Key result
Durable-polymer-coated stents and biodegradable-polymer-coated stents showed comparable rates of major adverse cardiac events (adjusted HR 0.891) at 2 years in acute myocardial infarction patients with current smoking.
Why the study?
Does biodegradable-polymer-coated DES improve clinical outcomes compared to durable-polymer-coated DES in AMI patients with current smoking undergoing PCI?
Observational (n=8,357)
Yes
Does biodegradable-polymer-coated DES improve clinical outcomes compared to durable-polymer-coated DES in AMI patients with current smoking undergoing PCI?
Hazard Ratio: 0.891 (95% CI 0.648–1.226)
Absolute Event Rate: 7.1% vs 6.5%
p-value: p=0.480
No difference supports preferring one polymer type; leaves open optimal stent choice in smoking AMI patients.
OBJECTIVE: Data concerning the effect of current smoking on solely new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) are limited. We investigated the impact of current smoking on 2-year clinical outcomes between durable-polymer (DP)-coated DES (zotarolimus-eluting [ZES] and everolimus eluting [EES]) and biodegradable-polymer (BP)-coated biolimus-eluting stent (BES) in acute myocardial infarction (AMI) patients after successful percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). METHODS: Finally, a total of 8357 AMI patients with current smoking underwent successful PCI with new-generation DES (ZES, EES, and BES) were enrolled and divided into three groups as ZES (n = 3199), EES (n = 3987), and BES group (n = 1171). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death (cardiac death [CD] or non-cardiac death), recurrent AMI (re-MI), any revascularization (target lesion revascularization [TLR], target vessel revascularization [TVR], and non-TVR). The secondary endpoint was the incidence of definite or probable stent thrombosis (ST). RESULTS: The 2-year adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of MACE for ZES vs. EES (1.055; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.843-1.321; p = 0.638), ZES vs. BES (HR, 0.885; 95% CI, 0.626-1.251; p = 0.488), EES vs. BES (HR, 0.889; 95% CI, 0.633-1.250; p = 0.499), and ZES/EES vs. BES (HR, 0.891; 95% CI, 0.648-1.126; p = 0.480) were similar. The occurrence of ST after adjustment were also comparable. In addition, the 2-year adjusted HR for all-cause death, CD, re-MI, TLR, TVR, and non-TVR were not different. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, DP-DES and BP-DES showed comparable safety and efficacy during 2-year follow-up periods. Therefore, DP-DES or BP-DES are equally acceptable in AMI patients with current smoking undergoing PCI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) with current smoking (n=8,357). Durable-polymer-coated stents (ZES/EES) vs. Biodegradable-polymer-coated stents (BES) was evaluated on Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) defined as all-cause death, recurrent AMI, or any coronary revascularization (HR 0.891, 95% CI 0.648-1.226, p=0.480). Durable-polymer-coated stents and biodegradable-polymer-coated stents showed comparable rates of major adverse cardiac events (adjusted HR 0.891) at 2 years in acute myocardial infarction patients with current smoking.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: