The short- and long-term outcomes of percutaneous intervention with drug-eluting stent vs bare-metal stent in saphenous vein graft disease: An updated meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials.

Abstract

The use of drug-eluting stents (DES) vs bare-metal stents (BMS) in saphenous vein graft (SVG) lesions remains controversial. We conducted a meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials comparing the outcomes of DES with BMS in SVG percutaneous coronary interventions. A search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and Clinicaltrials.gov was performed for all randomized clinical trials. We evaluated the short- and long-term clinical outcomes of the following: all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), definite/probable stent thrombosis, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and target-vessel revascularization (TVR). From a total of 1582 patients in 6 randomized clinical trials, 797 had DES and 785 had BMS. Patients with DES had lower short-term MACE, TLR, and TVR in comparison with BMS (odds ratio [OR]: 0.56, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.35-0.91, P = 0.02; OR: 0.43, 95% CI: 0.19-0.99, P = 0.05; and OR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.22-0.95, P = 0.04, respectively). However, there were no different outcomes for all-cause mortality (P = 0.63) or stent thrombosis (P = 0.21). With long-term follow-up, there were no significant reductions of MACE (P = 0.20), TLR (P = 0.57), TVR (P = 0.07), all-cause mortality (P = 0.29), and stent thrombosis (P = 0.76). The use of DES in SVG lesions was associated with lower short-term MACE, TLR, and TVR in comparison with BMS. However, there were no significant differences with long-term follow-up.