Mahesh V Madhavan1,2, James P Howard3, Azim Naqvi2, Ori Ben-Yehuda2, Bjorn Redfors2,4, Megha Prasad1, Bahira Shahim2, Martin B Leon1,2, Sripal Bangalore5, Gregg W Stone2,6, Yousif Ahmad7. 1. Columbia University Irving Medical Center, NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 2. Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, NY, USA. 3. National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, UK. 4. Department of Cardiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden. 5. New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 6. The Zena and Michael A. Wiener Cardiovascular Institute, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA. 7. Smidt Heart Institute, Cedars Sinai Medical Center, San Vicente Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: Contemporary 2nd-generation thin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A previous meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 11 658 patients demonstrated a 16% reduction in the 1-year risk of target lesion failure (TLF) with ultrathin-strut DES compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. Whether this benefit is sustained longer term is not known, and newer trial data may inform these relative outcomes. We therefore sought to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing clinical outcomes with ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 µm strut thickness) with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing ultrathin-strut DES to conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. The pre-specified primary endpoint was long-term TLF, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death. There were 16 eligible trials in which 20 701 patients were randomized. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 2.5 years. Ultrathin-strut DES were associated with a 15% reduction in long-term TLF compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES [relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.96, P = 0.008] driven by a 25% reduction in CD-TLR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences between stent types in the risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, ultrathin-strut DES reduced the risk of TLF, driven by less CD-TLR compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES, with similar risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
AIMS: Contemporary 2nd-generation thin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) are considered standard of care for revascularization of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. A previous meta-analysis of 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with 11 658 patients demonstrated a 16% reduction in the 1-year risk of target lesion failure (TLF) with ultrathin-strut DES compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. Whether this benefit is sustained longer term is not known, and newer trial data may inform these relative outcomes. We therefore sought to perform an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs comparing clinical outcomes with ultrathin-strut DES (≤70 µm strut thickness) with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. METHODS AND RESULTS: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis of all RCTs comparing ultrathin-strut DES to conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES. The pre-specified primary endpoint was long-term TLF, a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), or clinically driven target lesion revascularization (CD-TLR). Secondary endpoints included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death. There were 16 eligible trials in which 20 701 patients were randomized. The weighted mean follow-up duration was 2.5 years. Ultrathin-strut DES were associated with a 15% reduction in long-term TLF compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES [relative risk (RR) 0.85, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.76-0.96, P = 0.008] driven by a 25% reduction in CD-TLR (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.62-0.92, P = 0.005). There were no significant differences between stent types in the risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, or all-cause mortality. CONCLUSIONS: At a mean follow-up of 2.5 years, ultrathin-strut DES reduced the risk of TLF, driven by less CD-TLR compared with conventional 2nd-generation thin-strut DES, with similar risks of MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality. Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.
Authors: Thomas Pilgrim; Olivier Muller; Dik Heg; Marco Roffi; David J Kurz; Igal Moarof; Daniel Weilenmann; Christoph Kaiser; Maxime Tapponnier; Sylvain Losdat; Eric Eeckhout; Marco Valgimigli; Peter Jüni; Stephan Windecker; Juan F Iglesias Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2021-03-22 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Donald E Cutlip; Stephan Windecker; Roxana Mehran; Ashley Boam; David J Cohen; Gerrit-Anne van Es; P Gabriel Steg; Marie-angèle Morel; Laura Mauri; Pascal Vranckx; Eugene McFadden; Alexandra Lansky; Martial Hamon; Mitchell W Krucoff; Patrick W Serruys Journal: Circulation Date: 2007-05-01 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rosaly A Buiten; Eline H Ploumen; Paolo Zocca; Carine J M Doggen; Peter W Danse; Carl E Schotborgh; Martijn Scholte; K Gert van Houwelingen; Martin G Stoel; Marc Hartmann; R Melvyn Tjon Joe Gin; Samer Somi; Gerard C M Linssen; Marlies M Kok; Clemens von Birgelen Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-08-14 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: William Wijns; Mathias Vrolix; Stefan Verheye; Danny Schoors; Ton Slagboom; Marcel Gosselink; Edouard Benit; David Kandzari; Dennis Donohoe; John A Ormiston Journal: EuroIntervention Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 6.534
Authors: A Kastrati; J Mehilli; J Dirschinger; F Dotzer; H Schühlen; F J Neumann; M Fleckenstein; C Pfafferott; M Seyfarth; A Schömig Journal: Circulation Date: 2001-06-12 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Rosaly A Buiten; Eline H Ploumen; Paolo Zocca; Carine J M Doggen; Gillian A J Jessurun; Carl E Schotborgh; Ariel Roguin; Peter W Danse; Edouard Benit; Adel Aminian; K Gert van Houwelingen; Alexander R Schramm; Martin G Stoel; Samer Somi; Marc Hartmann; Gerard C M Linssen; Clemens von Birgelen Journal: JACC Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2020-05-11 Impact factor: 11.195
Authors: Mahesh V Madhavan; Ajay J Kirtane; Björn Redfors; Philippe Généreux; Ori Ben-Yehuda; Tullio Palmerini; Umberto Benedetto; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Pieter C Smits; Clemens von Birgelen; Roxana Mehran; Thomas McAndrew; Patrick W Serruys; Martin B Leon; Stuart J Pocock; Gregg W Stone Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2020-02-18 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Thomas Pilgrim; Raffaele Piccolo; Dik Heg; Marco Roffi; David Tüller; Olivier Muller; Igal Moarof; George C M Siontis; Stéphane Cook; Daniel Weilenmann; Christoph Kaiser; Florim Cuculi; Lukas Hunziker; Franz R Eberli; Peter Jüni; Stephan Windecker Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-08-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Gregg W Stone; Takeshi Kimura; Runlin Gao; Dean J Kereiakes; Stephen G Ellis; Yoshinobu Onuma; Bernard Chevalier; Charles Simonton; Ovidiu Dressler; Aaron Crowley; Ziad A Ali; Patrick W Serruys Journal: JAMA Cardiol Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 14.676
Authors: Rafael Romaguera; Pablo Salinas; Josep Gomez-Lara; Salvatore Brugaletta; Antonio Gómez-Menchero; Miguel A Romero; Sergio García-Blas; Raymundo Ocaranza; Pascual Bordes; Marcelo Jiménez Kockar; Neus Salvatella; Victor A Jiménez-Díaz; Mar Alameda; Ramiro Trillo; Dae Hyun Lee; Pedro Martín; María López-Benito; Alfonso Freites; Virginia Pascual-Tejerina; Felipe Hernández-Hernández; Bruno García Del Blanco; Mohsen Mohandes; Francisco Bosa; Eduardo Pinar; Gerard Roura; Josep Comin-Colet; Antonio Fernández-Ortiz; Carlos Macaya; Xavier Rossello; Manel Sabate; Stuart J Pocock; Joan A Gómez-Hospital Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2022-03-31 Impact factor: 29.983