P. Omedé,1 A. Abbate,4 G. P. Trevi,1 and I. Sheiban1

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Impact of Diabetes Mellitus on Early and Long-term Results of Percutaneous Drug- eluting Stent Implantation for Unprotected Left Main Coronary Disease.

Advertisements

Allen Jeremias MD MSc, Sanjay Kaul MD, Luis Gruberg MD, Todd K. Rosengart MD, David L. Brown MD Divisions of Cardiovascular Medicine and Cardiothoracic.

1 SUPERIORITY OF A HIGH CLOPIDOGREL LOADING DOSE REGIMEN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION: EVIDENCE FROM A META-ANALYSIS G. BIONDI-ZOCCAI1,

Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai Division of Cardiology, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

Published in Circulation 2005 Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Versus Conservative Therapy in Nonacute Coronary Artery Disease: A Meta-Analysis Demosthenes.

A Systematic Review On The Hazards Of Aspirin Discontinuation Among Patients With Or At Risk For Coronary Artery Disease Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai Hemodynamics.

Elective Stenting versus Balloon Angioplasty with Bail-out Stenting for Small Vessel Coronary Artery Disease: Evidence from a Meta-analysis of Randomized.

1 SIROLIMUS-ELUTING STENTS FOR IN-STENT RESTENOSIS TREATMENT IN 278 UNSELECTED PATIENTS: INSIGHTS ON LONG-TERM OUTCOMES FROM A LARGE TWO-CENTER REGISTRY.

Arterial Revascularization Therapies Part II: a nonrandomized comparison of contemporary PCI and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with.

Title1 Brain Natriuretic Peptide Levels Have A Significant Prognostic Role In Patients With Suspected Or Confirmed Acute Pulmonary Embolism: Evidence From.

1 Percutaneous Below-The-Knee Stent Implantation Among 468 Patients With Critical Limb Ischemia: Pooled Analysis And Comparison Of Drug-Eluting Versus.

Clinical Writing for Interventional Cardiologists.

Left Main Trifurcation Disease: Early and Long-Term Outcomes Of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention I.Sheiban, A.Gerasimou, F. Sciuto, P.Omedè, G. Biondi.

SIROLIMUS-ELUTING STENTS EFFECTIVELY INHIBIT NEOINTIMAL PROLIFERATION AS COMPARED TO BARE METAL STENTS IN DISEASED SAPHENOUS VEIN GRAFTS: 6-month IVUS.

Intravascular ultrasound does not provide any significant clinical benefit for percutaneous coronary intervention of bifurcation lesions Giuseppe Biondi.

1 HIGH CLOPIDOGREL LOADING DOSE IS SUPERIOR TO A STANDARD 300 MG REGIMEN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS CORONARY INTERVENTION: EVIDENCE FROM A META-ANALYSIS.

Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai University of Turin, Turin, Italy METCARDIO, Turin, Italy JOINT SYMPOSIUM WITH JACCT - Bologna, 25/9/2008.

A Prospective, Randomized Trial Evaluating a Paclitaxel-Eluting Balloon in Patients TReated with Endothelial Progenitor Cell CapTuring Stents for De Novo.

Hypothesis: baseline risk status of the patients and proximity to a recent cardiovascular event influence the response to dual anti-platelet therapy. Patients.

1 Efficacy of a novel anti-inflammatory drug-eluting balloon coated with genistein before stent implantation in porcine coronary arteries I. Sheiban, C.

Drug-eluting stent meta-analyses & Long-term follow-up of high-risk subsets: Reconciling the evidence DES e BMS: riflessioni e pensieri 23 febbraio 2007,

1 Superiority Of A Simple Stenting Strategy For Coronary Bifurcation Lesions In The Drug-Eluting Stent Era: Evidence From A Meta-Analysis Of 1141 Patients.

Is there any role for intravascular ultrasound in bifurcation lesions? Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai, MD University of Turin, Turin, Italy.

4 th European Bifurcation Club September PRAGUE A comprehensive meta- analysis on drug-eluting stenting for unprotected left main disease.

1 R1 임준욱 Anticoagulant and Antiplatelet Therapy Use in 426 Patients With Atrial Fibrillation Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention and Stent Implantation.

Date of download: 7/10/2016 Copyright © The American College of Cardiology. All rights reserved. From: Impact of Coronary Anatomy and Stenting Technique.

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in percutaneous coronary intervention – summary of key articles While angiography is routinely used for assessment of CAD,

Intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in the treatment of long and diffuse lesions– summary of key articles Prepared by Radcliffe Cardiology 21 November2016.

FIGURE 3. FOREST PLOT AFTER CONTROLLING FOR NETWORK INCONSISTENCY

Systematic review of Present clinical reality

Brady Et Al., "sequential compression device compliance in postoperative obstetrics and gynecology patients", obstetrics and gynecology, vol. 125, no.

Effects of Uric acid- lowering therapy on renal outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis Nephrol Dial Transplant (2014) 29: Vaughan Washco.

The MASS-DAC Study.

insights from a meta-analysis of

NORSTENT Trial design: Patients with obstructive coronary artery disease were randomized to a drug-eluting stent (DES) (n = 4,504) versus a bare-metal.

Figure 3 One-year adverse events (death, post-discharge myocardial infarction, revascularization) after PCI according to patients who (A) would not have.

Primer on Adjusted Indirect Comparison Meta-Analyses

LONG-DES II Trial Randomized Comparison of the Efficacy of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent in the Treatment of Long Native Coronary.

DES Should be Used as the Default Stent in ACS!

Fatimah Al-Ani 1,2,. MD MRCP, Jose Maria Bastida Bermejo3,

POISE-2 PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation-2 Trial

First time a CETP inhibitor shows reduction of serious CV events

Stenting of Coronary Arteries in Non Stress/Benestent Disease

Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai

Bern-Rotterdam Registry Published in the Lancet

Long-term follow-up of the DIABETES I (DIABETes and sirolimus Eluting Stent) trial: P Jiménez-Quevedo, M Sabaté, DJ Angiolillo, JA Gómez-Hospital, R Hernández-Antolín,

Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai

Diabetes mellitus in patients undergoing percutaneous drug-eluting stent implantation: short and long-term results Claudio Moretti, M.D. Division of Cardiology,

Background There is ongoing debate to identify the most effective drug-eluting stent between the two currently most used devices (ie, sirolimus- [SES]

American College of Cardiology Presented by Dr. Stephan Windecker

Incidence And Management Of Restenosis After Treatment Of Unprotected Left Main Disease With Drug-Eluting Stents: 70 Restenotic Cases From A Cohort Of.

Giuseppe Biondi Zoccai, MD

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials of Manual Thrombectomy in ST elevation myocardial infarction Investigators: Ashraf Alazzoni,

Efficacy and Safety of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors During Elective Coronary Revascularization A meta-analysis of randomized trials performed in the.

AN INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATIVE META-ANALYSIS ON 1,274 PATIENTS UNDERGOING PERCUTANEOUS DRUG-ELUTING STENTING FOR UNPROTECTED LEFT MAIN CORONARY ARTERY.

NIPPON Trial design: Patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were randomized to short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) (6 months; n.

American Heart Association Presented by Dr. Julinda Mehilli

Incidence and management of restenosis after treatment of unprotected left main disease with drug-eluting stents: 70 restenotic cases from a cohort of.

PREDICTORS OF ADVERSE EVENTS IN PATIENTS WITH UNPROTECTED LEFT MAIN DISEASE TREATED WITH DRUG-ELUTING STENTS: EVIDENCE FROM A COLLABORATIVE META-REGRESSION.

European Society of Cardiology Scientific Congress, September 2006

BENEFITS OF CLOPIDOGREL IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING CORONARY STENTING SIGNIFICANTLY DEPEND ON LOADING DOSE: EVIDENCE FROM A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-REGRESSION.

Efficacy and Safety of Glycoprotein IIb/IIIa Inhibitors During Elective Coronary Revascularization A meta-analysis of randomized trials performed in the.

Single Versus Multiple Vessel Stenting In Patients With St-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Results From A 30,886-Patient Meta-Analysis Giuseppe Biondi.

ORAL CILOSTAZOL TREATMENT PREVENTS RESTENOSIS AND MAJOR ADVERSE CLINICAL EVENTS AFTER DRUG-ELUTING STENT IMPLANTATION: EVIDENCE FROM A META-ANALYSIS G.

Comparison of radial versus femoral access in patients undergoing invasive management for acute coronary syndromes: evidence from a systematic review and.

Maintenance of Long-Term Clinical Benefit with

Is Prasugrel Superior To Ticagrelor For The Treatment Of Patients With Acute Coronary Syndromes? Evidence From A 32,893-Patient Adjusted Indirect Comparison.

Drug-eluting stents versus coronary artery bypass grafting for the treatment of coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized and nonrandomized.

