Percutaneous coronary intervention of moderate to severe calcified coronary lesions: insights from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of drug eluting stents (DES) when compared with bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with moderate to severe calcified coronary lesions.

BACKGROUND

Calcified coronary lesions present unique technical challenges during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and it is not known if DES are as safe and as effective in the presence of calcium, as randomized trials typically exclude this common patient subset.

METHODS

We evaluated patients with PCI of a single calcified lesion enrolled across five recruitment waves in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry between 1997 and 2006. Patients were divided into two groups based on the stent type- BMS and DES. The primary efficacy outcome was the need for repeat revascularization at 1 year and the primary safety outcome was a composite of death and myocardial infarction at 1 year.

RESULTS

Among the 1,537 patients included in the analysis, 884 (57%) underwent PCI with BMS and 653 (43%) with DES. DES use was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of repeat revascularization (10.0% vs. 15.3%; P = 0.003) with no significant higher risk of primary safety outcome (9.3% vs. 10.5%; P = 0.45) when compared to the BMS group. In a propensity score adjusted analysis, DES use was associated with a significantly lower risk in repeat revascularization (HR = 0.57; 95% CI 0.40-0.82; P = 0.002) and no significant difference in the risk of death and myocardial infarction (HR = 0.78; 95% CI 0.53-1.15; P = 0.20) compared to BMS group.

CONCLUSION

In this large multicenter registry of patients with a moderate to severe calcified coronary lesion, use of DES compared to BMS was associated with significant reduction in the risk of repeat revascularization without any increase in death and myocardial infarction.