Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/37331
Title: Polymer-free versus permanent polymer-coated drug eluting stents for the treatment of coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis of randomized trials.
Authors: Nogic J.;Baey Y.-W.;Nerlekar N. ;Ha F.J.;Cameron J.D.;Nasis A. ;West N.E.J.;Brown A.J.
Institution: (Nogic, Baey, Nerlekar, Ha, Cameron, Nasis, Brown) Monash Cardiovascular Research Centre, Monash University and Monash Heart, Monash Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia (West) Department of Interventional Cardiology, Papworth Hospital NHS Trust, Cambridge, United Kingdom
Issue Date: 2-Oct-2018
Copyright year: 2018
Publisher: Blackwell Publishing Inc. (E-mail: subscrip@blackwellpub.com)
Place of publication: United States
Publication information: Journal of Interventional Cardiology. 31 (5) (pp 608-616), 2018. Date of Publication: October 2018.
Journal: Journal of Interventional Cardiology
Abstract: Background: Polymer-free drug eluting stents (PF-DES) were developed, in part, to overcome risk of late ischemic events observed with permanent polymer-coated DES (PP-DES). However, trial results are inconsistent with longer-term safety and efficacy of PF-DES remaining unknown. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials assessing outcomes of patients receiving PF-DES versus PP-DES for treatment of coronary artery disease (CAD). Method(s): Electronic searches were performed for randomized trials comparing outcomes between PF-DES and PP-DES. Trials reporting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), stent thrombosis (ST), all-cause death, target lesion/vessel revascularization (TLR/TVR), and late lumen loss (LLL) were included. Analyses were performed at longest follow-up and landmarked beyond 1-year. Result(s): Twelve trials (6,943 patients) were included. There was no significant difference in MACE between PF-DES and PP-DES at longest follow-up (Odds Ratio [OR] 0.96, 95%CI 0.85-1.10, P = 0.59) or landmark analysis beyond 1-year (OR 0.96, 95%CI 0.76-1.20, P = 0.70). Although PF-DES were associated with a significant reduction in all-cause death (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.72-1.00, P < 0.05), this effect was not present on landmark analysis beyond 1-year (OR 0.89, 95%CI 0.73-1.10, P = 0.30). There were no differences observed for MI (OR 1.00, 95%CI 0.77-1.28, P = 0.99) or ST (OR 0.95, 95%CI 0.54-1.68, P = 0.86), with similar efficacy outcomes including TVR (OR 1.07, 95%CI 0.91-1.26, P = 0.42), TLR (OR 1.03, 95%CI 0.88-1.21, P = 0.68) and angiographic LLL (pooled mean difference 0.01 mm, 95%CI -0.08 to 0.11, P = 0.76). Conclusion(s): PF-DES are as safe and efficacious as PP-DES for the treatment of patients with CAD, but do not significantly reduce late ischemic complications.Copyright © 2018 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
DOI: http://monash.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/joic.12522
ORCID: Nogic, Jason; ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5024-0729
PubMed URL: 29797804 [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=29797804]
ISSN: 0896-4327
URI: https://repository.monashhealth.org/monashhealthjspui/handle/1/37331
Type: Article
Type of Clinical Study or Trial: Systematic review and/or meta-analysis
Appears in Collections:Articles

Show full item record

Page view(s)

10
checked on Sep 27, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in Monash Health Research Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.