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

doi:10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036

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^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Faculty of Health Sciences & Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

19 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.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	105-113
Number of pages	9
Journal	European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes
Volume	5
Issue number	2
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036
Publication status	Published - Apr 2019

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Access to Document

10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036Licence: Free to read

Cite this

@article{4d62025aa2844b69b5799118c01c303a,

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.",

author = "Naim Mridha and Deloshaan Subhaharan and Selvanayagam Niranjan and Rashid, \{Mohammed K.\} and Peter Psaltis and Kuljit Singh",

note = "Funding Information: Future Leader Fellowship from the National Heart Foundation of Australia, and project grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and NHF to P.P. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.",

year = "2019",

month = apr,

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 et al.
In: European Heart Journal - Quality of Care and Clinical Outcomes, Vol. 5, No. 2, 04.2019, p. 105-113.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

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

N1 - Funding Information: Future Leader Fellowship from the National Heart Foundation of Australia, and project grant funding from the National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia and NHF to P.P. Publisher Copyright: © Published on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology. All rights reserved.

PY - 2019/4

Y1 - 2019/4

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.

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85064138838

U2 - 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036

DO - 10.1093/ehjqcco/qcy036

M3 - Article

C2 - 30032294

AN - SCOPUS:85064138838

SN - 2058-5225

VL - 5

SP - 105

EP - 113

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

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

IS - 2

ER -

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

Abstract

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this