Back to Search
Start Over
Comparable clinical safety and efficacy of biodegradable versus durable polymer paclitaxel eluting stents despite shorter dual antiplatelet therapy: insights from a multicenter, propensity score-matched registry.
- Source :
-
Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions [Catheter Cardiovasc Interv] 2013 Sep 01; Vol. 82 (3), pp. E155-62. Date of Electronic Publication: 2012 Dec 03. - Publication Year :
- 2013
-
Abstract
- Background: The biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents have been proposed as an alternative to durable polymer DES, theoretically improving vessel healing and reducing the need for prolonged double anti platelet therapy (DAPT), however clinical significance of this technology is under debate. Therefore, we sought to compare the clinical outcomes of two Paclitaxel eluting stents (PES) containing different polymer-based eluting matrices.<br />Methods: In this multicenter registry of 392 consecutive patients who underwent PCI between June 2006 and September 2008, we included patients with stable angina or NSTE-ACS displaying at least one significant lesion (>50% diameter stenosis) in native coronary arteries.<br />Results: Biodegradable polymer PES (BP-PES, LUC Chopin(2) , Balton, Poland) was implanted in 206 patients, whereas durable polymer PES (DP-PES, Taxus, Boston Scientific, USA) was implanted in 186 patients. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics between groups with the exception of increased diabetes and number of lesions for BP-PES. In risk-unadjusted analysis at 1-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in TLR (BP-PES: 8.4% vs.<br />Dp-Pes: 6%; P = 0.36), TVR (BP-PES: 11.1% vs.<br />Dp-Pes: 8.4%; P = 0.36) and incidence of stent thromboses (BP-PES: 2.15% vs.<br />Dp-Pes: 3.4%; P = 0.42) between groups. There was also no difference in MACCE between groups (17.6% vs. 14.4%, P = 0.49). The mean dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) compliance at 1 year was 77% for BP-PES versus 92% for DP-PES (P = 0.03). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a significantly higher long-term stroke free survival in BP-PES (P = 0.04). After adjustment, this was sustained with an additional tendency toward higher MI free survival for BP-PES (P = 0.059).<br />Conclusions: In this observational analysis, BP-PES were comparable to DP-PES, with regard to incidence of repeated revascularizations, stent thromboses and MACCE despite earlier DAPT discontinuation.<br /> (Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)
- Subjects :
- Acute Coronary Syndrome diagnosis
Acute Coronary Syndrome drug therapy
Acute Coronary Syndrome mortality
Aged
Angina, Stable diagnosis
Angina, Stable drug therapy
Angina, Stable mortality
Coronary Stenosis diagnosis
Coronary Stenosis drug therapy
Coronary Stenosis mortality
Coronary Thrombosis mortality
Coronary Thrombosis prevention & control
Disease-Free Survival
Drug Administration Schedule
Drug Therapy, Combination
Female
Humans
Incidence
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Medication Adherence
Middle Aged
Myocardial Infarction mortality
Myocardial Infarction prevention & control
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention adverse effects
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention mortality
Poland epidemiology
Propensity Score
Prosthesis Design
Registries
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors
Stroke mortality
Stroke prevention & control
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Absorbable Implants
Acute Coronary Syndrome therapy
Angina, Stable therapy
Cardiovascular Agents administration & dosage
Coronary Stenosis therapy
Drug-Eluting Stents
Paclitaxel administration & dosage
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention instrumentation
Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors administration & dosage
Polymers
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 1522-726X
- Volume :
- 82
- Issue :
- 3
- Database :
- MEDLINE
- Journal :
- Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions
- Publication Type :
- Academic Journal
- Accession number :
- 23109067
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.24732