Drug-Eluting Stents Compared With Bare Metal Stents for Stenting the Ductus Arteriosus in Infants With Ductal-Dependent Pulmonary Blood Flow.

There have been no clinical studies evaluating the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) for infants who underwent ductus arteriosus (DA) stent placement for ductal-dependent pulmonary blood flow (PBF). We aimed to compare the use of second-generation (fluoropolymer-coated everolimus) DES to BMS in infants who underwent DA stenting for ductal-dependent PBF. A retrospective study of infants who underwent DA stenting for ductal-dependent PBF from January 2004 to March 2018 at a single tertiary care pediatric hospital was performed. Of 94 infants identified, 71 (46 BMS and 25 DES) met inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics of the DES and BMS cohorts were comparable. The patent lumen to stent diameter on subsequent angiographic evaluation was 81% in DES as compared with 50% in BMS group; p = 0.01. There were 2 deaths early in our experience, both in the BMS group. Unplanned reinterventions were less in the DES group (3, 12% patients) compared with the BMS group (13, 28%), p = 0.03. Pulmonary artery size as assessed using Nakata and pulmonary artery symmetry index was comparable in both the groups. There was no difference in infection rates between the groups. On multivariate analysis, prematurity, BMS, and lower oxygen saturations at discharge were associated with subsequent unplanned reintervention (p = 0.01, 0.03 and 0.03, respectively). In conclusion, our clinical experience suggests that in infants who underwent DA stenting for ductal-dependent PBF, (fluoropolymer-coated everolimus eluting) DES results in less luminal loss and lower unplanned reintervention for cyanosis as compared with BMS implantation.