Cargando…

Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DESs). METHODS: PubMed, Science Direct, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chongqing VIP databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the safet...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lv, Jianfeng, Wu, Yazhou, Zhang, Xingmei, Jing, Tao, Zhang, Li, Tong, Shifei, Song, Zhiyuan, Wang, Mingli, Wang, Gang, Chi, Luxiang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-015-0110-z
_version_ 1782367421707845632
author Lv, Jianfeng
Wu, Yazhou
Zhang, Xingmei
Jing, Tao
Zhang, Li
Tong, Shifei
Song, Zhiyuan
Wang, Mingli
Wang, Gang
Chi, Luxiang
author_facet Lv, Jianfeng
Wu, Yazhou
Zhang, Xingmei
Jing, Tao
Zhang, Li
Tong, Shifei
Song, Zhiyuan
Wang, Mingli
Wang, Gang
Chi, Luxiang
author_sort Lv, Jianfeng
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DESs). METHODS: PubMed, Science Direct, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chongqing VIP databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of BP-DESs versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DESs). Efficacy included the prevalence of target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and late lumen loss (LLL), and safety of these stents at the end of follow-up for the selected research studies were compared. RESULTS: A total of 16 qualified original studies that addressed a total of 22,211 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In regard to efficacy, no statistically significant difference in TLR (odds ratio (OR) = 0.94, P = 0.30) or TVR (OR 1.01, P = 0.86) was observed between patients treated with BP-DESs and those with DP-DESs. However, there were significant differences in in-stent LLL (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.07, P = 0.005) and in-segment LLL (WMD = −0.03, P = 0.05) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. In terms of safety, there was no significant difference in overall mortality (OR 0.97, P = 0.67), cardiac death (OR 0.99, P = 0.90), early stent thrombosis (ST) and late ST (OR 0.94, P = 0.76; OR 0.96, P = 0.73), or myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.99, P = 0.88) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. However, there was a statistically significant difference in very late ST (OR 0.69, P = 0.007) between these two groups. In addition, the general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: BP-DESs are safe, efficient, and exhibit superior performance to DP-DESs with respect to reducing the occurrence of very late ST and LLL. The general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4403984
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-44039842015-04-21 Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis Lv, Jianfeng Wu, Yazhou Zhang, Xingmei Jing, Tao Zhang, Li Tong, Shifei Song, Zhiyuan Wang, Mingli Wang, Gang Chi, Luxiang Eur J Med Res Research BACKGROUND: A meta-analysis was conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DESs). METHODS: PubMed, Science Direct, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Chongqing VIP databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing the safety and efficacy of BP-DESs versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DESs). Efficacy included the prevalence of target lesion revascularization (TLR), target vessel revascularization (TVR), and late lumen loss (LLL), and safety of these stents at the end of follow-up for the selected research studies were compared. RESULTS: A total of 16 qualified original studies that addressed a total of 22,211 patients were included in this meta-analysis. In regard to efficacy, no statistically significant difference in TLR (odds ratio (OR) = 0.94, P = 0.30) or TVR (OR 1.01, P = 0.86) was observed between patients treated with BP-DESs and those with DP-DESs. However, there were significant differences in in-stent LLL (weighted mean difference [WMD] = −0.07, P = 0.005) and in-segment LLL (WMD = −0.03, P = 0.05) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. In terms of safety, there was no significant difference in overall mortality (OR 0.97, P = 0.67), cardiac death (OR 0.99, P = 0.90), early stent thrombosis (ST) and late ST (OR 0.94, P = 0.76; OR 0.96, P = 0.73), or myocardial infarction (MI) (OR 0.99, P = 0.88) between patients treated with BP-DESs and with DP-DESs. However, there was a statistically significant difference in very late ST (OR 0.69, P = 0.007) between these two groups. In addition, the general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up. CONCLUSION: BP-DESs are safe, efficient, and exhibit superior performance to DP-DESs with respect to reducing the occurrence of very late ST and LLL. The general trend of the rates of TVR and TLR of BP-DESs groups was lower than DP-DESs groups after a 1-year follow-up. BioMed Central 2015-03-05 /pmc/articles/PMC4403984/ /pubmed/25889197 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-015-0110-z Text en © Lv et al.; licensee BioMed Central. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Lv, Jianfeng
Wu, Yazhou
Zhang, Xingmei
Jing, Tao
Zhang, Li
Tong, Shifei
Song, Zhiyuan
Wang, Mingli
Wang, Gang
Chi, Luxiang
Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title_full Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title_fullStr Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title_short Comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
title_sort comparison of the safety and efficacy of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4403984/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25889197
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40001-015-0110-z
work_keys_str_mv AT lvjianfeng comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT wuyazhou comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT zhangxingmei comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT jingtao comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT zhangli comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT tongshifei comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT songzhiyuan comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT wangmingli comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT wanggang comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis
AT chiluxiang comparisonofthesafetyandefficacyofbiodegradablepolymerdrugelutingstentsversusdurablepolymerdrugelutingstentsametaanalysis