Effectiveness of drug eluting stents in patients with small coronary artery lesions

Han Yaling,Liu Haiwei,Jing Quanmin
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1005-2194.2006.14.008
2006-01-01
Abstract:Objective To assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug eluting stents(DES,including Cypher and TAXUS stent)in treating patients with single- and multi-vessel de novo lesions located in small native coronary arteries with comparison of bare metal stent(BMS).Methods From December 2002 to May 2005,coronary stenting procedures were performed in 407 patients with small coronary artery lesions consecutively(among whom 150 patients with multi-vessel small coronary lesion).There were 214 patients(63 patients with multi-vessel)in BMS group,140 patients(46 patients with multi-vessel)in Cypher group and 132 patients(41 patients with multi-vessel)in TAXUS group.The results of in-hospital and 6-month clinical follow-up were analysed among the 3 groups.Results There were no differences in lesion characteristic,success rate of percutanous coronary intervention(PCI),in-hospital major adverse cardiac events(MACE)and in-stent minimal lumen diameter after PCI among 3 groups.However,angiographic restenosis occurred significantly less in two DES groups than in BMS group(4.9%in Cypher group and 7.5%in TAXUS group vs 29.2% in BMS group,P<0.05).Accordingly,MACE at 6-month follow-up differed significantly between two DES groups and BMS group(6.3%in Cypher group and 9.4% in TAXUS group vs 26.1% in BMS group,P<0.01).The subgroups analysis for 150 patients with small and multi-vessel coronary lesion found that the angiographic restenosis and MACE at 6-month follow-up were significantly decreased in two DES groups compared with BMS groups(restenosis rate 6.7%in Cypher group,7.1%in TAXUS group vs 37.5%in BMS group,P<0.05;MACE 4.1% in Cypher group,4.8% in TAXUS group vs 21.0% in BMS group,P<0.05).Conclusion Both Cypher and TAXUS stenting therapy are safe and efficient in patients with small coronary lesion,and the same ideal outcomes are obtained in subgroup patients with small and multivessel coronary lesions.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?