High bleeding risk: is BMS still justifiable?

Original Title: Is Bare-Metal Stent Implantation Still Justifiable in High Bleeding Risk Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention? A Pre-Specified Analysis From the ZEUS Trial. Reference: Sara Ariotti et al. J Am Coll Cardiol Intv. 2016;9(5):426-436.

 

This work studied ischemic and bleeding events in high bleeding risk patients randomized to the zotarolimus eluting stent (ZEZ) Endeavor vs. conventional bare metal stents (BMS), followed by dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients with both stable and unstable coronary artery disease.

Drug eluting stents are controversial in patients with high bleeding risk since prolonged DATP may poses safety concerns.

The ZEUS trial (Zotarolimus-Eluting Endeavor Sprint Stent in Uncertain DES Candidates) was a multicenter, randomized and simple blind trial including 828 high bleeding risk patients randomized to ZES vs. BMS followed by 30 days of DAPT.

Primary end point was a combination of death, MI and revascularization at 12 months that occurred in 22.6% of patients in the ZES group vs 29% of patients in the BMS group (HR: 0.75; CI 95% 0.57 to 0.98; p=0.033).

This difference was basically driven by a lower AMI rate (3.5% vs. 10.4%; p<0.001) and a lower revascularization rate (5.9% vs. 11.4%; p=0.005) in the ZES group.

The definite/probable thrombosis rate was lower in the ZES group and bleeding events were similar in the two groups.

Conclusion
Zotarolimus eluting stents in high bleeding risk patients with stable or unstable coronary artery disease provide superior safety and efficacy than conventional bare metal stents.

Editorial Comment
Just one month DAPT was safe in this study but we should not generalize this benefit to all drug eluting stents until there is more information. The Leaders Free study on biolimus eluting stents published in NEJM this past October, also showed superior safety and efficacy in high bleeding risk patients with only one month DAPT.

More articles by this author

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Coronary Perforations and Use of Covered Stents: Safe and Effective Long-Term Strategy?

Coronary perforations remain one of the most serious complications of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), especially in cases of Ellis ruptures type III. In these...

Left Main Coronary Artery Disease: Intravascular Imaging-Guided PCI vs. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

Multiple randomized clinical trials have demonstrated superior outcomes with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) vs. percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with left main...

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Related Articles

SOLACI Sessionsspot_img

Recent Articles

COILSEAL: Use of Coils in Percutaneous Coronary Intervention, Useful for Complication Management?

The use of coils as vascular closing tool has been steadily expanding beyond its traditional role in neuroradiology into coronary territory, where it remains...

Treatment of In-Stent Restenosis in Small Vessels with Paclitaxel-Coated Balloons

Coronary artery disease (CAD) in smaller epicardial vessels occurs in 30% to 67% of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention and poses particular technical challenges....

Contemporary Challenges in Left Atrial Appendage Closure: Updated Approach to Device Embolization

Even though percutaneous left atrial appendage (LAA) closure is generally safe, device embolization – with 0 to 1.5% global incidence – is still a...