-
Circ Cardiovasc Interv · Feb 2014
Meta Analysis Comparative StudyStent thrombosis with second-generation drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents: network meta-analysis of primary percutaneous coronary intervention trials in ST-segment–elevation myocardial infarction [corrected].
- Femi Philip, Shikhar Agarwal, Matthew C Bunte, Matthew Bunte, Sachin S Goel, E Murat Tuzcu, Stephen Ellis, and Samir R Kapadia.
- From the Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Heart and Vascular Institute, Cleveland Clinic, OH.
- Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Feb 1; 7 (1): 49-61.
BackgroundThe relative safety of drug-eluting stents (DESs) and bare-metal stents (BMSs) with respect to stent thrombosis (ST) continues to be debated. There are limited data comparing safety and efficacy of second-generation DES to BMS. We compared the clinical outcomes between second-generation DES and BMS for primary percutaneous coronary intervention using network meta-analysis.Methods And ResultsRandomized controlled trials comparing stent types (first-generation DES, second-generation DES or BMS) were considered for inclusion. A search strategy used Medline, Embase, Cochrane databases, and proceedings of the international meetings. Information about study design, inclusion criteria, and sample characteristics were extracted. Network meta-analysis was used to pool direct (comparison of second-generation DES to BMS) and indirect evidence (first-generation DES with BMS and second-generation DES) from the randomized trials. Twenty-one trials comparing all stents types, including 12 866 patients randomly assigned to treatment groups, were analyzed. A significantly lower incidence of ST was noted with the use of second-generation DES as early as 30 days (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.15-0.82) and between 31 days and 1 year (OR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30-0.79) when compared with BMS. Second-generation DES was associated with significantly lower incidence of definite ST at 1 year (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.11-0.83) and myocardial infarction (OR, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.17-0.54) and target vessel revascularization at 1 year (OR, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.80-0.98) when compared with BMS. There was no difference in mortality at 30 days (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.45-1.59) or 1 year (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.56-1.14) with the use of second-generation DES versus BMS. The small number of events may influence the precision of the analysis.ConclusionsNetwork meta-analysis of randomized trials of primary percutaneous coronary intervention demonstrated lower incidence of ST, myocardial infarction, and target vessel revascularization with second-generation DES when compared with BMS. The use of second-generation DES for percutaneous coronary intervention in ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction was not associated with adverse events when compared with BMS.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.