Long-term benefit-risk balance of drug-eluting vs. bare-metal stents in daily practice: Does stent diameter matter? Three-year follow-up of BASKET

94Citations
Citations of this article
53Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Aims: To assess the long-term benefit-risk ratio of drug-eluting (DES) vs. bare-metal stents (BMS) relative to stent size. Methods and results: All 826 consecutive BASKET (BAsel Stent Kosten-Effektivitäts Trial) patients randomized 2:1 to DES vs. BMS were followed after 3 years. Data were analysed separately for patients with small stents (<3.0 mm vessel/<4.0 mm bypass grafts, n = 268) vs. only large stents (≥3.0 mm native vessels, n = 558). Clinical events were related to stent thrombosis. Three-year clinical target-vessel revascularization rates remained borderline reduced after DES [9.9 vs. 13.9% (BMS), P = 0.07], particularly in patients with small stents (10.7 vs. 19.8%, P = 0.03; large stents: 9.5 vs. 11.5%, P = 0.44). Cardiac death/myocardial infarction (MI) rates (12.7 vs. 10.0%, P = 0.30) were similar, however, death/MI beyond 6 months was higher after DES [9.1 vs. 3.8% (BMS), P = 0.009], mainly due to increased late death/MI in patients with large stents (9.7 vs. 3.1%, P = 0.006). The results paralleled findings for stent thrombosis. Conclusion: The clinical benefit of DES was maintained at no overall increased risk of death or death/MI up to 3 years. However, death/MI rates were increased in DES vs. BMS patients beyond 6 months, particularly in patients with large stents, paralleling findings for stent thrombosis. Thus, stent size seems to influence the 3-year benefit-risk ratio after DES implantation. © The Author 2008.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Pfisterer, M., Brunner-La Rocca, H. P., Rickenbacher, P., Hunziker, P., Mueller, C., Nietlispach, F., … Kaiser, C. (2009). Long-term benefit-risk balance of drug-eluting vs. bare-metal stents in daily practice: Does stent diameter matter? Three-year follow-up of BASKET. European Heart Journal, 30(1), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehn516

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free