A mixed treatment comparison for short- and long-term outcomes of bare-metal and drug-eluting coronary stents

Abstract

BackgroundThe increasing use of drug eluting stents in interventional cardiology calls for assessment of their efficacy and safety, both among drug-eluting and bare-metal stents, in the context of rational decision making. MethodsWe searched for papers that compared any of the sirolimus-eluting stent, paclitaxel-eluting stent, drug- eluting stent, biodegradable stent, everolimus-eluting stent, zotarolimus-resolute eluting stent, biolimus- eluting stent, bare-metal stent and zotarolimus-eluting stent. The search was contacted through Medline, the Cochrane database, Embase, TCTMD, ClinicalTrials.gov, Clinical Trial Results, CardioSource, abstracts and presentations from major cardiovascular meetings. We also searched for further articles cited by selected papers. Furthermore, important conferences and relevant proceedings and abstracts, such as the American Heart Association, American College of Cardiology, Transcatheter Cardiovascular Therapeutics, Society of Cardiovascular Angiography and Intervention, European Society of Cardiology, and Euro-PCR, were also searched. Inclusion criteria were: randomised controlled trials (RCTs), size of study (≥100 patients), duration more than 6months and definition of reported endpoints (target vessel revascularization, thrombosis, myocardial infarction and cardiac death). Analysis of the data was performed for short-term (less than a year) and long-term outcomes (more than a year). A mixed treatment comparison approach was utilised for the data analysis. ConclusionsBased on the rankings of each treatment, a distinct difference between the 2nd and 1st generation stents was identified. We can conclude that everolimus, zotarolimus-resolute and biolimus eluting stents carry the highest probabilities of being superior for all endpoints.