Download PDF
Thromb Haemost 2015; 113(03): 464-472
DOI: 10.1160/TH14-07-0599
Theme Issue Article
Schattauer GmbH

Progress in interventional cardiology: challenges for the future

Sakine Simsekyilmaz
1   Institute for Molecular Cardiovascular Research, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
2   Biomedical Research Center, Tongji Hospital, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China
,
Elisa A. Liehn
1   Institute for Molecular Cardiovascular Research, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
,
Constantin Militaru
3   Deparment of Cardiology, Emergency Hospital, Craiova, Romania
,
Felix Vogt
4   Department of Cardiology, Pulmonology, Intensive Care and Vascular Medicine, Medical Faculty, RWTH Aachen University, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Received: 13 July 2014

Accepted after major revision: 10 January 2014

Publication Date:
17 November 2017 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Summary

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the western and developing countries. Percutaneous transluminal coronary interventions have become the most prevalent treatment option for coronary artery disease; however, due to serious complications, such as stent thrombosis and in-stent restenosis (ISR), the efficacy and safety of the procedure remain important issues to address. Strategies to overcome these aspects are under extensive investigation. In this review, we summarise relevant milestones during the time to overcome these limitations of coronary stents, such as the development of polymer-free drug-eluting stents (DES) to avoid pro-inflammatory response due to the polymer coating or the developement of stents with cell-directing drugs to, simultaneously, improve re-endothelialisation and inhibit ISR amongst other techniques most recently developed, which have not fully entered the clinical stage. Also the novel concept of fully biodegradable DES featured by the lack of a permanent foreign body promises to be a beneficial and applicable tool to restore a natural vessel with maintained vasomotion and to enable optional subsequent surgical revascularisation.

Keywords

Coronary interventions - stent implantation - neointima formation - stent thrombosis - in-stent restenosis
 

  • References

  • 1 Mueller RL, Sanborn TA. The history of interventional cardiology: cardiac catheterisation, angioplasty, and related interventions. Am Heart J 1995; 129: 146-172.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Heiss HW. Werner Forssmann: a German problem with the Nobel Prize. Clin Cardiol 1992; 15: 547-549.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Schlumpf M. 30 Jahre Ballonkatheter: Andreas Grüntzig, ein Pionier in Zürich. Schweiz Ärztezeit 2004; 85: 3460.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Sigwart U. et al. Intravascular stents to prevent occlusion and restenosis after transluminal angioplasty. N Engl J Med 1987; 316: 701-706.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Iakovou I. et al. Incidence, predictors, and outcome of thrombosis after successful implantation of drug-eluting stents. J Am Med Assoc 2005; 293: 2126-2130.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Mauri L. et al. Stent thrombosis in randomized clinical trials of drug-eluting stents. N Engl J Med 2007; 356: 1020-1029.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Liehn EA. et al. Blockade of keratinocyte-derived chemokine inhibits endothelial recovery and enhances plaque formation after arterial injury in ApoE-deficient mice. Arterioscl Thromb Vasc Biol 2004; 24: 1891-1896.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Raymond C, Menon V. Dual antiplatelet therapy in coronary artery disease: a case-based approach. Clevel Clin J Med 2009; 76: 663-670.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Leon MB. et al. A clinical trial comparing three antithrombotic-drug regimens after coronary-artery stenting. Stent Anticoagulation Restenosis Study Investigators. N Engl J Med 1998; 339: 1665-1671.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Yeh SP. et al. Ticlopidine-associated aplastic anemia. A case report and review of literature. Ann Hematol 1998; 76: 87-90.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Page Y. et al. Thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura related to ticlopidine. Lancet 1991; 337: 774-776.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Steinhubl SR. et al. Incidence and clinical course of thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura due to ticlopidine following coronary stenting. EPISTENT Investigators. Evaluation of Platelet IIb/IIIa Inhibitor for Stenting. J Am Med Assoc 1999; 281: 806-810.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Mangalpally KK, Kleiman NS. The safety of clopidogrel. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2011; 10: 85-95.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Kam PC, Nethery CM. The thienopyridine derivatives (platelet adenosine diphosphate receptor antagonists), pharmacology and clinical developments. Anaesthesia 2003; 58: 28-35.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wiviott SD. et al. Greater clinical benefit of more intensive oral antiplatelet therapy with prasugrel in patients with diabetes mellitus in the trial to assess improvement in therapeutic outcomes by optimizing platelet inhibition with prasugrel-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction 38. Circulation 2008; 118: 1626-1636.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Wiviott SD. et al. Prasugrel versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2007; 357: 2001-2015.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Wallentin L. et al. Ticagrelor versus clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1045-1057.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Windecker S. et al. 2014 ESC/EACTS Guidelines on myocardial revasculari-sation: The Task Force on Myocardial Revascularisation 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 Epub ahead of print.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Asencio LA. et al. Combining Antiplatelet and Antithrombotic Therapy (Triple Therapy): What Are the Risks and Benefits?. Am J Med 2014; 127: 579-585.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Holmes Jr. DR. et al. Combining antiplatelet and anticoagulant therapies. J Am Coll Cardiol 2009; 54: 95-109.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Heidbuchel H. et al. European Heart Rhythm Association Practical Guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Europace 2013; 15: 625-651.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Heidbuchel H. et al. EHRA practical guide on the use of new oral anticoagulants in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation: executive summary. Eur Heart J 2013; 34: 2094-2106.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Dickneite G. Prothrombin Complex Concentrates as Reversal Agents for New Oral Anticoagulants: Lessons from Preclinical Studies with Beriplex. Clin Lab Med 2014; 34: 623-635.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Faraoni D. et al. Perioperative Management of Patients Receiving New Oral Anticoagulants: An International Survey. Clin Lab Med 2014; 34: 637-654.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Amsterdam EA. et al. AHA/ACC Guideline for the Management of Patients With Non-ST-Elevation Acute Guidelines Coronary Syndromes: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines. Circulation. 2014 Epub ahead of print.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Auer J. et al. Long-term outcomes following coronary drug-eluting- and bare-metal-stent implantation. Atherosclerosis 2010; 210: 503-509.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 van Werkum JW. et al. Long-term clinical outcome after a first angiographically confirmed coronary stent thrombosis: an analysis of 431 cases. Circulation 2009; 119: 828-834.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Lagerqvist B. et al. Stent thrombosis in Sweden: a report from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. Circulation Cardiovasc Interv 2009; 2: 401-408.