-vessel or left main coronary artery disease: 10-year follow-up of the multicentre randomised controlled SYNTAX trial. Lancet 2019; 394 (10206): 1325-1334
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Farkouh ME, Domanski M, Sleeper LA. et al; FREEDOM Trial Investigators. Strategies for multivessel revascularization in patients with diabetes. N Engl J Med 2012; 367 (25) 2375-2384
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Esper RB, Farkouh ME, Ribeiro EE. et al. SYNTAX score in patients with diabetes undergoing coronary revascularization in the FREEDOM trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 72 (23 Pt A): 2826-2837
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Fedak PWM, Bhatt DL, Verma S. Coronary bypass surgery for diabetes and multivessel disease: forget the SYNTAX. J Am Coll Cardiol 2018; 72 (23 Pt A): 2838-2840
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Holm NR, Mäkikallio T, Lindsay MM. et al; NOBLE investigators. Percutaneous coronary angioplasty versus coronary artery bypass grafting in the treatment of unprotected left main stenosis: updated 5-year outcomes from the randomised, non-inferiority NOBLE trial. Lancet 2020; 395 (10219): 191-199
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar