Loading…

Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries

Background Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus bare‐metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries. Objective and Methods The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 m...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions 2013-06, Vol.81 (7), p.1087-1094
Main Authors: Geng, Deng-Feng, Meng, Zhe, Yan, Hai-Yan, Nie, Ru-Qiong, Deng, Jing, Wang, Jing-Feng
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1819-e8a4974531b6eee055acc6292adb631a27da0fcbb761409747e5394e0f630c4b3
cites
container_end_page 1094
container_issue 7
container_start_page 1087
container_title Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
container_volume 81
creator Geng, Deng-Feng
Meng, Zhe
Yan, Hai-Yan
Nie, Ru-Qiong
Deng, Jing
Wang, Jing-Feng
description Background Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus bare‐metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries. Objective and Methods The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 mm) by performing a meta‐analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Six RCTs with 4,399 patients were included in this study. Overall, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risks of the composite of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (cardiac death/MI), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, however, DES was associated with significant reduction in the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) compared with BMS [0.48 (0.33, 0.70)] with consistent benefits among patients with reference vessel diameter ≥ 3.5 mm, reference vessel diameter ≥ 4.0 mm, stent length ≤ 15 mm, first‐generation DES or second‐generation DES. In patients with ≥ 3‐year follow‐up, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risk of cardiac death/MI, TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Conclusions This meta‐analysis suggests that DES is superior to BMS in terms of adverse cardiac events in large coronary arteries at the mid‐term follow‐up. The long‐term efficacy of newer‐generation DES versus BMS in larger coronary arteries is still worth further evaluation. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/ccd.24599
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1355167489</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2978867951</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1819-e8a4974531b6eee055acc6292adb631a27da0fcbb761409747e5394e0f630c4b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9UMtOwzAQtBBIlMKBP4jEOa3fjo8QoEUtcAHBzXKcbZWSJsVOgP49pq047Ug7szszCF0SPCIY07Fz5YhyofURGhBBaaqofD8-YKK5PEVnIawwxlpSPUB3N9ZDuobO1knooOmSL_ChD0np-2UKdd9VzfKwqZqktn4JiWt921i_TazvwFcQztHJwtYBLg5ziF7v717yaTp_njzk1_PUkYzoFDLLteKCkUICABbCOhdtUFsWkhFLVWnxwhWFkoTjyFQgmOaAF5Jhxws2RFf7uxvffvYQOrNqe9_El4YwIYhUPNORNd6zvqsatmbjq3U0awg2fxWZWJHZVWTy_HYHoiLdK6qY9OdfYf2HkYopYd6eJiabqOmMPM7MjP0Cwqtp5Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1355167489</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Read &amp; Publish Collection</source><creator>Geng, Deng-Feng ; Meng, Zhe ; Yan, Hai-Yan ; Nie, Ru-Qiong ; Deng, Jing ; Wang, Jing-Feng</creator><creatorcontrib>Geng, Deng-Feng ; Meng, Zhe ; Yan, Hai-Yan ; Nie, Ru-Qiong ; Deng, Jing ; Wang, Jing-Feng</creatorcontrib><description>Background Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus bare‐metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries. Objective and Methods The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 mm) by performing a meta‐analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Six RCTs with 4,399 patients were included in this study. Overall, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risks of the composite of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (cardiac death/MI), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, however, DES was associated with significant reduction in the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) compared with BMS [0.48 (0.33, 0.70)] with consistent benefits among patients with reference vessel diameter ≥ 3.5 mm, reference vessel diameter ≥ 4.0 mm, stent length ≤ 15 mm, first‐generation DES or second‐generation DES. In patients with ≥ 3‐year follow‐up, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risk of cardiac death/MI, TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Conclusions This meta‐analysis suggests that DES is superior to BMS in terms of adverse cardiac events in large coronary arteries at the mid‐term follow‐up. The long‐term efficacy of newer‐generation DES versus BMS in larger coronary arteries is still worth further evaluation. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1522-1946</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-726X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/ccd.24599</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CARIF2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>adverse cardiac events ; bare-metal stent ; Cardiology ; drug-eluting stent ; Heart attacks ; large coronary arteries ; target vessel revascularization ; Thrombosis ; Veins &amp; arteries</subject><ispartof>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2013-06, Vol.81 (7), p.1087-1094</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c1819-e8a4974531b6eee055acc6292adb631a27da0fcbb761409747e5394e0f630c4b3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Geng, Deng-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meng, Zhe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yan, Hai-Yan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nie, Ru-Qiong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Jing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jing-Feng</creatorcontrib><title>Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries</title><title>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</title><addtitle>Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent</addtitle><description>Background Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus bare‐metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries. Objective and Methods The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 mm) by performing a meta‐analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Six RCTs with 4,399 patients were included in this study. Overall, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risks of the composite of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (cardiac death/MI), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, however, DES was associated with significant reduction in the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) compared with BMS [0.48 (0.33, 0.70)] with consistent benefits among patients with reference vessel diameter ≥ 3.5 mm, reference vessel diameter ≥ 4.0 mm, stent length ≤ 15 mm, first‐generation DES or second‐generation DES. In patients with ≥ 3‐year follow‐up, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risk of cardiac death/MI, TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Conclusions This meta‐analysis suggests that DES is superior to BMS in terms of adverse cardiac events in large coronary arteries at the mid‐term follow‐up. The long‐term efficacy of newer‐generation DES versus BMS in larger coronary arteries is still worth further evaluation. