0
Letters |

Outcomes in the Era of Bare-Metal Stents vs the Era of Drug-Eluting Stents

Abhimanyu Beri, MD
JAMA. 2009;301(1):33-34. doi:10.1001/jama.2008.898
Text Size: A A A
Published online

To the Editor: I have a number of concerns about the study by Dr Malenka and colleagues1 on outcomes following stenting in the bare-metal stent era vs drug-eluting stent era, which concluded that there was a decline in the need for repeat revascularization procedures. First, the authors excluded patients with any percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass within 1 year. These patients were likely to have bare-metal stents since the drug-eluting stent cohort was from the years immediately after these stents were introduced. Thus, some cases with restenosis within a year were likely to have been left out.

Second, the authors did not perform separate analyses for patients receiving bare-metal vs drug-eluting stents even though this information was available based on codes from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification. Third, no information was provided about the reasons certain patients received bare-metal vs drug-eluting stents, which could have led to a selection bias. There was no analysis of differences between patients in each group. It seems likely that patients who had poorer prognosis or contraindications to dual antiplatelet agents preferentially received bare-metal stents. There may also have been a bias induced by physician preferences or hospital policy.

Fourth, there is a limited follow-up of only 2 years; this may cover most stent thrombosis but not capture restenosis, which is a more chronic process.2 In addition, the study interpretation is limited by the absence of angiographic data about the site of a recurrent event, so it is uncertain whether a recurrent event was restenosis, thrombosis, or an unrelated event in another vessel. Fifth, patients with drug-eluting stents were using clopidogrel, which itself may lower risk of recurrent myocardial infarction and hence may be a confounder.3

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Financial Disclosures: None reported.

REFERENCES

Malenka DJ, Kaplan AV, Lucas FL, Sharp SM, Skinner JS. Outcomes following coronary stenting in the era of bare-metal vs the era of drug-eluting stents.  JAMA. 2008;299(24):2868-2876
PubMedCrossRef
Serruys PW, Luijten HE, Beatt KJ,  et al.  Incidence of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty: a time-related phenomenon: a quantitative angiographic study in 342 consecutive patients at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months.  Circulation. 1988;77(2):361-371
PubMedCrossRef
Bhatt DL, Fox KA, Hacke W,  et al.  Clopidogrel and aspirin versus aspirin alone for the prevention of atherothrombotic events.  N Engl J Med. 2006;354(16):1706-1717
PubMedCrossRef

First Page Preview

First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

Interactive Graphics

Video

Country-Specific Mortality and Growth Failure in Infancy and Yound Children and Association With Material Stature

Use interactive graphics and maps to view and sort country-specific infant and early dhildhood mortality and growth failure data and their association with maternal

Malenka DJ, Kaplan AV, Lucas FL, Sharp SM, Skinner JS. Outcomes following coronary stenting in the era of bare-metal vs the era of drug-eluting stents.  JAMA. 2008;299(24):2868-2876
PubMedCrossRef
Serruys PW, Luijten HE, Beatt KJ,  et al.  Incidence of restenosis after successful coronary angioplasty: a time-related phenomenon: a quantitative angiographic study in 342 consecutive patients at 1, 2, 3, and 4 months.  Circulation. 1988;77(2):361-371
PubMedCrossRef
Bhatt DL, Fox KA, Hacke W,  et al.  Clopidogrel and aspirin versus aspirin alone for the prevention of atherothrombotic events.  N Engl J Med. 2006;354(16):1706-1717
PubMedCrossRef
January 7, 2009
Jeremy A. Rassen, ScD; Sebastian Schneeweiss, MD, ScD
JAMA. 2009;301(1):33-34.
January 7, 2009
David J. Malenka, MD; Jonathan S. Skinner, PhD; F. Lee Lucas, PhD
JAMA. 2009;301(1):33-34.
CME Course for:


You need to register in order to view this quiz.


To understand the clinical management of acute heart failure syndromes.
Accreditation Information The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity.
Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
To view and print your certificate and access a summary of your CME courses go to My CME.
NOTE:
Citing articles are presented as examples only. In non-demo SCM6 implementation, integration with CrossRef’s “Cited By” API will populate this tab (http://www.crossref.org/citedby.html).
Submit a Response

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.