BACKGROUND: Observational studies from the USA have demonstrated that off-label use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is common. Data on off-label use in Western Europe are limited. METHODS: We analyzed the data of consecutive patients receiving DES prospectively enrolled in the multicenter German DES.DE registry (Deutsches Drug-Eluting Stent Register) between October 2005 and October 2006. Off-label use was defined in the presence of one of the following criteria: ST-elevation myocardial infarction, in-stent stenosis, chronic total occlusion, lesions in a bypass graft, in bifurcation or left main stem, stent length per lesion ≥32 mm, and vessel diameter <2.5 or >3.5 mm. RESULTS: Overall, 4,295 patients were included in this analysis and divided into two groups: 2,366 (55.1%) received DES for off-label and 1,929 (44.9%) for on-label indications. There were substantial differences in the rates of off-label use at the participating hospitals. Patients with off-label DES more often presented with high-risk features such as acute coronary syndrome, cardiogenic shock, congestive heart failure, and more complex coronary anatomy. Among hospital survivors, the incidence of the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction and stroke (MACCE) (9.2 vs. 7.4%, p < 0.05), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (11.3 vs. 9.1%, p < 0.05) was increased in the off-label group at the 1-year follow-up. However, in the multivariate analysis off-label use was not linked with an elevated risk for MACCE (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.18) and TVR (hazard ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.42). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, DES was very frequently used off-label. After adjustment for confounding variables, off-label use was not associated with an increase of adverse events.
BACKGROUND: Observational studies from the USA have demonstrated that off-label use of drug-eluting stents (DES) is common. Data on off-label use in Western Europe are limited. METHODS: We analyzed the data of consecutive patients receiving DES prospectively enrolled in the multicenter German DES.DE registry (Deutsches Drug-Eluting Stent Register) between October 2005 and October 2006. Off-label use was defined in the presence of one of the following criteria: ST-elevation myocardial infarction, in-stent stenosis, chronic total occlusion, lesions in a bypass graft, in bifurcation or left main stem, stent length per lesion ≥32 mm, and vessel diameter <2.5 or >3.5 mm. RESULTS: Overall, 4,295 patients were included in this analysis and divided into two groups: 2,366 (55.1%) received DES for off-label and 1,929 (44.9%) for on-label indications. There were substantial differences in the rates of off-label use at the participating hospitals. Patients with off-label DES more often presented with high-risk features such as acute coronary syndrome, cardiogenic shock, congestive heart failure, and more complex coronary anatomy. Among hospital survivors, the incidence of the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction and stroke (MACCE) (9.2 vs. 7.4%, p < 0.05), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) (11.3 vs. 9.1%, p < 0.05) was increased in the off-label group at the 1-year follow-up. However, in the multivariate analysis off-label use was not linked with an elevated risk for MACCE (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.62-1.18) and TVR (hazard ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 0.78-1.42). CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, DES was very frequently used off-label. After adjustment for confounding variables, off-label use was not associated with an increase of adverse events.
Authors: Jörg Carlsson; Stefan K James; Johan Lindbäck; Fredrik Scherstén; Tage Nilsson; Ulf Stenestrand; Bo Lagerqvist Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2009-04-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Anthony A Bavry; Dharam J Kumbhani; Thomas J Helton; Przemyslaw P Borek; Girish R Mood; Deepak L Bhatt Journal: Am J Med Date: 2006-12 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Htut K Win; Angel E Caldera; Kelly Maresh; John Lopez; Charanjit S Rihal; Manish A Parikh; Juan F Granada; Sachin Marulkar; Deborah Nassif; David J Cohen; Neal S Kleiman Journal: JAMA Date: 2007-05-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Probal Roy; Ashesh N Buch; Aamir Javaid; Teruo Okabe; Vikram Raya; Tina L Pinto Slottow; Daniel H Steinberg; Kimberly Smith; Zhenyi Xue; Natalie Gevorkian; Lowell F Satler; Kenneth M Kent; William O Suddath; Augusto D Pichard; Joseph Lindsay; Ron Waksman Journal: Am J Cardiol Date: 2007-12-21 Impact factor: 2.778
Authors: Sigmund Silber; Per Albertsson; Francisco F Avilés; Paolo G Camici; Antonio Colombo; Christian Hamm; Erik Jørgensen; Jean Marco; Jan-Erik Nordrehaug; Witold Ruzyllo; Philip Urban; Gregg W Stone; William Wijns Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 29.983
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: I Akin; C A Nienaber; G Richardt; R Tölg; M Hochadel; S Schneider; J Senges; U Tebbe; U Zeymer; G Sabin; K-H Kuck; M W Bergmann Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2014-01-28 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Aydin Huseynov; Stefan Baumann; Holger Nef; Thomas Riemer; Steffen Schneider; Thomas Pfannenbecker; Stephan Achenbach; Julinda Mehilli; Thomas Münzel; Tommaso Gori; Jochen Wöhrle; Ralf Zahn; Johannes Kastner; Axel Schmermund; Gert Richardt; Christian W Hamm; Ibrahim Akin Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2019-06-29 Impact factor: 5.460