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Sarno G. et al. Stent Thrombosis in New-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents in Patients With STEMI Undergoing Primary PCI: A Report From SCAAR. J Am Coll Cardiol 2014; 64: 16-24.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Nakazawa G. et al. Coronary responses and differential mechanisms of late stent thrombosis attributed to first-generation sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57: 390-398.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Virmani R. et al. Localized hypersensitivity and late coronary thrombosis secondary to a sirolimus-eluting stent: should we be cautious?. Circulation 2004; 109: 701-705.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Choi SY. et al. Intravascular ultrasound findings of early stent thrombosis after primary percutaneous intervention in acute myocardial infarction: a Harmonizing Outcomes with Revascularisation and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction (HORIZONS-AMI) substudy. Circulation Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 4: 239-247.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Mamas MA. et al. Stent fracture: Insights on mechanisms, treatments, and outcomes from the food and drug administration manufacturer and user facility device experience database. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 83: E251-259.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Dangas GD. et al. Effect of switching antithrombin agents for primary angio-plasty in acute myocardial infarction: the HORIZONS-SWITCH analysis. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 57: 2309-2316.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Fischman DL. 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.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Krone RJ. et al. Evaluation of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association and the Society for Coronary Angiography and Interventions lesion classification system in the current “stent era” of coronary interventions (from the ACC-National Cardiovascular Data Registry). Am J Cardiol 2003; 92: 389-394.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Raval FM, Nikolajczyk BS. The Bidirectional Relationship between Metabolism and Immune Responses. Discoveries 2013; 1: e6.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Silvestre-Roig C. et al. Atherosclerotic plaque destabilisation: mechanisms, models, and therapeutic strategies. Circ Res 2014; 114: 214-226.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Stary HC. et al. A definition of advanced types of atherosclerotic lesions and a histological classification of atherosclerosis. A report from the Committee on Vascular Lesions of the Council on Arteriosclerosis, American Heart Association. Circulation 1995; 92: 1355-1374.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Cutlip DE. et al. Clinical restenosis after coronary stenting: perspectives from multicenter clinical trials. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002; 40: 2082-2089.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Roukoz H. et al. Comprehensive meta-analysis on drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents during extended follow-up. Am J Med 2009; 122: 581-e1-10.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Pacurari M. et al. The role of microRNAs in Rennin-Angiotensin-Aldosterone System (RAAS)-mediated Vascular Inflammation and Remodeling. Discoveries 2013; 1: e4.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Costa MA, Simon DI. Molecular basis of restenosis and drug-eluting stents. Circulation 2005; 111: 2257-2273.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Morice MC. et al. A randomized comparison of a sirolimus-eluting stent with a standard stent for coronary revascularisation. N Engl J Med 2002; 346: 1773-1780.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Stone GW. et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004; 350: 221-231.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Capodanno D. et al. Novel drug-eluting stents in the treatment of de novo coronary lesions. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2011; 7: 103-118.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Serruys PW. et al. Comparison of zotarolimus-eluting and everolimus-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med 2010; 363: 136-146.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Byrne RA. et al. Biodegradable polymer versus permanent polymer drug-eluting stents and everolimus- versus sirolimus-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: 3-year outcomes from a randomized clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 58: 1325-1331.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Garg S. et al. The twelve-month outcomes of a biolimus eluting stent with a biodegradable polymer compared with a sirolimus eluting stent with a durable polymer. EuroInterv 2010; 6: 233-239.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Scheller B. et al. Treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis with a paclitaxelcoated balloon catheter. N Engl J Med 2006; 355: 2113-2124.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Unverdorben M. et al. Paclitaxel-coated balloon catheter versus paclitaxel-coated stent for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis. Circulation 2009; 119: 2986-2994.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Erbel R. et al. Temporary scaffolding of coronary arteries with bioabsorbable magnesium stents: a prospective, non-randomised multicentre trial. Lancet 2007; 369: 1869-1875.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Mahnken AH. et al. Coronary artery stents in multislice computed tomography: in vitro artifact evaluation. Invest Radiol 2004; 39: 27-33.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Serruys PW. 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: 1578-1588.