A comparative analysis of major clinical outcomes using drug‐eluting stents versus bare metal stents in diabetic versus nondiabetic patients

OBJECTIVES: We aim to explore the clinical outcome of drug-eluting stents (DES) versus bare-metal stents (BMS) implantation in diabetics versus nondiabetic patients. BACKGROUND: Diabetic patients sustain worse long-term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) when compared with nondiabetics. The use of DES decreases the rate of repeat revascularization in this population but data concerning long-term clinical benefits, such as myocardial infarction (MI) or mortality is scant. METHODS: We analyzed data from a comprehensive registry of 6,583 consecutive patients undergoing PCI at our center. A propensity score was used for analysis of outcomes and for matching (DES vs. BMS). Outcome parameters were total mortality, MI, repeat target vessel revascularization (TVR) rates, and risk-adjusted event-free survival. Within this cohort, we identified 2,571 nondiabetic patients and these were compared with 1,826 diabetic coronary patients. RESULTS: Mean and median follow up time was 3 and 3.25 years, respectively. Overall, diabetics had higher rates of major-adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) at 4 years compared with nondiabetics (23.03 vs. 31.96 P > 0.001). DES use was associated with lower rates of TVR in both groups [diabetics hazard ratio (HR) = 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.42-0.76, P < 0.001, nondiabetics HR = 0.73, 95% CI: 0.55-0.97, P = 0.03] while sustained decreased rates of both mortality and MI were evident solely among diabetics (HR = 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.89, P = 0.004 in diabetic vs. HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.69-1.13, P = 0.3). CONCLUSIONS: In a "real-world," unselected population and extended clinical use, DES in diabetics was associated with sustained decreased rates of MI, death, TVR, and MACE while this benefit was attenuated in the nondiabetic population.