Safety and efficacy of degradable vs. permanent polymer drug-eluting stents: A meta-analysis of 18,395 patients from randomized trials

BackgroundDegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (DP-DES) represent a promising strategy to improve the delayed healing and hypersensitive reaction in the vessel. However, the efficacy and safety of DP-DES vs. permanent polymer drug-eluting stents (PP-DES) are less well defined. The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the total, short (< 30 days), mid (30 days–1 year) and long (> 1 year) term outcomes of DP-DES vs. PP-DES.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized clinical trials to compare any of approved DP- and PP-DES. Efficacy endpoints were target-lesion revascularization (TLR) and in-stent late loss (ISLL). Safety endpoints were death, myocardial infarction (MI), and composite of definite and probable stent thrombosis (ST).ResultsThe meta-analysis included 19 RCTs (n = 18,395) with interesting results. As compared with DES, there was a significantly reduced very late ST (OR [95% CI] = 0.42 [0.24–0.77], p = 0.852) and ISLL (OR [95% CI] = − 0.07 [− 0.12–0.02], p = 0.000) in DP-DES patients. However, there were no differences between DP-DES and PP-DES for other safety and efficiency outcomes, except that the stratified analysis showed a significant decreased TLR with DP-DES as compared to paclitaxel-eluting stent (OR [95% CI] = 0.41 [0.20–0.81], p = 0.457).ConclusionsDP-DES are more effective in reducing very late ST and ISLL, as well as comparable to PP-DES with regard to death, TLR and MI. Further large RCTs with long-term follow-up are warranted to better define the relative merits of DP-DES.