Search

Background: Limited data are available on the long-term effects of contemporary drug-eluting stents versus contemporary bare-metal stents on rates of death, myocardial infarction, repeat revascularization, and stent thrombosis and on quality of life.Methods: We randomly assigned 9013 patients who had stable or unstable coronary artery disease to undergo percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with the implantation of either contemporary drug-eluting stents or bare-metal stents. In the group receiving drug-eluting stents, 96% of the patients received either everolimus- or zotarolimus-eluting stents. The primary outcome was a composite of death from any cause and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction after a median of 5 years of follow-up. Secondary outcomes included repeat revascularization, stent thrombosis, and quality of life.Results: At 6 years, the rates of the primary outcome were 16.6% in the group receiving drug-eluting stents and 17.1% in the group receiving bare-metal stents (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.88 to 1.09; P=0.66). There were no significant between-group differences in the components of the primary outcome. The 6-year rates of any repeat revascularization were 16.5% in the group receiving drug-eluting stents and 19.8% in the group receiving bare-metal stents (hazard ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.85; P<0.001); the rates of definite stent thrombosis were 0.8% and 1.2%, respectively (P=0.0498). Quality-of-life measures did not differ significantly between the two groups.Conclusions: In patients undergoing PCI, there were no significant differences between those receiving drug-eluting stents and those receiving bare-metal stents in the composite outcome of death from any cause and nonfatal spontaneous myocardial infarction. Rates of repeat revascularization were lower in the group receiving drug-eluting stents. (Funded by the Norwegian Research Council and others; NORSTENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00811772 .). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The safety of drug-eluting stents has been called into question by recent reports of increased stent thrombosis, myocardial infarction, and death. Such studies have been inconclusive because of their insufficient size, the use of historical controls, a limited duration of follow-up, and a lack of access to original source data. Methods We performed a pooled analysis of data from four double-blind trials in which 1748 patients were randomly assigned to receive either sirolimus-eluting stents or bare-metal stents and five double-blind trials in which 3513 patients were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel-eluting stents or bare-metal stents; we then analyzed the major clinical end points of the trials. Results The 4-year rates of stent thrombosis were 1.2% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 0.6% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.20) and 1.3% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 0.9% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.30). However, after 1 year, there were five episodes of stent thrombosis in patients with sirolimus-eluting stents versus none in patients with bare-metal stents (P=0.025) and nine episodes in patients with paclitaxel-eluting stents versus two in patients with bare-metal stents (P=0.028). The 4-year rates of target-lesion revascularization were markedly reduced in both the sirolimus-stent group and the paclitaxel-stent group, as compared with the bare-metal–stent groups. The rates of death or myocardial infarction did not differ significantly between the groups with drug-eluting stents and those with bare-metal stents. Conclusions Stent thrombosis after 1 year was more common with both sirolimus-eluting stents and paclitaxel-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents. Both drug-eluting stents were associated with a marked reduction in target-lesion revascularization. There were no significant differences in the cumulative rates of death or myocardial infraction at 4 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Recent reports have indicated that there may be an increased risk of late stent thrombosis with the use of drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents. Methods We evaluated 6033 patients treated with drug-eluting stents and 13,738 patients treated with bare-metal stents in 2003 and 2004, using data from the Swedish Coronary Angiography and Angioplasty Registry. The outcome analysis covering a period of up to 3 years was based on 1424 deaths and 2463 myocardial infarctions and was adjusted for differences in baseline characteristics. Results The two study groups did not differ significantly in the composite of death and myocardial infarction during 3 years of follow-up. At 6 months, there was a trend toward a lower unadjusted event rate in patients with drug-eluting stents than in those with bare-metal stents, with 13.4 fewer such events per 1000 patients. However, after 6 months, patients with drug-eluting stents had a significantly higher event rate, with 12.7 more events per 1000 patients per year (adjusted relative risk, 1.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05 to 1.37). At 3 years, mortality was significantly higher in patients with drug-eluting stents (adjusted relative risk, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.35), and from 6 months to 3 years, the adjusted relative risk for death in this group was 1.32 (95% CI, 1.11 to 1.57). Conclusions Drug-eluting stents were associated with an increased rate of death, as compared with bare-metal stents. This trend appeared after 6 months, when the risk of death was 0.5 percentage point higher and a composite of death or myocardial infarction was 0.5 to 1.0 percentage point higher per year. The long-term safety of drug-eluting stents needs to be ascertained in large, randomized trials [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Definitions of stent thrombosis that have been used in clinical trials of drug-eluting stents have been restrictive and have not been used in a uniform manner. Methods We applied a hierarchical classification of stent thrombosis set by the Academic Research Consortium (ARC) across randomized trials involving 878 patients treated with sirolimus-eluting stents, 1400 treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents, and 2267 treated with bare-metal stents. We then pooled 4 years of follow-up data. All events were adjudicated by an independent clinical-events committee. Results The cumulative incidence of stent thrombosis according to the original protocol definitions was 1.2% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 0.6% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.20; 95% confidence interval [CI], −0.4 to 1.5) and 1.3% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 0.8% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.24; 95% CI, −0.3 to 1.4). The incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis as defined by the ARC was 1.5% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 1.7% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.70; 95% CI, −1.5 to 1.0) and 1.8% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 1.4% in the bare-metal–stent group (P=0.52; 95% CI, −0.7 to 1.4). The incidence of definite or probable events occurring 1 to 4 years after implantation was 0.9% in the sirolimus-stent group versus 0.4% in the bare-metal–stent group and 0.9% in the paclitaxel-stent group versus 0.6% in the bare-metal–stent group. Conclusions The incidence of stent thrombosis did not differ significantly between patients with drug-eluting stents and those with bare-metal stents in randomized clinical trials, although the power to detect small differences in rates was limited [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The long-term effects of treatment with sirolimus-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, have not been established. Methods We performed an analysis of individual data on 4958 patients enrolled in 14 randomized trials comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents (mean follow-up interval, 12.1 to 58.9 months). The primary end point was death from any cause. Other outcomes were stent thrombosis, the composite end point of death or myocardial infarction, and the composite of death, myocardial infarction, or reintervention. Results The overall risk of death (hazard ratio, 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80 to 1.30) and the combined risk of death or myocardial infarction (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.81 to 1.16) were not significantly different for patients receiving sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents. There was a significant reduction in the combined risk of death, myocardial infarction, or reintervention (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.34 to 0.54) associated with the use of sirolimus-eluting stents. There was no significant difference in the overall risk of stent thrombosis with sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents (hazard ratio, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.86). However, there was evidence of a slight increase in the risk of stent thrombosis associated with sirolimus-eluting stents after the first year. Conclusions The use of sirolimus-eluting stents does not have a significant effect on overall long-term survival and survival free of myocardial infarction, as compared with bare-metal stents. There is a sustained reduction in the need for reintervention after the use of sirolimus-eluting stents. The risk of stent thrombosis is at least as great as that seen with bare-metal stents [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author suggests that drug-eluting stents represent an important advance in the management of coronary artery disease and have benefited many patients. In the rush to bring "breakthrough" technologies to market, unanticipated adverse events will occur. The solution is not to stop expediting the approval of novel products, but to improve public communication and require longer post-marketing studies.