Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with conventional bare stent implantation in the real world: The Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology hospital (research) registry

The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents in unselected patients treated in the daily practice is currently unknown. Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation has been used as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rott...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Circulation (New York, N.Y.) N.Y.), 2004-01, Vol.109 (2), p.190-195
Hauptverfasser: LEMOS, Pedro A, SERRUYS, Patrick W, MCFADDEN, Eugene, SIANOS, Georgios, HOFMA, Sjoerd H, SMITS, Pieter C, VAN DER GIESSEN, Willem J, DE FEYTER, Pim J, VAN DOMBURG, Ron T, SAI, Francesco, ARAMPATZIS, Chourmouzios A, HOYE, Angela, DEGERTEKIN, Muzaffer, TANABE, Kengo, DAEMEN, Joost, LIU, Tommy K. K
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents in unselected patients treated in the daily practice is currently unknown. Sirolimus-eluting stent implantation has been used as the default strategy for all percutaneous procedures in our hospital as part of the Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. Consecutive patients with de novo lesions (n=508) treated exclusively with sirolimus-eluting stents (SES group) were compared with 450 patients who received bare stents in the period just before (pre-SES group). Patients in the SES group more frequently had multivessel disease, more type C lesions, received more stents, and had more bifurcation stenting. At 1 year, the cumulative rate of major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, or target vessel revascularization) was 9.7% in the SES group and 14.8% in the pre-SES group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.62 [95% CI, 0.44 to 0.89]; P=0.008). The 1-year risk of clinically driven target vessel revascularization in the SES group and in the pre-SES group was 3.7% versus 10.9%, respectively (HR, 0.35 [95% CI, 0.21 to 0.57]; P
ISSN:0009-7322
1524-4539
DOI:10.1161/01.CIR.0000109138.84579.FA