OBJECTIVE: The toxicity of anti-cancer chemotherapeutic agents can be reduced by associating these compounds, such as the anti-proliferative agent paclitaxel, with a cholesterol-rich nanoemulsion (LDE) that mimics the lipid composition of low-density lipoprotein (LDL). When injected into circulation, the LDE concentrates the carried drugs in neoplastic tissues and atherosclerotic lesions. In rabbits, atherosclerotic lesion size was reduced by 65% following LDE-paclitaxel treatment. The current study aimed to test the effectiveness of LDE-paclitaxel on inpatients with aortic atherosclerosis. METHODS: This study tested a 175 mg/m2 body surface area dose of LDE-paclitaxel (intravenous administration, 3/3 weeks for 6 cycles) in patients with aortic atherosclerosis who were aged between 69 and 86 yrs. A control group of 9 untreated patients with aortic atherosclerosis (72-83 yrs) was also observed. RESULTS: The LDE-paclitaxel treatment elicited no important clinical or laboratory toxicities. Images were acquired via multiple detector computer tomography angiography (64-slice scanner) before treatment and at 1-2 months after treatment. The images showed that the mean plaque volume in the aortic artery wall was reduced in 4 of the 8 patients, while in 3 patients it remained unchanged and in one patient it increased. In the control group, images were acquired twice with an interval of 6-8 months. None of the patients in this group exhibited a reduction in plaque volume; in contrast, the plaque volume increased in three patients and remained stable in four patients. During the study period, one death unrelated to the treatment occurred in the LDE-paclitaxel group and one death occurred in the control group. CONCLUSION: Treatment with LDE-paclitaxel was tolerated by patients with cardiovascular disease and showed the potential to reduce atherosclerotic lesion size.

OBJETIVO: A reestenose intra-stent é a maior limitação das intervenções coronárias percutâneas. O carbeto de silício amorfo (SiC-a), substância antitrombótica e antiinflamatória capaz de reduzir a deposição de fibrina, plaquetas e leucócitos sobre o stent, apresenta potencial de prevenir a hiperplasia neo-intimal e a reestenose. MÉTODOS: Estudo prospectivo, randomizado e tipo rótulo aberto comparando pacientes com doença coronariana tratados com e sem stents revestidos com o SiC-a, utilizando a angiografia quantitativa e o ultra-som intracoronário. Foram incluídos 100 pacientes (50 em cada grupo) a fim de mensurar o volume de hiperplasia neo-intimal intra-stent/extremidades. Como os stents comparados apresentavam extensões diferentes, o volume de hiperplasia foi analisado em valores absolutos (por paciente) e relativos (por milímetro de extensão do stent). Avaliaram-se ainda os eventos cardíacos maiores e os resultados da angiografia quantitativa. RESULTADOS: Os grupos apresentaram características de base semelhantes. Todos os pacientes foram tratados com sucesso. No 6° mês de evolução foram reestudados 94% dos casos dos dois grupos, obtendo-se ultra-som em 92%. O volume de hiperplasia neo-intimal absoluto foi significativamente maior nos tratados com os stents revestidos (51.2 DP 18.8 mm³ vs 41.9 DP 16.4 mm³; p=0.014), porém o relativo foi semelhante (2.9 DP 1.0 mm³/mm stent vs 2.5 DP 0.9 mm³/mm stent; p=0.108). A obstrução volumétrica da luz também foi similar (36.4 DP 11.1% vs 37.9 DP 10.9%; p=0.505). O diâmetro mínimo da luz (1.9 DP 0.7 mm vs 1.8 DO 0.6 mm; p=0.552), a reestenose (19.1% vs 17%; p>0.999) e a revascularização do vaso-alvo (16% vs 14%; p>0.999) não diferiram. CONCLUSÃO: Os stents revestidos apresentaram resultados clínicos, angiográficos e ultra-sonográficos similares aos controles.

