Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug-eluting stent (DES) versus bare-metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries.

OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 mm) by performing a meta-analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

RESULTS: Six RCTs with 4,399 patients were included in this study. Overall, there were no significant between-group differences in the risks of the composite of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (cardiac death/MI), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, however, DES was associated with significant reduction in the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) compared with BMS [0.48 (0.33, 0.70)] with consistent benefits among patients with reference vessel diameter ≥ 3.5 mm, reference vessel diameter ≥ 4.0 mm, stent length ≤ 15 mm, first-generation DES or second-generation DES. In patients with ≥ 3-year follow-up, there were no significant between-group differences in the risk of cardiac death/MI, TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis.

CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis suggests that DES is superior to BMS in terms of adverse cardiac events in large coronary arteries at the mid-term follow-up. The long-term efficacy of newer-generation DES versus BMS in larger coronary arteries is still worth further evaluation.