Key result
Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiac events compared to bare metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (25.4% vs. 50.0%; OR 0.48, P=0.03).
Why the study?
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with saphenous vein graft disease compared to bare metal stents?
Cohort (n=109)
Does sirolimus-eluting stent implantation reduce major adverse cardiac events in patients with saphenous vein graft disease compared to bare metal stents?
In patients with saphenous vein graft disease, sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced long-term major adverse cardiac events and target vessel revascularization compared to bare metal stents.
May support sirolimus-eluting stents in saphenous vein grafts; leaves open need for randomized confirmation.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) in the treatment of saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease. BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) of SVG lesions with bare metal stents (BMS) is associated with frequent in-stent restenosis, progression of disease in nonstented SVG segments, and suboptimal clinical outcomes. While SES have been shown to reduce restenosis rates in various native lesion subsets, the long-term clinical impact of SES use in SVG lesions is less clear. METHODS: We compared our first 59 patients who underwent SES implantation in SVGs with 50 consecutive patients who received BMS in an equivalent time period prior to SES availability. Clinical outcomes were compared in both groups. RESULTS: Baseline clinical variables between the two groups were similar. Mean graft age in the SES cohort was older than that in the BMS cohort (12.9 years vs. 9.4 years). At follow-up, the SES group had a 24.6% absolute lower incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (25.4% vs. 50.0%), driven by a 20.7% absolute lower incidence of target vessel revascularization (TVR) (15.3% vs. 36.0%). The SES treatment group had a 24.1% lower rate of clinical restenosis (11.9% vs. 36.0%). The use of a SES was an independent negative predictor of MACE at a mean follow-up of 20 months (odds ratio [OR]= 0.48,P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the placement of longer stents in patients with older, smaller SVGs, the use of SES in the treatment of SVG lesions appears to be safe and is associated with less clinical restenosis and more favorable long-term clinical outcomes as compared with BMS.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Minutello et al. (2007) conducted a cohort in Saphenous vein graft (SVG) disease (n=109). Sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) vs. Bare metal stents (BMS) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (OR 0.48, p=0.03). Sirolimus-eluting stents significantly reduced the incidence of major adverse cardiac events compared to bare metal stents in saphenous vein graft lesions (25.4% vs. 50.0%; OR 0.48, P=0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: