OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare coronary stent implantation with balloon angioplasty (BA), in a diabetic population, in terms of the six-month angiographic outcome and four-year clinical events. BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients have a poor angiographic and clinical outcome after standard coronary BA. To date, it is still unclear whether stent implantation may improve this outcome. METHODS: We investigated this issue by individual matching of 314 diabetic patients treated with either coronary stenting or standard BA. These two groups were derived from a population of consecutive diabetic patients (1993 to 1996). Matching criteria were gender, anti-diabetic regimen, stenosis location, reference diameter, and minimal luminal diameter (+/-0.4 mm). One lesion per patient was considered for matching. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups of 157 patients. At six months, the rates of restenosis (27% vs. 62%; p < 0.0001) and occlusion (4% vs. 13%; p < 0.005) were lower in the stent group than in the BA group. This was associated with a significant decrease in ejection fraction at six months in the BA group (p = 0.02) while, during the same period, no change was observed in the stent group (p = NS). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that angiographic benefit was consistent among the subgroups. At four years, the combined clinical end point of cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction was lower in the stent group (14.8% vs. 26.0%; p = 0.02), as was the need for repeat revascularization (35.4% vs. 52.1%; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a population of diabetic patients, coronary stent implantation was associated with a highly beneficial effect on the six-month angiographic outcome and four-year clinical events compared with standard BA.
OBJECTIVES: We sought to compare coronary stent implantation with balloon angioplasty (BA), in a diabetic population, in terms of the six-month angiographic outcome and four-year clinical events. BACKGROUND:Diabeticpatients have a poor angiographic and clinical outcome after standard coronary BA. To date, it is still unclear whether stent implantation may improve this outcome. METHODS: We investigated this issue by individual matching of 314 diabeticpatients treated with either coronary stenting or standard BA. These two groups were derived from a population of consecutive diabeticpatients (1993 to 1996). Matching criteria were gender, anti-diabetic regimen, stenosis location, reference diameter, and minimal luminal diameter (+/-0.4 mm). One lesion per patient was considered for matching. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups of 157 patients. At six months, the rates of restenosis (27% vs. 62%; p < 0.0001) and occlusion (4% vs. 13%; p < 0.005) were lower in the stent group than in the BA group. This was associated with a significant decrease in ejection fraction at six months in the BA group (p = 0.02) while, during the same period, no change was observed in the stent group (p = NS). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that angiographic benefit was consistent among the subgroups. At four years, the combined clinical end point of cardiac death and non-fatal myocardial infarction was lower in the stent group (14.8% vs. 26.0%; p = 0.02), as was the need for repeat revascularization (35.4% vs. 52.1%; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a population of diabeticpatients, coronary stent implantation was associated with a highly beneficial effect on the six-month angiographic outcome and four-year clinical events compared with standard BA.
Authors: Gordon E Pate; May Lee; Karin Humphries; Eric Cohen; Robert Lowe; Rebecca S Fox; Robert Teskey; Christopher E Buller Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 5.223
Authors: J R Timmer; I C C van der Horst; J P S Henriques; K Thomas; H J G Bilo; J C A Hoorntje; M J de Boer; H Suryapranata; F Zijlstra Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 2.380