<< Activated stem cells in damaged lungs could be first step toward cancer | Effect of the quality and outcomes framework on diabetes care in the UK >>
Read in | English | 简体中文 | 繁體中文 | Filipino | Bahasa

Drug-eluting stents more effective than bare-metal stents in heart attack patients

Published on May 26, 2009 at 7:55 PM · 1 Comment

NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Medical Center, together with the Cardiovascular Research Foundation (CRF), announced that its landmark study comparing the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents and bare-metal stents was published in the May 7 New England Journal of Medicine.

The study, HORIZONS-AMI (Harmonizing Outcomes with RevascularIZatiON and Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction), showed that in heart attack patients undergoing angioplasty, the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents reduces rates of target lesion revascularization (TLR) and binary angiographic restenosis when compared to the use of bare-metal stents after one year.

Additionally, the primary safety measure of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), including death, reinfarction, stent thrombosis and stroke established the non-inferiority of drug-eluting stents with respect to safety through one year.

The study was led by Dr. Gregg W. Stone, director of cardiovascular research and education in the Center for Interventional Vascular Therapy at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center; and professor of medicine at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons. The research was sponsored and managed by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation with research grant support from Boston Scientific Corporation and The Medicines Company.

In the trial, the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents resulted in a significant reduction of ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (TLR) at 12 months (4.5% vs. 7.5%). TLR, which was the primary efficacy endpoint of the trial, refers to the rate at which a particular lesion re-narrows following stent implantation severely enough to require either a repeat angioplasty or bypass surgery operation.

Comments
  1. Editor Editor Australia says:

    Editors Note: The full journal paper: Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction

    Background There is no consensus regarding the safety and efficacy of drug-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, in patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who are undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI).

    Methods We randomly assigned, in a 3:1 ratio, 3006 patients presenting with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction to receive paclitaxel-eluting stents (2257 patients) or otherwise identical bare-metal stents (749 patients). The two primary end points of the study were the 12-month rates of target-lesion revascularization for ischemia (analysis powered for superiority) and a composite safety outcome measure of death, reinfarction, stroke, or stent thrombosis (powered for noninferiority with a 3.0% margin). The major secondary end point was angiographic evidence of restenosis at 13 months.

    Results Patients who received paclitaxel-eluting stents, as compared with those who received bare-metal stents, had significantly lower 12-month rates of ischemia-driven target-lesion revascularization (4.5% vs. 7.5%; hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43 to 0.83; P=0.002) and target-vessel revascularization (5.8% vs. 8.7%; hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; P=0.006), with noninferior rates of the composite safety end point (8.1% vs. 8.0%; hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.76 to 1.36; absolute difference, 0.1 percentage point; 95% CI, –2.1 to 2.4; P=0.01 for noninferiority; P=0.92 for superiority). Patients treated with paclitaxel-eluting stents and those treated with bare-metal stents had similar 12-month rates of death (3.5% and 3.5%, respectively; P=0.98) and stent thrombosis (3.2% and 3.4%, respectively; P=0.77). The 13-month rate of binary restenosis was significantly lower with paclitaxel-eluting stents than with bare-metal stents (10.0% vs. 22.9%; hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.57; P<0.001).

    Conclusions In patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction who were undergoing primary PCI, implantation of paclitaxel-eluting stents, as compared with bare-metal stents, significantly reduced angiographic evidence of restenosis and recurrent ischemia necessitating repeat revascularization procedures. No safety concerns were apparent at 1 year.

    content.nejm.org/cgi/content/abstract/360/19/1946

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News-Medical.Net.



  Country flag

biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading