Bare-metal stents versus drug-eluting stents in large (≥3.5 mm) single coronary artery: Angiographic and clinical outcomes at 6 months

Jin Oh Na, Jin Won Kim, Cheol Ung Choi, Un Jung Choi, Seung Yong Shin, Hong Euy Lim, Eung Ju Kim, Seung-Woon Rha, Chang Gyu Park, Hong Seog Seo, Dong Joo Oh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to dramatically reduce restenosis and improve the rate of event-free survival in large randomized trials, the benefit of DES appears to be limited to restenosis. In large arteries, it is not clear which type of stent is more superior in angiographic and clinical outcomes between DES and bare-metal stents (BMS). We compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of DES versus BMS in large arteries (≥3.5 mm). Method: Two hundred and forty patients from March 2002 to March 2007 received stents; 196 patients were treated with DES (44.9% sirolimus-eluting stents; 43.9% paclitaxel-eluting stents; 11.2% zotarolimus-eluting stents) and 44 with cobalt-chromium BMS for single de novo lesions in a large vessel. All subjects received aspirin, clopidogrel, and/or cilostazol as the standard antiplatelet regimen. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were evaluated at 6 months. Results: For the baseline characteristics, there were no significant differences between the DES and BMS groups. In addition, for the initially implanted stent there was no difference in the length, stent diameter, and lesion site between the two groups. After 6 months, the follow-up angiogram showed that in-stent diameter restenosis and late loss was more common with BMS than DES (39 ± 21% vs. 19 ± 17%, p = 0.007; 1.44 ± 0.83 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.58 mm, p = 0.009, respectively). However, the target-lesion revascularization/target-vessel revascularization, and total major adverse cardiac events showed no significant differences between the groups (5.3% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.62; 5.3% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.86, respectively). Conclusion: The DES and cobalt-chromium BMS placed in large coronary arteries showed equally favorable 6-month clinical outcomes, although the 6-month angiographic results appeared more favorable in the DES group than in the BMS group.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)108-114
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Cardiology
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Aug 1

Fingerprint

Drug-Eluting Stents
Stents
Coronary Vessels
Metals
clopidogrel
Chromium
Cobalt
Arteries
Sirolimus
Paclitaxel
Aspirin
Disease-Free Survival

Keywords

  • Bare-metal stent
  • Drug-eluting stent
  • Large coronary artery

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{773e02eb799046b5ad5aff53ce61a1c8,
title = "Bare-metal stents versus drug-eluting stents in large (≥3.5 mm) single coronary artery: Angiographic and clinical outcomes at 6 months",
abstract = "Background: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to dramatically reduce restenosis and improve the rate of event-free survival in large randomized trials, the benefit of DES appears to be limited to restenosis. In large arteries, it is not clear which type of stent is more superior in angiographic and clinical outcomes between DES and bare-metal stents (BMS). We compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of DES versus BMS in large arteries (≥3.5 mm). Method: Two hundred and forty patients from March 2002 to March 2007 received stents; 196 patients were treated with DES (44.9{\%} sirolimus-eluting stents; 43.9{\%} paclitaxel-eluting stents; 11.2{\%} zotarolimus-eluting stents) and 44 with cobalt-chromium BMS for single de novo lesions in a large vessel. All subjects received aspirin, clopidogrel, and/or cilostazol as the standard antiplatelet regimen. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were evaluated at 6 months. Results: For the baseline characteristics, there were no significant differences between the DES and BMS groups. In addition, for the initially implanted stent there was no difference in the length, stent diameter, and lesion site between the two groups. After 6 months, the follow-up angiogram showed that in-stent diameter restenosis and late loss was more common with BMS than DES (39 ± 21{\%} vs. 19 ± 17{\%}, p = 0.007; 1.44 ± 0.83 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.58 mm, p = 0.009, respectively). However, the target-lesion revascularization/target-vessel revascularization, and total major adverse cardiac events showed no significant differences between the groups (5.3{\%} vs. 3.6{\%}, p = 0.62; 5.3{\%} vs. 4.6{\%}, p = 0.86, respectively). Conclusion: The DES and cobalt-chromium BMS placed in large coronary arteries showed equally favorable 6-month clinical outcomes, although the 6-month angiographic results appeared more favorable in the DES group than in the BMS group.",
keywords = "Bare-metal stent, Drug-eluting stent, Large coronary artery",
author = "Na, {Jin Oh} and Kim, {Jin Won} and Choi, {Cheol Ung} and Choi, {Un Jung} and Shin, {Seung Yong} and Lim, {Hong Euy} and Kim, {Eung Ju} and Seung-Woon Rha and Park, {Chang Gyu} and Seo, {Hong Seog} and Oh, {Dong Joo}",
year = "2009",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.jjcc.2009.05.004",
language = "English",
volume = "54",
pages = "108--114",
journal = "Journal of Cardiology",
issn = "0914-5087",
publisher = "Japanese College of Cardiology (Nippon-Sinzobyo-Gakkai)",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Bare-metal stents versus drug-eluting stents in large (≥3.5 mm) single coronary artery

