Durable-polymer drug-eluting stents had similar 2-year rates of major adverse cardiac events compared to biodegradable-polymer stents in AMI and prediabetes (aHR 1.125; 95% CI 0.834-1.518; P=0.440).
Cohort (n=4,377)
Does durable-polymer drug-eluting stents improve major adverse cardiac events compared to biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes after successful percutaneous coronary intervention?
In patients with acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes, durable-polymer and biodegradable-polymer newer-generation drug-eluting stents demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy over a 2-year follow-up.
Estimación del efecto: aHR 1.125 (95% CI 0.834-1.518)
valor p: p=0.440
Hyperglycemia is an important risk factor for poor clinical outcomes in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The relative superiority of the long-term clinical outcomes of durable-polymer (DP) -based and biodegradable-polymer (BP) -based newer-generation drug-eluting stents (DESs) after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in patients with AMI and prediabetes is not well established. We compared the clinical outcomes in such patients between DP-based and BP-based newer-generation DESs.A total of 4,377 patients with AMI and prediabetes were divided into the following two groups: the DP-DES group (n = 3,775; zotarolimus-eluting stents ZES; n = 1,546 and everolimus-eluting stents EES; n = 2,229) and the BP-DES group (n = 602; biolimus-eluting stents BES). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction (re-MI), or any repeat revascularization. The secondary endpoint was the occurrence of stent thrombosis (ST).The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of MACEs for ZES versus EES, ZES versus BES, EES versus BES, and ZES/EES versus BES (aHR: 1.125; 95% confidence interval CI, 0.834-1.518; P = 0.440) were similar. The cumulative incidence of ST was also comparable between the DP-DES and BP-DES groups (aHR: 1.407; 95% CI, 0.476-4.158; P = 0.537). Moreover, the 2-year aHRs of all-cause death, CD, re-MI, target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and non-TVR were similar.Patients with AMI and prediabetes who received DP-DES or BP-DES during PCI showed comparable safety and efficacy during the 2-year follow-up period.
Kim et al. (Fri,) conducted a cohort in Acute myocardial infarction and prediabetes (n=4,377). Durable-polymer-based drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) vs. Biodegradable-polymer-based drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as all-cause death, recurrent myocardial infarction, or any repeat revascularization (aHR 1.125, 95% CI 0.834-1.518, p=0.440). Durable-polymer drug-eluting stents had similar 2-year rates of major adverse cardiac events compared to biodegradable-polymer stents in AMI and prediabetes (aHR 1.125; 95% CI 0.834-1.518; P=0.440).