Cargando…
Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials
BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent (PFS) versus permanent polymer drug-eluting stent (PPDES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain controversial. Our meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of PFS with those...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518142/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28724348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0603-5 |
_version_ | 1783251434643390464 |
---|---|
author | Gao, Kang Sun, Yiguang Yang, Ming Han, Ling Chen, Liwei Hu, Wenze Chen, Ping Li, Xiaohong |
author_facet | Gao, Kang Sun, Yiguang Yang, Ming Han, Ling Chen, Liwei Hu, Wenze Chen, Ping Li, Xiaohong |
author_sort | Gao, Kang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent (PFS) versus permanent polymer drug-eluting stent (PPDES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain controversial. Our meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of PFS with those of PPDES in patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoints were incidence of stent thrombosis (ST) and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoints included the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death (CD), late lumen loss (LLL), and diameter stenosis (DS). Subgroup analyses were also conducted based on the follow-up time. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs met the including criteria, and 8616 patients were included in the study. No significant differences were observed between PFS and PPDES treatments in the incidence of ST (RR 0.90; 95% CI: 0.62–1.31; P = 0.58; I (2) = 0), TLR (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76–1.00; P = 0.05; I (2) = 37%), CD (RR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.72–1.10; P = 0.28; I (2) = 0), MI (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.71–1.05; P = 0.15; I (2) = 0), LLL (SMD 0.01; 95% CI: -0.29–0.30; P = 0.96; I(2) = 90%), and DS (SMD -0.01; 95% CI: - 0.25 to 0.23; P = 0.93; I(2) = 83%). Meanwhile, the patients with PFS had a lower incidence of MACE (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78–0.97; P = 0.01; I (2) = 0) than those with PPDES. CONCLUSION: In the overall analysis, patients with PFS presented a lower risk of MACE versus PPDES, but no significant difference were obtained in the risk of ST, TLR, MI, CD, DDD and DS. In the Short term follow up, patients with PSF presented a lower risk of TLR compared with PPDES. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-017-0603-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5518142 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-55181422017-08-16 Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials Gao, Kang Sun, Yiguang Yang, Ming Han, Ling Chen, Liwei Hu, Wenze Chen, Ping Li, Xiaohong BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent (PFS) versus permanent polymer drug-eluting stent (PPDES) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) remain controversial. Our meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of PFS with those of PPDES in patients undergoing PCI. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Clinical Trials.gov databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The primary endpoints were incidence of stent thrombosis (ST) and target-lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary endpoints included the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), myocardial infarction (MI), cardiac death (CD), late lumen loss (LLL), and diameter stenosis (DS). Subgroup analyses were also conducted based on the follow-up time. RESULTS: Eleven RCTs met the including criteria, and 8616 patients were included in the study. No significant differences were observed between PFS and PPDES treatments in the incidence of ST (RR 0.90; 95% CI: 0.62–1.31; P = 0.58; I (2) = 0), TLR (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.76–1.00; P = 0.05; I (2) = 37%), CD (RR 0.89; 95% CI: 0.72–1.10; P = 0.28; I (2) = 0), MI (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.71–1.05; P = 0.15; I (2) = 0), LLL (SMD 0.01; 95% CI: -0.29–0.30; P = 0.96; I(2) = 90%), and DS (SMD -0.01; 95% CI: - 0.25 to 0.23; P = 0.93; I(2) = 83%). Meanwhile, the patients with PFS had a lower incidence of MACE (RR 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78–0.97; P = 0.01; I (2) = 0) than those with PPDES. CONCLUSION: In the overall analysis, patients with PFS presented a lower risk of MACE versus PPDES, but no significant difference were obtained in the risk of ST, TLR, MI, CD, DDD and DS. In the Short term follow up, patients with PSF presented a lower risk of TLR compared with PPDES. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12872-017-0603-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2017-07-19 /pmc/articles/PMC5518142/ /pubmed/28724348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0603-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. 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 Article Gao, Kang Sun, Yiguang Yang, Ming Han, Ling Chen, Liwei Hu, Wenze Chen, Ping Li, Xiaohong Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title | Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title_full | Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title_fullStr | Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title_full_unstemmed | Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title_short | Efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
title_sort | efficacy and safety of polymer-free stent versus polymer-permanent drug-eluting stent in patients with acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5518142/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28724348 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-017-0603-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gaokang efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT sunyiguang efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT yangming efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT hanling efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT chenliwei efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT huwenze efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT chenping efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials AT lixiaohong efficacyandsafetyofpolymerfreestentversuspolymerpermanentdrugelutingstentinpatientswithacutecoronarysyndromeametaanalysisofrandomizedcontroltrials |