A1 Vertaisarvioitu alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä lehdessä
Erratum to: Neointimal coverage and vasodilator response to titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents and everolimus-eluting stents in patients with acute coronary syndrome – insights from the BASE-ACS trial
Alaotsikko: insights from the BASE-ACS trial
Tekijät: Karjalainen PP, Kiviniemi TO, Lehtinen T, Nammas W, Ylitalo A, Saraste A, Mikkelsson J, Pietila M, Biancari F, Airaksinen JKE
Kustantaja: SPRINGER
Kustannuspaikka: DORDRECHT; VAN GODEWIJCKSTRAAT 30, 3311 GZ DORDRECHT, NETHERLANDS
Julkaisuvuosi: 2013
Journal: International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Tietokannassa oleva lehden nimi: International Journal of Cardiovascular Imaging
Lehden akronyymi: Int.J.Cardiovasc.Imaging
Numero sarjassa: 8
Vuosikerta: 29
Numero: 8
Aloitussivu: 1915
Lopetussivu: 1915
Sivujen määrä: 1
ISSN: 1569-5794
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10554-013-0312-9
Incomplete stent endothelialization is associated with late and very late stent thrombosis. In a post hoc analysis of the BASE-ACS trial, we sought to assess neointimal coverage and coronary flow reserve (CFR) 9 months after implantation of titanium-nitride-oxide-coated bioactive stents (BAS) versus everolimus-eluting stents (EES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). In the BASE-ACS trial, 827 patients with ACS were randomized to receive either BAS or EES. In the current study, we examined neointimal growth and strut coverage by optical coherence tomography and CFR by trans-thoracic echocardiography in 28 consecutive non-diabetic patients with the culprit lesion in the left anterior descending coronary artery. The primary endpoints were binary stent strut coverage and CFR at 9-month follow-up. A total of 13 patients were included in the BAS group (2,033 struts); 15 in the EES group (2,898 struts). Binary stent strut coverage was higher and malapposed struts lower with BAS versus EES (99.4 vs 89.2, and 0.2 vs 4.6 %, respectively, p < 0.001 for both). Neointimal hyperplasia thickness was greater with BAS versus EES (274.2 vs 100.1 μm, respectively, p < 0.001). CFR was lower with EES versus BAS (2.2 ± 0.8 vs 3.0 ± 0.5, respectively, p = 0.001). Abnormal CFR (<2.5) were detected in 10 patients in the EES group versus one in the BAS group (p = 0.002). The current study demonstrated that in patients with ACS, BAS resulted in improved neointimal stent strut coverage and better coronary vasodilator function as compared with EES at 9-month follow-up.
