» Articles » PMID: 16106007

Sirolimus-eluting Stents Vs Paclitaxel-eluting Stents in Patients with Coronary Artery Disease: Meta-analysis of Randomized Trials

Overview
Journal JAMA
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2005 Aug 18
PMID 16106007
Citations 38
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Context: Placement of sirolimus-eluting stents or paclitaxel-eluting stents has emerged as the predominant percutaneous treatment strategy in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). Whether there are any differences in efficacy and safety between these 2 drug-eluting stents is unclear.

Objective: To compare outcomes of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents on the basis of data generated by randomized head-to-head clinical trials.

Data Sources: PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings from major cardiology meetings, and Internet-based sources of information on clinical trials in cardiology from January 2003 to April 2005.

Study Selection: Randomized trials comparing the sirolimus-eluting stent with the paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with CAD reporting the outcomes of interest (target lesion revascularization, angiographic restenosis, stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction [MI], death, and the composite of death or MI) during a follow-up of at least 6 months.

Data Extraction: Two reviewers independently identified studies and abstracted data on sample size, baseline characteristics, and outcomes of interest.

Data Synthesis: Six trials, including 3669 patients, met the selection criteria. No significant heterogeneity was found across trials. Target lesion revascularization, the primary outcome of interest, was less frequently performed in patients who were treated with the sirolimus-eluting stent (5.1%) vs the paclitaxel-eluting stent (7.8%) (odds ratio [OR], 0.64; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.84; P = .001). Similarly, angiographic restenosis was less frequently observed among patients assigned to the sirolimus-eluting stent (9.3%) vs the paclitaxel-eluting stent (13.1%) (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.55-0.86; P = .001). Event rates for sirolimus-eluting vs paclitaxel-eluting stents were 0.9% and 1.1%, respectively, for stent thrombosis (P = .62); 1.4% and 1.6%, respectively, for death (P = .56); and 4.9% and 5.8%, respectively, for the composite of death or MI (P = .23).

Conclusions: Patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents had a significantly lower risk of restenosis and target vessel revascularization compared with those receiving paclitaxel-eluting stents. Rates of death, death or MI, and stent thrombosis were similar.

Citing Articles

Coronary Drug-Coated Balloons for De Novo and In-Stent Restenosis Indications.

Giacoppo D, Saucedo J, Scheller B J Soc Cardiovasc Angiogr Interv. 2024; 2(3):100625.

PMID: 39130710 PMC: 11308150. DOI: 10.1016/j.jscai.2023.100625.


The Use of Bioactive Polymers for Intervention and Tissue Engineering: The New Frontier for Cardiovascular Therapy.

Nappi F, Nenna A, Larobina D, Martuscelli G, Avtaar Singh S, Chello M Polymers (Basel). 2021; 13(3).

PMID: 33573282 PMC: 7866823. DOI: 10.3390/polym13030446.


Semaphorin-3A protects against neointimal hyperplasia after vascular injury.

Wu J, Zhou Y, Hong C, Chen A, Luo Y, Mao L EBioMedicine. 2018; 39:95-108.

PMID: 30579864 PMC: 6355729. DOI: 10.1016/j.ebiom.2018.12.023.


Coronary stents and vascular response to implantation: literature review.

Brancati M, Burzotta F, Trani C, Leonzi O, Cuccia C, Crea F Pragmat Obs Res. 2017; 8:137-148.

PMID: 28761388 PMC: 5516876. DOI: 10.2147/POR.S132439.


Is There Any Significant Difference in Stent Thrombosis Between Sirolimus and Paclitaxel Eluting Stents?: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Bundhun P, Wu Z, Chen M Medicine (Baltimore). 2016; 95(5):e2651.

PMID: 26844487 PMC: 4748904. DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000002651.