Two-year clinical outcomes after large coronary stent (4.0 mm) placement: comparison of bare-metal stent versus drug-eluting stent

Background:

The absolute benefit of drug‐eluting stents (DES) in low‐risk patients and lesions is not well established.

Hypothesis:

The long term clinical outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention in a single coronary artery disease may not be affected by the type of stent.

Methods:

This study assessed and compared 2‐year clinical outcomes of 304 consecutive patients (147 BMS patients and 157 DES patients) treated with a single coronary stent (4.0 mm) for single de novo large coronary artery disease in 3 referral cardiac centers. The primary outcome was a composite of major adverse cardiac events at 2 years after the index procedure.

Results:

The reference vessel diameter was similar in both groups (3.92 ± 0.29 mm in BMS vs 3.95 ± 0.24 mm in DES, P = 0.50). Late loss was larger in the BMS group (1.04 ± 0.83 mm vs 0.73 ± 0.91 mm in DES, P = 0.03). The incidence of major adverse cardiac events at the 2‐year clinical follow‐up was very low, 24 of 304 patients (7.9%), regardless of stent type deployed (7.5% in BMS vs 8.3% in DES, P = 0.83). The rate of target vessel revascularization was also similar in both groups (4.8% in BMS vs 5.7% in DES, P = 0.80).

Conclusions:

Two‐year clinical outcomes after PCI with a single large coronary stent (4.0 mm) were excellent. The clinical outcomes were not affected by the type of stent used. Copyright © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. The authors have no funding, financial relationships, or conflicts of interest to disclose.