کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
5978287 | 1576259 | 2012 | 7 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |

IntroductionIt is unknown whether drug-eluting stents (DES), in comparison with bare-metal stents (BMS), improve clinical outcomes of ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) patients with renal insufficiency. We aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of BMS versus DES, as well as sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) versus paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES), in STEMI patients with renal insufficiency.MethodsFrom the Korea Acute Myocardial Infarction Registry, 874 STEMI patients with renal insufficiency (glomerular filtration rate <Â 60Â ml/min) comprising 116 patients with BMS and 758 patients with DES (430 SES and 328 PES) implantation were selected. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) within 1Â year, defined as composite of all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction and target lesion revascularization were compared. In addition to multivariate adjusted analysis, propensity analysis for stent choice was performed.ResultsWith a median follow-up of 342Â days, 116 MACE occurred. MACE was more frequent in the BMS group than in the DES group before (HR [95% CI]Â =Â 2.3 [1.3-3.8]) and after propensity score matching (HR [95% CI]Â =Â 2.0 [1.0-3.8]). The difference of MACE was mainly driven by a higher rate of target lesion revascularization rate in the BMS group. In comparison between SES and PES, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in propensity score-matched populations (HR [95% CI]Â =Â 0.7 [0.4-1.1]).ConclusionsIn STEMI patients with renal insufficiency, DES implantation exhibits a favorable 1Â year clinical outcomes than BMS implantation, however, no difference was found between SES and PES.
Journal: International Journal of Cardiology - Volume 154, Issue 1, 12 January 2012, Pages 71-77