Center for Cardiovascular Technology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA.
Am J Cardiol. 2010 Aug 15;106(4):492-7. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2010.03.059.
Previous reports have shown the advantage of paclitaxel compared to limus-derivative drugs for the treatment of diabetics. A total of 109 diabetics (115 lesions) treated with everolimus-eluting stents (EESs, n = 58) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PESs, n = 55) undergoing 8 to 9 months of follow-up 3-dimensional intravascular ultrasound examinations were enrolled. In addition to the standard intravascular ultrasound parameters, the percentage of neointimal volume (neointimal volume/stent volume) and maximum percentage of cross-sectional narrowing (neointimal area/stent area) was calculated. EESs showed a lower percentage of neointimal volume (7.2 +/- 7.1% vs 11.7 +/- 11.0%; p = 0.01) and maximum percentage of cross-sectional narrowing (22.5 +/- 16.3% vs 29.4 +/- 19.2%; p = 0.04) than PESs. One case of severe narrowing (lesions with maximum percentage of cross-sectional narrowing >60%) in the EES group developed and 6 cases in the PESs group (p = 0.05). The EESs showed no serial changes for vessel or peri-stent plaque during the follow-up period, and PESs showed significant increases in vessel and peri-stent plaque. PESs showed significantly greater peri-stent plaque increase, with a tendency toward greater vessel enlargement than EESs. Late acquired incomplete stent apposition was observed in 2 PES cases. The major adverse cardiac event rate was comparable < or =2 years. In conclusion, EESs showed greater neointimal suppression without significant vessel expansion than PESs in diabetic patients. In this small cohort, no significant differences were observed in the major adverse cardiac event rate < or =2 years.
先前的报告显示,与雷帕霉素衍生物药物相比,紫杉醇在治疗糖尿病患者方面具有优势。共纳入 109 例糖尿病患者(115 处病变),分别接受依维莫司洗脱支架(EES,n = 58)或紫杉醇洗脱支架(PES,n = 55)治疗,随访 8-9 个月,行 3 维血管内超声检查。除标准血管内超声参数外,还计算了新生内膜体积百分比(新生内膜体积/支架体积)和最大截面积狭窄百分比(新生内膜面积/支架面积)。EES 的新生内膜体积百分比(7.2% ± 7.1%比 11.7% ± 11.0%;p = 0.01)和最大截面积狭窄百分比(22.5% ± 16.3%比 29.4% ± 19.2%;p = 0.04)均低于 PES。EES 组有 1 例严重狭窄(最大截面积狭窄百分比>60%),PES 组有 6 例(p = 0.05)。在随访期间,EES 组血管和支架周围斑块无序列变化,而 PES 组血管和支架周围斑块显著增加。PES 组支架周围斑块增加显著,血管扩张趋势大于 EES 组。2 例 PES 患者出现晚期获得性支架贴壁不良。主要不良心脏事件发生率在 2 年内相似。结论:EES 在糖尿病患者中显示出比 PES 更强的抑制新生内膜形成作用,而血管扩张不明显。在这个小队列中,2 年内主要不良心脏事件发生率无显著差异。