The Unrestricted Use of Sirolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents Results in Better Clinical Outcomes During 6-Year Follow-Up Than Bare-Metal Stents — Cihan Şimşek (2010) | RDL Network
The Unrestricted Use of Sirolimus- and Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents Results in Better Clinical Outcomes During 6-Year Follow-Up Than Bare-Metal Stents
КАРДИОЛОГИЯ УЗБЕКИСТАНА 3(10): 1051-1058
Article 2010 English
Authors
CŞ
Cihan Şimşek
MM
Michael Magro
EB
Eric Boersma
Abstract
1 min read
Objectives
The aim of this study was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome after unrestricted use of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) or paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) as compared with bare-metal stents (BMS) in consecutive de novo patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).
Background
SES and PES have been shown to significantly decrease target vessel revascularization (TVR) rates compared with BMS in “real-world” registries. However, possible higher rates of very-late stent thrombosis and a restenosis “catch-up” trend might jeopardize the benefit.
Methods
Three PCI cohorts, each with exclusive use of 1 stent type (BMS = 450; SES = 508; PES = 576), were systematically followed for the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE).
Results
Very-late stent thrombosis was more common in SES and PES patients than BMS patients (2.4% vs. 0.9% vs. 0.4%, respectively; p = 0.02); however, there were no significant differences between the stent types for all-cause mortality and all-cause mortality/myocardial infarction at 6-year follow-up. Sixty-nine SES patients (Kaplan-Meier estimate 14%) and 72 PES patients (14%) had a TVR, as compared with 79 BMS patients (18%; log-rank p = 0.02), which maintained significance after adjustment for (potential) confounders. Multivariate analysis showed that DES implantation is associated with lower incidence of TVR and MACE than BMS implantation (hazard ratio: 0.65, 95% confidence interval: 0.49 to 0.86; p = 0.003; hazard ratio: 0.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.65 to 0.97; p = 0.02, respectively). Incidence of MACE was also lower in SES and PES patients (30% and 30%, respectively) than in BMS patients (34%); however, significance was borderline.
Conclusions
The unrestricted use of both DES resulted in a sustained advantage in decreasing TVR and, to a lesser extent, MACE compared with BMS at 6 years. The SES and PES are equally safe and effective in the treatment of coronary lesions.
Cihan Şimşek, Michael Magro, Eric Boersma, Yoshinobu Onuma, Sjoerd T. Nauta, Gideon Valstar, Robert‐Jan van Geuns, Willem van der Giessen, Ron van Domburg, Patrick W. Serruys
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.