Cargando…

Comparison of new-generation drug-eluting stents versus drug-coated balloon for in-stent restenosis: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE: The study sought to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). DESIGN: Meta-analysis using data from randomised trial found by searches on PubMed, the Cochrane...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Cai, Jin-Zan, Zhu, Yong-Xiang, Wang, Xin-Yu, Bourantas, Christos V, Iqbal, Javaid, Zhu, Hao, Cummins, Paul, Dong, Sheng-jie, Mathur, Anthony, Zhang, Yao-Jun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5855471/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29472254
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-017231
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVE: The study sought to compare angiographic and clinical outcomes of new-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) versus drug-coated balloon (DCB) in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). DESIGN: Meta-analysis using data from randomised trial found by searches on PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov and websites of major cardiovascular congresses. SETTING: Only randomised trials comparing DES with DCB were included. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with ISR in the included trials. INTERVENTIONS: New-generation DES versus DCB. OUTCOMES: The angiographic and clinical outcomes including cardiac death, all-cause death, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularisation (TLR), target vessel revascularisation (TVR), major adverse cardiac events (MACE) and stent thrombosis were investigated. RESULTS: Five trials including 913 patients were eligible and included. Pooled analysis in angiographic results identified that new-generation DES were associated with higher acute luminal gain (−0.31 mm, 95% CI −0.42 to −0.20, P<0.001) and lower per cent diameter stenosis (risk ratio (RR): 0.28, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.55, P=0.04). DES significantly reduced the risk of TLR (RR: 1.96, 95% CI 1.17 to 3.28, P=0.01) compared with DCB; however, there was no statistical differences for MACE (RR: 1.21, 95% CI 0.67 to 2.17, P=0.53), myocardial infarction (RR: 1.16, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.48, P=0.69) and cardiac death (RR: 1.80, 95% CI 0.60 to 5.39, P=0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Interventions with new-generation DES appear to be associated with significant reduction in per cent diameter stenosis and TLR at short-term follow-up, but had similar MACE, myocardial infarction and cardiac death for patients with coronary ISR compared with DCB. Appropriately powered studies with longer term follow-up are warranted to confirm these findings.