Search

We performed a propensity score-matching comparison of the midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes after primary stenting between using bare-metal stents (BMSs) and sirolimus-eluting stent (SES; Cypher Bx Velocity) for ST-segment elevated myocardial infarction (STEMI), because, in the drug-eluting stent era, the indication of the BMSs when a large balloon diameter is required remained to be controversial. This was a single-center, nonrandomized, retrospective study investigated in October 2013 by enrolling STEMI patients treated with primary stenting using either SES (n = 468) or BMS (n = 171) between September 2004 and December 2011. In 204 patients, the baseline-adjusted values produced similar mean maximum balloon sizes (BMS 3.67 ± 0.47 mm; SES 3.70 ± 0.56 mm; p = 0.477), and the incidence rates of binary in-stent restenosis (% diameter stenosis >50 % on secondary angiography) after SES placement (7.8 %) was significantly lower than that after BMS placement (23.5 %; p = 0.002). In baseline-adjusted 300 patients, the incidence of the clinical endpoints comprising cardiac death, nonfatal recurrent MI, and definite stent thrombosis after SES placement (11.3 %; 1241 ± 786 days; p = 0.557) was not significantly different from after BMS placement (8.7 %; mean follow-up period, 549 ± 486 days; p = 0.557). SES was not significantly related to the clinical endpoint [hazard ratio 2.31; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.88-6.08; p = 0.089). BMS did not offset the SES's angiographic efficacy for primary stenting for STEMI patients, despite placed using a large-sized balloon.

Background and Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to examine the mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who presented within 48 h and received paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) or sirolimus-eluting stents (SES)., Methods and Results: This study was a retrospective, non-randomized, single-center study. The post-discharge clinical outcomes of 357 consecutive patients who presented within 48 h of their first STEMI and received PES (n=163) or SES (n=194) between February 2007 and February 2009 were analyzed in May 2011. The incidence of post-discharge events (i.e. cardiac death and non-fatal recurrent MI) after PES placement (0.6%) did not significantly differ from that after SES placement (1.5%). Treatment with PES was not related to the risk of adverse events post-discharge (mean follow-up period for PES placement, 1170±243 days; hazard ratio, 0.346; 95% CI, 0.036-3.371; p=0.361). No definite stent thromboses developed after treatment with PES or SES. The incidence of binary in-stent restenosis (stenosis of more than 50% of the diameter at secondary angiography performed 10-18 months after the initial procedure) after PES placement (17.1%) was significantly higher than that after SES placement (4.8%; p<0.001). PES placement was an independent predictor of binary in-stent restenosis (odds ratio, 3.892; 95% CI, 1.470-10.30; p=0.006)., Conclusions: Retrospective examination of the post-discharge clinical course after placement of PES and SES showed favorable midterm clinical outcomes among Japanese STEMI patients treated within 48h of onset. However, SES treatment resulted in superior angiographic outcomes compared to PES., (Copyright © 2012 Japanese College of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: The long-term safety and efficacy of primary stenting using drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) are not fully understood in Japan. Therefore, we retrospectively examined the midterm clinical and angiographic outcomes in STEMI patients after primary stenting using sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in a clinical setting through a historical comparison with those of bare-metal stents (BMS)., Methods and Results: The study design was a retrospective, nonrandomized, and single-center study. The clinical outcomes for 568 consecutive patients who presented within 12 h of their first STEMI and who were treated with BMS (n = 198; 184 STEMIs from June 2003 to August 2004 and 14 STEMIs from September 2004 to May 2007) or SES (n = 370; from August 2004 to May 2007) at our medical center in Japan were retrospectively investigated in February 2010. The incidence of post-discharge events (comprising cardiac death and nonfatal recurrent MI) after SES placement (3.9%) was not significantly different from that after BMS placement (6.7%). SES was not related to the risk of post-discharge events (mean follow-up for SES, 1327 ± 415 days; BMS, 1818 ± 681 days) (hazard ratio of 0.369 at 95% CI, 0.119-1.147, p = 0.085). The incidence of definite stent thromboses after SES placement (0.54%) was not significantly higher than that after BMS placement (0%). The incidence of binary in-stent restenosis (% diameter stenosis of more than 50% at secondary angiography) after SES placement (8.3%) was significantly lower than that after BMS placement (25.7%; p < 0.001)., Conclusions: From the present historical comparison of SES and BMS, we conclude that primary stenting using SES in a clinical setting has favorable clinical and angiographic outcomes in Japanese STEMI patients., (Copyright © 2011 Japanese College of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and purpose: The purpose of the present study was to examine the mid-term clinical and angiographic outcomes of patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) who presented within 48 h and received paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) or sirolimus-eluting stents (SES). Methods and results: This study was a retrospective, non-randomized, single-center study. The post-discharge clinical outcomes of 357 consecutive patients who presented within 48 h of their first STEMI and received PES (n = 163) or SES (n = 194) between February 2007 and February 2009 were analyzed in May 2011. The incidence of post-discharge events (i.e. cardiac death and non-fatal recurrent MI) after PES placement (0.6%) did not significantly differ from that after SES placement (1.5%). Treatment with PES was not related to the risk of adverse events post-discharge (mean follow-up period for PES placement, 1170 ± 243 days; hazard ratio, 0.346; 95% CI, 0.036-3.371; p = 0.361). No definite stent thromboses developed after treatment with PES or SES. The incidence of binary in-stent restenosis (stenosis of more than 50% of the diameter at secondary angiography performed 10-18 months after the initial procedure) after PES placement (17.1%) was significantly higher than that after SES placement (4.8%; p < 0.001). PES placement was an independent predictor of binary in-stent restenosis (odds ratio, 3.892; 95% CI, 1.470-10.30; p = 0.006). Conclusions: Retrospective examination of the post-discharge clinical course after placement of PES and SES showed favorable midterm clinical outcomes among Japanese STEMI patients treated within 48 h of onset. However, SES treatment resulted in superior angiographic outcomes compared to PES. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]