J. Tift Mann

CONTEXT: Following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), short-term clopidogrel therapy in addition to aspirin leads to greater protection from thrombotic complications than aspirin alone. However, the optimal duration of combination oral antiplatelet therapy is unknown. Also, although current clinical data suggest a benefit for beginning therapy with a clopidogrel loading dose prior to PCI, the practical application of this therapy has not been prospectively studied. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefit of long-term (12-month) treatment with clopidogrel after PCI and to determine the benefit of initiating clopidogrel with a preprocedure loading dose, both in addition to aspirin therapy. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Clopidogrel for the Reduction of Events During Observation (CREDO) trial, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted among 2116 patients who were to undergo elective PCI or were deemed at high likelihood of undergoing PCI, enrolled at 99 centers in North America from June 1999 through April 2001. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive a 300-mg clopidogrel loading dose (n = 1053) or placebo (n = 1063) 3 to 24 hours before PCI. Thereafter, all patients received clopidogrel, 75 mg/d, through day 28. From day 29 through 12 months, patients in the loading-dose group received clopidogrel, 75 mg/d, and those in the control group received placebo. Both groups received aspirin throughout the study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: One-year incidence of the composite of death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the intent-to-treat population; 28-day incidence of the composite of death, MI, or urgent target vessel revascularization in the per-protocol population. RESULTS: At 1 year, long-term clopidogrel therapy was associated with a 26.9% relative reduction in the combined risk of death, MI, or stroke (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.9%-44.4%; P =.02; absolute reduction, 3%). Clopidogrel pretreatment did not significantly reduce the combined risk of death, MI, or urgent target vessel revascularization at 28 days (reduction, 18.5%; 95% CI, -14.2% to 41.8%; P =.23). However, in a prespecified subgroup analysis, patients who received clopidogrel at least 6 hours before PCI experienced a relative risk reduction of 38.6% (95% CI, -1.6% to 62.9%; P =.051) for this end point compared with no reduction with treatment less than 6 hours before PCI. Risk of major bleeding at 1 year increased, but not significantly (8.8% with clopidogrel vs 6.7% with placebo; P =.07). CONCLUSIONS: Following PCI, long-term (1-year) clopidogrel therapy significantly reduced the risk of adverse ischemic events. A loading dose of clopidogrel given at least 3 hours before the procedure did not reduce events at 28 days, but subgroup analyses suggest that longer intervals between the loading dose and PCI may reduce events.

BACKGROUND: Restenosis after coronary stenting necessitates repeated percutaneous or surgical revascularization procedures. The delivery of paclitaxel to the site of vascular injury may reduce the incidence of neointimal hyperplasia and restenosis. METHODS: At 73 U.S. centers, we enrolled 1314 patients who were receiving a stent in a single, previously untreated coronary-artery stenosis (vessel diameter, 2.5 to 3.75 mm; lesion length, 10 to 28 mm) in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. A total of 652 patients were randomly assigned to receive a bare-metal stent, and 662 to receive an identical-appearing, slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent. Angiographic follow-up was prespecified at nine months in 732 patients. RESULTS: In terms of base-line characteristics, the two groups were well matched. Diabetes mellitus was present in 24.2 percent of patients; the mean reference-vessel diameter was 2.75 mm, and the mean lesion length was 13.4 mm. A mean of 1.08 stents (length, 21.8 mm) were implanted per patient. The rate of ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization at nine months was reduced from 12.0 percent with the implantation of a bare-metal stent to 4.7 percent with the implantation of a paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk, 0.39; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.26 to 0.59; P<0.001). Target-lesion revascularization was required in 3.0 percent of the group that received a paclitaxel-eluting stent, as compared with 11.3 percent of the group that received a bare-metal stent (relative risk, 0.27; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.16 to 0.43; P<0.001). The rate of angiographic restenosis was reduced from 26.6 percent to 7.9 percent with the paclitaxel-eluting stent (relative risk, 0.30; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.19 to 0.46; P<0.001). The nine-month composite rates of death from cardiac causes or myocardial infarction (4.7 percent and 4.3 percent, respectively) and stent thrombosis (0.6 percent and 0.8 percent, respectively) were similar in the group that received a paclitaxel-eluting stent and the group that received a bare-metal stent. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with bare-metal stents, the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent is safe and markedly reduces the rates of clinical and angiographic restenosis at nine months.

