EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2010
Safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in saphenous vein grafts lesions: a meta-analysis.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание 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.
Sanchez-Recalde Angel, Jiménez Valero Santiago, Moreno Raul, Barreales Laura, Lozano Iñigo, Galeote Guillermo, Martín Reyes Roberto, Calvo Luis, Lopez-Sendon Jose L
Аннотация
AIMS: Controversy exists about the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents (DES) in saphenous vein bypass grafts (SVGs). The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of all published studies comparing DES and bare-metal stents (BMS) in patients with SVGs disease.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 22 studies comparing DES versus BMS in 5,543 patients with SVGs disease. The primary efficacy endpoint was target vessel revascularisation (TVR). The primary safety endpoint was mortality. Other outcomes of interest were cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), stent thrombosis and a combined of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). DES significantly reduced the risk of TVR, OR=0.56 (95% CI, 0.41-0.76, p=0.0003) and TLR, OR=0.58 (95% CI, 0.41-0.81; p=0.001). Total mortality and cardiac mortality were significantly lower in DES versus BMS, OR=0.69 (95% CI, 0.49-0.98, p=0.04) and OR=0.71 (95% CI, 0.51-0.99; p=0.04), respectively. The overall risk of stent thrombosis, and myocardial infarction were not significantly different for patients receiving DES vs. BMS. Total MACE were significantly lower in patients receiving DES, OR=0.55 (95% CI, 0.42-0.71; p<0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that the use of DES in patients with SVG lesions is associated with a reduction of the need of reintervention and mortality compared with BMS.
METHODS AND RESULTS: We included 22 studies comparing DES versus BMS in 5,543 patients with SVGs disease. The primary efficacy endpoint was target vessel revascularisation (TVR). The primary safety endpoint was mortality. Other outcomes of interest were cardiac mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), stent thrombosis and a combined of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). DES significantly reduced the risk of TVR, OR=0.56 (95% CI, 0.41-0.76, p=0.0003) and TLR, OR=0.58 (95% CI, 0.41-0.81; p=0.001). Total mortality and cardiac mortality were significantly lower in DES versus BMS, OR=0.69 (95% CI, 0.49-0.98, p=0.04) and OR=0.71 (95% CI, 0.51-0.99; p=0.04), respectively. The overall risk of stent thrombosis, and myocardial infarction were not significantly different for patients receiving DES vs. BMS. Total MACE were significantly lower in patients receiving DES, OR=0.55 (95% CI, 0.42-0.71; p<0.00001).
CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that the use of DES in patients with SVG lesions is associated with a reduction of the need of reintervention and mortality compared with BMS.