We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Long-term clinical outcomes after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation for treatment of restenosis within bare-metal versus drug-eluting stents.
Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions 2008 April 2
BACKGROUND: Sirolimus-eluting stents have been increasingly used for treatment of restenosis after implantation of bare metal stents (BMSs) or drug-eluting stents (DESs), but little is known regarding their long-term outcomes.
METHODS: We compared long-term clinical outcomes in 295 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents for post-BMS (n = 224) vs. post-DES (n = 71) restenosis. All follow-ups were at least 12 months, and the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR).
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except that mean lesion length (28.0 +/- 16.2 vs. 19.5 +/- 13.6, P < 0.01) and mean stented length (35.4 +/- 19.2 vs. 25.7 +/- 14.7, P < 0.01) were significantly longer in the post-BMS group. Major in-hospital complications occurred in 2 patients. During a mean follow-up of 31.3 +/- 11.1 months, there were 9 deaths (4 cardiac, 5 noncardiac), 3 nonfatal MIs, and 25 TLRs. Late stent thrombosis was documented in 2 patients (1 in each group). There were no between group differences in cardiac or total deaths, but there were trends toward less frequent cardiac death/MI or TLR in the post-BMS group. The cumulative probability of MACE-free survival was significantly better for the post-BMS group (95.0% +/- 1.5% vs. 87.3% +/- 4.0% at 1 year; 93.0% +/- 1.7% vs. 81.0% +/- 5.2% at 2 years; Log Rank P = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, post-DES restenosis was the only significant predictor of MACE (OR 3.29, 95%CI 1.13-9.61, P = 0.029).
CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stents were effective for treatment of in-stent restenosis, but post-DES restenosis was associated with poorer outcomes than post-BMS restenosis.
METHODS: We compared long-term clinical outcomes in 295 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents for post-BMS (n = 224) vs. post-DES (n = 71) restenosis. All follow-ups were at least 12 months, and the primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as cardiac death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR).
RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except that mean lesion length (28.0 +/- 16.2 vs. 19.5 +/- 13.6, P < 0.01) and mean stented length (35.4 +/- 19.2 vs. 25.7 +/- 14.7, P < 0.01) were significantly longer in the post-BMS group. Major in-hospital complications occurred in 2 patients. During a mean follow-up of 31.3 +/- 11.1 months, there were 9 deaths (4 cardiac, 5 noncardiac), 3 nonfatal MIs, and 25 TLRs. Late stent thrombosis was documented in 2 patients (1 in each group). There were no between group differences in cardiac or total deaths, but there were trends toward less frequent cardiac death/MI or TLR in the post-BMS group. The cumulative probability of MACE-free survival was significantly better for the post-BMS group (95.0% +/- 1.5% vs. 87.3% +/- 4.0% at 1 year; 93.0% +/- 1.7% vs. 81.0% +/- 5.2% at 2 years; Log Rank P = 0.016). In multivariate analysis, post-DES restenosis was the only significant predictor of MACE (OR 3.29, 95%CI 1.13-9.61, P = 0.029).
CONCLUSIONS: Sirolimus-eluting stents were effective for treatment of in-stent restenosis, but post-DES restenosis was associated with poorer outcomes than post-BMS restenosis.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app