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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |