JACC. Cardiovascular interventions · 2010
Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein graft interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализСистематический обзорНазвание 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.
Wiisanen Matthew E, Abdel-Latif Ahmed, Mukherjee Debabrata, Ziada Khaled M
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: We sought to review the published data and perform a meta-analysis to reach robust conclusions in the comparison between bare-metal stents (BMS) and drug-eluting stents (DES) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs).
BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents are superior to BMS in reducing major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after PCI in native coronary arteries. However, studies comparing BMS with DES in PCI of SVG have had mixed results, probably due to smaller numbers and the nonrandomized nature of most of them.
METHODS: The published reports search identified 4 randomized controlled trials and 19 cohort studies comparing BMS with DES in SVG interventions. Clinical end point data were abstracted and analyzed in aggregate and in subgroup analyses with random-effects model.
RESULTS: Patients receiving DES had a lower risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.75; confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.96), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR: 0.57; CI: 0.40 to 0.82), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR: 0.56; CI: 0.40 to 0.77), and MACE (OR: 0.61; CI: 0.42 to 0.79). Drug-eluting stent use resulted in a significant absolute risk reduction in TLR (-0.07; CI: -0.11 to -0.03), TVR (-0.10; CI: -0.15 to -0.05), and MACE (-0.12; CI: -0.18 to -0.06). There was no significant difference between the groups in recurrent myocardial infarction (OR: 0.99; CI: 0.65 to 1.51) or stent thrombosis (OR: 0.78; CI: 0.40 to 1.52).
CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis comparing DES with BMS use in PCI of SVG lesions, DES use was associated with improved mortality, MACE, TLR, and TVR. There was no evidence of increased risk of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis.
BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting stents are superior to BMS in reducing major adverse cardiac events (MACE) after PCI in native coronary arteries. However, studies comparing BMS with DES in PCI of SVG have had mixed results, probably due to smaller numbers and the nonrandomized nature of most of them.
METHODS: The published reports search identified 4 randomized controlled trials and 19 cohort studies comparing BMS with DES in SVG interventions. Clinical end point data were abstracted and analyzed in aggregate and in subgroup analyses with random-effects model.
RESULTS: Patients receiving DES had a lower risk of mortality (odds ratio [OR]: 0.75; confidence interval [CI]: 0.59 to 0.96), target lesion revascularization (TLR) (OR: 0.57; CI: 0.40 to 0.82), target vessel revascularization (TVR) (OR: 0.56; CI: 0.40 to 0.77), and MACE (OR: 0.61; CI: 0.42 to 0.79). Drug-eluting stent use resulted in a significant absolute risk reduction in TLR (-0.07; CI: -0.11 to -0.03), TVR (-0.10; CI: -0.15 to -0.05), and MACE (-0.12; CI: -0.18 to -0.06). There was no significant difference between the groups in recurrent myocardial infarction (OR: 0.99; CI: 0.65 to 1.51) or stent thrombosis (OR: 0.78; CI: 0.40 to 1.52).
CONCLUSIONS: In this meta-analysis comparing DES with BMS use in PCI of SVG lesions, DES use was associated with improved mortality, MACE, TLR, and TVR. There was no evidence of increased risk of myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis.