Why the study?
Does first-generation DES compared to second-generation DES increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events in patients 1 year after stenting, irrespective of DAPT duration?
Does first-generation DES compared to second-generation DES increase the risk of adverse cardiovascular events in patients 1 year after stenting, irrespective of DAPT duration?
First-generation DES are associated with worse clinical outcomes compared to second-generation DES, a risk that persists even with prolonged dual antiplatelet therapy.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
First-generation DES linked to higher events than second-generation; extends prior comparisons but leaves causal effects and DAPT optimization open in observational data.
There is an apparent benefit with extension of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) beyond 1 year after implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES). Assessment by a Double Randomization of a Conventional Antiplatelet Strategy vs a Monitoring-Guided Strategy for Drug-Eluting Stent Implantation, and of Treatment Interruption vs Continuation One Year After Stenting (ARCTIC)-Generation assessed whether there is a difference of outcome between first- vs second-generation DES and if there is an interaction with DAPT duration in the ARCTIC-Interruption study. ARCTIC-Interruption randomly allocated 1259 patients 1 year after stent implantation to a strategy of interruption of DAPT (n = 624), in which aspirin antiplatelet treatment only was maintained, or DAPT continuation (n = 635) for 6 to 18 additional months. The primary endpoint was the composite of death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, stroke, or urgent revascularization. A total of 520 and 722 patients received a first- and a second-generation DES, respectively. After a median follow-up of 17 months (interquartile range, 15-18 months) after randomization, the primary endpoint occurred in 32 (6.2%) and 19 (2.6%) patients with first- and second-generation DES, respectively (hazard ratio: 2.31, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.07, P = 0.004). This was observed irrespective of the strategy of interruption or continuation of DAPT and timing of study recruitment. Major bleeding events occurred in 4 (0.8%) and 3 patients (0.4%) with first- and second-generation DES, respectively (hazard ratio: 1.79, 95% confidence interval: 0.40-8.02, P = 0.44). Results did not change after multiple adjustments for potential confounding variables. ARCTIC-Generation showed worse clinical outcome with first- vs second-generation DES, a difference that appeared to persist even with prolonged DAPT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Collet et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: