GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)  (2)
  • Yang, Han-Mo  (2)
Material
Publisher
  • Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)  (2)
Language
Years
  • 1
    In: Circulation, Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), Vol. 130, No. suppl_2 ( 2014-11-25)
    Abstract: Background: Long term outcomes are imperative to confirm safety of drug-eluting stents. There have been two randomized controlled trials comparing everolimus-eluting stents (EES) and Resolute zotarolimus-eluting stents (ZES-R). To date, long-term clinical outcomes of these stents were limited to only one report which has recently reported 4-year comparisons of these stents. Therefore, more evidences are needed regarding long-term clinical outcomes of the second generation stents. This study compared the long-term clinical outcomes of EES with ZES-R in “all-comer” cohorts up to 3-year follow-up. Methods: The EXCELLENT and RESOLUTE-Korea registries prospectively enrolled 3,056 patients treated with EES and 1,998 with ZES-R. Target lesion failure and patient-related composite events were compared in crude and propensity score matched analyses. Results: Of 5054 patients, 3830 patients (75.8%) had off label indication (2217 with EES and 1613 with ZES-R). The stent-related outcome (189 [6.2%] vs. 127 [6.4%] , p=0.812) and the patient-related outcome (420 [13.7%] vs. 250 [12.5%] , p=0.581) did not differ between EES and ZES-R respectively at 3 year, which was corroborated by similar results from the propensity score-matched cohort (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.70-1.20, p=0.523 and 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.02, p=0.081, for stent and patient related outcomes, respectively). The rate of definite or probable stent thrombosis up to 3 years (22 [0.7%] vs. 10 [0.5%] , p=0.370) was also similar. The rate of stent thrombosis was very low and comparable between the two stents (3 [0.1%] vs. 1 [0.1%] , p=0.657). In multivariate analysis, chronic renal failure (adjusted HR 3.615, 95% CI 2.440-5.354, p 〈 0.001) and off label indication (adjusted HR 1.782, 95% CI 1.169-2.718, p=0.007) were the strongest predictors of target lesion failure. Conclusion: In this robust real world registry with unrestricted use of EES and ZES-R, both stents showed comparable safety and efficacy at 3-year follow-up. Overall incidences of target lesion failure and definite stent thrombosis, including very late stent thrombosis, were low, even in the patients with off label indications, suggesting excellent long term safety and sustained efficacy of both types of second generation drug-eluting stents.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0009-7322 , 1524-4539
    Language: English
    Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1466401-X
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Circulation, Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health), Vol. 130, No. suppl_2 ( 2014-11-25)
    Abstract: Objective: The optimal treatment option for in-stent restenosis (ISR) is not established. We performed a Bayesian network meta-analysis comparing the efficacy and safety of drug-eluting balloon (DEB), drug-eluting stent (DES) or plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) for treatment of ISR. Design: Systemic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis using random-effects model. The primary outcome was target lesion revascularization (TLR). The secondary outcomes were myocardial infarction (MI), all-cause mortality or major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). The pairwise posterior median odds ratio (OR) with 95% credible interval (CrI) was the effect measure. Data Sources: PubMed, EMBASE, BioMed Central, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings through February 2014. Eligibility Criteria for Selecting Studies: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DEB, DES, or POBA for treatment of ISR. Results: This analysis included 2,059 patients from 11 RCTs. The risk of TLR was markedly lower in patients treated with DEB (OR 0.22, 95% CrI 0.10-0.42) or DES (OR 0.24, 95% CrI 0.11-0.47) than in those treated with POBA. The risk of TLR (OR 0.92, 95% CrI 0.43-1.90) was similar between DEB and DES. The risk of MI or all-cause mortality was lowest in the DEB group compared with DES or POBA, which did not meet statistical significance. The risk of MACE was significantly lower in DEB (OR 0.24, 95% CrI 0.12-0.39) or DES (OR 0.28, 95% CrI 0.14-0.53) than in POBA, but it was similar between DEB and DES group (OR 0.84, 95% CrI 0.45-1.50). The probability to be ranked as the best treatment were 59.9% (DEB), 40.1% (DES), and 0.1% (POBA) in terms of TLR, whereas, 63.0% (DEB), 35.3% (POBA), and 1.7% (DES) in terms of MI. Conclusions: DEB or DES was markedly better than POBA in preventing TLR, but not for MI or mortality in treatment of ISR. DEB resulted in less MI than DES without statistical significance.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0009-7322 , 1524-4539
    Language: English
    Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
    Publication Date: 2014
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1466401-X
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...