Late Clinical Events of Drug Eluting Versus Bare Metal Stenting; Opces' Ancillary Study Publisher



Khosravi AR^{6, 8} ; Raoufi A^{6, 8} ; Pourmoghadas M^{6, 8} ; Paydari N^{7, 8} ; Gharipour M^{7, 8} ; Namdari M¹ ; Khaledifar A² ; Khosravi M³ ; Bahonar A^{7, 8} ; Ostovan M⁴ ; Hassanzadeh M⁵ ; Sarrafzadegan N^{7, 8} Show Affiliations
Source: Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences Published:2013

Abstract

Objective: To compare one year clinical outcomes of patients with chronic stable angina who underwent implantation of bare metal stent (BMS) or drug eluting stent (DES). Methodology: Four hundred forty two (442) participants of OPCES study (Osvix versus Plavix in Cardiovascular Events after Stenting) were included in this sub-study. After evaluation of exclusion criteria (combined DES and BMS stenting (n=31) and incomplete data (n=48) patients were divided in two groups according to selected stent(DES or BMS). Follow-up was conducted by a structured telephone interview after 6 and 12 months. The patients' documents were reviewed by the Study Event Committee in the Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Center to evaluate the occurrence of study endpoints which consisted of clinical success rate and major adverse cardiac events (Major Adverse Cardiac Events (MACE), cardiac death, nonfatal MI, target vessel revascularization and stroke) in hospital, after 6 and 12 months. Results: One hundred sixty six (45.7%) patients were in the DES and 197(54.3%) were in the BMS group. Procedural complications were seen more frequently in the DES group (1.0% vs. 4.8%, P=0.027), the prevalence of the in-hospital MACE, angiographic and clinical success rate were the same between both the groups. There was no significant difference regarding 6 and 12 months MACE rate in patients treated by BMS or DES (6 months: 1.1% vs. 0.6%, p>0.999 12 month: 3.4% vs 2.6%, P = 0.755). Conclusion: Considering the same clinical outcome and the economical parameters, use of the BMS after proper patient selection are recommended.