Drug eluting stents versus bare metal stents in coronary artery disease patients: outcomes and complications

Background: To date, data regarding the long-term safety and efficacy of BMS and DES implantation in a real-world population are limited. Thus, this study was designed to study the complications, early and late outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare metal stents (BMS) after implantation in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients up to 6months follow-up period.Methods: This was a single-center, hospital-based, prospective study conducted at a tertiary care center in India. Records of 250 patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the period of January to December 2007 were included in the study. Early outcomes were indications of coronary angioplasty, length of hospital stay, Killip’s classification at presentation, type of coronary lesions, cath-lab outcomes and acute stent thrombosis (ST). Patients were clinically followed-up till hospital discharge, 30days and in 6months.Results: Total 250 patients with an age range of 30-39years underwent PCI. Of the study population who underwent PCI 111 patients (44.4%) received DES, 104 patients (8%) received BMS, 20 patients received both DES and BMS and 15 patients underwent POBA, respectively. Complications like stroke and major bleeding were observed in 2 patients (0.8%) and 12 patients (4.8%) respectively. TIMI III flow and ST was observed in 215 patients (91.5%) and 6 patients (2.6%), respectively. Death was observed in 3 patients (1.2%) due to cardiogenic shock.Conclusions: DES and BMS have good procedural success in achieving early revascularization with PCI. The incidence of ST was almost equal in DES compared to BMS.

Efficiency and safety of drug-eluting stents and bare metal stents in elderly coronary artery disease： Meta-analysis / 中国介入影像与治疗学

Objective To evaluate the efficiency and safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) and bare metal stents (BMS) in elderly with coronary artery disease (CAD).Methods PubMed,Embase,Cochrane Library,CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched before October 28,2017.The pertinent randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies (CS) were included.The outcomes were all-cause mortality (ACM),myocardial infarction (MI),target vessel revascularization (TVR),cardiac death (CD),stent thrombosis (ST) and bleeding.Relative risk (RR) with 95％ confidence interval (95％CI) was analyzed.Results A total of 17 studies with 10 813 patients were included.Overall and in CS group,there were significant lower risks of ACM (RR＝0.71,0.68,both P＜0.001),MI (RR＝0.66,P＜0.001;RR＝0.60,P＝0.008),TVR (RR＝0.50,0.54,both P＜0.001),CD (RR＝0.73,0.72,P＝0.003,0.020) and ST (RR＝0.68,0.59,P＝ 0.02,0.01) in DES patients compared with BMS patients,but the risk of bleeding was not significantly different (RR ＝ 1.00,1.00,P ＝ 0.96,0.97).In RCT group,DES (compared with BMS) was only associated with significantly lower risks of MI (RR＝0.68,P＝0.003) and TVR (RR＝0.43,P＜0.001),no difference was detected in other indexes.Conclusion DES is more efficacious and safer than BMS for elderly patients with CAD.

Long-term Outcomes of Drug-eluting versus Bare-metal stent for ST-elevation Myocardial Infarction / Resultados a Longo Prazo de Eluição de Fármaco versus Stent Metálico para Infarto do Miocárdio com Elevação ST

Background: Long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) remain uncertain. Objective: To investigate long-term outcomes of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Methods: We performed search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane library, and ISI Web of Science (until February 2013) for randomized trials comparing more than 12-month efficacy or safety of DES with BMS in patients with STEMI. Pooled estimate was presented with risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects model. Results: Ten trials with 7,592 participants with STEMI were included. The overall results showed that there was no significant difference in the incidence of all-cause death and definite/probable stent thrombosis between DES and BMS at long-term follow-up. Patients receiving DES implantation appeared to have a lower 1-year incidence of recurrent myocardial infarction than those receiving BMS (RR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.00, p= 0.05). Moreover, the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) after receiving DES was consistently lowered during long-term observation (all p< 0.01). In subgroup analysis, the use of everolimus-eluting stents (EES) was associated with reduced risk of stent thrombosis in STEMI patients (RR = 0.37, p=0.02). Conclusions: DES did not increase the risk of stent thrombosis in patients with STEMI compared with BMS. Moreover, the use of DES did lower long-term risk of repeat revascularization and might decrease the occurrence of reinfarction. .

