Second generation drug‐eluting stents versus bare‐metal stents for percutaneous coronary intervention of the proximal left anterior descending artery: An analysis of the BASKET‐PROVE I and II trials. Issue 5 (19th July 2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Mangione, Fernanda Marinho; Biering‐Sørensen, Tor; Nochioka, Kotaro; Jatene, Tannas; Silvestre, Odilson Marcos; Hansen, Kim Wadt; Sørensen, Rikke; Jensen, Jan Skov; Jorgensen, Peter Godsk; Jeger, Raban; Kaiser, Christoph; Pfisterer, Matthias; Galatius, Søren
• Is Part Of: Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions. Volume 91:Issue 5(2018)
• Page Start: 867
• Page End: 873
• Publication Date: 2017-07-19
• Subjects: coronary disease -- coronary stenosis -- revascularization; Heart -- Diseases -- Diagnosis -- Periodicals; Cardiac catheterization -- Periodicals; 616.1207572
• DOI: 10.1002/ccd.27200
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1522-1946

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: To compare mid‐term outcomes between patients undergoing proximal left anterior descending artery (LAD) percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with second generation drug‐eluting stent (DES) or bare‐metal stent (BMS). Background: PCI with BMS and first‐generation DES have shown to be safe options for the treatment of proximal LAD stenosis, however associated with considerable reintervention rates. Overall, second‐generation DES has proven to be superior to BMS and first‐generation DES, nevertheless, its effect for proximal LAD PCI has not previously been reported. Methods: We analyzed 2‐year outcomes of 1, 100 patients from the BASKET‐PROVE I and II trials, referred for proximal LAD PCI with second generation DES ( n = 680) or BMS ( n = 420). Results: The cumulative 2‐year incidence of major adverse cardiac events (MACE, composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction (MI) and target vessel revascularization (TVR)) was lower in second generation DES than in BMS treated patients (7.3% vs. 12.3%; HR 0.57, 95% CI 0.39/0.85), mainly driven by a reduced rate of TVR (3.7% vs. 10.0%; HR 0.35, CI 0.21/0.58). No difference was found in cardiac death (1.9% vs. 1.9%; HR 1.01, CI 0.42/2.44) and MI (4.4% vs. 4.7%; HR 0.93, CI 0.53/1.64). The benefit of DES use seemed to be more prominent in female patients with a reduction in MACE ( P for interaction = 0.025). Conclusions: In patients with proximal LAD stenosis, treatment with second‐generation DES was associated with reduced 2‐year rates of adverse cardiac events and TVR compared to BMS, with reintervention rates similar to those earlier reported from bypass surgery.