MedElevator
Войти в исследования International journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026
Outcomes of durable versus biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Skos Christof, Rogozarski Jovan, Dizdarevic Al Medina, M Steiner-Gager Gloria, Postula Marek, Eyileten Ceren, Toma Aurel, Speidl Walter S, Skoro-Sajer Nika, Gerges Christian, Lang Irene M, Siller-Matula Jolanta M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) is among the most common cardiovascular procedures, but stents still pose risks of restenosis or thrombosis. Drug-eluting stents (DES) with polymer coatings have improved long-term outcomes.
AIM: This study evaluated whether the latest biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) offer improved safety over durable polymer DES (DP-DES).
METHODS: Data were collected from a single-centre registry at the Medical University of Vienna, including patients who underwent PCI between 2015 and 2020. Patients were categorized by stent type and PCI indication (All Comer, CCS-PCI, ACS-PCI). The primary endpoint comprised of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death.
RESULTS: 2118 patients were eligible for further analysis. 1232 patients (58.2%) received a DP-DES. In the all-comer cohort, 5-year MACE rates were 12% for BP-DES vs 14.5% for DP-DES. Multivariate analysis showed no significant difference in MACE for the use of BP-DES (OR 0.941, 95% CI 0.734-1.207, p = 0.631). However, TLR rates were significantly lower in patients treated with BP-DES (3.4% vs 6.8%, OR 0.567, 95% CI 0.372-0.865, p = 0.008), mainly driven by lower rates of TLR within the ACS PCI cohort (1.5% vs 4.9%, OR 0.364, 95% CI 0.158-0.841, p = 0.018). In CCS PCI patients, MACE and TLR rates demonstrated no significant differences.
CONCLUSION: BP-DES and DP-DES show a similar long-term safety profile regarding MACE. BP-DES demonstrate a lower risk of TLR in the all-comer cohort, driven by reduced rates in ACS-PCI patients.
AIM: This study evaluated whether the latest biodegradable polymer DES (BP-DES) offer improved safety over durable polymer DES (DP-DES).
METHODS: Data were collected from a single-centre registry at the Medical University of Vienna, including patients who underwent PCI between 2015 and 2020. Patients were categorized by stent type and PCI indication (All Comer, CCS-PCI, ACS-PCI). The primary endpoint comprised of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), including target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death.
RESULTS: 2118 patients were eligible for further analysis. 1232 patients (58.2%) received a DP-DES. In the all-comer cohort, 5-year MACE rates were 12% for BP-DES vs 14.5% for DP-DES. Multivariate analysis showed no significant difference in MACE for the use of BP-DES (OR 0.941, 95% CI 0.734-1.207, p = 0.631). However, TLR rates were significantly lower in patients treated with BP-DES (3.4% vs 6.8%, OR 0.567, 95% CI 0.372-0.865, p = 0.008), mainly driven by lower rates of TLR within the ACS PCI cohort (1.5% vs 4.9%, OR 0.364, 95% CI 0.158-0.841, p = 0.018). In CCS PCI patients, MACE and TLR rates demonstrated no significant differences.
CONCLUSION: BP-DES and DP-DES show a similar long-term safety profile regarding MACE. BP-DES demonstrate a lower risk of TLR in the all-comer cohort, driven by reduced rates in ACS-PCI patients.