What is the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention? A meta-analysis

Anthony A. Bavry, Dharam J. Kumbhani, Thomas J. Helton, Deepak L. Bhatt

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

161 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) is relatively limited. There is concern that DES used for percutaneous coronary intervention may result in subsequent thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on eight trials (total of 13 study arms) in 3,817 patients with coronary artery disease who were randomized to either PES or BMS. RESULTS: As compared with BMS, PES do not increase the hazard for thrombosis up to 12 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 2.04, p = 0.86]). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square value for Q-statistic = 5.90 [10 degrees of freedom], p = 0.82). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to trials with a polymeric stent platform (Treatment of de novo coronary disease using a single pAclitaXel elUting Stent [TAXUS]-I, -II, -IV, and -VI) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.53, p = 0.99), trials with longer lesions (TAXUS-IV and -VI) (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.91, p = 0.41), and trials that used a higher dose of paclitaxel (ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Clinical trial [ASPECT], European evaLUaTion of paclitaxel Eluting Stents [ELUTES], and DELIVER-I) (RR = 1.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.81, p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that standard dose PES do not increase the hazard of stent thrombosis compared to BMS.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)941-946
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of the American College of Cardiology
Volume45
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 15 2005

Fingerprint

Percutaneous Coronary Intervention
Paclitaxel
Stents
Meta-Analysis
Thrombosis
Metals
Odds Ratio
Confidence Intervals
Drug-Eluting Stents
Coronary Disease
Coronary Artery Disease

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Nursing(all)

Cite this

What is the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention? A meta-analysis. / Bavry, Anthony A.; Kumbhani, Dharam J.; Helton, Thomas J.; Bhatt, Deepak L.

In: Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 45, No. 6, 15.03.2005, p. 941-946.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{c35159d0f0bd452b99c5fd9b021ec192,
title = "What is the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention?: A meta-analysis",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) is relatively limited. There is concern that DES used for percutaneous coronary intervention may result in subsequent thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on eight trials (total of 13 study arms) in 3,817 patients with coronary artery disease who were randomized to either PES or BMS. RESULTS: As compared with BMS, PES do not increase the hazard for thrombosis up to 12 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.06, 95{\%} confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 2.04, p = 0.86]). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square value for Q-statistic = 5.90 [10 degrees of freedom], p = 0.82). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to trials with a polymeric stent platform (Treatment of de novo coronary disease using a single pAclitaXel elUting Stent [TAXUS]-I, -II, -IV, and -VI) (RR = 1.01, 95{\%} CI 0.40 to 2.53, p = 0.99), trials with longer lesions (TAXUS-IV and -VI) (RR = 0.62, 95{\%} CI 0.2 to 1.91, p = 0.41), and trials that used a higher dose of paclitaxel (ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Clinical trial [ASPECT], European evaLUaTion of paclitaxel Eluting Stents [ELUTES], and DELIVER-I) (RR = 1.87, 95{\%} CI 0.52 to 6.81, p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that standard dose PES do not increase the hazard of stent thrombosis compared to BMS.",
author = "Bavry, {Anthony A.} and Kumbhani, {Dharam J.} and Helton, {Thomas J.} and Bhatt, {Deepak L.}",
year = "2005",
month = "3",
day = "15",
doi = "10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.064",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "941--946",
journal = "Journal of the American College of Cardiology",
issn = "0735-1097",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What is the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents for percutaneous coronary intervention?

T2 - A meta-analysis

AU - Bavry, Anthony A.

AU - Kumbhani, Dharam J.

AU - Helton, Thomas J.

AU - Bhatt, Deepak L.

PY - 2005/3/15

Y1 - 2005/3/15

N2 - OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) is relatively limited. There is concern that DES used for percutaneous coronary intervention may result in subsequent thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on eight trials (total of 13 study arms) in 3,817 patients with coronary artery disease who were randomized to either PES or BMS. RESULTS: As compared with BMS, PES do not increase the hazard for thrombosis up to 12 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 2.04, p = 0.86]). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square value for Q-statistic = 5.90 [10 degrees of freedom], p = 0.82). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to trials with a polymeric stent platform (Treatment of de novo coronary disease using a single pAclitaXel elUting Stent [TAXUS]-I, -II, -IV, and -VI) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.53, p = 0.99), trials with longer lesions (TAXUS-IV and -VI) (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.91, p = 0.41), and trials that used a higher dose of paclitaxel (ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Clinical trial [ASPECT], European evaLUaTion of paclitaxel Eluting Stents [ELUTES], and DELIVER-I) (RR = 1.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.81, p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that standard dose PES do not increase the hazard of stent thrombosis compared to BMS.

AB - OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the risk of stent thrombosis associated with the use of paclitaxel-eluting stents (PES) compared to bare-metal stents (BMS). BACKGROUND: Clinical experience with coronary drug-eluting stents (DES) is relatively limited. There is concern that DES used for percutaneous coronary intervention may result in subsequent thrombosis. METHODS: We conducted a meta-analysis on eight trials (total of 13 study arms) in 3,817 patients with coronary artery disease who were randomized to either PES or BMS. RESULTS: As compared with BMS, PES do not increase the hazard for thrombosis up to 12 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.06, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55 to 2.04, p = 0.86]). There was no evidence of heterogeneity among the studies (chi-square value for Q-statistic = 5.90 [10 degrees of freedom], p = 0.82). Similar results were obtained when the analysis was restricted to trials with a polymeric stent platform (Treatment of de novo coronary disease using a single pAclitaXel elUting Stent [TAXUS]-I, -II, -IV, and -VI) (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.53, p = 0.99), trials with longer lesions (TAXUS-IV and -VI) (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.91, p = 0.41), and trials that used a higher dose of paclitaxel (ASian Paclitaxel-Eluting Stent Clinical trial [ASPECT], European evaLUaTion of paclitaxel Eluting Stents [ELUTES], and DELIVER-I) (RR = 1.87, 95% CI 0.52 to 6.81, p = 0.34). CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence suggests that standard dose PES do not increase the hazard of stent thrombosis compared to BMS.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=14844323640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=14844323640&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.064

DO - 10.1016/j.jacc.2004.11.064

M3 - Article

C2 - 15766833

AN - SCOPUS:14844323640

VL - 45

SP - 941

EP - 946

JO - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

JF - Journal of the American College of Cardiology

SN - 0735-1097

IS - 6

ER -