Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction

  • Stone G
  • Lansky A
  • Pocock S
  • et al.
413Citations
Citations of this article
184Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

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 targetlesion 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. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00433966.) Copyright © 2009 Massachusetts Medical Society.

References Powered by Scopus

Get full text
1692Citations
355Readers

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Stone, G. W., Lansky, A. J., Pocock, S. J., Gersh, B. J., Dangas, G., Wong, S. C., … Mehran, R. (2009). Paclitaxel-Eluting Stents versus Bare-Metal Stents in Acute Myocardial Infarction. New England Journal of Medicine, 360(19), 1946–1959. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa0810116

Readers over time

‘09‘10‘11‘12‘13‘14‘15‘16‘17‘18‘19‘20‘21‘22‘23‘24‘2506121824

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 70

60%

Researcher 27

23%

Professor / Associate Prof. 16

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 4

3%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Medicine and Dentistry 105

80%

Agricultural and Biological Sciences 13

10%

Engineering 7

5%

Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Bi... 7

5%

Article Metrics

Tooltip
Mentions
News Mentions: 1

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free
0