Abstract 13590: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Bare-Metal versus Drug-Eluting Stents in Managing Saphenous Venous Graft Disease: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Abstract

Introduction: Current understanding of the relative safety and efficacy of bare metal stents (BMS) vs. drug eluting stents (DES) in patients with saphenous venous graft disease (SVGD) relies on analysis of small datasets. Methods: Literature search was performed using PubMed, Embase and Web of Science to identify relevant articles on outcomes of BMS vs. DES in patients with SVGD. A random effects model was used to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for several safety and efficacy outcomes including major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), target lesion revascularization (TLR), total vessel revascularization (TVR), in-stent restenosis, and stent thrombosis. Results: Of 3644 total citations on the initial search, 40 studies comprising 83,151 (33,306 BMS, 49,845 DES) patients qualified for quantitative analysis. The mean age was 72 years, and the mean ejection fraction was 47%. The inter group proportion of hypertension was 78% vs. 83%, diabetes mellitus was 37% vs. 14%, and hyperlipidemia was 69% vs. 78% in patients with BMS vs. DES, respectively (Table). Patients receiving DES had significantly lower odds of MACE (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.77), and its components; TLR (OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92), TVR (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.46-0.81); and stent restenosis (OR 0.61, 95% CI 0.45-0.84) compared with BMS (Figure). The risk of stent thrombosis (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61-1.15) was similar between the two groups. Conclusions: Compared with BMS, patients receiving DES for SVGD demonstrated a lower risk of adverse events, stent stenosis, and need for revascularization.