Clinical Outcome Comparison of Everolimus- and Biolimus-eluting Stents in Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction.
10.3904/kjm.2015.89.4.418
- Author:
In Cheol PARK
1
;
Myung Ho JEONG
;
In Soo KIM
;
Jung Ae RHEE
;
Jin Su CHOI
;
In Hyae PARK
;
Leem Soon CHAI
;
Yun Ah JEONG
;
Dae Yong HYUN
;
Hae Chang JEONG
;
Ki Hong LEE
;
Keun Ho PARK
;
Doo Sun SIM
;
Kye Hun KIM
;
Young Joon HONG
;
Hyung Uk PARK
;
Ju Han KIM
;
Young Keun AHN
;
Jeong Gwan CHO
;
Jong Chun PARK
Author Information
1. The Heart Research Center of Chonnam National University Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Korea. myungho@chollian.net
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Myocardial infarction;
Stents;
Prognosis
- MeSH:
Diabetes Mellitus;
Humans;
Mortality;
Myocardial Infarction*;
Percutaneous Coronary Intervention;
Prevalence;
Prognosis;
Propensity Score;
Stents*;
Stroke Volume
- From:Korean Journal of Medicine
2015;89(4):418-427
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND/AIMS: We compared the efficacy and safety of the second-generation everolimus-eluting stent (EES) and the third generation biolimus-eluting stent (BES) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI). METHODS: We analyzed 629 consecutive patients (mean age 65.1 +/- 11.2 years, 426 males) with AMI undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention from February 2008 to April 2012. They were divided into two groups according to stent type (EES group, n = 426; BES group, n = 203). The primary end-point was 2-year major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), defined as the composite of all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, non-target vessel revascularization and target lesion revascularization. The secondary end-point was 2-year target lesion failure (TLF). RESULTS: There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics, except that the patients with EES had a significantly higher prevalence of diabetes mellitus (34.7 vs. 22.7%, p = 0.002) and were older (67.1 +/- 11.3 vs. 64 +/- 12.9 years, p = 0.039) compared with the patients with BES. After propensity score matching, 2-year clinical outcomes showed no differences in composite MACEs or TLF between the two groups. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed that stent type was not a predictor of 2-year mortality or MACEs. However, older age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.037, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.014-1.060, p = 0.001), diabetes mellitus (HR 2.247, 95% CI 1.426-3.539, p = 0.001) and a left ventricular ejection fraction < or = 45% (HR 3.007, 95% CI 1.978-4.573, p = 0.001) were independent predictors for 2-year MACEs in patients undergoing EES or BES. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with BES had similar clinical 2-year outcomes compared with EES patients with AMI.
