In order to bring you the best possible user experience, this site uses Javascript. If you are seeing this message, it is likely that the Javascript option in your browser is disabled. For optimal viewing of this site, please ensure that Javascript is enabled for your browser.

The free consultation period for this content is over.

It is now only available year-round to ESC Professional Members, Fellows of the ESC, and Young combined Members

Incidence of adverse cardiac events after endothelial progenitor cell capturing stent implantation compared to paclitaxel-eluting stents

Session Poster session 1

Speaker Marc Ohlow

Event : ESC Congress 2017

  • Topic : coronary artery disease, acute coronary syndromes, acute cardiac care
  • Sub-topic : Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
  • Session type : Poster Session

Authors : M Adamaszek (Bad Berka,DE), A Farah (Dortmund,DE), Y Dar Alammouri (Nablus, West Bank,,PS), B Lauer (Bad Berka,DE), M Ohlow (Bad Berka,DE)

Authors:
M. Adamaszek1 , A. Farah2 , Y. Dar Alammouri3 , B. Lauer1 , M. Ohlow1 , 1Central Hospital Bad Berka, Department of Cardiology - Bad Berka - Germany , 2Medizinische Klinik III, Klinikum Westfalen, - Dortmund - Germany , 3Al Najah National University Hospital, Department of Cardiology - Nablus, West Bank, - Palestine Territories ,

Citation:
European Heart Journal ( 2017 ) 38 ( Supplement ), 191

Background: A “pro-healing” approach for prevention of in-stent restenosis is theoretically favorable over the use of cytotoxic/cytostatic drugs released from drug eluting stents to treat coronary artery disease. Promoting accelerated endothelialization of the stent, endothelial progenitor cell capturing stents (ECS) have shown promising results in studies with patients carrying non-complex lesions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the GenousTM ECS versus the Taxus Liberte' paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) in patients with coronary lesions.

Methods: During the study period (2010–2012) all consecutive patients receiving ECS were retrospectively compared to age, sex and lesion location matched controls receiving PES. 6-months angiographic and long term clinical outcomes were analyzed. The primary endpoint was the cumulative long-term major adverse cardiac events (MACE).

Results: Out of 908 patients analyzed (454 ECS and 454 PES), 811 (89.3%) were available for up to 60 months follow-up (FU) (mean 34.5±16.8 months). The primary end point occurred in 33.5% (ECS) versus 14.8% (PES) resulting in a hazard ratio of 3.4 (95% Cl: 2.29–4.04; p<0.0001) and included cardiac death (7.3% versus 4.4%; p=0.09), myocardial infarction (2.2% versus 5.3%; p=0.02), and target vessel revascularisation (TVR) (24.0% versus 10.4%; p<0.0001). The incidence of definitive/probable stent thrombosis (ST) was 0.4% versus 0.9% (p=0.69); very late (>1 year) ST occurred in one patient in each group (0.2%).

A total of 513 patients (58.7%) underwent 6-months angiographic follow-up. Target lesion revascularisation, TVR, and MACE were significantly more frequent in the ECS group (13.8% versus 4.5%; 15.9% versus 4.5%; and 16.7% versus 6.2%, respectively; p<0.0001 for all).

Conclusions: Within 3 years FU implantation of the ECS in patients with de-novo coronary lesions resulted in a significant higher rate of the primary endpoint compared to PES. This was mainly driven by repeat revascularizations, the number of stent thromboses was low in both groups.

Table 1

Members get more

Join now
  • 1ESC Professional Members – access all resources from general ESC events 
  • 2ESC Association Members (Ivory, Silver, Gold) – access your Association’s resources
  • 3Under 40 or in training - with a Combined Membership, access all resources
Join now

Our sponsors

ESC 365 is supported by Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim and Lilly Alliance, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Pfizer Alliance, Novartis Pharma AG and Vifor Pharma in the form of educational grants. The sponsors were not involved in the development of this platform and had no influence on its content.

logo esc

Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease

Who we are