Drug-eluting Stents In Diabetic Patients Research Articles

Drug-Eluting Balloons and Drug-Eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients Undergoing Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Due to Restenosis-DM-Dragon Registry.

Background: The rate of in-stent restenosis (ISR) is decreasing; however, it is still a challenge for contemporary invasive cardiologists. Therapeutic methods, including drug-eluting balloons (DEBs), intravascular lithotripsy, excimer laser coronary atherectomy, and imaging-guided percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents (DES), have been implemented. Patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) are burdened with a higher risk of ISR than the general population. Aims: DM-Dragon is aimed at evaluating the clinical outcomes of ISR treatment with DEBs vs. DES, focusing on patients with co-existing diabetes mellitus. Methods: The DM-Dragon registry is a retrospective study comprising data from nine high-volume PCI centers in Poland. A total of 1117 patients, of whom 473 individuals had DM and were treated with PCI due to ISR, were included. After propensity-score matching (PSM), 198 pairs were created for further analysis. The primary outcome of the study was target lesion revascularization (TLR). Results: In DM patients after PSM, TLR occurred in 21 (10.61%) vs. 20 (10.1%) in non-diabetic patients, p = 0.8690. Rates of target vessel revascularization (TVR), target vessel myocardial infarction, device-oriented composite endpoint (DOCE), and cardiac death did not differ significantly. Among diabetic patients, the risk of all-cause mortality was significantly lower in the DEB group (2.78% vs. 11.11%, HR 3.67 (95% confidence interval, CI) [1.01-13.3), p = 0.0483). Conclusions: PCI with DEBs is almost as effective as DES implantation in DM patients treated for ISR. In DM-Dragon, the rate of all-cause death was significantly lower in patients treated with DEBs. Further large-scale, randomized clinical trials would be needed to support these findings.

B-23 | Outcomes Of Drug-Coated Balloon Versus Drug-Eluting Stent In Diabetic Patients With De-Novo Coronary Artery Disease: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis

Studies that investigated the outcomes of drug-coated balloons (DCB) compared to drug-eluting stents (DES) following percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with de-novo coronary artery disease (CAD) showed conflicting Results. We aimed to compare the outcomes of DCB with DES in diabetic patients with de-novo CAD.

Efficacy of Drug-Eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients Admitted with ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarctions Treated with Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Background: Diabetic patients show higher adverse ischemic event rates and mortality when undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in acute myocardial infarctions. Therefore, diabetic patients might benefit even more from modern-generation drug-eluting stents (DES). The aim of the present study was to compare adverse ischemic events and mortality rates between bare-metal stents (BMS) and DES in diabetic patients admitted with ST-elevation-myocardial infarction (STEMI) with non-diabetic patients as the control group. Methods: All STEMI patients undergoing emergency PCI and stent implantation documented between 2006 and 2019 in the Bremen STEMI registry entered the analysis. Efficacy was defined as a combination of in-stent thrombosis, myocardial re-infarction or additional target lesion revascularization at one year. Results: Of 8356 patients which entered analysis, 1554 (19%) were diabetics, while 6802 (81%) were not. 879 (57%) of the diabetics received a DES. In a multivariate model, DES implantation in diabetics compared to BMS was associated with lower rates of in-stent thrombosis (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05–0.6), myocardial re-infarctions (OR 0.35, 95%CI, 0.2–0.7, p < 0.01) and of the combined endpoint at 1 year ((ST + MI + TLR): OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.2–0.6, p < 0.01), with a trend towards lower 5-year mortality (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.3–1.0, p = 0.058). When comparing diabetic to non-diabetic patients, an elevation in event rates for diabetics was only detectable in BMS (OR 1.78, 95% CI 0.5–0.7, p < 0.01); however, this did not persist when treated with a DES (OR 1.03 95% CI 0.7–1.6, p = 0.9). Conclusions: In STEMI patients with diabetes, the use of DES significantly reduced ischemic event rates and, unlike with BMS, adverse ischemic event rates became similar to non-diabetic patients.

TCT-625 Five-Year Clinical Outcomes of NOBORI Biolimus-Eluting Stent versus XIENCE Everolimus-Eluting Stent in Diabetic Patients

Diabetes mellitus remains a significant predictor of adverse clinical outcomes even in the newer-generation drug-eluting stent (DES) era. However, long-term clinical outcomes of various DES in diabetic patients have not yet been fully evaluated. We sought to compare long-term clinical outcomes

Early (≤ 30Days), Late (31-360Days) and Very Late (> 360Days) Stent Thrombosis in Patients with Insulin-Treated versus Non-Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis.

IntroductionAt this time in 2018, with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and coronary artery disease (CAD) still on the rise, the post-percutaneous coronary interventional (PCI) outcomes observed in patients with diabetes mellitus who are on insulin therapy (ITDM) and those who do not require insulin (NITDM) are still controversial and require further investigation. Considering this idea to be of particular interest to the readers, as well as being an important issue in interventional cardiology, we aimed to systematically assess early (≤ 30 days), late (31–360 days) and very late (> 360 days) stent thrombosis in patients with ITDM and NITDM following drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation.MethodsWell-known online databases (the Cochrane, EMBASE and MEDLINE databases and http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched for relevant English publications based on ITDM and NITDM and stent thrombosis following PCI using specific terms. Early stent thrombosis, late stent thrombosis and very late stent thrombosis were the clinical outcomes. The main analysis was carried out using the latest version of the RevMan software (version 5.3) whereby odds ratios (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were generated.ResultsA total of 8524 participants with T2DM (2273 participants were on insulin therapy and 6251 participants were not) were included. Results of this analysis showed early stent thrombosis to be significantly higher in patients with ITDM (OR 1.81, 95% CI 1.04–3.15; P = 0.04), whereas late and very late stent thromboses were not significantly different following PCI with DES in diabetic patients with versus without insulin therapy (OR 1.44, 95% CI 0.73–2.84, P = 0.30 and OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.33–1.92, P = 0.62, respectively). Late stent thromboses associated exclusively with everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) were not significantly different in patients with ITDM and NITDM.ConclusionFollowing PCI with DES, early stent thrombosis was significantly higher in patients with ITDM. However, late and very late stent thromboses were not significantly different in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were treated with or without insulin. Comparison with individual DES was not sufficiently powerful to reach a conclusion.

In Vivo Evaluation of the Synergic Effect of Metformin and mTOR Inhibitors on the Endothelial Healing of Drug-eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients

Introduction and objectivesRecent animal studies have shown metformin (MF) to impair endothelialization of drug-eluting stents (DES). The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of MF on the healing of DES in human coronary arteries of patients with diabetes mellitus by optical coherence tomography (OCT). MethodsThe RESERVOIR trial randomized 116 lesions in 112 patients with diabetes mellitus to amphilimus- or everolimus-eluting stents and included mandatory OCT at 9 months of follow-up. Patients were divided in 3 groups according to the glucose-lowering agents received: a) no MF; b) MF in noninsulin treated patients, and c) MF in insulin-treated patients. The primary safety endpoint was the rate of uncovered stents. ResultsSeventeen patients with 19 lesions did not receive MF, whereas MF was administered to 53 noninsulin treated patients (54 lesions) and 28 insulin-treated patients (28 lesions). Baseline characteristics were comparable, although noninsulin treated patients who received MF had better glycemic control (P < .01). By OCT, rates of uncovered struts were comparable between groups (3.07±4.80% vs 2.23±4.73% vs 3.43±6.69%, respectively; P = .48). Multivariate models confirmed that MF had no effect on the healing of DES (OR, 1.49, 95%CI, 0.71-3.08; P = .29). Similarly, quantitative angiography showed no effect of MF on late lumen loss, whereas patients treated with exogenous insulin had greater late lumen loss (P = .02). ConclusionsMetformin use does not impair endothelial healing of DES in patients with both insulin- and noninsulin-treated diabetes mellitus. According to these results, MF should not be discouraged in these patients.

Coronary Stents in Diabetic Patients: State of the Knowledge.

This review article aims to summarize the findings of the most relevant research that compared the use of paclitaxel vs. "limus" based drug eluting stent (DES) in diabetic patients and to define the current state of knowledge with new stent technologies in this patient population. Since drug eluting stents (DES) were introduced, it has been of great interest to establish whether paclitaxel or sirolimus eluting stents have the same safety and efficacy features for patients with coronary artery disease. The answer to this question is particularly relevant for diabetic patients. Several randomized trials, registry-based studies, and meta-analyses have assessed the performance of these different DES in diabetic patients. The most recently published data favors limus over paclitaxel DES in diabetic patients, but most of these studies compared first vs. second generation DES with the inherent caveats of comparing different platforms, alloys, and drug delivery vehicles. In this literature review, we found that there is robust evidence favoring the use of DES over bare metal stents in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease. We also found that the current state of knowledge is that the everolimus eluting stents have better safety and efficacy than paclitaxel eluting stents in diabetic patients and hence should be the preferred choice. New revascularization strategies including bio-absorbable scaffolds, polymer free stents, and bio-degradable polymers are being studied in diabetic patients with encouraging results.

TCT-72 Short and medium-term clinical outcome of amphilimus polymer-free drug-eluting stent in diabetic patients: An all-comers multicenter spanish registry. (Control-8 registry)

TCT-72 Short and medium-term clinical outcome of amphilimus polymer-free drug-eluting stent in diabetic patients: An all-comers multicenter spanish registry. (Control-8 registry)

Long-term clinical outcomes of drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with small vessels compared to larger vessel—7years clinical follow-up

The aim of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of drug-eluting stents (DES) in small vessels in patients with non-insulin-dependent (NIDDM) and insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM). Several randomized trials have shown DES to significantly reduce the angiographic and clinical events in diabetic patients. However, there is insufficient data on similar outcomes in diabetics with small vessels. We studied 258 consecutive diabetic patients (173 NIDDM and 85 IDDM) who underwent coronary stenting with DES, divided into 2 cohorts: group A (vessels<2.7mm): 163 patients, and group B (vessels≥2.7mm): 95 patients. We analyzed the major adverse cardiac events (MACE) [death, nonfatal myocardial infarction MI, and target lesion revascularization (TVR)] over a mean follow-up of 78.4±14.8months. Group A patients had: smaller reference diameter (2.4±0.31 versus 3.14±0.2mm, p=0.0001), longer lesions (19.3±9.5 versus 16.7±7.1mm, p=0.023), more complex lesions: (B2/C) (80.7 versus 52.6%, p<0.033), bifurcation lesions (25.8 versus 11.6%, p=0.007), diffuse disease (42.9 versus 26.3%, p=0.008), multivessel (32.5 versus 18.9%, p=0.019), eccentric lesions (57.1 versus 43.2%, p=0.031), more stents implanted (1.99±1.6 versus 1.7±1.3, p<0.0001), more overlapping stents (29.4 versus 13.7%, p=0.004) and more stents length (25.7±4.9 versus 20.2±2.6, p<0.003). During the follow-up, both groups had overall similar MACE (10.4 versus 11.7%, p=0.9) with insignificant higher restenosis (9.2 versus 8.4%, p=0.832) and TVR (7.4 versus 6.4%, p=0.75) in group A. There was no difference in death (p=0.111) or MI (p=0.858). Both groups had similar stent thrombosis rate (1.2 versus 1.1%, p=0.899), angina events (10.4 versus 16.8%, p=0.137), abnormal stress thallium (14.1 versus 14.7%, p=0.890), and hospital days (2.91 versus 3.57, p=0.886). Despite complex angiographic characteristics, the use of DES in diabetic patients with small vessels showed favorable clinical outcomes and similar low TVR compared to those with large vessels.

Neointimal response to second-generation drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with de-novo coronary lesions: intravascular ultrasound study.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent of neointimal response after the implantation of a second-generation drug-eluting stent, zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES-ER, Endeavor Resolute) or everolimus-eluting stent (EES, Xience V), using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) in diabetic patients. In all, 154 diabetic patients with de-novo coronary lesions were randomized to be implanted with a ZES-ER or EES, and the angiographic follow-up at 9 months combined with a complete IVUS study was available for 96 patients with 101 lesions. Baseline demographic and lesion parameters were similar in both groups at index percutaneous coronary intervention. On follow-up angiography, in-stent late lumen loss and minimal lumen diameter were not different between the two groups. On IVUS study, neointimal hyperplasia volume [median (interquartile range): ZES-ER vs. EES; 2.25 mm (0.57-6.25) vs. 1.59 mm (0.45-8.37), P=0.615] and in-stent percentage of volume obstruction [median (interquartile range): ZES-ER vs. EES; 1.16% (0.33-3.61) vs. 0.77% (0.29-4.01), P=0.615] showed similar results between the two groups. In diabetic patients, the second-generation drug-eluting stents, ZES-ER and EES, were comparable in inhibiting neointimal proliferation.

