Key result
In FFR-deferred lesions, in-stent restenosis predicts ~533% greater 3-year ischemia-driven TLR risk.
Why the study?
The comparative long-term effectiveness and safety of titanium-nitride-oxide coated stents versus drug-eluting stents in acute coronary syndrome patients were unclear.
Does titanium-nitride-oxide coated stent (TiNOS) improve clinical outcomes compared to drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Cohort (n=440)
Yes
Does titanium-nitride-oxide coated stent (TiNOS) improve clinical outcomes compared to drug-eluting stents (DES) in patients with acute coronary syndrome?
Hazard Ratio: 6.33 (95% CI 2.25–17.8)
p-value: p=<0.01
In patients with acute coronary syndrome, titanium-nitride-oxide coated stents may reduce long-term rates of MI and stent thrombosis compared to drug-eluting stents, although overall MACE rates are similar.
TiNOS offers lower MI, cardiac death, and stent thrombosis than DES in ACS at 5 years; extends 1-year RCT evidence with similar MACE.
BACKGROUND In severe cases of coronary artery disease, percutaneous coronary intervention provide promising results. The stent used could be a drug-eluting stent (DES) or a titanium-nitride-oxide coated stent (TiNOS). AIM To compare the 5-year effectiveness and safety of the two stent types. METHODS The following systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines, and PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception till August 2023. Primary outcomes were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death or MI, and ischemia-driven total lesion revascularization (ID-TLR). RESULTS Four randomized controlled trials (RCT), which analyzed a sum total of 3045 patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS) after a median follow-up time of 5 years were included. Though statistically insignificant, an increase in the ID-TLR was observed in patients receiving TiNOSs vs DESs. In addition, MI, cardiac death and MI, and definite stent thrombosis (DST) were significantly decreased in the TiNOS arm. Baseline analysis revealed no significant results with meta-regression presenting non-ST elevated MI (NSTEMI) as a statistically significant covariate in the outcome of MACE. CONCLUSION TiNOS was found to be superior to DES in terms of MI, cardiac death or MI, and DST outcomes, however, the effect of the two stent types on ID-TLR and MACE was not significant. A greater number of studies are required to establish an accurate comparison of patient outcomes in TiNOS and DES.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fahim et al. (2024) conducted a cohort in Angiographically intermediate epicardial coronary artery stenosis (n=440). In-stent restenosis (ISR) vs. No in-stent restenosis was evaluated on Ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization (TLR) in deferred lesions within 3 years (HR 6.33, 95% CI 2.25-17.8, p=<0.01). In lesions deferred based on fractional flow reserve, in-stent restenosis (HR 6.33) and higher SYNTAX score (HR 1.10) were independent predictors of ischemia-driven target lesion revascularization at 3 years.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: