PLoS ONE (Jan 2014)

Safety and efficacy of biodegradable drug-eluting vs. bare metal stents: a meta-analysis from randomized trials.

  • Yangguang Yin,
  • Yao Zhang,
  • Xiaohui Zhao

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099648
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 6
p. e99648

Abstract

Read online

BACKGROUND: Biodegradable polymeric coatings have been proposed as a promising strategy to enhance biocompatibility and improve the delayed healing in the vessel. However, the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer drug-eluting stents (BP-DES) vs. bare metal stents (BMS) are unknown. The aim of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of BP-DES vs. BMS. METHODS AND RESULTS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched for randomized clinical trials, until December 2013, that compared any of approved BP-DES and BMS. Efficacy endpoints were target-vessel revascularization (TVR), target-lesion revascularization (TLR) and in-stent late loss (ISLL). Safety endpoints were death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (DST). The meta-analysis included 7 RCTs with 2,409 patients. As compared with BMS, there was a significantly reduced TVR (OR [95% CI] = 0.37 [0.28-0.50]), ISLL (OR [95% CI] = -0.41 [-0.48-0.34]) and TLR (OR [95% CI] = 0.38 [0.27-0.52]) in BP-DES patients. However, there were no difference for safety outcomes between BP-DES and BMS. CONCLUSIONS: BP-DES is more effective in reducing ISLL, TVR and TLR, as safe as standard BMS with regard to death, ST and MI. Further large RCTs with long-term follow-up are warranted to better define the relative merits of BP-DES.