Meta-analysis of three randomized controlled trials comparing coronary artery bypass grafting with percutaneous coronary intervention using drug-eluting stenting in patients with diabetes.

Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) was found to be the preferred strategy of revascularization in patients with diabetes in the bare-metal stent (BMS) era. The introduction of drug-eluting stents (DESs) led to a significant reduction in the rates of repeat revascularization (RRV) when compared with BMSs. We did a collaborative analysis of data from randomized controlled trials in the contemporary era to compare CABG versus percutaneous coronary intervention using DESs in diabetic patients. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis from randomized trials in the contemporary era comparing PCI with DESs with CABG in diabetic patients with multivessel disease. A comprehensive literature search (1 January 2003 to 18 May 2013) identified randomized controlled trials that reported long-term outcomes comparing PCI using DESs with CABG in 2974 diabetic patients. At 1 year, PCI was associated with a significant increase in the incidence of RRV [2.48 (1.56-3.94); P ≤0.0001], lower incidence of stroke [relative risk (RR) = 0.43 (0.19-0.81); P = 0.017], and no difference in death or myocardial infarction (MI). At 5 years, PCI was still associated with a lower incidence of stroke, but was associated with a significant increase in the incidence of death [RR = 1.36 (1.11-1.66); P = 0.0033] and MI [RR = 2.01 (1.54-2.62); P ≤0.0001]. In patients with diabetes, PCI was associated with no difference in death and MI at 1 year. However, at 5 years, PCI was associated with a higher incidence of death and MI. PCI was associated with a higher incidence of RRV but a lower incidence of stroke.

Second- versus first-generation drug-eluting stents for diabetic patients: a meta-analysis.

IntroductionThe issue of whether various drug-eluting stents (DES) provide similar benefit in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease remains unclear. The purpose of the study is to assess the clinical utility of the second-generation and first-generation DES in patients with diabetes mellitus by a meta-analysis.Material and methodsA systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases was conducted. We included randomized trials involving head-to-head comparison of clinical outcomes of second- versus first-generation DES in patients with a diagnosis of diabetes with at least 6-month follow-up data. Summary statistics were calculated using random-effects models.ResultsA total of 10 trials with 4503 patients were available for analysis. The pooled analyses showed that the second-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES) significantly lowered all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.37–0.90; p = 0.01) and the risk of stent thrombosis (RR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.22–0.95; p = 0.03) compared with the first-generation sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and the overall first-generation DES, respectively. Moreover, the EES showed a tendency toward reducing the incidence of recurrent myocardial infarction when compared with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) (RR = 0.58, p = 0.08). In contrast, the second-generation zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES) were associated with increased rates of stent thrombosis and risk of target lesion revascularization in comparison with the SES (both p < 0.05) or the overall first-generation DES (both p < 0.05).ConclusionsThe second-generation EES are highly effective in reducing the risk of major cardiac events in diabetic patients with coronary artery disease.

Meta-analysis of 14 trials comparing bypass grafting vs drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease

Background and aimClinical trials have reported lower mortality and repeated revascularization rate in diabetic patients treated with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) as compared to percutaneous revascularization. However, these studies were conducted in the era of bare-metal stents. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis to compare CABG to PCI with drug-eluting stents (DES) in diabetic patients with multivessel and/or left main disease. Methods and resultsThe literature was scanned by formal search of electronic databases (Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases), and major international scientific session abstracts from 2000 to 2013. Primary endpoint was mortality. A total of 14 (4 randomized and 10 non-randomized) trials were finally included, with a total of 7072 patients. Up to 5 years follow-up, CABG was associated with a reduction in mortality (7.3% vs 10.4%, OR[95%CI] = 0.65[0.55–0.77], p < 0.0001; phet = 0.00001), with similar results in both RCTs (OR[95%CI] = 0.64[0.50–0.82], p = 0.0005) and NRCTs (OR[95%CI] = 0.75[0.6–0.94)], p = 0.01) (p int = 0.93). A significant relationship was observed between risk profile and benefits in mortality with CABG (p < 0.001). CABG reduced target vessel revascularization (TVR; 5.2% vs 15.7%, OR[95%CI] = 0.30[0.25–0.36], p < 0.00001, p het = 0.02), with a relationship between risk profile and the benefits from CABG as compared to DES (p < 0.0001). CABG was associated with a lower rate of MACCE (14.9% vs 22.9%, OR[95%CI] = 0.59[0.51–0.67], p < 0.00001, p het<0.00001) but higher risk of CVA (3.6% vs 1.4%, OR[95%CI] = 2.34[1.63–3.35], p < 0.00001, p het = 0.71). ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis demonstrates that among diabetic patients with multivessel disease and/or left main disease, CABG provides benefits in mortality and TVR, especially in high-risk patients but it is counterbalanced by a higher risk of stroke. Future trials are certainly needed in the era of new DES and improved antiplatelet therapies.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between first-generation and second-generation drug-eluting stents in type 2 diabetic patients

Drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation has significantly reduced the risk of restenosis and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared with bare-metal stents in type 2 diabetic patients. Differences in outcomes between the first-generation and second-generation DESs in diabetic patients, however, have yet to be evaluated. We compared MACEs after second-generation DES implantation compared with those of first-generation stents in diabetic patients. This single-center prospective cohort study compared first-generation DES (n=654) and second-generation DES (n=339) implantation in type 2 diabetic patients by propensity score matching. The primary outcome was the occurrence of MACEs, defined as a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization. The rate of MACEs was lower in the second-generation DES group after 2 years of follow-up (3.3 vs. 10.0%, P<0.001). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed higher MACE-free survival in diabetic patients in the second-generation DES group (log-rank P<0.001). In a Cox regression analysis, first-generation DES (hazard ratio=3.60, 95% confidence interval, 2.03-6.37, P<0.001) was an independent predictor for MACEs. In type 2 diabetic patients, second-generation DES implantation resulted in lower MACEs compared with first-generation DESs, primarily because of lower target lesion and vessel revascularization rates.

Neointimal response to second generation drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with de novo coronary lesions; intravascular ultrasound study

Neointimal response to second generation drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with de novo coronary lesions; intravascular ultrasound study

Neointimal Response to Second Generation Drug-eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients with De Novo Coronary Lesions; Intravascular Ultrasound Study

Neointimal Response to Second Generation Drug-eluting Stents in Diabetic Patients with De Novo Coronary Lesions; Intravascular Ultrasound Study

The Future REvascularization Evaluation in patients with Diabetes mellitus: Optimal management of Multivessel disease (FREEDOM) trial: Clinical and angiographic profile at study entry

The optimal revascularization strategy for diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (MVD) remains uncertain for lack of an adequately powered, randomized trial. The FREEDOM trial was designed to compare contemporary coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) to percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug-eluting stents in diabetic patients with MVD against a background of optimal medical therapy. A total of 1,900 diabetic participants with MVD were randomized to PCI or CABG worldwide from April 2005 to March 2010. FREEDOM is a superiority trial with a mean follow-up of 4.37 years (minimum 2 years) and 80% power to detect a 27.0% relative reduction. We present the baseline characteristics of patients screened and randomized, and provide a comparison with other MVD trials involving diabetic patients. The randomized cohort was 63.1 ± 9.1 years old and 29% female, with a median diabetes duration of 10.2 ± 8.9 years. Most (83%) had 3-vessel disease and on average took 5.5 ± 1.7 vascular medications, with 32% on insulin therapy. Nearly all had hypertension and/or dyslipidemia, and 26% had a prior myocardial infarction. Mean hemoglobin A1c was 7.8 ± 1.7 mg/dL, 29% had low-density lipoprotein <70 mg/dL, and mean systolic blood pressure was 134 ± 20 mm Hg. The mean SYNTAX score was 26.2 with a symmetric distribution. FREEDOM trial participants have baseline characteristics similar to those of contemporary multivessel and diabetes trial cohorts. The FREEDOM trial has successfully recruited a high-risk diabetic MVD cohort. Follow-up efforts include aggressive monitoring to optimize background risk factor control. FREEDOM will contribute significantly to the PCI versus CABG debate in diabetic patients with MVD.

Comparing outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass versus drug-eluting stent in diabetic patients

Off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery and sirolimus-eluting stent placement have been widely used for the treatment of coronary artery disease. The goal of this study was to compare long-term outcomes after off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery or sirolimus-eluting stent placement in diabetic patients with multivessel disease. This observational study enrolled 350 off-pump coronary artery bypass patients and 143 sirolimus-eluting stent patients receiving care at our institution between 2000 and 2007. All patients had diabetes and multivessel disease including proximal left anterior descending or left main coronary artery. The choice of revascularization (percutaneous coronary intervention versus coronary artery bypass surgery) was left to the physician's discretion rather than randomization. Cox proportional-hazard analyses, adjusting baseline risk factors and propensity score, which predicted the probability of receiving off-pump coronary artery bypass, were conducted to evaluate outcomes, including all-cause mortality, cardiac death, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events. During the follow-up (2.6±1.6 years) period, there was no difference between off-pump coronary artery bypass and sirolimus-eluting stent placement in all-cause mortality or cardiac death. However, the incidences of acute coronary syndrome, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were markedly lower in the patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass than in those receiving sirolimus-eluting stent placement. Off-pump coronary artery bypass is superior to sirolimus-eluting stent placement in terms of acute coronary syndrome, target vessel revascularization, and major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease.

Performance of the Firebird™ Drug-eluting Stent in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

Performance of the Firebird™ Drug-eluting Stent in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

Performance of the Firebird™ Drug-eluting Stent in Diabetic Patients with Multivessel Coronary Artery Disease

Preliminary data have shown the Firebird™ and the Cypher® stents have similar safety and efficacy profiles. However, to date, no study has evaluated the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the Firebird™ stent in diabetic patients. The performance of the Firebird™ stent in diabetic patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (CAD) (n = 100) was compared to that of the Cypher® stent, using historical data from the ARTS-II study (n = 159). We compared the major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at one year. Most of the patients in the Firebird™ group were male (65%), with mean age of 63.3 ± 10.4 years and 5% were receiving insulin. Stable coronary syndromes were prevalent (60%), 45% had three-vessel CAD and ventricular function was preserved (56.6 ± 13.7%). In patients with three-vessel CAD, 135 lesions were treated with ≥ 3 stents in 78% of the cases and 2 stents in the remaining ones. In patients with two-vessel CAD, 110 lesions were treated with ≥ 2 stents in 80% of the cases and 1 stent in the remaining ones. The incidence of MACE at one year of the Firebird™ stent was 21%, death was observed in 3% of the patients, myocardial infarction in 2% and a new revascularization procedure in 18%, predominantly at the expense of a new PCI in 14% of the cases. Comparison with the Cypher® group did not show differences for any of the evaluated endpoints. In our study, the use of the Firebird™ stent showed similar results to those of patients in the ARTS-II study, which makes it attractive for use in the complex scenario of diabetic patients with multivessel CAD. Desempenho do Stent Farmacológico Firebird™ em Diabéticos Portadores de Doença Coronária Multiarterial Dados preliminares têm demonstrado que o perfil de segurança e eficácia do stent Firebird™ é semelhante ao do stent Cypher®. No entanto, até o presente momento, nenhum estudo avaliou a intervenção coronária percutânea (ICP) com o Firebird™ em diabéticos. Comparamos, em diabéticos portadores de doença arterial coronária (DAC) multiarterial, o desempenho do Firebird™ (n = 100) ao do Cypher®, utilizando os dados históricos do estudo ARTS-II (n = 159). Foram comparados os eventos cardiovasculares adversos maiores (ECAM) em um ano. A maioria dos pacientes do grupo Firebird™ era do sexo masculino (65%), com média de idade de 63,3 ± 10,4 anos e 5% estavam em uso de insulina. Predominaram os quadros clínicos estáveis (60%), 45% eram portadores de DAC triarterial e a função ventricular era preservada (56,6 ± 13,7%). Nos pacientes com DAC triarterial, foram tratadas 135 lesões, com 3 ou mais stents em 78% dos casos e 2 stents nos demais. Nos pacientes com DAC biarterial, foram tratadas 110 lesões com 2 ou mais stents em 80% dos casos e 1 stent nos demais. A incidência de ECAM em um ano do Firebird™ foi de 21%, óbito ocorreu em 3% dos pacientes, infarto do miocárdio em 2%, e novo procedimento de revascularização miocárdica em 18%, predominantemente à custa de nova ICP em 14% dos casos. A comparação com o grupo Cypher® não mostrou diferenças para nenhum dos desfechos avaliados. Em nosso estudo, o uso do stent Firebird™ apresentou resultados similares aos dos pacientes do estudo ARTS-II, o que o torna atrativo para ser utilizado no complexo cenário de pacientes diabéticos portadores de DAC multiarterial.