In patients requiring stenting of large coronary arteries, no significant differences were found among sirolimus-eluting, everolimus-eluting, and bare-metal stents with respect to the rate of death or myocardial infarction. With the two drug-eluting stents, similar reductions in rates of target-vessel revascularization were seen. (Funded by the Basel Cardiovascular Research Foundation and the Swiss National Foundation for Research; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN72444640.).

Objectives To examine the safety and effectiveness of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents compared with bare metal stents.Design Individual patient data meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Cox proportional regression models stratified by trial, containing random effects, were used to assess the impact of stent type on outcomes. Hazard ratios with 95% confidence interval for outcomes were reported.Data sources and study selection Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomised controlled trials that compared cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents with bare metal stents were selected. The principal investigators whose trials met the inclusion criteria provided data for individual patients. Primary outcomesThe primary outcome was cardiac mortality. Secondary endpoints were myocardial infarction, definite stent thrombosis, definite or probable stent thrombosis, target vessel revascularisation, and all cause death. ResultsThe search yielded five randomised controlled trials, comprising 4896 participants. Compared with patients receiving bare metal stents, participants receiving cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents had a significant reduction of cardiac mortality (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.49 to 0.91; P=0.01), myocardial infarction (0.71, 0.55 to 0.92; P=0.01), definite stent thrombosis (0.41, 0.22 to 0.76; P=0.005), definite or probable stent thrombosis (0.48, 0.31 to 0.73; P<0.001), and target vessel revascularisation (0.29, 0.20 to 0.41; P<0.001) at a median follow-up of 720 days. There was no significant difference in all cause death between groups (0.83, 0.65 to 1.06; P=0.14). Findings remained unchanged at multivariable regression after adjustment for the acuity of clinical syndrome (for instance, acute coronary syndrome v stable coronary artery disease), diabetes mellitus, female sex, use of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors, and up to one year v longer duration treatment with dual antiplatelets. ConclusionsThis meta-analysis offers evidence that compared with bare metal stents the use of cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents improves global cardiovascular outcomes including cardiac survival, myocardial infarction, and overall stent thrombosis. IntroductionRandomised controlled trials, 1 2 a meta-analysis, 3 and an observational study 4 have consistently shown reduced rates of target vessel revascularisation because of angiographic restenosis and ischaemia after treatment with drug eluting stents compared with bare metal stents. As a result, most percutaneous coronary interventions are done with drug eluting stents rather than bare metal stents. The higher rates of late stent thrombosis and the RESEARCHconcern about higher risks of late stent thrombosis after early discontinuation of dual antiplatelet therapy with first generation drug eluting stents, however, have raised safety concerns. 6New drug eluting stents have been developed with novel materials, designs, and delivery systems, with biocompatible polymers and new anti...

No abstract

rug-eluting stents (DES) with biodegradable polymers were developed to be as effective as second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents and as safe after 1 year as bare-metal stents (BMS).1 Thus, very late stent thrombosis (VLST: beyond 1 year after implantation), which has been associated with the durable polymer of first-generation DES, Background-Biodegradable-polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) were developed to be as effective as second-generation durable-polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) and as safe >1 year as bare-metal stents (BMS). Thus, very late stent thrombosis (VLST) attributable to durable polymers should no longer appear. Methods and Results-To address these early and late aspects, 2291 patients presenting with acute or stable coronary disease needing stents ≥3.0 mm in diameter between April 2010 and May 2012 were randomly assigned to biolimus-A9-eluting BP-DES, second-generation everolimus-eluting DP-DES, or thin-strut silicon-carbide-coated BMS in 8 European centers. All patients were treated with aspirin and risk-adjusted doses of prasugrel. The primary end point was combined cardiac death, myocardial infarction, and clinically indicated target-vessel revascularization within 2 years. The combined secondary safety end point was a composite of VLST, myocardial infarction, and cardiac death. The cumulative incidence of the primary end point was 7.6% with BP-DES, 6.8% with DP-DES, and 12.7% with BMS. By intention-to-treat BP-DES were noninferior (predefined margin, 3.80%) compared with DP-DES (absolute risk difference, 0.78%; −1.93% to 3.50%; P for noninferiority 0.042; per protocol P=0.09) and superior to BMS (absolute risk difference, −5.16; −8.32 to −2.01; P=0.0011). The 3 stent groups did not differ in the combined safety end point, with no decrease in events >1 year, particularly VLST with BP-DES. Conclusions-In large vessel stenting, BP-DES appeared barely noninferior compared with DP-DES and more effective than thin-strut BMS, but without evidence for better safety nor lower VLST rates >1 year. Findings challenge the concept that durable polymers are key in VLST formation. Clinical Trial Registration-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01166685.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundSecond‐generation drug eluting stents (DES) may reduce costs and improve clinical outcomes compared to first‐generation DES with improved cost‐effectiveness when compared to bare metal stents (BMS). We aimed to conduct an economic evaluation of a cobalt‐chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co‐Cr EES) compared with BMS in percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).ObjectiveTo conduct a cost‐effectiveness analysis (CEA) of a cobalt‐chromium everolimus eluting stent (Co‐Cr EES) versus BMS in PCI.MethodsA Markov state transition model with a 2‐year time horizon was applied from a US Medicare setting with patients undergoing PCI with Co‐Cr EES or BMS. Baseline characteristics, treatment effects, and safety measures were taken from a patient level meta‐analysis of 5 RCTs (n = 4,896). The base‐case analysis evaluated stent‐related outcomes; a secondary analysis considered the broader set of outcomes reported in the meta‐analysis.ResultsThe base‐case and secondary analyses reported an additional 0.018 and 0.013 quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) and cost savings of $236 and $288, respectively with Co‐Cr EES versus BMS. Results were robust to sensitivity analyses and were most sensitive to the price of clopidogrel. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, Co‐Cr EES was associated with a greater than 99% chance of being cost saving or cost effective (at a cost per QALY threshold of $50,000) versus BMS.ConclusionsUsing data from a recent patient level meta‐analysis and contemporary cost data, this analysis found that PCI with Co‐Cr EES is more effective and less costly than PCI with BMS. © 2016 The Authors. Catheterization and Cardiovascular Interventions Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.