In:
Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions, Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), Vol. 3, No. 1 ( 2010-02), p. 42-49
Abstract:
Background— Diabetes is a powerful predictor of adverse events in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Drug-eluting stents reduce restenosis rates compared with bare metal stents; however, controversy remains regarding which drug-eluting stents provides greater benefit in patients with diabetes. Accordingly, we compared the safety and efficacy of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES) with paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) among diabetic patients in a contemporary registry. Methods and Results— Using the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry, we evaluated 2-year outcomes of diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions with SES ( n =677) and PES ( n =328). Clinical and demographic characteristics, including age, body mass index, insulin use, left ventricular function, and aspirin/clopidogrel use postprocedure, did not differ significantly between the groups except that PES-treated patients had a greater frequency of hypertension and hyperlipidemia. At the 2-year follow-up, no significant differences were observed between PES and SES with regard to safety or efficacy end points. PES- and SES-treated patients had similar rates of death (10.7% versus 8.2%, P =0.20), death and myocardial infarction (14.9% versus 13.6%, P =0.55), repeat revascularization (14.8% versus 17.8%, P =0.36), and stent thrombosis (1.3% versus 1.3%, P =0.95). After adjustment, no significant differences between the 2 stent types in any outcome were observed. Conclusions— PES and SES are equally efficacious and have similar safety profiles in diabetic patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions in clinical practice.
Type of Medium:
Online Resource
ISSN:
1941-7640
,
1941-7632
DOI:
10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.109.885996
Language:
English
Publisher:
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Publication Date:
2010
detail.hit.zdb_id:
2450801-9
Bookmarklink
