Seven-Year Clinical Outcomes of Sirolimus-Eluting Stent Versus Bare-Metal Stent: A Matched Analysis From A Real World, Single Center Registry.
10.3346/jkms.2013.28.3.396
- Author:
Ung KIM
1
;
Jong Seon PARK
;
Sang Hee LEE
;
Dong Gu SHIN
;
Young Jo KIM
Author Information
1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Internal Medicine, Yeungnam University Medical Center, Daegu, Korea. pjs@med.yu.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- Keywords:
Drug-Eluting Stents;
Bare-Metal Stents;
Long-term
- MeSH:
Aged;
Angioplasty, Balloon, Coronary/adverse effects/*methods;
Coronary Angiography;
Coronary Stenosis/mortality/radiography/*therapy;
Databases, Factual;
*Drug-Eluting Stents;
Female;
Follow-Up Studies;
Humans;
Ischemia/etiology;
Kaplan-Meier Estimate;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Myocardial Infarction/etiology;
Myocardial Revascularization;
Registries;
Sirolimus/*therapeutic use;
*Stents;
Thrombosis/etiology
- From:Journal of Korean Medical Science
2013;28(3):396-401
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes for seven years, between sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) and bare metal stent (BMS). During the BMS and drug-eluting stent (DES) transition period (from April 2002 to April 2004), 434 consecutive patients with 482 lesions underwent percutaneous coronary intervention, using BMS or SES. Using propensity score matching, 186 patients with BMS and 166 patients with SES were selected. Seven year clinical outcomes of major adverse cardiac events (MACE), such as cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and ischemia-driven target vessel revascularization (TVR), and angiographic definite stent thrombosis (ST) were compared. At one-year follow up, patients with SES showed significantly lower MACE (9.1% in BMS vs 3.0% in SES, P = 0.024). However, cumulative MACE for 7 yr was not significantly different between two groups (24.7% in BMS vs 17.4% in SES, P = 0.155). There was no significant difference in MI, TVR, death and ST. The TVR were gradually increased from 1 to 7 yr in SES, on the contrary to that of BMS. In conclusion, although SES showed better clinical outcomes in the early period after implantation, it did not show significant benefits in the long-term follow up, compared with that of BMS.