Unrestricted Use of Drug-eluting Stents Compared with Bare-metal Stents in Routine Clinical Practice: Findings from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Objectives: We investigated the effectiveness and safety of drug-eluting stents (DES) as used in routine clinical practice.
Background: Randomized trials have shown that DES prevent target vessel revascularization in selected patients, but whether this translates into superior outcomes, compared with bare-metal stents (BMS), for the full spectrum of patients treated with DES in North America is unknown.
Methods: Patients in the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry enrolled in 2004 who received at least 1 DES (n = 1,460) were compared with 1,763 patients enrolled in the recruitment period immediately preceding the approval of DES (2001 to 2002) who received at least 1 BMS.
Results: Patients receiving DES more often had diabetes mellitus and less often presented with an acute myocardial infarction (MI). At 1 year, cumulative death and MI was 7.6% in DES- and 8.7% in BMS-treated patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.68 to 1.15; p = 0.34). The 1-year rate of target vessel revascularization was 5.0% in DES and 9.2% in BMS patients (p < 0.001), and the risk of any repeat revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention or coronary bypass was lower in DES patients (adjusted HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.60; p < 0.001). Patients with both simple and complex lesion characteristics benefited from DES with lower risk of repeat target vessel revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention compared with BMS (any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.83; absence of any complex lesion: adjusted HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.71). The 1-year incidence of stent thrombosis was 1.0% in DES patients.
Conclusions: The generalized use of DES resulted in better outcomes than BMS, with fewer clinically driven revascularization procedures and similar rates of death and MI at 1 year.
Hommels T, Hermanides R, Fabris E, Kedhi E Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2023; 22(1):123.
PMID: 37226183 PMC: 10210327. DOI: 10.1186/s12933-023-01844-1.
Jalnapurkar S, Xu K, Zhang Z, Merz C, Elkayam U, Pai R J Am Heart Assoc. 2021; 10(21):e021056.
PMID: 34668401 PMC: 8751836. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021056.
Carotid Artery Atherosclerotic Profile as Risk Predictor for Restenosis After Coronary Stenting.
Rodrigues C, Bazan R, Reis F, Silveira C, Hueb L, Carvalho F Arq Bras Cardiol. 2021; 116(4):727-733.
PMID: 33886718 PMC: 8121410. DOI: 10.36660/abc.20190650.
Lee C, Tsai F, Su M, Yeh H, Chiang Y, Hsieh C Acta Cardiol Sin. 2019; 35(4):402-411.
PMID: 31371901 PMC: 6656978. DOI: 10.6515/ACS.201907_35(4).20190108B.
Hommels T, Hermanides R, Rasoul S, Berta B, Ijsselmuiden A, Jessurun G Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2019; 18(1):25.
PMID: 30851731 PMC: 6408833. DOI: 10.1186/s12933-019-0827-z.