Comparison of six-year clinical outcome of sirolimus-and paclitaxel-eluting stents to bare-metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: An analysis of the RESEARCH (Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) and T-SEARCH (Taxus Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) registries

Cihan Simsek, Michael Magro, Eric Boersma, Yoshinobu Onuma, Sjoerd Nauta, Joost Daemen, Marcia Gaspersz, Robert Jan Van Geuns, Willem Van Der Giessen, Ron Van Domburg, Patrick Serruys

Research output: Contribution to a Journal (Peer & Non Peer)Articlepeer-review

17 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Short-and long-term data showed that drug-eluting stents (DES) significantly decreased target vessel revascularization (TVR) and major adverse cardiac event (MACE) rates compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). However, conflicting long-term data remain for patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Objective: Our aim was to assess the 6-year clinical outcome of all patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PPCI) for a de novo lesion with exclusive use of BMS, sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) and paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES). Methods: Three PPCI cohorts (BMS ≤ 80; SES ≤ 92; PES ≤ 162) were systematically followed for the occurrence of MACE. Results: Very late stent thrombosis was more common after the implantation of SES as compared to PES or BMS (7.6, 0.6, and 0.0, respectively; p ≤ 0.001). Kaplan-Meier estimates indicate no statistically significant difference for mortality between the three stent types at 6 years (BMS ≤ 25; SES ≤ 15; PES ≤ 21; Log-rank p ≤ 0.2). After adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics, mortality, mortality/myocardial infarction (MI), and MACE rates were significantly lower for SES compared to BMS, but not for PES (aHR ≤ 0.41, 95 CI: 0.17-0.98; aHR ≤ 0.44, 95 CI: 0.21-0.96; aHR ≤ 0.35, 95 CI: 0.17-0.72, respectively). No differences were observed between the three stent types for TVR rates. Conclusion: Neither SES nor PES improved safety or efficacy as compared to BMS in a STEMI population at 6 years. After adjusting, the usage of SES resulted in a significant decrease in mortality, mortality/MI and MACE rates as compared to BMS, in contrast to the usage of PES. SES and PES have a similar effectiveness and safety profile, although very late stent thrombosis was more common with SES.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)336-341
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Invasive Cardiology
Volume23
Issue number8
Publication statusPublished - Aug 2011
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • percutaneous coronary intervention
  • ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction
  • stents

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of six-year clinical outcome of sirolimus-and paclitaxel-eluting stents to bare-metal stents in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: An analysis of the RESEARCH (Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) and T-SEARCH (Taxus Stent Evaluated at Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital) registries'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this