We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Long-term safety and effectiveness of drug-eluting stents compared to bare metal stents in ST elevation myocardial infarction: findings from the Guthrie Health Off-label Stent (GHOST) Registry.
Journal of Interventional Cardiology 2012 April
BACKGROUND: Multiple randomized trials and observational studies have shown drug-eluting stents (DES) to be safe and effective at 3-year follow-up in stent thrombosis (ST)-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) treated with primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, outcomes data beyond 3-4 years after DES implantation are sparse.
METHODS: We studied 554 STEMI patients who underwent successful PCI with either DES or bare metal stent (BMS). Primary study end-points were time to occurrence of ST and the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary end-points were time to occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and discrete events that comprise MACE (death, MI, and target vessel revascularization [TVR]). Outcomes of the DES and BMS groups were assessed by survival analysis and multivariable Cox regression.
RESULTS: There were 205 (37%) patients who received DES and 349 (63%) patients who received BMS. At a median follow-up of 41.4 months after PCI, there were no differences in the unadjusted incidence of ST (ST, 3.4 vs. 4.3%, log-rank P = 0.61) and MI (6.8% vs. 8%, P = 0.61) between DES versus BMS groups, respectively. However, DES implantation was associated with lower unadjusted incidence of death or MI (11% vs. 23.5%, P = 0.0002), MACE (16% vs. 34%, P < 0.0001), death (6.3% vs. 17%, P = 0.0004), and TVR (9.8% vs. 18%, P = 0.008) than BMS implantation. In multivariable analyses, DES implantation was associated with significantly lower incidence of MACE (adjusted HR = 0.47 [95% CI: 0.31-0.76], P = 0.0007) than BMS implantation.
CONCLUSION: In our study of STEMI patients, DES implantation was safer than BMS implantation and was associated with lower MACE at long-term follow-up.
METHODS: We studied 554 STEMI patients who underwent successful PCI with either DES or bare metal stent (BMS). Primary study end-points were time to occurrence of ST and the composite of death or myocardial infarction (MI). Secondary end-points were time to occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and discrete events that comprise MACE (death, MI, and target vessel revascularization [TVR]). Outcomes of the DES and BMS groups were assessed by survival analysis and multivariable Cox regression.
RESULTS: There were 205 (37%) patients who received DES and 349 (63%) patients who received BMS. At a median follow-up of 41.4 months after PCI, there were no differences in the unadjusted incidence of ST (ST, 3.4 vs. 4.3%, log-rank P = 0.61) and MI (6.8% vs. 8%, P = 0.61) between DES versus BMS groups, respectively. However, DES implantation was associated with lower unadjusted incidence of death or MI (11% vs. 23.5%, P = 0.0002), MACE (16% vs. 34%, P < 0.0001), death (6.3% vs. 17%, P = 0.0004), and TVR (9.8% vs. 18%, P = 0.008) than BMS implantation. In multivariable analyses, DES implantation was associated with significantly lower incidence of MACE (adjusted HR = 0.47 [95% CI: 0.31-0.76], P = 0.0007) than BMS implantation.
CONCLUSION: In our study of STEMI patients, DES implantation was safer than BMS implantation and was associated with lower MACE at long-term follow-up.
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