BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce the need for repeat revascularization, but their long-term safety relative to that of bare-metal stents (BMS) in general use remains uncertain. We sought to compare the clinical outcome of patients treated with DES with that of BMS. METHODS AND RESULTS: All adults undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting between April 1, 2003, and September 30, 2004, at non-US government hospitals in Massachusetts were identified from a mandatory state database. Patients were classified from the index admission according to stent types used. Clinical and procedural risk factors were collected prospectively. Risk-adjusted mortality, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rate differences (DES-BMS) were estimated through propensity score matching without replacement. A total of 11 556 patients were treated with DES, and 6237 were treated with BMS, with unadjusted 2-year mortality rates of 7.0% and 12.6%, respectively (P<0.0001). In 5549 DES patients matched to 5549 BMS patients, 2-year risk-adjusted mortality rates were 9.8% and 12.0%, respectively (P=0.0002), whereas the respective rates for myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization were 8.3% versus 10.3% (P=0.0005) and 11.0% versus 16.8% (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: DES treatment was associated with lower rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization than BMS treatment in similar patients in a matched population-based study. Comprehensive follow-up in this inclusive population is warranted to identify whether similar safety and efficacy remain beyond 2 years.
BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) reduce the need for repeat revascularization, but their long-term safety relative to that of bare-metal stents (BMS) in general use remains uncertain. We sought to compare the clinical outcome of patients treated with DES with that of BMS. METHODS AND RESULTS: All adults undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with stenting between April 1, 2003, and September 30, 2004, at non-US government hospitals in Massachusetts were identified from a mandatory state database. Patients were classified from the index admission according to stent types used. Clinical and procedural risk factors were collected prospectively. Risk-adjusted mortality, myocardial infarction, and revascularization rate differences (DES-BMS) were estimated through propensity score matching without replacement. A total of 11 556 patients were treated with DES, and 6237 were treated with BMS, with unadjusted 2-year mortality rates of 7.0% and 12.6%, respectively (P<0.0001). In 5549 DES patients matched to 5549 BMS patients, 2-year risk-adjusted mortality rates were 9.8% and 12.0%, respectively (P=0.0002), whereas the respective rates for myocardial infarction and target-vessel revascularization were 8.3% versus 10.3% (P=0.0005) and 11.0% versus 16.8% (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: DES treatment was associated with lower rates of mortality, myocardial infarction, and target-vessel revascularization than BMS treatment in similar patients in a matched population-based study. Comprehensive follow-up in this inclusive population is warranted to identify whether similar safety and efficacy remain beyond 2 years.
Authors: Sidney C Smith; Ted E Feldman; John W Hirshfeld; Alice K Jacobs; Morton J Kern; Spencer B King; Douglass A Morrison; William W O'neill; Hartzell V Schaff; Patrick L Whitlow; David O Williams; Elliott M Antman; Sidney C Smith; Cynthia D Adams; Jeffrey L Anderson; David P Faxon; Valentin Fuster; Jonathan L Halperin; Loren F Hiratzka; Sharon Ann Hunt; Alice K Jacobs; Rick Nishimura; Joseph P Ornato; Richard L Page; Barbara Riegel Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-01-03 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Laura Mauri; Wen-hua Hsieh; Joseph M Massaro; Kalon K L Ho; Ralph D'Agostino; Donald E Cutlip Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David M Shahian; Treacy Silverstein; Ann F Lovett; Robert E Wolf; Sharon-Lise T Normand Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-03-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Matthias Pfisterer; Hans Peter Brunner-La Rocca; Peter T Buser; Peter Rickenbacher; Patrick Hunziker; Christian Mueller; Raban Jeger; Franziska Bader; Stefan Osswald; Christoph Kaiser Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2006-11-02 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Eric L Eisenstein; Kevin J Anstrom; David F Kong; Linda K Shaw; Robert H Tuttle; Daniel B Mark; Judith M Kramer; Robert A Harrington; David B Matchar; David E Kandzari; Eric D Peterson; Kevin A Schulman; Robert M Califf Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-12-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Joost Daemen; Peter Wenaweser; Keiichi Tsuchida; Linda Abrecht; Sophia Vaina; Cyrill Morger; Neville Kukreja; Peter Jüni; Georgios Sianos; Gerrit Hellige; Ron T van Domburg; Otto M Hess; Eric Boersma; Bernhard Meier; Stephan Windecker; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Lancet Date: 2007-02-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Bo Lagerqvist; Stefan K James; Ulf Stenestrand; Johan Lindbäck; Tage Nilsson; Lars Wallentin Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Cindy L Grines; Robert O Bonow; Donald E Casey; Timothy J Gardner; Peter B Lockhart; David J Moliterno; Patrick O'Gara; Patrick Whitlow Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2007-02-13 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Jeffrey W Moses; Stephen G Ellis; Joachim Schofer; Keith D Dawkins; Marie-Claude Morice; Antonio Colombo; Erick Schampaert; Eberhard Grube; Ajay J Kirtane; Donald E Cutlip; Martin Fahy; Stuart J Pocock; Roxana Mehran; Martin B Leon Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ioannis Tentzeris; Rudolf Jarai; Serdar Farhan; Johann Wojta; Martin Schillinger; Alexander Geppert; Michael Nürnberg; Gerhard Unger; Kurt Huber Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2010-09-22 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Suresh R Mulukutla; Oscar C Marroquin; Helen A Vlachos; Faith Selzer; Catalin Toma; Kevin E Kip; J Dawn Abbott; Elizabeth Holper; Joon S Lee; Sameer Khandhar; Michael Kutcher; Sheryl Kelsey; Conrad Smith; David Faxon; David O Williams Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2012-12-01 Impact factor: 2.778