Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Ano de publicação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Heart ; 101(4): 271-8, 2015 Feb.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25423953

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To investigate clinical outcomes of coronary intervention using a biolimus-eluting stent (BES) compared with a sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) in patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the Limus Eluted from A Durable versus ERodable Stent (LEADERS) coating trial at the final 5-year follow-up. METHODS: The LEADERS trial is a multicentre all-comer study, where patients (n=1707) were randomised to percutaneous intervention with either BES containing biodegradable polymer or SES containing durable polymer. Out of 1707 patients enrolled in this trial, 573 patients had percutaneous coronary intervention for AMI (BES=280, SES=293) and were included in the current analysis. Patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE, including all death, all myocardial infarction (MI) and all revascularisations), major adverse cardiac events (MACE, including cardiac death, MI and clinically indicated target vessel revascularisation) and stent thrombosis were assessed at 5-year follow-up. RESULTS: The baseline clinical, angiographic and procedural characteristics were well matched between BES and SES groups. In all patients with AMI, coronary intervention with a BES, compared with SES, significantly reduced POCE (28.9% vs 42.3%; relative risk (RR) 0.61, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.82, p=0.001) at 5-year follow-up. There was also a reduction in MACE rate in the BES group (18.2% vs 25.9%; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.95, p=0.025); however, there was no difference in cardiac death and stent thrombosis. In patients with ST-elevation MI (STEMI), coronary intervention with BES significantly reduced POCE (24.4% vs 39.3%; RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.85, p=0.006), MACE (12.6% vs 25.0%; RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.83, p=0.008) and cardiac death (3.0% vs 11.4%; RR 0.25, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.75, p=0.007), along with a trend towards reduction in definite stent thrombosis (3.7% vs 8.6%; RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.15 to 1.18, p=0.088), compared with SES. CONCLUSIONS: BES, compared with SES, significantly improved safety and efficacy outcomes in patients with AMI, especially those with STEMI, at 5-year follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT 00389220.


Assuntos
Implantes Absorvíveis , Fármacos Cardiovasculares/administração & dosagem , Stents Farmacológicos , Infarto do Miocárdio/terapia , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/instrumentação , Polímeros/química , Sirolimo/análogos & derivados , Idoso , Angiografia Coronária , Trombose Coronária/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Estimativa de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Infarto do Miocárdio/diagnóstico , Infarto do Miocárdio/mortalidade , Razão de Chances , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/efeitos adversos , Intervenção Coronária Percutânea/mortalidade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Desenho de Prótese , Recidiva , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Sirolimo/administração & dosagem , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA