SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2013
Bare metal stents, durable polymer drug eluting stents, and biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents for coronary artery disease: mixed treatment comparison meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 82 papers, 16 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
82 citing papers in PubMed, 16 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 308 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative effectiveness of ultrathin vs. standard strut drug-eluting stents: insights from a large-scale meta-analysis with extended follow-up.European journal of medical research · 2024Pooled it
- Temporal Trends in the Outcomes of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention With Zotarolimus Eluting Stents Versus Everolimus Eluting Stents: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Clinical cardiology · 2024Pooled it
- Comparison of biodegradable and durable polymer drug-eluting stents in acute coronary syndrome: a meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2022Pooled it
- Comparison of biodegradable and newer generation durable polymer drug-eluting stents with short-term dual antiplatelet therapy: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis of randomized trials comprising of 43,875 patients.Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis · 2022Pooled it
- Long-term follow-up after ultrathin vs. conventional 2nd-generation drug-eluting stents: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European heart journal · 2021Pooled it
- Ultrathin-strut biodegradable polymer versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis.Open heart · 2020Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Different light-activation systems associated with dental bleaching: a systematic review and a network meta-analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2019Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of ultrathin strut biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus durable polymer drug-eluting stents: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.BMC cardiovascular disorders · 2018Pooled it
- The short- and long-term outcomes of percutaneous intervention with drug-eluting stent vs bare-metal stent in saphenous vein graft disease: An updated meta-analysis of all randomized clinical trials.Clinical cardiology · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of percutaneous coronary intervention with cobalt-chromium everolimus eluting stents versus bare metal stents: Results from a patient level meta-analysis of randomized trials.Catheterization and cardiovascular interventions : official journal of the Society for Cardiac Angiography & Interventions · 2017Pooled it
- Percutaneous intervention versus coronary artery bypass graft surgery in left main coronary artery stenosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The Safety and Efficacy of Absorb Bioresorbable Vascular Scaffold: A Systematic Review.Clinical cardiology · 2016Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of biodegradable drug-eluting vs. bare metal stents: a meta-analysis from randomized trials.PloS one · 2014Pooled it
- Patients with higher-atherothrombotic risk vs. lower-atherothrombotic risk undergoing coronary intervention with newer-generation drug-eluting stents: an analysis from the randomized BIOFLOW trials.Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society · 2023Trial
- A randomised comparison of coronary stents according to short or prolonged durations of dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute coronary syndromes: a pre-specified analysis of the SMART-DATE trial.EuroIntervention : journal of EuroPCR in collaboration with the Working Group on Interventional Cardiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2021Trial
- An abluminal biodegradable polymer sirolimus-eluting stent versus a durable polymer everolimus-eluting stent in patients undergoing coronary revascularization: 3-year clinical outcomes of a randomized non-inferiority trial.Scientific reports · 2019Trial
- Trial
22 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo compare the efficacy and safety of biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents with those of bare metal stents and durable polymer drug eluting stents.
designMixed treatment comparison meta-analysis of 258,544 patient years of follow-up from randomized trials. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: PubMed, Embase, and Central were searched for randomized trials comparing any of the Food and Drug Administration approved durable polymer drug eluting stents (sirolimus eluting, paclitaxel eluting, cobalt chromium everolimus eluting, platinum chromium everolimus eluting, zotarolimus eluting-Endeavor, and zotarolimus eluting-Resolute) or biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents, with each other or against bare metal stents. OUTCOMES: Long term efficacy (target vessel revascularization, target lesion revascularization) and safety (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis). Landmark analysis at more than one year was evaluated to assess the potential late benefit of biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents.
resultsFrom 126 randomized trials and 258,544 patient years of follow-up, for long term efficacy (target vessel revascularization), biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel eluting stents (rate ratio 0.66, 95% credibility interval 0.57 to 0.78) and zotarolimus eluting stent-Endeavor (0.69, 0.56 to 0.84) but not to newer generation durable polymer drug eluting stents (for example: 1.03, 0.89 to 1.21 versus cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents). Similarly, biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to paclitaxel eluting stents (rate ratio 0.61, 0.37 to 0.89) but inferior to cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents (2.04, 1.27 to 3.35) for long term safety (definite stent thrombosis). In the landmark analysis after one year, biodegradable polymer drug eluting stents were superior to sirolimus eluting stents for definite stent thrombosis (rate ratio 0.29, 0.10 to 0.82) but were associated with increased mortality compared with cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents (1.52, 1.02 to 2.22). Overall, among all stent types, the newer generation durable polymer drug eluting stents (zotarolimus eluting stent-Resolute, cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents, and platinum chromium everolimus eluting stents) were the most efficacious (lowest target vessel revascularization rate) stents, and cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents were the safest with significant reductions in definite stent thrombosis (rate ratio 0.35, 0.21 to 0.53), myocardial infarction (0.65, 0.55 to 0.75), and death (0.72, 0.58 to 0.90) compared with bare metal stents.
conclusionsBiodegradable polymer drug eluting stents are superior to first generation durable polymer drug eluting stents but not to newer generation durable polymer stents in reducing target vessel revascularization. Newer generation durable polymer stents, and especially cobalt chromium everolimus eluting stents, have the best combination of efficacy and safety. The utility of biodegradable polymer stents in the context of excellent clinical outcomes with newer generation durable polymer stents needs to be proven.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.