Clinical Outcomes After Implantation of Polyurethane-Covered Cobalt-Chromium Stents: Insights from the Papyrus-Spain Registry

Abstract

Background/purposeThe main indication of covered stents (CS) is coronary artery perforation (CAP), but, they have been increasingly used in other scenarios. Data on the long-term follow-up of CS is limited, and no studies have been conducted specifically using new-generation polyurethane-covered cobalt-chromium Papyrus CS. Purpose: to evaluate the clinical outcomes after hospital discharge of Papyrus CS and to compare their outcome after implantation in CAP or coronary artery aneurysms (CAA). Methods/materialsWe evaluated the baseline clinical characteristics, lesion subsets, procedural features and the outcomes after initial discharge of Papyrus CS implanted in 17 high-PCI-volume centers. Results127 Papyrus CS were implanted in 108 patients (68 ± 1 years; 82.8% male) admitted for stable coronary disease (32.3%), NSTEMI (42.4%) or STEMI (25.3%). The number of CS per patient was 1.2 ± 0.6 (diameter: 3.5 ± 1.7 mm; length: 18.5 ± 3.7 mm). Angiographic success rate was 96%. CS diameter was larger in CAA (CAP:3.04 ± 0.5 mm vs CAA:4.1 ± 2.7 mm; p = .022). Intracoronary imaging techniques were used more frequently in CAA (p < .0001). After a mean follow-up of 22 ± 16 months, the major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE) rate was 7.1% [cardiac death: 2%, Myocardial infarction: 5%, Target Lesion Revascularization: 5% and Stent Thrombosis (ST): 3%]. MACE rate was similar in CAP (7.7%) and CAA (7.1%) (p = .9). However, CAA showed a higher ST rate (CAP: 0% vs CA: 7.1%; p = .04). ConclusionAfter hospital discharge, clinical outcomes after Papyrus CS implantation are acceptable (considering the clinical scenario and compared with other treatment alternatives) with no significant differences in the MACE rate between those implanted in CAA or in CAP. However, CAA group showed a higher ST rate.