The Journal of invasive cardiology · 2011
Comparison of six-year clinical outcome of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents to bare-metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: an analysis of the RESEARCH (rapamycin-eluting stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) and T-SEARCH (taxus stent evaluated at Rotterdam cardiology hospital) registries.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Simsek Cihan, Magro Michael, Boersma Eric, Onuma Yoshinobu, Nauta Sjoerd, Daemen Joost, Gaspersz Marcia, van Geuns Robert-Jan, van der Giessen Willem, van Domburg Ron, Serruys Patrick
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Short- and long-term data showed that drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly decreased target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). However, conflicting long-term data remain for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI).
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of all patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for a de novo lesion with exclusive use of BMS, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES).
METHODS: Three PPCI cohorts (BMS = 80; SES = 92; PES = 162) were systematically followed for the occurrence of MACE.
RESULTS: Very late stent thrombosis was more common after the implantation of SES as compared to PES or BMS (7.6%, 0.6%, and 0.0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicate no statistically significant difference for mortality between the three stent types at 6 years (BMS = 25%; SES = 15%; PES = 21%; Log-rank p = 0.2). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, mortality, mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), and MACE rates were significantly lower for SES compared to BMS, but not for PES (aHR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.98; aHR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.96; aHR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, respectively). No differences were observed between the three stent types for TVR rates.
CONCLUSION: Neither SES nor PES improved safety or efficacy as compared to BMS in a STEMI population at 6 years. After adjusting, the usage of SES resulted in a significant decrease in mortality, mortality/MI and MACE rates as compared to BMS, in contrast to the usage of PES. SES and PES have a similar effectiveness and safety profile, although very late stent thrombosis was more common with SES.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of all patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for a de novo lesion with exclusive use of BMS, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES).
METHODS: Three PPCI cohorts (BMS = 80; SES = 92; PES = 162) were systematically followed for the occurrence of MACE.
RESULTS: Very late stent thrombosis was more common after the implantation of SES as compared to PES or BMS (7.6%, 0.6%, and 0.0%, respectively; p = 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicate no statistically significant difference for mortality between the three stent types at 6 years (BMS = 25%; SES = 15%; PES = 21%; Log-rank p = 0.2). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, mortality, mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), and MACE rates were significantly lower for SES compared to BMS, but not for PES (aHR = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.98; aHR = 0.44, 95% CI: 0.21-0.96; aHR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, respectively). No differences were observed between the three stent types for TVR rates.
CONCLUSION: Neither SES nor PES improved safety or efficacy as compared to BMS in a STEMI population at 6 years. After adjusting, the usage of SES resulted in a significant decrease in mortality, mortality/MI and MACE rates as compared to BMS, in contrast to the usage of PES. SES and PES have a similar effectiveness and safety profile, although very late stent thrombosis was more common with SES.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedAngioplasty, Balloon, CoronaryCoronary RestenosisCoronary ThrombosisDrug-Eluting StentsElectrocardiographyFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIncidenceKaplan-Meier EstimateLongitudinal StudiesMaleMetalsMiddle AgedMyocardial InfarctionNetherlandsPaclitaxelRegistriesRegression AnalysisRetrospective StudiesSirolimusStentsTreatment Outcome