A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents.

Aims: The durable polymer (DP) of a drug-eluting stent (DES) serves no function once drug elution is complete. To ascertain the benefits of bioabsorbable polymer (BP) over DP-DESs requires a longer follow-up period, to overcome the time taken for polymer absorption. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of BP-DES with the DP-DES over mid (2 years) to long-term (3-5 years) follow-up.
Methods and Results: A thorough computer-based search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases. We only included randomized controlled studies comparing clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs. Only studies where data were available for a minimum of 2 years were included. A separate analysis of 2-year outcomes and 3- to 5-year outcomes were conducted. Data from 6 and 8 studies were included in 3- to 5-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively. There were no differences between stent groups in cardiac mortality, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, and reinfarction rates for either 2-year or 3- to 5-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis according to strut thickness (<100 µm, >100 µm) of BP-DES demonstrated similar results. The analyses of ST and very late ST favoured BP-DESs but did not reach statistically significant level.
Conclusion: There were no differences in clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs over mid- and long-term follow-up.
(Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved. © The Author(s) 2018. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)