OBJECTIVE: In-stent restenosis remains a major limitation following coronary stent implantation. Amorphous silicon-carbide (a-SiC) coating has been shown to improve stent biocompatibility, therefore, reducing local inflammation and thrombus generation. Due to the latter, a-SiC coating might have an impact on the prevention of neointimal hyperplasia (NIH) and restenosis. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, open-label trial compared a-SiC-coated (group A) versus uncoated (group B) stent implantation in de novo lesions. We included 100 patients (50 patients in each group) and the primary end-point was in-stent volume of NIH measured by intravascular ultrasound. RESULTS: All patients underwent successful stent deployment. Although absolute NIH volume was greater in A (51.2 mm³ SD 18.8 mm³ versus 41.9 mm³ SD 16.4 mm³; P = 0.014), relative (divided per mm of stent length) NIH volume was similar (2.9 mm³/mm stent SD 1.0 mm³/mm stent versus 2.5 mm³/mm stent SD 0.9 mm³/mm stent; P = 0.108). Late loss, restenosis, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) were similar. CONCLUSION: A-SiC-coated stents did not reduce either NIH or MACE at long-term follow-up.

OBJETIVO: Análise comparativa dos resultados hospitalares em pacientes infartados reperfundidos por meio de uma intervenção coronariana percutânea de resgate ou primária. MÉTODOS: Selecionados pacientes consecutivos, submetidos a uma intervenção percutânea no infarto do miocárdio (< 24h), entre 1997 e 2000, incluídos no registro nacional multicêntrico CENIC, comparando os resultados hospitalares, entre aqueles submetidos ao procedimento de resgate (n=840) ou primário (n=8.531). RESULTADOS: Os pacientes que realizaram intervenção de resgate eram significativamente mais jovens, com infarto anterior, associado à presença de disfunção ventricular, porém com menor porcentual de doença coronariana multiarterial, comparados aos primários. As taxas de implante de stents foram similares (56,9% vs. 54,9%; p=0,283), mas o sucesso do procedimento foi menor nos casos de resgate (88,1% vs. 91,2%; p<0,001), cursando com maior mortalidade (7,4% vs. 5,6%; p=0,034), comparado à intervenção primária; nova revascularização (< 0,5%), cirurgia de emergência (< 0,3%) e reinfarto (< 2,6%) foram similares. A análise multivariada identificou o procedimento de resgate como preditor de mortalidade ao final da fase hospitalar [RC (IC=95%) = 1,60 (1,17-2,19); p=0,003]. CONCLUSÃO: Neste registro nacional, a intervenção de resgate apresentou uma maior mortalidade hospitalar, comparada ao procedimento primário.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a comparative analysis of in-hospital results obtained from AMI patients who underwent rescue or primary PTCA. METHODS: From the Brazilian Interventional National Registry (CENIC), we selected all consecutive patients who underwent a percutaneous coronary intervention for myocardial infarction (< 24 hours), between 1997 and 2000, analyzing those undergoing a rescue (n=840) or a primary (n=8,531) procedure, and comparing their in-hospital results. RESULTS: Rescue patients were significantly younger males with anterior wall infarctions, associated with left ventricular dysfunction, but had less multivessel disease, compared with those treated with primary intervention. Coronary stents were implanted in at similar rates (56.9% vs. 54.9%; P=0.283). Procedural success were lower for rescue cases (88.1% vs. 91.2%; P<0.001), with higher mortality (7.4% vs. 5.6%; P=0.034), compared with the primary intervention group; target vessel revascularization (< 0.5%), emergency bypass surgery (< 0.3%) and reinfarction (< 2.6%) rates were similar for both strategies. Multivariate analysis identified the rescue procedure as a predictor of in-hospital death [OR(CI=95%) = 1.60 (1.17-2.19); P=0.003]. CONCLUSION: Patients who underwent a rescue coronary intervention had higher in-hospital death rates compared with those who underwent a primary coronary intervention.