CONTEXT: Compared with bare metal stents, drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis in noncomplex lesions. The utility of drug-eluting stents has not been evaluated in more difficult stenoses. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety and efficacy of the polymer-based, slow-release paclitaxel-eluting stent in a patient population with more complex lesions than previously studied. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: Prospective, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter randomized trial conducted from February 2003 to March 2004 at 66 academic and community-based institutions with 1156 patients who underwent stent implantation in a single coronary artery stenosis (vessel diameter, 2.25-4.0 mm; lesion length, 10-46 mm), including 664 patients (57.4%) with complex or previously unstudied lesions (requiring 2.25-mm, 4.0-mm, and/or multiple stents) and 9-month clinical and angiographic follow-up. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive 1 or more bare metal stents (n = 579) or identical-appearing paclitaxel-eluting stents (n = 577). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization at 9 months. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were well matched. Diabetes was present in 31% of patients. The mean (SD) reference vessel diameter was 2.69 (0.57) mm, the reference lesion length was 17.2 (9.2) mm, and 78% of lesions were type B2/C. A mean (SD) of 1.38 (0.58) stents (total mean [SD] length, 28.4 [13.1] mm) were implanted per lesion; 33% of lesions required multiple stents. Stents that were 2.25 mm and 4.0 mm in diameter were used in 18% and 17% of lesions, respectively. Compared with bare metal stents, paclitaxel-eluting stents reduced the 9-month rate of target lesion revascularization from 15.7% to 8.6% (P<.001) and target vessel revascularization from 17.3% to 12.1% (P = .02). Similar rates were observed for cardiac death or myocardial infarction (5.5% for bare metal stent group vs 5.7% for paclitaxel-eluting stent group) and stent thrombosis (0.7% in both groups). Angiographic restenosis was reduced from 33.9% to 18.9% in the entire study cohort (P<.001), including among patients receiving 2.25-mm stents (49.4% vs 31.2%; P = .01), 4.0-mm stents (14.4% vs 3.5%; P = .02), and multiple stents (57.8% vs 27.2%; P<.001). CONCLUSION: Compared with a bare metal stent, implantation of the paclitaxel-eluting stent in a patient population with complex lesions effectively reduces clinical and angiographic restenosis.

BACKGROUND: The safety and efficacy of the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent after implantation in a broad cross section of de novo coronary lesions at 1 year are unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the TAXUS-IV trial, 1314 patients with single de novo coronary lesions 10 to 28 mm in length, with reference-vessel diameter 2.5 to 3.75 mm, coverable by a single study stent, were prospectively randomized to the slow-release, polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent or an identical-appearing bare-metal EXPRESS stent. By actuarial analysis, the TAXUS stent compared with the bare-metal stent reduced the 12-month rates of target-lesion revascularization by 73% (4.4% versus 15.1%, P<0.0001), target-vessel revascularization by 62% (7.1% versus 17.1%, P<0.0001), target-vessel failure by 52% (10.0% versus 19.4%, P<0.0001), and composite major adverse cardiac events by 49% (10.8% versus 20.0%, P<0.0001). The 1-year rates of cardiac death (1.4% versus 1.3%), myocardial infarction (3.5% versus 4.7%), and subacute thrombosis (0.6% versus 0.8%) were similar between the paclitaxel-eluting and control stents, respectively. Between 9 and 12 months, there were significantly fewer myocardial infarctions (0% versus 1.1%, P=0.007), target-vessel revascularizations (2.4% versus 5.8%, P=0.002), and major adverse cardiac events (2.4% versus 6.3%, P=0.0009) in the paclitaxel-eluting stent than in the control stent group, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The relative efficacy reported at 9 months for the polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting TAXUS stent compared with the EXPRESS stent is preserved and continues to increase at 1 year, with no safety concerns apparent.