BACKGROUND: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains an "off label" indication due to concerns regarding their performance in this patient subset. METHODS: We searched Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Internet-based sources of information on clinical trials in cardiology for randomized trials comparing drug-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in patients with AMI. Hazard ratios for the composite of death or recurrent myocardial infarction, (primary safety endpoint), reintervention (primary efficacy endpoint), death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were calculated performing a meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials with 7,781 patients. RESULTS: There was no difference in the hazard of death or recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.91; [95% CI 0.75-1.09]) between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. Treatment with drug-eluting stents resulted in a significant reduction in the hazard of reintervention (0.41 [95% CI 0.32-0.52]). The hazards of death (0.90 [95% CI 0.71-1.15]), myocardial infarction (0.81 [95% CI 0.63-1.04]), and stent thrombosis (0.84 [95% CI 0.61-1.17]) were not significantly different between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. CONCLUSIONS: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with AMI is safe and markedly reduces the need for reintervention as compared to bare-metal stents.
BACKGROUND: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) remains an "off label" indication due to concerns regarding their performance in this patient subset. METHODS: We searched Medline, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Internet-based sources of information on clinical trials in cardiology for randomized trials comparing drug-eluting stents with bare-metal stents in patients with AMI. Hazard ratios for the composite of death or recurrent myocardial infarction, (primary safety endpoint), reintervention (primary efficacy endpoint), death, recurrent myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis were calculated performing a meta-analysis of 14 randomized trials with 7,781 patients. RESULTS: There was no difference in the hazard of death or recurrent myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.91; [95% CI 0.75-1.09]) between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. Treatment with drug-eluting stents resulted in a significant reduction in the hazard of reintervention (0.41 [95% CI 0.32-0.52]). The hazards of death (0.90 [95% CI 0.71-1.15]), myocardial infarction (0.81 [95% CI 0.63-1.04]), and stent thrombosis (0.84 [95% CI 0.61-1.17]) were not significantly different between patients treated with drug-eluting stents versus patients treated with bare-metal stents. CONCLUSIONS: Use of drug-eluting stents in patients with AMI is safe and markedly reduces the need for reintervention as compared to bare-metal stents.
Authors: Christian Spaulding; Patrick Henry; Emmanuel Teiger; Kevin Beatt; Ezio Bramucci; Didier Carrié; Michel S Slama; Bela Merkely; Andrejs Erglis; Massimo Margheri; Olivier Varenne; Ana Cebrian; Hans-Peter Stoll; David B Snead; Christoph Bode Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gerrit J Laarman; Maarten J Suttorp; Maurits T Dirksen; Loek van Heerebeek; Ferdinand Kiemeneij; Ton Slagboom; L Ron van der Wieken; Jan G P Tijssen; Benno J Rensing; Mark Patterson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-09-14 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Adnan Kastrati; Julinda Mehilli; Jürgen Pache; Christoph Kaiser; Marco Valgimigli; Henning Kelbaek; Maurizio Menichelli; Manel Sabaté; Maarten J Suttorp; Dietrich Baumgart; Melchior Seyfarth; Matthias E Pfisterer; Albert Schömig Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-02-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Bas L van der Hoeven; Su-San Liem; J Wouter Jukema; Navin Suraphakdee; Hein Putter; Jouke Dijkstra; Douwe E Atsma; Marianne Bootsma; Katja Zeppenfeld; Pranobe V Oemrawsingh; Ernst E van der Wall; Martin J Schalij Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Ibrahim Akin; Marcus Wiemer; Steffen Schneider; Jochen Senges; Matthias Hochadel; Gert Richardt; Mohamed Abdel-Wahab; Karl-Heinz Kuck; Christoph A Nienaber Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2011-11-13 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Artur Dziewierz; Zbigniew Siudak; Tomasz Rakowski; Ralf Birkemeyer; Waldemar Mielecki; Paweł Ranosz; Jacek S Dubiel; Dariusz Dudek Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2010-09-18 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Antoinette de Waha; Salvatore Cassese; Duk-Woo Park; Francesco Burzotta; Robert A Byrne; Tomohisa Tada; Lamin A King; Seung-Jung Park; Albert Schömig; Adnan Kastrati Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2012-03-16 Impact factor: 5.460
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: Tobias Härle; Uwe Zeymer; Arne Kristian Schwarz; Claus Lüers; Matthias Hochadel; Harald Darius; Wolfgang Kasper; Karl Eugen Hauptmann; Dietrich Andresen; Albrecht Elsässer Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-01-17 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Giuseppe De Luca; Maurits T Dirksen; Henning Kelbæk; Leif Thuesen; Marteen A Vink; Christoph Kaiser; Tania Chechi; Gaia Spaziani; Emilio Di Lorenzo; Harry Suryapranata; Gregg W Stone Journal: J Thromb Thrombolysis Date: 2015-01 Impact factor: 2.300