Premium
Improved survival with drug‐eluting stent implantation in comparison with bare metal stent in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction
Author(s) -
Gioia Giuseppe,
Matthai William,
Benassi Alberto,
Rana Hamza,
Levite Howard A.,
Ewing Lannae G.
Publication year - 2006
Publication title -
catheterization and cardiovascular interventions
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.988
H-Index - 116
eISSN - 1522-726X
pISSN - 1522-1946
DOI - 10.1002/ccd.20833
Subject(s) - medicine , ejection fraction , cardiology , mace , myocardial infarction , clinical endpoint , stent , drug eluting stent , bare metal stent , heart failure , percutaneous coronary intervention , randomized controlled trial
OBJECTIVE : We examined the efficacy of drug‐eluting stent (DES) implantation (Sirolimus or Paclitaxel) in patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy and severe left ventricular (LV) dysfunction and compared the outcome with a similar group of patients undergoing bare metal stent (BMS) implantation. BACKGROUND : Patients with severe LV dysfunction are a high risk group. DES may improve the long term outcomes compared with BMS. METHODS : One hundred and ninety one patients (23% women) with severe LV dysfunction (LV ejection fraction ≤35%) underwent coronary stent implantation between May 2002 and May 2005 and were available for follow‐up. One hundred and twenty eight patients received DES (Sirolimus in 72 and Paclitaxel in 54) and 63 patients had BMS. Patients with acute S‐T elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) were excluded. The primary endpoint was cardiovascular mortality. A composite endpoint of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) including cardiovascular mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and target vessel revascularization (TVR) was the secondary endpoint. RESULTS : Mean follow‐up was 420 ± 271 days. No differences were noted in age (69 ± 10 years vs. 70 ± 10 years, P = NS), number of vessel disease (2.3 ± 0.7 vs. 2.2 ± 0.8, P = NS), history of congestive heart failure (47% vs. 46%, P = NS), MI (60% vs. 61%, P = NS), or number of treated vessels (1.3 ± 0.5 vs. 1.3 ± 0.6, P = NS) for the DES and BMS group, respectively. Diabetes was more common among DES patients (45% vs. 25%, P = 0.01). The left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was similar between the two groups (28% ± 6% vs. 26% ± 8%, P = NS for the DES and BMS, respectively). During the follow‐up, there were a total of 25 deaths of which two were cancer related (2 in DES group). There were 23 cardiac deaths, 8/126 (6%) which occurred in the DES group and 15/63 (24%) in the BMS group ( P = 0.05 by log‐rank test). MACE rate was 10% for the DES group and 41% for the BMS group ( P = 0.003). NYHA class improved in both groups (from 2.5 ± 0.8 to 1.7 ± 0.8 in DES and from 2 ± 0.8 to 1.4 ± 0.7 in the BMS, P = NS). CONCLUSION : Compared with bare‐metal stents, DES implantation reduces mortality and MACE in high risk patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. © 2006 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.