Drug-eluting Stents Improve Clinical Outcomes in Chinese Diabetic Patients with De Novo Coronary Artery Disease
Zhang Qi,Fang Yue-hua,Zhang Rui-yan,Hu Jian,Yang Zhen-kun,Ni Jun,Zhang Jian-sheng,Shen Wei-feng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00029330-200609020-00013
2006-01-01
Abstract:Diabetes mellitus (DM) has been regarded as an equivalent risk factor as coronary artery disease1 and is present in nearly 25% of patients who receive percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).2 DM is shown as an adverse predictor for major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after PCI in bare metal stent (BMS) era.3 Recently, clinical trials have demonstrated the favorable tendency of using drug-eluting stents (DES) in treating diabetic patients with coronary artery disease.4,5 This study compared the clinical outcomes between the diabetic patients receiving DES with those receiving BMS in China. CLINICAL DATA Patient selection From October 2002 to October 2004, 163 consecutive patients with DM6 received DES (DES group), 46.0% of them received Cypher stent (Cordis, J&J, USA), 27.6% received Firebird stent (Microport, Shanghai, China), and 26.4% received Taxus stent (Boston Scientific, USA). During the same time, 155 consecutive diabetic patients receiving BMS were served as the controls (BMS group). The clinical baseline between the two groups were similar (all P>0.05, Table 1). Major exclusion criteria included impaired glucose tolerance without medication, unprotected left main disease, vessel diameter <2.25 mm or >4.0 mm, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <0.25, prior treatment with stent or coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery, known allergies to aspirin, ticlopidine or clopidogrel.Table 1: The baseline between DES and BMS groupsPCI procedure Patients were pretreated with oral aspirin (100 mg/d) and ticlopidine (250 mg, twice daily) or clopidogrel (75 mg/d) at least 2 days before the procedure. For certain patients, a loading dose of 300 - 450 mg clopidogrel was applied at least 2 hours before emergency PCI. Coronary stenting was performed according to the standard technique.7 Procedural success was defined as residual stenosis ≤20% without in-hospital major clinical complications (including death, myocardial infarction, emergency CABG).8 Ticlopidine or clopidogrel was continued for at least 3 months after initial stenting in the BMS group and was used at least 9 months in patients treated with DES. Aspirin was prescribed indefinitely for all patients. The primary endpoint of MACE includes death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and target vessel revascularization (TVR, either by PCI or CABG) at 12-month follow-up. The follow-up information was obtained by telephone or outpatient interview at 30 days and 12 months after discharge. Statistical analysis Quantitative variables were presented as mean± standard deviation (SD) and categorical variables as percentage. Comparison between groups was made using Student unpaired t test. The chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables. We used SPSS 10.0 for statistical analysis. P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Outcomes Coronary lesion characteristics were well matched between the two groups. The total stent length per patient was significantly longer in DES group. In DES group, one patient had abrupt vessel closure after stenting, which caused post-procedural myocardial infarction identified by CK-MB increasing more than 3 times and one died after procedure due to post-peritoneal hemorrhage. In BMS group, one patient received emergency CABG because of perforation and cardiac tamponade during the LAD stent implantation (Table 2).Table 2: PCI procedural and in-hospital outcomes between DES and BMS groupsAt the 30-day follow-up, one patient in DES group had non-fatal myocardial infarction and stent thrombus, which was treated successfully by balloon angioplasty. One in BMS group died of heart failure. At the 12-month, 15% of the DES patients received angiographic follow-up (17% in the BMS group, data is non-comparable). The MACE rate was significantly lower in DES group than that in BMS group, mainly due to a significant reduction in the need for TVR (Table 3). The occurrence rate of angiographically documented stent thrombus was similar in the two groups (1.3% in DES vs 0.7% in BMS, P>0.05). The MACE free survival was significantly improved in the DES group compared with that in BMS group (Fig.).Fig.: Kaplan-Meier event free survival curve during the follow-up.Table 3: Clinical outcomes at 30-day and 12-month between DES and BMS groups (n, %)DISCUSSION Diabetes mellitus is associated with increased atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease. Patients with diabetes often have worse clinical outcomes following both surgical revascularization and PCI.9 DES has markedly reduced late lumen loss, restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization compared to BMS.10,11 However, the principle that sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents are superior to thin-strut BMS for preventing repeat revas-cularization in diabetic patients can not be concluded from SIRIUS and TAXUS-IV trials.12 Optimal therapy for diabetic coronary disease is still under definition.13 Recently, the DIABETES trial demonstrates that sirolimus-eluting stent is safe and efficacious in reducing both angiographic and clinical parameters of restenosis compared with BMS in diabetic patients. Target lesion revascularization and MACE rate significantly decrease in the sirolimus-eluting stent group (31.3% vs 7.3% and 36.3% vs 11.3%, respectively; both P<0.001).4 A subanalysis for the diabetic patients in SIRIUS trial shows that sirolimus-eluting stents reduce MACE in both diabetic and non-diabetic patients. However, a trend still remains toward higher frequency of repeat intervention in diabetic compared to the non-diabetic patients.5 The current study is performed to evaluate the “real-world” efficacy of DES (both sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents) in treating Chinese diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. A marked reduction in MACE rate at 12-month follow-up is observed in DES group, and the salutary effects of DES may be mainly resulted from the significant TVR reduction during the follow-up, although complete revascularization (74.2% in DES group and 70.3% in BMS group) is less than previous study for non-diabetic patient.7 In addition, safety is preserved with implantation of DES in diabetic patients. The benefits in clinical events occur in the absence of thrombotic complications related to using DES. Last, but not the least, optimal control of diabetes and aggressive modification of cardiovascular risk factors are essential in the management of diabetic patients after PCI.2,10 Recent data suggest close control of blood glucose [glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) less than 7.0%] may improve clinical outcomes during the follow-up after PCI.14 Insulin-sensitizing medications (thiazolidinediones) may benefit in improving clinical outcomes among diabetic patients receiving PCI.15 In this study, blood glucose level is well controlled by continued medications or insulin supplement in all patients. However, the effect of thiazolidinediones on clinical events is not observed in this study. In conclusion, DES significantly improves the clinical outcomes for Chinese diabetic patients with de novo coronary artery disease through markedly reducing TVR. Nevertheless, continued optimal adjunctive pharmacotherapy and control of hyperglycemia should be required and strengthened to achieve the maximum clinical benefits following PCI in diabetic patients.