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</description><subject>adverse cardiac events</subject><subject>bare-metal stent</subject><subject>Cardiology</subject><subject>drug-eluting stent</subject><subject>Heart attacks</subject><subject>large coronary arteries</subject><subject>target vessel revascularization</subject><subject>Thrombosis</subject><subject>Veins &amp; arteries</subject><issn>1522-1946</issn><issn>1522-726X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9UMtOwzAQtBBIlMKBP4jEOa3fjo8QoEUtcAHBzXKcbZWSJsVOgP49pq047Ug7szszCF0SPCIY07Fz5YhyofURGhBBaaqofD8-YKK5PEVnIawwxlpSPUB3N9ZDuobO1knooOmSL_ChD0np-2UKdd9VzfKwqZqktn4JiWt921i_TazvwFcQztHJwtYBLg5ziF7v717yaTp_njzk1_PUkYzoFDLLteKCkUICABbCOhdtUFsWkhFLVWnxwhWFkoTjyFQgmOaAF5Jhxws2RFf7uxvffvYQOrNqe9_El4YwIYhUPNORNd6zvqsatmbjq3U0awg2fxWZWJHZVWTy_HYHoiLdK6qY9OdfYf2HkYopYd6eJiabqOmMPM7MjP0Cwqtp5Q</recordid><startdate>20130601</startdate><enddate>20130601</enddate><creator>Geng, Deng-Feng</creator><creator>Meng, Zhe</creator><creator>Yan, Hai-Yan</creator><creator>Nie, Ru-Qiong</creator><creator>Deng, Jing</creator><creator>Wang, Jing-Feng</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130601</creationdate><title>Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries</title><author>Geng, Deng-Feng ; Meng, Zhe ; Yan, Hai-Yan ; Nie, Ru-Qiong ; Deng, Jing ; Wang, Jing-Feng</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1819-e8a4974531b6eee055acc6292adb631a27da0fcbb761409747e5394e0f630c4b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>adverse cardiac events</topic><topic>bare-metal stent</topic><topic>Cardiology</topic><topic>drug-eluting stent</topic><topic>Heart attacks</topic><topic>large coronary arteries</topic><topic>target vessel revascularization</topic><topic>Thrombosis</topic><topic>Veins &amp; arteries</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Geng, Deng-Feng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meng, Zhe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Yan, Hai-Yan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nie, Ru-Qiong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Deng, Jing</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Jing-Feng</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Geng, Deng-Feng</au><au>Meng, Zhe</au><au>Yan, Hai-Yan</au><au>Nie, Ru-Qiong</au><au>Deng, Jing</au><au>Wang, Jing-Feng</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries</atitle><jtitle>Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions</jtitle><addtitle>Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent</addtitle><date>2013-06-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>81</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>1087</spage><epage>1094</epage><pages>1087-1094</pages><issn>1522-1946</issn><eissn>1522-726X</eissn><coden>CARIF2</coden><abstract>Background Uncertainties exist with regard to the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) versus bare‐metal stent (BMS) in large coronary arteries. Objective and Methods The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of BMS versus DES in terms of clinical events in large coronary vessels (≥3.0 mm) by performing a meta‐analysis of all relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results Six RCTs with 4,399 patients were included in this study. Overall, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risks of the composite of cardiac death and nonfatal myocardial infarction (cardiac death/MI), cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and stent thrombosis, however, DES was associated with significant reduction in the risk of target vessel revascularization (TVR) compared with BMS [0.48 (0.33, 0.70)] with consistent benefits among patients with reference vessel diameter ≥ 3.5 mm, reference vessel diameter ≥ 4.0 mm, stent length ≤ 15 mm, first‐generation DES or second‐generation DES. In patients with ≥ 3‐year follow‐up, there were no significant between‐group differences in the risk of cardiac death/MI, TVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction or stent thrombosis. Conclusions This meta‐analysis suggests that DES is superior to BMS in terms of adverse cardiac events in large coronary arteries at the mid‐term follow‐up. The long‐term efficacy of newer‐generation DES versus BMS in larger coronary arteries is still worth further evaluation. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.</abstract><cop>Washington</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/ccd.24599</doi><tpages>8</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1522-1946
ispartof Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions, 2013-06, Vol.81 (7), p.1087-1094
issn 1522-1946
1522-726X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_1355167489
source Wiley-Blackwell Read & Publish Collection
subjects adverse cardiac events
bare-metal stent
Cardiology
drug-eluting stent
Heart attacks
large coronary arteries
target vessel revascularization
Thrombosis
Veins & arteries
title Bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent in large coronary arteries
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T06%3A20%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Bare-metal%20stent%20versus%20drug-eluting%20stent%20in%20large%20coronary%20arteries&rft.jtitle=Catheterization%20and%20cardiovascular%20interventions&rft.au=Geng,%20Deng-Feng&rft.date=2013-06-01&rft.volume=81&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=1087&rft.epage=1094&rft.pages=1087-1094&rft.issn=1522-1946&rft.eissn=1522-726X&rft.coden=CARIF2&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/ccd.24599&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E2978867951%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c1819-e8a4974531b6eee055acc6292adb631a27da0fcbb761409747e5394e0f630c4b3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1355167489&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true