Clinical outcomes of serolimus-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients: a meta-analysis / 中华医学杂志(英文版)

ABSTRACT

<p><b>BACKGROUND</b>The benefits and safety of sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) have not been systematically quantified in different trials in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with primary or rescue percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). A meta-analysis of randomised trials comparing SES and bare-metal stent (BMS) was performed.</p><p><b>METHODS</b>A systematic literature search was conducted to identify all randomized clinical trials. The primary outcome was the rate of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs). The secondary outcomes included death, recurrent myocardial infarction, recurrent revascularization, and stent thrombosis.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Totally, 1973 STEMI patients were enrolled in seven eligible randomized trials comparing SES with BMS. The pooled rate of major adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (9.7% vs 20.3%, OR 2.45, 95% CI 1.88-3.19, P < 0.00001). No significant difference in all causes of death was found between the SES and BMS groups, as well as in the pooled recurrent myocardial infarction rates. The pooled recurrent revascularization rate was significantly lower in the SES group than in the BMS group (5.1% vs 14.8%, OR 3.30, 95% CI 2.37-4.60, P < 0.00001). No significant difference was found between the pooled rates of stent thrombosis (1.2% in the SES group and 2.0% in the BMS group, OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.79-3.26, P = 0.19).</p><p><b>CONCLUSIONS</b>SES is associated with a decreased risk of major adverse cardiac events compared with BMS by the greater reduction in repeat revascularization in STEMI patients. Larger trials with longer follow up are warranted to better define the role of SES in STEMI.</p>