Clinical and Angiographic Outcomes of Drug‐Eluting Stents in Patients With Large Vessel and Single Coronary Artery Lesion

Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Inje University Busan Baik Hospital, South Korea.
Clinical Cardiology (Impact Factor: 2.59). 06/2010; 33(6):340-4. DOI: 10.1002/clc.20744
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the clinical and angiographic outcomes of 3 drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with large vessel diameter and single coronary artery lesions.
The efficacy of 3 DESs may be similar.
A total of 411 consecutive patients who visited 3 university hospitals from June 2004 to December 2007 and had a single coronary lesion which was treated with the use of a DES that was 3.5 mm in diameter were enrolled in this study. Patients were divided into 3 stent groups: Paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES, n = 105), Sirolimus-eluting stent (SES, n = 259), and Zotarolimus-eluting stent (ZES, n = 47). The study end point was a composite of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), and ischemia-driven target-vessel revascularization (TVR) for 12 months.
Baseline characteristics were not different. Late loss was higher in the ZES group than the other stents (0.5 +/- 0.4 mm in SES vs 0.3 +/- 0.5 mm in PES, 0.7 +/- 0.5 mm in ZES, P = 0.001). The total MACE-free survival rate was not significantly different between the SES group and the PES group (98.8% in SES vs 97.1% in PES, P = 0.252) or the PES group and the ZES group (97.1% in PES vs 93.6% in ZES, P = 0.301). However, the SES group showed a significantly better MACE-free survival rate compared with the ZES group (98.8% in SES vs 93.6% in ZES, P = 0.018).
Clinical and angiographic outcomes of DES in a large vessel diameter and single coronary artery is excellent and SES appears to show better angiographic and clinical outcomes than ZES.

30 Reads
  • Source
    • "A total of seven end points were extracted from five studies [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]. End points studied were myocardial infarction (MI), major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiac death, all-cause death, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Revascularization after myocardial infarction is often achieved via percutaneous coronary intervention, which often entails stenting. Drug-eluting stents have shown benefits over bare metal stents in this setting, and a variety of drug-eluting stents are now available, including sirolimus-, paclitaxel-, and zotarolimus-eluting stents. There are studies that have compared the various drug-eluting stents and this meta-analysis pools data comparing 12-month clinical outcomes of zotarolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting stents. End points studied were myocardial infarction, major adverse cardiac events, cardiac death, all-cause death, stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularization, and target lesion revascularization.There was a statistically significant reduction in risk of myocardial infarction (odds ratio, 0.250, confidence interval, 0.160 to 0.392) and statistically insignificant reductions in major adverse cardiac events (odds ratio, 0.813, confidence interval, 0.656 to 1.007), cardiac death (odds ratio, 0.817, confidence interval, 0.359 to 1.857), all cause death (odds ratio, 0.820, confidence interval, 0.443 to 1.516), and target lesion revascularization (odds ratio, 0.936, confidence interval 0.702 to 1.247). There was a statistically significant increase in target vessel revascularization (odds ratio, 1.336, confidence interval, 1.003 to 1.778) and a statistically insignificant increase in stent thrombosis (odds ratio, 1.174, confidence interval, 0.604 to 2.280). These findings are similar to the individual studies although other studies have noted increased late loss with zotarolimus-eluting stents and this current data associated with late loss should be kept in mind when makimg clinical decisions regarding sent selection.
    05/2011; 2011(1):675638. DOI:10.5402/2011/675638


30 Reads