Paclitaxel-eluting versus bare metal stents in primary PCI: a pooled patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials

Giuseppe De Luca*, Maurits T. Dirksen, Henning Kelbæk, Leif Thuesen, Marteen A. Vink, Christoph Kaiser, Tania Chechi, Gaia Spaziani, Emilio Di Lorenzo, Harry Suryapranata, Gregg W. Stone

*Corresponding author af dette arbejde

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftArtikelForskningpeer review


Concerns have emerged regarding a higher risk of stent thrombosis after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation, especially in the setting of ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis based on individual patient data to evaluate long-term safety and effectiveness of paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES) as compared to bare metal stents (BMS) in patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for STEMI. We examined all completed randomized trials on PES for STEMI. Individual patient data were obtained from six trials. We performed survival analyses with the use of Cox-regression analysis stratified according to trial. Kaplan–Meier survival curves are presented with event rates reported as estimated probabilities. A subsequent landmark analysis was performed for patients who were event-free at 1-year follow-up in order to define outcome in terms of early (≤1 year) and late (>1 year) events. A total of six trials were finally included in the meta-analysis with 4435 patients, 2875 (64.8 %) assigned to PES and 1560 (35.2 %) to BMS. No significant differences in baseline characteristics were observed between the two groups. However, a significantly higher percentage of patients in the DES group were on dual antiplatelet therapy during 3-year follow-up, as compared to BMS. At long-term follow-up (1,095 [1,090–1,155] days), no significant difference between PES and BMS was observed in mortality (9.2 vs 11.9 %, respectively, HR [95 % CI] = 0.84 [0.67, 1.06], p = 0.15, pheterogeneity = 0.59), reinfarction (8.8 vs 7 %, respectively; HR [95 % CI] = 1.10 [0.84, 1.44], p = 0.51, pheterogeneity = 0.32), stent thrombosis (6.7 vs 4.0 % respectively, HR [95 % CI] = 1.13 [0.82, 1.55], p = 0.45, pheterogeneity = 0.99) and TVR (11.9 vs 20.0 %; HR [95 % CI] = 0.64 [0.54, 0.77], p < 0.0001, pheterogeneity = 0.25). Landmark analysis showed that PES was associated with a significantly higher rate of very late reinfarction (>1 year) (5.6 vs 3.9 %, HR [95 % CI] = 1.61 [1.05–2.47], p = 0.03, pheterogeneity = 0.51], very late ST (2.9 vs 1.1 %, HR [95 % CI] = 1.88 [1.00–3.54], p = 0.05, pheterogeneity = 0.94]. The present pooled patient-level meta-analysis demonstrates that among STEMI patients undergoing primary PCI, PES compared to BMS is associated with a significant reduction in TVR at long-term follow-up. Although there were no differences in cumulative mortality, reinfarction or stent thrombosis, the incidence of very late reinfarction and stent thrombosis was increased with PES.

Sider (fra-til)101-112
Antal sider12
TidsskriftJournal of Thrombosis and Thrombolysis
Udgave nummer1
StatusUdgivet - 1 jan. 2015
Udgivet eksterntJa


Udforsk hvilke forskningsemner 'Paclitaxel-eluting versus bare metal stents in primary PCI: a pooled patient-level meta-analysis of randomized trials' indeholder.