View : 21 Download: 0

Outcomes After Unrestricted Use of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Routine Clinical Practice A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study

Title
Outcomes After Unrestricted Use of Everolimus-Eluting and Sirolimus-Eluting Stents in Routine Clinical Practice A Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Study
Authors
Park, Duk-WooKim, Young-HakSong, Hae-GeunAhn, Jung-MinKim, Won-JangLee, Jong-YoungKang, Soo-JinLee, Seung-WhanLee, Cheol WhanPark, Seong-WookYun, Sung-CheolHer, Sung HoHur, Seung HoPark, Jin SikKim, Myeong-KonChoi, Yun SeokKim, Hyun SookCho, Jang-HyunLee, Sang GonPark, Yong WhiJeong, Myung-HoLee, Bong KiLee, Nae-HeeLim, Do-SunYoon, JunghanSeung, Ki BaeShin, Won-YongRha, Seung-WoonKim, Kee-SikTahk, Seung-JeaPark, Byoung EunAhn, TaehoonYang, Joo-YoungJeong, Yong SeokRhew, Jay-HyunPark, Seung-JungIRIS-DES Investigators
Ewha Authors
박시훈
SCOPUS Author ID
박시훈scopus
Issue Date
2012
Journal Title
CIRCULATION-CARDIOVASCULAR INTERVENTIONS
ISSN
1941-7640JCR Link
Citation
vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 365 - 371
Keywords
angioplastycoronary diseasestents
Publisher
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
Indexed
SCI; SCIE; SCOPUS WOS
Abstract
Background-It remains unclear whether there are differences in the safety and efficacy outcomes between everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and sirolimus- eluting stents (SES) in contemporary practice. Methods and Results-We prospectively enrolled 6166 consecutive patients who received EES (3081 patients) and SES (3085 patients) between April 2008 and June 2010, using data from the Interventional Cardiology Research In-Cooperation Society-Drug-Eluting Stents Registry. The primary end point was a composite of death, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or target-vessel revascularization (TVR). At 2 years of follow-up, the 2 study groups did not differ significantly in crude risk of the primary end point (12.1% for EES versus 12.4% for SES; HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.84-1.12, P=0.66). After adjustment for differences in baseline risk factors, the adjusted risk for the primary end point remained similar for the 2 stent types (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.82-1.12, P=0.60). There were also no differences between the stent groups in the adjusted risks of the individual component of death (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67-1.30, P=0.68), MI (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.79-1.18, P=0.74), and TVR (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.82-1.49, P=0.51). The adjusted risk of stent thrombosis also was similar (HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.47-2.84, P=0.75). Conclusions-In contemporary practice of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures, the unrestricted use of EES and SES showed similar rates of safety and efficacy outcomes with regard to death, MI, sent thrombosis, and TVR. Future longer-term follow-up is needed to better define the relative benefits of these drug-eluting stents.
DOI
10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.111.966549
Appears in Collections:
의과대학 > 의학과 > Journal papers
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE