Rotterdam, Netherlands
Rotterdam, Netherlands

Time filter

Source Type

Smits P.C.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Hofma S.,Medisch Centrum Leeuwarden | Togni M.,HOpital Cantonal de Fribourg | Vazquez N.,Hospitalario Juan Canalejo | And 10 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2013

Background Drug-eluting stents with durable biocompatible or biodegradable polymers have been developed to address the risk of thrombosis associated with first-generation drug-eluting stents. We aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of a biodegradable polymer-coated biolimus-eluting stent with a thin-strut everolimus-eluting stent coated with a durable biocompatible polymer. Methods This open-label, prospective, randomised, controlled, non-inferiority trial was undertaken at 12 sites across Europe. We used limited exclusion criteria (age p>18 years, life expectancy p>5 years, reference vessel diameter 2•0-4•0 mm) to enrol patients eligible for percutaneous coronary intervention. Patients were randomly allocated (2:1) by computer-generated random numbers to receive either a biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stent (Nobori, Terumo, Tokyo, Japan) or a durable fluoropolymer-based everolimus-eluting stent (Xience V or Prime, Abbott Vascular, Santa Clara, CA, USA, or Promus, Boston Scientific, Natick, MA, USA). The primary endpoint was a composite of safety (cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction) and efficacy (clinically indicated target vessel revascularisation) at 12 months, analysed by intention to treat. Patients received dual antiplatelet therapy for 12 months after discharge. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01233453. Findings From Jan 12, 2009, to Feb 7, 2011, we enrolled 2707 patients (4025 lesions), 1795 of whom were assigned to receive the biolimus-eluting stent (2638 lesions) and 912 to an everolimus-eluting stent (1387 lesions). 2688 (99•3%) patients completed 12 months' follow-up. Significantly more patients in the biolimus-eluting stent group received a non-assigned stent than did those in the everolimus-eluting stent group (105 [5•9%] vs 19 [2•1%]; p<0•0001). The primary endpoint occurred in 93 (5•2%) patients in the biolimus-eluting stent group and 44 (4•8%) patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group at 12 months (relative risk 1•07 [95% CI 0•75-1•52]; p non-inferiorityp<0•0001). Analysis per protocol did not change the outcome of this trial (pnon-inferiorityp<0•0001). Interpretation Biodegradable polymer biolimus-eluting stents are as safe and efficacious as the current standard of a thin-strut everolimus-eluting stent with a durable biocompatible polymer. We need to follow-up patients for longer to show whether the biolimus-eluting stent reduces the risk of stent thrombosis after 1 year when compared with the everolimus-eluting stent. Funding Terumo Europe (Leuven, Belgium) and the Research Foundation of the Cardiology Department, Maasstad Hospital (Rotterdam, Netherlands).


Biondi-Zoccai G.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Sabate M.,Hospital Clinic | Valgimigli M.,University of Ferrara | Frati G.,University of Rome La Sapienza | And 7 more authors.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | Year: 2013

Objectives The authors investigated the relative safety and efficacy of different drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) using a network meta-analysis. Background The relative safety of DES and BMS in patients with STEMI continues to be debated, and whether advances have been made in this regard with second-generation DES is unknown. Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing currently U.S. approved DES or DES with BMS in patients with STEMI were searched using MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Information on study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted. Results Twenty-two trials including 12,453 randomized patients were analyzed. At 1-year follow-up, cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents (CoCr-EES) were associated with significantly lower rates of cardiac death or myocardial infarction (MI) and stent thrombosis (ST) than BMS. Differences in ST were apparent as early as 30 days and were maintained for 2 years. CoCr-EES were also associated with significantly lower rates of 1-year ST than paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) were also associated with significantly lower rates of 1-year cardiac death/myocardial infarction than BMS. CoCr-EES, PES, and SES, but not zotarolimus-eluting stents, had significantly lower rates of 1-year target vessel revascularization (TVR) than BMS, with SES also showing lower rates of TVR than PES. Conclusions In patients with STEMI, steady improvements in outcomes have been realized with the evolution from BMS to first-generation and now second-generation DES, with the most favorable safety and efficacy profile thus far demonstrated with CoCr-EES. © 2013 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.


