European Journal of Medical Research (Jul 2024)

Comparative effectiveness of ultrathin vs. standard strut drug-eluting stents: insights from a large-scale meta-analysis with extended follow-up

  • Ahmed Hassan,
  • Ahmed Mazen Amin,
  • Ahmed Farid Gadelmawla,
  • Ahmed Mansour,
  • Hamed Abdelma’aboud Mostafa,
  • Mariam Tarek Desouki,
  • Mostafa Mahmoud Naguib,
  • Bilal Ali,
  • Aisha Siraj,
  • Mustafa Suppah,
  • Diaa Hakim

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40001-024-01949-7
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 29, no. 1
pp. 1 – 23

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Newer generation ultrathin strut stents are associated with less incidence of target lesion failure (TLF) in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in the short term. However, its long-term effect on different cardiovascular outcomes remains unknown. Objectives We aim to identify the effects of newer-generation ultrathin-strut stents vs. standard thickness second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) on long-term outcomes of revascularization in coronary artery disease. Methods We searched PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library databases, and Scopus for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and registries that compare newer-generation ultrathin-strut ( 70 mm) DES to evaluate cardioprotective effects over a period of up to 5 years. Primary outcome was TLF, a composite of cardiac death, target vessel myocardial infarction (TVMI) or target lesion revascularization (TLR). Secondary outcomes included the components of TLF, stent thrombosis (ST), and all-cause death were pooled as the standardized mean difference between the two groups from baseline to endpoint. Results We included 19 RCTs and two prospective registries (103,101 patients) in this analysis. The overall effect on the primary outcome was in favor of second-generation ultrathin struts stents in terms of TLF at ≥ 1 year, ≥ 2 years, and ≥ 3 years (P value = 0.01, 95% CI [0.75, 0.96]), P value = 0.003, 95% CI [0.77, 0.95]), P value = 0.007, 95% CI [0.76, 0.96]), respectively. However, there was no reported benefit in terms of TLF when we compared the two groups at ≥ 5 years (P value = 0.21), 95% CI [0.85, 1.04]). Some of the reported components of the primary and secondary outcomes, such as TLR, target vessel revascularization (TVR), and TVMI, showed the same pattern as the TLF outcome. Conclusion Ultrathin-strut DES showed a beneficial effect over thicker strut stents for up to 3 years. However, at the 5-year follow-up, the ultrathin strut did not differ in terms of TLF, TLR, TVR, and TVMI compared with standard-thickness DES, with similar risks of patient-oriented composite endpoint (POCE), MI, ST, cardiac death, and all-cause mortality.

Keywords