Ten‐year clinical outcomes after drug‐eluting stents implantation according to clinical presentation—Insights from the DECADE cooperation

Fabian Starnecker,J. J. Coughlan,Lisette Okkels Jensen,Sarah Bär,Sebastian Kufner,Salvatore Brugaletta,Lorenz Räber,Michael Maeng,Luis Ortega‐Paz,Dik Heg,Karl‐Ludwig Laugwitz,Manel Sabaté,Stephan Windecker,Adnan Kastrati,Kevin Kris Warnakula Olesen,Salvatore Cassese
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.14323
2024-10-02
European Journal of Clinical Investigation
Abstract:Long‐term outcomes of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention with drug‐eluting stents for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) were investigated. Compared with CCS patients, ACS patients have an increased risk of all‐cause death and repeat revascularization of remote vessels up to 1‐year follow‐up, with no significant differences thereafter. ACS patients have a consistently higher risk of MI and definite ST up to 10‐year follow‐up. Background Investigations of very long‐term outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with drug‐eluting stents (DES) according to clinical presentation are scarce. Here, we investigated the 10‐year clinical outcomes of patients undergoing DES‐PCI according to clinical presentation. Methods Patient‐level data from five randomized trials with 10‐year follow‐up after DES‐PCI were pooled. Patients were dichotomized into acute coronary syndrome (ACS) or chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) groups as per clinical presentation. The primary outcome was all‐cause death. Secondary outcomes were cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), definite stent thrombosis (ST) and repeat revascularization involving the target lesion (TLR), target vessel (TVR) or non‐target vessel (nTVR). Results Of the 9700 patients included in this analysis, 4557 presented with ACS and 5143 with CCS. Compared with CCS patients, ACS patients had a higher risk of all‐cause death and nTVR in the first year, but comparable risk thereafter. In addition, ACS patients had a higher risk of MI [adjusted hazard ratio 1.21, 95% confidence interval (1.04–1.41)] and definite ST [adjusted hazard ratio 1.48, 95% confidence interval (1.14–1.92)], while the risk of TLR and TVR was not significantly different up to 10‐year follow‐up. Conclusions Compared to CCS patients, ACS patients treated with PCI and DES implantation have an increased risk of all‐cause death and repeat revascularization of remote vessels up to 1 year, with no significant differences thereafter and up to 10‐year follow‐up. ACS patients have a consistently higher risk of MI and definite ST. Whether these differences persist with current antithrombotic and secondary prevention therapies requires further investigation.
medicine, general & internal, research & experimental
What problem does this paper attempt to address?