Sirolimus Stent vs. Bare Stent in Acute Myocardial Infarction Trial

Section C: Clinical trial update: Oral antiplatelet therapy

Presentation transcript:

P. Omedé,1 A. Abbate,4 G. P. Trevi,1 and I. Sheiban1 Oral Cilostazol Prevents Restenosis And Repeat Revascularization After Percutaneous Coronary Stenting: A Meta-Analysis Of 15 Randomized Trials And 4897 Patients G. Biondi-Zoccai,1 C. Moretti,1 M. Lotrionte,2 P. Agostoni,3 F. Sciuto,1 P. Omedé,1 A. Abbate,4 G. P. Trevi,1 and I. Sheiban1 1University of Turin, Turin, Italy (gbiondizoccai@gmail.com); 2Catholic University, Rome, Italy; 3AZ Middelheim, Antwerp, Belgium; 4Virginia Commonwealth University, Virginia, USA

BACKGROUND Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce the risk of restenosis after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in comparison to bare-metal stents (BMS), but may pose a risk of thrombosis. Furthermore, DES are not uniformly powerful in reducing restenosis, especially in patients with abundant neointimal hyperplasia (eg diabetics).

BACKGROUND Cilostazol is an oral antiplatelet agent with pleiotropic effects, including inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia. It is a safe agent, already approved in several countries for the symptomatic treatment of intermittent claudication and peripheral artery disease Cilostazol could hold the promise of preventing both restenosis and thrombosis after PCI with stenting.

OBJECTIVES We aimed to systematically review randomized clinical trials on the angiographic and clinical impact of cilostazol after percutaneous coronary stenting. Our goal was specifically to pool major outcomes from included studies with meta-analytic techniques.

METHODS We searched Bio-MedCentral, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, EMBASE, and PubMed for randomized trials comparing cilostazol vs control after PCI (keywords: cilostazol, coronary, and restenosis; updated March 2008). Inclusion criteria were: (a) randomized allocation, (b) comparison of cilostazol vs control, (c) after PCI with stenting, and (d) follow-up ≥1 month. Exclusion criteria were: (a) duplicate reports, (b) lack of outcome data beyond hospitalization, and (c) equivocal or nonrandom treatment allocation.

METHODS Co-primary end-points were binary angiographic restenosis and repeat revascularization, abstracted and pooled by means of random-effect relative risks (RR) with RevMan 4.2 (Cochrane Collaboration). Stent thrombosis and small study/ publication bias (ie the likelihood of small yet nominally significant studies being selectively published in the literature) were also appraised.

REVIEW PROFILE

INCLUDED STUDIES Study Year Pts on cilostazol Pts on control Rx Stent type Abe 2002 37 41 BMS Chen 2006 52 54 CIDES 2008 113 124 DES CREST 2005 259 267 DECLARE-Diabetes 200 DECLARE-Long 2007 250 Han 34 Inoue 2004 32 Kamishirado 57 Kozuma 2001 61 58 Kunishima 1997 35 Lee 344 345 Mizoguchi 2003 65 Ochiai 1999 23 21 Park 254 240 RACTS 202 194 Sekiguchi 89 86 Sekiya 1998 82 83 Takeyasu 427 436 Yamasaki 18 17 Yoon 147 149

RESULTS A total of 21 randomized clinical trials were included (5577 patients, 2780 randomized to oral cilostazol for 1-6 months, and 2797 randomized to control therapy or placebo), with median follow-up of 6 months. Pooled analysis showed that cilostazol was associated with statistically significant reductions in binary angiographic restenosis (relative risk=0.61 [95% confidence interval 0.51-0.75], p<0.001) and repeat revascularization (relative risk=0.73 [0.60-0.88], p=0.001).

RESULTS Cilostazol appeared also safe, with no significant increase in the risk of stent thrombosis (relative risk=1.27 [0.69-2.35], p=0.45) or bleeding (relative risk=0.73 [0.46-1.17], p=0.19). Sub-analysis restricted to trials using only DES, including a total of 1137 patients, confirmed that cilostazol lead to significant reductions in binary angiographic restenosis (relative risk=0.54 [0.36-0.79], p=0.002).

RESULTS Similarly, among patients treated solely with DES, cilostazol lead to a statistically significant reduction in repeat revascularizations (relative risk=0.47 [0.29-0.76], p=0.002). Conversely, risk of stent thrombosis or bleeding in DES-treated patients was not significantly influenced by cilostazol (respectively relative risk= 0.77 [0.14-4.06], p=0.76, and relative risk=0.72 [0.23-2.30], P=0.58), . Funnel plots suggested however the presence of small study bias, but limited to the BMS group.

