n Cardiovascular Journal of Africa - Efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in coronary artery disease patients with diabetes : a meta-analysis : cardiovascular topic
|Article Title||Efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting stents versus bare-metal stents in coronary artery disease patients with diabetes : a meta-analysis : cardiovascular topic|
|© Publisher:||Clinics Cardive Publishing|
|Journal||Cardiovascular Journal of Africa|
|Affiliations||1 Shandong Univeristy, China, 2 Shandong Univeristy, China, 3 Shandong Univeristy, China, 4 Shandong Univeristy, China and 5 Shandong Univeristy, China|
|Publication Date||Aug 2013|
|Pages||274 - 279|
|Keyword(s)||Bare-metal stent, Diabetes, Efficacy, Meta-analysis, Safety and Sirolimus-eluting stent|
Objective : To compare by meta-analysis the efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting and bare-metal stents in coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with diabetes.
Methods : PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from 1971 to 2012. Data on the efficacy and safety of sirolimus-eluting and bare-metal stents in patients with diabetes were collected. A meta-analysis was then performed on a total of 1 259 CAD patients with diabetes from six studies. The odds ratio (OR) was used for comparison. Subgroup analysis was performed according to the sample size, year of study, subjects' geographic area and study method.
Results : Compared with those in the bare-metal stent group (BMS), the subjects in the sirolimus-eluting stent (SES) group had a reduced risk for major cardiac events [OR 0.42, 95% confidence interval (CI): 024-0.74, p < 0.01] and target-lesion revascularisation (OR 0.26, 95% CI: 0.11-0.59, p < 0.01). There was no difference for myocardial infarction (OR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.61-1.40, p > 0.05) or mortality (OR 1.19, 95% CI: 0.74-1.92, p > 0.05). Subgroup analysis showed a significant difference for overall risk of major cardiac events between SES and BMS when the sample size was ≤ 90 (OR 0.28, 95% CI: 0.16-0.48, p < 0.01), when it was a randomised control trial (RCT) (OR 0.28, 95% CI: 0.19-0.42, p < 0.01), or when it was performed on European subjects (OR 0.45, 95% CI: 0.27-0.77, p < 0.01). The sensitivity was not different when one study was removed at a time.
Conclusion : Our study confirmed that SES are safer and more effective than BMS in CAD patients with diabetes, as far as major cardiac events are concerned.
Article metrics loading...