Ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) have been related to potential improvement in stent-related outcomes compared with thicker-struts DES. However, comparisons among different ultra-thin devices are lacking. All randomized controlled trials comparing ultrathin (struts thickness <70 mu m) and thicker-struts DESs in an all-comers population were included. Target lesion failure (TLF), as defined by included trials, at 1-year follow-up was the primary end point. Overall mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. Arms of included trials were compared using network meta-analysis. Nine studies encompassing 20,081 patients were included, of which 9,509 patients had an ultrathin DES: Orsiro (evaluated in 7 arms with 8,086 patients), MiStent (1 arm with 703 patients), or Supraflex (1 arm with 720 patients). At 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were noted for TLF among these ultrathin DES. In particular, Orsiro was associated with a similar risk of TLF compared with Supraflex (risk rate 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.78) and showed the highest probability of performing best in terms of TLF, myocardial infarction, and TLR. Ultrathin DES are all associated with a comparable risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut DES. In terms of TLR and TLF risk, Orsiro was the one with the highest probability of best performances, either compared with other ultrathin DES or to devices with thicker struts. (c) 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2024;216:9-18)

Comparison Among Ultra-Thin Coronary Stents: A Network Meta-Analysis

Scudeler L.;Savoca F.;Zugna D.;Isaevska E.;De Filippo O.
;
De Ferrari G. M.;D'Ascenzo F.
Last
2024-01-01

Abstract

Ultrathin-strut drug-eluting stents (DES) have been related to potential improvement in stent-related outcomes compared with thicker-struts DES. However, comparisons among different ultra-thin devices are lacking. All randomized controlled trials comparing ultrathin (struts thickness <70 mu m) and thicker-struts DESs in an all-comers population were included. Target lesion failure (TLF), as defined by included trials, at 1-year follow-up was the primary end point. Overall mortality, myocardial infarction, target lesion revascularization (TLR), and stent thrombosis were the secondary end points. Arms of included trials were compared using network meta-analysis. Nine studies encompassing 20,081 patients were included, of which 9,509 patients had an ultrathin DES: Orsiro (evaluated in 7 arms with 8,086 patients), MiStent (1 arm with 703 patients), or Supraflex (1 arm with 720 patients). At 1-year follow-up, no significant differences were noted for TLF among these ultrathin DES. In particular, Orsiro was associated with a similar risk of TLF compared with Supraflex (risk rate 1.07, 95% confidence interval 0.59 to 1.78) and showed the highest probability of performing best in terms of TLF, myocardial infarction, and TLR. Ultrathin DES are all associated with a comparable risk of TLF compared with thicker-strut DES. In terms of TLR and TLF risk, Orsiro was the one with the highest probability of best performances, either compared with other ultrathin DES or to devices with thicker struts. (c) 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. (Am J Cardiol 2024;216:9-18)
2024
216
9
18
network meta-analysis; percutaneous coronary intervention; ultrathin drug-eluting stents
Marengo G.; Bruno F.; Scudeler L.; Savoca F.; Zugna D.; Isaevska E.; Pilgrim T.; Jensen L.O.; De Filippo O.; Richiardi L.; De Ferrari G.M.; D'Ascenzo F.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
Comparison Among Ultra-Thin Coronary Stents: A Network Meta-Analysis.pdf

Accesso riservato

Tipo di file: PDF EDITORIALE
Dimensione 2.33 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
2.33 MB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/2318/1967130
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 1
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 1
social impact