RISK OF BINARY RESTENOSIS Study Cilostazol Control RR (random) RR (random) or sub-category n/N n/N 95% CI 95% CI 01 BMS Kunishima 3/35 11/41 0.32 [0.10, 1.05] Sekiya 9/82 20/83 0.46 [0.22, 0.94] Yamasaki 0/18 3/17 0.14 [0.01, 2.44] Ochiai 0/23 5/21 0.08 [0.00, 1.42] Park 58/254 65/240 0.84 [0.62, 1.15] Kozuma 10/61 19/58 0.50 [0.25, 0.98] Abe 0/37 15/41 0.04 [0.00, 0.58] Kamishirado 7/54 17/57 0.43 [0.20, 0.97] Mizoguchi 4/65 13/65 0.31 [0.11, 0.89] Inoue 4/34 10/32 0.38 [0.13, 1.08] Sekiguchi 24/89 20/86 1.16 [0.69, 1.94] CREST 57/259 92/267 0.64 [0.48, 0.85] Han 5/34 10/37 0.54 [0.21, 1.43] RACTS 47/202 60/194 0.75 [0.54, 1.04] Takeyasu 119/427 128/436 0.95 [0.77, 1.17] Chen 7/52 17/54 0.43 [0.19, 0.95] Subtotal (95% CI) 1726 1729 0.62 [0.50, 0.78] Total events: 354 (Cilostazol), 505 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 32.08, df = 15 (P = 0.006), I² = 53.2% Test for overall effect: Z = 4.14 (P < 0.0001) 02 DES DECLARE-Long 14/250 23/250 0.61 [0.32, 1.16] CIDES 9/113 20/124 0.49 [0.23, 1.04] DECLARE-DIABETES 13/200 26/200 0.50 [0.26, 0.94] Subtotal (95% CI) 563 574 0.54 [0.36, 0.79] Total events: 36 (Cilostazol), 69 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 0.24, df = 2 (P = 0.89), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 3.17 (P = 0.002) Total (95% CI) 2289 2303 0.61 [0.51, 0.75] Total events: 390 (Cilostazol), 574 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 34.95, df = 18 (P = 0.010), I² = 48.5% Test for overall effect: Z = 4.86 (P < 0.00001) 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Favours cilostazol Favours control

RISK OF REPEAT REVASCULARIZATION Study Cilostazol Control RR (random) RR (random) or sub-category n/N n/N 95% CI 95% CI 01 BMS Ochiai 0/25 4/25 0.11 [0.01, 1.96] Park 11/208 13/201 0.82 [0.38, 1.78] Yoon 1/147 1/149 1.01 [0.06, 16.05] Kozuma 15/65 27/65 0.56 [0.33, 0.94] Kamishirado 4/54 12/57 0.35 [0.12, 1.02] Sekiguchi 14/144 11/138 1.22 [0.57, 2.59] CREST 54/354 56/351 0.96 [0.68, 1.35] Han 7/50 11/50 0.64 [0.27, 1.51] Lee 5/344 4/345 1.25 [0.34, 4.63] RACTS 46/201 64/196 0.70 [0.51, 0.97] Takeyasu 96/427 103/436 0.95 [0.75, 1.21] Chen 3/60 10/60 0.30 [0.09, 1.04] Subtotal (95% CI) 2079 2073 0.79 [0.65, 0.96] Total events: 256 (Cilostazol), 316 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 13.82, df = 11 (P = 0.24), I² = 20.4% Test for overall effect: Z = 2.42 (P = 0.02) 02 DES DECLARE-Long 9/250 18/250 0.50 [0.23, 1.09] CIDES 7/141 15/139 0.46 [0.19, 1.09] DECLARE-DIABETES 7/200 16/200 0.44 [0.18, 1.04] Subtotal (95% CI) 591 589 0.47 [0.29, 0.76] Total events: 23 (Cilostazol), 49 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 0.05, df = 2 (P = 0.97), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 3.09 (P = 0.002) Total (95% CI) 2670 2662 0.73 [0.60, 0.88] Total events: 279 (Cilostazol), 365 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 18.67, df = 14 (P = 0.18), I² = 25.0% Test for overall effect: Z = 3.24 (P = 0.001) 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Favours cilostazol Favours control

RISK OF STENT THROMBOSIS Study Cilostazol Control RR (random) RR (random) or sub-category n/N n/N 95% CI 95% CI 01 BMS Kunishima 0/30 1/40 0.44 [0.02, 10.46] Sekiya 0/63 3/63 0.14 [0.01, 2.71] Park 2/247 1/243 1.97 [0.18, 21.56] Yoon 1/147 1/149 1.01 [0.06, 16.05] Kozuma 0/62 1/62 0.33 [0.01, 8.03] Kamishirado 0/65 2/65 0.20 [0.01, 4.09] Inoue 0/34 0/32 Not estimable Sekiguchi 8/144 1/138 7.67 [0.97, 60.50] CREST 1/354 1/351 0.99 [0.06, 15.79] Han 1/50 0/50 3.00 [0.13, 71.92] Lee 5/344 4/345 1.25 [0.34, 4.63] RACTS 2/201 2/196 0.98 [0.14, 6.85] Takeyasu 8/321 1/321 8.00 [1.01, 63.59] Subtotal (95% CI) 2062 2055 1.37 [0.70, 2.68] Total events: 28 (Cilostazol), 18 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 11.15, df = 11 (P = 0.43), I² = 1.3% Test for overall effect: Z = 0.92 (P = 0.36) 02 DES DECLARE-Long 1/250 1/250 1.00 [0.06, 15.90] CIDES 1/113 1/124 1.10 [0.07, 17.34] DECLARE-DIABETES 0/200 1/200 0.33 [0.01, 8.13] Subtotal (95% CI) 563 574 0.77 [0.14, 4.06] Total events: 2 (Cilostazol), 3 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 0.36, df = 2 (P = 0.83), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 0.31 (P = 0.76) Total (95% CI) 2625 2629 1.27 [0.69, 2.35] Total events: 30 (Cilostazol), 21 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 11.93, df = 14 (P = 0.61), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 0.76 (P = 0.45) 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Favours cilostazol Favours control

RISK OF BLEEDING Study Cilostazol Control RR (random) RR (random) or sub-category n/N n/N 95% CI 95% CI 01 BMS Kunishima 0/30 0/40 Not estimable Sekiya 0/63 0/63 Not estimable Ochiai 0/25 0/25 Not estimable Park 2/247 3/243 0.66 [0.11, 3.89] Yoon 2/147 3/149 0.68 [0.11, 3.99] Kamishirado 0/65 1/65 0.33 [0.01, 8.03] Inoue 0/34 0/32 Not estimable Sekiguchi 3/144 1/138 2.88 [0.30, 27.31] CREST 13/354 16/351 0.81 [0.39, 1.65] Han 1/50 2/50 0.50 [0.05, 5.34] Lee 3/344 5/345 0.60 [0.14, 2.50] RACTS 0/201 3/196 0.14 [0.01, 2.68] Takeyasu 1/321 1/321 1.00 [0.06, 15.92] Subtotal (95% CI) 2025 2018 0.73 [0.44, 1.22] Total events: 25 (Cilostazol), 35 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 3.18, df = 8 (P = 0.92), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 1.19 (P = 0.24) 02 DES DECLARE-Long 2/250 4/250 0.50 [0.09, 2.71] DECLARE-DIABETES 3/200 3/200 1.00 [0.20, 4.90] Subtotal (95% CI) 450 450 0.72 [0.23, 2.30] Total events: 5 (Cilostazol), 7 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 0.34, df = 1 (P = 0.56), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 0.55 (P = 0.58) Total (95% CI) 2475 2468 0.73 [0.46, 1.17] Total events: 30 (Cilostazol), 42 (Control) Test for heterogeneity: Chi² = 3.53, df = 10 (P = 0.97), I² = 0% Test for overall effect: Z = 1.31 (P = 0.19) 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 1000 Favours cilostazol Favours control

FUNNEL PLOT FOR BINARY RESTENOSIS 0.0 DES BMS 0.4 0.8 Standard error (log relative risk 1.2 1.6 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 Relative risk (fixed effect)

CONCLUSIONS Cilostazol appears effective and safe in reducing the risk of restenosis and repeat revascularization after stenting implantation, in both the bare metal and DES era. This inexpensive treatment can be envisaged in most patients treated with BMS, and in those treated with DES who remain at higher risk of restenosis and thus can benefit from further inhibition of neointimal hyperplasia.

For further slides on these topics please feel free to visit the metcardio.org website: http://www.metcardio.org/slides.html