Safety and Efficacy Update on First-Generation Drug-Eluting Stents

Accumulating data on the safety and efficacy of first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) show a favorable risk/benefit profile compared with bare-metal stents (BMS). A recently reported collaborative network meta-analysis including >18,000 patients in 38 randomized trials along with other recen...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American journal of cardiology 2008-11, Vol.102 (9), p.18J-23J
Main Author: Spaulding, Christian, MD
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Angioplasty
Biological and medical sciences
Cardiology
Cardiology. Vascular system
Cardiovascular
Drug therapy
Drug-Eluting Stents
Effectiveness studies
Humans
Medical sciences
Meta-Analysis as Topic
Metals
Mortality
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Safety
Stents
Thrombosis
Transplants & implants
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Accumulating data on the safety and efficacy of first-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) show a favorable risk/benefit profile compared with bare-metal stents (BMS). A recently reported collaborative network meta-analysis including >18,000 patients in 38 randomized trials along with other recent meta-analyses indicate that the use of DES versus BMS is associated with a 50%–70% reduction in the need for repeat revascularization and no difference in the rates of overall stent thrombosis, overall mortality, cardiac mortality, or death or myocardial infarction over 4 years of follow-up. Furthermore, the most recent data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry (SCAAR) indicate no difference in mortality between DES and BMS use. The collaborative network meta-analysis and other analyses suggest that late stent thrombosis is a distinct but infrequent phenomenon complicating the use of DES; the risk posed by late thrombosis appears to be offset by a reduced need for repeat revascularizations and thus, a reduced risk of adverse outcomes associated with such interventions.
ISSN:0002-9149
1879-1913
DOI:10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.09.005