American Journal of Cardiology
Volume 109, Issue 7 , Pages 932-940, 1 April 2012

Meta-Analysis of Long-Term Outcomes for Drug-Eluting Stents Versus Bare-Metal Stents in Primary Percutaneous Coronary Interventions for ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

  • Eric L. Wallace, DO

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
  • ,
  • Ahmed Abdel-Latif, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
  • ,
  • Richard Charnigo, PhD

      Affiliations

    • School of Public Health, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
  • ,
  • David J. Moliterno, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
  • ,
  • Bruce Brodie, MD

      Affiliations

    • LeBauer Cardiovascular Research Foundation, Greensboro, North Carolina
  • ,
  • Rahul Matnani, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
  • ,
  • Khaled M. Ziada, MD

      Affiliations

    • Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Gill Heart Institute, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author: Tel: 859-323-6195; fax: 859-323-6475

Received 23 September 2011; received in revised form 23 November 2011; accepted 23 November 2011. published online 05 January 2012.

The use of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) has shown early benefit over bare-metal stents (BMSs) in decreasing adverse cardiac events. However, there are concerns regarding the increased risk of late and very late stent thrombosis (ST) after DES use. With the paucity of ST events individual trials may have been underpowered to detect significant differences. We sought to perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the available literature examining the outcomes of DESs and BMSs in PPCI after ≥3 years of follow-up. We analyzed 8 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 5 observational studies comparing DESs to BMSs in PPCI. Clinical end-point data were analyzed for RCTs and observational studies separately using random-effect models. RCTs included 5,797 patients in whom first-generation DESs (sirolimus- or paclitaxel-eluting stents) were compared to BMS control arms. Patients receiving DESs had a significantly lower risk of target lesion revascularization (odds ratio [OR] 0.48, confidence interval [CI] 0.37 to 0.61), target vessel revascularization (OR 0.53, CI 0.42 to 0.66), and accordingly major adverse cardiac events (OR 0.69; CI 0.56 to 0.84). Incidence of ST was not different between groups (OR 1.02, CI 0.76 to 1.37). There was no significant difference in mortality (OR 0.88, CI 0.68 to 1.12) or recurrent myocardial infarction (OR 0.97; CI 0.61 to 1.54). Among observational studies (n = 4,650) fewer studies reported on target lesion revascularization and target vessel revascularization, but the trend remained in favor of DESs. A small but statistically significant increase in ST was noted with DES use (OR 1.62, CI 1.18 to 2.21) at ≥3 years of follow up, without evidence of recurrent myocardial infarction. Those receiving DESs had a significantly lower mortality compared to those receiving BMSs (OR, 0.65, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.80, p <0.001). In conclusion, this meta-analysis of RCTs examining the long-term outcomes of first-generation DESs versus BMSs in PPCI, DES use resulted in decreased repeat revascularization with no increase in ST, mortality, or recurrent myocardial infarction.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0002-9149(11)03437-0

doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2011.11.021

American Journal of Cardiology
Volume 109, Issue 7 , Pages 932-940, 1 April 2012