OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcome of paclitaxel eluting stents (PES) versus sirolimus eluting stents (SES) for the treatment of acute ST elevation myocardial infarction. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: The first 136 consecutive patients treated exclusively with PES in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction in this single centre registry were prospectively clinically assessed at 30 days and one year. They were compared with 186 consecutive patients treated exclusively with SES in the preceding period. SETTING: Academic tertiary referral centre. RESULTS: At 30 days, the rate of all cause mortality and reinfarction was similar between groups (6.5% v 6.6% for SES and PES, respectively, p = 1.0). A significant difference in target vessel revascularisation (TVR) was seen in favour of SES (1.1% v 5.1% for PES, p = 0.04). This was driven by stent thrombosis (n = 4), especially in the bifurcation stenting (n = 2). At one year, no significant differences were seen between groups, with no late thrombosis and 1.5% in-stent restenosis (needing TVR) in PES versus no reinterventions in SES (p = 0.2). One year survival free of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was 90.2% for SES and 85% for PES (p = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were seen in MACE-free survival at one year between SES and PES for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction with very low rates of reintervention for restenosis. Bifurcation stenting in acute myocardial infarction should, if possible, be avoided because of the increased risk of stent thrombosis.
OBJECTIVE: To compare clinical outcome of paclitaxel eluting stents (PES) versus sirolimus eluting stents (SES) for the treatment of acute ST elevation myocardial infarction. DESIGN AND PATIENTS: The first 136 consecutive patients treated exclusively with PES in the setting of primary percutaneous coronary intervention for acute myocardial infarction in this single centre registry were prospectively clinically assessed at 30 days and one year. They were compared with 186 consecutive patients treated exclusively with SES in the preceding period. SETTING: Academic tertiary referral centre. RESULTS: At 30 days, the rate of all cause mortality and reinfarction was similar between groups (6.5% v 6.6% for SES and PES, respectively, p = 1.0). A significant difference in target vessel revascularisation (TVR) was seen in favour of SES (1.1% v 5.1% for PES, p = 0.04). This was driven by stent thrombosis (n = 4), especially in the bifurcation stenting (n = 2). At one year, no significant differences were seen between groups, with no late thrombosis and 1.5% in-stent restenosis (needing TVR) in PES versus no reinterventions in SES (p = 0.2). One year survival free of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) was 90.2% for SES and 85% for PES (p = 0.16). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences were seen in MACE-free survival at one year between SES and PES for the treatment of acute myocardial infarction with very low rates of reintervention for restenosis. Bifurcation stenting in acute myocardial infarction should, if possible, be avoided because of the increased risk of stent thrombosis.
Authors: D E Cutlip; D S Baim; K K Ho; J J Popma; A J Lansky; D J Cohen; J P Carrozza; M S Chauhan; O Rodriguez; R E Kuntz Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-04-17 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Cindy L Grines; David A Cox; Eulogio Garcia; James E Tcheng; John J Griffin; Giulio Guagliumi; Thomas Stuckey; Mark Turco; John D Carroll; Barry D Rutherford; Alexandra J Lansky Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-03-28 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Eugène P McFadden; Eugenio Stabile; Evelyn Regar; Edouard Cheneau; Andrew T L Ong; Timothy Kinnaird; William O Suddath; Neil J Weissman; Rebecca Torguson; Kenneth M Kent; August D Pichard; Lowell F Satler; Ron Waksman; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Lancet Date: 2004 Oct 23-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Andrew T L Ong; Angela Hoye; Jiro Aoki; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Gaston A Rodriguez Granillo; Karel Sonnenschein; Evelyn Regar; Eugene P McFadden; Georgios Sianos; Willem J van der Giessen; Peter P T de Jaegere; Pim de Feyter; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Andrew T L Ong; Patrick W Serruys; Jiro Aoki; Angela Hoye; Carlos A G van Mieghem; Gaston A Rodriguez-Granillo; Marco Valgimigli; Karel Sonnenschein; Evelyn Regar; Martin van der Ent; Peter P T de Jaegere; Eugene P McFadden; Georgios Sianos; Willem J van der Giessen; Pim J de Feyter; Ron T van Domburg Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-04-05 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Pedro A Lemos; Francesco Saia; Sjoerd H Hofma; Joost Daemen; Andrew T L Ong; Chourmouzios A Arampatzis; Angela Hoye; Eugene McFadden; Georgios Sianos; Pieter C Smits; Willem J van der Giessen; Pim de Feyter; Ron T van Domburg; Patrick W Serruys Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2004-02-18 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Stephen G Ellis; David A Cox; James Hermiller; Charles O'Shaughnessy; James Tift Mann; Mark Turco; Ronald Caputo; Patrick Bergin; Joel Greenberg; Jeffrey J Popma; Mary E Russell Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-01-15 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Marie-Claude Morice; Patrick W Serruys; J Eduardo Sousa; Jean Fajadet; Ernesto Ban Hayashi; Marco Perin; Antonio Colombo; G Schuler; Paul Barragan; Giulio Guagliumi; Ferenc Molnàr; Robert Falotico Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2002-06-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jeffrey W Moses; Martin B Leon; Jeffrey J Popma; Peter J Fitzgerald; David R Holmes; Charles O'Shaughnessy; Ronald P Caputo; Dean J Kereiakes; David O Williams; Paul S Teirstein; Judith L Jaeger; Richard E Kuntz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-10-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Antonio Colombo; Janusz Drzewiecki; Adrian Banning; Eberhard Grube; Karl Hauptmann; Sigmund Silber; Dariusz Dudek; Stephen Fort; Francois Schiele; Krysztof Zmudka; Giulio Guagliumi; Mary E Russell Journal: Circulation Date: 2003-08-04 Impact factor: 29.690