Cargando…
Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials
BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting balloon (DEB) has become an alternative option to drug-eluting stent (DES) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the effect of drug-eluting balloon with regular bare-mental stent (BMS) in de novo coronary artery disease (CAD) is unclear. This meta-analysis...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5405921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28445555 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176365 |
_version_ | 1783231865319063552 |
---|---|
author | Cui, Kongyong Lyu, Shuzheng Song, Xiantao Yuan, Fei Xu, Feng Zhang, Min Wang, Wei Zhang, Dongfeng Dai, Jing |
author_facet | Cui, Kongyong Lyu, Shuzheng Song, Xiantao Yuan, Fei Xu, Feng Zhang, Min Wang, Wei Zhang, Dongfeng Dai, Jing |
author_sort | Cui, Kongyong |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting balloon (DEB) has become an alternative option to drug-eluting stent (DES) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the effect of drug-eluting balloon with regular bare-mental stent (BMS) in de novo coronary artery disease (CAD) is unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of DEB with regular BMS compared to BMS or DES in de novo CAD. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of DEB+BMS in comparison with BMS or DES were obtained by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through January 2016. Primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and late lumen loss (LLL). Secondary endpoints included death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis (ST), binary restenosis, and minimum lumen diameter (MLD). Dichotomous and continuous data were presented as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively, and analyzed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 14 RCTs involving 2281 patients were included in this meta-analysis. DEB+BMS showed significantly less MACEs (OR: 0.67, 95%CI 0.45 to 0.99, P = 0.04) and reduced LLL (MD: -0.30 mm, 95%CI: -0.48 mm to -0.11 mm, P = 0.001) compared with BMS. Meanwhile, treatment with DEB+BMS had disadvantages over DES in terms of MACEs (OR: 1.94, 95%CI 1.24 to 3.05, P = 0.004), LLL (MD: 0.20 mm, 95%CI: 0.07 mm to 0.33 mm, P = 0.003), TLR (OR: 2.53, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.72, P = 0.003), and MLD (MD: -0.25 mm, 95%CI: -0.42 mm to -0.09 mm, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: This limited evidence demonstrated that treatment with DEB+BMS appears to be effective in de novo CAD. In addition, DEB+ BMS clearly showed superiority to BMS, but is inferior to DES in the treatment of patients with de novo CAD. Hence, DES (especially new generation DES) should be recommended for patients with de novo CAD. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5405921 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-54059212017-05-14 Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials Cui, Kongyong Lyu, Shuzheng Song, Xiantao Yuan, Fei Xu, Feng Zhang, Min Wang, Wei Zhang, Dongfeng Dai, Jing PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Drug-eluting balloon (DEB) has become an alternative option to drug-eluting stent (DES) for the treatment of in-stent restenosis (ISR). However, the effect of drug-eluting balloon with regular bare-mental stent (BMS) in de novo coronary artery disease (CAD) is unclear. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of DEB with regular BMS compared to BMS or DES in de novo CAD. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the efficacy of DEB+BMS in comparison with BMS or DES were obtained by searching the PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases through January 2016. Primary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) and late lumen loss (LLL). Secondary endpoints included death, myocardial infarction (MI), target lesion revascularization (TLR), stent thrombosis (ST), binary restenosis, and minimum lumen diameter (MLD). Dichotomous and continuous data were presented as odds ratios (ORs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively, and analyzed using a random-effects model. RESULTS: A total of 14 RCTs involving 2281 patients were included in this meta-analysis. DEB+BMS showed significantly less MACEs (OR: 0.67, 95%CI 0.45 to 0.99, P = 0.04) and reduced LLL (MD: -0.30 mm, 95%CI: -0.48 mm to -0.11 mm, P = 0.001) compared with BMS. Meanwhile, treatment with DEB+BMS had disadvantages over DES in terms of MACEs (OR: 1.94, 95%CI 1.24 to 3.05, P = 0.004), LLL (MD: 0.20 mm, 95%CI: 0.07 mm to 0.33 mm, P = 0.003), TLR (OR: 2.53, 95% CI 1.36 to 4.72, P = 0.003), and MLD (MD: -0.25 mm, 95%CI: -0.42 mm to -0.09 mm, P = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: This limited evidence demonstrated that treatment with DEB+BMS appears to be effective in de novo CAD. In addition, DEB+ BMS clearly showed superiority to BMS, but is inferior to DES in the treatment of patients with de novo CAD. Hence, DES (especially new generation DES) should be recommended for patients with de novo CAD. Public Library of Science 2017-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC5405921/ /pubmed/28445555 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176365 Text en © 2017 Cui et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ 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 author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Cui, Kongyong Lyu, Shuzheng Song, Xiantao Yuan, Fei Xu, Feng Zhang, Min Wang, Wei Zhang, Dongfeng Dai, Jing Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title | Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title_full | Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title_fullStr | Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title_short | Drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
title_sort | drug-eluting balloon versus bare-mental stent and drug-eluting stent for de novo coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5405921/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28445555 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0176365 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cuikongyong drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT lyushuzheng drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT songxiantao drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT yuanfei drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT xufeng drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT zhangmin drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT wangwei drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT zhangdongfeng drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials AT daijing drugelutingballoonversusbarementalstentanddrugelutingstentfordenovocoronaryarterydiseaseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisof14randomizedcontrolledtrials |