Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis
- PMID: 17869634
- DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61444-5
Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis
Abstract
Background: Whether the two drug-eluting stents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration-a sirolimus-eluting stent and a paclitaxel-eluting stent-are associated with increased risks of death, myocardial infarction, or stent thrombosis compared with bare-metal stents is uncertain. Our aim was to compare the safety and effectiveness of these stents.
Methods: We searched relevant sources from inception to March, 2007, and contacted investigators and manufacturers to identify randomised controlled trials in patients with coronary artery disease that compared drug-eluting with bare-metal stents, or that compared sirolimus-eluting stents head-to-head with paclitaxel-eluting stents. Safety outcomes included mortality, myocardial infarction, and definite stent thrombosis; the effectiveness outcome was target lesion revascularisation. We included 38 trials (18,023 patients) with a follow-up of up to 4 years. Trialists and manufacturers provided additional data on clinical outcomes for 29 trials. We did a network meta-analysis with a mixed-treatment comparison method to combine direct within-trial comparisons between stents with indirect evidence from other trials while maintaining randomisation.
Findings: Mortality was similar in the three groups: hazard ratios (HR) were 1.00 (95% credibility interval 0.82-1.25) for sirolimus-eluting versus bare-metal stents, 1.03 (0.84-1.22) for paclitaxel-eluting versus bare-metal stents, and 0.96 (0.83-1.24) for sirolimus-eluting versus paclitaxel-eluting stents. Sirolimus-eluting stents were associated with the lowest risk of myocardial infarction (HR 0.81, 95% credibility interval 0.66-0.97, p=0.030 vs bare-metal stents; 0.83, 0.71-1.00, p=0.045 vs paclitaxel-eluting stents). There were no significant differences in the risk of definite stent thrombosis (0 days to 4 years). However, the risk of late definite stent thrombosis (>30 days) was increased with paclitaxel-eluting stents (HR 2.11, 95% credibility interval 1.19-4.23, p=0.017 vs bare-metal stents; 1.85, 1.02-3.85, p=0.041 vs sirolimus-eluting stents). The reduction in target lesion revascularisation seen with drug-eluting stents compared with bare-metal stents was more pronounced with sirolimus-eluting stents than with paclitaxel-eluting stents (0.70, 0.56-0.84; p=0.0021).
Interpretation: The risks of mortality associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents are similar. Sirolimus-eluting stents seem to be clinically better than bare-metal and paclitaxel-eluting stents.
Comment in
-
Drug-eluting stents and late stent thrombosis.Lancet. 2007 Sep 15;370(9591):914-5. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61424-X. Lancet. 2007. PMID: 17869619 No abstract available.
-
Safety of drug-eluting stents: demystifying network meta-analysis.Lancet. 2007 Dec 22;370(9605):2099-100. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61898-4. Lancet. 2007. PMID: 18156025 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Drug-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents for acute coronary syndrome.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 23;8(8):CD012481. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012481.pub2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017. PMID: 28832903 Free PMC article.
-
Drug eluting and bare metal stents in people with and without diabetes: collaborative network meta-analysis.BMJ. 2008 Aug 29;337:a1331. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1331. BMJ. 2008. PMID: 18757996 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Stent thrombosis with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: evidence from a comprehensive network meta-analysis.Lancet. 2012 Apr 14;379(9824):1393-402. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)60324-9. Epub 2012 Mar 23. Lancet. 2012. PMID: 22445239 Review.
-
Coronary artery stents: a rapid systematic review and economic evaluation.Health Technol Assess. 2004 Sep;8(35):iii-iv, 1-242. doi: 10.3310/hta8350. Health Technol Assess. 2004. PMID: 15361315
-
Revascularisation versus medical treatment in patients with stable coronary artery disease: network meta-analysis.BMJ. 2014 Jun 23;348:g3859. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g3859. BMJ. 2014. PMID: 24958153 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Long-term follow-up after coronary stenting with the sirolimus-eluting stent in clinical practice: results from the prospective multi-center German Cypher Stent Registry.Clin Res Cardiol. 2012 Sep;101(9):709-16. doi: 10.1007/s00392-012-0448-y. Epub 2012 Apr 7. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012. PMID: 22485014
-
STENTING STRATEGY AND FOLLOW-UP RESULTS OF MULTI-CENTER REGISTRY IN FUKUSHIMA CITY FOR LEFT MAIN CORONARY ARTERY DISEASE: BARE METAL STENT VERSUS DRUG-ELUTING STENT.Fukushima J Med Sci. 2015;61(1):79-85. doi: 10.5387/fms.2015-5. Epub 2015 Jul 2. Fukushima J Med Sci. 2015. PMID: 26135665 Free PMC article.
-
Everolimus-eluting versus sirolimus-eluting stents: an updated meta-analysis of randomized trials.Clin Res Cardiol. 2012 Jun;101(6):461-7. doi: 10.1007/s00392-012-0414-8. Epub 2012 Mar 16. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012. PMID: 22422445
-
Very late outcomes of drug-eluting stents coated with biodegradable polymers: insights from the 5-year follow-up of the randomized PAINT trial.Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2014 Dec;4(6):480-6. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2223-3652.2014.12.05. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2014. PMID: 25610805 Free PMC article.
-
Bioresorbable Stents in PCI.Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016 Aug;18(8):74. doi: 10.1007/s11886-016-0750-9. Curr Cardiol Rep. 2016. PMID: 27312934 Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical