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
. 2019 Jun 22;393(10190):2503-2510.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)30474-X. Epub 2019 May 2.

Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Raffaele Piccolo  1 , Kaare H Bonaa  2 , Orestis Efthimiou  3 , Olivier Varenne  4 , Andrea Baldo  5 , Philip Urban  6 , Christoph Kaiser  7 , Wouter Remkes  8 , Lorenz Räber  5 , Adam de Belder  9 , Arnoud W J van 't Hof  10 , Goran Stankovic  11 , Pedro A Lemos  12 , Tom Wilsgaard  2 , Jörg Reifart  13 , Alfredo E Rodriguez  14 , Expedito E Ribeiro  12 , Patrick W J C Serruys  15 , Alex Abizaid  16 , Manel Sabaté  17 , Robert A Byrne  18 , Jose M de la Torre Hernandez  19 , William Wijns  20 , Peter Jüni  21 , Stephan Windecker  5 , Marco Valgimigli  22 ; Coronary Stent Trialists' Collaboration
Collaborators, Affiliations
Free article
Meta-Analysis

Drug-eluting or bare-metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Raffaele Piccolo et al. Lancet. .
Free article

Erratum in

  • Department of Error.
    [No authors listed] [No authors listed] Lancet. 2019 Jun 22;393(10190):2492. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31324-8. Epub 2019 Jun 4. Lancet. 2019. PMID: 31174832 No abstract available.

Abstract

Background: New-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) have mostly been investigated in head-to-head non-inferiority trials against early-generation DES and have typically shown similar efficacy and superior safety. How the safety profile of new-generation DES compares with that of bare-metal stents (BMS) is less clear.

Methods: We did an individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials to compare outcomes after implantation of new-generation DES or BMS among patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. The primary outcome was the composite of cardiac death or myocardial infarction. Data were pooled in a one-stage random-effects meta-analysis and examined at maximum follow-up and a 1-year landmark. Risk estimates are reported as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs. This study is registered in PROSPERO, number CRD42017060520.

Findings: We obtained individual data for 26 616 patients in 20 randomised trials. Mean follow-up was 3·2 (SD 1·8) years. The risk of the primary outcome was reduced in DES recipients compared with BMS recipients (HR 0·84, 95% CI 0·78-0·90, p<0·001) owing to a reduced risk of myocardial infarction (0·79, 0·71-0·88, p<0·001) and a possible slight but non-significant cardiac mortality benefit (0·89, 0·78-1·01, p=0·075). All-cause death was unaffected (HR with DES 0·96, 95% CI 0·88-1·05, p=0·358), but risk was lowered for definite stent thrombosis (0·63, 0·50-0·80, p<0·001) and target-vessel revascularisation (0·55, 0·50-0·60, p<0·001). We saw a time-dependent treatment effect, with DES being associated with lower risk of the primary outcome than BMS up to 1 year after placement. While the effect was maintained in the longer term, there was no further divergence from BMS after 1 year.

Interpretation: The performance of new-generation DES in the first year after implantation means that BMS should no longer be considered the gold standard for safety. Further development of DES technology should target improvements in clinical outcomes beyond 1 year.

Funding: Bern University Hospital.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in