Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2007 Jul;93(7):792-800.
doi: 10.1136/hrt.2006.093740.

A quantitative estimate of bare-metal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction: angiographic measures in relation to clinical outcome

Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

A quantitative estimate of bare-metal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction: angiographic measures in relation to clinical outcome

Tone Svilaas et al. Heart. 2007 Jul.

Abstract

We performed a systematic review of all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from the pre-drug-eluting-stent era comparing bare-metal stenting (BMS) with balloon angioplasty in patients with acute myocardial infarction (MI) to examine coronary angiographic parameters of infarct-related vessel patency and to relate the angiographic measures to clinical outcome. The search was restricted to published RCTs in humans. 10 RCTs, (6192 patients) were analysed. Compared with balloon angioplasty, BMS was associated with reduced rates of reocclusion (6.7% vs 10.1%, OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.96, p = 0.03) and restenosis (23.9% vs 39.3%, OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.59, p<0.001), but not with reduced rates of subacute thrombosis (1.7% in both groups). BMS showed a reduction in target vessel revascularisation (TVR; 12.2% vs 19.2%, OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.69, p<0.001), but not in mortality (5.3% vs 5.1%) or reinfarction (3.9% vs 4%). The findings of this study support BMS placement in acute MI. The discrepancy between angiographic and clinical parameters has important implications for future studies investigating further technical improvements in mechanical reperfusion therapy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interest: None.

References

    1. Zijlstra F, Hoorntje J C, de Boer M J.et al Long‐term benefit of primary angioplasty as compared with thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med 19993411413–1419. - PubMed
    1. Keeley E C, Boura J A, Grines C L. Primary angioplasty versus intravenous thrombolytic therapy for acute myocardial infarction: a quantitative review of 23 randomized trials. Lancet 200336113–20. - PubMed
    1. Silber S, Albertsson P, Aviles F F.et al Task force for percutaneous coronary interventions of the European Society of Cardiology. Guidelines for percutaneous coronary interventions. Eur Heart J 200526804–847. - PubMed
    1. Alfonso F, Rodriguez P, Phillips P.et al Clinical and angiographic implications of coronary stenting in thrombus‐containing lesions. J Am Coll Cardiol 199729725–733. - PubMed
    1. Antoniucci D, Santoro G M, Bolognese L.et al A clinical trial comparing primary stenting of the infarct‐related artery with optimal primary angioplasty for acute myocardial infarction: results from the Florence Randomized Elective Stenting in Acute Coronary Occlusions (FRESCO) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 1998311234–1239. - PubMed

MeSH terms