Fundamento: Os resultados a longo prazo dos stents farmacológicos (SF) contra stents convencionais (SC) em pacientes com infarto do miocárdio com elevação do segmento ST (IMEST) permanecem incertos. Objetivo: Investigar os resultados a longo prazo dos stents farmacológicos (SF) contra stents convencionais (SC) em pacientes com infarto do miocárdio com elevação do segmento ST (IMEST) . Métodos: Foi realizada pesquisa de dados nas bases de dados MEDLINE, EMBASE, na Cochrane Library, e na ISI Web of Science (até fevereiro de 2013) para estudos clínicos aleatórios que comparam a eficácia durante mais de 12 meses ou a segurança do SF com SC em pacientes com IMEST. Foi apresentada uma estimativa agrupada com risco relativo (RR) e seu intervalo de confiança de 95 % (IC), utilizando modelo de efeitos aleatórios. Resultados: Dez estudos com 7.592 participantes com IMEST foram incluídos. Os resultados gerais mostraram que não houve diferença significativa na incidência de morte por todas as causas e trombose de stent definida/provável entre SF e SC em seguimento de longo prazo. Os pacientes que receberam implante de SF pareciam ter uma incidência de infarto do miocárdio recorrente inferior a1 ano que aqueles que receberam SC (RR = 0,75, 95% CI 0,56-1,00, p = 0,05). Além disso, o risco de revascularização do vaso alvo (RVA) depois de receber o SF diminui consistentemente durante a observação a longo prazo (todos p <0,01). Na análise de subgrupo, o uso de stents com eluição de everolimus (EEE) foi associado a um risco reduzido de trombose de stent em pacientes IMEST (RR = 0,37, p = 0,02). Conclusões: SF não aumentou o risco de trombose de stent em pacientes com IMEST em comparação com SC. Além disso, o uso de SF fez baixar o risco de longo prazo de repetição ...

Cost-Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting vs. Bare-Metal Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease from the Korean National Health Insurance Database

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the use of drug-eluting stents (DESs), as compared with bare-metal stents (BMSs) in Korea. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted between January 2000 and December 2007. Subjects were stent-treated for the first time between 2004 and 2005, with four years of follow-up (2004-2007) (n=43674). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was used to calculate the costs of DESs compared with BMSs among patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Cost-effectiveness was assessed with effectiveness defined as a reduction in major adverse cardiac events after six months and after one, two, three, and four years. RESULTS: The total costs of a DESs were 674108 Korean won (KRW) higher than that of a BMSs at the end of the follow-up; 13635 thousand KRW per patient treated with DESs and 12960 thousand KRW per patient treated with BMSs. The ICER was 256315 per KRW/death avoided and 293090 per KRW/re-stenting avoided among the CAD patients at the end of the follow-up. CONCLUSION: The ICER for the high-risk patients was lower than that for the low-risk patients. The use of DESs is clinically more useful than the use of BMSs for CAD and myocardial infarction patients, especially for those considered to be high-risk patients in Korea.

Seven-Year Clinical Outcomes of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Bare-Metal Stent: A Matched Analysis From A Real World, Single Center Registry

The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes for seven years, between sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS). During the BMS and drug-eluting stent (DES) transition period (from April 2002 to April 2004), 434 consecutive patients with 482 lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, using BMS or SES. Using propensity score matching, 186 patients with BMS and 166 patients with SES were selected. Seven year clinical outcomes of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), such as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR), and angiographic definite stent thrombosis (ST) were compared. At one-year follow up, patients with SES showed significantly lower MACE (9.1% in BMS vs 3.0% in SES, P = 0.024). However, cumulative MACE for 7 yr was not significantly different between two groups (24.7% in BMS vs 17.4% in SES, P = 0.155). There was no significant difference in MI, TVR, death and ST. The TVR were gradually increased from 1 to 7 yr in SES, on the contrary to that of BMS. In conclusion, although SES showed better clinical outcomes in the early period after implantation, it did not show significant benefits in the long-term follow up, compared with that of BMS.

Controversies in the use & implementation of drug-eluting stent technology.

The introduction of drug eluting stents has resulted in dramatic reductions in the rates of restenosis and the need for repeat revascularization. In the last several years, concern has been raised regarding the long-term safety of this technology, particularly in the area of late restenosis and stent thrombosis. The development of newer anti-restenotic drug coatings, biodegradable polymers and even completely bioabsorbable stents offer the potential to address these limitations. Additional questions that have recently come to the forefront include the optimal duration of dual antiplatelet therapy, the use of platelet reactivity assays and genetic testing and drug eluting stent use in the treatment of acute myocardial infarction. This article will attempt to address these and other areas of controversy in the use and implementation of drug eluting stents.

Is There a Benefit of Drug-Eluting Stents Rather than Bare Metal Stents in Large Coronary Artery Lesions? / 대한내과학회지

Drug-eluting stents (DES) are widely used rather than bare metal stents (BMS) in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) because DES have been shown to dramatically reduce restenosis and improve the rate of event free survival. Many clinical trials have been shown the advantages of DES over BMS in subset of small coronary artery diseases. There are, however, conflicting reports on the advantages of DES over BMS for larger coronary artery lesions. In this issue of the journal, Kim et al investigated the clinical outcomes between DES and BMS in large coronary artery diseases. In future, additional large, randomized, controlled, muticenter trials with new generation DES and intravascular ultrasound-guided PCI will be needed to define the clear role of DES on large coronary artery lesions.