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Serruys PW. et al. A bioabsorbable everolimus-eluting coronary stent system (ABSORB): 2-year outcomes and results from multiple imaging methods. Lancet 2009; 373: 897-910.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Tamai H. et al. Initial and 6-month results of biodegradable poly-l-lactic acid coronary stents in humans. Circulation 2000; 102: 399-404.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Vogt F. et al. Long-term assessment of a novel biodegradable paclitaxel-eluting coronary polylactide stent. Eur Heart J 2004; 25: 1330-1340.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 van der Giessen WJ. et al. Marked inflammatory sequelae to implantation of biodegradable and nonbiodegradable polymers in porcine coronary arteries. Circulation 1996; 94: 1690-1697.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Onuma Y. et al. Bioresorbable scaffold technologies. Circulation J 2011; 75: 509-520.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Grundeken MJ. et al. Treatment of coronary bifurcation lesions with the Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold in combination with the Tryton dedicated coronary bifurcation stent: evaluation using two- and three-dimensional optical coherence tomography. EuroInterv. 2014 Epub ahead of print.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Seth A. et al. Salvage of side branch by provisional “TAP technique” using Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds for bifurcation lesions: first case reports with technical considerations. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2014; 84: 55-61.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Zamiri P. et al. The biocompatibility of rapidly degrading polymeric stents in porcine carotid arteries. Biomaterials 2010; 31: 7847-7855.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Grabow N. et al. Development of a sirolimus-eluting poly (L-lactide)/poly(4-hy-droxybutyrate) absorbable stent for peripheral vascular intervention. Biomed Tech 2013; 58: 429-437.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Onuma Y, Serruys PW. Bioresorbable scaffold: the advent of a new era in percutaneous coronary and peripheral revascularisation?. Circulation 2010; 123: 779-797.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Chen SL. et al. Perspective on bifurcation PCI. J Interv Cardiol 2009; 22: 99-109.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Iakovou I. et al. New strategies in the treatment of coronary bifurcations. Herz 2011; 36: 198-212.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Lee MS, Finch W. Stenting techniques for patients with bifurcation coronary artery disease. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2011; 12: 231-239.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Moussa ID. Coronary artery bifurcation interventions: the disconnect between randomized clinical trials and patient centered decision-making. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2011; 77: 537-545.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Liehn EA. et al. Chemokines: inflammatory mediators of atherosclerosis. Arch Physiol Biochem 2006; 112: 229-238.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Zeiffer U. et al. Neointimal smooth muscle cells display a proinflammatory phenotype resulting in increased leukocyte recruitment mediated by P-selectin and chemokines. Circ Res 2004; 94: 776-784.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Zernecke A. et al. SDF-1alpha/CXCR4 axis is instrumental in neointimal hyperplasia and recruitment of smooth muscle progenitor cells. Circ Res 2005; 96: 784-791.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Hristov M. et al. Importance of CXC chemokine receptor 2 in the homing of human peripheral blood endothelial progenitor cells to sites of arterial injury. Circ Res 2007; 100: 590-597.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Hristov M. et al. Regulation of endothelial progenitor cell homing after arterial injury. Thromb Haemost 2007; 98: 274-277.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Blindt R. et al. A novel drug-eluting stent coated with an integrin-binding cyclic Arg-Gly-Asp peptide inhibits neointimal hyperplasia by recruiting endothelial progenitor cells. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 47: 1786-1795.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Soehnlein O. et al. Neutrophil-derived cathelicidin protects from neointimal hy-perplasia. Science Transl Med 2011; 3: 103ra98.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Aoki J. et al. Endothelial progenitor cell capture by stents coated with antibody against CD34: the HEALING-FIM (Healthy Endothelial Accelerated Lining Inhibits Neointimal Growth-First In Man) Registry. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005; 45: 1574-1579.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Hoffmann J. et al. Immobilized DNA aptamers used as potent attractors for porcine endothelial precursor cells. J Biomed Materials Res Part A 2008; 84: 614-621.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Schober A. et al. Crucial role of the CCL2/CCR2 axis in neointimal hyperplasia after arterial injury in hyperlipidemic mice involves early monocyte recruitment and CCL2 presentation on platelets. Circ Res 2004; 95: 1125-1133.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Liehn EA. et al. A new monocyte chemotactic protein-1/chemokine CC motif ligand-2 competitor limiting neointima formation and myocardial ischemia/ reperfusion injury in mice. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 56: 1847-1857.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Zernecke A. et al. Deficiency in CCR5 but not CCR1 protects against neointima formation in atherosclerosis-prone mice: involvement of IL-10. Blood 2006; 107: 4240-4243.