A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents

Naim Mridha, Deloshaan Subhaharan, Selvanayagam Niranjan, Mohammed K. Rashid, Peter Psaltis, Kuljit Singh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Aims The durable polymer (DP) of a drug-eluting stent (DES) serves no function once drug elution is complete. To ascertain the benefits of bioabsorbable polymer (BP) over DP-DESs requires a longer follow-up period, to overcome the time taken for polymer absorption. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of BP-DES with the DP-DES over mid (2 years) to long-term (3-5 years) follow-up. Methods and results A thorough computer-based search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases. We only included randomized controlled studies comparing clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs. Only studies where data were available for a minimum of 2 years were included. A separate analysis of 2-year outcomes and 3- to 5-year outcomes were conducted. Data from 6 and 8 studies were included in 3- to 5-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively. There were no differences between stent groups in cardiac mortality, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, and reinfarction rates for either 2-year or 3- to 5-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis according to strut thickness (<100 μm, >100 μm) of BP-DES demonstrated similar results. The analyses of ST and very late ST favoured BP-DESs but did not reach statistically significant level. Conclusion There were no differences in clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs over mid- and long-term follow-up.

LanguageEnglish
Pages105-113
Number of pages9
JournalEuropean Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes
Volume5
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2019

Keywords

  • Bioabsorbable polymer
  • Drug-eluting stent
  • Durable polymer

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy
  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine

Cite this

@article{ec5ccc1e34ce4ad49f566ae4f76b0b88,
title = "A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents",
abstract = "Aims The durable polymer (DP) of a drug-eluting stent (DES) serves no function once drug elution is complete. To ascertain the benefits of bioabsorbable polymer (BP) over DP-DESs requires a longer follow-up period, to overcome the time taken for polymer absorption. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of BP-DES with the DP-DES over mid (2 years) to long-term (3-5 years) follow-up. Methods and results A thorough computer-based search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases. We only included randomized controlled studies comparing clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs. Only studies where data were available for a minimum of 2 years were included. A separate analysis of 2-year outcomes and 3- to 5-year outcomes were conducted. Data from 6 and 8 studies were included in 3- to 5-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively. There were no differences between stent groups in cardiac mortality, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, and reinfarction rates for either 2-year or 3- to 5-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis according to strut thickness (<100 μm, >100 μm) of BP-DES demonstrated similar results. The analyses of ST and very late ST favoured BP-DESs but did not reach statistically significant level. Conclusion There were no differences in clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs over mid- and long-term follow-up.",
keywords = "Bioabsorbable polymer, Drug-eluting stent, Durable polymer",
author = "Naim Mridha and Deloshaan Subhaharan and Selvanayagam Niranjan and Rashid, {Mohammed K.} and Peter Psaltis and Kuljit Singh",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036",
language = "English",
volume = "5",
pages = "105--113",
journal = "European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes",
issn = "2058-5225",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "2",

}

A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents. / Mridha, Naim; Subhaharan, Deloshaan; Niranjan, Selvanayagam; Rashid, Mohammed K.; Psaltis, Peter; Singh, Kuljit.

In: European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes, Vol. 5, No. 2, 01.04.2019, p. 105-113.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to compare long-term clinical outcomes of bioabsorbable polymer and durable polymer drug-eluting stents

AU - Mridha, Naim

AU - Subhaharan, Deloshaan

AU - Niranjan, Selvanayagam

AU - Rashid, Mohammed K.

AU - Psaltis, Peter

AU - Singh, Kuljit

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Aims The durable polymer (DP) of a drug-eluting stent (DES) serves no function once drug elution is complete. To ascertain the benefits of bioabsorbable polymer (BP) over DP-DESs requires a longer follow-up period, to overcome the time taken for polymer absorption. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of BP-DES with the DP-DES over mid (2 years) to long-term (3-5 years) follow-up. Methods and results A thorough computer-based search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases. We only included randomized controlled studies comparing clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs. Only studies where data were available for a minimum of 2 years were included. A separate analysis of 2-year outcomes and 3- to 5-year outcomes were conducted. Data from 6 and 8 studies were included in 3- to 5-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively. There were no differences between stent groups in cardiac mortality, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, and reinfarction rates for either 2-year or 3- to 5-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis according to strut thickness (<100 μm, >100 μm) of BP-DES demonstrated similar results. The analyses of ST and very late ST favoured BP-DESs but did not reach statistically significant level. Conclusion There were no differences in clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs over mid- and long-term follow-up.

AB - Aims The durable polymer (DP) of a drug-eluting stent (DES) serves no function once drug elution is complete. To ascertain the benefits of bioabsorbable polymer (BP) over DP-DESs requires a longer follow-up period, to overcome the time taken for polymer absorption. The primary aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the safety and efficacy of BP-DES with the DP-DES over mid (2 years) to long-term (3-5 years) follow-up. Methods and results A thorough computer-based search was performed using Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and PubMed databases. We only included randomized controlled studies comparing clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs. Only studies where data were available for a minimum of 2 years were included. A separate analysis of 2-year outcomes and 3- to 5-year outcomes were conducted. Data from 6 and 8 studies were included in 3- to 5-year and 2-year follow-up, respectively. There were no differences between stent groups in cardiac mortality, stent thrombosis (ST), target lesion revascularization, target vessel failure, and reinfarction rates for either 2-year or 3- to 5-year follow-up. Subgroup analysis according to strut thickness (<100 μm, >100 μm) of BP-DES demonstrated similar results. The analyses of ST and very late ST favoured BP-DESs but did not reach statistically significant level. Conclusion There were no differences in clinical outcomes between BP-DESs and DP-DESs over mid- and long-term follow-up.

KW - Bioabsorbable polymer

KW - Drug-eluting stent

KW - Durable polymer

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064138838&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036

DO - 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036

M3 - Article

VL - 5

SP - 105

EP - 113

JO - European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes

T2 - European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes

JF - European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes

SN - 2058-5225

IS - 2

ER -