What is the clinical evidence from this study?

Study design: Cohort. Population: Coronary artery disease (n=1176). Intervention: MULTI-LINK VISION stent vs. PRO-Kinetic stent. Primary outcome: Target lesion revascularization (TLR) (p=0.24).

October 10, 2011Journal of Interventional Cardiology

Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Thin-Strut Cobalt-Chromium Stents in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era: Results of the COBALT (Comparison of Bare-Metal Stents in All-Comers’ Lesion Treatment) Registry

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Key result

MULTI-LINK VISION bare-metal stent shows similar TLR rates versus PRO-Kinetic stent.

P=0.24
n=1,176

Why the study?

Does the MULTI-LINK VISION stent improve clinical outcomes compared to the PRO-Kinetic stent in patients with coronary artery disease selected for bare-metal stent implantation?

Population

1,176 patients with coronary artery disease selected for bare-metal stent implantation due to limited…

Comparison

MULTI-LINK VISION thin-strut cobalt-chromium… vs PRO-Kinetic thin-strut cobalt-chromium…

Design

Cohort

Follow-up

Median 549.5 days (VISION) and 528.5 days (PRO-Kinetic)

Authors

MAMohamed Abdel‐WahabInterventional / Structural Cardiology RTRalph TöelgKiel University GKGuido KassnerSegeberger Kliniken

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

May inform BMS selection in selected CAD patients; leaves open randomized confirmation of equivalence.

Study Design

Type

Cohort (n=1,176)

Multicenter

Structured PICO

Does the MULTI-LINK VISION stent improve clinical outcomes compared to the PRO-Kinetic stent in patients with coronary artery disease selected for bare-metal stent implantation?

Population

1,176 patients with coronary artery disease treated with bare-metal stents due to specific clinical or anatomic criteria, followed for a median of approximately 18 months.

Exposure

MULTI-LINK VISION thin-strut cobalt-chromium bare-metal stent (n=438)

Comparator

PRO-Kinetic thin-strut cobalt-chromium bare-metal stent (n=738)

Outcome

Target lesion revascularization (TLR) and target vessel revascularizationhard clinical

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 10.4% vs 12.3%

p-value: p=0.24

In selected patients, new-generation thin-strut bare-metal stents (MULTI-LINK VISION and PRO-Kinetic) provide acceptable and comparable long-term clinical outcomes.

Cite This Study

Abdel‐Wahab et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Coronary artery disease (n=1,176). MULTI-LINK VISION stent vs. PRO-Kinetic stent was evaluated on Target lesion revascularization (TLR) (p=0.24). The MULTI-LINK VISION bare-metal stent was associated with similar rates of target lesion revascularization compared to the PRO-Kinetic stent (10.4% vs. 12.3%; P=0.24).

synapsesocial.com/papers/6aa3eb86aaaedccdac74a04b https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-8183.2011.00672.x

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Thin-Strut Cobalt-Chromium Stents in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era: Results of the COBALT (Comparison of Bare-Metal Stents in All-Comers’ Lesion Treatment) Registry

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Study Design

Structured PICO

Main Result

Cite This Study

Long-Term Clinical Outcome of Thin-Strut Cobalt-Chromium Stents in the Drug-Eluting Stent Era: Results of the COBALT (Comparison of Bare-Metal Stents in All-Comers’ Lesion Treatment) Registry

Discussion

Member takes

Implication

Study Design

Structured PICO

Main Result

Cite This Study

Also Consider

Also Consider