Biondi-Zoccai G.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Sabate M.,Hospital Clinic | Smits P.C.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Kaiser C.,University of Basel | And 6 more authors.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | Year: 2014

Objectives This study sought to investigate the relative safety and efficacy of bioabsorbable polymer (BP)-based biolimus-eluting stents (BES) versus durable-polymer (DP)-drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS) by means of a network meta-analysis. Background Studies have suggested that BP-BES might reduce the risk of stent thrombosis (ST) and late adverse outcomes compared with first-generation DES. However, the relative safety and efficacy of BP-BES versus newer-generation DES coated with more biocompatible DP have not been investigated in depth. Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing BP-BES versus currently U.S.-approved DES or BMS were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Information on study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted. Results Data from 89 trials including 85,490 patients were analyzed. At 1-year follow-up, BP-BES were associated with lower rates of cardiac death/myocardial infarction (MI), MI, and target vessel revascularization (TVR) than BMS and lower rates of TVR than fast-release zotarolimus-eluting stents. The BP-BES had similar rates of cardiac death/MI, MI, and TVR compared with other second-generation DP-DES but higher rates of 1-year ST than cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (CoCr-EES). The BP-BES were associated with improved late outcomes compared with BMS and paclitaxel-eluting stents, considering the latest follow-up data available, with nonsignificantly different outcomes compared with other DP-DES although higher rates of definite ST compared with CoCr-EES. Conclusions In this large-scale network meta-analysis, BP-BES were associated with superior clinical outcomes compared with BMS and first-generation DES and similar rates of cardiac death/MI, MI, and TVR compared with second-generation DP-DES but higher rates of definite ST than CoCr-EES. © 2014 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation.


Palmerini T.,Unita Operativa di Cardiologia | Benedetto U.,University of Oxford | Biondi-Zoccai G.,University of Rome La Sapienza | Della Riva D.,Unita Operativa di Cardiologia | And 11 more authors.
Journal of the American College of Cardiology | Year: 2015

Background Previous meta-analyses have investigated the relative safety and efficacy profiles of different types of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare-metal stents (BMS); however, most prior trials in these meta-analyses reported follow-up to only 1 year, and as such, the relative long-term safety and efficacy of these devices are unknown. Many recent studies have now reported extended follow-up data. Objectives This study sought to investigate the long-term safety and efficacy of durable polymer-based DES, bioabsorbable polymer-based biolimus-eluting stents (BES), and BMS by means of network meta-analysis. Methods Randomized controlled trials comparing DES to each other or to BMS were searched through MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases and proceedings of international meetings. Information on study design, inclusion and exclusion criteria, sample characteristics, and clinical outcomes was extracted. Results Fifty-one trials that included a total of 52,158 randomized patients with follow-up duration ≥3 years were analyzed. At a median follow-up of 3.8 years, cobalt-chromium everolimus-eluting stents (EES) were associated with lower rates of mortality, definite stent thrombosis (ST), and myocardial infarction than BMS, paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), and sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and less ST than BES. Phosphorylcholine-based zotarolimus-eluting stents had lower rates of definite ST than SES and lower rates of myocardial infarction than BMS and PES. The late rates of target-vessel revascularization were reduced with all DES compared with BMS, with cobalt-chromium EES, platinum chromium-EES, SES, and BES also having lower target-vessel revascularization rates than PES. Conclusions After a median follow-up of 3.8 years, all DES demonstrated superior efficacy compared with BMS. Among DES, second-generation devices have substantially improved long-term safety and efficacy outcomes compared with first-generation devices. © 2015 American College of Cardiology Foundation.


Objectives: This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) in patients with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) and stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Background: Although randomized trials have shown superiority of EES to PES, the safety and efficacy of EES in ACS is unknown. Methods: We performed a patient-level pooled analysis from the prospective, randomized SPIRIT (Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System) II, III, IV, and COMPARE (A Trial of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice) trials in which 2,381 patients with ACS and 4,404 patients with stable CAD were randomized to EES or to PES. Kaplan-Meier estimates of death, myocardial infarction (MI), ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization, and stent thrombosis were assessed at 2 years and stratified by clinical presentation (ACS vs. stable CAD). Results: At 2 years, patients with ACS compared with stable CAD had higher rates of death (3.2% vs. 2.4%, hazard ratio [HR]: 1.37 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.02 to 1.85], p = 0.04) and MI (4.9% vs. 3.4%, HR: 1.45 [95% CI: 1.14 to 1.85], p = 0.02). In patients with ACS, EES versus PES reduced the rate of death or MI (6.6% vs. 9.3%, HR: 0.70 [95% CI: 0.52 to 0.94], p = 0.02), stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 2.9%, HR: 0.25 [95% CI: 0.12 to 0.52], p = 0.0002), and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (4.7% vs. 6.2%, HR: 0.69 [95% CI: 0.48 to 0.99], p = 0.04). In patients with stable CAD, EES reduced the rate of death or MI (4.5% vs. 7.1%, HR: 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48 to 0.80], p = 0.0002), stent thrombosis (0.7% vs. 1.8%, HR: 0.34 [95% CI: 0.19 to 0.62], p = 0.0002), and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (3.9% vs. 6.9%, HR: 0.55 [95% CI: 0.42 to 0.73], p < 0.0001). Conclusions: Treatment with EES versus PES provides enhanced safety and efficacy regardless of the acuity of the clinical syndrome being treated and appears to mitigate the increased risk of stent thrombosis associated with ACS. (A Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [SPIRIT II]; NCT00180310; SPIRIT III: A Clinical Evaluation of the Investigational Device XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System [EECSS] in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [SPIRIT III]; NCT00180479; SPIRIT IV Clinical Trial: Clinical Evaluation of the XIENCE V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Subjects With de Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions [SPIRIT IV]; NCT00307047; A Trial of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice: the COMPARE Trial [COMPARE]; NCT01016041) © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation.


Stone G.W.,Columbia University Medical Center | Kedhi E.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Kereiakes D.J.,Christ Hospital Heart and Vascular Center | Parise H.,Columbia University Medical Center | And 3 more authors.
Circulation | Year: 2011

Background-: Some (but not all) prior trials have reported differential outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention with paclitaxel-eluting stents versus stents eluting rapamycin analogs according to the presence of diabetes mellitus. These studies lacked sufficient power to examine individual safety and efficacy end points. Methods and results-: To determine whether an interaction exists between the presence of diabetes mellitus and treatment with everolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents, we pooled the databases from the Clinical Evaluation of the Xience V Everolimus Eluting Coronary Stent System in the Treatment of Patients With De Novo Native Coronary Artery Lesions (SPIRIT) II, SPIRIT III, SPIRIT IV, and A Trial of Everolimus-Eluting Stents and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents for Coronary Revascularization in Daily Practice (COMPARE) trials in which percutaneous coronary intervention was performed in 6780 patients, 1869 (27.6%) of whom had diabetes mellitus. Patients without diabetes mellitus treated with everolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents had significantly reduced 2-year rates of mortality (1.9% versus 3.1%; P=0.01), myocardial infarction (2.5% versus 5.8%; P<0.0001), stent thrombosis (0.3% versus 2.4%; P<0.0001), and ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (3.6% versus 6.9%; P<0.0001). In contrast, among patients with diabetes mellitus, there were no significant differences between the 2 stent types in any measured safety or efficacy parameter. Significant interactions were present between diabetic status and stent type for the 2-year end points of myocardial infarction (P=0.01), stent thrombosis (P=0.0006), and target lesion revascularization (P=0.02). Conclusions-: We have identified a substantial interaction between diabetes mellitus and stent type on clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention. In patients without diabetes mellitus, everolimus-eluting stents compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents resulted in substantial 2-year reductions in death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, and target lesion revascularization, whereas no significant differences in safety or efficacy outcomes were present in diabetic patients. © 2011 American Heart Association, Inc.


Kedhi E.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Joesoef K.S.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | McFadden E.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | Wassing J.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis | And 3 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2010

Background: Everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents, compared with bare metal stents, reduced the risk of restenosis in clinical trials with strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. We compared the safety and efficacy of the second-generation everolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in real-life practice. Methods: We randomly assigned 1800 consecutive patients (aged 18-85 years) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention at one centre to treatment with everolimus-eluting or paclitaxel-eluting stents. The primary endpoint was a composite of safety and efficacy (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularisation) within 12 months. Patients were not told which stent they had been allocated. Analysis was by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01016041. Findings: Follow-up was completed in 1797 patients. The primary endpoint occurred in 56 (6%) of 897 patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 82 (9%) of 903 in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group (relative risk 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·95], p value for superiority=0·02). The difference was attributable to a lower rate of stent thrombosis (6 [<1%] vs 23 [3%], 0·26 [0·11-0-64], p=0·002), myocardial infarction (25 [3%] vs 48 [5%], 0·52 [0·33-0·84], p=0·007), and target vessel revascularisation (21 [2%] vs 54 [6%], 0·39 [0·24-0·64], p=0·0001). Cardiac death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or target lesion revascularisation occurred in 44 [5%] patients in the everolimus-eluting stent group versus 74 [8%] patients in the paclitaxel-eluting stent group, p value for superiority was 0·005. Interpretation: The everolimus-eluting stent is better than the second generation paclitaxel-eluting stent in unselected patients in terms of safety and efficacy. On the basis of our results, we suggest that paclitaxel-eluting stents should no longer be used in everyday clinical practice. Funding: Unrestricted grants from Abbott Vascular and Boston Scientific. © 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.


The hypothenar hammer syndrome is a condition characterised by ischaemia of a finger secondary to thrombosis or an aneurysm or pseudoaneurysm of the ulnar artery in the hand. It typically occurs in the dominant hand of middle-aged men whose occupational or recreational activities require the use of the hand as a hammer. Arteriography is considered to be the gold standard for diagnosing this condition. Severe symptomatic cases are treated by surgical resection and revascularisation. The pathophysiology of this syndrome, its diagnosis and its management are discussed in this article by means of two representative cases, each having a different clinical presentation, diagnostic method and treatment.


Chandran N.S.,National University Hospital Singapore | Oranje A.P.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis
Pediatric Dermatology | Year: 2014

A 2-year-old girl with a diagnosis of loose anagen hair syndrome was treated with a tapering regime of minoxidil 5% solution over 28 months, resulting in quick, significant clinical improvement with no adverse effects. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.


De Bruijn K.,Rotterdam University | Den Hartog D.,Rotterdam University | Tuinebreijer W.,Rotterdam University | Roukema G.,Maasstad Ziekenhuis
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - Series A | Year: 2012

Background: Following internal fixation of intertrochanteric hip fractures, tip apex distance, fracture classification, position of the screw in the femoral head, and fracture reduction are known predictors for screw cutout, but the reliability of these measurements is unknown. We investigated the reliability of the tip apex distance measurement, the Cleveland femoral head dividing system, the three-grade classification system of Baumgaertner for fracture reduction, and the AO classification system as predictors for screw cutout. Methods: All patients with an intertrochanteric hip fracture who were managed with either a dynamic hip screw or a gamma nail between January 2007 and June 2010 were evaluated from our hip trauma database. Results: The tip apex distance measurement was reliable and patients with device cutout had a significantly higher tip apex distance. The agreement between observers with regard to screw position and fracture reduction was moderately reliable. After adjustment for tip apex distance and screw position, A3 fractures were at more risk of cutout compared with A1 fractures. Poor fracture reduction was significantly related with a higher incidence of cutout in univariate analysis, but not in multivariate analysis. Central-inferior and anterior-inferior positions, after adjustment for tip apex distance and screw position, were significantly protective against cutout. Conclusion: To decrease probable risks of cutout, the tip apex distance needs to stay small or the screw needs to be placed central-inferiorly or anterior-inferiorly. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. Copyright © 2012 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.

Loading Maasstad Ziekenhuis collaborators
Loading Maasstad Ziekenhuis collaborators