T2 - Angiographic and clinical outcomes at 6 months

AU - Na, Jin Oh

AU - Kim, Jin Won

AU - Choi, Cheol Ung

AU - Choi, Un Jung

AU - Shin, Seung Yong

AU - Lim, Hong Euy

AU - Kim, Eung Ju

AU - Rha, Seung-Woon

AU - Park, Chang Gyu

AU - Seo, Hong Seog

AU - Oh, Dong Joo

PY - 2009/8/1

Y1 - 2009/8/1

N2 - Background: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to dramatically reduce restenosis and improve the rate of event-free survival in large randomized trials, the benefit of DES appears to be limited to restenosis. In large arteries, it is not clear which type of stent is more superior in angiographic and clinical outcomes between DES and bare-metal stents (BMS). We compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of DES versus BMS in large arteries (≥3.5 mm). Method: Two hundred and forty patients from March 2002 to March 2007 received stents; 196 patients were treated with DES (44.9% sirolimus-eluting stents; 43.9% paclitaxel-eluting stents; 11.2% zotarolimus-eluting stents) and 44 with cobalt-chromium BMS for single de novo lesions in a large vessel. All subjects received aspirin, clopidogrel, and/or cilostazol as the standard antiplatelet regimen. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were evaluated at 6 months. Results: For the baseline characteristics, there were no significant differences between the DES and BMS groups. In addition, for the initially implanted stent there was no difference in the length, stent diameter, and lesion site between the two groups. After 6 months, the follow-up angiogram showed that in-stent diameter restenosis and late loss was more common with BMS than DES (39 ± 21% vs. 19 ± 17%, p = 0.007; 1.44 ± 0.83 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.58 mm, p = 0.009, respectively). However, the target-lesion revascularization/target-vessel revascularization, and total major adverse cardiac events showed no significant differences between the groups (5.3% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.62; 5.3% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.86, respectively). Conclusion: The DES and cobalt-chromium BMS placed in large coronary arteries showed equally favorable 6-month clinical outcomes, although the 6-month angiographic results appeared more favorable in the DES group than in the BMS group.

AB - Background: Although drug-eluting stents (DES) have been shown to dramatically reduce restenosis and improve the rate of event-free survival in large randomized trials, the benefit of DES appears to be limited to restenosis. In large arteries, it is not clear which type of stent is more superior in angiographic and clinical outcomes between DES and bare-metal stents (BMS). We compared the angiographic and clinical outcomes of DES versus BMS in large arteries (≥3.5 mm). Method: Two hundred and forty patients from March 2002 to March 2007 received stents; 196 patients were treated with DES (44.9% sirolimus-eluting stents; 43.9% paclitaxel-eluting stents; 11.2% zotarolimus-eluting stents) and 44 with cobalt-chromium BMS for single de novo lesions in a large vessel. All subjects received aspirin, clopidogrel, and/or cilostazol as the standard antiplatelet regimen. The angiographic and clinical outcomes were evaluated at 6 months. Results: For the baseline characteristics, there were no significant differences between the DES and BMS groups. In addition, for the initially implanted stent there was no difference in the length, stent diameter, and lesion site between the two groups. After 6 months, the follow-up angiogram showed that in-stent diameter restenosis and late loss was more common with BMS than DES (39 ± 21% vs. 19 ± 17%, p = 0.007; 1.44 ± 0.83 mm vs. 0.62 ± 0.58 mm, p = 0.009, respectively). However, the target-lesion revascularization/target-vessel revascularization, and total major adverse cardiac events showed no significant differences between the groups (5.3% vs. 3.6%, p = 0.62; 5.3% vs. 4.6%, p = 0.86, respectively). Conclusion: The DES and cobalt-chromium BMS placed in large coronary arteries showed equally favorable 6-month clinical outcomes, although the 6-month angiographic results appeared more favorable in the DES group than in the BMS group.

KW - Bare-metal stent

KW - Drug-eluting stent

KW - Large coronary artery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67650735249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67650735249&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jjcc.2009.05.004

DO - 10.1016/j.jjcc.2009.05.004

M3 - Article

C2 - 19632529

AN - SCOPUS:67650735249

VL - 54

SP - 108

EP - 114

JO - Journal of Cardiology

JF - Journal of Cardiology

SN - 0914-5087

IS - 1

ER -