• Kang-Yin Chen, Seung-Woon Rha, Lin Wang, Yong-Jian Li, Guang-Ping Li, Cheol Ung Choi, Chang Gyu Park, Hong Seog Seo, Dong Joo Oh, Myung Ho Jeong, Young Keun Ahn, Taek Jong Hong, Young Jo Kim, Shung Chull Chae, Seung Ho Hur, In Whan Seong, Jei Keon Chae, Myeong Chan Cho, Jang Ho Bae, Dong Hoon Choi, Yang Soo Jang, In Ho Chae, Hyo Soo Kim, Chong Jin Kim, Jung Han Yoon, Tae Hoon Ahn, Wook Sung Chung, Ki Bae Seung, Seung Jung Park, and Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry Investigators.
• Cardiovascular Center, Korea University Guro Hospital, 80, Guro-dong, Guro-gu, Seoul 152-703, Republic of Korea.
• Int. J. Cardiol. 2014 Oct 20; 176 (3): 583-8.

BackgroundIn contrast to many studies comparing everolimus-eluting stent (EES) with paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES), data directly comparing EES with sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) are limited, especially in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI).MethodsThis study includes 2911 AMI patients treated with SES (n=1264) or EES (n=1701) in Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry (KAMIR). Propensity score matching was applied to adjust for baseline imbalance in clinical and angiographic characteristics, yielding a total of 2400 well-matched patients (1200 receiving SES and 1200 receiving EES). One-year clinical outcomes were compared between the two propensity score matched groups.ResultsBaseline clinical and angiographic characteristics were similar between the two propensity score matched groups. One-year clinical outcomes of the propensity score matched cohort were comparable between the EES versus the SES groups including the rates of cardiac death (4.8% vs. 4.8%, P=1.000), recurrent myocardial infarction (1.4% vs. 1.7%, P=0.619), target lesion revascularization (1.4% vs. 1.6%, P=0.737), target lesion failure (7.0% vs. 7.3%, P=0.752), and probable or definite stent thrombosis (0.5% vs. 0.9%, P=0.224) except for a trend toward lower incidence of target vessel revascularization (1.9% vs. 3.0%, P=0.087) and a lower rate of total major adverse cardiac events (9.3% vs. 11.9%, P=0.034) in the EES group.ConclusionsThe present propensity score matched analysis performed in a large-scale, prospective, multicenter registry suggests that the second-generation drug-eluting stent EES has at least comparable or even better safety and efficacy profiles as compared with SES in the setting of AMI.Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

27 keywords...

hide…