Key result
Overlapping stents show similar 5-year composite outcomes compared to no-overlap stenting in STEMI.
Why the study?
The impact of stent overlapping on long-term clinical outcomes in STEMI patients was unclear.
Does overlapping stent implantation increase adverse clinical outcomes in STEMI patients compared to no-overlap stents?
Cohort (n=1,498)
Does overlapping stent implantation increase adverse clinical outcomes in STEMI patients compared to no-overlap stents?
Hazard Ratio: 1.14 (95% CI 0.8–1.62)
Absolute Event Rate: 26.3% vs 22.3%
p-value: p=0.47
In STEMI patients, overlapping stents do not significantly increase long-term patient-oriented composite outcomes compared to no-overlap stents, though overlap with bare-metal stents may increase the risk of stent thrombosis.
AIMS: The aim of this study was to compare the long-term outcomes of STEMI patients treated with overlap vs. no-overlap stents. METHODS AND RESULTS: We analysed the one- and five-year clinical outcomes of 1,498 STEMI patients according to overlapping stent implantation. The primary endpoint was a patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation. Stent thrombosis data were also analysed. Four hundred and four (27.0%) patients were treated with overlapping stents, whereas the remaining 1,094 (73.0%) were not. At one and five years, there was no difference in PoCE between the overlap vs. no-overlap group, even after adjustment (14.9% vs. 12.4%; HR 1.20, 95% CI: 0.76-1.90; p=0.44, and 26.3% vs. 22.3%; HR 1.14, 95% CI: 0.80-1.62; p=0.47, respectively). At five years, within the overlap group, patients who received BMS had a trend towards a higher rate of PoCE and DoCE as compared to those who received EES. At one year, there was a trend towards a higher rate of definite/probable stent thrombosis in the overlap compared to the no-overlap group (2.2% vs. 1.6%; HR 2.35, 95% CI: 0.95-5.90; p=0.06). This difference was driven by a higher rate for BMS compared to EES (4.4% vs. 0%, p for interaction=0.03) in the overlap group. At five years, the absolute risk difference for overlap (3.5% vs. 2.2%, p=0.99) and interaction for BMS (p=0.03) were similar. CONCLUSIONS: In patients presenting with STEMI, the long-term PoCE was similar for the overlap and no-overlap groups. Overlap among patients receiving BMS appears to be associated with a higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes and stent thrombosis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ortega‐Paz et al. (2017) conducted a cohort in ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) (n=1,498). Overlapping stents vs. No-overlap stents was evaluated on Patient-oriented composite endpoint (PoCE) of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, and repeat revascularisation at 5 years (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.80-1.62, p=0.47). Overlapping stent implantation in STEMI patients resulted in similar 5-year rates of death, MI, or repeat revascularization compared to no-overlap (HR 1.14; 95% CI 0.80-1.62; p=0.47).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: