Drug-eluting stents have great impact to the coronary artery bypass grafting(CABG) in cardiac surgery. Someone even believes that it could replace the surgery procedure. However, the drug-eluting stents are not so ideally in the clinic practice. There are no significant difference between drug-eluting stents and bare metal stents in the mortality and the angina recurrence in middle-long term follow-up. The same results are in the compare with the CABG. As the challenge of the drug-eluting stents, the cardiac surgery has many aspects practice and progress in the harvest of the bypass graft. In the article, the change of the CABG conduit in the era of drug-eluting stents are reviewed.
Objective To evaluate the effectiveness and security through meta-analysis of a comprehensive study of efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus drug-eluting stent percutaneous coronary intervention (DES-PCI), for diabetes mellitus with multi-vessel coronary disease. Methods Databases including The Cochrane Library, PubMed, MEDLINE, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP were searched from their establishment dates to 2010. Published information and conference papers including references were handsearched. Relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on diabetic patients with coronary multi-vessel disease treated with revascularization were collected and screened by two reviewers independently. After data extraction and quality assessment of the included studies, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.0. Results A total of eight studies involving a total of 3 689 cases (CABG group: 1 814 cases; DES-PCI group: 1 875 cases) were included. Results of meta-analyses showed that: compared with the DES-PCI group, the CABG group could significantly reduce postoperative repeat revascularization rate (OR=0.27, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.69, P=0.006) and major cardio-cerebral vascular events (OR=0.49, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.62, Plt;0.000 01). But in reducing mortality rate (OR=0.84, 95%CI 0.64 to 1.10, P=0.21), cerebrovascular events (OR=2.00, 95%CI 0.97 to 4.14, P=0.06) and myocardial infarction incidence rate (OR=0.92, 95%CI 0.53 to 1.59, P=0.75), there were no significant differences between the two groups. Conclusion CABG is superior to DES-PCI in the treatment of diabetic patients with multi-vessel disease. However, due to the limitation of the quality and quantity of the included studies, the above conclusion should be tested by conducting more large-scale, multi-center and prospective RCTs in future.
ObjectiveTo systematically review the long-term efficacy of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) versus drug-eluting stent implantation (DES-PCI) for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease. MethodsWe searched The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), PubMed, EMbase, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data and VIP to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) about CABG versus DES-PCI for patients with coronary multivessel disease from the inception to October 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies, then meta-analysis was performed by using RevMan 5.2 software. ResultsA total of seven RCTs, involving 5 723 patients were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: compared with the DES-PCI group, the CABG group had lower 1-year incidence of target vessel revascularization (OR=0.39, 95%CI 0.31 to 0.48, P<0.000 01), 5-year mortality (OR=0.78, 95%CI 0.65 to 0.94, P=0.008), and 5-year incidence of myocardial infarction (OR=0.46, 95%CI 0.37 to 0.58, P<0.000 01). However, 1-year, 2-year and 5-year incidences of stroke in the CABG group were significantly higher than that in the DES-PCI group (all P values <0.05). ConclusionThe available evidence suggests that CABG is superior to DES-PCI for patients with multivessel coronary artery disease in long-term effects, but CABG could increase the incidence of stroke. Due to the quantity and quality of the included studies, the above conclusions still need to be verified by more high-quality RCTs.
Objective To systematically review the efficacy and safety of different duration of dual antiplatelet therapies in patients undergoing new-generation drug-eluting stents implantation. Methods Such databases as MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library (Issue 2, 2015), EMbase, CBM, CNKI and WanFang Data were searched to collect studies on the different duration of dual antiplatelet therapies in patients undergoing new-generation drug-eluting stents implantation from inception to April 2015. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.3 software. Results Six trials were included. The results of meta-analysis showed: compared with 12 months dual antiplatelet therapy group, the incidence of bleeding in the 6 months dual antiplatelet therapy group was lower (OR=0.48, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.89, P=0.02). There were no significant differences in incidence of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality, stroke and stent thrombosis between two groups. Compared with 24 months dual antiplatelet therapy group, the incidence of stent thrombosis in the 12 months dual antiplatelet therapy group was higher (OR=2.50, 95%CI 1.13 to 5.61, P=0.02), but the incidence of bleeding in 12 months dual antiplatelet therapy group was lower (OR=0.25, 95%CI 0.07 to 0.89, P=0.03). No significant differences were found in the incidence of myocardial infarction, all cause mortality and stroke between 12 months dual antiplatelet therapy group and 24 months dual antiplatelet therapy group. Conclusions 6 months dual antiplatelet therapy following new-generation drug-eluting stent implantation is relatively more safe and efficacy. There is significant increase of incidence of bleeding in 12 or 24 months dual antiplatelet therapy. Due to the limited quantity and quality of included studies, the above results are needed to be validated by more high quality studies.
ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of four antiplatelet regimens after coronary drug-eluting stents by network meta-analysis.MethodsPubMed, The Cochrane Library, EMbase and Web of Science databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the comparison of different antiplatelet regimens after coronary drug-eluting stenting from inception to December 31st, 2019. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed risk bias of included studies. Network meta-analysis was then performed by using Gemtc14.3 software, Stata16.0 software and RevMan5.3 software.ResultsA total of 23 RCTs involving 45 837 patients were included. The results of network meta-analysis showed that: in terms of prevention of myocardial infarction (MI) recurrence, the aspirin monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy was inferior to the triple antiplatelet therapy (OR=2.13, 95%CI 1.08 to 4.03). In terms of reducing the incidence of ischemic compound events, the triple antiplatelet therapy was superior to the standard dual antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.53, 95%CI 0.39 to 0.72), the aspirin monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.49, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.69) and the P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.51, 95%CI 0.35 to 0.73). There was no statistically significant difference among the four interventions in reducing the rate of in-stent thrombosis and all-cause mortality (P>0.05). In terms of safety, the bleeding rate of aspirin monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy was lower than that of standard dual antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.70, 95%CI 0.55 to 0.86) and triple antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.58, 95%CI 0.36 to 0.90), and the bleeding rate of P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy was also lower than that of standard dual antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.51, 95%CI 0.39 to 0.65) and triple antiplatelet therapy (OR=0.43, 95%CI 0.26 to 0.67). The probability ranking diagram showed that: in terms of the recurrence rate of MI, the rate of in-stent thrombosis and the incidence of ischemic compound events, triple antiplatelet therapy was the lowest and aspirin monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy was the highest. However, in terms of all-cause mortality and bleeding rate, aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy was the lowest and triple antiplatelet therapy was the highest.ConclusionsThe available evidence suggests that when the risk of ischemia is low, we should choose aspirin or P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy after short-term dual antiplatelet therapy, and P2Y12 inhibitor monotherapy may have a lower risk of ischemia and bleeding. When the risk of ischemia is high and bleeding is low, the triple or standard dual antiplatelet therapy should be selected, and the efficacy of triple antiplatelet therapy is superior, while the safety may be inferior.
Implantation of drug-eluting stents (DES) is one of the most effective treatment for intraluminal vascular diseases such as vascular stenosis caused by atherosclerosis. Antiproliferative drugs offered by could significantly reduce the restenosis of blood vessels, which is beneficial to interventional therapy in more advanced and complex vascular diseases. This review sumarizes the state-of-the-art of the DES based on the function of loaded drug and material of the stents. We hope this review can provide basic information of DES for clinicians and researchers to make more rational choices in practical applications. Moreover, this review also propses the prospects of drug-loaded stents.