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Postea O. et al. Contribution of platelet CX(3)CR1 to platelet-monocyte complex formation and vascular recruitment during hyperlipidemia. Arterioscl Thromb Vasc Biol 2012; 32: 1186-1193.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Shagdarsuren E. et al. C5a receptor targeting in neointima formation after arterial injury in atherosclerosis-prone mice. Circulation 2010; 122: 1026-1036.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Simsekyilmaz S. et al. Role of extracellular RNA in atherosclerotic plaque formation in mice. Circulation 2014; 129: 598-606.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Tilstam PV. et al. Bone marrow-specific knock-in of a non-activatable Ikkalpha kinase mutant influences haematopoiesis but not atherosclerosis in Apoe-deficient mice. PloS One 2014; 9: e87452.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Hanekamp CE. et al. Randomized study to compare balloon angioplasty and elective stent implantation in venous bypass grafts: the Venestent study. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2003; 60: 452-457.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Reifart N. et al. Randomized comparison of angioplasty of complex coronary lesions at a single center. Excimer Laser, Rotational Atherectomy, and Balloon Angioplasty Comparison (ERBAC) Study. Circulation 1997; 96: 91-98.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Bloom JM. Stent placement compared with balloon angioplasty for obstructed coronary bypass grafts. N Engl J Med 1998; 338: 198-199.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 de Feyter PJ. et al. Balloon angioplasty for the treatment of lesions in saphenous vein bypass grafts. J Am Coll Cardiol 1993; 21: 1539-1549.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Rittger H. 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.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Stella PR. et al. A multicenter randomized comparison of drug-eluting balloon plus bare-metal stent versus bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in bifurcation lesions treated with a single-stenting technique: six-month angiographic and 12-month clinical results of the drug-eluting balloon in bifurcations trial. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 80: 1138-1146.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Bansal D. et al. Percutaneous intervention in saphenous vein bypass graft disease: case against the use of drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008 51: 970-971; author reply 971-972.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Wong SC. et al. Immediate results and late outcomes after stent implantation in saphenous vein graft lesions: the multicenter U. S. Palmaz-Schatz stent experience. The Palmaz-Schatz Stent Study Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1995; 26: 704-712.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Lee MS. et al. Saphenous vein graft intervention. J Am Coll Cardiol 2011; 4: 831-843.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 Kim WJ. et al. Randomized comparison of everolimus-eluting stent versus sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for de novo coronary artery disease in patients with diabetes mellitus (ESSENCE-DIABETES): results from the ESSENCE-DIABETES trial. Circulation 2011; 124: 886-892.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Hoffmann R. et al. Implantation of paclitaxel-eluting stents in saphenous vein grafts: clinical and angiographic follow-up results from a multicentre study. Heart 2007; 93: 331-334.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Bansal D. et al. Percutaneous intervention on the saphenous vein bypass grafts-long-term outcomes. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2008; 71: 58-61.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Elezi S. et al. Vessel size and outcome after coronary drug-eluting stent placement: results from a large cohort of patients treated with sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2006; 48: 1304-1309.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 98 Costopoulos C. et al. Comparison of first- and second-generation drug-eluting stents in saphenous vein grafts used as aorto-coronary conduits. Am J Cardiol 2013; 112: 318-322.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Medina A. et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of in-stent restenosis: immediate and late results. Texas Heart Inst J 2005; 32: 11-15.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Yang HM. et al. Long-term clinical and angiographic outcomes after implantation of sirolimus-eluting stents with a “modified mini-crush” technique in coronary bifurcation lesions. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv 2009; 74: 76-84.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Papayannis AC. et al. Optical coherence tomography analysis of the stenting of saphenous vein graft (SOS) Xience V Study: use of the everolimus-eluting stent in saphenous vein graft lesions. J Invas Cardiol 2012; 24: 390-394.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Liistro F. et al. Long-term effectiveness and safety of sirolimus stent implantation for coronary in-stent restenosis results of the TRUE (Tuscany Registry of sirolimus for unselected in-stent restenosis) registry at 4 years. J Am Coll Cardiol 2010; 55: 613-616.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Jaguszewski M. et al. Feasibility of second-generation bioresorbable vascular scaffold implantation in complex anatomical and clinical scenarios. Clin Res Cardiol. 2014 Epub ahead of print.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 104 Serruys PW. et al. Dynamics of vessel wall changes following the implantation of the absorb everolimus-eluting bioresorbable vascular scaffold: a multi-imaging modality study at 6, 12, 24 and 36 months. EuroInterv 2014; 9: 1271-1284
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar