Why the study?
Do drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis rates compared to bare metal stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Do drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis rates compared to bare metal stents in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention?
Drug-eluting stents represent a major advance in interventional cardiology by dramatically reducing restenosis rates compared to bare metal stents, though long-term safety and cost implications require consideration.
May favor DES in PCI to curb restenosis; leaves open long-term safety and cost questions for prospective trials.
The development of drug-eluting coronary stents has proved to be a quantum advance in interventional cardiology, rivaling the impact of stenting itself. Drug-eluting coronary stents deliver effective local concentrations of antiproliferative drugs (thus avoiding systemic toxicities), without substantially modifying the technique of percutaneous coronary intervention. Studies involving several different stent platforms and antiproliferative drug coatings have recently demonstrated dramatic reductions in restenosis rates, compared to conventional bare metal stents. Although the clinical benefits of drug-eluting stents are increasingly evident, important concerns about their long-term safety and costs have been raised. Furthermore, drug-eluting stents are being claimed to replace coronary artery bypass surgery in the near future. This review article evaluates the current best available evidence on the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents with a focus on the impact of this "revolutionary" new technology on the practice of coronary artery bypass surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Raja et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: