Low restenosis rate of the NIR coronary stent: results of the Danish multicenter stent study (DANSTENT)--a randomized trial comparing a first-generation stent with a second-generation stent.

BACKGROUND Larger studies evaluating the angiographic results of second-generation stents are scarce. The objectives of this study were to assess current standards of angiographic and clinical outcomes after implantation of the second-generation stainless steel stent, NIR (Medinol Ltd, Tel Aviv, Israel), and to compare the outcomes with those of the first-generation Palmaz-Schatz (PS) stent (Johnson & Johnson, Warren, NJ). METHODS Patients having coronary artery lesions that could be covered by a stent of 15 mm in length were randomly assigned to receive the NIR or the PS. Procedural success, 6-month angiographic findings, and 1-year clinical outcomes were determined. RESULTS In 424 patients included in the study, the overall procedural success rate was high (NIR 98%, PS 99%, P =.90). Follow-up angiography was conducted in 91% of the patients. The overall rate of angiographic restenosis was low in both groups (NIR 9.9%, PS 12.6%, P =.35). We found a low restenosis rate in vessels with a minimal lumen diameter >3.1 mm after the procedure, particularly in the NIR group (<6%). The rate of target lesion revascularization after 1 year did not differ (NIR 12%, PS 10%, P =.47). CONCLUSIONS The angiographic and clinical outcomes after implantation of the second-generation stainless steel stent were not significantly better than those of the first-generation stent. The low restenosis rates, particularly in patients with the largest minimal lumen diameters after stent implantation, warrants circumspection when planning the evaluation of newer stent technologies that aim to further reduce coronary restenosis.

[1]  E J Topol,et al.  Coronary morphologic and clinical determinants of procedural outcome with angioplasty for multivessel coronary disease. Implications for patient selection. Multivessel Angioplasty Prognosis Study Group. , 1990, Circulation.

[2]  M. Hadamitzky,et al.  Diabetes mellitus and the clinical and angiographic outcome after coronary stent placement. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[3]  Antonio Colombo,et al.  Randomised comparison of implantation of heparin-coated stents with balloon angioplasty in selected patients with coronary artery disease (Benestent II) , 1998, The Lancet.

[4]  C M Gibson,et al.  Generalized model of restenosis after conventional balloon angioplasty, stenting and directional atherectomy. , 1993, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[5]  J. Moses,et al.  Efficacy of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty in small coronary arteries. Stent Restenosis Study (STRESS) Investigators. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[6]  H Yokoi,et al.  Three-year follow-up after implantation of metallic coronary-artery stents. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  P. Teirstein,et al.  A randomized comparison of coronary-stent placement and balloon angioplasty in the treatment of coronary artery disease. Stent Restenosis Study Investigators. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[8]  K Ulm,et al.  Restenosis after coronary placement of various stent types. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[9]  C. Di Mario,et al.  Comparison of immediate and follow-up results of the short and long NIR stent with the Palmaz-Schatz stent. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[10]  R D Safian,et al.  The Importance of Acute Luminal Diameter in Determining Restenosis After Coronary Atherectomy or Stenting , 1992, Circulation.

[11]  M. Leon,et al.  Tissue proliferation within and surrounding Palmaz-Schatz stents is dependent on the aggressiveness of stent implantation technique. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[12]  M. Leon,et al.  Patterns and mechanisms of in-stent restenosis. A serial intravascular ultrasound study. , 1996, Circulation.

[13]  M. Bell,et al.  The PARAGON stent study: a randomized trial of a new martensitic nitinol stent versus the Palmaz-Schatz stent for treatment of complex native coronary arterial lesions. , 2000, The American journal of cardiology.

[14]  S. Pocock,et al.  A Clinical Trial Comparing Three Antithrombotic-Drug Regimens after Coronary-Artery Stenting , 1998 .

[15]  C. Di Mario,et al.  Angiographic and clinical outcome following coronary stenting of small vessels: a comparison with coronary stenting of large vessels. , 1998, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[16]  P. Serruys,et al.  First international new intravascular rigid-flex endovascular stent study (FINESS): clinical and angiographic results after elective and urgent stent implantation. The FINESS Trial Investigators. , 1997, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[17]  Larry S. Dean,et al.  Randomized Comparison of GR-II Stent and Palmaz-Schatz Stent for Elective Treatment of Coronary Stenoses , 2000, Circulation.

[18]  J. Stauffer,et al.  Randomised comparison of Micro Stent I with Palmaz-Schatz stent placement for the elective treatment of short coronary stenoses. , 1998, Catheterization and cardiovascular diagnosis.

[19]  D. Baim,et al.  Long-term (4- to 6-year) outcome of Palmaz-Schatz stenting: paucity of late clinical stent-related problems. , 1996, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

[20]  A. Wahle,et al.  Angiography and Intravascular Ultrasound , 2000 .

[21]  G. Mintz,et al.  Coronary in-stent restenosis - predictors, treatment and prevention. , 2000, European heart journal.

[22]  I. Penn,et al.  Intravascular ultrasound-guided optimized stent deployment. Immediate and 6 months clinical and angiographic results from the Multicenter Ultrasound Stenting in Coronaries Study (MUSIC Study) , 1998, European heart journal.

[23]  D. Baim,et al.  A Predictive Method for Estimating the Late Angiographic Results of Coronary Intervention Despite Incomplete Ascertainment , 1993, Circulation.

[24]  J. Reiber,et al.  Standardization of Central Off-Line Quantitative Image Analysis: Implications from Experiences with Quantitative Coronary Angiography , 2000, Heart Drug.

[25]  Which Stent Should Be Regarded as the Gold Standard for Treatment of Coronary Artery Stenoses? , 2000, Heart Drug.

[26]  W Rutsch,et al.  A comparison of balloon-expandable-stent implantation with balloon angioplasty in patients with coronary artery disease. Benestent Study Group. , 1994, The New England journal of medicine.

[27]  D. Baim,et al.  Restenosis after Arterial Injury Caused by Coronary Stenting in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus , 1993, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[28]  J. Marco,et al.  Nine‐year follow‐up of balloon‐expandable Palmaz‐Schatz stent in patients with single‐vessel disease , 2000, Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions.

[29]  A Randomized Trial Comparing Stenting With Balloon Angioplasty in Small Vessels in Patients With Symptomatic Coronary Artery Disease , 2000 .

[30]  D. Baim,et al.  Final results of a randomized trial comparing the MULTI-LINK stent with the Palmaz-Schatz stent for narrowings in native coronary arteries. , 2001, The American journal of cardiology.

[31]  Christian W Hamm,et al.  Nickel and molybdenum contact allergies in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis , 2000, The Lancet.

[32]  M. Hadamitzky,et al.  Influence of lesion length on restenosis after coronary stent placement. , 1999, The American journal of cardiology.

[33]  J. Reiber,et al.  Predictors of coronary in-stent restenosis: importance of angiotensin-converting enzyme gene polymorphism and treatment with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. , 2001, Journal of the American College of Cardiology.