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
. 2010 Apr 27;55(17):1854-66.
doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.12.038.

Efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents in chronic total coronary occlusion recanalization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Humberto J Colmenarez  1 , Javier Escaned, Cristina Fernández, Liliana Lobo, Sara Cano, Juan G del Angel, Fernando Alfonso, Pilar Jimenez, Camino Bañuelos, Nieves Gonzalo, Eulogio García, Rosana Hernández, Carlos Macaya
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stents in chronic total coronary occlusion recanalization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Humberto J Colmenarez et al. J Am Coll Cardiol. .

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting stent (DES) and bare-metal stent (BMS) use in chronic total occlusion (CTO) recanalization.

Background: The long-term effectiveness and safety of DES use in CTO recanalization are unclear, and performance of randomized clinical trials in the field is complex.

Methods: Major electronic information sources were explored for articles comparing outcomes with DES and BMS use among patients with CTO. Assessed clinical outcomes were death, myocardial infarction, target vessel revascularization, major adverse cardiac events, and stent thrombosis; angiographic outcomes were stent restenosis and stent reocclusion.

Results: Fourteen comparative studies were identified (a total of 4,394 patients). When compared with BMS, DES significantly reduced risk of major adverse cardiac events (relative risk [RR]: 0.45, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.34 to 0.60, p < 0.001) and TVR (RR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.28 to 0.58, p < 0.001) without increasing death (RR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.66 to 1.16, p = 0.88) or myocardial infarction (RR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.46, p = 0.80). This benefit was sustained at >/=3 years of follow-up. Lower RRs for restenosis (RR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.41, p < 0.001) and stent reocclusion (RR: 0.30, 95% CI: 0.18 to 0.49, p < 0.001) were also observed in the DES group. A strong trend toward a higher rate of stent thrombosis was documented in DES-treated patients (RR: 2.79, 95% CI: 0.98 to 7.97, p = 0.06).

Conclusions: DES use in CTO recanalization is associated with significantly fewer major adverse cardiac events and fewer occurrences of target vessel revascularization, restenosis, and stent reocclusion than with BMS. Although a statistical trend toward a higher risk of stent thrombosis was observed, the use of DES in this context seems to be safe, with an overall benefit sustained in the long term.

PubMed Disclaimer

LinkOut - more resources