Literature DB >> 22586281

Short- and long-term outcomes with drug-eluting and bare-metal coronary stents: a mixed-treatment comparison analysis of 117 762 patient-years of follow-up from randomized trials.

Sripal Bangalore1, Sunil Kumar, Mario Fusaro, Nicholas Amoroso, Michael J Attubato, Frederick Feit, Deepak L Bhatt, James Slater.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have been in clinical use for nearly a decade; however, the relative short- and long-term efficacy and safety of DES compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) and among the DES types are less well defined. METHODS AND
RESULTS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized clinical trials, until March 2012, that compared any of the Food and Drug Administration-approved durable stent and polymer DES (sirolimus-eluting stent [SES], paclitaxel-eluting stent [PES], everolimus-eluting stent [EES], zotarolimus-eluting stent [ZES], and ZES-Resolute [ZES-R]) with each other or against BMS for de novo coronary lesions, enrolling at least 100 patients and with follow-up of at least 6 months. Short-term (≤ 1 year) and long-term efficacy (target-vessel revascularization, target-lesion revascularization) and safety (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis) outcomes were evaluated and trial-level data pooled by both mixed-treatment comparison and direct comparison analyses. From 76 randomized clinical trials with 117 762 patient-years of follow-up, compared with BMS, each DES reduced long-term target-vessel revascularization (39%-61%), but the magnitude varied by DES type (EES~SES~ZES-R>PES~ZES>BMS), with a >42% probability that EES had the lowest target-vessel revascularization rate. There was no increase in the risk of any long-term safety outcomes, including stent thrombosis, with any DES (versus BMS). In addition, there was reduction in myocardial infarction (all DES except PES versus BMS) and stent thrombosis (with EES versus BMS: Rate ratio, 0.51; 95% credibility interval, 0.35-0.73). The safest DES appeared to be EES (>86% probability), with reduction in myocardial infarction and stent thrombosis compared with BMS. Short-term outcomes were similar to long-term outcomes, with SES, ZES-R, and everolimus-eluting stent being the most efficacious and EES being the safest stent.
CONCLUSIONS: DES are highly efficacious at reducing the risk of target-vessel revascularization without an increase in any safety outcomes, including stent thrombosis. However, among the DES types, there were considerable differences, such that EES, SES, and ZES-R were the most efficacious and EES was the safest stent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22586281     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.112.097014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circulation        ISSN: 0009-7322            Impact factor:   29.690


  105 in total

1.  Cost-effectiveness modelling of percutaneous coronary interventions in stable coronary artery disease.

Authors:  Ariel Beresniak; Thibaut Caruba; Brigitte Sabatier; Yves Juillière; Olivier Dubourg; Nicolas Danchin
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2015-10-26

2.  In-stent restenosis: local drug delivery with a stent or balloon?

Authors:  Matias B Yudi; Ron Waksman; Andrew E Ajani
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Time for science to catch up with clinical practice?

Authors:  Sara Ariotti; Giuseppe Gargiulo; Stephan Windecker; Marco Valgimigli
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 2.895

4.  TLR3 and TLR4 as potential clinical biomarkers for in-stent restenosis in drug-eluting stents patients.

Authors:  Shao Liang; Ma Aiqun; Li Jiwu; Zhang Ping
Journal:  Immunol Res       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 2.829

5.  Three-year efficacy and safety of new- versus early-generation drug-eluting stents for unprotected left main coronary artery disease insights from the ISAR-LEFT MAIN and ISAR-LEFT MAIN 2 trials.

Authors:  Salvatore Cassese; Sebastian Kufner; Erion Xhepa; Robert A Byrne; Johanna Kreutzer; Tareq Ibrahim; Klaus Tiroch; Marco Valgimigli; Ralph Tölg; Massimiliano Fusaro; Heribert Schunkert; Karl-Ludwig Laugwitz; Julinda Mehilli; Adnan Kastrati
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2015-12-22       Impact factor: 5.460

6.  Coronary stenting: A matter of revascularization.

Authors:  Aldo Bonaventura; Fabrizio Montecucco; Luca Liberale
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2017-03-26

7.  Percutaneous coronary intervention, a historical perspective looking to the future.

Authors:  Johan Bennett; Christophe Dubois
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.895

Review 8.  Stenting in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Intervention for Acute ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction.

Authors:  Sanjog Kalra; Hemal Bhatt; Ajay J Kirtane
Journal:  Methodist Debakey Cardiovasc J       Date:  2018 Jan-Mar

Review 9.  Effect of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention on Survival in Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease.

Authors:  Francisco Ujueta; Ephraim N Weiss; Binita Shah; Steven P Sedlis
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 2.931

10.  Antiplatelet therapy: Defining the optimal duration of DAPT after PCI with DES.

Authors:  Alon Eisen; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2015-06-09       Impact factor: 32.419

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.