PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
June 19, 2007Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions14 citations

Comparison of drug‐eluting stents with bare metal stents in unselected patients with acute myocardial infarction

View Full Paper
LKLeon Iri KupferwasserAAAllen M. AmornNKNikhil Kapoor

Structured PICO

Does the use of drug-eluting stents reduce major adverse cardiovascular events compared to bare metal stents in patients with acute myocardial infarction?

P
Population
261 consecutive patients with acute myocardial infarction
I
Intervention
Drug-eluting stents (DES) (n=131)
C
Comparator
Bare metal stents (BMS) (n=130)
O
Outcome
Major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 12 monthscomposite

In patients with acute myocardial infarction, the use of drug-eluting stents is associated with a significant reduction in 12-month major adverse cardiovascular events compared to bare metal stents, despite more complex procedures.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the procedural characteristics and outcomes of patients with acute myocardial infarction treated with drug-eluting stents (DES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: DES have been shown to reduce the incidence of restenosis and target vessel revascularization (TVR) in clinical randomized studies when compared with BMS in patients undergoing elective percutaneous intervention. Limited data are available with the use of DES in patients with acute ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction. METHODS: Two hundred and sixty-one consecutive patients who presented with myocardial infarction between 7/2001 and 8/2005 were studied. The procedural characteristics, 30-day and 12-month outcomes of 131 patients treated with DES were compared with 130 patients treated with BMS. RESULTS: At 12-months follow-up DES therapy was associated with a substantial decrease in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (HR 0.33; P =0.002), TVR (HR 0.19; P =0.002), and recurrent myocardial infarction (HR 0.23; P =0.051) vs. BMS therapy. Coronary interventions utilizing DES were characterized by a marked increase in the number of stent per target vessel (DES: 1.9 +/- 0.9 vs. BMS: 1.38 +/- 0.6, P < 0.0001), treatment of bifurcation (DES: 21% vs. BMS: 5%, P =0.0004), and multivessel intervention (DES: 22% vs. BMS: 8%, P =0.003). CONCLUSION: The routine use of DES in acute myocardial infarction is associated with reduced rates of MACE at 12 months vs BMS, despite a higher rate of complex procedures in the DES treated patients. In addition to its anti-restenosis effect, the improved outcome of patients treated with DES may be linked to a more complete revascularization in association with prolonged clopidogrel therapy.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kupferwasser et al. (2007) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a21a2d3e0373b1e768b8f14https://doi.org/10.1002/ccd.21083
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper