top banner image  

topleft corner image     top right corner image
 


bullet

JACC Homepage JACC Imaging Homepage
Still not a subscriber to JACC Imaging or JACC Interventions?

     top nav image

     

J Am Coll Cardiol Intv, 2009; 2:231-239, doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2008.12.010
© 2009 by the American College of Cardiology Foundation
This Article
Right arrow Figures Only
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Applegate, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Little, W. C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Applegate, R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Little, W. C.

Clinical Research

3-Year Comparison of Drug-Eluting Versus Bare-Metal Stents

Robert J. Applegate, MD, FACC*, Matthew T. Sacrinty, MPH, Michael A. Kutcher, MD, FACC, Renato M. Santos, MD, FACC, Sanjay K. Gandhi, MD, FACC, William C. Little, MD, FACC

Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Section of Cardiology, Winston-Salem, North Carolina

* Reprint requests and correspondence: Dr. Robert J. Applegate, Section of Cardiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27157-1045 (Email: bapplega{at}wfubmc.edu).

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare 3-year cumulative outcomes to landmark second- and third-year outcomes with the routine use of drug-eluting stents (DES) (>75% "off-label") with a comparable group treated with bare-metal stents (BMS).

Background: Long-term safety concerns after "off-label" DES use persist, despite recent 2-year data showing comparable safety to BMS use.

Methods: Clinical outcomes (nonfatal myocardial infarction, all-cause mortality) were assessed in 1,147 consecutive patients who received a BMS in the year before the introduction of DES at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center and 1,246 consecutive patients that received a DES after it became our routine choice with equivalent complete 3-year follow-up.

Results: Stents were used for "off-label" indications in 80% of DES patients. At 3 years, the hazard ratio for DES compared with BMS for cumulative target vessel revascularization was 0.65 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.51 to 0.82), nonfatal myocardial infarction or death was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.71 to 1.03), and all-cause mortality 0.80 (95% CI: 0.64 to 1.01). The DES clinical benefits occurred entirely within the first year, with similar rates of these clinical end points in the second and third year. The cumulative hazard ratio of stent thrombosis DES compared with BMS was 1.07 (95% CI: 0.57 to 2.01), with similar rates of stent thrombosis in the third year (p = 0.70).

Conclusions: The routine clinical use of DES for "off-label" indications was associated with lower clinical end points at 3 years than treatment with BMS in a comparable group of patients, with similar cumulative rates of stent thrombosis. There was no evidence of late "catch-up" of adverse DES events.

Key Words: angioplasty • mortality • stents

Abbreviations and Acronyms
  BMS = bare-metal stent(s)
  CI = confidence interval
  DES = drug-eluting stent(s)
  HR = hazard ratio
  MI = myocardial infarction
  PCI = percutaneous coronary intervention
  ST = stent thrombosis
  TVR = target vessel revascularization






 
   
 
home link current link search link archive link topics link cardiology careers link